Why does CIT have NO eyewitnesses to a flyover?

Originally posted by jthomas


LOL, Craig! What you have accomplished is to now call your *star* witness a liar,

LOL jthomas!

What a hilarious way to discount this critical account and the 13 independently corroborated north side witnesses!

LIARS!


The problem is that they have absolutely no motive to lie if the official story is true jthomas. Funny how that part slips your mind.

Logic......it's not just for breakfast anymore!

The notion that you can make up your own story for Roosevelt and translate an "and then" to mean "30 minutes later" is simply insane.

Roosevelt said the same exact thing in 2001 as he did to us in 2008.

We simply confirmed that "and then" in the first interview actually meant "7 steps" or "10 seconds tops" as opposed to 30 minutes, proving a flyover beyond all reasonable doubt.

You simply aren't reasonable and you are desperately working as hard as you can to spin this critical information.....and failing hard.

But keep on bumping this thread all you want there buddy.

The more attention this gets the better because NO honest human will agree with you on this matter since the interviews with Roosevelt quite clearly prove you a liar.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by jthomas


LOL, Craig! What you have accomplished is to now call your *star* witness a liar,

LOL jthomas!

What a hilarious way to discount this critical account and the 13 independently corroborated north side witnesses!

Dodging noted. You accused Roosevelt Roberts of lying.

The problem is that they have absolutely no motive to lie if the official story is true jthomas.

Strawman noted.

We're talking about your story, Craig. You still can't support it with evidence

The notion that you can make up your own story for Roosevelt and translate an "and then" to mean "30 minutes later" is simply insane.

The number of minutes from 9:12 am to the the time of the crash or your imagined flyover is exactly how many, Craig?

Roosevelt said the same exact thing in 2001 as he did to us in 2008.

Anyone can see that the accounts are different.

We simply confirmed that "and then" in the first interview actually meant "7 steps" or "10 seconds tops" as opposed to 30 minutes, proving a flyover beyond all reasonable doubt.

Except you got it backwards and said the explosion occurred first and THEN Roberts ran out on to the south loading dock. But Roberts says in his first interview just the opposite -- he was on the dock and ran inside when the explosion occurred, a full 30 minutes after seeing some plane flying around.

You simply aren't reasonable and you are desperately working as hard as you can to spin this critical information.....and failing hard.

I am just letting you show for all to see how desperate you are to claim a mixed-up eyewitness with different accounts that you accuse of lying and misrepresent is your one and only "eyewitness" to nothing.

But keep on bumping this thread all you want there buddy.

It's fine that you show everyone how bankrupt CIT is.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by jthomas]

I never accused Roosevelt of lying.

He was incorrect about the time.

Big deal!

That is an easy and quite typical mistake that means nothing.

But the fact is that in BOTH interviews he explains seeing what he thought was a "2nd plane" flying away immediately after the explosion in the building.

But he never saw 2 planes.

He never saw the plane approach because as he describes in detail, he was inside the Pentagon and just hung up the phone at that time of the explosion.

It would be impossible to see the plane approach from inside the building.

But perfectly possible to see it flying away 7 steps later as he describes.

Your ridiculous 30 minute fantasy is a sad sorry cop-out and really exposes your desperation to spin the information at all costs to honesty and truth.

It's simply not what Roosevelt ever described to anyone.

Day 13

Day 13 and no one has yet produced positive, verified eyewitness, media, or physical evidence that ANY jet flew over and away from the Pentagon.

In new developments, Craig Ranke is now attacking his *star* eyewitness, Roosevelt Roberts, claiming Roberts never meant what he said in his first account with the Library of Congress 2 1/2 months after 9/11.

Frantic in trying to reconcile what Roberts actually said with CIT's "flyover theory", Craig Ranke comes up twisting reality claiming a mixed-up witness with two different accounts is "solid" evidence of a flyover.

As CIT's made-up story continues to unravel from Craig's own contradictions, people who once believed him are seeing the true nature of CIT's propaganda campaign.

So, after 13 days of giving anyone a chance to produce any positive, verifiable evidence of anyone seeing any jet fly over and away from the Pentagon, not a single eyewitness to a flyover or any evidence whatsoever has been produced.

CIT will most likely close down by year's end.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT


He was incorrect about the time.

You have no ability to claim that.

Big deal!

The fact that he saw a plane at "9:12, 9:11" means he did not see any plane consistent with your "theory."

That is an easy and quite typical mistake that means nothing.

You can't claim it was a mistake.

But the fact is that in BOTH interviews he explains seeing what he thought was a "2nd plane" flying away immediately after the explosion in the building.

His first account says no such thing. You know that.

But he never saw 2 planes.

He never saw the plane approach because as he describes in detail, he was inside the Pentagon and just hung up the phone at that time of the explosion.

I have already shown you exactly what he said. He was OUTSIDE when the explosion occurred and he only saw one plane outside the Pentagon at 9:11 or 9:12, completely unrelated to the attacks.

It would be impossible to see the plane approach from inside the building.

Roberts didn't claim to see any plane approach in his first interview, now did he, Craig? You can't put words in his mouth to make your story work. It's intellectually dishonest. Roberts clearly stated that the only plane he saw outside the Pentagon was the plane "flying around the south parking lot" at "9:12, 9:11". It doesn't help you to keep misrepresenting Robert's statements which everyone can hear for themselves:

"Then my seargent, Seargent Woolwich, Woody, he called and he said, hey, rob, listen, we gonna threatcon delta. As I hang up the phone, the plane hit the building. It all came at the same time, watching the tv, it was like, it was almost timed for preciseness. So, as I hung up the phone, and I ran to the center of the dock and I looked up and I saw another plane flying around the south parking lot, it's about like 9:12, 9:11 in the morning. And then there was dust and stuff coming from the ceiling, you could hear people screaming. So, what I did was, I turned around and drew out my weapon, and I didn't know what was going on. I thoughts we was being invaded, I didn't know what was happening. So I ran back into South Loading and I start forcing people out of the building."

memory.loc.gov.../afc911bib:@field(DOCID+@lit(afc911000155))

Your ridiculous 30 minute fantasy is a sad sorry cop-out and really exposes your desperation to spin the information at all costs to honesty and truth.

It's simply not what Roosevelt ever described to anyone.

In fact, that's exactly what Robert's described and you can spin it like you do everything else to suit your desired conclusion.

The fact remains: Roosevelt Robert's saw NO flyover of any jet either at the time or in the way that your "theory" requires that he does; that he describes two different accounts, one to LOC and one to you, that he claims in his interview that a jet flew toward the Pentagon from the southwest, circled, and flew away back to the southwest, which is completely in contradiction to YOUR OWN flyover claims.

You know for a FACT, Craig Ranke, that Roberts is no credible eyewitness to your theory and you can continue to spam here all you want but everyone can see that your theory makes no sense and is not supported by any evidence whatsoever.

The only honest thing for you to do is admit it here and every other forum and to shut down CIT.












[edit on 1-12-2008 by jthomas]

[edit on 1-12-2008 by jthomas]

[edit on 1-12-2008 by jthomas]

Since this discussion isn't going anywhere this thread will be closed.

If there is any new information or anything new to add, you can u2u myself or another mod and we will consider re-opening the thread.