Pentaconned spreads disinfo (ranke CIT disinfo )

[Southern Patriot]

It's not just JimD ... other mods have said CIT is disinfo, including Sane ... I'm keeping my mouth shut from now on but let's not forget one of the CIT fans did say Alex Jones worked for the Vatican ... I guess it was interpreted as trolling.

On a lighter note... I'm now going to make a disinfo bingo card inspired by this thread name lol

He didn't say he worked for the Vatican....He said that the way things were going, he was beginning to believe the insane rumors that he did.

[jimd3100]

Well, looks like you've kept yourselves busy with BS haven't you? First off I never renamed any thread, but agree completely with the rename because it is 100% accurate.

This CIT garbage is far worse than no planers. So think I give a crap if the BS artists that go to forum to forum with their little swarm of loony bees don't approve? Not in the slightest. Some of you can stop calling yourselves "truthers".  You are no more of a truther than any debunker refusing to acknowledge hijackers living with an FBI informant. Just like them you refuse to acknowledge evidence, in this case, that planes flew into buildings on 9/11. Guess what? Most of the world already knows it, about time you catch up don't you think? Some of us resent being lumped in with mentally ill people whose only goal in life is to get attention to make a name for themselves.

Some of us mods have watched these truth destroying mental patients who call themselves CIT go from message board to message board (usually after being banned)and turning the boards into a cesspool of insanity.  Frankly we prefer to not tolerate some insane BS like no planes and this stuff is much worse. We don't like no planners who not once have explained to me how Chief Pfieffer is involved, and he has to be since he watched the plane fly into the building and called it in, and we can all see him do it on film, but no one wants to explain his involvement. Kind of hard to do since all he gained from 9/11 was a dead brother and a bad cough. So go f**k yourselves no planners. {{But Jimd3100--this isn't no plane stuff this is interviews with people who were there}}  Yea, and it's worse than the no plane BS. LOL! What CIT have done is prove beyond any doubt that a passenger jet flew into the pentagon. What happened to your invisible missile theory? What about the global hawk or A-3 skywarrior? Now it's a preposterous flyover? LOL!  So let's go with it then. You folks falling for this BS are you ready to admit a passenger jet was at the pentagon now? Since all these witnesses said so and none claim it flew over the pentagon are you actually willing to admit a passenger jet was at the pentagon on 9/11? I guess the only thing left then is to admit it crashed into it or flew over it right? So which is it? What does the evidence-witnesses-and common sense and logic say? Flyover or fly into?
 
If you believe it was a flyover you have no choice but to believe all the following  people were "in on it" and helped murder people on 9/11. 1. Mike Walter 2. Lloyd England 3. K Wheelhouse 4. Father Mcgraw
Mike Walter was on his way to work at the USA today building which was down the street and the CIT loons have claimed the USA today reporters were there because they are "in on it".  That's what they do-they destroy the truth movement and message boards with insanity. They have at one time or another claimed that the following are all "government operatives" or helped murder people on 9/11. John Farmer, Jim Hoffman, Arabesque, Mike Walter, Lloyd England, Father McGraw, Keith Wheelhouse, Russel Pickering, and the person on this very thread who calls himself DVD and is a "third wheel" member of CIT also claimed reprehenser at 9/11 blogger is an "operative" as well. That's what got you guys banned there isn't it DVD? Reprehenser, who runs the most important (IMO) 9/11 website on the internet is also "in on it" right dikhead? Not a single person on this board myself included has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than 9/11 blogger and the person who runs it and these nutjobs have the nerve to accuse him of being an "operative", and you wonder why their BS is confined to the BS section? This DVD individual who I already had banned once said this in another forum in reference to this very prisonplanet forum ..."i think im going to start some shit over there......
eta : i can't. that place is just so awful. it sucks so bad and the gatekeepers are running it."

 So when he came here to "start his shit" I had him banned. Isn't that horrible of me? To kick someone to the curb who already stated this was their next target after watching their insanity play out on other boards? Isn't that terrible that I care about the truth movement being truthfull? Care to deny this DVD?  "Why don't you so called truthers start spreading some truth and stamp out this BS instead of falling for it and making yourself look stupid? If there are any operatives here it is the ones who are trying to destroy the very best 9/11 sites and making outrageous accusations against the very people we need. That is CIT. Why do you think they call themselves that? Because they are attention seeking loons. CIT=just another 3 letter agency to me.
So you really want to look at some evidence? Then let's do it.

[jimd3100]

First lets expose some lies.
All the witnesses place the plane on a different flight path than is possible. This is a lie.

First they admit all the witnesses see 1 plane, a passenger jet. Do you actually care what the witnesses have to say? Because for years allot of you didn't. Here it is, a list of what the witnesses have to say. According to C Ranke he has claimed to me " these are just static words in a paper". Did you catch that? Just words. No, I can assure you that these are human beings. Start treating them like that.
Here is what they saw....
http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/index.html

Seems like a plane flew into the pentagon doesn't it? For those that are jumping up and down saying lets go to court I'd like to remind you that these are folks that don't even need to be called you know why? Because every CIT witness will swear they saw the plane fly into the building and your closing argument will say " see folks? they were mistaken"? LOL! That's some court case.

Your whole case is....The military did a big magic trick at the pentagon and caused everyone to have a mass hallucination. They all just think they saw a plane fly into the pentagon, but Abracadabra and <poof>it flew over it and no one was the wiser. David Copperfield is nothing compared to the magicians at the military. How f**king stupid!

Is Father McGraw a "north side witness"? No. Therefor he must be "in on it". Is the cab driver a north side witness? No so he must be "in on it". How about wheelhouse? No, so he must be "in on it". And you call that evidence? LOL! How amazingly insane! This is what is evidence....
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/noplane/index.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/noplane/compressor.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/noplane/hulldebris.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/noplane/hullpiece.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/noplane/gearshaft.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/noplane/wheelhub.html

This is physical evidence that backs up the claims of those who claim they saw a passenger jet hit the pentagon, which includes the MINORITY who put the flight path slightly north of where it should be. They all agree-a plane hit the pentagon, and the physical evidence confirms it. But as "truthers' you want to claim that "oh, that was all planted". LOL! Planted by who? Where is your evidence of that? You have none. Just the mantra......"the flight path a small number claim means it must be planted." No Logic- no common sense. How about Isabell James? North side witness? Nope, almost no one is....
http://www.dailymotion.com/Ashoka_lc/Pentagon/video/x1ihc1_pentagon-eyewitness-isabel-james_news

Neither is Walter so of course he is a mass murderer...
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1jqaz_pentagon-eyewitness-mike-walter_news

All in the name of "9/11 truth." It wasn't enough that years before when liers who call themselves truthers edited that clip to make it appear that he said it was a missile, now we have to call him a mass murdering operative. How disgusting. The truth movement owes this man an apology already and what do you so called truthers prefer? To accuse him of being a lieing operative when we ourselves(actually those trying to hijack the movement)are the liers, and it is proven in that clip. How about standing up for the truth and defending this movement with some integrity and discernment instead of insane accusations against ordinary people willing to talk with us? To much to ask? How about some truth in the truth movement? If not, it's over and done.

Other than being accused of being lieing murderers by CIT guess what else McGraw Walter England Wheelhouse among others have in common? Every single one of them describe 1 plane hitting the building and every single one of them were nice enough to invite these nuts into their own home and give their story. In other words, they have nothing to hide and were nice to the "truth movement" only to be f**ked over later by these loons that you love. And you wonder why this is in the BS section. Yea, that's real helpfull. Not a single one of them gained a thing from 9/11 and not a single one has mafia bodyguards like Silverstein or secret service protecting them like Bush and Cheney. They are us! Regular working class ordinary people with families, mortgages, and lives to live.

Ever see the compelling evidence CIT has gathered against Bush? Cheney? Tenet? Rumsfeld? No? You haven't? Because they are busy trying to convict ordinary INNOCENT citizens who tried to be helpfull to us, while they're not busy slandering the leaders of this movement like Hoffman and 9/11 blogger. And you wonder why this is in the BS section? It's right where it belongs and the title of the thread is appropriate. CIT is complete disinfo, 9/11 truth dividing and destroying insane BS. You that have fallen for it can discuss how horrible gatekeeping operatives we here at prisonplanet  with the no planner cousins. It wont bother us a bit. Some of us are more interested in the truth than fairy tales that destroy credibility. Get over your phobia of a plane hitting the pentagon. On 9/11 planes flew into buildings the evidence is overwhelming and most of the world already knows this. Stop destroying this movement with insanity and driving out the rational people. We have real evidence. We can prove they wanted this event(PNAC) we can prove the Saudi and American Governments were aware of and intentionally let in and helped the hijackers. The evidence Steven Jones is presenting is extremely compelling. We can prove Bush was a traitor. We have tons of real evidence including the fact that Hanjour was a terrible pilot who couldn't have pulled this off. It's 2009 now, a passenger jet was at the pentagon. Wipe away the insanity of CIT and they have proven it-that's the big irony here. Truthers should be working on what kind of equipment/software could have been used to overtake and guide these planes to their targets(Dov Zakheim anyone?) instead of harassing INNOCENT old cab drivers.

Marquis and Ranke simply refused to believe Walter saw what he saw. "They were saying things like, 'Are you sure the plane didn't land [at Reagan airport] and they set off a bomb?' They kept coming up with all these scenarios.

"Some of those guys [at the party] were young and nice and disaffected [about] their government," Walter concludes. "And some of them were crazy."
http://www.ocweekly.com/2008-08-14/features/pentaconned/1

"In the clip, Lagasse also makes repeated references to the fact that he saw the plane hit the Pentagon—and didn't see any plane fly away from the area."
http://www.ocweekly.com/2008-08-14/features/pentaconned/5

http://www.ocweekly.com/2008-08-14/features/pentaconned/1

How about giving a real 9/11 researcher like Jim Hoffman or Steven Jones a 1 page article instead of a 7 page piece painting "truthers" as insane. Some of us resent being lumped in with people who are clearly insane. Start using some common sense and logic. And look at real evidence.

[Voskhod3]

If you believe it was a flyover you have no choice but to believe all the following  people were "in on it" and helped murder people on 9/11. 1. Mike Walter 2. Lloyd England 3. K Wheelhouse 4. Father Mcgraw

But something is wrong, because there are 13 witnesses who say south Citgo was impossible, two of them cops say "zero chance". Are you saying they are lying?

I don't know what the truth is but there is definitely something strange about the Pentagon.

If anyone knows me they will know how dogged I am against no-planers! They are complete idiots.

But I thought this CIT video was fair, well presented and raised some very interesting issues that deserve examination.

[mym]

yeah I do not believe those "no planers" and I thought the CIT was fairly orchestrated, and I as well do not know the truth as to what is what.  But the evidences that were stated by CIT were also fairly persuasive as well.  Some eyewitnesses say the Pentagon attack involved explosive detonation and smells of cordite (I believe something you don't get from airplane fuel smells).  I also believe that those out of site cannot be true witnesses as to the account and seems like they are "in on it".

agh something is most definitely goin on that people don't want us to know and I am all for learning the details

agh, am confused lol


 

[phasma]

Mym, Its entirely reasonable to be confused. Who isn`t !? I am. Truth is until someone lets us in on the truth we will never know what the hell happened at the pentagon. There is obviously something very amiss. Why is it they can show those planes hitting the towers again and again and again and again ad nauseum, but they refuse to show us the plane hitting the pentagon - why? Why only show those clips that do not in actuality show anything?
I still have doubts that a totally inadequate pilot could in fact make the manouvers required to exact the damage pattern observed. Surely it would have been far easier to just dive into the pentagon? (This situation however assumes that what we have learned regarding the pilots abilities stands true - in fact how do we know he was not a good pilot ? Because, THEY told us he was! We do not actually know !) So infact maybe we should ask ourselves if an experienced pilot could make that manouvere or not? Maybe he could. Again we dont know. So we have to rely on testimony from people who are eyewitnesses, and the opinions of other pilots whom ought to know, and these seem to contradict each oher and so we are left trying to make sense of a situation that ultimately we can never resolve!

[jimd3100]

Why is it they can show those planes hitting the towers again and again and again and again ad nauseum, but they refuse to show us the plane hitting the pentagon - why? Why only show those clips that do not in actuality show anything?

Because there is no video other than what has been released, that show a plane hitting the building. It doesn't matter if you believe there should be. They have already stated that there isn't so there will never be one released. They have other video, maybe even with a plane who knows but they have already stated there is no more that show what impacted.

I still have doubts that a totally inadequate pilot could in fact make the manouvers required to exact the damage pattern observed. Surely it would have been far easier to just dive into the pentagon?

Yes, it would have been wiser and easier to just dive into it.

(This situation however assumes that what we have learned regarding the pilots abilities stands true - in fact how do we know he was not a good pilot ? Because, THEY told us he was! We do not actually know !)

Actually we do know...the evidence is overwhelming, see....

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=103918.msg623597#msg623597

[phasma]

Because there is no video other than what has been released, that show a plane hitting the building. It doesn't matter if you believe there should be. They have already stated that there isn't so there will never be one released. They have other video, maybe even with a plane who knows but they have already stated there is no more that show what impacted.
 
But they do have video, they only release stills of specific time points as far as i aware.
Also, there is cctv all over the outside of the pentagon !
Thanks for the link, will have a look

[phasma]

From the link you provided:

.....If you believe the WTC was blown to kingdom come, you have no choice but to believe that before the plane flew into it, it was primed and ready for explosion. If it was already fitted with explosives, then there can be no risk of the plane not hitting it's target. Planes being flown by nuts who had never flown passenger jets. You would have to know the plane would hit the target. The only way possible is if the planes were under the control of someone else. Can we prove these planes were not being controlled by jihadi amatuer nutjobs? Hani Hanjour and his flying show is very compelling evidence. Also, the first targets to be hit would be the WTC. It would be essential to hit them first to make sure they were hit., before any type of response could stop the operation, either from authorities or passengers.  They were hit first. If you believe the WTC was primed for explosion the planes had to have been under control of those knowing the WTC was ready for disintegration. Accepting the obvious evidence that flt 77 hit the pentagon helps prove this point. Hani Hanjour was a horrible pilot.

Ok so it seems true that Hanjour couldnt fly for sh1t. I`ll accept that. If this is true then the likihood of him being able to perform the movements on 9/11 seem highly unlikely ( Have any of you guys had a go at a flight simulator - not the game kind, i mean the real ones used by pilots? I used to date a pilot and he took me to one of these places once in Milton keynes (UK) . The planes are not as difficult to manouvere (once up) as you might think, also the controls are so sensitive just a small movement results in a larger than you might expect reaction) - so the level of skill required to fly, at speed, so low, seems far beyond the capabilities of Hanjour).
If this is true then either someone else was at the controls (bang goes another official story lie) or it was being controlled remotely (i know they can fly jumbo`s remotely (maybe thats what the small plane people saw was doing, or maybe it was just observing) - they do it when they crash test them) I do not know though if it would be possible to keep such finite control of the plane at low level remotely.

[Scootle]

Let's play DISINGO!

[Voskhod3]

Let's play DISINGO!

Scottle you can play this game all you like.

However, either the cops and the cemetary people are lying or the plane flew north of Citgo.

The cops say "zero chance" of a south path.. and they say that because they saw the plane and no way could see a south path.

Something is deeply amiss here.. even if it turns out the cops and others are lying.. you would have to ask why?

There is something strange about the Pentagon and my belief is that the stupid and persistant no-planes sh*t about the WTC is designed to obfuscate what happened at the Pentagon.

[phasma]

I dont see how anyone can say there were no planes at the wtc ! I have heard the it was a hologram crap, and i mean, seriously ! I think some one in some govt room somewhere makes this sh`t up and releases it in an attempt to muddy the waters !

[Scootle]

I think some one in some govt room somewhere makes this sh`t up and releases it in an attempt to muddy the waters !

That's exactly what me and JimD are saying about the Pentagon flyover/no-jet-impact theories.

Why did they even bother attacking the pentagon? What happened in New York was traumatic enough ... I believe the only reason they did it was to confuse people researching into the events. Whenever a false flag attack is carried out the media always seems to release a tonne of disinfo iin the days and weeks following ... I mean the BBC reported the hijackers were still alive! Does that mean they are? ... Unlikely ...  The reason they do it is to confuse people researching into it so that they start promoting easily debunkable myths. Us infowarriors have to sort of sieve through all the misinfo and disinfo and critically analyze it all.

That's why the debunkers come in handy... We see a photo of a beam with an angled cut and our first thought is "proof of demolition"... well the debunkers will say "well it could have been formed by a torch cutter during cleanup operations"... and by doing that they kind of act as peer reviewers and allow us to build a stronger case.

[Mike Philbin]

but the southern (poles down) approach is the ONLY approach for the evidence of PLANE THROUGH PENTAGON. the video footage DOESN'T support a 757 hitting the Pentagon.

guys, something's really WRONG with the official story.

seriously.

[kushfiend]

What about the dozens of experienced airline pilots who have testified that flying a jumbo jet at full descent into a target the size of the twin towers would be physically impossible to do and every single person that has tried to do so in simulations has failed?

Only possibility = remote piloted drone aircraft

or

missiles

or

combination of the two

[Dig]

Well, looks like you've kept yourselves busy with BS haven't you? First off I never renamed any thread, but agree completely with the rename because it is 100% accurate.

This CIT garbage is far worse than no planers. So think I give a crap if the BS artists that go to forum to forum with their little swarm of loony bees don't approve? Not in the slightest. Some of you can stop calling yourselves "truthers".  You are no more of a truther than any debunker refusing to acknowledge hijackers living with an FBI informant. Just like them you refuse to acknowledge evidence, in this case, that planes flew into buildings on 9/11. Guess what? Most of the world already knows it, about time you catch up don't you think? Some of us resent being lumped in with mentally ill people whose only goal in life is to get attention to make a name for themselves.

Some of us mods have watched these truth destroying mental patients who call themselves CIT go from message board to message board (usually after being banned)and turning the boards into a cesspool of insanity.  Frankly we prefer to not tolerate some insane BS like no planes and this stuff is much worse. We don't like no planners who not once have explained to me how Chief Pfieffer is involved, and he has to be since he watched the plane fly into the building and called it in, and we can all see him do it on film, but no one wants to explain his involvement. Kind of hard to do since all he gained from 9/11 was a dead brother and a bad cough. So go f**k yourselves no planners. {{But Jimd3100--this isn't no plane stuff this is interviews with people who were there}}  Yea, and it's worse than the no plane BS. LOL! What CIT have done is prove beyond any doubt that a passenger jet flew into the pentagon. What happened to your invisible missile theory? What about the global hawk or A-3 skywarrior? Now it's a preposterous flyover? LOL!  So let's go with it then. You folks falling for this BS are you ready to admit a passenger jet was at the pentagon now? Since all these witnesses said so and none claim it flew over the pentagon are you actually willing to admit a passenger jet was at the pentagon on 9/11? I guess the only thing left then is to admit it crashed into it or flew over it right? So which is it? What does the evidence-witnesses-and common sense and logic say? Flyover or fly into?
 
If you believe it was a flyover you have no choice but to believe all the following  people were "in on it" and helped murder people on 9/11. 1. Mike Walter 2. Lloyd England 3. K Wheelhouse 4. Father Mcgraw
Mike Walter was on his way to work at the USA today building which was down the street and the CIT loons have claimed the USA today reporters were there because they are "in on it".  That's what they do-they destroy the truth movement and message boards with insanity. They have at one time or another claimed that the following are all "government operatives" or helped murder people on 9/11. John Farmer, Jim Hoffman, Arabesque, Mike Walter, Lloyd England, Father McGraw, Keith Wheelhouse, Russel Pickering, and the person on this very thread who calls himself DVD and is a "third wheel" member of CIT also claimed reprehenser at 9/11 blogger is an "operative" as well. That's what got you guys banned there isn't it DVD? Reprehenser, who runs the most important (IMO) 9/11 website on the internet is also "in on it" right dikhead? Not a single person on this board myself included has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than 9/11 blogger and the person who runs it and these nutjobs have the nerve to accuse him of being an "operative", and you wonder why their BS is confined to the BS section? This DVD individual who I already had banned once said this in another forum in reference to this very prisonplanet forum ..."i think im going to start some shit over there......
eta : i can't. that place is just so awful. it sucks so bad and the gatekeepers are running it."

 So when he came here to "start his shit" I had him banned. Isn't that horrible of me? To kick someone to the curb who already stated this was their next target after watching their insanity play out on other boards? Isn't that terrible that I care about the truth movement being truthfull? Care to deny this DVD?  "Why don't you so called truthers start spreading some truth and stamp out this BS instead of falling for it and making yourself look stupid? If there are any operatives here it is the ones who are trying to destroy the very best 9/11 sites and making outrageous accusations against the very people we need. That is CIT. Why do you think they call themselves that? Because they are attention seeking loons. CIT=just another 3 letter agency to me.
So you really want to look at some evidence? Then let's do it.

CIT is not only disinfo, it is headstong and stubborn to no end. I mean we went through huge debates until finally they were just like "you better f**king believe this assholes!"

They do the same thing on every forum they go to until they get banned for abusively pushing stuff.  I know it is wrong information, as far as CIT receiving checks directly from Rockefeller/Rothschild, well I have no proof of that.

What really ticks me off about their "docudramas" is that they take patriotic witnesses who out of the kindness of their heart allow totally grass roots reporters to interview them. And then instead of allowing the testimony to be the judge of what happened, they push square pegs into round holes. In other words if the testimony does not fit their limited view of things, they insinuate that the witness is compromised, has something to hide, or even worse.

I cannot tell you how much this hurts the truth movement. This basically sends a message to all those that might talk to people like all of us that they will be libeled, slandered, and discredited by the very people supposedly preaching "truth".

Very, very disruptive to the truth movement and to independent investigations.

The name CIT stands for "Citizen Investigative Team" but they do not even stand by their own investigative interviews, instead they debunk them. It is nuts.

[Dig]

but the southern (poles down) approach is the ONLY approach for the evidence of PLANE THROUGH PENTAGON. the video footage DOESN'T support a 757 hitting the Pentagon.

guys, something's really WRONG with the official story.

seriously.

The main thing wrong with the official story is that Hani Hanjour could never have done what they say he did.  Expose that and there is no chance of a debunking. Expose that and there is no way the official story is true.

[Dig]

Let's play DISINGO!

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Any chance that you could work with Brocke on this to really make it glow?

As a side note the citizen shit is really getting a bit complex (sorry for being O/T and please do not spend the next 25 posts debating this, there are over 50 threads on this already). Why TF would Infraguard target people who were investigating this. That to me was extremely odd. What about 2012 endtimes?

[trailhound]

 Ok so we have established that these 13 witnesses are all operatives? I dont know about that. Also lets keep it real, lets not speculate about what did hit the pentagon because we dont know. I know i and most others on this thread are not speculating. Just trying to fit the legitimate square peg eyewitness testimony into the round hole of the official story. Maybe it can be done i just havent seen it.  I think if this vid is going to be deemed 'disinfo' it should be thoroughly debunked and i have not seen that. What i have seen is strawmen arguments like 'you're a no planner' and 'planes flew into buildings on 9/11.'   Im not arguing these points.

 Also i guess add Bob Bowman to your list of disingo because he , being a pilot himself, directs people to pilots for 9/11 truth.

[Mike Philbin]

I think if this vid is going to be deemed 'disinfo' it should be thoroughly debunked and i have not seen that.

Nope, me either. I've just seen a glaring MOD AGENDA and (I know this place won't necessarily miss me if I go) I'm not sure I like that.

[trailhound]

Nope, me either. I've just seen a glaring MOD AGENDA and (I know this place won't necessarily miss me if I go) I'm not sure I like that.

 I didnt see every post he ever made so i am not going to say the mods were wrong, but element had some great responses in this thread.  Right or wrong made some great points to ponder.    Could somebody direct me to another forum where element had his ass handed to him or something?  I would be interested to see him debate someone like jimd3001 or Sane.

 I thought his posts were deleted but just found them.

[trailhound]

Scootle wrote

Yay ... backup ... and I thought I was left to fight these no-planers on my own ...

 See this is what is annoying, nobody here or at CIT is saying 'no planes.'  CIT may be disinfo, i dont know, but the witnesses' accounts on this video should be at least admitted as evidence. That does not mean strong conclusions and subsequent speculations should be made based on it, but I consider this video a good one to keep around for witness testimony alone. More analysis is necessary but i wont be writing this film off as pure disingo to be ignored.

[Atomgrad]

There is something strange about the Pentagon and my belief is that the stupid and persistant no-planes sh*t about the WTC is designed to obfuscate what happened at the Pentagon.

+ 1

Some of you can stop calling yourselves "truthers".  You are no more of a truther than any debunker refusing to acknowledge hijackers living with an FBI informant. Just like them you refuse to acknowledge evidence, in this case, that planes flew into buildings on 9/11. Guess what? Most of the world already knows it, about time you catch up don't you think? Some of us resent being lumped in with mentally ill people whose only goal in life is to get attention to make a name for themselves.

Jimd3100, who are you having a go at here? Them (CIT) for making the film or us (Forum members) for watching it? It's definitely hard to tell.

Here's what I think happened, feel free to point anything that doesn't make sense.

The witnesses in the CIT vid saw a large white commercial type plane, one was also seen at the twin towers, the white jet was also reported flying over the White House/Pentagon later, it was filmed. This white jet is rumoured to be one of the 'Shadow Government' control room planes (I can't remember their designations, but you know what I mean).

2 white jets, one at each crash site, both crash sites involving planes doing apparently impossible things.

I believe that the white jets were controlling the planes involved (whatever type they happen to be).

The witnesses in the CIT film saw the control plane, the Pentagon wintesses saw the impact plane, both sets of witesses saw different planes. The control plane had 2 jobs, 1, Control the crash plane and hopefully remain unseen. However if it was seen (as it appears to have been), it was on a different trajectory so, 2, it would act as a false sighting, which could be used to instigate the very type of arguement that is going on in this thread.

Of course, I am willing to accept that I am totally wrong, it is after all only my opinion. But to me at least, it makes perfect sense.

[trailhound]

 Interesting point is that both officer Lagasse and lloyd the cab driver seem perplexed about the location of the light poles. Both suggest they were at a different place than where the photos show.  This makes me wonder if CIT is being disingenuous about where the poles were.  If the poles were indeed where the pictures show them i dont see how its possible for the plane at 500 knots to pass on the north side of the gas station, Lagasse suggests as far north as the edge of arlington, come south enough to hit those poles then bank left into the pentagon...i just cant see it. I reserve the right to say perhaps i have been mislead, but i am definitely going to look into this further.

 

[pcc]

i just cant see it. I reserve the right to say perhaps i have been mislead, but i am definitely going to look into this further.

thats great LD.. here is a witness that CIT lists as contacted and confirmed.. but they leave him out..

Probst took a sidewalk alongside Route 27, which runs near the Pentagon's western face. Traffic was at a standstill because of a road accident. Then, at about 9:35 a.m., he saw the airliner in the cloudless September sky.

American Airlines Flight 77 approached from the west, coming in low over the nearby five-story Navy Annex on a hill overlooking the Pentagon.

"He has lights off, wheels up, nose down," Probst recalled. The plane seemed to be accelerating directly toward him. He froze.

"I knew I was dead," he said later. "The only thing I thought was, 'Damn, my wife has to go to another funeral, and I'm not going to see my two boys again.'."

He dove to his right. He recalls the engine passing on one side of him, about six feet away.

The plane's right wing went through a generator trailer "like butter," Probst said. The starboard engine hit a low cement wall and blew apart.

http://www.militarycity.com/sept11/fortress1.html

there were over 100 witnesses that CIT dismisses, that corroborate the physical evidence..
and slightly more than a dozen who don't.. most of which were not in a position of having it fly directly overhead..
(and none saw it fly away)
trying to discern, from a distance, just exactly where in the sky something is, in relation to a relatively short landmark is guess work at best.. (go to an airport and observe planes taking off and landing and try to determine which group of houses it passes over.. not easy)
whenever there is conflicting eyewitness testimony, the physical evidence will always hold more weight..

and as long as your looking.. check out this paper on the flight path from the witness accounts..

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/NoC

ps. good to see you back Jim!

[phigsy]

 I know it is wrong information, as far as CIT receiving checks directly from Rockefeller/Rothschild, well I have no proof of that.

If you know then tell us how you know. As to the latter, if you have no proof why mention it? Reminds me of the episode of The Simpsons where Homer is accused of molesting the child minder & a completely unrelated woman goes on a chat show and says "I don't know Homer Simpson, I've never met Homer Simpson but.......... wwwaaahhhh!!!!!!" - and breaks down crying.

Seems like CIT might be able to teach you a thing or two about 'proof'.

  I didnt see every post he ever made so i am not going to say the mods were wrong, but element had some great responses in this thread.  Right or wrong made some great points to ponder.    Could somebody direct me to another forum where element had his ass handed to him or something?  I would be interested to see him debate someone like jimd3001 or Sane.

1st point you make: you're right he did.
2nd point: That to me is what is most suspicious in all of this; that the 2 mods come out of the woodwork to suddenly 'join in' this thread only after element, DVD and 911 Analyser seem to have 'exited the building'. And they still haven't explained the spelling mistake/convoluted title.

I'll repeat myself and state that I'm beginning to lose a modicum of faith in this forum.

[Scootle]

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie - deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth - persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
~ John F Kennedy

[Voskhod3]

CIT is not only disinfo, it is headstong and stubborn to no end. I mean we went through huge debates until finally they were just like "you better f**king believe this assholes!"

They do the same thing on every forum they go to until they get banned for abusively pushing stuff.  I know it is wrong information, as far as CIT receiving checks directly from Rockefeller/Rothschild, well I have no proof of that.

What really ticks me off about their "docudramas" is that they take patriotic witnesses who out of the kindness of their heart allow totally grass roots reporters to interview them. And then instead of allowing the testimony to be the judge of what happened, they push square pegs into round holes. In other words if the testimony does not fit their limited view of things, they insinuate that the witness is compromised, has something to hide, or even worse.

I cannot tell you how much this hurts the truth movement. This basically sends a message to all those that might talk to people like all of us that they will be libeled, slandered, and discredited by the very people supposedly preaching "truth".

Very, very disruptive to the truth movement and to independent investigations.

The name CIT stands for "Citizen Investigative Team" but they do not even stand by their own investigative interviews, instead they debunk them. It is nuts.

None of this explains why CIT has interviews with 13 people who saw a north of Citgo approach.

Are the cops lying?

Because from where they saw the plane they could not see a south of Citgo approach.

I think CIT have a good video here that deserves serious examination.

Don't just cry "disinfo" unless you have an explanation for the 13 witnesses.

[Voskhod3]

I think if this vid is going to be deemed 'disinfo' it should be thoroughly debunked and i have not seen that. What i have seen is strawmen arguments like 'you're a no planner' and 'planes flew into buildings on 9/11.'

Absolutely.

[Freeski]

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie - deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth - persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
~ John F Kennedy

Wow, that's some quote. "...the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought". Brilliant, BUT it also presumes that being awake is somehow a burden -- when in fact it's not. It's scary, fascinating and important. Besides, whether you know it or not, the syndicate wants to own and control you, maybe even snuff you out for good.

[Scootle]

If I can be bothered tomorrow what I might do is make a very simple 3DS Max animation of some plane like object flying a set motion path over, around and to the side of some simple geometic objects ...  then I'm gonna render the animation ... take a screenshot of the area from birdseye view... upload the animation to youtube ... have everyone here watch the animation once and only once... then several hours later try to draw the motion path over the birds eye image from memory... then see if anyone can draw the correct path ...

[Voskhod3]

If I can be bothered tomorrow what I might do is make a very simple 3DS Max animation of some plane like object flying a set motion path over, around and to the side of some simple geometic objects ...  then I'm gonna render the animation ... take a screenshot of the area from birdseye view... upload the animation to youtube ... have everyone here watch the animation once and only once... then several hours later try to draw the motion path over the birds eye image from memory... then see if anyone can draw the correct path ...

How is that going to change the story of the cops?

[trailhound]

pcc wrote

and as long as your looking.. check out this paper on the flight path from the witness accounts..

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/NoC

 Yeah i checked that out and it seems to confirm from yet another pilot that if the plane was on the north side of the citgo it couldnt make the necessary turns to cause the damage to the poles and pentagon. The writer must be implying that the two officers at the citgo are operatives of the al queda 9/11 truth movement.

 

[phigsy]

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie - deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth - persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
~ John F Kennedy

Apro Po of what, exactly? You know, contrary to a certain mindset that needs to hold Kennedy up as some holier than thou superprophet and shit-doesn't-stink-god-creature, there is another that says you don't get to occupy that level of elected office without being just a teensy bit sly & manipulative (or at least being able to rely on a number of dodgy contacts facilitated through your father).

9/11 'truthers', or any other sort for that matter, should be the last people to hold up celebrities (which is what he was, let's face it) as the fount of all wisdom.

It's intellectual cowardice. Pure & simple.

[pcc]

pcc wrote
 Yeah i checked that out and it seems to confirm from yet another pilot that if the plane was on the north side of the citgo it couldnt make the necessary turns to cause the damage to the poles and pentagon. The writer must be implying that the two officers at the citgo are operatives of the al queda 9/11 truth movement.

nope.. he is using the locations supplied by the witnesses to prove that the flight path would have been impossible..
but according to the CIT "government magic show" the plane must either hit or flyover the official impact point to have been effective at "fooling" the witnesses..
Reheats paper confirms that the "flyover" path was equally impossible..
we already know how LaGasse feels about CIT's conclusions.. why is he so pissed?
Probst said it came in from across the Annex.. why was he dismissed as a witness?
because he said it hit?

[jimd3100]

However, either the cops and the cemetary people are lying or the plane flew north of Citgo.

No one is lying(except CIT)

The cops say "zero chance" of a south path.. and they say that because they saw the plane and no way could see a south path.

Lots of people saw the plane, and they all have their own interpretation of the events just like at any other event.
None of these people are lying and yet they don't say the exact same thing....

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/index.html

They are witnesses and you gather as many statements as possible and physical evidence and come to a reasonable conclusion. The greatest magic show in history is not reasonable. A plane hitting is.
This person is not lying...
http://www.dailymotion.com/Ashoka_lc/Pentagon/video/x1ihc1_pentagon-eyewitness-isabel-james_news

This person is not lying...
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1jqaz_pentagon-eyewitness-mike-walter_news

Want to see another person these weirdos interviewed and is not lying? He is undercover operative Keith Wheelhouse, he has to be an operative   because he was very very close to the pentagon and watched a jet slam into it, now go to the 14:11 mark of this video and freeze frame it. oops....looks like he didn't draw the flight path they wanted either, so now he HAS to be an operative  
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3383333411025014760&hl=en

Listen to his interpretation of events starting at the 15:00 mark. So what CIT does as they do with every witness is grab something and make a big deal about it and build up to an amazingly stupid and unbelievable scenario such as a mass illusion of everyone there...the worlds greatest magic trick.....or perhaps a plane flew into the building...hmmmmmm....I wonder which makes more sense....

BTW Wheelhouse was facing away from the pentagon while the others were not which explains why he saw the c 130 which was indeed in the air. He drew the flight paths of both planes rather accurately. However he is off in his estimation of how close the c 130 was to the jet and his estimate of watching it come in for 60 seconds is most likely off as well, but other than that an excellent witness just like every other person including the police officers. All these people were honest decent and good witnesses. Only to have "truthers" such as CIT call some operatives and others right about this and wrong about that in order to put their own insane spin on what they want to sell you. Don't be a chump and fall for their self promoting insane BS.

BTW- Wheelhouse is also convinced truthers are insane after his experience with these guys. Great ambassadors of truth aren't they?

[trailhound]

Some of the witnesses sound in agreement with CIT's witnesses and others are not relevant. This one is interesting.

As I came up along the Pentagon I saw helicopters. That's not strange. It's the Pentagon. Then I saw the plane. There were only a few cars on the road, we all stopped. I know I wanted to believe that plane was making a low descent into National Airport, but it was nearly on the road. And it was headed straight for the building. It made no sense. The pilot didn't seem to be planning to pull up anytime soon. It was there. A huge jet. Then it was gone. A massive hole in the side of the Pentagon gushed smoke. The noise was beyond description. ... I called my boss. I had no memory of how to work my cellphone. I hit redial and his number came up. "Something hit the Pentagon. It must have been a helicopter." I knew that wasn't true, but I heard myself say it. I heard myself believe it, if only for a minute. "Buildings don't eat planes. That plane, it just vanished. There should have been parts on the ground. It should have rained parts on my car. The airplane didn't crash. Where are the parts?" That's the conversation I had with myself on the way to work. It made sense this morning. I swear that it did. ... There seems to be no footage of the crash, only the site. The gash in the building looks so small on TV. The massiveness of the structure lost in the tight shots of the fire. There was a plane. It didn't go over the building. It went into the building. I want them to find it whole, wedged between floors or something. I know that isn't going to happen, but right now I pretend. I want to see footage of the crash. I want to make it make sense. I want to know why there's this gap in my memory, this gap that makes it seem as though the plane simply became invisible and banked up at the very last minute, but I don't think that's going to happen.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/index.html

"I watched this - it looked like a commuter plane, two-engined come down from the south real low proceed right on and crash right into the Pentagon. I watched it come in very low over the trees and it just dipped down and came down right over 395 right into the Pentagon."

[Dig]

If you know then tell us how you know. As to the latter, if you have no proof why mention it? Reminds me of the episode of The Simpsons where Homer is accused of molesting the child minder & a completely unrelated woman goes on a chat show and says "I don't know Homer Simpson, I've never met Homer Simpson but.......... wwwaaahhhh!!!!!!" - and breaks down crying.

Seems like CIT might be able to teach you a thing or two about 'proof'.


1st point you make: you're right he did.
2nd point: That to me is what is most suspicious in all of this; that the 2 mods come out of the woodwork to suddenly 'join in' this thread only after element, DVD and 911 Analyser seem to have 'exited the building'. And they still haven't explained the spelling mistake/convoluted title.

I'll repeat myself and state that I'm beginning to lose a modicum of faith in this forum.

Dude, why are you here? CIT is disinfo, they refute their own witnesses. not only that but they slander and libel them. they are pushing round pegs into square holes. it is a joke. when exposed they get completely irate and go batshit crazy. why do you think every other credible blog on the internet has banned their nonsensical ramblings and purposeful obfuscation of logic, evidence, and sanity?

Go to their forum and talk about some stuff brought up here and see what happens. the posts are here, they have not been removed. if you go through all of it a pattern will emerge. if you simply do not buy it, well go there and discuss it. they are a smear on the truth movement and seem to have no interest in helping to get more independent investigations. they know all the answers and just want to cram their (refuted by their own witnesses) theory down the throats of anyone stumbling along looking for truth.

i know this may seem harsh without the rockefeller cancelled check to their domain name, but we really have been through this adnauseum.

please at least read through the damn thread, then ask away if you feel the need.

[Dig]

thats great LD.. here is a witness that CIT lists as contacted and confirmed.. but they leave him out..

there were over 100 witnesses that CIT dismisses, that corroborate the physical evidence..
and slightly more than a dozen who don't.. most of which were not in a position of having it fly directly overhead..
(and none saw it fly away)
trying to discern, from a distance, just exactly where in the sky something is, in relation to a relatively short landmark is guess work at best.. (go to an airport and observe planes taking off and landing and try to determine which group of houses it passes over.. not easy)
whenever there is conflicting eyewitness testimony, the physical evidence will always hold more weight..

and as long as your looking.. check out this paper on the flight path from the witness accounts..

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/NoC

ps. good to see you back Jim!

well where the f**k have you been.

do not go anywhere and please help clear this shit up.  the CIT bullshit is filling up the air in this thread and we really do appreciate the "cleaner" coming in to rid us of this foul stench. (what is the matter, don't know a compliment when you see one?)

[Dig]

Apro Po of what, exactly? You know, contrary to a certain mindset that needs to hold Kennedy up as some holier than thou superprophet and shit-doesn't-stink-god-creature, there is another that says you don't get to occupy that level of elected office without being just a teensy bit sly & manipulative (or at least being able to rely on a number of dodgy contacts facilitated through your father).

9/11 'truthers', or any other sort for that matter, should be the last people to hold up celebrities (which is what he was, let's face it) as the fount of all wisdom.

It's intellectual cowardice. Pure & simple.

Wow are you on the CIT team? Because you definitely have that rare talent of just blasting whoever does not agree with you, and even blasting the last somewhat elected president of this country as collateral damage.

Really, wtf? the statement is pretty right on.  The mythmakers at CIT are really hurting the truth movement by alienating any possible witness to the pentagon attacks.