It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


CIT eyewitness points to South side flight path

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 12:05 AM

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt

Preston... Does this witness claim to have seen the impact?

Put 2 + 2 together.

Sure doesn't.

In fact he specifically says that he did NOT see an impact and that all he saw was the fireball.

But he says he is 100% sure about the north side approach and 12 other people in the area are on record corroborating this.

Put 2 + 2 together.

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 12:20 AM
Oh yeah and don't forget.....

Robert saw the plane "pull up" after passing the north side of the citgo.

Put 2 + 2 together.

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 01:10 AM
Further posts in this thread are useless.

Now that jthomas' myth has been busted, it's pointless to make any more posts. jthomas was not there to interview the witness - he has no idea what the witness was stating. Craig rightly came in and fixed up the myth that jthomas was spreading.

Further posts will only keep on bumping this useless thread and it will also score jthomas more ATS points. Who wants to do that?

The best course of action for this thread is to see it drift off the front page, never to be viewed again.

We know which usual crowd will want to keep bumping this thread. Don't give them the satisfaction of engaging them anymore. Craig cleared it all up.

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 05:27 AM

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Is this a joke?

Of course not. Turcois indicated the aircraft hit the building. Great witness you have there, Ranke.

On edit: The diagram supposedly penned by Turcois has the aircraft flight path terminating at the point of impact at the Pentagon. This would indicate that, in Turcois' opinion, the aircraft stopped there.

Second point, if Turcois said he saw the aircraft "pull up" after it passed the Citgo, and further stated he did not see the aircraft impact, then he "must: have seen the aircraft fly over the building, something he does not state. Did you ask him if he saw the aircraft fly over the building? If not, how can you trust anything he says prior to that point?

[edit on 6-11-2008 by pinch]

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 02:18 PM
Given the CIT Twoofaloons dissembling here, let's review the confirmed facts:

1. Robert Turcios, with the Pentagon to his back, points to the true South Side flight path as he states:"...from this corner..." Confirmned and verified in the CIT video.

2. ALL CIT Citgo eyewitnesses believe with 100% certainty that the American Airlines aircraft they witnessed flew into the Pentagon.

3. Craig Ranke failed to ask any Citgo eyewitness whether they saw AA77 hit the Pentagon or flew over it. Since we know they all believed it hit the Pentagon, CIT most likely edited the Citgo eyewitness statements out of the final video to preserve its "official story."

4. The North Side of Citgo flight path is completely inconsistent with the observed Pentagon damage.

5. The true South Side flight path is consistent with both the damage and direction of flight of AA77.

6. ALL the verified eyewitness statements from well over 100 people is consistent with each other, the true South Side flight path, and confirms along with every other bit of evidence that AA77 approached and hit the Pentagon along the true South Side flightpath.

7. ALL data confirms that AA77 was able to fly the confirmed South Side flight path and impact the Pentagon without experiencing high or unusual G forces. The faulty Pilots for 9/11 Truth analysis was unable to refute the confirmed GIS reconstruction, the FDR data, and is completely consistent with the topography, Boeing 757 flight characteristics and capabilities, as well as the verified and confirmed eyewitness testimony.

8. CIT's Craig Ranke and Pilots for 9/11 Truth's Rob Balsamo confirm that AA77 (or the phantom "white" jet they invented) should have definitely appeared in the confirmed Pentagon parking lot entrance security camera video.

9. CIT and Balsamo, without evidence from any source, both claim that AA77 (or their invented "white" jet) "should have" definitely appeared in the Pentagon security camera video pulling up and flying over the Pentagon at the spot where the confirmed explosion at the Pentagon as demonstrated in my avatar at left. Neither Ranke or Balsamo is able to offer any evidence whatsoever why the camera recorded the explosion but NO aircraft flying over the Pentagon.

10. All members and all supporters of CIT and Pilots for 9/11 Truth are completely unable to produce any eyewitnesses, police reports, or media reports of anyone claiming to have seen AA77 (or any aircraft whatsoever, real or imagined) flying over and away from the Pentagon. Recognizing that dozens of eyewitnesses on both sides of the Pentagon would have had to have seen such an obvious event, Ranke, Marquis, and Balsamo have been at a complete loss to explain this crucial factual discrepancy and will not look for eyewitnesses to a so-called "flyover" event.

Therefore, without being able to produce one single bit of evidence that AA77 did not do anything other than hit the Pentagon from a completely verified and flyable South of Citgo flight path, recorded, witnessed, and verified by the overwhelming preponderance of evidence, it can be concluded that Ranke's and Balsamo's completely amateur and fault-filled "investigation" is worthless and null and void.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 03:45 PM
Very good post!
Yet they continue to claim to have smoking gun evidence but refuse to bring evidence of MASS MURDER to a court, LE, MSM, etc.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in