Hello everyone.

My Jack Tripper profile had a good run but I've decided it's time to come out strong with my real name.

The information presented in The PentaCon is too critical to hide behind fictional names when discussing this important information.

Aldo is my partner in CIT and we will run this forum together.

Thanks for your participation. Feel free to use this thread to ask any questions and if anyone ever wants me to start a thread here based on a particular issue or question about The PentaCon I will be happy to do so.

I was very impressed by your PentaCon documentary. I would like to take this opportunity on congratulating you for exposing another lie in the official 9/11 story.

One issue I have wondered about is this: if the 9/11 perpetrators wanted us to believe that Flight 77 hit five (or six - I believe someone found evidence of another one) light poles and crashed into the Pentagon, why did they take the risk of flying another large jet (perhaps the real Flight 77, perhaps not) by the north side of the Citgo gas station? As it could have been spotted by far more than the few eyewitnesses interviewed, was there not a great risk in flying this plane so close to the Pentagon about the same time as the explosion occurred there that it could have been reported to the media, making the 'official' story unravel? And for what reason? If they wanted us to think the plane that crashed into the Pentagon approached by the south path, why have this plane flying in the vicinity at all? Especially as it never landed at Regan? Why have it flying so low if it never crashed? What was the point of it being there anyway? It is as if some one wanted to provide a clue for someone later to discover that the official story was false!

Have you made sense of what the plane seen by the two police officers was doing flying so low and why it was in the vicinity? Was it to avoid being spotted on radar? And where did it go? The controllers MUST have seen it on their radar scopes - but silence!

I would appreciate your thoughts.

P.S. Forgive me if I am wrong in assuming that you are one of the makers of the PentaCon film. I never read the thread you referred to.

Thanks for the kind words micpsi!

Yes I am the one conducting the interviews and am 1/2 of CIT.

Your question is an excellent one but unfortunately requires a complex response that you will need to wrap your mind around.

The plane was clearly used as a decoy to fool people into accepting the notion that a plane hit the building.

Obviously it worked quite well with all witnesses at the citgo station DESPITE the fact that they saw it on the north side.

We believe the perpetrators most likely deliberately had the decoy plane on the wrong side of the station as a cover for anyone that may have seen it fly over the building.

In other words....they wanted to be able to say that the plane they saw fly over the building was a different plane then the one that allegedly hit.

Evidence for this is the fact that there are some witness accounts of a "2nd plane/jet" that "shadowed" the AA jet and and "veered off" over the pentagon immediately after the explosion.

Since none of the witnesses we spoke with saw a "2nd plane" we believe these stories were planted as a cover story for those that may have seen it fly over. This way there is an explanation out there for what they saw even though it seemed contradictory to what the official story claimed happened.

Either that or else the plane was slightly off course and we happened to uncover this fatal mistake.

Hey Craig,

Could you put up a thread solely on the Lightpoles? And put together any / or all of your research thus far on the lightpoles? (links are fine to save you some time)

This has been irritating me for quite some time, I need to know how they came down, that will be a big help if we can figure that out.

Id just like to add my thanks to Jack for bringing us the Pentacon. It has helped me in my own personal understanding of the 9/11 attacks. I always knew that no plane hit the pentagon, the pictures show this, but i was never 100% sure and even at one point convinced myself i could actually see parts of the plane in the photos..

When you consider that a plane mite not have crashed in Shanksville, and not even shot out the air, it becomes apparent that there was some serious illusions going on with the planes in general.. i'll just leave it at that

Fantastic work CIT. you and your team are to be congratulated on a brilliant peice of work that was both informative, easy to understand and most of all visually appealing (exceptional work on the 3D).

Your dedication to this project is amazing. The truth is no longer 'out there' - you have found it!