Pentaconned spreads disinfo (ranke CIT disinfo )

[Voskhod3]

"Like I said before what I said contradicts the theories of engineers that never asked me or Sgt Brooks or any Police eyewitnesses what he-she or they saw. Obviously what I saw happened, therefore the conclusions made by people who didnt see it can be flawed...I accept the fact that there can be miscalculations on my part, but NOT whether or not the plane was on the North or South side of the gas station."

-Sgt William Lagasse

He's either telling the truth or he's spreading disinfo.

There is no middle ground here.

If he's spreading disinfo he's made himself very public in doing it.

If he's telling the truth then the light poles are faked, if the light poles are faked you have to ask why?

[mym]

ok,  all those that we know as a cover-up on 9/11 are cover ups loool...meaning, the twin towers and the one building 7, the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania.

If they orchestrated the bombing the first time in the 90's (FBI admission by Ted Gunderson), then it all FALLS into place.


Man that hole though, just doesn't seem right that a plane went through it!  Please tell me physics wise somebody!  Where is the debris like you see with the towers if it was a jet?

[phasma]

My problem with the round hole swallowing a plane theory is this (im not saying i believe it is impossible - would just like to see how it is possible)

Assuming a plane made that hole then of course the logical question is where did the wings go?
Did they tuck in neatly on impact? (I doubt this, the fuselage i know is strongest around the wng area because of the wings)
Could they have been destroyed on impact? (logic tells me maybe, but if this were so that the engines must have been left on the outside of the hole because there is no evidence of them going through the wall) additionally, if the wings were in fact blown up on impact then there ought to have been explosions on each side of the fuselage (one for each wing fuel tank) and there should be evidence of this exteriorly. Again i see none, only charring above the central body of the hole.
The above argument applies also for the tail fin.
I see no evidence of a strike, nor evidence that the tail went in.
Most tail fins are fastened on by 3 bolts. Im pretty sure an impact with something so solid as a wall , where the rest of the plane and wings make it through the wall (assuming they can?) would result in the shearing off of the tail fin (the plane may have hit at 250 knots, but it would have deccelerated quickly upon hitting making it more likely that the tail would remain intact - at least partially.
Can anyone help me out here? Im not a no planer, i accept there likely was a plane, can someone help me understand this vanishing trick and the points i raised above?

[mym]

Can anyone help me out here? Im not a no planer, i accept there likely was a plane, can someone help me understand this vanishing trick and the points i raised above?

DITTO!!!

[Voskhod3]

Noth Citgo in a nutshell.

This is a good picture of where most of the north citgo witnesses were and where THEY DREW the flight path for the CIT team.



Really big picture: http://bp3.blogger.com/_Hcx8a9Xb6OE/SJZi6kJhMxI/AAAAAAAAAGg/bDjhitTp_j8/s1600-h/GEMAP.jpg

This was up close and personal!

I don't see anyway these guys are mistaken.

They are either telling the truth or are spreading disinfo.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Noth Citgo in a nutshell.

This is a good picture of where most of the north citgo witnesses where and where THEY DREW the flight path for the CIT team.



Really big picture: http://bp3.blogger.com/_Hcx8a9Xb6OE/SJZi6kJhMxI/AAAAAAAAAGg/bDjhitTp_j8/s1600-h/GEMAP.jpg

This was up close and personal!

I don't see anyway these guys are mistaken.

They are either telling the truth or are spreading disinfo.

Most of those flightpaths 'bend' around Citgo don't you find that odd? And if the very bottom flightpath would have carried on in a straight line it would have hit the impact zone in the bulls eye so why did the plane then 'bend' around Citgo to get to the same target area it was heading to anyway? 

[Voskhod3]

Most of those flightpaths 'bend' around Citgo don't you find that odd? And if the very bottom flightpath would have carried on in a straight line it would have hit the impact zone in the bulls eye so why did the plane then 'bend' around Citgo to get to the same target area it was heading to anyway? 

What?

They all said it banked.

Flight paths bend when you bank.

The plane was incredibly close to them, this is not something you would have a hazy memory about.

Either they are lying or they are spreading disinfo. There is ZERO room for being mistaken.

Either way something is fishy about the Pentagon.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

What?

They all said it banked.

Flight paths bend when you bank.

The plane was incredibly close to them, this is not something you would have a hazy memory about.

Either they are lying or they are spreading disinfo. There is ZERO room for being mistaken.

Either way something is fishy about the Pentagon.

What do you mean 'what'? The plane's flight paths 'bend' around Citgo when there's no reason for this to happen, other than to support this theory that the planes were North of Citgo. Sorry but that's just odd. The point is why did the plane bank around Citgo when it was heading towards the Pentagon anyway?

[Voskhod3]

What do you mean 'what'? The plane's flight paths 'bend' around Citgo when there's no reason for this to happen, other than to support this theory that the planes were North of Citgo. Sorry but that's just odd.

Why is it odd? If it didn't bend it would have completely missed the Pentagon?

The point is why did the plane bank around Citgo when it was heading towards the Pentagon anyway?

The point is that 13 people saw this plane so close that they will never forget it and they are CERTAIN they know where it flew.

There is no mistaking here.

There are two choices.

1) They are telling the truth.
2) They are spreading disinfo.

Either choice opens a can of worms.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Why does the plane take such an unusual flight path according to these witnesses?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Is that bend in the flight path even possible?

[Voskhod3]

Is that bend in the flight path even possible?

Are the witnesses telling the truth or spreading disinfo?

Why are you missing the point David?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

If you look at the curvature of the flight path the plane would have had to bank to the left to go around Citgo and then bank to the right to get back on track to hit the Pentagon in the known impact zone!!! And you don’t find that odd???

[Voskhod3]

If you look at the curvature of the flight path the plane would have had to bank to the left to go around Citgo and then bank to the right to get back on track to hit the Pentagon in the known impact zone!!! And you don’t find that odd???

Why are you missing the point?

Either the witnesses are lying or spreading disinfo.

Which?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Why are you missing the point?

Either the witnesses are lying or spreading disinfo.

Which?

It's the same old story with you everytime. You frame the debate in your head and then expect everyone else to go along with your flawed logic.

[Scootle]

If you look at the curvature of the flight path the plane would have had to bank to the left to go around Citgo and then bank to the right to get back on track to hit the Pentagon in the known impact zone!!! And you don’t find that odd???

It depends ... if it was just one constant curve from the annex to the pentagon then its possible... if it was straight for a bit ... then a curve... then straight for a bit, the plane would have to be banking at 70 degrees at the speed it was goin at which is impossible... i find it unlikely that it was just a constant curve tho coz u'd have to be mega precise... then again it probably was remotely flown.

[Voskhod3]

It's the same old story with you everytime. You frame the debate in your head and then expect everyone else to go along with your flawed logic.

It's the same old story with you that when pressed you want to go off on a tangent.

Where is my flawed logic?

I'm just asking you a simple question.

This is what the witnesses say they saw - there can be no mistake - look at where they were and just how close they say the plane was.

Now are they lying or spreading disinfo?

[Voskhod3]

It depends ... if it was just one constant curve from the annex to the pentagon then its possible... if it was straight for a bit ... then a curve... then straight for a bit, the plane would have to be banking at 70 degrees at the speed it was goin at which is impossible... i find it unlikely that it was just a constant curve tho coz u'd have to be mega precise... then again it probably was remotely flown.

Someone else missing the point.

The witnesses are all telling the same story. Are the witnesses lying or spreading disinfo?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

It depends ... if it was just one constant curve from the annex to the pentagon then its possible... if it was straight for a bit ... then a curve... then straight for a bit, the plane would have to be banking at 70 degrees at the speed it was goin at which is impossible... i find it unlikely that it was just a constant curve tho coz u'd have to be mega precise... then again it probably was remotely flown.

Yeah but I'm talking about the flight path that I've highlighted in green. The plane had to bank to the left because it leaves the straight flight path to the left but this would then take it away from the Pentagon so it then has to bank to the right to get it back on target again which I find odd to say the least. 

[Voskhod3]

Yeah but I'm talking about the flight path that I've highlighted in green. The plane had to bank to the left because it leaves the straight flight path to the left but this would then take it away from the Pentagon so it then has to bank to the right to get it back on target again which I find odd to say the least. 

Were you a witness? Your green line is irrelevant!

We have 13 witness to a north of citgo plane that banked.

Are they lying or spreading disinfo?

There is no middle ground.

[Scootle]

Someone else missing the point.

The witnesses are all telling the same story. Are the witnesses lying or spreading disinfo?

No they're are working from trauma and fuzzy memory ....

Each one of those people would have only seen the plane for about 5 to 10 seconds tops ... then they would have discussed what they saw with other witnesses on the day ... some of who were probably agents ... then they would have gone home watched tv to see all the other chaos going on that day and would have been shocked and traumatized ... then as time went on, what they saw, what the news told them, and their discussions with other witnesses would have all blurred into one ... then 2 or 3 months later in november/december they finally put their accounts of record...

Could they accurately describe what happened during a 5 to 10 second time frame after all that?

But then I suppose you'll say: "There's 13 of them ... they can't all be wrong the same way could they?"

They weren't the only 13 witnesses... there were over a 100 in total... so what u have in fact is 13 out of 100 correlating with eachother ... which isn't suprising... with over 100 witnesses, ur bound to get some correlation.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Were you a witness? Your green line is irrelevant!

We have 13 witness to a north of citgo plane that banked.

Are they lying or spreading disinfo?

There is no middle ground.

There's no middle ground, REALLY? So they can't be MISTAKEN? They can't have been EXPLOITED? You really do talk rubbish.

[Voskhod3]

There's no middle ground, REALLY? So they can't be MISTAKEN? They can't have been EXPLOITED? You really do talk rubbish.

How could they be exploited? I have seen no evidence that they were exploited, their ENTIRE interviews with CIT are available.

Yes NO MIDDLE GROUND - NO MISTAKES - 13 PEOPLE - NORTH CITGO - BANKING PLANE.

Did you look at the large picture? Did you see how close they say the plane was? Is that something you would be hazy about?

They are either telling the truth or spreading disinfo.

Which?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

''NO MISTAKES'' haha you've obviously got no idea about human nature. Take a look at scootle's latest post above, that's a lesson right there in objectivity you'd be well advised to learn.

[Voskhod3]

''NO MISTAKES'' haha you've obviously got no idea about human nature. Take a look at scootle's latest post above, that's a lesson right there in objectivity you'd be well advised to learn.

13 people.

Interviewed at length.

No mistakes.

All backing each other up.

Nothing taken out of context.

13 people.

Now the only question is: Are they telling the truth or spreading disinfo?

I'm open to both possibilities.

Either way is bad.

[trailhound]

David England wrote

There's no middle ground, REALLY? So they can't be MISTAKEN?

 The guys at arlington describe the plane coming off the Navy annex and said they ran for cover because it was headed right at them.  Seems like the plane flew almost caddy corner across the annex heading towards arlington and began its right bank sometime after the annex. 

[Voskhod3]

David England wrote
 The guys at arlington describe the plane coming off the Navy annex and said they ran for cover because it was headed right at them.  Seems like the plane flew almost caddy corner across the annex heading towards arlington and began its right bank sometime after the annex. 

Their statements are VERY clear, thanks to the CIT team for getting this evidence which no one else has bothered to try and gather.

Yes they say the plane was headed right for them and then banked.

Either they are telling the truth or are spreading disinfo.

It is clear there is no room for being mistaken.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Their statements are VERY clear, thanks to the CIT team for getting this evidence which no one else has bothered to try and gather.

Yes they say the plane was headed right for them and then banked.

Either they are telling the truth or are spreading disinfo.

It is clear there is no room for being mistaken.

REITERATE TOTAL NONSENSE. When it is exposed that your arguments are worthless and lack substance, just keep repeating them over and over again as if people reading do not have a brain.

[Voskhod3]

Which part is worthless and lacking in substance?

David, do you have anthing else in your locker besides ad homiem?

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Which part is worthless and lacking in substance?

David, do you have anthing else in your locker besides ad homiem?

Haha gimme a break don't act like this thread is 3 posts long.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

REITERATE TOTAL NONSENSE. When it is exposed that your arguments are worthless and lack substance, just keep repeating them over and over again as if people reading do not have a brain.

Their statements are VERY clear, thanks to the CIT team for getting this evidence which no one else has bothered to try and gather.

Yes they say the plane was headed right for them and then banked.

Either they are telling the truth or are spreading disinfo.

It is clear there is no room for being mistaken.

13 people.

Interviewed at length.

No mistakes.

All backing each other up.

Nothing taken out of context.

13 people.

Now the only question is: Are they telling the truth or spreading disinfo?

I'm open to both possibilities.

Either way is bad.

How could they be exploited? I have seen no evidence that they were exploited, their ENTIRE interviews with CIT are available.

Yes NO MIDDLE GROUND - NO MISTAKES - 13 PEOPLE - NORTH CITGO - BANKING PLANE.

Did you look at the large picture? Did you see how close they say the plane was? Is that something you would be hazy about?

They are either telling the truth or spreading disinfo.

Which?

Were you a witness? Your green line is irrelevant!

We have 13 witness to a north of citgo plane that banked.

Are they lying or spreading disinfo?

There is no middle ground.

Someone else missing the point.

The witnesses are all telling the same story. Are the witnesses lying or spreading disinfo?

It's the same old story with you that when pressed you want to go off on a tangent.

Where is my flawed logic?

I'm just asking you a simple question.

This is what the witnesses say they saw - there can be no mistake - look at where they were and just how close they say the plane was.

Now are they lying or spreading disinfo?

Why are you missing the point?

Either the witnesses are lying or spreading disinfo.
Which?

Are the witnesses telling the truth or spreading disinfo?
Why are you missing the point David?

Why is it odd? If it didn't bend it would have completely missed the Pentagon?
The point is that 13 people saw this plane so close that they will never forget it and they are CERTAIN they know where it flew.

There is no mistaking here.

There are two choices.

1) They are telling the truth.
2) They are spreading disinfo.
Either choice opens a can of worms.

What?

They all said it banked.

Flight paths bend when you bank.

The plane was incredibly close to them, this is not something you would have a hazy memory about.

Either they are lying or they are spreading disinfo. There is ZERO room for being mistaken.

Either way something is fishy about the Pentagon.

He's either telling the truth or he's spreading disinfo.

There is no middle ground here.

If he's spreading disinfo he's made himself very public in doing it.

If he's telling the truth then the light poles are faked, if the light poles are faked you have to ask why?

[Voskhod3]

Well were they telling the truth or spreading disinfo?

Nobody answered the question..

Now is your big chance.

[DAVIDENGLAND]

Well were they telling the truth or spreading disinfo?

Nobody answered the question..

Now is your big chance.

How about they made a film which they passionately believed in but it turned out to be not quite as insightful as they had hoped it would be?

[Voskhod3]

What the hell does that mean?

How about you answer the question?

[trailhound]

David England wrote

Haha gimme a break don't act like this thread is 3 posts long.

There isnt a damn thing in this thread that disproves the flight path as described by the witnesses.  If there was you probably would have used it in your argument.  Three people at the gas station place the plane north of the gas station. 4 people at arlington say it was coming right at them. I personally dont give a f**k what your opinion is about the flight path.

[Voskhod3]

But he does have his own green line.

[jimd3100]

so when people don't see tail sections and huge engines and landing gears and airplane seats and luggage they won't question it because look the plane came that way it even tore light poles out of the ground.

I'll let Lagasse himself take this one....
From: "Lagasse, William, , PFPA"
"The fact that you are insinuating that this was staged and a fraud is unbelievable.You ask were the debris is...well it was in the building..I saw it everywhere. I swear to god you people piss me off to no end.....The biggest piece of debris I saw was one of the engines smashed...but intact in the building. I saw the building from the inside and outside..before during and after the collapse and rest assured that it was indeed an American airlines 757 that struck the Pentagon that morning."
http://www.911-strike.com/lagasse.htm
landing gears...


airplane seats...
"They walked closer. At the mouth of the third hole they saw a piece of a wheel and countless shards of wreckage. Some of them looked like pieces of seats." Page 149
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/0891419055/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241360487&sr=1-1#

"When Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers,
they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him."

"It was the worst thing you can imagine," said Williams, whose squad from Fort Belvoir, Va., entered the building, less than four hours after the terrorist attack.I wanted to cry from the minute I walked in. But I have soldiers under me and I had to put my feelings aside."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/sept01/2001-09-14-pentagon-usat.htm
Luggage...
"As crews dug deeper, unmistakable remnants of a passenger plane were
everywhere. Wallets, shoes, jewelry, and the everyday items that had been
stuffed into dozens of suitcases were littered throughout the debris."
Page 426
http://www.amazon.com/Firefight-Inside-Battle-Save-Pentagon/dp/0891419055/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241360487&sr=1-1#

mike walter works for cia today. do you trust the corporate media whores? are you telling us that usa today isn't compromised?

LOL! This is priceless! So being a reporter for USA today automatically compromises him and makes him an operative(the real reason of course is because he also destroys this stupid theory)and yet pentagon police officers in no way are to be viewed with suspicion they are good and trustworthy...but only part of their testimony is, the other part is where they were "fooled".

Do any of you see a problem here?
Mike Walter is a south side witness, but he doesn't count because he works for USA today. However people who work for the pentagon do count.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1jqaz_pentagon-eyewitness-mike-walter_news

K Wheelhouse doesn't count and is compromised because he years ago did a stint in the Army like millions of others, and has the c 130 a bit closer than it really was, but pentagon police officers are not compromised.
Freeze frame at 14:11 mark proves he is not N side witness
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3383333411025014760&hl=en

Father McGraw is compromised and doesn't count because he once worked for the DoJ but pentagon police officers are not compromised witnesses.

Watch this video...Isabell James is not a n side witness, and doesn't work for USA today and has never worked for the military, but guess what? CIT says her husband is in the military and so doesn't count...
http://www.dailymotion.com/Ashoka_lc/Pentagon/video/x1ihc1_pentagon-eyewitness-isabel-james_news

These are just some South side witnesses that they've talked to(except I James to my knowledge) there are others. Does anyone see a problem here?

father McGraw was a former doj attorney. father mcgraw said that he didn't see the plane hit any light poles and deduced it after the event.

He saw a plane then a flying lightpole, yea I think I would deduce the same thing, but since he doesn't work for the pentagon he can't be trusted, LOL what a loon...oh and he also destroys this stupid theory so he's "in on it".
 

you're like troy you just make things up as you go along that are beyond stupid and then try to attribute your claims to real 911 truthers. you're a sad little angry man jimd.

actually I'm not sad, little, or angry....just disgusted

 

nothing you says discredits these eyewitnesses in the video and their accounts.

I've never attempted to discredit any witness, that's what CIT does

how did april gallop escape the impacting 757?

Anyone here ever heard of Brian Birdwell ? Of course you haven't. You know why? Because the "truth" movement doesn't give two sh*ts about this pentagon survivor. Guess why? He was almost burnt to a crisp, and nearly died but it wasn't the fire that almost killed him.....

"Brian is a Pentagon 9/11survivor......The doctor told him that had he not gone to Georgetown first, he probably would not have survived because of the jet fuel in his lungs."
http://www.aogusma.org/Class/1961/BirdwellLuncheon.htm
And now you know why. Where do you think jet fuel comes from?

for those interested craig was on kevin barret's show discussing all this info including the duhbunkers attacks against cit : http://noliesradio.org/archives/3068

Big surprise K Barrett who with Fetzer are the dynamic dunces no plane wonder boys, they have the no planner killtown on too allot LOL! But I encourage others to listen...
http://noliesradio.org/archives/3068
Notice how throughout the entire interview Ranke Lies. He claims through the interview everyone they talked to confirmed a north side path. At the 17:23 mark you can hear him say how they went and even tried to find witnesses of a south path and sure enough everyone confirmed those at the gas station. He lies throughout the entire interview, like at the 9:35 mark where they went there without preconceived theories and if people placed the plane in the proper place they would accept that. These guys had this flyover theory since late 2005 early 2006. When they first went to Arlington it was because they invited themselves when Dylan Avery and Russell Pickering went. Russell blew the whistle on these guys long ago, he knew exactly why they went there. Russell helped with the LCFC movie and the CIT boys were not happy that Dylan didn't go with this flyover BS, you see that would have been a great introduction to their sh*t movie they were working on and given them the credibility they wanted. See a response of Dylan's during their attacks at this time,... he posts as enigs .....

"To you guys, everyone is an agent, and everything is planted. Add to that your tirades on this website and others, and you wonder why nobody takes you seriously.
Submitted by enigs on Mon, 10/22/2007 - 2:30pm.

and

"Craig, don't play dumb. Anyone who's watched your behavior on our forum knows exactly where you stand.

"The generator damage? It was faked! The light poles? They were faked! These eyewitnesses? They're lying or agents! Bla bla bla..."

Aldo's tirade in the TNR pretty much seals the deal. You think Lloyd England is a government operative, "THE DEVIL" as Aldo put it.

I have a limited amount of screen time to work with, and the last thing I'm going to waste time on is accusing Lloyd and McGraw of being "in on it" just because you and Aldo demand it.

Let me make my film, and I'll let you make yours. You sure can dish it out, but you can't take it yourself."
Submitted by enigs on Mon, 10/22/2007 - 3:12pm
http://www.911blogger.com/node/12113

You see that was a monkey wrench in their plan. These guys are BS artists and out to make a name for themselves. They also suffer from mental illness.

You've seen the actions of DVD(Dom) their 3rd wheel member, accusing members on this thread of being undercover debunker's and used the word operative in regards to me, and I immediately confessed. These guys have all claimed that Lloyd is an undercover asset, Walter is an undercover asset, McGraw is an undercover asset, everyone that works at USA today are compromised, J Hoffman is an undercover operative, Arabescue is an undercover operative, 9/11 blogger is run by an undercover asset. So it's very clear that the mental illness they suffer from is acute paranoia, and mix that with illusions of grander and you have some serious mental health issues here. I am not joking. This is real. Why are you even bothering with these mentally ill people?


On Rankes' interview at the 35:19 mark listen to him describe the book in Lloyd's car for more insight into his mental disease. When these guys along with Russell and Dylan went to see Lloyd he showed them pictures of his car when he got it back on 9/12. The pictures showed a book by David Icke on the passenger seat. So what you say? Ranke explains in the interview what this means....He said the gov put that there so that Lloyd would seem to be on "our" side. A "conspiracy theorist" and against the Government. So the truth movement would be "sympathetic" to him. But Inspector Ranke was to smart for that. Now...think about that......he is claiming the gov put a book by D Icke in Lloyd's car......and knew that Ranke would arrive and see it years in the future from pictures they knew Lloyd would take and show him? This is truly insane.

I'll let Mike Walter have a say after all the BS the "truth" movement has done to him...BTW Walter fed these guys at his own house. Even after loose change came out with their edited clip of him saying it was a missile that hit(on LCFC you'll see the loose change crew changed their take on the pentagon)he invited them to his home when they asked to speak with him.

"After getting a telephone call from a self-described 9/11 researcher named Russell Pickering, Walter invited Pickering and Dylan Avery, the film's director, to his house in Fairfax, Virginia."

"They showed up with a couple of other people Walter had never spoken with: Craig Ranke, a fast talker with wild eyes, and Aldo Marquis, a heavyset guy who didn't talk much. The two said they were helping Avery and Pickering with research for their film. Walter chatted casually with the pair, and at one point, he realized that Ranke was surreptitiously tape-recording the conversation."

"That was weird, he thought. And increasingly, so was the conversation itself. Although Pickering and Avery seemed relatively normal, Ranke and Marquis appeared to be on a mission to prove that the Pentagon plane crash never happened. They wouldn't listen to anything that contradicted this notion."

"Marquis and Ranke simply refused to believe Walter saw what he saw. "They were saying things like, 'Are you sure the plane didn't land [at Reagan airport] and they set off a bomb?' They kept coming up with all these scenarios."

"Some of those guys [at the party] were young and nice and disaffected [about] their government," Walter concludes. "And some of them were crazy."
http://www.ocweekly.com/2008-08-14/features/pentaconned/

On 9/11 planes flew into buildings. All this other stuff is BS to distract you. Stop allowing yourselves to be conned by disInfo.

[trailhound]

 I dont give a shit about CIT's credibility or what they did in the past.  It could be Henry Kissinger interviewing Sgt Lagasse and the guys at arlington and i would still scratch my head and say hmmm how did that plane hit those light poles? Dylan Avery put out bs before too nobody's perfect.  Trying to find where somebody posted witnesses who dispute the flight path...oh thats right they didnt.  Alex admits he's not perfect.  That doesnt mean he does not have good intentions.

[jimd3100]

I dont give a shit about CIT's credibility or what they did in the past.  It could be Henry Kissinger interviewing Sgt Lagasse and the guys at arlington and i would still scratch my head and say hmmm how did that plane hit those light poles? Dylan Avery put out bs before too nobody's perfect.  Trying to find where somebody posted witnesses who dispute the flight path...oh thats right they didnt.

Are you sure that M Walter I James Father McGraw and K Wheelhouse don't exist?
LOL @ good intentions!

[trailhound]

Are you sure that M Walter I James Father McGraw and K Wheelhouse don't exist?

 Im sure they exist.  Do they definitively place the plane south of the citgo?