Roosevelt Roberts Jr. Explained
Uploader Comments (brokenstyx)
All Comments (33)
-
-
its a perfectly logical breakdown.
"all of you"? methinks ur a little paranoid. you couldn't even rebut my answers here, then it was YOU who suggested running away to another forum.
i can answer questions here just fine :) and i also showed you the link to where further questions are answered. you just don't like the fact that there was no flyover, and that CIT are being proven so conclusively wrong.
soz
x
-
You "advertised" an illogical breakdown of this guy's testimony as can be seen in your half-ass answers to my questions which are answered at the link above.
All of you start threads then run away back to pumpshitout.
KP50 went to debate Debs at PSO and he is even hiding THERE!
-
@amadanish (and everyone)
i've added a link to the discussion thread in the video info.
-
"grow a pair"? do you think i don't go there coz i'm intimidated by your questions? i post almost everyday at pumpitout, come along to there - i simply advertised my video on 911oz.
and what questions am i avoiding?
-
Here man, grow a pair and go over to 911oz and answer the questions there.
I've answered your nonsense there. 911oz . com / vbulletin / showpost . php ? p = 38555 & postcount = 30
-
The really telling thing for me in that interview with Roosvelt Roberts is that he doesn't mention the 'third plane'. If the plane that these CIT people think he is talking about is some 'flyover' plane then the C-130 would be a third plane. No mention of it at all- he says there was a second plane but not a third plane. They don't ask him about the third plane. The idea that anyone would use this confusing unclear interview as evidence of anything is pretty absurd.
please note, CIT never dared go on a podcast with me. i challenged them publicly several times.
brokenstyx 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
This is terrible. Your interpretation is far more confusing than CIT's is. You're putting words in Roosevelt's mouth. It harkens back to Clinton's word parsing on the stand or the definition of a hanging chad from the 2000 elections. You make some very strong claims without enough substance to back it up. Thumbs down.
iphrazel 1 year ago
@iphrazel
what part didn't you understand?
the part where he saw a plane flying near the lightpoles?
the part where he describes seeing the plane hit the WTC on the TV?
the part where he saw a second plane flying the same direction the C-130 flew?
hmm...
brokenstyx 1 year ago