Home          Evidence       Strategy       FAQ       Report       News       Contact

DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you


 

 YT/Cosmos coming unglued, calls hard evidence "speculation"
Craig Ranke CIT
Posted: Sep 25 2009, 08:58 AM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 3,930
Member No.: 1
Joined: 29-August 07



Consider this a formal debate challenge to YT/Cosmos, the administrator of the truthaction.org forum which is the main hang out for the small clique of CIT detractors who deem themselves activists in the truth movement.

From what I gather he's here in LA so I'd be happy to meet with him and record the debate on video.

As the acceptance of our research/findings/conclusions has skyrocketed the activity at his forum has plummeted while he has struggled to control, stifle, and refuse discussion of CIT and the Pentagon attack in general.

His initial excitement regarding the Jim Hoffman interview with Michael Wolsey attacking us for a full hour while blatantly labeling us "disinfo" caused him to allow a thread at his forum to disseminate the attack.

He said:
QUOTE (YT)

This is excellent - thanks Michael, Jim and Scott!

I hope many people will listen to this.
source


Of course this opened the door to discussion about us and the thread has been the primary focus on his forum for about 7 weeks now.

Bruno from WeAreChangeLA showed up and was systematically going through faulty arguments on Hoffman's site.

He stayed extremely civil and exposed some deceptive arguments until YT couldn't take it anymore and accused him of promoting "wild speculation" by quoting Bruno's endorsement of our work.

QUOTE (YT)


"Bruno Bruhwiler wrote:
The plane that flew over the Pentagon, on a trajectory just north of the gas station was not a commercial airliner."
- from CIT's "Praise" page


That's quite an incredible statement, Bruno. Where is the proof of this?



To which Bruno very appropriately replied:
QUOTE (Bruno)

Cosmos, please go to when I first joined this discussion and I explained my position. Lots of witnesses saw a large plane heading toward the Pentagon but not on the path that the Official story tells us; a large plane did not hit the Pentagon; scientifically we can deduce that the large Plane flew over the Pentagon.

If you disagree, then please tell me where that large plane disappeared to.


And YT basically ended the discussion and locked the thread shortly after adding this:
QUOTE (YT)

Oh, I disagree alright. I disagree that stating wild speculation as fact is anything that responsible activists should be doing. In fact, they don't.

source


Cosmos/YT,

There is nothing speculative about the hard evidence we have presented proving the plane flew north of the citgo, proving it did not hit the light poles or building.

Let us know how it goes after you contact the witnesses we spoke with and tell each of them that what they saw on 9/11 was "wild speculation".

In the mean time, I look forward to your email accepting my challenge to a debate.
Top
Voskhod3
Posted: Sep 26 2009, 09:45 AM


Concerned Citizen


Group: Friends
Posts: 128
Member No.: 1,047
Joined: 17-July 09



Banning and locking is cowardice.

A lot of forums do this whenever CIT gets mentioned.

They can't keep it up forever, more and more people want an explantion for the north of Citgo witnesses.
Top
« Next Oldest | CIT response | Next Newest »
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you

Topic Options



Hosted for free by InvisionFree* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0592 seconds | Archive