The PentaCon update, page 1

As most of you have seen, loved, hated, etc. "The PentaCon" that Craig (formerly known as Jack Tripper) and his CIT team has published, he has made some updates. I am just passing this along to those who have not yet been to his website after the first video was published.

The PentaCon "Smoking Gun version"

He has added Lloyd's account to his website as well, watched it for the first time today. Which is the following link

Lloyd the Cab Driver interviewed by CIT

He has updated his Info section for extended readings:

Info Section

The team will also be referrenced at the "Ready for Mainstream" in New York City on 9/8/07:

New York City 6th anniversary gathering

And more at his Home site:

The PentaCon

I, for one, wish them the best and hope we get some answers soon. We are still waiting for the Researchers Edition as far as I know.

What do you guys think, that havent seen this already?

Comments on your current thoughts up to date on the CIT?

*Note: I made this thread to give everyone an update on how things are going. Or to let people know that the site has been updated since the first video release.*

Be sure to visit his message board here at ATS as well:

The PentaCon forums

reply to post by ANOK

---

Anok ~

So, this guy goes out and finds 4 people to say what side of the Citgo station the plane flew over. Woo Hooo... yet there are hundreds that refute those 4. If you watched the 911 CT show on the History Channel, they were interviewing an eyewitness that SAW THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.

Even two of his witnesses SAW the plane HIT the pentagon. You can't pick and choose what you want to believe from a witness.... "Well he saw the plane come over this side....but he was mistaken when he saw it hit the Pentagon"

CAll me a troll... Shill...whatever..your name calling does nothing.

Craig and Aldo, just to let you know we haven't forget you guys, and your breathtaking interviews :

www.patriotsquestion911.com...


And again another important scientist coming out of the woodwork about all the evasions of important events by the infamous NIST reports :

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3

At last a NIST insider for 19 years, who followed the whole investigation by NIST, and visited all their meetings, declaring it a half baked investigation, which got severely hampered by politically oriented lawyers working for the same government which lied to us, and which tried to avoid any serious investigation of the events of 11 September 2001.

I hope you guys come out soon with the Researchers Edition, so I can put my teeth in it and help to unearth the truth of the Pentagon attack.

[edit on 22/8/07 by LaBTop]

reply to post by CaptainObvious

---

Even two of his witnesses SAW the plane HIT the pentagon. You can't pick and choose what you want to believe from a witness.... "Well he saw the plane come over this side....but he was mistaken when he saw it hit the Pentagon"

I agree. Its because of this glaring hole in the "CIT" theory that I hardly even bothered posting in their forum. From what I have read they have never responded to that particular criticism. Here's hoping they will now.

CT

reply to post by Conspiracy Theorist

---

Of course we have responded to it.

Here is what we say on the front page of our website:

*Special note: Many detractors to the information we present suggest we are wrong because the witnesses at the CITGO station believe the plane hit the building. This is what true critical thinkers call circular logic. We claim the fact that the witnesses place the plane on the north side of the station proves it was used as an instrument of deception during a perfectly timed military sleight of hand illusion because it is impossible for a plane in that location to have created the physical damage. In other words; the intended goal was to fool witnesses into believing the plane hit the building. The fact that the witnesses were successfully deceived exactly as the perpetrators intended does not prove that they are incorrect in their placement of the plane. Quite the opposite is true. Their placement of the plane proves that they were deceived in regards to the impact.

And then we go on to demonstrate the 7 basic principles of sleight of hand and describe how it applies to the 9/11 operation.

Go to our website and check it out.

Bottom line everyone MUST choose which claim to believe.....

The north side or the impact.

They can not be simultaneously true.

Since all of the witnesses we present had a MUCH better vantage point of the plane as it passed by the station it makes infinitely more sense to suggest they were correct about the north side.

9/11 was an operation of deception.

Just because people were deceived into believing the impact just as the perpetrators intended does not prove they were incorrect about their corroborated placement of the plane.

This is why the witnesses weren't afraid to talk to us in the first place!

They were deceived and they thought they were supporting the official story.

An appropriate analogy would be that just because people were deceived into believing the WTC fell solely because of the planes and fire does not disprove controlled demolition.





[edit on 26-8-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

---

We claim the fact that the witnesses place the plane on the north side of the station proves it was used as an instrument of deception during a perfectly timed military sleight of hand illusion because it is impossible for a plane in that location to have created the physical damage

No offense intended. But to me this seems like bending reality to fit your theory. Two of your witnesses say they saw the plane fly north of the citgo and hit the pentagon. By using your logic, I could say that the appearance of a plane on the north side of the citgo was a perfectly timed military sleight of hand illusion and that your witnesses, didnt really see anything.

Just because people were deceived into believing the impact just as the perpetrators intended does not prove they were incorrect about their corroborated placement of the plane.

The placement of the plane and subsequently your theory(IMHO) is not really corroborated when you have 2 witnesses, not saying it hit the pentagon, but that they saw it hit the pentagon.

No matter how you spin it, to me it appears that you are indeed picking and choosing what to believe from your own witnesses.

CT

reply to post by CaptainObvious

---

Hey cap I want an answer to this.
What did you ever find out?

reply to post by 11Bravo

---

A post I made back in June? Damn..i don't even remember that... have you been waiting that long ?

Let me se if I can find some time to read the entire thread..then I will get back to you.

reply to post by CaptainObvious

---

Still waiting.

US Consulate Whistleblower Says 9/11 Hijackers Passports were issued by the CIA
  Posted 17 days ago with 21 member flags

9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 11 days ago with 14 member flags

In Depth Look At The Pentagon Witnessess On 9/11
  Posted 19 days ago with 12 member flags

Hollywood Stars Seek to Make Feature Film Focused on WTC Demolitions
  Posted 18 days ago with 12 member flags

9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 5 days ago with 12 member flags

Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 16 days ago with 11 member flags

An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
  Posted 14 days ago with 11 member flags

Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 12 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: