Flight 77 flight path

[The Big Dog]

First off I´m NOT Craig detective.
Where in that last post did you actually READ?
How could he describe the flightpath of the plane from a perfect position as being totally NOC from the Annex to the Citgo to the sign he is describing AND see an impact.
How is it humanly possible to watch a plane fly at you from a confined space without flinching??
Not only that but now you are adamant that he watched a 200ft diameter fireball with the windows breaking around him and what some people described as the ´loudest noise´ they had ever heard.
His NOC testimony is corraborated. NOC and impact are impossible.

So now you are calling BOGER a liar too? (cit mode) I can't wait until you go say that to his face! (cit mode off)

Seems like everyone is lying to the CIT boys.
One thing I wish, is that
CIT would release the raw video.
Know when they plan to do that?

 

[WildCat]

2. He obviously had very little time to specify exactly where he saw the plane in relation to the wall. He saw a bigass plane heading for him for God´s sake!



Do you actually think this guy had time to find his bearings in a 1-2 second timeframe while running for his life?

BWHAHAHAHA!!!! Oh man, you just freaking debunked everything that CIT has ever said!!

FANTASTIC!

So it goes!
Once it hits the internet, it is there foreover.
Can someone get a screenshot of that.
Kind of ironic, wouldn't you say?

Zing!

 

[dtugg]

Airplane debris all over the pentagon lawn and inside the pentagon
DNA positively identified inside the pentagon of passengers from the plane
Somewhere around 100 witnesses that saw the impact
Pictures of bodies strapped to airline seats
ZERO witnesses seeing the plane fly over the pentagon

Well, obviously that was all faked. After all, a few witnesses interviewed by a couple of idiots with an agenda years later say the plane flew on the other side of some gas station (but that it still hit the Pentagon). Sheesh, how much more evidence could you want?

 

[Crazytimes]

Well, obviously that was all faked. After all, a few witnesses interviewed by a couple of idiots with an agenda years later say the plane flew on the other side of some gas station (but that it still hit the Pentagon). Sheesh, how much more evidence could you want?

Cool, then Mud should be able to explain to me how they faked all of this. Things like planting debris all over the lawn in broad daylight.

 

[mudlark]

BWHAHAHAHA!!!! Oh man, you just freaking debunked everything that CIT has ever said!!

FANTASTIC!

So it goes!
Once it hits the internet, it is there foreover.
Can someone get a screenshot of that.
Kind of ironic, wouldn't you say?

Now you are reaching man.
There is a major difference between somebody saying they saw a plane coming over their heads and placing it in relationship to the surroundings and a guy watching the nose of a plane come at him for less than 2 seconds running for his life and diving under a vehicle.

Screen it if you want.

 

[The Big Dog]

Now you are reaching man.
There is a major difference between somebody saying they saw a plane coming over their heads and placing it in relationship to the surroundings and a guy watching the nose of a plane come at him for less than 2 seconds running for his life and diving under a vehicle.

Screen it if you want.

So Boger is off the table, huh? Awesome. What other CIT witnesses are you going to be throwing under the bus in this thread?

 

[bje]

Now you are reaching man.
There is a major difference between somebody saying they saw a plane coming over their heads and placing it in relationship to the surroundings and a guy watching the nose of a plane come at him for less than 2 seconds running for his life and diving under a vehicle.

Screen it if you want.

Actually, there is a major difference between claiming "the jet flew over and away from the Pentagon," and actually providing positive evidence for a "flyover."

CIT has no such evidence.

We've been over this for years. Craig Ranke knows that he has absolutely NO eyewitnesses to any "flyover" from the hundreds of people all around the Pentagon. None of those people ever reported seeing ANY jet "fly over and away from the Pentagon" as Craig claims.

Now, do we have to educate you too, Mudlark? You don't have a single piece of positive evidence that any "jet flew over and away from the Pentagon." None. Zero. Zilch.

 

[Caustic Logic]

In the second link, you say that some stuff in your original analysis was not accurate. In this video, http://www.veoh.com/search/videos/q/caustic+logic#watch=v14831085ACnQG4Rt , is everything adjusted so that it is accurate?

Also, great work!

The mistake was only seen by early readers of that same post. John Farmer set me straight, I used a proper solar calculator, and the post and video are pretty well sound. And I'm not mr. Science, but the basic concepts are simple, math app. but close, and no one's raised any real issues yet.

Great job being a rational human and rising above! Mudlark is still hung up on some words some people have spewed from their mouths about where the plane was. Sorry, words= roughly zero, less than zero here.

 

[stewieg]

FINISH THE INTERVIEW LIAR! Post the description he gave as he watched the plane GO INTO THE PENTAGON.

Really Craig, are you that desperate for attention? Go back and interview a few more so that we can watch yet another self debunking P.O.S. like all your other ones.

http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/search/label/Craig Ranke

 

[mudlark]

Cool, then Mud should be able to explain to me how they faked all of this. Things like planting debris all over the lawn in broad daylight.

So let´s ignore the verified recorded testimony in question and jump to the speculatory discussion? Noted.

 

[BigAl]

So let´s ignore the verified recorded testimony in question and jump to the speculatory discussion? Noted.

No cherry-picking allowed. Listen to all the eyewitnesses, hundreds of them.

 

[mudlark]

The mistake was only seen by early readers of that same post. John Farmer set me straight, I used a proper solar calculator, and the post and video are pretty well sound. And I'm not mr. Science, but the basic concepts are simple, math app. but close, and no one's raised any real issues yet.

Great job being a rational human and rising above! Mudlark is still hung up on some words some people have spewed from their mouths about where the plane was. Sorry, words= roughly zero, less than zero here.

First of all...what are you talking about??
Is the shadow 100%. Not in your opinion. Is it fact?
It really shows how far people will reach here that they will push aside this testimony and concentrate on what may POSSIBLY be a shadow.
My real issue would be the authenticity of the video.
That is, is it uncontaminated? More importantly can it be seen as proof that outweighs this testimony?
No.

 

[The Big Dog]

So let´s ignore the verified recorded testimony in question and jump to the speculatory discussion? Noted.

Oops! You have not released all the recorded footage.

Fail.

 

[tj15]

Yep,
I 100% agree. It proves nothing.
You´ll have to point out which ´south of Citgo witnesses´ you are referring to and if they are confirmed and verified. Not media reports or second hand testimony.

First prove to me that it IS a shadow and not a glitch in the video.
A video that has been discussed here.
That is as weak if not weaker argument than the drawing. Scanning grainy possibly contaminated videos for a POSSIBLE shadow and ignoring/sidestepping confirme corraborative testimony.
Are you trying to say that this trumps this evidence?
If I presented this ´shadow´ I´d be laughed out of this discussion. Again. Weak.

I listed a couple south of Citgo witnesses in an earlier post. Can you explain EACH ONE?

As for the shadow, there seems to be some dark sports at the exact moment (if I'm not mistaken) and the exact place (if I'm not mistaken) where there is supposed to be a shadow from flight 77.

 

[lapman]

So let´s ignore the verified recorded testimony in question and jump to the speculatory discussion? Noted.

There are no "testimonies." Only a few interviews that you put all your faith into and ignore everything else. Typical of TM cult members. Your interviews are not verified since the physical evidence does not confirm them. In every court of law, physical evidence trumps eyewitness testimony every single time. So, where is your proof that the physical evidence was fabricated, planted, etc.? Do you have even one eyewitness that saw the light poles pushed over by NWO agents? People running around the lawn throwing aircraft debris all over the place? Certainly, you have a "verified and confirmed" eyewitness to that.

 

[mudlark]

No cherry-picking allowed. Listen to all the eyewitnesses, hundreds of them.

Yes, that´s all I want to discuss. Witness testimony from whatever source and compare it to these witnesses.
Hundreds? Within the basin of land from the Annex to the Pentagon facade?

 

[mudlark]

There are no "testimonies." Only a few interviews that you put all your faith into and ignore everything else. Typical of TM cult members. Your interviews are not verified since the physical evidence does not confirm them. In every court of law, physical evidence trumps eyewitness testimony every single time. So, where is your proof that the physical evidence was fabricated, planted, etc.? Do you have even one eyewitness that saw the light poles pushed over by NWO agents? People running around the lawn throwing aircraft debris all over the place? Certainly, you have a "verified and confirmed" eyewitness to that.

I put my ´faith´ into people who were actually there that day with no axe to grind who were in a position to describe the plane´s approach. Especially if they corraborate from various positions.
This testimony is uncontaminated from ordinary people. That´s why I have ´faith´ in it.

 

[WildCat]

Yes, that´s all I want to discuss. Witness testimony from whatever source and compare it to these witnesses.
Hundreds? Within the basin of land from the Annex to the Pentagon facade?

By "these witnesses", you mean the ones who say the plane hit the Pentagon, yes?

 

[mudlark]

I listed a couple south of Citgo witnesses in an earlier post. Can you explain EACH ONE?

As for the shadow, there seems to be some dark sports at the exact moment (if I'm not mistaken) and the exact place (if I'm not mistaken) where there is supposed to be a shadow from flight 77.

You´ll have to remind me..I´m a bit busy at the moment keeping up with questions that have nothing to do with the posts I´ve entered on this thread.

the exact place (if I'm not mistaken) where there is supposed to be a shadow from flight 77.

The important word being ´supposed´

 

[mudlark]

By "these witnesses", you mean the ones who say the plane hit the Pentagon, yes?

I have no problem discussing witnesses who claim to have seen an impact.
I´m trying to discern how NOC coupled with an impact are physically possible.
They aren´t.