CIT skeptics finally admit north side approach is possible after all!, page 15
Pages: <<  12    13    14    15  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times


reply posted on 5-10-2008 @ 04:42 PM by SPreston
posted by SPreston
Most of these people are untraceable and do not exist.
posted by Soloist
And I guess all the rescue workers don't exist either?

Pretty amazing of all the people that were there, that only a dozen or so which just happen to place the plane on the "north side" are the one's you guys claim to exist. And of the others, they are discounted and called "automatically suspect" , how convenient.

So go find them and re-interview them. You can't? How convenient.

As far as verifiable names which can be traced and interviewed?
No they do not exist until you go track them down and verify their accounts. You still can't?

posted by SPreston
Even if a few of these people are real, they were to the south and saw an aircraft to the north and that aircraft was flying over the Navy Annex and north of the Citgo and could not possibly have lined up with the official damage path through the light poles and through the Pentagon interior.
posted by Soloist
Wow, assume much do we? That's pretty awesome that you somehow know what they saw, after claiming they don't exist.

Well what else could they have seen looking north since the aircraft has been proven over the Navy Annex and north of the Citgo by previously published re-interviewed eyewitnesses and the FAA has just released a video verifying that portion of the flight path? Do you disagree with the FAA video?

posted by SPreston
These supposed eyewitness accounts you wave around are just a bunch of unverifiable mainstream media propaganda sound bytes and print bytes published for their masters.
posted by Soloist
Your anti-government bias is showing, it's *really* hard to take you serious, so I won't.

No. My mainstream media bias is showing through and the treacherous prostitutes deserve every bit of it.


reply posted on 14-10-2008 @ 01:11 PM by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by Soloist



The point is that if you are truly unbiased and interested in truth you will only accept confirmed independent verifiable evidence a means to exonerate the government from involvement

Otherwise you are forced to accept what you are told based on faith.

I support religious freedom so I won't fault you for that.



reply posted on 15-10-2008 @ 11:47 AM by Soloist
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to
post by Soloist



The point is that if you are truly unbiased and interested in truth you will only accept confirmed independent verifiable evidence a means to exonerate the government from involvement


Bolding mine for dramatic effect.

What a twisted way of looking at things, yet you claim to be unbiased? Does that sound about right?

We should accept the "confirmed independent verifiable evidence" from "unbiased" conspiracy theorists who hate the government? That doesn't sound like the "truth" to me in any shape or form. No thanks, I'll pass.

Where is the "confirmed independent verifiable evidence" in the forms of interviews of all the rescue workers? What evidence exists to the whereabouts of the plane? The crew? What about the cell phone calls to the family members? Witnesses to the massive plane part "planting"?



Otherwise you are forced to accept what you are told based on faith.
I support religious freedom so I won't fault you for that.


Wrong! Video. Pictures. Cell phone calls. Witness statements. All of which disagree with your theory.

The junk you are selling is belief, without any proof. And I will fault you for that.


reply posted on 14-12-2008 @ 12:20 PM by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by amazing



They just use irrelevant straw man arguments and blanket denial.

The fact is....the north side evidence is completely falsifiable.

All they need to do is present 14 first-hand witness accounts of people who place the plane on the south side and have equal to or better vantage points compared with the 13 north side witnesses we present!

It should be easy schmeezy!

If of course the plane flew on the south side.






pssssssst.......It didn't.


[edit on 14-12-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]
Pages: <<  12    13    14    15  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 14 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 15 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 9 days ago with 6 member flags
you must try this youre self ????
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags