|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
21st October 2008, 04:49 AM | #1 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
CIT amping up the crazy – nastier witness attacks
With CIT “to ignore or not to ignore” has been the question. But I’ve just seen some insanity that sharpens the question. Since their flyover witness turned out to be simply toying with the boys, and their miraculous list of 13 NoC witnesses was achieved by including six copies of the same perspective error, the next step was clear: amp up the attacks on those witnesses who can’t even arguably fit their theory. Two cases are worthy of mention.
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=417 They’re preparing to release another video of “CIT's latest encounter” with Lloyd England, the elderly cab driver who was nearly killed when something smashed through his windshield right on the “official flight path.” I’ve kept somewhat quiet on their attacks against him, perhaps because it’s too obvious and oft-noticed – a leading edge persistent bad move. Aldo whines:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Madlene Zakhem, the suspicious south-path testifying Crypto-Jew (their characterization) is hashed over publicly again. Her “bizarre behavior” is finally enunciated – she had her arms crossed and seemed “stand-offish” in her interview, and later cut the lines of communication with the CIT. Oh man, this is sooo juicy… She cut them off right after this e-mail from August 6 2007:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
21st October 2008, 05:07 AM | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
|
Wow, the CIT are literally some of the most stupid, vile people in the entire world.
|
21st October 2008, 05:10 AM | #3 |
Spectral Challenger
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,602
|
I was reading the Madlene Zakhem thread at the CIT site on the weekend, and was absolutely amazed at how low these characters will stoop to try promote their garbage.
I really hope that they get dragged into court for crimen injuria one day. |
__________________
Flat Earth Theory: The unfortunate result of ordering pizza to satisfy munchies after smoking way too much weed to bring you down from that hectic acid trip. |
|
21st October 2008, 05:11 AM | #4 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
|
Behold your peers, truthers...
|
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison |
|
21st October 2008, 05:11 AM | #5 |
Based on a true story!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
|
|
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom |
|
21st October 2008, 05:22 AM | #6 |
Critical Doofus
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9,421
|
|
__________________
"You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet |
|
21st October 2008, 06:00 AM | #7 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,157
|
Anti-semitism doesn't influence the movement AT ALL.
|
__________________
MarkyX's Haunted Bloghouse - Read my boredom |
|
21st October 2008, 07:42 AM | #8 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Wow, Crazy Craig and Fat Aldo spend all of their time (and the time of their coterie of mindless drones, including our old punching bag SD) attacking an old man, yet bizarrely cannot take the time to actually prove with supporting math that an airliner can fly any path described by any CIT witness:
My challenge to them, boys, calculate the flight path and resultant forces on an airliner descending over the annex, banking north of Citgo, descending below the level of the trees, and pulling out of the bank and the descent and up and over the impact site at the Pentagon. Stop with your baseless and stupid attacks on witnesses, and prove that a plane could do what you claim it did. Man, with attacks like this, it is no wonder that so many Truthers hate these thugs. |
21st October 2008, 07:46 AM | #9 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,774
|
Quote:
|
21st October 2008, 09:35 AM | #10 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,723
|
It's simple, really. If these witnesses are correct then CIT must be wrong, and that's not an option for them. Look at their entire philosophy and how they present themselves, their theories, and their witnesses. The one thing that's NEVER an option is "we got it wrong". Anything that disproves their crazy ideas is either said to be wrong (eyewitnesses), planted (physical evidence), or it is just plain ignored (physics).
|
__________________
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen -Einstein |
|
21st October 2008, 12:13 PM | #11 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
I notice the CIT thugs have taken the time to comment that a fantasy "hockey stick" flight path (a strawman if I ever saw one) is: "Umm....it's an IMPOSSIBLE G maneuver for both examples, meaning all possible official scenarios."
So they know how to do the math, I guess, so lets stop with attacking old cab drivers, and provide the math, pronto. |
21st October 2008, 03:10 PM | #12 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,448
|
Their flyover witness was screwing with them? When did that happen? That must have been solid gold.
|
21st October 2008, 03:51 PM | #13 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,126
|
Wow Aldo just makes garbage up as he goes along....
Quote:
|
21st October 2008, 04:00 PM | #14 |
Critical Doofus
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9,421
|
|
__________________
"You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet |
|
21st October 2008, 04:09 PM | #15 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,546
|
I would like to encourage the CIT boys to continue doing what they arer doing as long as possible. Eventually they will get to an age where they realize they have wasted their lives AND they will be too old to start any kind of new careers. I will then go out of my way to order pizza form which ever parlor they will end up working at.
|
21st October 2008, 04:32 PM | #16 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com...r-witness.html
Well that's my theory and opinion, of course. Others feel he must've seen the C-130, CIT thinks he's just confused, but he has the "second plane" looking a lot like 77 and approaching in a similar fashion, then turning hard hard left and U-turning to depart to the southwest, the same way it came in. The second half of the video is me drawing the flight path along with his words, check it. And he's still their one "critical flyover witness." At the end of the video, note how they purposefully chased him off despite his massive importance. Implications... The scariest part of this new campaign for me is the emotional foreshadowing. They are trying to provoke some nutball fan of theirs to do something stupid.
Quote:
Uh oh, now I'm in on the NWO campaign to shut them up... that means they must be right! |
21st October 2008, 07:47 PM | #17 |
Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,510
|
I don't ever want to see another CIT goon accuse JREF of "calling [CIT's] witnesses liars".
|
__________________
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...2b728514ea.gif "The evidence that the attacks of 9/11 were an inside job just keeps not coming in." --pomeroo |
|
21st October 2008, 10:14 PM | #18 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,394
|
This is why "Truth" organizations should be considered hate groups.
|
22nd October 2008, 02:02 AM | #19 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 498
|
Originally Posted by Aldo
Note to intelligence agencies: When placing assets in deep cover, please at least TRY to remember to change the last name and their accent. |
__________________
LUCUS @ LCF "that is a popular misconception or LIE...not saying you are lying, just saying that is not true..." |
|
22nd October 2008, 04:04 AM | #20 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
|
It is too bad that Mr. England has not taken these morons to court for harassment.
TAM |
22nd October 2008, 04:48 AM | #21 | |||
NWO Kitty Wrangler
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
|
I couldn't find the best bit, but this part reminded me of Blackadder Goes Forth....
|
|||
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd |
||||
22nd October 2008, 05:54 AM | #22 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,083
|
Originally Posted by GIT
|
22nd October 2008, 05:59 AM | #23 |
Based on a true story!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
|
Do not try to force this to make sense. It comes from a place where the rules of cause-and-effect have been repealed, and the normal rules don't apply. The same thought process that brings this also brings the idea that even though they ordered the murder of thousands, getting them under oath and making them face perjury charges will make them spill the beans.
So, if you try to make it make sense, you'll just pull a groin muscle. |
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom |
|
22nd October 2008, 07:35 AM | #24 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Craig completely cracks up (and i could not be happier):
"People need to realize the incredible significance of Lloyd's account. He in the center of this entire violent event as all of the physical damage/evidence begins with HIS cab. His claim is make or break for the official story and they have not been shy to use it along with his seemingly innocent simple persona as a major part of the propaganda to sell their claim. The notion that he lied to get attention or money from the authorities is absurd because THEY used his story. It all comes back to the north side approach because this definitively PROVES Lloyd's story false so making excuses or theories to sugar coat the situation is not a logical approach to this information." The final piece to the CIT puzzle? A flight path supported by confirmed calculations? Video, photographic, physical evidence? A whistle blower, perhaps? Nope, a video they shot in which Craig and FattyAldo call an old cab driver a liar. My greatest satisfaction will be when they wake up and realize how pathetic they are. |
22nd October 2008, 07:59 AM | #25 |
NWO Kitty Wrangler
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
|
The notion that he lied to get attention from the authorities is absurd because he got attention from the authorities? * That's absurd, even coming from these idiots..... *Please note, I don't think Mr. England lied at all, but even if CIT believes he did, this argument is still utter crap. |
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd |
|
22nd October 2008, 08:05 AM | #26 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
|
"a major part of the propaganda to sell their claim"
THis made me laugh. 1. The USG has not spoken much of 9/11 outside of the ani, for the last 3-4 years. 2. Where is all of this propaganda using Lloyd England at the front of it? 3. Get over yourselves, CIT, and your useless, ridiculous, stinking pile of ********* that you are trying to pass off as "evidence". Yes Craig, I am still waiting to hear how the authorities are handling this new ground breaking, earth shattering evidence you said you presented to them over a year ago. Oh let me guess, the police, and all authorities you can think of, are in on it too, right? TAM |
22nd October 2008, 08:08 AM | #27 |
Critical Doofus
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9,421
|
See, the authorities were all set to act upon CiT's evidence and serve warrants on Bushco. as well as every powerful Jew living in the US, but then the NWO distributed a smear piece on them in an alternative news journal and ruined their otherwise impeccable credibility. MAN we're good. |
__________________
"You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet |
|
22nd October 2008, 10:34 AM | #28 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
How old is Lloyd now anyway?
Wasn't he in his late 70's on 9/11/01? / I do however, appear to have lost the support of my mom over on the CIT forum. What can I say, she loves fat fingers! (That is hilarious!) http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showuser=765 |
22nd October 2008, 10:49 AM | #29 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
|
|
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison |
|
22nd October 2008, 10:54 AM | #30 |
Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,510
|
SLANDER, torts. The defaming a man in his reputation by speaking or writing words which affect his life, office, or trade, or which tend to his loss of preferment in marriage or service, or in his inheritance, or which occasion any other particular damage. Law of Nisi Prius, 3. In England, if slander be spoken of a peer, or other great man, it is called Scandalum Magnatum. Falsity and malice are ingredients of slander. Bac. Abr. Slander. Written or printed slanders are libels; see that word.
2. Here it is proposed to treat of verbal slander only, which may be considered with reference to, 1st. The nature of the accusation. 2d. The falsity of the charge. 3d. The mode of publication. 4th. The occasion; and 5th. The malice or motive of the slander. 3.-Sec. 1. Actionable words are of two descriptions; first, those actionable in themselves, without proof of special damages and, secondly, those actionable only in respect of some actual consequential damages. 4.-1. Words of the first description must impute: 1st. The guilt of some offence for which the party, if guilty, might be indicted and punished by the criminal courts; as to call a person a "traitor," "thief," "highwayman;" or to say that he is guilty of "perjury," "forgery," "murder," and the like. And although the imputation of guilt be general, without stating the particulars of the pretended crime, it is actionable. Cro. Jac. 114, 142; 6 T. R. 674; 3 Wils. 186; 2 Vent. 266; 2 New Rep. 335. See 3 Serg. & Rawle, 255 7 Serg. & Rawle, 451; 1 Binn. 452; 5 Binn. 218; 3 Serg. & Rawle, 261; 2 Binn. 34; 4 Yeates, 423; 10 Serg. & Rawle, 44; Stark. on Slander, 13 to 42; 8 Mass. 248; 13 Johns. 124; Id. 275. 5.-2d. That the party has a disease or distemper which renders him unfit for society. Bac. Abr. Slander, B 2. An action can therefore be sustained for calling a man a leper. Cro. Jac. 144 Stark. on Slander, 97. But charging another with having had a contagious disease is not actionable, as he will not, on that account, be excluded from society. 2 T. R. 473, 4; 2 Str. 1189; Bac. Abr. tit. Slander, B 2. A charge which renders a man ridiculous, and impairs the enjoyment of general society, and injures those imperfect rights of friendly intercourse and mutual benevolence which man has with respect to man, is also actionable. Holt on Libels, 221. 6.-3d. Unfitness in an officer, who holds an office to which profit or emolument is attached, either in respect of morals or inability to discharge the duties of the office in such a case an action lies. 1 Salk. 695, 698; Rolle, Ab. 65; 2 Esp. R. 500; 5 Co. 125; 4 Co. 16 a; 1 Str. 617; 2 Ld. Raym. 1369; Bull. N. P. 4; Holt on Libels, 207; Stark. on Slander, 100. 7.-4th. The want of integrity or capacity, whether mental or pecuniary, in the conduct of a profession, trade or business, in which the party is engaged, is actionable, 1 Mal. Entr. 244 as to accuse an attorney or artist of inability, inattention, or want of integrity; 3 Wils. 187; 2 Bl. Rep. 750; or a clergyman of being a drunkard; 1 Binn. 178; is actionable. See Holt on Libels, 210; Id. 217. 8.-2. Of the second class are words which are actionable only in respect of special damages sustained by the party slandered. Though the law will not permit in these cases the inference of damage, yet when the damage has actually been sustained, the party aggrieved may support an action for the publication of an untruth; 1 Lev. 53; 1 Sid. 79, 80; 3 Wood. 210; 2 Leon. 111; unless the assertion be made for the assertion of a supposed claim; Com. Dig. tit. Action upon the case for Defamation, D 30; Bac. Ab. Slander, B; but it lies if maliciously spoken. See 1 Rolle, Ab. 36 1 Saund. 243 Bac. Abr. Slander, C; 8 T. R. 130 8 East, R. 1; Stark. on Slander, 157. 9.-Sec. 2. The charge must be false; 5 Co. 125, 6; Hob. 253; the falsity of the accusation is to be implied till the contrary is shown. 2 East, R. 436; 1 Saund. 242. The instance of a master making an unfavorable representation of his servant, upon an application for his character, seems to be an exception, in that case there being a presumption from the occasion of the speaking, that the words were true. 1 T. R. 111; 3 B. & P. 587; Stark. on Slander, 44, 175, 223. 10.-Sec. 3. The slander must, of course, be published, that is, communicated to a third person; and if verbal, then in a language which he understands, otherwise the plaintiff's reputation is not impaired. 1 Rolle, Ab. 74; Cro. Eliz. 857; 1 Saund. 2425 n. 3; Bac. Abr. Slander, D 3. A letter addressed to the party, containing libelous matter, is not sufficient to maintain a civil action, though it may subject the libeler to an indictment, as tending to a breach of the peace; 2 Bl. R. 1038; 1 T. R. 110; 1 Saund. l32, n. 2; 4 Esp. N. P. R. 117; 2 Esp. N. P. R. 623; 2 East, R. 361; the slander must be published respecting the plaintiff; a mother cannot maintain an action for calling her daughter a bastard. 11 Serg. & Rawle, 343. As to the case of a man who repeats the slander invented by another, see Stark. on Slander, 213; 2 P. A. Bro. R. 89; 3 Yeates, 508; 3 Binn. 546. 11.-Sec. 4. To render words actionable, they must be uttered without legal occasion. On some occasions it is justifiable to utter slander of another, in others it is excusable, provided it be uttered without express malice. Bac. Ab. Slander, D 4; Rolle, Ab. 87; 1 Vin. Ab. 540. It is justifiable for au attorney to use scandalizing expressions in support of his client's cause and pertinent thereto. 1 M. & S. 280; 1 Holt's R. 531; 1 B. & A. 232; see 2 Serg. & Rawle, 469; 1 Binn. 178; 4 Yeates, 322; 1 P. A. Browne's R. 40; 11 Verm. R. 536; Stark. on Slander, 182. Members of congress and other legislative assemblies cannot be called to account for anything said in debate. 12.-Sec. 5. Malice is essential to the support of an action for slanderous words. But malice is in general to be presumed until the contrary be proved; 4 B. & C. 247; 1 Saund. 242, n. 2; 1 T. R. 1 11, 544; 1 East, R. 563; 2 East, R. 436; 2 New Rep. 335; Bull. N. P. 8; except in those cases where the occasion prima facie excuses the publication. 4 B. & C. 247. See 14 Serg. & Rawle, 359; Stark. on Slander, 201. See, generally, Com. Dig. tit. Action upon the case for Defamation; Bac. Abr. Slander; 1 Vin. Abr. 187; 1 Phillim. Ev. ch. 8; Yelv. 28, n.; Doctr. Plac. 53 Holt's Law of Libels; Starkie on Slander, Ham. N. P. ch. 2, s. 3. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856. |
__________________
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...2b728514ea.gif "The evidence that the attacks of 9/11 were an inside job just keeps not coming in." --pomeroo |
|
22nd October 2008, 11:39 AM | #31 |
Drunken Shikigami
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
|
ive always been amused by CITs approach to evidence, even more so than other truthers
1: Evidence A points to X 2: Therefore Y 3: Therefore A is fake |
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein |
|
22nd October 2008, 11:45 AM | #32 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
22nd October 2008, 12:25 PM | #33 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,126
|
|
22nd October 2008, 12:29 PM | #34 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,126
|
|
22nd October 2008, 02:15 PM | #35 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
22nd October 2008, 02:18 PM | #36 |
Drunken Shikigami
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
|
|
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein |
|
22nd October 2008, 05:45 PM | #37 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd October 2008, 12:59 AM | #38 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,394
|
Talk about physical evidence. Don't you think these two explosions had the same ignition source? (jet fuel)
|
23rd October 2008, 03:18 AM | #39 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
Well I'm not a big legal guy, but when i see 150 year old interpretations, I wonder what Bouvier had to say about online discussion forums. Is that slander or libel? Or slalibander?
Does this belong here, or anywhere? CIT have also amped up their hyper-sensitive defense of their "own" witness and have moved from using them as human shields (are you calling the witnesses liars?) to offensive weapons. An anonymous friend of CIT (likely Aldo but who cares) at my blog has been threatening me thus:
Quote:
Uh, yeah. I'd suggest he might have thot it was NoC cuz of perspective. And he'd say "yeah, probably," and I'd show him a graphic of where the plane had to be and he'd say 'well, that must be it then, cause it didn't fly over, and I saw it clip the light poles.' But I don't go bothering people over trivial tripe. What, are you going to send him after me?
Quote:
Ah! Surely this message was first approved by a PFPS press officer. That wacky Lagasse.
Quote:
This citizen investigoogler is trying to get my current address to help direct them my way. Swing them witnesses around now, slugger! Don't wanna get your hands dirty on my "stink," but your prized witnesses' names make handy weapons, don't they? Nothing is too low. Are they dangerous or just a cesspool of harmless but extremely irritating provocation? I hope the latter because all I can see doing here is to keep complaining, or shrug my shoulders and move on. The universe is simply dumber than I hoped. |
23rd October 2008, 04:11 AM | #40 |
Village Idiot.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,368
|
I predict someday Craig and Aldo will turn on each other, and it will result in violence.
|
__________________
"Stellafane! My old partner in crime!" - Kelly J |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|