IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cit , craig ranke , lloyd england

Reply
Old 29th June 2019, 08:38 AM   #121
Myriad
The Clarity Is Devastating
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 17,626
There is only one rational response to the information that the yellow "perpendicular path" depicted on rubygray's map is impossible for the airliner to have flown, especially given that the witnesses did not report the aircraft being in a steep bank.

That would be something along the lines of, "Oh, I didn't know that about how airplanes work. I'll have to go back to the witness reports and the other available evidence and see if I can come up with a better hypothesis about the flight path. One that's actually physically possible."

Of course I'm not surprised that that response has not been given. But until it is, all other responses can be safely disregarded.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 08:46 AM   #122
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,380
So CIT assembled eye witnesses 8 years after the event and they "remembered" differently than actual event. Not surprising as memory fades/changes slightly with elapsed time. They can remember exactly where they stood and how they faced? I doubt the veracity of this video.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 08:59 AM   #123
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,693
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
There is only one rational response to the information that the yellow "perpendicular path" depicted on rubygray's map is impossible for the airliner to have flown, especially given that the witnesses did not report the aircraft being in a steep bank.

That would be something along the lines of, "Oh, I didn't know that about how airplanes work. I'll have to go back to the witness reports and the other available evidence and see if I can come up with a better hypothesis about the flight path. One that's actually physically possible."
The problem is that this entire bunch of garbage is not rational. The idiots who propagate this garbage have no understanding at all of aerodynamics, so they do what CE is doing and avoid any math or rationality regarding the nonsense. If they did it would have all been over years ago as all of the stupid flight paths are simply not possible based on aerodynamic fact. So they draw lines on a map and post what they interpret as valid witness statements to the exclusion of established facts.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 02:23 PM   #124
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Does this imply that you did??
Do tell.
I have the FDR and Radar data. Don't need witnesses. I am a qualified aircraft accident investigator who served on several investigations and was board president for one.

You are not qualified to use hearsay and make valid conclusions.

Jim Fetzer? lol - that is your source?

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
As you know, many of the "100 people" who claim to have seen the plane hit the Pentagon, were mistaken, as they were not in a position where they could see this. eg. Joel Sucherman. There was a group of trees blocking his view from the top of the bridge. He could see the south wall of the Pentagon, but there was no explosion there. etc etc etc.
100 witnesses saw 77 impact. FDR, Radar, damage to the Pentagon (exactly the damage a 757 going 483.5 knots at impact would make), DNA confirm the 100 who saw 77 impact the Pentagon.

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Why don't we discuss every one of those "100 people"? I would be interested to know what they all said they saw.
Darn, they are confirmed by FDR, Radar, DNA, damage to the Pentagon; even the jet fuel fireball on slowspeed parking lot video confirm this.

You are not able to research the jet fuel fire ball and compart to jet crashes? Sloopy research gives you some sick fantasy.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
I never mentioned a missile etc.
But there was indeed a "military aircraft" in the area at the same time as the plane flew. Many videos and a couple of excellent photos, plus testimony from numerous witnesses, prove this to be true.
The C-130 had to deviate for 77 who was not on a Flight path. The C-130 followed 77, directed by ATC. We have ATC radio records tracking 77 and talking to the C-130.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Actually, many witnesses testified to a plane flying over.
Nope, because the only aircraft flying over the Pentagon, or near besides 77 which impacted, was a C-130. No witnesses saw 77 fly over, the FDR, Radar prove it.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Here are just a few examples :
A few, not 100? I have the FDR and Radar, you have hearsay and failure to understand simile, metaphors, and have no clue how to use witness statements related to flying.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
At least 3 people travelling east on I-395 did make statements which are consistent with having seen a flyover.
Lol, this is funny, you dismiss 100 people who say they saw 77 hit the Pentagon, and like CIT believe in some magical flyover. Ignore the people which 77 almost hit as it impacted the Pentagon. Good one, did you learn this is aircraft accident investigation school or what? A big pile of "or what".


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Michael Kelly had a plane fly very low over his head as he was about to drive onto the 14th Street Bridge. Immediately he looked back, and heard and saw the explosion at the Pentagon behind him. He gave this testimony 20 minutes post impact, and sounded extremely confused at what he had seen.
It is very rare we see a plane going 480 knots full throttle at 40 feet, in a pitch pio. Confused? He could have been killed if the terrorists moved the "stick" (yoke) just a fraction of an inch. This witness is for impact.

You realize the damage to the Pentagon was due to a 757 loaded with people and luggage and fuel as a Kinetic Energy impact, not an explosion. Do you realize the impact was equal in energy to a 1200 pound bomb. Do you have a practical grasp of physics? How do you explain the damage to the Pentagon is Exactly what a 757 at 483.5 knots would do? Right you prefer to make up lies.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Don Scott was a busdriver travelling east on I-395, when after having just passed Macy's store in Crystal City, he witnessed a jet making a sharp turn from the north of the Pentagon. Then as it straightened out, he looked behind him, and saw and heard the explosion at the Pentagon. This testimony was published in the Washington Post on 9/16/2001.
Another witness for impact. He heard 77 impact the Pentagon. BTW, there was no explosion, it was 77's impact, not explosives. Simile, sounded like and explosion. Better study simile, you are about to suffer more from it.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Dennis Smith was a Pentagon employee having a cigarette in the courtyard, when he "saw the tail of the plane" before he heard and saw the explosion. Basic geometry applied to the 75-foot Pentagon roof and the plane's flight path proves that he could not have seen the tail of the jet on its approach from the west, from any point inside the courtyard. He could only have witnessed the tail if it had flown above him, across the 5-acre courtyard.
Got some timeline to go with this. Did you try to see if 77 tail was visible because the terrain is higher over the dreaded official flight path. I would have to say you failed to do any real math, geometry, and physics to go with another failed claim by you. Remember, most if not all of your so called witnesses agree an aircraft hit the Pentagon, and many point to the official flight path in CIT videos. Irony.

Where in the courtyard? Exactly where. How many seconds before he heard and saw the jet-fuel fireball? How far was he from the impact point, and why did he NOT see your flyover? lol, this gets silly after a while, you can't explain who faked the FDR, DNA, Radar, yet you present a witness who did not see your Flyover. How high was Flight 77 when he saw the tail? How high it the tail of 757? 44.5 feet! 4 seconds away 77 was over a 140 foot terrain, over 200 feet above the ground. Thus our witness for impact was at 35 feet MSL, and Flight 77's tail was at 384.5 feet MSL, about 3200 feet away, going over 800 feet per second. Can you do the geometry adding the Pentagon? Can you find out exactly where Dennis was on his smoke break? I would have left out the 5-acre stuff, it adds to the possibility he did see 77 seconds before impact since 77 did impact. Are you going to do the math? Got math?

Why do you have so many impact witnesses?

You can almost see a tail from 1200 feet back, 1000 feet up, and clearly see the tail at 6000 feet out and 500 feet up. Thus it is possible to see a tail four seconds away going 800 fps, about 3200 feet away; now is the Pentagon wall obstructing an object 3200 feet away about 350 feet higher than Smith. Got math?


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
David Ball was a truck driver on I-395 who testified to a friend of Jim Fetzer that he saw the plane fly over the Pentagon. When Fetzer heard about this, he tried to arrange for Ball to speak on his radio show. Ball was reluctant to do this. Shortly after, he was found murdered.
BTW, invoking Fetzer is an automatic you lost card. You lost. Fetzer is a liar, and will do most anything to support his failed fantasies, as he is being sued for doing so. Don't use Fetzer as a source, he makes your lies look dumber.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
CNN claimed during live coverage that, "An eye witness told us the plane didn't crash into the building".
This the "eyewitness" is not an eyewitness. What are you doing, a Sgt Schultz defense? I saw nothing.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Recently while going through old forums I read an account by a woman on the opposite side of the Pentagon who had a similar story, but I will need to find that again.
More hearsay to go with your fantasy of a flyover. The C-130 saw no flyover. Radar did not see a flyover. The tower at DCA, right next to the Pentagon did not see a flyover. Better study ATC reports and what really happened.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
The enigmatic "Skarlet" within a matter of hours, wrote up and published her experience in terms which vividly capture what would have been the disbelief of seeing a plane overflying the Pentagon, moulded by media saturation of the fireball and aftermath linked to a "hijacked 757".
There was no flyover, too bad no one got out their cameras. Guess you have not heard of Radar, or the fact an airport is right next to the Pentagon.


Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
ď'Buildings donít eat planes. That plane, it just vanished. There should have been parts on the ground. It should have rained parts on my car. The airplane didnít crash. Where are the parts?' Thatís the conversation I had with myself on the way to work. It made sense this morning. I swear that it did ...
It is true buildings don't eat planes. It crashed, it just vanished is a simile. There were thousands of parts on the ground. At 483.5 knots impact with the Pentagon, there will be thousands if not millions of small parts and the only large parts are the core of the engines found in the Pentagon. The landing gear, very strong, found in the Pentagon. The FDR, found in the Pentagon. All the DNA of the victims except the small boy, found in the Pentagon. The victimes you mock by spreading lies.

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
"I want to make it make sense. I want to know why thereís this gap in my memory, this gap that makes it seem as though the plane simply became invisible and banked up at the very last minute, but I donít think thatís going to happen."
What does this mean, banked up. What does this witness mean by banked up? You have nothing to support your claim. Oh, the plane hit the Pentagon. Darn, another witness for impact.

I guess some expected to see recognizable aircraft part, and there are parts if you know what makes up an aircraft. Like buildings, aircraft are not solid, you can't rent solid office space, or place hundreds of seats in a solid aircraft. The aircraft is a hollow Al tube, and does not do well at 483.5 knots hitting a building.

I study aircraft accidents during aircraft accident investigation class from USC, and high speed crashes don't leave large aircraft part as do slow speed crashes, as in landing speed crashes. Pilots are trained to crash as slow as possible, and many accidents happen during take off and landing, at slow speeds. When you bring up anyone who said there were no aircraft parts and use it as evidence for a sick fantasy, you failed. From a distance, if you did not witness the aircraft impact, you might not know it was an aircraft. There were parts all over.

What do you expect an aircraft to look like at impact of 483.5 knots?
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 03:47 PM   #125
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,380
beachnut, I'm curious what the FDR showed as height AGL. When was it 699(499) I don't remember which? The video says it is impossible to get to just off the ground and hit the Pentagon. I'm wondering if it was while he plane was circling down to reach the low level?
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 03:56 PM   #126
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
beachnut, I'm curious what the FDR showed as height AGL. When was it 699(499) I don't remember which? The video says it is impossible to get to just off the ground and hit the Pentagon. I'm wondering if it was while he plane was circling down to reach the low level?
About four seconds out, going 800 fps, 77 was over 200 feet (AGL) on the Radar Altimeter, over terrain about 140 feet MSL. I have the FDR in excel.

Will he do the math to show Smith could not see the tail? Does he know he can't use saw the tail, then the explosion (the KE impact) as evidence for a fly over.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 29th June 2019 at 04:36 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 06:58 PM   #127
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,657
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
.....

No one can refute the FDR with evidence.

......

Except Cap'n Bobby! Who somehow thought an FDR found inside the Pentagon proved a plane flew over the Pentagon!

CIT & PFFFFT! Pure comedy gold!
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 07:01 PM   #128
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
VIN NARAYANAN WAS A NORTHSIDE WITNESS

Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
This eyewitness actually refutes your nonsense. The location you've set is wrong:
Then I looked up to my left and saw an American Airlines jet flying right at me. The jet roared over my head, clearing my car by about 25 feet. The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign above me as it headed straight at the Pentagon.
https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...rst-person.htm

If he was heading North and he was under an exit sign, he could not have been in the location you've drawn him. He was either on the bridge or slightly south of it.

Also, guess what sign had damage from the plane?
So you are endorsing Aldo Marquis' flawed interpretation of Narayanan's s testimony as to his location?
Wrong.
This Official Flight Path believer is actually utilising CIT's imodel here, which was completely erroneous from the start.

Narayanan stated that he was "on the other side of the Pentagon" from Joel Sucherman.
There is several minutes of video shot from about 6 car lengths south of the bridge overhead sign, showing Joel Sucherman right there.
Therefore, Sucherman was on the SOUTH SIDE of the Pentagon,
and Vin Narayanan was necessarily on the NORTH side of the building.

This proves that Narayanan was a little south of one of the 2 overhead signs further north up Route 27.
But as the next overhead sign stands over only the southbound lanes, and Narayanan was northbound, it seems more likely that he was actually close to the overhead sign opposite the heliport, beside the cemetery.

That middle overhead sign is actually about 45 yards SOUTH of a line extended out from the southwest face of the Pentagon.
If Narayanan had been approaching this overhead sign, then he and Sucherman would have both been on the "SAME SIDE" of the Pentagon.
More proof Narayanan was nowhere near the bridge.

Narayanan stated categorically that no light poles were knocked down, from his perspective.
Another proof that he was nowhere near the bridge.
If he had been near the middle overhead sign, he would at least have seen Poles #4 & 5 to his right.
But he did not, so he must have been even further north.

He looked to his LEFT and saw the plane coming at him.
Had he been on the bridge with the plane travelling at 60 degrees to the highway, he would have had to ,look BEHIND him to see it.
This is proof that the plane crossed Route 27 more or less perpendicular to it, and NOT on the steep angle of the Official Flight Path.
Therefore also, proof that the plane DID NOT FLY ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

Narayanan looked to his RIGHT and watched the explosion.
There is no view of the impact site from that position on the bridge.
A group of trees totally obscures it.
So Narayanan cannot have been on the bridge.

Also, the impact site is not "to the right" from the bridge.
It is 330 yards northeast of the bridge.
He would have had to be looking FORWARD, but still could not have seen it.
Again, even more proof that Narayanan was not on the bridge.

The fabled "damage to the overhead sign on the bridge" is merely grasping at straws.
There is a small patch of what appears to be rust on an upright pole, which is totally consistent with the many similar patches of rust on all other components of overhead signs and guardrails in the vicinity.

The "missing rung" is not conclusive unless you are able to find photographic evidence of its presence before 9:37:46 a.m. on the morning of 9/11.

And even that would not be conclusive, because of the method by which I am aware that other "evidence" at this scene was staged in real time.
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 07:09 PM   #129
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
Real evidence ignored for fantasy

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
... And even that would not be conclusive, because of the method by which I am aware that other "evidence" at this scene was staged in real time.
Light posts were knocked down by 77.

There was zero evidence staged. Another lie. How many lies do you have?

FDR proves you wrong again.

Why do you lie and mock those murdered by terrorists?

Have you figured out your flight path was not seen on 911?

Explain how the FDR, Radar, DNA and more was faked, and how many people it took to do this fantasy you have and can't explain.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 07:19 PM   #130
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
lies born in ignorance, 9/11 truth legacy

The old gish gallop of cherry picked witnesses and fantasy interpretation.

How do they (9/11 liars) do it, without thinking about the murdered passengers on four jet, spreading failed interpretations turned into lies and fantasy. How do they do it.

Oh, I know. It is too simple to form wild fantasy, it requires no math, no research, just google it up, spin it, and lie. Mock the murdered with lies born in ignorance.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 07:20 PM   #131
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,657
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
A group of trees totally obscures it.

Oh dear lord, here we go again!

A 30' wide tree "totally obscures" a 125' x 155' x 125 ton aircraft!

Only in truther land!

Does his name sound Jewish? Maybe he was Mossad.

__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 07:22 PM   #132
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by AJM8125 View Post
Military aircraft? Over our Nation's Capital? With a great ******* air force base operating from across the river?

Do tell.
If I could find this evidence on videos and photos, as well as eye witness testimonies in the public domain, then it ought also to be obvious to you what that military aircraft was.

I suggest you spend some time researching for yourself, as I did.
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 07:26 PM   #133
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,657
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
If I could find this evidence on videos and photos, as well as eye witness testimonies in the public domain, then it ought also to be obvious to you what that military aircraft was.

I suggest you spend some time researching for yourself, as I did.

There's a great line from the Dan Brown novel The Lost Symbol about how people today mistake "researched" with "Googled".
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 08:05 PM   #134
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
TJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,663
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
If I could find this evidence on videos and photos, as well as eye witness testimonies in the public domain, then it ought also to be obvious to you what that military aircraft was.

I suggest you spend some time researching for yourself, as I did.
Research it? I've spent a few hours on the topic.

Say rubygray, What do you believe happened to N644AA, better known as AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757-223 which American Airlines claimed was destroyed when it was deliberately flown into The Pentagon?

What happened to the passengers and crew of N644AA? Their families held funerals and memorials, some are remembered by public spaces named for them. Are the families being lied to?

And what of all those witness testimonies that conclude with a great ******* American Airlines aircraft slamming into The Pentagon?

What research have you done on that?
__________________


Laughing my ass off as Trump's brown shirts are rounded up, one by one.

Last edited by TJM; 29th June 2019 at 08:06 PM.
TJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 09:35 PM   #135
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
Radar data ignored again.

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
If I could find this evidence on videos and photos, as well as eye witness testimonies in the public domain, then it ought also to be obvious to you what that military aircraft was.

I suggest you spend some time researching for yourself, as I did.
You have not done research, you have no clue your flight path was impossible due to your own witness statements.

Wow, the evidence for exactly which aircraft were where is in the Radar data, no need for video. A C-130 which passed 77 was asked by ATC to follow 77. You don't do reality, you do fantasy.

You have not done research, you do fantasy based on nonsense. You take witnesses and make up lies.

When will your refute the FDR, DNA, Radar, and the other witnesses who saw 77 hit the Pentagon? Never.

Have you done the math to see if Smith could see the tail? NO
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2019, 11:34 PM   #136
The Common Potato
Critical Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 410
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
For the newbies, watch this video which evolves the "map" Reheat has been lying about since more than a decade. Take your time, understand what is going on during the presentation.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Newbie here. I've been reading your stuff for several years. Reheat has not been lying about anything. CIT are simply incompetent and confused. They start off with the assumption that their witnesses are 100% correct and could not be in any way mistaken.
The Common Potato is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 03:38 AM   #137
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Narayanan stated that he was "on the other side of the Pentagon" from Joel Sucherman.
So that's your only proof of his location? Wow. Where does that come from? At what time was he "on the other side of the Pentagon"?

The rest is interpretation, not proof. That he didn't notice any poles clipped, doesn't mean there weren't any. Everything happened very quickly. It's even possible that he saw a pole being clipped and interpreted it as the sign being clipped. The relative left/right is not proof of anything.

I see you're studiously avoiding any replies as to what you think actually happened. I'm sure that's because you know it doesn't stand any critical scrutiny.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 08:30 AM   #138
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
CIT's EGREGIOUS ERRORS

Originally Posted by The Common Potato View Post
Newbie here. I've been reading your stuff for several years. Reheat has not been lying about anything. CIT are simply incompetent and confused. They start off with the assumption that their witnesses are 100% correct and could not be in any way mistaken.
That really is not true though, which is why I am posting here.

I believe CIT did some valuable work in finding and personally interviewing witnesses who had an excellent view of the plane. They did what nobody else could be bothered to do. They made numerous trips to Arlington and searched out witnesses. Mostly, they believed the witnesses' testimony, but in several cases, they made terrible errors. They accused some of their witnesses of lying and rejected their statements.

Why did they do this? Purely because of the photos of the cab next to the downed pole on the bridge. They had seen the pictures of the cab, and could not believe that the plane had knocked those poles down, nor the unlikely story of how a pole smashed through the cab windshield.

So they went out there to find answers. They were invited along as volunteer consultants by Dylan Avery for his film Loose Change Final Cut. They had never done any interviews before, and Lloyde was their first victim. Russell Pickering also was there. None of them believed the Official bridge-cab-pole story. They had been ridiculing this story on forums for years already.

They were convinced that Lloyde's story was the same as the Official version.
But Lloyde was telling a different story. He assumed that everybody understood what he was trying to tell them. They were talking at crossed purposes the whole time. They totally misconstrued everything Lloyde said.

Aldo, Craig & Russell knew that the Jason Ingersoll photographs were supposed to represent how the plane had hit Pole #1 while flying over the bridge, and that this pole had then impaled the windshield.

But Lloyde had never seen Ingersoll's photos. He knew where he was when the pole hit, and he took it for granted that everyone else knew too. So he was never asked outright to point out his location at impact, and Lloyde never thought to volunteer the information that he was beside the cemetery wall when the plane came into view for a split second as it flew across his cab, and a piece of pole smashed through his windshield.

At the end of the interview (in "The First Known Accomplice'), Aldo said to Lloyde,

"And when it happened, you were up on the bridge, right?"

Lloyde looked astounded and confused that anyone should ask that. He said,

"No! I wasn't up on no bridge".

Aldo kept trying to get him to say that he was on the bridge, and 5 times, Lloyde denied this vehemently.

But Aldo and Craig just would not accept this. They did not ask Lloyde to tell them where he was. They just assumed Lloyde was lying.

The next witness they interviewed was Father Stephen McGraw. He had stated that his car was a few feet away from Lloyde's cab. Therefore Aldo and Craig had formed the opinion that McGraw had to have been on the bridge too. McGraw stated that he got out of his car, walked across the traffic lanes and was on the lawn where he waited for victims to be brought out, within 1 minute or so.

But Mark Faram had taken photos of McGraw with victims on the lawn, and these were taken about 20 minutes after the impact. On the strength of this, Aldo and Craig decided McGraw was lying as well. However, I have now found an image of McGraw waiting there on the lawn opposite the heliport as he said, less than 3 1/2 minutes after impact. McGraw was not lying. He was a few feet away from Lloyde's cab ... and he saw the cab with a piece of pole in it ... beside the cemetery wall, not on the bridge.

On the next trip, Craig and cameraman Christopher Taylor interviewed Lloyde again. Craig absolutely harassed Lloyde. He put words in his mouth, he made blatant accusations that Lloyde had to have been on the bridge, but Lloyde staunchly maintained that he was opposite the heliport when it happened. Hence the video "The Eye of the Storm".

CIT also interviewed Joel Sucherman and Vin Narayanan. Again, because of their false idea that Lloyde was on the bridge, they misconstrued their locations, and assumed that these guys were lying. All because of those photos of the 5 downed poles. They went even further and decided that everybody who worked for the Gannett corporation was also lying, as they accused in their video "The USATODAY Parade".

But CIT was absolutely wrong in these accusations. Except for Mike Walter, who convicted himself by changing his story many times, all the other witnesses can be proven to have been at locations where their statements made perfect sense. CIT got these stories and locations wrong. All these people - Lloyde England, Father McGraw, Narayanan, Sucherman, Mary Ann Owens, were genuine northside witnesses.

CIT interviewed Sergeant William Lagasse, who testified that from his position at a gas pump at the Citgo, he saw the plane flying between the Citgo station and Arlington cemetery. This is proven correct because the Citgo FOIA-released CCTV footage shows Lagasse exactly where he had claimed to be. CIT totally accepted Lagasse's testimony - except for the part where he adamantly declared that Lloyde's cab was hit by a pole beside the cemetery, and that NOTHING HAPPENED ON THE BRIDGE.

That is the reason CIT's investigation floundered. Not because the flyover theory was wrong, but because they sabotaged it themselves with their slander of numerous other witnesses who could have supported it.
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 08:33 AM   #139
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
So that's your only proof of his location? Wow. Where does that come from? At what time was he "on the other side of the Pentagon"?

The rest is interpretation, not proof. That he didn't notice any poles clipped, doesn't mean there weren't any. Everything happened very quickly. It's even possible that he saw a pole being clipped and interpreted it as the sign being clipped. The relative left/right is not proof of anything.
Comprehension is apparently not your strongest atribute.

Try reading it all again, without the bigoted presumptuous attitude and preconceived notions.
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 08:45 AM   #140
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 30,422
The single biggest disproof of these CTs is that the "conspirators" couldn't be guaranteed tons of cameras wouldn't capture every incident. This is why the WTC can't use "missile" arguments, because even the first one was filmed by at least three cameras, and it is obviously a plane.

So it was time to goalpost shift there -- it's a different plane, with astounding engineering to paint windows as if it were a passenger plane, or a missile with attached wings, or some other crap.

At the Pentagon, they couldn't know only one slow-frame camera would happen to be pointing at the area of the crash at that moment. It's the height of incredulity to think they would, what, cross their fingers there weren't a dozen tourist cameras on at that moment?

And finally, why use different techniques at different buildings? Other planes not the real ones at the WTC, but a missile at the Pentagon -- why not use a third (and fourth) fake plane at the other sites?
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

Last edited by Beerina; 30th June 2019 at 08:47 AM.
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 09:12 AM   #141
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
TJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,663
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
On the next trip, Craig and cameraman Christopher Taylor interviewed Lloyde again. Craig absolutely harassed Lloyde. He put words in his mouth, he made blatant accusations that Lloyde had to have been on the bridge, but Lloyde staunchly maintained that he was opposite the heliport when it happened.
Every wonder why Mr. England insisted he wasn't on a bridge?



He was on an elevated roadway going across an overpass. While technically a bridge there is no perception of actually being on a bridge. That's why I wrote earlier:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 View Post
I don't see a bridge in the image you posted.
Niether did Mr. England.




There you go.
__________________


Laughing my ass off as Trump's brown shirts are rounded up, one by one.
TJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 09:14 AM   #142
The Common Potato
Critical Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 410
Really, the idea is that one doesn't ask leading questions. You don't ask which side of Cisco; you ask where on the map was the flight path? CIT are both dumb and intellectually dishonest. You seem not to get this simple idea.
The Common Potato is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 09:22 AM   #143
The Common Potato
Critical Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 410
I used to know a bloke who thought Everton was a good football club.
The Common Potato is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 09:30 AM   #144
The Common Potato
Critical Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 410
It floundered because it's fishy, there is no evidence to support it.
The Common Potato is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 09:59 AM   #145
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Comprehension is apparently not your strongest atribute.

Try reading it all again, without the bigoted presumptuous attitude and preconceived notions.
I've read it again, no change in opinion. His testimony is compatible with him being south of the sign at the bridge, and your interpretation is not proof for any other location, as you are taking certain things too literally (e.g. "to the right" - did you expect him to specify "to the northeast" or what?).

Take a look at this image: http://www.citizeninvestigationteam....outh-citgo.jpg - his testimony is compatible with a location a few cars behind the bus that is under the sign at the bridge.

And no one saw a plane banking at the angle required for the turn you propose, therefore that trajectory is just impossible.

I'll ask again, since you haven't replied: where does Narayanan state that he was "on the other side of the Pentagon" from Joel Sucherman, and when was he?
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 10:04 AM   #146
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,028
I really had hoped that ruby would show us the new videos and/or photos that they said support their new theory. It's been so damned long ago that ruby claimed there were new videos and photos supporting his new theory that I even forgot what the theory was, and how many new videos and how many new photos there are supposed to be.

Could ruby please go back to their very first posts here, read them, and now finally deliver their theory together with the videos and images (ideally annotated) that they believe supports that theory?

Thank you very much!

(I am essentially skipping any posts here that do not contain images or links to videos)
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 10:14 AM   #147
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,028
Originally Posted by AJM8125 View Post
Every wonder why Mr. England insisted he wasn't on a bridge?

https://i.imgur.com/yls9vVF.jpg

He was on an elevated roadway going across an overpass. While technically a bridge there is no perception of actually being on a bridge. That's why I wrote earlier:



Niether did Mr. England.




There you go.
Less than an hour ago, I was driving on a stretch of Autobahn that I new was crossing the shallow valley of a minor river. A traffic sign slowed traffic from unlimited (it's the Autobahn, folks! ) to 100 and then 80 km/h, with an explanation that they were repairing the bridge, and I didn't spot a bridge and wondered for a moment or two what bloody bridge they are talking about, and only after I had crossed the bridge and speed limit was discontinued did I remember that I must have crossed the bridge over the river and that that is they bridge they are repairing. I have crossed that bridge quite a few times, with the general knowledge that somewhere along that stretch the Autobahn crosses a river, so there must be a bridge, but practically never were aware I was on a bridge. Simply the facts that the Autobahn has a wide shoulder, and that the river is lined with shrubbery, is enough to conceal that you are on a bridge.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 10:39 AM   #148
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,380
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
About four seconds out, going 800 fps, 77 was over 200 feet (AGL) on the Radar Altimeter, over terrain about 140 feet MSL. I have the FDR in excel.

Will he do the math to show Smith could not see the tail? Does he know he can't use saw the tail, then the explosion (the KE impact) as evidence for a fly over.
Ok, do you have any idea as to why he stated the altitude and the impossibility of getting to near zero altitude to hit the Pentagon?
Realizing he is a CT and misuses data for their own stupid reasons.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 10:43 AM   #149
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
rubygray's failed to the physics for his fantasy failed flight path

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
...
That is the reason CIT's investigation floundered. Not because the flyover theory was wrong, but because they sabotaged it themselves with their slander of numerous other witnesses who could have supported it.
CIT made up lies, there was no flyover, Radar and witnesses prove it.

Be sure to ignore the FDR, Radar and DNA. Science will destroy your sick fantasy.

Why do you apologize for 19 murderers? Why do you hate the USA?
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 11:27 AM   #150
CompusMentus
Waiting for the Worms
 
CompusMentus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Swansea UK
Posts: 1,672
Originally Posted by The Common Potato View Post
I used to know a bloke who thought Everton was a good football club.

Obvious disinfo

Compus
__________________
Tongue-tied and twisted just an earth-bound misfit
CompusMentus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 03:30 PM   #151
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Its pretty hard to ignore real time data concerning the aircraft.
I find it impossible to ignore the internally corroborative evidence revealed on numerous videos independently shot from separate locations, taken prior to 9:48 a.m. (when Jason Ingersoll's first photo of Lloyde England's cab on the bridge was taken).

Last edited by rubygray; 30th June 2019 at 04:20 PM. Reason: Typo corrected
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 03:34 PM   #152
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,028
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
...evidence revealed on numerous videos independently shot from separate locations on numerous videos taken prior to 9:48 a.m. ...
I think you haven't shown and explained those videos, or have you?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 03:50 PM   #153
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Why do you apologize for 19 murderers? Why do you hate the USA?
Surely you know that many of the alleged hijackers are still well and functional in their home countries? But the faces published as belonging to those falsely accused "hijackers" have never been corrected. Do you imagine that G. Dubbaya's good buddy Osama really said to himself, "I know what let's do! Let's kill a few thousand citizens of the US of A so's they have the excuse they need to invade Arab countries and wantonly slaughter millions of us"?

I hate corruption wherever it breeds.

It is only your vicious and perverted imagination that thinks I hate the USA. Whenever i was there though, many of its own citizens hated it so much that they wanted to come home with me.

But it is this kind of blind fomented bigotry among American citizens which was so ready to support a wholesale criminal slaughter of potentially millions minding their own business at home in their sovereign countries, after George Bush so cleverly solved the world's greatest whodunnit within 2 hours of the towers being hit. What happened there is no less reprehensible than the war crimes committed in any other dictatorial act of mass extermination. 9/11 was merely the ruse contrived to justify a mandate for the phony "war on terror".
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 03:53 PM   #154
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I think you haven't shown and explained those videos, or have you?
No, not yet, or at least not here. I am laying it all out elsewhere in my thread "LLOYDE ENGLAND VINDICATED WITH NEW EVIDENCE ON PHOTOS AND VIDEO".
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 04:07 PM   #155
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 32,741
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Surely you know that many of the alleged hijackers are still well and functional in their home countries?
What is your evidence for this claim?
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 04:16 PM   #156
rubygray
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 407
WHY WOULD I NEED TO WONDER?

Originally Posted by AJM8125 View Post
Every wonder why Mr. England insisted he wasn't on a bridge?

https://i.imgur.com/yls9vVF.jpg

He was on an elevated roadway going across an overpass. While technically a bridge there is no perception of actually being on a bridge. That's why I wrote earlier:

Niether did Mr. England.



There you go.
Lloyde England was a career cabbie in his home town when a pole crashed through his windscreen.

Just as you no doubt recollect exactly where you were when 9/11happened, so did Lloyde.

He said he was not on the bridge because he was not there.

He was 350 yards north of the bridge, as has now been proven by several of the many videos which were confiscated by the FBI immediately after the event.

Some of these videos were subsequently released under FOIA submissions, but only after they had been either doctored for general exhibition, or deemed so inocuous as to be no threat.

However the FBI did not scrutinise some of these videos carefully enough before releasing them. When Lloyde England's evidence is taken at face value, and some of those videos are analysed at the time and location where he stated he was prior to the Jason Ingersoll photos, it is revealed that Lloyde was telling the truth. His taxi was videoed there by the cemetery wall, opposite the heliport, at 9:41 - 42 a.m.

His cab was then videoed being moved to the bridge scene by 9:45 a.m.

It is true that the cab was photographed on the bridge at 9:48 a.m., and that Lloyde was photographed near the cab on the bridge from 9:55 a.m. (fully 18 minutes post impact), but as Lloyde consistently protested,

"THAT'S NOT WHERE IT HAPPENED!"

Last edited by rubygray; 30th June 2019 at 04:19 PM. Reason: Durned predictive texting
rubygray is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 04:19 PM   #157
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,472
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Surely you know that many of the alleged hijackers are still well and functional in their home countries?
I know that the woo cranks have made that claim.

But I know I have researched it and found it to be utter BS only swallowed by the gullible.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 04:45 PM   #158
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Niceville, Florida, USA
Posts: 5,130
Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Surely you know that many of the alleged hijackers are still well and functional in their home countries? But the faces published as belonging to those falsely accused "hijackers" have never been corrected.

No, they aren't. Why do you think that no two Arabs can possibly have the same name? For example: Here is an intelius.com search for the name Tim McVeigh, and we find that there are several listed (#20 is the "real" Timothy McVeigh, BTW). Or is this evidence of some vast government conspiracy concerning the Oklahoma City bombing?

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Do you imagine that G. Dubbaya's good buddy Osama really said to himself, "I know what let's do! Let's kill a few thousand citizens of the US of A so's they have the excuse they need to invade Arab countries and wantonly slaughter millions of us"?

Argument from incredulity. Fail. Further, your ignorance of the terrorist mindset is frankly breathtaking. Terrorists generally want their targets to react disproportionately, in order to provide the terrorists with handy propaganda and recruiting material. And, apart from the issue of your blatant hyperbole, why do you imagine that bin Laden cared how many Arabs had to die in order to achieve his goal of getting the US out of Saudi Arabia?

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
But it is this kind of blind fomented bigotry among American citizens which was so ready to support a wholesale criminal slaughter of potentially millions minding their own business at home in their sovereign countries . . .

More blatant hyperbole. Fail.

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
. . . after George Bush so cleverly solved the world's greatest whodunnit within 2 hours of the towers being hit.

[citation needed]

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
What happened there is no less reprehensible than the war crimes committed in any other dictatorial act of mass extermination. 9/11 was merely the ruse contrived to justify a mandate for the phony "war on terror".

Why don't you provide some real evidence that the US has engaged in acts of "mass extermination" in Iraq and Afghanistan? We'll wait.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 04:50 PM   #159
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
Alive terrorists story was retracted long ago - wow

Originally Posted by rubygray View Post
Surely you know that many of the alleged hijackers are still well and functional in their home countries? But the faces published as belonging to those falsely accused "hijackers" have never been corrected. Do you imagine that G. Dubbaya's good buddy Osama really said to himself, "I know what let's do! Let's kill a few thousand citizens of the US of A so's they have the excuse they need to invade Arab countries and wantonly slaughter millions of us"?

I hate corruption wherever it breeds.

It is only your vicious and perverted imagination that thinks I hate the USA. Whenever i was there though, many of its own citizens hated it so much that they wanted to come home with me.

But it is this kind of blind fomented bigotry among American citizens which was so ready to support a wholesale criminal slaughter of potentially millions minding their own business at home in their sovereign countries, after George Bush so cleverly solved the world's greatest whodunnit within 2 hours of the towers being hit. What happened there is no less reprehensible than the war crimes committed in any other dictatorial act of mass extermination. 9/11 was merely the ruse contrived to justify a mandate for the phony "war on terror".
Wow, the alive terrorists card! lol
No, the alive "hijackers" have the same name as the murderers/terrorists. You feel for the dumbest mistake by some reporter, and it was corrected, thus you do open loop fantasy. The same names were retracted, 19 terrorists identified on planes by witnesses and some with DNA died at impact.

You have a sick fantasy born in hatred of the USA, and are projecting much.

As expected you can't do the physics to see your flight path is not possible. FDR debunks your lies.

UBL failed, he went too far. UBL had to hide out for years with his wives. Rich Saudi thought he was of Islam, he was a simple thug, and was laughing at those like you making up wild fantasy - bet he felt good that some are so gullible and paranoid to make him feel better he murdered thousands with his failed followers.

Why do you apologize for 19 murderers, and do it spreading lies with no supporting evidence. Only russian hacker are dumber than 9/11 truth nuts like CIT.

I doubt anyone but paranoid conspiracy theories want to follow you to ... nowhere - you hate the USA, don't like Bush, typical of 9/11 truthers who only have lies and fantasy.

Anyone who did not suspect UBL was involved (as a suspect) 9/11 after the second aircraft impact was not paying attention to world wide terrorism (based on perfect weather and systems being up). Even Bush had briefings on world wide terrorism, and he paid attention (ironic to see so many dems miss bush since clownstick arrived). Why did you fail to suspect UBL? Right, you don't do rational research.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 30th June 2019 at 04:57 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2019, 04:57 PM   #160
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Niceville, Florida, USA
Posts: 5,130
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
UBL failed, he went too far. UBL had to hide out for years with his wives. Rich Saudi thought he was of Islam, he was a simple thug . . .

That's a good point; in addition to not caring about the cost, he presumably thought that once the US took enough casualties, we'd give up and go home, as in Vietnam. But he should have asked the Japanese how that plan worked out for them in 1941.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.