CIT Ranke and Marquis make cover of OC Weekly

[Bobert]

Yes they have rocketed past delusional.
There should be a separate galaxy named after the CIT.

[Bobert]

From Gustave

Quote:

This record wouldn't have been possible without cover boy Craig Ranke (drop the pretentious "CIT" label, Craig: what are you, a doctor of divinity?), who contributed an obsessive 23 comments, all trying to assert Nick libeled him and fellow honorific wielder Aldo Marquis. When I asked Craig to detail specifically how Nick libeled the two, not only did he comment back, but he emailed me the comment as well. Bit OCD there, aren't we?

[CptColumbo]

Is one or all of the CIT-heads suffering from a multiple personality disorder?

[SlightlyAbovePar]

"Capt. Bob" concerns me. His behavior is.........disturbing. For those of you actively flying planes for hire, please tell me there are checks and balances?!

It really, really disturbs me that someone at the controls of a plane I might be flying on can behave this way. I am not talking about his moon bat theories. Everyone is entitled to their opinion(s).

I am talking about his (seemingly) willingness to move from the computer screen, to a personal confrontation.

[Totovader]

Is claiming someone committed libel without that actually being an established fact... actually libel in itself?

I can't wait for the little CIT to go to court. That would be worth reporting on.

[Reheat]

Originally Posted by SlightlyAboveApr

It really, really disturbs me that someone at the controls of a plane I might be flying on can behave this way. I am not talking about his moon bat theories. Everyone is entitled to their opinion(s).

He does not have a current Medical Certificate. Believe me, there are plenty of people who will be very interested if he renews it.....

[Mr.Herbert]

Originally Posted by Mangoose

Mr. Herbert: I'm hitting myself for not thinking of doing that re-do of the cover first! GJ, mate!

thanks, I was going to place a different object in Ranke's hand... but I'm quite certain the mods would have been on that. (no pun ladies)

[CptColumbo]

Originally Posted by Totovader

Is claiming someone committed libel without that actually being an established fact... actually libel in itself?

I can't wait for the little CIT to go to court. That would be worth reporting on.

The funny thing is they are probably bragging to friends about the article.

Either way, it's going to be a cold day in heck (heck I tell you) before any other (remotely) MSM news source does a story on them. Not just because its a non-story, but all the trouble of dealing with the CIT-heads.

[bje]

Originally Posted by Reheat

He does not have a current Medical Certificate.

Hmmmmm...... I wonder why.

[jaydeehess]

I know that the CiT shout 'libel' but have they actually said they will pursue action in court yet?

Odd that their defence of accusations of libel against Llyod England was, IIRC, that Mr.England was not pursueing such court involvement. Somehow it proved that they were right about him being an operative. So we can then conclude that if the CiT do not take action against Schou that it constitutes an admission by them that Schou's representation of them is in fact true.

[jhunter1163]

Lloyd England probably doesn't even know that these morons are libeling him so. Maybe someone should clue him in.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

Lloyd England probably doesn't even know that these morons are libeling him so. Maybe someone should clue him in.

Pleeaaase... You give CIT far too much credit. There's a reason Lloyd is possibly unaware of what Craig and Aldo are doing, and that reason is because they're utterly insignificant.

They have no noticeable affect on anything.

[StoneWT]

Cap'n Bob is a blowhard. He won't actually do anything physical. I've met numerous troofers with potty mouths and violent tendencies on Internet forums. They tend to be small and wimpy in person.

[R.Mackey]

One other thing I noticed, from the first comment thread at the OC Weekly, was yet another tantalizing glimpse into their beliefs:

Originally Posted by CIT Craig Ranke, CIT

He [Schou] goes on, “-pause for circus music- a magic trick in which a military plane painted to resemble an American Airlines jet flew low over the Pentagon while explosives took down a wall of the structure in a convenient cloud of smoke, thus allowing the plane to fly away and secretly land somewhere, presumably at nearby Reagan National Airport. Unfortunately, their film The PentaCon, doesn’t provide any evidence of this.”

We don’t provide evidence for this because it is not our claim. We never said the decoy jet in question was painted to look like an AA jet and in fact we claim the opposite. The evidence we provide suggests that it did not look like an AA jet since most independent witnesses we spoke with describe different colors.

Source

This little detail is new to me. So let me see if I've got it straight:

According to the Citzen Investigation Team, the Government or whomever wanted to fool the world into thinking American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, along a certain heading that took it through several light poles and low over the freeway just prior to impact.

To do this, They executed the following:

• They flew an aircraft over the Pentagon
• The aircraft traveled along a different heading entirely, on the opposite side of a visible landmark (viz. the Citgo station)
• The aircraft passed nowhere near the light poles in question
• The light poles were sabotaged anyway, in some completely different fashion than aircraft impact
• One light pole was staged to penetrate the windshield of a car, in traffic, again despite the actual aircraft not passing anywhere near overhead
• A large amount of explosives was detonated as the aircraft passed by
• The aircraft then flew away over the Pentagon, where it was allegedly sighted by at least one individual
• The explosion or whatever demolition carried out at the Pentagon left a hole far too small to have been caused by AA 77
• A readable flight data recorder (FDR) was planted (along with an insufficient amount of aircraft debris) that allegedly conflicts with both Their false story and the track of the actual aircraft

And, finally,

• The aircraft in question was deliberately painted so as to not even resemble an American Airlines jetliner.

I am reasonably certain that the above is the stupidest hypothesis ever conceived for any purpose, including parody, intentional humor, or even stress tests of human perception in psychological experiments.

In the future, I plan to take no notice whatsoever of the Citizens Investigation Team, other than to link back to this post. From here, there is simply no return. I deeply pity the minds that are snared by such utter madness.

[A W Smith]

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

I am reasonably certain that the above is the stupidest hypothesis ever conceived for any purpose, including parody, intentional humor, or even stress tests of human perception in psychological experiments.

But thats exactly why I find the CIT threads so enjoyable. It's so stupid its funny.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

One other thing I noticed, from the first comment thread at the OC Weekly, was yet another tantalizing glimpse into their beliefs:


Source

This little detail is new to me. So let me see if I've got it straight:

According to the Citzen Investigation Team, the Government or whomever wanted to fool the world into thinking American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, along a certain heading that took it through several light poles and low over the freeway just prior to impact.

To do this, They executed the following:

• They flew an aircraft over the Pentagon
• The aircraft traveled along a different heading entirely, on the opposite side of a visible landmark (viz. the Citgo station)
• The aircraft passed nowhere near the light poles in question
• The light poles were sabotaged anyway, in some completely different fashion than aircraft impact
• One light pole was staged to penetrate the windshield of a car, in traffic, again despite the actual aircraft not passing anywhere near overhead
• A large amount of explosives was detonated as the aircraft passed by
• The aircraft then flew away over the Pentagon, where it was allegedly sighted by at least one individual
• The explosion or whatever demolition carried out at the Pentagon left a hole far too small to have been caused by AA 77
• A readable flight data recorder (FDR) was planted (along with an insufficient amount of aircraft debris) that allegedly conflicts with both Their false story and the track of the actual aircraft

And, finally,

• The aircraft in question was deliberately painted so as to not even resemble an American Airlines jetliner.

I am reasonably certain that the above is the stupidest hypothesis ever conceived for any purpose, including parody, intentional humor, or even stress tests of human perception in psychological experiments.

In the future, I plan to take no notice whatsoever of the Citizens Investigation Team, other than to link back to this post. From here, there is simply no return. I deeply pity the minds that are snared by such utter madness.

I would actually love to see those fools lay their delusion out in bullet points like that. I'm confident that it would contain immense idiocy which will continue to be completely hidden from them, but will be out there in all of its hope-for-humanity-crushing glory for everyone else to see...

I also completely understand why they will never do such a thing.

[bobloblaw]

Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd

I would actually love to see those fools lay their delusion out in bullet points like that.

I highly doubt it would happen.

Just compiling a list of the witnesses and their statements is "propaganda against the evidence we present" according to Craig.

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=219

[Minadin]

I don't know who did a better job of making CIT look like insane, paranoid jerk-offs . . . OCW's respected reporters, or CIT and friends by posting the comments that they have.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

This little detail is new to me. So let me see if I've got it straight:

According to the Citzen Investigation Team, the Government or whomever wanted to fool the world into thinking American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, along a certain heading that took it through several light poles and low over the freeway just prior to impact.

To do this, They executed the following:
[...]
And, finally,

• The aircraft in question was deliberately painted so as to not even resemble an American Airlines jetliner.

I am reasonably certain that the above is the stupidest hypothesis ever conceived for any purpose, including parody, intentional humor, or even stress tests of human perception in psychological experiments.

In the future, I plan to take no notice whatsoever of the Citizens Investigation Team, other than to link back to this post. From here, there is simply no return. I deeply pity the minds that are snared by such utter madness.

You see? How on Earth can they believe this stuff? It's not even good self-parody.

Their best guess is that it's a white plane with a blue stripe, with numbers on the tail (numbers, not letters, insists Reyes). Possibly with 'reflective properties' leading some (like Lagasse and Turcios) to think it was silver. Stephens also saw its tan belly as it neared the tan ground and was amazed. SPreston found its sky blue color of the scrap on the lawn a smoking gun. Sunlight white while in flight, at least according to witnesses mostly to the south. The amazing 'plane of many colors,' to paraphrase the old bible story.

This of course proves military deception.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

This of course proves military deception.

Well, who else would have access to undisclosed secret colour-changing paint? [/twoofer]

[mortimer]

Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd

I would actually love to see those fools lay their delusion out in bullet points like that.

I think it would look something like this:

• Plane flies north of Citgo
• ?
• INSIDE JORB!!!

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Originally Posted by bobloblaw

Just compiling a list of the witnesses and their statements is "propaganda against the evidence we present" according to Craig.

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=219

Oh my...

Originally Posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Furthermore it is IMPOSSIBLE for someone to simultaneously be an "impact" witness and an "NoC" witness..

He's so close...

Originally Posted by Craig Ranke CIT

The NoC evidence proves that there are no impact witnesses.

Yet so far away...

ETA: Also, this image posted by SPreston: http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/k...enpentagon.jpg

[Bobert]

Ok so he posted that in the open debate section.
The title of his thread is

Quote:

Pentagon witness classification table, by anonymous pseudoskeptic

So I assume that Craig or Waldo added the "by anonymous pseudoskeptic" at the end?
Are they thread Nazis over there or what?
Even in the "open debate" section?
Wow that is amazing.

[Bobert]

Ok maybe someone who can stomach the CIT more then I can translate this

Quote:

The NoC evidence proves that there are no impact witnesses.

My brain hurts.
Is he he saying that his witnsees couldnt not have seen the impact even though they say it impacted?

[Totovader]

Originally Posted by Bobert

Ok maybe someone who can stomach the CIT more then I can translate this

My brain hurts.
Is he he saying that his witnsees couldnt not have seen the impact even though they say it impacted?

Honestly, I think they're so desperate for attention that it's just become something like the Chewbacca defense.

"Look here, folks- these people are saying things that don't make sense. It just don't make sense. Therefore we have to throw out every single shred of evidence and simply make up our own, completely irrational, unsubstantiated, inconceivable, grandiose, ridiculous theory ever conceived by allegedly sane individuals."

When one fallacy isn't enough to help them deal with their cognitive dissonance, they simply pile on more fallacies. It's not rare- by any means- but it is unusual to see it in people who do not (as far as I know) require assisted living.

I don't think they believe their own lies- they just don't see any other way to gain popularity. They're nothing but wannabe revolutionaries.

[Alt+F4]

I think the original OC Weekly story portrayed the CIT guys as goofy and on the fringe, but sincere in their (wrong) beliefs. After reading the dozens of posts they have left on OC Weekly blogs they come off seriously disturbed with a stalker-type mentality.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

I think the original OC Weekly story portrayed the CIT guys as goofy and on the fringe, but sincere in their (wrong) beliefs. After reading the dozens of posts they have left on OC Weekly blogs they come off seriously disturbed with a stalker-type mentality.

Indeed. Craig's first post in that thread bobloblaw linked to:

Originally Posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Tell us the internet entity/screen name/names that exist in any forum where 9/11 has been discussed attributed to you and I will answer your question in full.

"I want to know who you are and where you've posted before I answer your question."

Not as creepy as asking for the person's real name and the city they live in, but still creepy... and paranoid...

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Bobert

Are they thread Nazis over there or what?
Even in the "open debate" section?
Wow that is amazing.

I'll quote from an earlier "Stundies" thread:

Quote:

Aldo Marquis CIT, at his little forum:

Quote:

There's nothing to debate.

What's so funny? It's posted in their "Open Debate" subforum!

[MarkyX]

Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd

Not as creepy as asking for the person's real name and the city they live in, but still creepy... and paranoid...

Pretty much. Craig asked me if I had a girlfriend once.

[beachnut]

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazin...hysteria-rock/

And example of some email OC Weekly is getting on the article.

Quote:

I am ever so grateful to the OC Weekly for taking the time in nick schou's article "Pentaconned" to blast these nutjobs, but I (as always) still have a gripe with you running this story. People like these guys are fringe lunatics and should be ignored. giving them press only encourages stupidity and adds to their already hyper-inflated egos.

The cons at Pentacon are badgering OC Weekly

Quote:

As I've already told Ranke and Marquis--and their fellow researcher Captain Bob from Pilots for 9/11 Truth--I'm interested in evidence, not innuendo. If they or anybody else reading this blog can provide any actual evidence showing what happened to the American Airlines jet they claim didn't hit the building--like the current whereabouts of the crew and passengers--I'll be the first to report it. Meanwhile, anyone who's interested in rehashing the debate can feel free to comment here.

It goes pure stupid at p4t --- (if you want to avoid headaches from reading pure stupid, do not go to p4t link, it could hurt your brain) http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//...pic=14222&st=0 Some funny emails.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//...#entry10749756

More: http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazin...ness-now-most/

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Bobert

Ok maybe someone who can stomach the CIT more then I can translate this

Quote:

The NoC evidence proves that there are no impact witnesses.

My brain hurts.
Is he he saying that his witnsees couldnt not have seen the impact even though they say it impacted?

If Craigo's contention that no one NoC could see an impact is correct then what Craigo has proven then is that all of his own witnesses got at least one thing,,,,wrong!

Given that the only thing his witnesses agree on is impact though, logic would then assert that Craig's contention is what is in error.

I should note that one of his witnesses, Robert Turcois, does state that he did not see the impact because the plane had descended below his line of sight beyond the highway overpass. Robert believes that the plane impacted because he NEVER SEES THE PLANE rise up into his view again but he does see the fireball.
In order for Robert to not see the plane again then the fireball would have to occur well enough in advance, and far enough from the front of the building, for the plane to rise up through the fireball of after it passed the point of origin of the fireball. That combination is simply untenable and Robert certainly understood that the plane hit the building and caused the fireball.

"Magic trick" indeed

[Mr.Herbert]

They are now appealing to ATS members with a massive delusional rant!

Sweet Jesus... Ranke made A VIDEO ON YOU TUBE!!!!

"Nick Schou, OC Weekly reporter, lies about 9/11 evidence & libels Citizen Investigation Team"

Quote:

There can now be no question that Schou went into this article with an agenda and a clear desire to portray us a certain way. It’s rather apparent he was unwilling to put in the necessary effort to validate, refute, or even understand the evidence and preferred to focus on gossip instead. This type of behavior is despicable for any journalist and frankly the extreme level of blatant dishonesty as outlined in this letter leaves the OC Weekly vulnerable to charges of libel. Citizen Investigation Team demands that all errors are corrected and that a complete retraction of all the false claims and distortions outlined in this letter is issued.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread385611/pg1

Wow... I started laughing... then got an uneasy feeling about this. The man is not right in the head.

[Totovader]

I love how the more pathetic their position looks the more there is "no question" and "without a doubt" the rational side are all "shills" and "agents". Cognitive dissonance at its finest.

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by Mr.Herbert

Sweet Jesus... Ranke made A VIDEO ON YOU TUBE!!!!

A twoofer acting crazy on youtube? No WAY!

[Alt+F4]

Originally Posted by Mr.Herbert

Wow... I started laughing... then got an uneasy feeling about this. The man is not right in the head.

At this point, it's just sad. Totovader is right, these guys just want to feel important and they just can't or won't accept the reality that no one agrees with them, no one will ever make them heros.

[16.5]

Originally Posted by Mr.Herbert

Wow... I started laughing... then got an uneasy feeling about this. The man is not right in the head.

Hee hee, Craig-y stole my correction that they had improperly used the word specific instead of specifically.

But he ignore my 473 requests for a flight path and the math to back it up.

Here is my response to the CIT:

you have not got the path,
and you do not have the math,
so we ain't gonna hear from the CIT No More!*

* sung to the tune of Dinah won't you blow your horn.

/by the way, I know it is childish to point out how fat Aldo is, and Craig's haircut, but in that video, Craig's hairdo is mesmerizing.

[Alt+F4]

Originally Posted by 16.5

he ignored my 473 requests for a flight path and the math to back it up.

Of course, and he always will. After all this time who still thinks these guys really care about what happened at the Pentagon? They only care about themselves.

Who has a more vested interest in this than the victim's families? The CIT wouldn't dare approach a Pentagon/AA77 victim's family organization with their "100%" proof of a fly-over because they (the CIT) know what they are pushing is a bunch of lies.

184 people were murdered and all they care about is how they come off on the Internet and in a local newspaper.

[NickUK]

Why doesn't Craig just say "Me and Aldo"?

It's a lot less letters than "Citizen Investigation Team"

[EvilBiker]

Originally Posted by NickUK

Why doesn't Craig just say "Me and Aldo"?

It's a lot less letters than "Citizen Investigation Team"

...'cos "CIT" sounds much better than "MAA"...

[jaydeehess]

Quote:

There can now be no question that Schou went into this article with an agenda and a clear desire to portray us a certain way. It’s rather apparent he was unwilling to put in the necessary effort to validate, refute, or even understand the evidence and preferred to focus on gossip instead. This type of behavior is despicable for any journalist and frankly the extreme level of blatant dishonesty as outlined in this letter leaves the OC Weekly vulnerable to charges of libel. Citizen Investigation Team demands that all errors are corrected and that a complete retraction of all the false claims and distortions outlined in this letter is issued.

Sounds pretty official.

They are giving OCW a chance to retract.

Next step is to give them enough time to dos so and then bring a charge of libel against the OCW and Schou and have their day in court.


oooh,,, I can hardly wait ..............