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

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by impressme
Who cares what Craig Ranke has to say he clearly has demonstrated himself as very one sided, very prejudiced to any outside evidence.

We clearly see these so call OS debunkers on here cherry picking eyewitness accounts that will only support the government Pentagon fairytales. Some of you continue to peddle your snake oil, claptrap in desperately trying to fool people that the OS is all true. Most ATS readers are not as stupid as some of you think.
The fact is there was some credible eyewitness who did go on record who saw something different and they did see an airplane fly in a different direction. None of you were there, so you cannot conclusively dismiss what they saw.
Again, because the government says so, doesn’t mean it is true, just how gullible do some of you think we are?

A Spanish saying comes to mind: "Only speak when you can improve on the silence."

Snowcrash, dearest mate,

It made me really sad when you told us all that you were penniless, and thus were unable
even to purchase Fenton's new book, although you (because of your reputation), probably
could have acquired same book with a hefty discount.

Now that you finally have come out of the closet and declared yourself a fully fledged
supporter of the official story, i trust that your financial situation has improved to such
a suitable degree, that no one any longer have to worry about your pecuniary problems.

I thank you therefore very much for now at long last letting us all know who we're in fact
dealing with, such that none have to 'speculate' upon this troublesome question anymore.


Cheers

Originally posted by djeminy
Snowcrash, dearest mate,

It made me really sad when you told us all that you were penniless, and thus were unable
even to purchase Fenton's new book, although you (because of your reputation), probably
could have acquired same book with a hefty discount.

I don't think so. And I wouldn't have even tried either. Fenton deserves to be paid in full. Right now, I'm reading a book by a well-known 9/11 Truther before release, though, so I guess I'm somewhat lucky after all.

Originally posted by djeminy
Now that you finally have come out of the closet and declared yourself a fully fledged
supporter of the official story, i trust that your financial situation has improved to such
a suitable degree, that no one any longer have to worry about your pecuniary problems.

That prose, the woolly, redundant allegories and the pretentious sarcasm... now where have I heard that all before. Ah yes. Señor, lobbing the inevitable "monetary gain" grenade. A sign of weakness and despair, always.

Originally posted by djeminy
I thank you therefore very much for now at long last letting us all know who we're in fact
dealing with, such that none have to 'speculate' upon this troublesome question anymore.

I find it highly amusing that it's always critters like you who think I "owe" you anything. I don't owe you a damn thing. I don't "owe" the 9/11 Truth Movement a damn thing. The 9/11 Truth Movement is filled with overly ambitious cult evangelists and conspiracy entrepreneurs. Foot soldiers from the flank, who redefine a CIA agent as "somebody who disagrees with my kooky theories". It makes life all the more exciting, doesn't it, trying to suffuse some street credibility into what is otherwise anathema, even in anti-authoritarian circles. Shall we call it "truth by persecution"? After all, the harder you are shunned and excommunicated, the closer to the truth you must be, right?

The Controlled Demolition of the 9/11 Truth movement is on your head. When and if I am no longer a truther, I will announce it forthrightly, without any shame, embarrassment or regret. But.. that will never happen. I am the house 9/11 Truth - Debunker. (And of course, I'm also Canadian, Dutch and Nepalese military intelligence and I conduct false flag attacks for the benefit of my NWO puppet masters) I have a bone to pick with the crap merchants who've destroyed this movement and continue to do so.

Meanwhile, I advise you to focus your limited analytical resources on the topic, rather than me personally. Inability to do so will get you reported. Thank you.

And... by the way... Don't you find it hilarious that I'm the only one of all of you who uses my known alias, instead of obfuscating it with another one? Yet... I'm the suspect...

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by djeminy
Snowcrash, dearest mate,

It made me really sad when you told us all that you were penniless, and thus were unable
even to purchase Fenton's new book, although you (because of your reputation), probably
could have acquired same book with a hefty discount.

I don't think so. And I wouldn't have even tried either. Fenton deserves to be paid in full. Right now, I'm reading a book by a well-known 9/11 Truther before release, though, so I guess I'm somewhat lucky after all.

Originally posted by djeminy
Now that you finally have come out of the closet and declared yourself a fully fledged
supporter of the official story, i trust that your financial situation has improved to such
a suitable degree, that no one any longer have to worry about your pecuniary problems.

That prose, the woolly, redundant allegories and the pretentious sarcasm... now where have I heard that all before. Ah yes. Señor, lobbing the inevitable "monetary gain" grenade. A sign of weakness and despair, always.

Originally posted by djeminy
I thank you therefore very much for now at long last letting us all know who we're in fact
dealing with, such that none have to 'speculate' upon this troublesome question anymore.

I find it highly amusing that it's always critters like you who think I "owe" you anything. I don't owe you a damn thing. I don't "owe" the 9/11 Truth Movement a damn thing. The 9/11 Truth Movement is filled with overly ambitious cult evangelists and conspiracy entrepreneurs. Foot soldiers from the flank, who redefine a CIA agent as "somebody who disagrees with my kooky theories". It makes life all the more exciting, doesn't it, trying to suffuse some street credibility into what is otherwise anathema, even in anti-authoritarian circles. Shall we call it "truth by persecution"? After all, the harder you are shunned and excommunicated, the closer to the truth you must be, right?

The Controlled Demolition of the 9/11 Truth movement is on your head. When and if I am no longer a truther, I will announce it forthrightly, without any shame, embarrassment or regret. But.. that will never happen. I am the house 9/11 Truth - Debunker. (And of course, I'm also Canadian, Dutch and Nepalese military intelligence and I conduct false flag attacks for the benefit of my NWO puppet masters) I have a bone to pick with the crap merchants who've destroyed this movement and continue to do so.

Meanwhile, I advise you to focus your limited analytical resources on the topic, rather than me personally. Inability to do so will get you reported. Thank you.

And... by the way... Don't you find it hilarious that I'm the only one of all of you who uses my known alias, instead of obfuscating it with another one? Yet... I'm the suspect...

edit on 13-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)

No, dear snowcrash, you're no longer "the suspect" .....'certainty' overrules that description.

You have spend the last 12 to 18 month denigrating, belittling, mocking and ridiculing any decent intelligent members of the Truth movement you thought were either touching upon the Truth or coming too close to it.
And this you did in the most condescending and haughty way possible.

The only exception being, when you're heaping sickening praise upon your few weird fellow members left on 'truthfaction', and which borders on nothing but sheer sycophancy.

Snowcrash, you live in a world of utter darkness where 'goodness' in any form is non-existent.
You live in a dark world where only lies, fraud, falsehood, fear, insincerity and duplicity can exist, and therefore you would be completely unaware of the fact that the only place you'll ever find the Truth, is in a world where honesty, sincerity, integrity, fairness, conscientiousness, together with the clear, plain and simple, rule supreme.
Or in other words: In a world dominated by the Light.

Only from this world will the Truth ever find its way to human kind ......and hence it will never come from you, or any of your colleagues.

Sorry if my plain speaking should offend you. The Truth is never received well by people living in your world!

Cheers

Originally posted by WetBlanky

I would suggest you take a look around, CIT have been meeting with congressmen and senators. One of them just destroyed a major mouthpiece for the govts story in a debate.

I'll ask again since you apparently are not going to answer this question.

What "congressmen and senators" are you "meeting" with? Which "one" "destroyed" a major mouthpiece in a debate?

I'm sorry, I must have missed that. If your "senator" was Mike Gravel and if this "debate" was some silly obscure Indie-Left Fringe Internet radio program against some equally obscure fool, please...spare me the histrionics.

If your "congressman/woman" was Cynthia McKinney, pardon me while I go over there and puke my guts out from laughing so hard.

So...who are they, these upstanding pillars of our government who CIT is talking with?

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Exactly. P4T's "experts" didn't discover the last seconds of the FDR data because they are incompetent.

I could reproduce Warren's work if I wanted to, and maybe I will.

In any case, Warren's work, from one programmer to another, is outstanding.

[...]

Terry Morin is clearly a SoC witness. Shall we talk about his parallel claim, fellas? Craig doesn't like to talk about that much.

Hi Snowcrash911,

Let's make you squirm a little.

Can you show me what the required SoC, 530 mph, 780 feet per second flight path looks like on a map?

As the plane approaches Terry Morin, is it on the north side or on the south side of Columbia Pike according to the official SoC flight path?

Can you please plot the lat/longs of this alleged decoded last 4 seconds on a map and show us the SoC path there please?

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by djeminy


djeminy, I don't what to say. I'm utterly devastated by your prosaic, flowery lampoon of myself and TruthAction. Whatever shall I do now?

Originally posted by WetBlanky
Can you show me what the required SoC, 530 mph, 780 feet per second flight path looks like on a map?

It's all over your own documentary. It's also shown in the Terry Morin image I posted somewhere above. Don't be silly.

Originally posted by WetBlanky
As the plane approaches Terry Morin, is it on the north side or on the south side of Columbia Pike according to the official SoC flight path?

South side. You know this, I know this, do you think you've got me "squirming" now?

I know what you're going to say: while "your" NoC witnesses are allowed to deviate wildly from the one and only NoC path, since there can be only one, you just average them out, and muffle this fact using apologetic phrases such as "witnesses are not computers".

However, when OS flight path witnesses deviate but one hair from the FDR, they're "disproving the official story".

No they're not, your argument is BS and I've explained this several times now. All witnesses are expected to be wildly mistaken about the flight path, and your witness pool is a biased selection. Period. Everybody else is attacked, smeared and snitchjacketed.

Originally posted by WetBlanky
Can you please plot the lat/longs of this alleged decoded last 4 seconds on a map and show us the SoC path there please?

Position report errors
The data file shows that the course position error at take-off from Dulles is much greater
than the error at the end of the final flight. The large error at the beginning may have
resulted from drift of the inertial navigation system while the plane was on the ground.
These errors are apparently largely corrected during flight, presumably by reference to
Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) and VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR),
which provide distance and direction from ground stations. Also available at the time was
the Global Positioning System (GPS). Significant position errors were nevertheless noticed
in the data from most of the normal landings described above, and corrections were made.
It was noticed that the errors became larger while the plane was taxiing toward its parking
spot, at which time it would presumably be too low to receive DME and VOR correcting
signals. It may seem surprising that GPS was not correcting drift, but the NTSB has
released a document which lists GPS as "not working or unconfirmed"

The errors in the data file position reports were corrected by creating a file consisting of
every fifth position report and applying the positions to Google Earth maps. In the case of
the 11 landings prior to flight 77, each plot was inspected to identify the position where the
plane turned off the runway onto a taxiway. The differences in latitude and longitude
between the plotted position where the plane turned and the junction with the taxiway were
used to adjust the data file values. Only landings in which the turn off position could be
clearly established were used in this work. The average latitude error was 329 feet and the
maximum error was 1197 feet. The average longitude error was 663 feet, maximum error
1410 feet. It is clear from this study that the position reports produced by this aircraft were
prone to error, producing recorded tracks which were parallel with, but offset from, their
real tracks. It is therefore not surprising that this was also found to be the case with the final
flight.

A method similar to that used to correct landings was used to correct the final flight. The
last position report is recorded 166 words prior to the recording of impact. This represents a
distance travelled of 528 feet, as may be determined using the details in the calculation at
the foot of page 6. Adding the distance from the nose to the accelerometers, about 75 feet,
gives 603 feet. The last position report was therefore created about 603 feet along the
centerline of the aircraft from the face of the Pentagon. There is of course appreciable
uncertainty in this figure as there may have been some crushing of the nose before the high
deceleration was recorded. Also we have been unable to determine whether there is any
software adjustment made to the position reports within the plane before they are recorded.
Any such errors would be small and would have negligible effects on the calculations and
conclusions of this paper as their only effect would be to alter by a few feet the location at
which each ground elevation was taken. The latitude error was found to be about 42 feet
and the longitude error about 392 ft, well below the averages for the previous flights.

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon, pg 13/14.

Answers to Balsamo here.

Wow, Proudbird, why do you keep avoiding my questions??

Have you verified Warren Stutt's data yourself?

Snowcrash, calm down son, you're going to hurt yourself.

That "tinrat" on Terry Morin stands. It's Terry Morin's statements word for word in a recorded interview not some online statement that GLs love to quote because of the possibility of obfuscating and adding their own slant.

He said he wa in between the wings of the Annex. Yes or no?

He said it went over his head. Yes or no?

He narrowed his perspective down to saying that he "couldn't see the stripes". Yes or no?

He said that if the Memorial had been built, it would have struck that. Yes or no?

He should have been describing this. Yes or no?

And when asked whether he saw the aircraft south of Columbia Pike, he said this..

No frickin' way.

Yes or no?

You seem to be implying a grey area over what the official path is according to the directional damage and the alleged FDR data that you've publically thrown your weight behind.

Are you now denying Legge/Stutt's paper? Yes or no?

Are you denying Warren Stutt's alleged "right bank data" which Stutt himself admitted would entail a "straight path"? "Data" which does not include any left bank?? Yes or no?

So, I'll ask again. Are there any "off SOC paths"?

Proudbird. Help him out here.

You call it "cornering" in your paranoid rant. I call it narrowing the parameters of the argument. Especially when somebody tries to invent his own bastardized and everchanging version of the official narrative. There are no grey areas. You guys cornered yourselves. Deal with it.

For the benefit of Proudird and Snowcrash.

The documented proof of the 330fps limitations of the RADALT stands.

The argument that it should refer to altitude has been thoroughly addressed by Rob Balsamo here:

pilotsfor911truth.org...

He (Stutt) now speculates that the performance specs of 0-330 fps tracking could be in the vertical (not the forward speed of the aircraft). Meaning, any rise in terrain, object, whatever, more than 330 fps, and the RA will "fall behind".

This image should give you guys a pretty straightforward and logical reason why your and Stutt's claims are incorrect.



Deep breaths now guys..

reply to post by snowcrash911

I am calling him mistaken. I've said this for a long time now. And so is Brooks. And Turcios. And Middleton. And Stafford. And Prather. And Carter. And Paik.

...and Sean Boger, and George Aman, and Steve Riskus, and Terry Morin and Levi Stephens and Albert Hemphill and every single witness that fails to describe the official path i any way whatsoever. All wrong. Every last one?

You don't find it bizarre that everybody was wrong in the same way, Snowcrash?

While you're at it, why not enlighten us as how how William Middleton described what he did given the fact that he had no view of the official path?



That a guy standing at this POV:



With this view (hint: the official path is waaaay over to the right. The ANC carpark is to the left of the bus):



Described this:

...And he glazed over like our parking lot here and made a turn toward the Pentagon

This question has been left unanswered throughout this thread. Be the first.

Cue the smoke and mirrors...

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by WetBlanky
Can you show me what the required SoC, 530 mph, 780 feet per second flight path looks like on a map?

It's all over your own documentary. It's also shown in the Terry Morin image I posted somewhere above. Don't be silly.

Hmm, it's not my documentary. But apparently, anyone who corners you with the details is Aldo Marquis. You look foolish by repeating it and you will again be reported.


Terry Morin said it was right on top of him as he was between the wings of the Navy Annex. He said here is "no frippin way" it was on the south side of Columbia Pike. Is the red line what Terry Morin described? Yes or no?

Does the purple line come over Ed Paik's shop as he describes? Does it come over the Navy Annex where morin is standing between the wings? I can answer this one for you. A resounding no.

Does the blue line come over Ed Paik's shop as he describes? Does it come over the Navy Annex, "right above" where Morin is standing between the wings? I can also answer this one for you. Another resounding no.

Does either of YOUR "versions" of the purple and blue flight paths match with the official red flight path you have shown there?

I'll let you answer that one.

Originally posted by WetBlanky
As the plane approaches Terry Morin, is it on the north side or on the south side of Columbia Pike according to the official SoC flight path?

South side. You know this, I know this, do you think you've got me "squirming" now?

Not yet, apparently. You seem to not realize how foolish you look.

So if the official, required SoC path, which includes your cherished alleged decoded 4 seconds-the same ones only Warren Stutt and no one else, including the NTSB, has found- has the plane on the SOUTH side of Columbia Pike, what does this say?

Craig: Let me ask you..what are the chances that the plane was on the South side of Columbia Pike?
Or on the South side of the VDOT?

Morin: No frickin way

Craig: No frickin way?

Morin: No frickin way. He was right over the top of me.

Is that the SoC path ie your red path? Yes or no?

I know what you're going to say: while "your" NoC witnesses are allowed to deviate wildly from the one and only NoC path, since there can be only one,

Deviate wildly? Lie much? They are all perfectly in line with each other with few variances and reasonable deductions on what they couldn't see before the plane got to their POV or after it left it. Paik connects to Terry Morin who has it "right over" him as he is between the Navy Annex wings, the ANC guys see it veer to the middle, then to the northern edge before it heads to them and makes it's slow banking right turn, as they run under it.

So there is one and only NoC flight path? Really? You have the data showing this one and only NoC flight path? Footage from a spy plane or a satellite? You know the EXACT position of the NoC plane as it passed over Paik's shop, the Annex, and then to the north of the Citgo? You have evidence of this one and only flight path that allows you to say the witnesses "deviated" from it?

you just average them out, and muffle this fact using apologetic phrases such as "witnesses are not computers".

Well they aren't. They aren't cameras either. Their memories aren't perfect, but when corroborated over and over on the general direction and trajectory of a flight path in relation to buildings and landmarks, it becomes clear what the flight path is.

Apparently with you, computers aren't computers either because you seem to suspend "your" data that shows it SoC in order to create your own "version"(your word) of not only the flight path, but the witness's accounts. Sad. Transparent.

Unless you wanted to show me the lat long points in "your" data that correspond with "your version" of the blue and purple flight paths?

However, when OS flight path witnesses deviate but one hair from the FDR, they're "disproving the official story".

What OS flight path witnesses? There are none.

You seem to not realize or pretend not to realize, that there is NO deviation from the official flight path allowed. It is a straight, 530 mph, 780 feet per second line into 5 light poles to then somehow magically level out over the lawn.

Or did you want to show us the data in the decoded 4 seconds that shows it "deviate" from the south side of Columbia Pike to over Terry Morin back to pole 1.

No they're not, your argument is BS and I've explained this several times now. All witnesses are expected to be wildly mistaken about the flight path,

Even when they are wildly corroborated about the flight path...by other witnesses at opposing vantage points???

reply to post by ThePostExaminer


According to this statement, third one down, :-


www.ratical.org...

Terry Morin states he was " 10 steps out from between Wings 4 and 5 ". If he was between the wings how could he have seen the plane fly on to the Pentagon ?

He also says " The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage." As he had a view of the side of the fuselage it clearly wasn't directly over him but a wingtip may have been.

Originally posted by snowcrash911
This was my version:

Terry Morin is clearly a SoC witness.

Can you show me, in your "version", where your purple or blue lines "cleared the 8th Wing of BMDO", and "If the Air Force Memorial had been built," "would have ran into it"?

Would you say that this account:


Michael Dobbs: "I was looking out the window and saw it come right over the Navy annex at a slow angle."

Would you say this is more in agreement with the north path or the official south side path?

Is Mike Dobbs account of it coming over the Navy Annex, more in agreement with Terry Morin's following statements?

CRAIG: What are the chances the plane flew on the south side, south of columbia Pike?


MORIN: No frickin way, it flew over the top of me.

(...)

CRAIG: Were you outside the edge

MORIN: No, I was inside..flew over the top of me

Or is that more in agreement with the official SoC path aka your red line? How about your blue and purple paths?

You guys should give it up. The plane came over the Navy Annex.

Your efforts are futile.

Ranke: are you saying he was off to the side of the Navy Annex, or ...

Hemphill: yeah, he would have been over my right shoulder

Ranke: but you saw the fuselage appear, was it directly over the top of the Navy Annex or ...

Hemphill: right over the top

Albert Hemphill

QUOTE
I couldn't believe what I was now seeing to my righQt: a silver, twin-engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over the Navy Annex

Christopher Munsey

QUOTE
It was on top of the Navy Annex.

Darius Prather

QUOTE
I looked up, looking in this direction and I can see the plane over the corner of that building here, the Navy Annex. From what I seen it was at right of it. It was on this corner of it.

Darrel Stafford

QUOTE
Carter: We saw a plane over here, the Navy Annex, come from over.
[...]
Q: Would you say it was more on the North side of the station over here or the south side?

Carter: It was more on this side. Right on this side

Donald Carter

QUOTE
Then when I looked I seen he was kind of fighting with the plane. And he glazed over like our parking lot here and made a turn toward the Pentagon….

…when it came down past the Navy Annex it came right down the center of the road here.

William Middleton

QUOTE
It was coming from here, very low, it almost hit my head. I thought it might hit the Navy Annex building's roof. That’s why I was running and I looked at the Navy Annex building and it wasn’t touched. 

Ed Paik

QUOTE
As he approached the heliport he noticed a plane flying low over the Annex and heading right for him.

Frank Probst

QUOTE
James Mosley, 57, was four stories up on a scaffold, washing the windows of the Navy Annex building when the plane flew overhead.

James Mosley

R. E. Rabogliatti was in his office at the Navy Annex. He peered out of his office window and saw the airliner looming over the building.

R.E. Rabogliatti

QUOTE
Boger: When I saw the plane he was practically in front of the Navy Annex.

Aldo: ..did it come over the Navy Annex to the right, to the middle or more to your left?

Boger : I would say more to the right also.

Sean Boger

QUOTE
I saw this [plane] come flying over the Navy Annex

Levi Stephens

QUOTE
I was looking and it came right over the top of Navy Annex.
-George Aman, ANC employee.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ThePostExaminer

 

According to this statement, third one down, :-


www.ratical.org...

Terry Morin states he was " 10 steps out from between Wings 4 and 5 ". If he was between the wings how could he have seen the plane fly on to the Pentagon ?

He also says " The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage." As he had a view of the side of the fuselage it clearly wasn't directly over him but a wingtip may have been.

Morin: ..I did NOT have a side view.

[...]

Remember I'm a little bit inside (of the wings)...I couldn´t see the stripes, I saw the belly.

I think you are confused. There is a door in the wing that he was coming out of that led him "10 steps" out to "in between wings 4 and 5".

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ThePostExaminer

 

According to this statement, third one down, :-


www.ratical.org...

Terry Morin states he was " 10 steps out from between Wings 4 and 5 ". If he was between the wings how could he have seen the plane fly on to the Pentagon ?

He also says " The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage." As he had a view of the side of the fuselage it clearly wasn't directly over him but a wingtip may have been.

Alfie, avoidance of my question as to whether you've verified Warren Stutt's alleged data duly noted.

Why, Alfie, when Terry Morin is recorded in an oral interview, where any discrepancies were ironed out by Craig Ranke, would you and others insist on quoting from an online written testimony?

No matter, I just wish you guys would actually listen to the interview. It's not going to bite.

Morin: I ran to the outside (TPE: from in between the wings) and got into a position where I could see it

Craig: So, you're saying that the entire plane, including the right wing...

(TPE: meaning to ask if the entire plane was North of Columbia Pike) Morin understood the question as being in reference to how much of the plane was over the Annex building.)

Morin: Is the right wing hanging a little bit over..?

i906.photobucket.com...

And of course wetblanky's quotes on not being able to see the stripes.

Got it? He was in between the wings of the Annex.

What happened beyond his field of vision when it passed the Navy Annex is corroborated multiple times as travelling NOC.

I had time for me to come down, start to see it descend and come back

Got it? His words. Morin claims that he had time to get into a better position to see a partial descent.

Certain people use the online testimony to insinuate that there was a "parallel to the Navy Annex" flightpath, yet North of Columbia Pike. Which will not cause the directional damage, is non-witness compatible and is not seen in any data (neither the alleged FDR as is, or the twisted nipple "dataset" qupted by GLs)

Now a question for you Alfie. Do you believe that Terry Morin is describing the official path in any way whatsoever?

Snowcrash and Proudbird, I'd appreciate answers to the many points raised above.

Maybe Proudbird could point out to Snowcrash where my post on the 330fps limitations of RADALT couldn't possibly be referring to altitude, when it's obvious it's referring to forward motion (speed).

Proudbird you still, 20 pages later, haven't apologized or at least acknowledged that the "nosecone" allegedly made its way through to C Ring is most definitely not a "truther fantasy" but that can wait.

Snowcrash, I need an answer as to whether you still believe that anything other than the OCT flightpath could cause the directional damage, an acknowledgement that I've interpretted Terry Morin's testimony to the letter, and when you can an answer to my William Middleton post.

Please don't enter this "from another angle" until you've addressed the false claims I've cleared up for you. And calm down!

I've much more to cover including an explanation as to how Warren Stutt's "data" and his and Legge's claims are wrong but I'd appreciate a response before we move on.

Thanks.

reply to post by GenRadek

Also, a video that ProudBird has posted also addresses three more alleged "NoC" witnesses

And which video would that be?

Originally posted by snowcrash911
reply to post by djeminy

 

djeminy, I don't what to say. I'm utterly devastated by your prosaic, flowery lampoon of myself and TruthAction. Whatever shall I do now?

I'm quite sure you'll just carry on as usual - just like this funny guy here:


"......
"He has nothing on!" shouted all the people at last.
The emperor shivered, for he was certain that they were right; but he thought,
"I must bear it until the procession is over." And he walked even more proudly,
and the two gentlemen of the imperial bedchamber went on carrying the train
that wasn't there."


Cheers