8 out of 8 at Citgo station

911kongen

Critical Thinker
911kongen
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
363
.. says that flight 77 had a different flight path ? Whats the source on this one.. can not find it!:boggled:
 
Seriously 911Kongen...don't even waste a minute of your life on CIT. They're absolutely, certifiably bonkers.
 
Wow. 8 out of 8. That's better than the 4 out of 5 dentists who recommend sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum!

Sorry. Had to do it.
 
It's another exercise in special pleading for the twoofers.

The witnesses interviewed by the Crap Instigation Team also affirm that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Ranke and Marquis routinely tie themselves into knots over this.
 
8 out of 8 people they decided to put in their video agree with them, surprising, no?
 
They (twoofer) say its 8 out of 8 people at the Citgo station. So who are they? One is named Williams Lassede or something like that... the other 7 is?
 
911kongen said:
They (twoofer) say its 8 out of 8 people at the Citgo station. So who are they? One is named Williams Lassede or something like that... the other 7 is?
Click to expand...

9K, you're kind of an odd kid. But if you're serious, I will answer as best I can.

I don't know of any 8 Citgo witnesses claim at all. There's no explanation or links here so far. There are three main Citgo witnesses anyway, the original cast of Impossible North Path Impact: The Non-Musical.
1) DPS Sgt. William Lagasse - first round with Eastman - second round with CIT
2) DPS Sgt. Chadwick Brooks was in a parking lot quite near the Citgo, but not quite at it. Close enough.
3) Robert Turcios - discovery by CIT - video corroboration he lied to them

100% of these Citgo witnesses, which are the only ones I know of, do say the plane was North of The Citgo. Whhoooopty dooo, words. Find 8, or 66, I don't care. Its like putting feathers on a scale balanced with a stack of bricks. Seriously. For all the reasons I'm too tired of reiterating.
 
Caustic Logic said:
100% of these Citgo witnesses, which are the only ones I know of, do say the plane was North of The Citgo. Whhoooopty dooo, words. Find 8, or 66, I don't care. Its like putting feathers on a scale balanced with a stack of bricks. Seriously. For all the reasons I'm too tired of reiterating.
Click to expand...


Long story short, Caustic Logic thinks that all those witnesses are planted in a huge disinfo operation anyway.
 
Who are the 8? I only know of two who were at the Citgo. One was leaning in his car and the other ran inside after pooping on himself. Please source the other 6, I'd really like to hear their accounts.
 
This just in - sometimes people on the internet are wrong.

ETA - you didn't click my link above, did you?

Here is Shirley Hughes "agreeing" with CIT.

CIT: Listen, because of the evidence we have, we know that the plane did not hit the building and continued on.
SHIRLEY: Yeah
CIT: Excuse me?! Yeah what?
SHIRLEY: What you said.
CIT: What did I say?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
Long story short, Caustic Logic thinks that all those witnesses are planted in a huge disinfo operation anyway.
Click to expand...

Long story short, CIT thinks that all those 100's of South Side Witnesses, the debris, the DNA, the various flight path data, the damage pattern, the CIT's own witnesses testimony that the god damn plane hit the freaking Pentagon, etc, were planted in a huge disinfo operation anyway.

Thanks CE! You make it insanely easy to debunk those ****ing morons!
 
911kongen said:
.. says that flight 77 had a different flight path ? Whats the source on this one.. can not find it!:boggled:
Click to expand...

Ah yes....a few people think that the plane was on a different approach path...yet they all still agree that it hit the pentagon.

That's like a few people claiming that the man who robbed the bank came from a different direction...it doesn't change the fact that they saw him rob the bank.
 
There goes 16.5. Always the same people popping up in these threads. "Funny" Craig Ranke photoshops in 3, 2, 1,...

@BCR: You're right - first the bunk, then the debunk ;)

Here's the latest CIT presentation. Regardless of ones opinion of their argument, they do an excellent job in presenting it. First the claim, then the evidence. No spooky music. I don't know the minutiae of it, but seem to remember that "8 Citgo witnesses" is not correct. They have more like four or five directly at the station, but all in all we are talking about more than a dozen witnesses corroborating a flightpath north of the gas station. Most if not all of them were not able to see the impact.

"National Security Alert"
 
Childlike Empress said:
There goes 16.5. Always the same people popping up in these threads. "Funny" Craig Ranke photoshops in 3, 2, 1,...

@BCR: You're right - first the bunk, then the debunk ;)

Here's the latest CIT presentation. Regardless of ones opinion of their argument, they do an excellent job in presenting it. First the claim, then the evidence. No spooky music. I don't know the minutiae of it, but seem to remember that "8 Citgo witnesses" is not correct. They have more like four or five directly at the station, but all in all we are talking about more than a dozen witnesses corroborating a flightpath north of the gas station. Most if not all of them were not able to see the impact.

"National Security Alert"
Click to expand...

If only they could come up with ONE witness who saw the plane pull up and fly over the Pentagon. Now THAT would be impressive, don't you agree?
 
twinstead said:
If only they could come up with ONE witness who saw the plane pull up and fly over the Pentagon. Now THAT would be impressive, don't you agree?
Click to expand...
If you want to see serious tap dancing, ask them if their witnesses were in a position to see the "fly over".:boxedin:
 
twinstead said:
If only they could come up with ONE witness who saw the plane pull up and fly over the Pentagon. Now THAT would be impressive, don't you agree?
Click to expand...


Would it make a change for you? What would you do if they were able to do so?

Better do your homework and watch the ****ing video before you answer, twinstead.
 
Not worth the effort

911kogen, I'm going to echo those posters who have counseled you to not waste your time with anyone having anything to do with the egregious CIT.

They are, truthfully, the worst of a bad lot and do not merit nor deserve scrutiny of any kind. That's exactly what they want. It's best to just ignore them.
 
A CIT and Chavez defender, how quaint. I suppose it's easier to defend CIT nowadays eh?
 
1 out of 1 in my household think CIT are @#$%ing loons, and now the 4 who I didn’t interview think I am too.
 
Childlike Empress said:
There goes 16.5. Always the same people popping up in these threads.
Click to expand...

Well reasoned response CE, rolls eyes.

Anyhow, we see that you have drawn deeply from the cup that is CIT. A No Planer at the pentagon, that is very nice.

Say, are you going to join the lynch mob and go after Lloyde England too? He is the heart of the conspiracy, you know. Craig and Aldo tell us that.

Say, now that you are a No Planer, can you ask Craig when they are going to release their raw videos as they promised? Or perhaps you do not care, you are convinced by their "excellent job in presenting it."

You know who else had an excellent way in presenting things? Leni Riefenstahl.
 
Caustic Logic said:
9K, you're kind of an odd kid. But if you're serious, I will answer as best I can.

I don't know of any 8 Citgo witnesses claim at all. There's no explanation or links here so far. There are three main Citgo witnesses anyway, the original cast of Impossible North Path Impact: The Non-Musical.
1) DPS Sgt. William Lagasse - first round with Eastman - second round with CIT
2) DPS Sgt. Chadwick Brooks was in a parking lot quite near the Citgo, but not quite at it. Close enough.
3) Robert Turcios - discovery by CIT - video corroboration he lied to them

100% of these Citgo witnesses, which are the only ones I know of, do say the plane was North of The Citgo. Whhoooopty dooo, words. Find 8, or 66, I don't care. Its like putting feathers on a scale balanced with a stack of bricks. Seriously. For all the reasons I'm too tired of reiterating.
Click to expand...


Thank you! I was looking around for the 8 peoples. But my conclusion is that the person im debating with, dont know anything! I believed that I maby was wrong, and that there was 8 people at citgo confirming a different flight path! So I asked if anybody had the source on this conspiracy theory!

I dont like asking the people im debating about this.. but maby I should! But he has to have heard this form some conspiracy nut! Then not asked for source and told it like a fact.

To me that was new, so I looked around, but did not find the 8 persons at Citgo. Now i know why! :D
 
Childlike Empress said:
And you? What parts of the evidence do you think were made up? Agree with CL?
Click to expand...


Apparently out little laderhozen clad twoofer thinks


  • Lamp posts downed by plane impact: faked
  • Generator damage by engine impact: faked
  • Boeing parts on the ground and inside the building: faked
  • Impact hole cutout in the Pentagon matching a 757-sized jetliner: faked
  • Recovered DNA identifying Flight 77 passengers and crew: faked
  • Recovered victim personal effects provided to family members: faked
  • All witnesses to the plane impact: plants or confused about what they saw
  • tree branches and leaves shorn off at the overpass by flight 77's engine and seen strewn about the highway amongst the downed lamp posts: faked
  • the missing foot peg and impact scar on the VDOT camera pole: faked

  • The genset trailer damage pushed TOWARD the direction of the pentagon face: faked
You better get your game on girly girl because I will OWN you when it comes to the pentacon.
 
Last edited:
Why the **** do they need to debate anyone when they have their indisputable proof? Is this about the Truth and exposing them or just about feeding their narcissism? Is there a difference?
 
As I posted earlier - Indeed, as we look a little closer, we discover that the flyover theory only works if humans on all of the other sides of the Pentagon do not exist.

Debating a mentally ill person is not only a waste of time, it's actually mean in that it lends credence to their delusions.

ETA - tuc0 beat me to it. Great minds, etc.
 
Childlike Empress said:
You didn't answer my question, 16.5.

btw, Ranke credits Caustic Logic as the only one of their critics who was willing to debate one on one. Here's their two years old discussion.

Maybe John Bursill will be the second.
Click to expand...

You did not ask me a question, genius.

I'll consider debating them once I have received the raw unedited video they promised to release.

Funny that you ignored that, No Planer.
 
A W Smith said:
Apparently out little laderhozen clad twoofer thinks


  • Lamp posts downed by plane impact: faked
  • Generator damage by engine impact: faked
  • Boeing parts on the ground and inside the building: faked
  • Impact hole cutout in the Pentagon matching a 757-sized jetliner: faked
  • Recovered DNA identifying Flight 77 passengers and crew: faked
  • Recovered victim personal effects provided to family members: faked
  • All witnesses to the plane impact: plants or confused about what they saw
    [*]tree branches and leaves shorn off at the overpass by flight 77's engine and seen strewn about the highway amongst the downed lamp posts: faked
  • the missing foot peg and impact scar on the VDOT camera pole: faked

  • The genset trailer damage pushed TOWARD the direction of the pentagon face: faked
You better get your game on girly girl because I will OWN you when it comes to the pentacon.
Click to expand...
Do you have a picture for the one in bold?... I haven't seen that before.
 
Childlike Empress said:
You didn't answer my question, 16.5.

btw, Ranke credits Caustic Logic as the only one of their critics who was willing to debate one on one. Here's their two years old discussion.

Maybe John Bursill will be the second.
Click to expand...

Yes Childlike, because most rational people have no problems debating actual evidence. However, they do not present actual evidence, but subjective and 'cherry-picked' personal accounts recorded years after the event, most of which are often in conflict with statements made by the same witnesses given closer to the event. In other words, they are presenting 'urban legend' and 'war stories' as evidence.

There were only 2 eyewitnesses at the Citgo, Lagasse and Turcios. Brooks was across the street. I not only watched their nauseating videos, but compared the statements to earlier ones and watched what they actually did on the video record (yes, the station had cameras). I even went to the station to verify the camera locations, angles and distances involved.

Ask the boys this one. They like to discredit England because they finally convinced him he was at another intersection, yet Lagasse pointed out the wrong intersection for the downed poles location (and he is a police officer who works the area every day). So why is one credible, and the other not? This is just one example of the foolishness that is CIT, and I don't debate foolishness.
 
tj15 said:
Do you have a picture for the one in bold?... I haven't seen that before.
Click to expand...


look at the leafy substance at the bottom of the frame in this photo

car3.jpg


now look at the top of the crown of the tree to the left. Notice the brown branches on top?
bombing15.jpg
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
#17

@smith: Go and own Ranke. They are perfectly capable of defending themselves. I'm just providing information that otherwise would be completely buried inside the dust you sorry excuses for debunkers produce.
Click to expand...

Hey Troll,

I confronted Ranke on one of his radio shows. I got the douche to admit that the CIVILIAN CONTRACTORS that were working in Wedge 1 were responsible for planting the bombs! Pretty cool huh?

What a snatch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom