It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The PentaCon a HOAX?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Hey Guys and girls,

Please keep it nice on here, So this topic can grow in the best way possible,

Thank you,




posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Anyone want to give me the highlights here?



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Hey MoD! And thanks Asala.

Well looks like I'm not getting my call in to NTSB today so i got a few.

Nick started this thread to challenge the PentaCon based on the FDR animation questions we were hashing out. I don't know why, since the connections between the two are tangential, but then Jack responded as he has to, and has spent most of his energy trying to provoke me into another debate when I've expressed my total disinterest as I'm focusing on the animation and stuff.

Oh that and JDX is thinking of suing me and Nick at least over that (I'm the one he's got the name on)
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Fun times!



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Whoa!! I guess you're a bona-fide CTer now you've been threatened with a law suit!


Thanks for the quick run-down on the thread - I lost interest on the last page or so.

I'll say this (now I've had a chance to consider some of the points raised over the last however long) - I don't think they're setting out to deliberately mis-lead, lie, etc.. but I think the way they've presented their "facts" needs clarifying A LOT. As has already been raised - if it is as it first appears - it is frankly very serious stuff. However, if it is not as it first appears, then appropriate notices about what it is they're actually showing needs to be made, so it isn't open to interpretation, and so they're not open to allegations of misrepresentation (it works both ways). If their case is solid - they have nothing to lose, right?


I look forward to hearing what you and Nick have to say on your FOIA requests and conversations with the NTSB.
Should be interesting to say the least.


[edit on 5-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
but then Jack responded as he has to, and has spent most of his energy trying to provoke me into another debate when I've expressed my total disinterest as I'm focusing on the animation and stuff.



Nonsense.

There is no "debate" with you!

It's like kicking around a baby kitten.

You expose yourself with your empty rhetoric and baseless accusations.

The thread I made debunking your pathetic hit-piece says it all.

What is so incredibly moronic about you and "Nick" contacting the NTSB is that you are doing so in order to investigate PFT as opposed to 9/11!



Get those nasty pilots you bulldogs!

My what an incredible contribution you are making towards 9/11 truth.

The perps have a lot to worry about with guys like you on the case.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by asala
Hey Guys and girls,

Please keep it nice on here, So this topic can grow in the best way possible,

Thank you,



Grow?

A deceptive inflammatory attack thread based on NOTHING?

I don't see how that is conducive to intellectual conversation.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jack TripperI thought Arabasque was bad with this shoddy copy and paste compilations/classifications of mainstream media published witness accounts that he hasn't even bothered to remotely analyze. (he includes people like pentagon renovation manager Lee Evey who wasn't even an eyewitness at all!)

But you take the cake. Arabasque is clearly not the brightest crayon in the box but even his lame work makes you look like a pre-schooler.


arabesque911.blogspot.com...

Just be glad I didn't review the last part of your film where it really jumps off the deep end.

Where is your evidence of a flyover again? Which of your witnesses saw the plane fly over the Pentagon? How many of your witnesses said it hit the Pentagon (hint: it's 75% of them)? How many witnesses have you found who have retracted their story about it hitting the Pentagon?

What? No witnesses support your theory?

How many witnesses did you contact from my list of over one hundred witnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon, hit the light the light poles, hit the generator and fly south of the CITGO gas station? arabesque911.blogspot...

[edit on 5-6-2007 by Arabesque]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Arabesque, thanks for the link to your blog. I have seen most of that information on your site strung all over the Internet at one time or another, but, that has to be one of the best debunkings that I have ever seen anywhere! Seriously, that was excellent. Do you have a comments section at that site?



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Thanks. Nope, I haven't enabled comments yet, but thanks for the high praise.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Jack Tripper, aka Craig Renke:

Here's a the background information:

1. The NTSB supplied P49T with a Flight 77 flight path animation and csv file that the P49T, (specifically Rob), says were doctored.

2. This fraudulent data shows FL 77 flying north of the Citgo and doing an apparent fly-over of the Pentagon. Just to be clear, "fraudulent" refers to the NTSB data, not whether or not it really came from the NTSB. P49T, Rob, John Lear, and most everybody else agrees that the animation and csv file contradict each other, and that the animation is internally contradictory.

3. P49T makes Pandora's Black Box. This video makes no mention that the animation is inherently incorrect. The 70 degree magnetic heading shown in the animation can't match the flight path shown in the video. But P49T doesn't point this out in their video. Instead, they use an animation that they know was doctored to try to prove something about the *REAL* FL 77 flight path.

4. Your witnesses describe for you FL 77 flying pretty near the exact flight path that the fraudulent "NTSB" animation and csv file show that FL 77 would have flown, right down to the flyover. Amazingly, the NTSB *faked* data matches up with all four of the witnesses you interviewed for your movie. But still, your "brother" organization didn't publicize that the animation was faked in their March 26, 2007 press release.


So here's the BIG question:

How much of a coincidence do you think it is that the NTSB slipped your "brother" organization, P49T, a *doctored* animation video that matches almost exactly with the witnesses you had for your movie? According to your story and P49T, the NTSB faked an animation video of FL 77's flight path that matches the real eye-witnesses you video taped.

Didn't you find it odd that the NTSB gave your "brother organization", and ONLY P49T, a *faked* video that happened to corroborate the movie you were producing? And aren't you ALL ABOUT corroboration, as in the quadruple corroboration of the witnesses?

Now if it was a *REAL* animation video then you would have the smoking gun. But Caustic's thread proved beyond all doubt, and brought attention to the fact that the animation *CAN'T* be real. The magnetic heading doesn't match the visual flight path shown in the video. And according to Rob, P49T KNEW the animation video was doctored long before you produced your movie. Yet no mention of this was made in Pandora's Black Box or the PentaCon.

So the story your stuck with is that the NTSB gave Rob and P49T a *fake* animation that coincidentally matched the flight path that the witnesses in your movie claimed.

Amazing coincidence, huh?

According to P49T/Rob, the NTSB gave your buddy Rob, and only your buddy Rob, a FAKE animation video that corroborates the witnesses in your movie.

And that's not even the best part... I'll save the best part for another post.

[edit on 5-6-2007 by nick7261]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
Anyone want to give me the highlights here?


Here's the recap:

Rob Balsamo (johndoex, Pilots for 9/11 Truth) and Craig Renke (Jack Tripper, PentaCon, Citizens Investigation Team) are the people who run "brother" organizations, both of which cite evidence that Flight 77 flew north of the Citgo and over the Pentagon. Both registered their respective web sites last fall. Renke/Tripper just stated he supports all of P49T's claims.

Balsamo claims to have received an animation video from the NTSB which he also admits has been doctored. Caustic proved this animation video was internally inconsistent because the magnetic heading of 70 degrees displayed on the instrument panel does not match up with the visual heading at which the plane is shown approaching the Pentagon in the animation video.

Now here's an interesting point. Tripper claims that even though he supports all of P49T's claims about the NTSB information, he never has used his "brother" organization's animation analysis to corroborate his witnesses, even though the NTSB animation puts the flight path almost exactly where his witnesses said it was. Not only that, the animation suggests that Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon, just like one of Tripper's witnesses claimed, and just like Tripper himself portrays over and over in his video.

So here's where we're at:

According to Tripper and his brother organization, P49T, the NTSB sent Balsamo a doctored animation video that just happens to corroborate the witnesses in Tripper's video. So basically Tripper has this video showing interviews of 4 witnesses claiming they saw a plane fly north of the Citgo, and the NTSB sent a fake video animation to Tripper's buddy, Balsamo, that corroborate Tripper's witnesses.

In the meantime, Balsamo keeps trying to use the fake animation to show that the *REAL* approach path and altitude were wrong. And if Caustic wouldn't have started the "NTSB" Animation is WRONG! thread, nobody would have noticed because neither Balsamo nor Tripper were making a big deal about Balsamo receiving *doctored* evidence from the NTSB. And I emphasized *doctored* as opposed to evidence that simply didn't match the official story. Balsamo claims unequivocally that the NTSB data he received was doctored.

And as the spotlight is shining brighter on Tripper and Balsamo, they've resorted to posting little more than rants and insults. Tripper has 4 eye-witnesses and a doctored NTSB animation that corroborates them. Balsamo has a *doctored* animation that doesn't match the official flight path.

But at least they have each other.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Wrong.

The NTSB released the FDR data AND the animation BEFORE we had obtained the citgo station witness accounts and BEF0RE we even made our first trip out to Arlington with Dylan and Russell.

And no they did not send them to Rob.

Rob and Merc were both Admins on the old Loose Change forum.

Chris (undertow) obtained the FDR data via FOIA and shortly after Calum Douglas (snowygrouch) obtained the animation.

Everyone was excited about the data but reserved because we knew it would take a while to decode it.

So when the animation was released we really started tripping because that was them decoding it for us!

Then Dylan, Russell, Merc, and I made our first trip to Arlington.

We interviewed Lloyd England, Stephen McGraw, and Madelene Zackhem, Edward Paik (not on location), and had dinner with Mike Walter.

Then just before we were supposed to catch our plane back to LA we stopped by the citgo station to try and get some good shots of the Pentagon.

The manager of the citgo told us all about her employee Robert Turcios who saw the plane on the north side of the station. We thought that was incredible but Robert was on vacation so we couldn't confirm his account.

So Dylan and I tried to get some shots of the Pentagon from up on the mound at the citgo but the cops took us down. We were detained for about 2 hours while the feds heavily interrogated us.


Russell suggested our connection to the citgo was blown so he deferred further research to Merc. Well Merc KNEW that Robert's account would be big so he followed up over the phone a few days after we got back.

Turns out Robert CONFIRMED the fact that he saw the plane on the north.

Merc posted all about it but Russell shot it down because we didn't have his account recorded etc.

A couple weeks later they released the citgo security video that shows no plane but also doesn't show Robert.

Coincidence?

And then Hugo Chavez called Bush the devil at the united nations. So out of the blue the Washington Post does an article called:
At the Pentagon Citgo, Price Trumps Patriotism

Look who is quoted at the bottom!

Now all of the sudden Robert tells us he can no longer talk with "media" so we can't call him anymore.

Next thing you know they completely repaint the building and take off any refernce to Citgo! It becomes simply "the Navy Exchange".

Coincidence?

But I knew we had to try to get more confirmation anyway so I booked the trip even though Robert said he couldn't talk to us.

I made the calls and got approval from the Navy to film on the property. I looked up Lagasse and Brooks and independently got them to agree to be filmed.

So I went back to Arlington and was succesful in getting the interviews on camera.

I basically begged Robert (who is clearly very shy and didn't want to be filmed) and convinced him by telling him I had approval from his bosses, the Navy, to film. So it all came together and worked out.

I slipped under the radar.

They tried to stop me but it didn't work.

Make of it what you will but this is the honest to goodness TRUTH about how it all went down.

So meanwhile Rob had been focusing on the FDR/Animation and he formed PFT. He was working on Chapter one of PBB before we had Robert, Lagasse, and Brooks on video tape or had formed CIT.

I don't think he was even aware of the discrepancies between the animation and the FDR when he made chapter one but you'll have to confirm that with him.

Bottom line, it was PURE COINCIDENCE that the NTSB animation seemed to match the eyewitnesses. And it was only natural that we would form CIT and call PFT our "brother" organization since we both focused on cutting edge information about the Pentagon.

I know it seems amazing but it's fact so let this post serve as an offical timeline for the record as to how we came across all the information.



[edit on 6-6-2007 by Jack Tripper]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by nick7261


Now here's an interesting point. Tripper claims that even though he supports all of P49T's claims about the NTSB information, he never has used his "brother" organization's animation analysis to corroborate his witnesses, even though the NTSB animation puts the flight path almost exactly where his witnesses said it was. Not only that, the animation suggests that Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon, just like one of Tripper's witnesses claimed, and just like Tripper himself portrays over and over in his video.


I don't trust ANY government supplied data so NO we do not cite the FDR as something that corroborates the eyewitnesses. In fact we know that it contradicts the eyewitness accounts that we report just as it contradicts the physical damage. Bottom line the FDR is anomalous and this contradicts the official story.




According to Tripper and his brother organization, P49T, the NTSB sent Balsamo a doctored animation video that just happens to corroborate the witnesses in Tripper's video. So basically Tripper has this video showing interviews of 4 witnesses claiming they saw a plane fly north of the Citgo, and the NTSB sent a fake video animation to Tripper's buddy, Balsamo, that corroborate Tripper's witnesses.



Oversimplification and incorrect. We interviewed MORE than 4 witnesses and our witness flight path goes as far back as 2 miles to the driving range of the Army Navy country club. All of these additional witness accounts will be in the Researcher's Edition of our film. The full witness flight path that we report CONTRADICTS the fdr AND the animation as well as the physical damage.






In the meantime, Balsamo keeps trying to use the fake animation to show that the *REAL* approach path and altitude were wrong. And if Caustic wouldn't have started the "NTSB" Animation is WRONG! thread, nobody would have noticed because neither Balsamo nor Tripper were making a big deal about Balsamo receiving *doctored* evidence from the NTSB. And I emphasized *doctored* as opposed to evidence that simply didn't match the official story. Balsamo claims unequivocally that the NTSB data he received was doctored.



You are once again misrepresenting our postions. PFT points out anomalies in the FDR. We point out anomalies in the eyewitness flight path. We do NOT EVER claim that the FDR represents the eyewitnesses.

We merely claim that BOTH contradict the physical evidence.

Got it?




And as the spotlight is shining brighter on Tripper and Balsamo, they've resorted to posting little more than rants and insults. Tripper has 4 eye-witnesses and a doctored NTSB animation that corroborates them. Balsamo has a *doctored* animation that doesn't match the official flight path.

But at least they have each other.



Oh spare me the melodramatic rhetoric. It boils down to the fact that you are threatened by what we report so you resort to conspiracy theories about us personally instead of analyzing the DATA!

Get a grip on yourself.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jack Tripper

I know it seems amazing but it's fact so let this post serve as an offical timeline for the record as to how we came across all the information.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by Jack Tripper]


Thanks for putting so much effort into this post. Believe me, I'm not trying to be a pain in the butt. I don't believe the official story either. If you've read any of my threads you would have noticed that.

If what you and Rob have is legitimate, it would break open the entire 9/11 story. If I bust your balls over the details, please don't take it personally. It's the only way that the truth can be fleshed out.

Thanks again for the honesty and sincerity of your post!



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:48 AM
link   
To Arabasque:

You mean your lame pathetic deceptive debunk attempt?

Post one account that directly contradicts the north side claim.

You can't do it.

All you can do is copy and paste Eric Bart's mainstream media published witness list!


Sorry but that is NOT research.

You are a blogger/compiler.

Not an investigator.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by Jack Tripper]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by nick7261

Originally posted by Jack Tripper

I know it seems amazing but it's fact so let this post serve as an offical timeline for the record as to how we came across all the information.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by Jack Tripper]


Thanks for putting so much effort into this post. Believe me, I'm not trying to be a pain in the butt. I don't believe the official story either. If you've read any of my threads you would have noticed that.

If what you and Rob have is legitimate, it would break open the entire 9/11 story. If I bust your balls over the details, please don't take it personally. It's the only way that the truth can be fleshed out.

Thanks again for the honesty and sincerity of your post!


Yeah I can tell that you are someone searching for truth that is a bit overzealous in their skepticism.

That's cool man.

Believe me.......our history is there too.

We've been working hard at this stuff for a while now.

I've got NOTHING to hide.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jack Tripper

Oh spare me the melodramatic rhetoric. It boils down to the fact that you are threatened by what we report so you resort to conspiracy theories about us personally instead of analyzing the DATA!

Get a grip on yourself.


LOL... I'm not threatened at all. I'm just a pain in the ass when it comes to validating the data. I was educated as an engineer, and by profession I analyze financial information to make money for myself and my investors. In these two fields you can't take anybody's word for anything. Trusting data without validating it can literally lead to people dying or losing millions.

The problem with analyzing the NTSB data is that I haven't been convinced it came from the NTSB. I don't know you or Rob, and just you guys saying it came from the NTSB doesn't carry much weight (nothing personal). After your timeline and your honesty, your word now carries more weight.

You've earned my respect.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by nick7261]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by nick7261

You've earned my respect.



It takes a man to admit that.

I appreciate your skepticism.

There are definitely a lot of spooks pushing BS out there so it's definitely justified.

But we are the real deal. I've never met Rob in person but I've talked to him on the phone and via internet long enough to know that he has only honest intentions.

I live by Merc and see him every day so we are CONSTANTLY working on getting new information.

Bottom line the north side is proof.

Lloyd is proof.

The Pentagon is NOT a "honeypot".

There are a TON of smoking guns at the Pentagon.

Think about why it has been spun so hard!

It's because it's such an obvious lie.

The movement needs to seriously refocus because we have been deliberately spun away from the strongest evidence we have.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Thanks Jack for your continued even handed and informed approach to this subject. You have shown more patience than most with those who would like to participate in the investigation but are limited, for whatever reason, to the screen in front of them. Please keep up the excellent work.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Yes Jack... and tell the Pod People and the Chem Trail people we all said hello.

Killtown and Tripper ..... what a great sitcom on SciFi that would make!!

I'm Coo Coo for Coco Puffs!!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join