CIT.....Time to call it a day

The NoC flight path has been proven aerodynamically impossible; give it up.
 
SpitfireIX said:
From Sucherman's eweek.com interview:


Off to the west, Sucherman saw another plane climb steeply and make a sharp turn. "I thought, Is this thing coming around to make a second attack? If there is another explosion, were [sic] toast." [bolding mine]
Click to expand...



Wow Joel thought the plane that hit the Pentagon veered off to come back for a 2nd attack.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
 
So what plane did Joel see peel away from the Pentagon 3-5 seconds after the first explosion for what he thought was going to come back for a second attack?
 
unreliability of witnesses = things like a minutte becomes 3-5 sec. in memory maybe?

Second attack = another attack after the plane crash into the Pentagon he saw?

Other plane = the C-130?

Decoy aircraft flies over and somehow gets back west how?
 
TC329 said:
So what plane did Joel see peel away from the Pentagon 3-5 seconds after the first explosion for what he thought was going to come back for a second attack?
Click to expand...
It could have been any plane and there is no actual time frame listed. He does not identify what type of plane it is or how far to the west it was either. It could have been the C-130, another airliner on a missed approach to the airport or any other plane. You "proof" only shows that there was another plane in the vicinity at the time and that is all. Stop making stuff up.
 
Last edited:
TC329 said:
Wow Joel thought the plane that hit the Pentagon veered off to come back for a 2nd attack.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Click to expand...

Wow. That is without a doubt the most grossly incompetent analysis of a statement I have ever seen. We are watching the gross distortion of facts, for which the CIT is so justly famous, happening in real time.

Are you deluded Dom? Do you really think that Joel thought that the plane that "slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon" 100 yards away was coming around for second attack. Are you completely daft man??

How is it possible that you have so completely distorted something so clear?

Pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Caustic Logic said:
unreliability of witnesses = things like a minutte becomes 3-5 sec. in memory maybe?

Second attack = another attack after the plane crash into the Pentagon he saw?

Other plane = the C-130?

Decoy aircraft flies over and somehow gets back west how?
Click to expand...

You're the absolute worst Larson...... lol
 
16.5 said:
Wow. That is without a doubt the most grossly incompetent analysis of a statement I have ever seen. We are watching the gross distortion of facts, for which the CIT is so justly famous, happening in real time.

Are you deluded Dom? Do youy really think that Joel thought that the plane that "slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon" 100 yards away was coming around for second attack. Are you completely daft man??

How is it possible that you have so completely distorted something so clear?

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

I don't believe Joel thought the plane initially. I believe Joel was told he saw a 'second plane' fly away because the one he saw approach obviously hit the Pentagon.

Joel says 3-5 seconds and won't identify it as a C130 even when showed a picture of a C130.

Is this thing coming around to make a second attack?
Click to expand...


"This thing" cant be "coming around to make a second attack" if it impacted the first time.
 
TC329 said:
So what plane did Joel watch 'peel away' 3-5 seconds after the explosions started?
Click to expand...

After he watched Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, yes, he watched 77 hit the Pentagon; the only plane around was a turbine engine C-130.

Too bad you discount reality in your quest to make up lies and spread false information.

So after he watched 77 hit the Pentagon and explode (due to the kinetic energy), what plane was left to be seen? Was it the C-130 turbine driven aircraft who was closer than 3,000 feet to the Pentagon, or do you have some fantasy ideas to use as your next non-conclusion?
So when will you drop your lie about planted lamppost? Does this also mean you agree Fight 77 impacted the Pentagon? You just said 77 hit the Pentagon; you are dropping your fantasy for reality?
 
Last edited:
TC329 said:
Joel says 3-5 seconds and won't identify it as a C130 even when showed a picture of a C130.
Click to expand...
Joel says nothing about "3-5" seconds in the story you linked to.

"This thing" cant be "coming around to make a second attack" if it impacted the first time.
Click to expand...
"This thing" does not mean "the same thing." In other words, he saw an airplane off to the west at an undetermined distance climbing and turning. Considering what had just happened, it would be easy for him to think that this other aircraft was a part of the attacks since 2 other aircraft had hit 2 other buildings that day.
 
Sucherman does say 3 to 5 seconds, but he is talking about how long after the impact he saw the plane, not how closely it was following AA77.

Furthermore, Sucherman was asked this question 6 years after the fact and hesitated while answering, at least giving me the impression that he was guessing.

You have to see through the tedious CIT The 2nd Plane Cover Story to see the interview where Sucherman made the "3 to 5 seconds" comment.
 
3-5 seconds? How fast was the plane going before it struck flew over the Pentagon? Would it even be visible from Mr. Sucherman's position 3-5 seconds after impact flyover assuming a constant velocity and heading?
 
TheRedWorm said:
3-5 seconds? How fast was the plane going before it struck flew over the Pentagon? Would it even be visible from Mr. Sucherman's position 3-5 seconds after impact flyover assuming a constant velocity and heading?
Click to expand...

You need to get with the program and catch up. It is a magical airplane, didn't you know. It can pull mega G's and I'll bet it's one of those that's silent, can fly under utility wires, and is no larger than a minivan. That Dom's is so smart that he knows of these thing when no one else does. Shame on you! ;)
 
Reheat said:
You need to get with the program and catch up. It is a magical airplane, didn't you know. It can pull mega G's and I'll bet it's one of those that's silent, can fly under utility wires, and is no larger than a minivan. That Dom's is so smart that he knows of these thing when no one else does. Shame on you! ;)
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, master. I forgot that it was a magic plane, and thus, it can....do magic! I'll return my check, report to NWO re-education immediately, and apologize for my gross ignorance. :D
 
TheRedWorm said:
I'm sorry, master. I forgot that it was a magic plane, and thus, it can....do magic! I'll return my check, report to NWO re-education immediately, and apologize for my gross ignorance. :D
Click to expand...

You'll get a raise if you can make him cough up some math to support that magical airplane. Wait a minute he's the one that needs an education, not you. You know like, 8th Grade! :D
 
Maybe it was the secret SUV low flying below the wire PNAC drone flown by Dick Cheney with his new WII prototype!

The same supersonic stealthy SUV under-the-wire craft that was seen by TC's best witness in PA!

Was it the hypersonic and special holographic design, able to plant light post in a single pass.

The funniest part of TC's investigation, his ability to take a witness statement and use it to support what every he wants. However, what are his conclusions. Like p4t, has he adopted the "don't make a conclusion or theory", let believes do that on their own.

So we have Joel, who saw 77 hit the Pentagon, and TC is making up his analysis to support a non-conclusion that is false.

He has proven to me, his flyover is a fantasy. Due to his own witnesses. One stop fantasy and debunking, by TC.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom