Heliport tower ATC Sean Boger: ultimate validation of the north side approach

[Baylor]

It's not the fault of CIT that the plane had to have been on the south side for the official story to be true.

Who the hell said that?

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

TLB:
HOW WAS THE WITNESS STATEMENTS VERIFIED?

Simply by interviewing the witnesses.

 

[dtugg]

That would be dozens.

Go back and watch all of their presentations, read through their threads, and count for yourself if you don't believe it.

Isn't it 13 NoC witnesses? Is 13 dozens?

 

[dtugg]

Simply by interviewing the witnesses.

You forgot, "and throwing out the parts that don't fit their delusions."

 

[Baylor]

Isn't it 13 NoC witnesses? Is 13 dozens?

I wouldn't exactly call the phone call to Mr. Roseborough an "interview."

 

[HyJinX]

Hi TLB.

Were the lampposts planted or not planted?

Thanks.

 

[double_o]

T
It's not their fault that a northern approach was reported by the CMH, National Geographic, and every single witness they interviewed.

Oh really?

Is that means they never interviewed Keith Wheelhouse, Mike Walter, Madlene Zakhem, Stephen McGraw, Loyd England and Wanda Ramey.

 

[dtugg]

Oh really?

Is that means they never interviewed Keith Wheelhouse, Mike Walters, Madlene Zakhem, Stephen McGraw, Loyd England and Wanda Ramey.

But those are the shills/assets/operatives! Obviously they don't count.

 

[DGM]

Simply by interviewing the witnesses.

How does that verify as FACT as you seem to imply?

 

[Bobert]

Isn't it 13 NoC witnesses? Is 13 dozens?

Remedial math skills seems to be a trand amongst the CIT Cult and their cult followers.

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

Is that means they never interviewed Keith Wheelhouse, Mike Walters, Madlene Zakhem, Stephen McGraw, Loyd England and Wanda Ramey.

Excuse me...every witness in a position to see the citgo and specifically state on what side it flew.

I swear the ONLY arguments you guys assert are based around semantics, typos, and faulty logic.

It's really pathetic.

 

[dtugg]

A CIT cult member calling us pathetic. Doesn't get any more hilarious than that.

 

[Mr.Herbert]

Simply by interviewing the witnesses.

So what you're saying is that Craig verified Sean Bogers statement.
"I watched the plane hit the Pentagon"

Thanks TLB! Oh, and thank you Craig Ranke.
The self debunking style of CIT is facinating.

 

[DavidJames]

It's really pathetic.

Pathetic is ignoring the literal tons of evidence that proves what really happened
Pathetic is ignoring the witnesses which prove your fantasy is just that.
Pathetic is believing the U.S. government is complicit in 9/11 and refusing to do anything of substance to achieve justice

But the champion pathetic thing you do is ignore your own witness testimony because it spoils your wet dream

That, asshat, is pathetic.

 

[beachnut]

...every witness in a position to see the citgo ...

It's really pathetic.

11.2G math? Yes I agree.

CIT witnesses point to the South! When you watch the video they point to the south flight path. Add infinite laughing dogs…

Yep, you have delusions from CIT (world worse investigators WWI) and Balsamo (11.2G failed math 11.2GFM). That is pathetic.

But CIT confirmed for the world Boger Saw 77 impact the Pentagon.

The OP brings us two things-
The worse interview in history as CIT steps on Boger.
Boger saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

 

[bje]

Well, we're still where we all were on 9/11/2001 when AA77 hit the Pentagon.

AA77 hit the Pentagon, Franco is still dead, there's not a spot of evidence to the contrary, and there is no evidence of any jet flying over and away from the Pentagon.

My thread is awfully lonely.

 

[Bell]

This is one of the strangest comments I have ever read.

It's not the fault of CIT that the plane had to have been on the south side for the official story to be true.

It's not their fault that a northern approach was reported by the CMH, National Geographic, and every single witness they interviewed.

Their "conclusion" simply exits because of this overwhelming evidence.

Not the other way around.

CIT did not create the evidence. They simply reported it.

Has CIT contacted NG allready? Has CIT asked NG to confirm the NoC flightpath? I imagine yes, being the honest boys that CIT are (Craig even goes as far as calling himself "honest, forthright, honorable, and correct.") Would you be so nice as to post NG's reaction? As long as NG has not confirmed CIT's nonsense, you can take them of your list with evidence.

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

It's not their fault that a northern approach was reported by the CMH, National Geographic, and every single witness they interviewed.

In several posts wherever you've claimed this, I've asked what the response of the National Geographic was. You have so far not only failed to provide an answer, but you've actually ignored the question. I can only assume this means that CIT never even bothered to contact National Geographic to ask them. It rather telling, something any researcher or journalist understand.

 

[DGM]

In several posts wherever you've claimed this, I've asked what the response of the National Geographic was. You have so far not only failed to provide an answer, but you've actually ignored the question. I can only assume this means that CIT never even bothered to contact National Geographic to ask them. It rather telling, something any researcher or journalist understand.

It's also telling to note they have never asked for clarification from their witnesses (who all say it hit the building) as to the plane hitting the building. They have also never told them why they think they saw (their explanation) what they did.

I wonder why.

 

[dtugg]

Why didn't the fraudulent idiots get their witnesses to abandon one of their two mutually exclusive claims? Either the plane hit the Pentagon or it flew NoC. I wonder if this is because they knew which one would be abandoned.