Excellent find Jezz, it's what I was looking for. Chris does make some valid points that should be investigated. There is just so much stuff I am just not sure what CIT is getting at.. Please correct me if I'm wrong: There were two planes, the one that flew over the NORTH of the Citgo was the "fly over plane" the plane that come from the South of Citgo was the actual plane that hit? Please explain the theory of all these planes that are seen, I heard you mention a c-130, a white plane, an AA plane..Please put these plains into retrospect and what is actually meant by all this.

Thanks!
Bud316

posted by tezzajw
Nice thread that I thought I would drag back from the dead.

OCT Believers - how many people allegedly saw the plane knock the light poles down?

OCT Believers - how many people allegedly saw the light pole in Lloyde's taxi?

posted by bud316
Excellent find Jezz, it's what I was looking for. Chris does make some valid points that should be investigated. There is just so much stuff I am just not sure what CIT is getting at.. Please correct me if I'm wrong: There were two planes, the one that flew over the NORTH of the Citgo was the "fly over plane" the plane that come from the South of Citgo was the actual plane that hit? Please explain the theory of all these planes that are seen, I heard you mention a c-130, a white plane, an AA plane..Please put these plains into retrospect and what is actually meant by all this.

Where did you learn of two aircraft? CIT has never mentioned two aircraft at the Pentagon. There was only one aircraft at the Pentagon which flew Over the Naval Annex (ONA) and North of the Citgo (NOC). There was no aircraft which flew the official flight path through the light poles. That was simulated and staged, with explosives outside and inside the Pentagon rendering the destruction and murdering the targeted personnel. The C-130 came in 3+ minutes later from the west northwest, was at a much higher altitude, and turned away off to the north long before it reached the Pentagon area.

The only plane at the Pentagon was the decoy aircraft which flew ONA and NOC. Some eyewitnesses described it as a white aircraft. Destroying the Lloyde/Taxi scenario is part of destroying the faked Official AA Flight 77 south side flight path. The actual Flight 77 Tail #N644AA apparently never even flew back into Virginia on 9-11-2001. It disappeared up near Ohio. You seriously need to study the CIT Research at the Pentacon, P4T, LC, and even here at ATS. There is a tremendous amount of research you are terribly lacking in. Who is Chris? Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis are the CIT researchers.



[edit on 11/10/08 by SPreston]

Bumped.

In another current thread, some official government story believers are trying to use witness statements, such as McGraw's, to prove that the light pole hit the taxi... Yeah, right. Good luck with that failed endeavour.

This thread should serve as a lesson about why those official government story believers need to conduct some independent verification of what witnesses really claimed that they saw...

Craig, what is your take on Mike Walter? I believe you said you had dinner at his place. (Incidentally, I'm not sure I would have dinner at the home of a person that I assumed was a government shill. He might order big macs in from the "specialty kitchen" at Langley.)

Is he a government shill? He's a smooth character. Was he trying to pump you for information? Please dish the dirt.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Craig, what is your take on Mike Walter? I believe you said you had dinner at his place. (Incidentally, I'm not sure I would have dinner at the home of a person that I assumed was a government shill. He might order big macs in from the "specialty kitchen" at Langley.)

Is he a government shill? He's a smooth character. Was he trying to pump you for information? Please dish the dirt.

Here is the "dirt" from the Ocean County news:

"After getting a telephone call from a self-described 9/11 researcher named Russell Pickering, Walter invited Pickering and Dylan Avery, the film's director, to his house in Fairfax, Virginia.

They showed up with a couple of other people Walter had never spoken with: Craig Ranke, a fast talker with wild eyes, and Aldo Marquis, a heavyset guy who didn't talk much. The two said they were helping Avery and Pickering with research for their film. Walter chatted casually with the pair, and at one point, he realized that Ranke was surreptitiously tape-recording the conversation.

That was weird, he thought. And increasingly, so was the conversation itself. Although Pickering and Avery seemed relatively normal, Ranke and Marquis appeared to be on a mission to prove that the Pentagon plane crash never happened. They wouldn't listen to anything that contradicted this notion.

"I understand why people have certain feelings about this government," Walter says. "There are things this administration did that I'm not pleased with, but facts are facts. I was on the road that day and saw what I saw. The plane was in my line of sight. You could see the 'AA' on the tail. You knew it was American Airlines."

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.""

As some here know, despite my disagreements with CIT -and- Pilots for 9/11 Truth, I've believed their pentagon plane flight path theory for quite some time now. What I'm still not sure of is whether or not Walter is simply mistaken regarding the flight path of the plane and of CIT, or if the truth is more sinister.

[edit on 16-11-2009 by scott3x]

Originally posted by hooper
I'm sorry - the poles were damaged and on the ground after the plane went by,

Please demonstrate your proof that shows the light pole hit the taxi.

Originally posted by hooper
The official narrative therefore stands unchallenged.

Which official narrative refers to the light pole hitting the taxi? Government driven, media driven?

Tell us all how you think you know that the light pole hit the taxi.

Originally posted by hooper
So Mike Walters actaully sees and describes Flight 77 crash into the building. Pretty much the end of the story there.

Here's some of what Mr. Walter says he saw:

Then I picked it up as it struck very low into the Pentagon. The wings folded back and it was like watching someone slam an empty aluminum can into a wall. The jet folded up like an accordion.

If that's what happened then what made the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon? Couldn't have been the fuselage of the airplane because Mike Walter saw that fold up like an accordion.

Despite what Mike Walter says he saw, we still have problems. When you throw Sgt. Lagasse into the mix we have big problems. But hey, our problems are solved. Those great patriots in the Bush administration scooped all of the videos showing the impact. All they have to do is release those videos and all of this CIT nonsense will go away and Sgt. Lagasse can go in for his new pair of glasses.

Why are the government holding the videos? Is there something shocking and embarassing on them?

[edit on 16-11-2009 by ipsedixit]

Good thread! S&F! I have always found it hard to believe that with all the long term planing that the OS claims these terrorists had that they failed to hit the SecDefs office and went right into the section of the pentagon that it did supposedly crash into despite all the stories of Hani Hanjor's poor skills as a pilot makes you wonder indeed.

I think as Mike keeps talking you will find that slowly and surely it turns out that he and Craig Ranke were saying the same thing all along. Mike's a survivor. And he's not the only one. A lot of people are going to be doing the same thing when they finally get it through their heads that this 9/11 truth thing is not going away.

It's not about truth, see, it's about truth truth.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by ipsedixit]

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by hooper
I'm sorry - the poles were damaged and on the ground after the plane went by,

Please demonstrate your proof that shows the light pole hit the taxi.

Originally posted by hooper
The official narrative therefore stands unchallenged.

Which official narrative refers to the light pole hitting the taxi? Government driven, media driven?

Tell us all how you think you know that the light pole hit the taxi.

The cab driver says it did. Prove him wrong. Not with speculation and pseudo physics, with another witness that will attest that the light did not hit the cab and the damage was done by others. If you don't have that you don't have jack. And while your at it please provide the affidavits for all the other witnesses that saws the lights being pre-positioned.

Thank You, looking forward to reading those testimonies.

Originally posted by hooper
The cab driver says it did. Prove him wrong.

You obviously don't understand logic, hooper. You and he are making the claim, you need to prove it happened.

There is no burden of proof upon me to demonstrate anything. You need to prove that Lloyde was telling the truth about what happened.

Originally posted by hooper
Not with speculation and pseudo physics, with another witness that will attest that the light did not hit the cab and the damage was done by others.

Obviously, you aren't quite sure how logic works to support a theory. You need to prove that it happened. How you choose to do that is up to you. Sure, if you want to provide a witness to support Lloyde, great. Go right ahead.

I expect in your next post you'll be trying to prove that the light pole hit the taxi and not generating noise to deflect the attention away from your claim.