| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Questions for bileduct | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jan 27 2008, 12:35 PM (954 Views) | |
| Avenger | Jan 27 2008, 12:35 PM Post #1 |
|
Why do you ask CIT about Veronica, but not her cousin, Cindy, even though Cindy is the one who got a better view of the plane? Why do you not ask about Jamal's account? |
 |
 
|
| Craig Ranke CIT | Jan 27 2008, 12:42 PM Post #2 |
|
They are desperately trying to pick and choose details to cause doubt on individual accounts while not considering the body of evidence. CIT has always understood that eyewitness testimony is not and can not be pin-point accurate. We simply conducted an investigation and reported on the entire body of evidence that we could find. Bile needs to consider all the witness accounts starting with Jamal and ending with Robert and draw a flight path with all of their APPROXIMATE placements of the plane in consideration. Funny how these psuedoskeptics will rail on about how unreliable eyewitnesses are but then they scrutinize each account expecting them to be 100% accurate. The details that were corroborated the most are white plane, north side of citgo. |
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 27 2008, 08:04 PM Post #3 |
|
First of all, I have my doubts that Veronica even saw the plane. Cindy's answers are vague and ambiguous - she puts the plane at roof top level travelling left to right, then states that the plane came from behind her, then motions left to right again. Where is "behind" her? Craig makes no attempt to determine this. Did she mean behind her from where she was at the point the question was asked? Did she mean behind her on the morning of 9/11, when she was facing east whilst brushing her teeth? Without having her draw the flight path of the plane there is very little that can be gleaned from her interview with any real accuracy other than what she believed the plane looked like.
Because "Jamal's" account is fairly innocuous and I have no reason to doubt that he believed he saw what he said he saw. Here's some questions for you - Did "Jamal" see the plane bank and turn to the left over the golf course and head towards the Navy Annex? No? Did "Mrs. Hubbard", "Veronica" or "Cindy" see this? No? Why does the "flyover" flight path show a left bank/turn over the golf course when NONE of the witnesses saw it? Isn't this called... embellishment? |
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 27 2008, 08:26 PM Post #4 |
|
You are being completely dishonest. I am scrutinizing the witness accounts to corroborate what they actually said with what you say they said. "Mrs. Hubbard's" testimony is a PRIME EXAMPLE of CIT dishonesty. She indicates that she saw the plane heading in a north-easterly direction towards I395, yet based on her testimony you draw a map with the plane heading north towards the Navy Annex. Then when you are called on it, you have the unmitigated gall to say:
Hubbard: It came this way, it came across, and it went between the house with the grey roof where the umbrella is? And the big house. It went through there, and then it pulled up so that it would miss those trees. And then the next thing I saw was the puff of smoke and heard the sound. There's a reason why you didn't pinpoint those locations on the map, Craig. You knew her testimony does not support your theory. Your deliberate dishonesty is becoming very, very apparent. Edited by bileduct, Jan 27 2008, 09:26 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 27 2008, 09:47 PM Post #5 |
|
Innocuous?? He said the plain flew over the driving range of Army Navy Country Club? Quite a ways off the official flight path. Are you aware of that?
That's because he lost sight of it after it flew over that building he was standing in front of. Do you know where he was standing in relation to the official flight path?
Because they were not in a position to see it bank.
Ok, but you're the one who started a thread about her. Now, you have your doubts about whether she even saw the plane. You think she lied? What reason would she have to lie?
That's why Craig asked her if it flew straight from the left or from behind. She said it flew in from behind. He asked did she see just the side of it or did it come in at an angle. She said it was at an angle. She later mentioned seeing one of the plane's engines. She used her hands to describe the direction it was traveling.  Do you think maybe that's the real reason you chose not to bring her up? Because you couldn't twist her account to fit the official story?
Don't you already know what she meant? Obviously she didn't see the plane while she was brushing her teeth.
What does she believe the plane looked like? Edited by Avenger, Jan 27 2008, 09:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 27 2008, 10:10 PM Post #6 |
|
And by the way, here's Jamal's location in relation to the official flight path. Where you see Jamal's name is not his location. His actual location is at the end of that black line that leads down from his name toward Army Navy Country Club. Still think his account is innocuous? |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 27 2008, 10:14 PM Post #7 |
|
One more thing. The official flight path doesn't go anywhere near Mrs. Hubbard, Veronica, or Cindy. All four (including Jamal) contradict the official flight path. You need to write a retraction. |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 27 2008, 10:37 PM Post #8 |
|
A saw you view this thread earlier. Retraction, please. |
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 27 2008, 11:19 PM Post #9 |
|
Retraction for what exactly? She said the plane came from behind her (whilst facing north) but doesn't mention that the plane was heading in a northerly direction towards the Navy Annex. She states that it was heading left to right on an angle. One could argue that this description fits the official flight path, but without knowing the specifics, who can really say either way? Did she mean behind her? Did she mean to the side of her? We can sit here and argue for hours on end about what direction Cindy is pointing, what she means when she says left to right, how much of an angle the plane was on and where "behind" is, and ultimately get nowhere because we will both have a different idea on what she actually meant. This is why I didn't bother asking any questions about her account, because she is vague and non-descriptive. I'm not twisting anyone's account. I am simply trying to reconcile the witness testimonies with the flyover theory, pointing out the inconsistencies and, in the case of "Mrs. Hubbard", outright deceptions. None of the white plane witnesses have overwhelmingly contradicted the official flight path. Their memory of the direction the plane was travelling is roughly in line with the official flight path, but the placement is obviously further to the south. I would not expect them to have 100% accuracy in placement and direction considering that, a) they are remembering an event that happened five years previously, and b) there is substancial room for error when trying to pinpoint the ground location of a flying object. Sgt. Brooks is a classic example of this, claiming that the plane came from "the middle of the trees" in front of the Navy Annex and later drew it approximately 450 feet north of that location. And there was what, 30 minutes, 1 hour between telling two different stories? And finally, Cindy says it was a white plane... with a blue stripe. |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 27 2008, 11:31 PM Post #10 |
|
Her words are petty clear, but it really doesn't matter because her location is nowhere near the official flight path. Can't you see how far north that red line is from their location? Edited by Avenger, Jan 27 2008, 11:35 PM.
|
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 27 2008, 11:45 PM Post #11 |
|
Her bathroom is approximately 800 feet or 266 yards south of the red line. She places the plane somewhere between her position and the red line. She gives no detail on any specific object that the plane flew over, leaving us to guess it's position based on her vague testimony. Eyewitness accounts are not infallable. ESPECIALLY five years after the fact. ESPECIALLY when trying to determine the ground location directly underneath a flying object. As stated before, Sgt. Brooks managed to place the place 450 feet or 150 yards further north of where he originally said it was. |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 28 2008, 12:00 AM Post #12 |
|
I think you better go back and review her account. She said she didn't see people in the windows, but, she could have because she described the windows as really, really big. She saw numbers on the tail. Plus, she used a nearby tree and a neighbor's house as a point of reference, so it could not have been that far away. So what do you think about Jamal's account of it flying over the driving range?
Edited by Avenger, Jan 28 2008, 12:02 AM.
|
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 28 2008, 12:32 AM Post #13 |
|
And from this you are making a guess on how far away the plane was? Do you honestly think that you wouldn't be able to see windows and tail numbers on a 757 that is 266 yards away?
You mean the tree shown below at point B?  So let's see, it was flying left to right, on an angle, coming from behind Cindy, and it flew close to the tree at point B? Is this what you are saying? Care to draw that on the map for me?
Seems to be on an angle that is consistent with the official flight path, however his perspective and the interpretation of his statements may well have put the flight path further to the south than it actually was. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Jan 28 2008, 04:43 AM Post #14 |
|
Deleted User
|
I did not see any report of a turn in Jamal's account. Then they show a path, not his, with his name and location attached. It's his, but with a turn to the north. I've been scanning the video and at the moment at least, it seems What they have is a succession of witnesses SW-NE who each saw the plane going ENE, then a non-existent NNE line drawn between them. At the risk of sounding like a 'cheerleader,' I have to say good work on this stuff. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Jan 28 2008, 04:51 AM Post #15 |
|
Deleted User
|
bileduct is a 'they?' Craig; I'm not saying there is one since I haven't looked at everything twice yet, but so far I haven't seen a single witness who describes the overall trajectory you've drawn. I measure that yellow line from Jamal's path to the Annnex as about 30 degrees real, halfway between due north (0 deg) and the official trajectory of app. 60 degrees. All gestures I'm seeing indicate something more east, closer to 90 degrees if a bit short/north of that. Name one if you can, provide their drawn path, or tell me where in any video they clearly indicate a heading in the neighborhood of 30 degrees NNE. I don't care where THEY were, I want directional clues where THE PLANE was headed. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jan 28 2008, 07:40 AM Post #16 |
|
Why do you put quotation marks around the witnesses names as if they aren't real people giving their real names? Jamal, Veronica, Cindy, & Mrs. Hubbard are all real people with real names. "Bileduct" seems more appropriate to be in quotation marks. Yes some anonymous individual on the internet trying to discredit real life everyday Americans who don't hide their identity because what they saw isn't what this lying Administration and fake corporate media told everyone what happened........ |
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 28 2008, 08:14 AM Post #17 |
|
Thankyou for the diversion. Put my name in quotes if you wish. It doesn't bother me in the least. Would you like to make an attempt to answer the question? Who witnessed the left bank over the golf course? Edited by bileduct, Jan 28 2008, 08:16 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 28 2008, 09:11 PM Post #18 |
|
LOL!  If there's one thing you're good for, it's comic relief. I didn't even bother reading the rest of your post. That is too funny. |
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 28 2008, 09:23 PM Post #19 |
|
So you're not going to draw on the map where Cindy said she saw the plane? |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 28 2008, 09:36 PM Post #20 |
|
So you're not gonna show us a AA 757 from 266 yards away?  Show us the tail numbers. I didn't know an American Airlines passenger plane had tail numbers. I thought it had two giant letter As on each side. Plus the windows look pretty small. Very hard to see. Especially with that blue stripe in the way. Edited by Avenger, Jan 28 2008, 09:40 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 28 2008, 09:38 PM Post #21 |
|
Do you even know what an American Airlines plane looks like? Do your homework and get back to me. |
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 28 2008, 09:43 PM Post #22 |
|
So you're not going to draw on the map where Cindy said she saw the plane? I'll deal with your diversion after you place the plane on the map. |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 28 2008, 09:47 PM Post #23 |
|
You won't deal with anything because you know she could not have seen what she did from 266 yards. |
|
|
|
| bileduct | Jan 28 2008, 09:50 PM Post #24 |
|
So you're not going to draw on the map where Cindy said she saw the plane? How many other witnesses reported seeing propellers on the plane? |
|
|
|
| Avenger | Jan 28 2008, 09:56 PM Post #25 |
|
She misspoke when she said propeller. She clarified that in the interview. You didn't know that?
The plane would have been behind her house. What's your point? |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic » |
8:09 AM Dec 2
