Official Story Shill Crushed By Truther/Researcher in Radio Debate!

Is there something that can be done moderator-wise about TPE's incessant quote-repeating of large walls of text as if they haven't been adequately addressed? I could get into a spam battle but what's the use? He'll just pick and choose what to respond to anyway, counting on the short attention spans of people who don't browse to previous pages to see if these spam blobs have already been addressed.

This is a game already lost by CIT and their troops, way past injury time, yet still going, for the very reasons outlined above. Reheat was right. "Zombie" comes to mind.

reply to post by snowcrash911

I wholeheartedly agree % 100. Any further CIT posts (including those of their supporters) needs to go to the HOAX bin.... It is nothing now, but useless reams and reams of SPAM...

Yup.

And what are these repeated "invitations" to Balsamo's lair of 9/11 lies?

Why invite us over while we all know the intention is to have us banned or muzzled immediately like everyone else who dared deviate from Balsamo's divine edicts, even the politest ones, like Warren Stutt?

It's like those million dollar challenges everybody knows will never be handed out, whether they be offered by James Randi or by Jimmy Walter. They're just there to present the illusion of a challenge unmet.

(Although I admit paranormality is bunk, so Randi's million dollar challenge will never be met for more than one reason)

Hell, Balsamo even recently banned his tireless sycophant "Scott", something which I admittedly enjoyed...

reply to post by snowcrash911


His tactics are quite well known by now.. Deceptive banning for those who disagree with his edicts, multiple socks (probably on his own site), constant appeals to the authority to those he conducted an initial interview with and who expressed some reservations regarding "the official story", but never to be heard from again. Half truths, techno-babble on fast moving video, and acronyms to impress the ignorant are some other hallmarks... I've probably only covered a portion of his deceit, but it's enough to convince rational folks of his agenda and it's anything but truth...

delete

Originally posted by trebor451
Plot a course from NOC to lane 1 of South Parking, heading southwest. Can't happen.

Roosevelt Roberts...

Roosevelt: "I was in south parking, and I was at the east loading dock when I ran outside and saw the low-flying aircraft above the parking lot."

Lincoln Liebner...

"I eventually ended up in what is known as Lane One, which is the furthest lane from the building."

The flyover happened...

ANC employee Erik Dihle: "Some people were yelling that a bomb hit the Pentagon and that a jet kept on going."

Originally posted by WetBlanky

Originally posted by trebor451
Plot a course from NOC to lane 1 of South Parking, heading southwest. Can't happen.

Roosevelt Roberts...

Roosevelt: "I was in south parking, and I was at the east loading dock when I ran outside and saw the low-flying aircraft above the parking lot."

Lincoln Liebner...

"I eventually ended up in what is known as Lane One, which is the furthest lane from the building."

The flyover happened...

ANC employee Erik Dihle: "Some people were yelling that a bomb hit the Pentagon and that a jet kept on going."

Ten years later and all they can do is trot out the same old crap that proves yet again they have no clue what they are talking about.

You don't even know where Lane 1 of Pentagon south parking is.

Roosevelt: Right; around the lane one area,

Roosevelt: It was, uh. . . it was heading, um. . . back across 27. . . and it looks like. . . it appeared to me- I was in the south, and that plane was heading. . . like, um. . . southwest. . . coming out.

Do me a favor. Put your finger where you think Roberts said he saw the plane and draw a line in the direction of southwest and tell all of us how the aircraft could "fly over the Pentagon", end up over where you claim Lane 1 is (Lane 1 of South Parking is, according to Pentagon parking maps, the lane closest to the Navy Annex - you know, the maps that Pentagon Police would use?), and as Roberts says, was "heading...like, um...southwest".

Next, find "27", the road Roberts says he saw the aircraft "heading, um...back across 27" and trace your finger along its route along the west side of the building. Then, put your other finger again on where you think Roberts said he saw the plane and tell us how an aircraft over what you claim is Lane 1 of South Parking was "heading, um...back across 27".

If you are putting all your PfT/CIT/Bush is Evil eggs in the Roosevelt Roberts basket, if you are planning on defending the galaxy against George Bush with Rosevelt Robert's account of what happened, if Rossevelt Roberts is the *absolut very best" you got, you people really are dumber than the box of hammers you have always been compared to - and that is being mean to hammers.

This gets funnier every day and I never though that could ever happen. I can see Veale now, assuming he is ever let back in a courtroom after his epic slapdown and sanctions from the April Gallop debacle, defending Roberts' account..."We understand, your honor, that wittneses are not infallible and that their accounts can be expected to have some small amount of deviation between them, and we agree that Officer Roberts' account is more screwed up than soup sandwich and there is absolutely no way we can reconcile anything of what he says because it is so contradictory, but we ask you to believe every word he says....except for that stuff that doesn't match our claims".

Regarding Eric Dihle, who are "some people"?

Originally posted by trebor451

Roosevelt Roberts...

Roosevelt: "I was in south parking, and I was at the east loading dock when I ran outside and saw the low-flying aircraft above the parking lot."

We'll go ahead and post this pic of the Pentagon Parking map - courtesy of "wetblank" himself.

Now, this rocket scientist of a witness Roosevelt Roberts with his "unimpeachable" eyewitness experience of seeing an airliner at "50 to less than a hundred feet" altitude over "lane 1" of South Parking heading southwest...or east...or whatever it was he meant. If you could please put your finger on where the map says "Lane 1" of South Parking is and put your other finger on where you claim Roberts said he saw the aircraft.. Roberts has to be some kind of an Einstein to confuse "Lane 1" with "Lanes 27 through 36", which are the numbered lanes in the section of parking *you* claim Roberts said he saw the aircraft over. And he is your *best* fly-over "witness. Box. Hammers.



Its *always* funny how the CIT/PfT crew always close one eye and squint out of the other while hand-waving away anything that doesn't work for them - like this, or like that absolutely hilarious "Doubletree fly over wItNeSs!!!@@!!" that the Buffet Slayer posted on PfT last week. Did you notice how it was *sooooo* earth shattering that he didn't even post it on CIT's *own* page?

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by trebor451

Roosevelt Roberts...

Roosevelt: "I was in south parking, and I was at the east loading dock when I ran outside and saw the low-flying aircraft above the parking lot."

We'll go ahead and post this pic of the Pentagon Parking map - courtesy of "wetblank" himself.

Now, this rocket scientist of a witness Roosevelt Roberts with his "unimpeachable" eyewitness experience of seeing an airliner at "50 to less than a hundred feet" altitude over "lane 1" of South Parking heading southwest...or east...or whatever it was he meant. If you could please put your finger on where the map says "Lane 1" of South Parking is and put your other finger on where you claim Roberts said he saw the aircraft.. Roberts has to be some kind of an Einstein to confuse "Lane 1" with "Lanes 27 through 36", which are the numbered lanes in the section of parking *you* claim Roberts said he saw the aircraft over. And he is your *best* fly-over "witness. Box. Hammers.

Its *always* funny how the CIT/PfT crew always close one eye and squint out of the other while hand-waving away anything that doesn't work for them - like this, or like that absolutely hilarious "Doubletree fly over wItNeSs!!!@@!!" that the Buffet Slayer posted on PfT last week. Did you notice how it was *sooooo* earth shattering that he didn't even post it on CIT's *own* page?

I'm glad you posted this. This was the location and position BEFORE they mangled the recording and changed it to the East side of the building. Another example of FRAUDULENT action. I hope someone has a copy of the original recording and I'll add all of this to the list of DECEPTIONS they've done to perpetuate this garbage.. There's a nice list already, but we'll add this one and post it somewhere eventually...

I can't leave you guys for a few days before you bury solid arguments in pages and pages of ad homs, repeating the same debunked, contradictory, speculative nonsense.

attention of Snowcrash, Reheat and Proudbird

Originally posted by Reheat

I'm glad you posted this. This was the location and position BEFORE they mangled the recording and changed it to the East side of the building. Another example of FRAUDULENT action. I hope someone has a copy of the original recording and I'll add all of this to the list of DECEPTIONS they've done to perpetuate this garbage.. There's a nice list already, but we'll add this one and post it somewhere eventually...

And when they bring up Lincoln Liebner as corroboration in this whole thing and try to keep spinning their cockamamie "Roberts said Lane 1 but he meant Lanes 27-36!!!", it just adds to the jocularity that is CIT. Liebner was walking over by the very southwest corner of the building, pasing by lanes 2 and 3 of South Parking. He is probably over 1,000 feet away from where the CIT buffoons claim Roberts' saw the "flyover". Why would Liebner talk about seeing the aircraft (and he saw it hit, btw) where he did and reference "Lane 1" when CIT claims it was over the eastern section of South Parking, lanes 27-36?

Faster. Funnier. Please.

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
I can't leave you guys for a few days before you bury solid arguments in pages and pages of ad homs, repeating the same debunked, contradictory, speculative nonsense.

attention of Snowcrash, Reheat and Proudbird

edit on 3-1-2012 by ThePostExaminer because: url

Ha ha ha ha! You edited it! Just now, before you edited it, it linked back to a post by me, and I know you were scared so much by that it drove you away for several days, and you never responded. Now it links to P4T. Hilarious.

It's on your mind, you know it.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by snowcrash911


Say what?

Yes, it linked back to your post originally. Mybad. I've so much of your crap links on my computer (makes for "interesting" reading..:@@

Have you even bothered your arse to read the rebuttal??

Weak.

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
I can't leave you guys for a few days before you bury solid arguments in pages and pages of ad homs, repeating the same debunked, contradictory, speculative nonsense.

attention of Snowcrash, Reheat and Proudbird

edit on 3-1-2012 by ThePostExaminer because: url

Ha ha ha ha! You edited it! Just now, before you edited it, it linked back to a post by me, and I know you were scared so much by that it drove you away for several days, and you never responded. Now it links to P4T. Hilarious.

It's on your mind, you know it.

edit on 3-1-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)

"Drove me away for a few days"? hahaha.

I'm just tired of the Groundhog Day theme in this thread!

25 pages of nonsense regarding what any logical person takes from reading and listening to Morin's testimony - Snowcrash response? Durr..nirvana fallacy. That is, Morin is a "moron", according to you and the pesky detail of Stutt's bank data which threw you all collectively under the bus!

Thanks Warren!

Stick to the OCT Snowcrash.

Over the Annex = No impact.
North of Columbia Pike = No impact.
NOC = No impact.

And the rest regarding RADALT limitations is based on the same barn dancing denial and ignoring documented proof of the 330fps limitations rpeatedly linked to you. End of story.

I thought you'd be a bit of a challenge...Jeebus...

reply to post by ThePostExaminer

Over the Annex = No impact.
North of Columbia Pike = No impact.
NOC = No impact.

Witnesses = Impact.

Done.

Doing what OSS does:

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
Apologies if this has been ..ahem..answered?

By you? No. And there's a whole laundry list of other things which you deliberately ignore and then move on as if nothing happened... as predicted and discussed in the previous pages.

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
I know you guys are busy running a sewer of ad homs and rants against a guy who you haven't the cojones to confront at his own forum. Proudbird, Snowcrash and Reheat, why hide here to throw insults when you can go straight to the source and "put him right"?

Just wondering.

I will debate Balsamo at Balsamo's well known heavy-handed administrative whim when Easter and Pentecost coincide on the calendar.

Balsamo's appalling, dictatorial, and cowardly treatment of Warren Stutt, encouraged by your sycophantic adlibs, speaks volumes.

Balsamo is a disruptive loser, but he can still talk to me using his sock puppet "Pink Panther" at 911oz, one of the few forum venues where he isn't banned yet. Each time he does so, I immediately respond.

What's your excuse?

(A) or (B), OneSliceShort. No more excuses and "witty" non-responses.

Originally posted by snowcrash911
Doing what OSS does:

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
Apologies if this has been ..ahem..answered?

By you? No. And there's a whole laundry list of other things which you deliberately ignore and then move on as if nothing happened... as predicted and discussed in the previous pages.

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
I know you guys are busy running a sewer of ad homs and rants against a guy who you haven't the cojones to confront at his own forum. Proudbird, Snowcrash and Reheat, why hide here to throw insults when you can go straight to the source and "put him right"?

Just wondering.

I will debate Balsamo at Balsamo's well known heavy-handed administrative whim when Easter and Pentecost coincide on the calendar.

Balsamo's appalling, dictatorial, and cowardly treatment of Warren Stutt, encouraged by your sycophantic adlibs, speaks volumes.

Balsamo is a disruptive loser, but he can still talk to me using his sock puppet "Pink Panther" at 911oz, one of the few forum venues where he isn't banned yet. Each time he does so, I immediately respond.

What's your excuse?

(A) or (B), OneSliceShort. No more excuses and "witty" non-responses.

So you've no response. Okay. Gotcha.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ThePostExaminer

 

Over the Annex = No impact.
North of Columbia Pike = No impact.
NOC = No impact.

Witnesses = Impact.

Done.

I thought you guys claimed that witness testimony was "unreliable", "worthless"? That in fact, witnesses are "morons" who can't tell left from right? Even Snowcrash insinuates that Morin didn't know whether he was looking "up" as the plane went over the Annex or actually looking across the street in the opposite direction?

(He was going for the "up but not quite over the Annex" option until I pointed out that Stutt's data contradicts this...although wait...he still claims it on other forums..)

You guys are so confusing.

reply to post by ThePostExaminer


You haven't even commented on my calculations TPE!

You haven't even answered (A) or (B)!

You haven't even commented on Ranke's debunking of Terry Morin!

What are you on?