Russell

 

Posted by: Russell Pickering Sep 11 2006, 10:53 PM
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=19&t=12857
OK, so we have determined that:

1) You will not attempt to create an actual representation of a flyover flight path that corresponds with any data we have including the laws of physics.

2) You will throw out all of the witnesses that saw the plane in the area south of the Citgo and claim to have seen it hit things including the building.

3) You will throw out all of the data from the flight animation, FDR and flight path map.

4) You will despite clear testimony of Madelyn associating the plane with her building and not the Annex extrapolate a tilt of the wing as a direction change to the Annex even though that tilt is in the opposite direction of the bank required to turn around the end of the Citgo and be anywhere near the "coordinated" demolitions.

5) You will say because video was confiscated therefore the plane flew over.

6) You will say that the topography in your opinion does not allow for an impact so therefore because there was a plane in the area it had to fly over (but you won't say at what point of the building).

7) You will say because of Lloyd's confusion (which you witnessed yourself) 5 years later at 74 years of age therefore a flyover happened. Oh yeah I forgot he had a David Icke book on his seat.

8) You will ignore the light poles, fence posts, and the generator because they may have been a nighttime "construction" operation.

9) You will ignore the tree, trailers and the damage to the Pentagon wall as pyrotechnics despite a fuselage entry hole and two engine entry holes.

10) You will ignore all of the debris some of which is identifiable as being from a 757 because it was all planted.

11) Photos are irrelevant because they are only of the faked scene anyway.

12) Any witnesses that contradict you will be labeled as conscious conspirators to mass murder, deep cover or mind control.

14) You will overlook the fact that even the witnesses you invoke require the selective editing of their accounts and that literally all of them believe the plane hit the building.

15) You are happy with the fact that despite thousands of people in the area on the other side of the Pentagon there is not a single report of a 757 busting out of an explosion that they all would have heard and looked up to see what happened.

16) To deal with all of this you will be suspicious of anybody who wants to continue investigating.

17) I presume this means if you had the opportunity to let all of America know this you would do so because it is all solved now.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Quote:

 

Originally posted by pinch

Do us all a favor. Send an email to your buddy Rob and ask him if a 90 ton airliner could make that turn at ANY speed and ANY altitude from a NoC flight path to a South parking fly-over.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread382628/pg1

Quote:

 

Michael Wolsey May 21 at 11:11pm

CIT, or Craig Ranke and Aldo Marqui are, IMO, some of the worst disinformation in the 911 movement. I have covered this topic extensively at my website and even did a couple of interviews on CIT with Jim Hoffman and Frank Legge. I will give you some links that I hope will help. Let me know. Thanks.

Michael

http://visibility911.com/blog/?cat=501
http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1328
http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1342
http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1351
http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1409
http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1512
http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1643


Michael Wolsey May 25 at 8:44am Hey Jeffrey-

I am a bit curious, what exactly is your relationship with craig and cit?


Jeffrey Hill May 25 at 11:43am

I just "met" Craig online when he and his diciples started to attack me at P4T for calling Pentagon witnesses:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19971

And ever since then we have been arguing back and forth!


Michael Wolsey May 25 at 11:56am

I am just curious because I heard the call where you and Craig were calling together and so I thought perhaps you were working together. It seems odd to me though because you seem to be asking the questions in a calm and respectful way and just gathering the information but Craig obviously has an agenda in his line of questioning, something he has always denied. You seemed to be genuinely disgusted, perhaps embarrassed as you stepped in to ease the tension, and then later after Evey hangs up, Craig rebukes you for it. Just seems a bit confusing to me so ya, would like to talk with you more.

Michael Wolsey May 25 at 11:56am

 

I am just curious because I heard the call where you and Craig were calling together and so I thought perhaps you were working together. It seems odd to me though because you seem to be asking the questions in a calm and respectful way and just gathering the information but Craig obviously has an agenda in his line of questioning, something he has always denied. You seemed to be genuinely disgusted, perhaps embarrassed as you stepped in to ease the tension, and then later after Evey hangs up, Craig rebukes you for it. [...]

gwb_223

 

So, in 4 minutes the perps managed to lug the pole over the concrete wall, drag it across the road (between the vehicles) and plant it. All the while miraculously managing to avoid the photographer's lense, both before and after.

That's remarkable work.

Did they use the end of the pole to smash the cab window, or hammers? "Excuse me cabbie, w're just going to smash the cr#p out of your windscreen. We'll explain why later".

Were they lying on the ground beyond the barrier to avoid being seen by the approaching photographer, having seen him coming?

If 9/11 was the result of a giant conspiracy the perps would invent you, Craig, as the perfect distraction. Otherwise this theory of yours is the most monumental exercise in self-delusion I've seen so far. There are about 6 people in the world even capable of believing it, and they're all here.

Meanwhile - where are the witnesses for a fly-over? Bear in mind that plane still had a long way to go, to get wherever it ended up.
Posted: Aug 1 2007, 03:44 AM, gwb_223
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=13005&st=20

Russell Aug 6 2007

01:24 PM

Craig,

I DO NOT say this as a matter of sarcasm. I am 100% serious. You need to find a source of consultation outside of your own universe and get some help.

You have now become so illogical as a result of your desire to be right that you have become irrational to a degree of concern in my opinion.

Think..........

Ingersoll photos have been available for a long time before our DC trip. All we did was acquire ones less published off the original card. They in NO WAY establish pole staging.

HARDLY EVER do you see digital photographers with an accurate time/date stamp set. In all of my years as a photographer I never set it once. Many photos and video totally unrelated to 9/11 have incorrect time/date data.

Linking a man's death to this is disgraceful and ludicrous. You ought to be ashamed of the lengths you are going to to prove your own theory.

For giving us some photos this man is dead? "Suicided" or actually self-inflicted.

But they let you walk onto government property with a video and catch uniformed officers and government employees on film exposing the whole thing?

They caused a man to die for photos that had already been released but did nothing to prevent CIT from exposing the whole thing on video???????????????

Craig - you were already in their database form the DC detainment. You believed they were tapping your phones after talking with Robert. They certainly knew of Robert's testimony from the original postings prior to your later interviews on film.

But everybody is alive and well.

Jason Ingersoll himself is just fine and has a photography business.

http://www.jasoningersoll.com/


IF his photos were incriminating, why did the USMC allow ANY of them to be released in the first place? He was subject to full censorship.

This is as insane as when you thought Jason Ingersoll was part of the conspiracy because the lighting systems at the Pentagon cleanup were Ingersoll-Rand Corporation.

At least go get evaluated.

Sincerely,
Russell
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=13005&st=40

shure

May 27 2010, 06:52 AM

I guess for Craig there is no turning back. A guy with an ego like he has could never admit he was wrong, could he?

elephant room

May 24 2010, 10:30 PM

Sticks,
Since these cit trolls came here and tried to slander Shure,
I have spent a little more time taking in your Deception series.
You really nailed them.
And the $ factor pointed out in Supplemental Materials is right on.



Good stuff above Debs!

Quote:

 

North side approach theory + zero witnesses who saw a flyover + zero evidence of planting aircraft debris + zero evidence of planting dna + zero evidence of planting generator damage + zero evidence of planting building damage + zero evidence of actors employed or hallucinating witnesses + zero evidence of disposing of Flight 77 + zero evidence of tampering with Hotel FOIA and other released video showing no flyover + lack of radar + ? = FLYOVER

Or

North side approach theory + ?????? = FLYOVER

Can CIT fill in the ??????......please?

Quote:

 

Well go on then...

Please provide proof a fly over.

Show me that either the above statement you made does not actually contradict everything you you've said about having proof of a flyover or alternatively.....
Simply SHOW ME THE PROOF of a flyover. Eg witnesses, videos, anything.

Quote:

 

I would also like to see some proof of a flyover/flyby.

Yougenedebs

May 24 2010, 12:36 AM

Here’s a blast from the past. Russell Pickering brings the hammer down on Craig and Aldo, the “You” Russell speaks to:

Russell

 

Posted by: Russell Pickering Sep 11 2006, 10:53 PM
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=19&t=12857
OK, so we have determined that:

1) You will not attempt to create an actual representation of a flyover flight path that corresponds with any data we have including the laws of physics.