• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

When is CIT going to release its interviews?

1337m4n

Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
1337m4n
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
3,510
They've been talking about flyover witnesses and whatnot for months now. Anyone have an idea when their interviews are going to be available on the interweb? The ones I can find are of their original debunked four.
 
Pleaes give them some time they lost the instruction manual on how to eject the tape:













51R7A4JRD2L._SL500_AA280_.jpg
 
Could someone post a link to the CIT interview with the employees at the airport who handled the landing of AA77 after the flyover?

Thanks in advance!
 
I wonder what day it is now, since I began counting the days until the authorities start the investigation for them?

I also recall them promising to release all of their tapes, all of their interviews unedited...seen those yet???

Why am I not surprised.

TAM:)
 
Officially documented by the Center For Military History and Library of congress
Click to expand...
WTF?
I would love an explanation for this "Official Documentation" that the CIT is touting.
 
Last edited:
Oh boy oh boy. did you see the s turn the arlington grounds keeper was trying to draw over the annex on the photograph? This is gonna be fun.

:dl:

groundskeeperScurve.jpg
 
That is a great point!
I do like how Craig spices it up by turning the victims on flight 77 into a marketing tool for this crapumentary.
Pentagon attack jet
Click to expand...
I like how in the preview you can hear him lead the witness.
As his "witness" is drawing a line showing the flight path Ranke comments
"so it was banking".
 
Last edited:
Hey Terriercell, that video does nicely a answer a good portion of the recent touted witnesses. Kudos, CIT finally has something up. And I have to say, they sound good for the case. All the dishonesty and twisting aside, I've always felt curiously wrong witnesses who just emerge from the woodwork in batches saying impossible things are part of the problem. That is, it's not all CIT, it's also people who freely say, corroborating each other, that it flew north of the Citgo and impacted, or it banked right to the north of the Annex, or whatever.

These guys are saying "second plane." Does that make them 2nd plane cover story liars like Sucherman and Wheelhouse? If not, why do they think the flyover was a second plane? If so, why do CIT trust liars to establish the plane being north of stuff and banking and stuff?

The toy plane is nice touch. Somehow when I see that I think bath time, (cue Ernie's rubber ducky song from Sesame Street). If that makes no sense, then never mind.

So those are covered. We're still waiting on Stephens, Boger, Morin, and some others... recordings, transcripts, anything better than CIT's word as to what they actually said... and the full Roberts interview, the words before "upon impact" Since I can't see their forum, maybe I missed where any of this was released? Can you tip us off here if so?

You know what, don't even answer. I don't want to know anything except how the big trial where all this evidence is finally used is going. Are you even in the preliminary stages yet?
 
You are doing nothing but trolling right now and the above has been reported as well as your troll on my thread.
Seems you want another vacation, eh?
 
Caustic Logic said:
Hey Terriercell, that video does nicely a answer a good portion of the recent touted witnesses. Kudos, CIT finally has something up. And I have to say, they sound good for the case. All the dishonesty and twisting aside, I've always felt curiously wrong witnesses who just emerge from the woodwork in batches saying impossible things are part of the problem. That is, it's not all CIT, it's also people who freely say, corroborating each other, that it flew north of the Citgo and impacted, or it banked right to the north of the Annex, or whatever.

These guys are saying "second plane." Does that make them 2nd plane cover story liars like Sucherman and Wheelhouse? If not, why do they think the flyover was a second plane? If so, why do CIT trust liars to establish the plane being north of stuff and banking and stuff?

The toy plane is nice touch. Somehow when I see that I think bath time, (cue Ernie's rubber ducky song from Sesame Street). If that makes no sense, then never mind.

So those are covered. We're still waiting on Stephens, Boger, Morin, and some others... recordings, transcripts, anything better than CIT's word as to what they actually said... and the full Roberts interview, the words before "upon impact" Since I can't see their forum, maybe I missed where any of this was released? Can you tip us off here if so?

You know what, don't even answer. I don't want to know anything except how the big trial where all this evidence is finally used is going. Are you even in the preliminary stages yet?
Click to expand...

:dl::dl::dl::dl:
 
I just wonder how many of those witnesses finished their comments with a "...and then it hit they building" or "...then I watched it hit the Pentagon" or "...and then the airplane flew right into the Pentagon" and don't know that particular piece of important testimony ended up on the cutting room floor. You KNOW for a fact if anyone said "...then it banked up and away and never hit the building" it would be in there, with a breathless "Fly Over WItness Revealed!" lead-in by the CIT boys.

Utter bullcrap and the poorest, most embarrassing display of what cannot by anyone's definition be called "investigative journalism" possible. No wonder they can't get *any* traction with this BS from anyone but those who have nothing but a tenuous grasp on reality.
 
A W Smith said:
Oh boy oh boy. did you see the s turn the arlington grounds keeper was trying to draw over the annex on the photograph? This is gonna be fun.

:dl:

[qimg]http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/groundskeeperScurve.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Does the 'X' mark where the treasure is buried? Arrrrrrrrr
 
The CIT has uncovered mass murder at the hands of the government yet all they are concerned about is what the skeptics think.
Pathetic
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=104050&t=413869
so the best you debunkers could muster is to harp on semantics regarding titles and referrences, but not address any of the (newly documented) eyewitnesses:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117959
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117810

for the record, im assuming that the Library of Congress referrence is to this list of audio interviews:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/911_archive/title_sound_recordingI1.html
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/S?ammem/afc911bib:@FIELD(AUTHOR+@od1(+brennan,+jennifer+))

does that clear it up for you? so what will you distract yourselves with now? what nitnoy details can you nitpick on in order to avoid the overall implications of these newly interviewed witnesses?

how about you Reheat? i see you've made sure to take a couple jabs at CIT over at your frathouse, yet have been uncharacteristically silent here at LC. dont you have any relevant rebuttal? or are you looking to adjust/correct/ammend your earlier "calculations"?

can you utter even a single debunking phrase to refute what these witnesses saw? of course not. where's the usual "got math?" line you have been so quick to revert to? well do YOU have math? can you now go about calculating numbers to (attempt to) match what the witnesses saw? or are you only versed in math when it suits your theories? you claimed to be seeking truth did you not? so how about it?

fine, until the full presentation has been released, you are all off the hook. but after its release, you will have no excuses and there will be no wiggle room, no ambiguity to hide behind. what then?

will we finally see a concession that the North of Citgo path is what really happened? honestly - im not holding my breath for it. im sure your cognitive dissonance will kick in to an all-time new high and you will find a way to once again dismiss reality in favor of cozy blissful ignorance.

AND if the newest round of evidence fails to awaken you, then i doubt anything can shake loose the layers of programming you've succombed to. i only hope you guys realize how deaf/blind and apathetic you are to the truth, so you can quit wasting our time and we can quit wasting yours.
Click to expand...
Are these guys in Junior High?
The next thing the CIT will want to do is to meet us skeptics at the back racks at 3pm!
I mean you have evidence of mass murder yet all you care about is what people say on an internet forum?
And TC calls me obsessed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom