Trailer for upcoming CIT presentation about the Pentagon attack.

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:20 PM
link   




posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinityoreilly

Originally posted by jthomas
I think that as long as this topic is still being entertained on this forum that all should be aware of what happens when obsession with trying to promote a theory without evidence gets out of hand.


I view the "official conspiracy" with this same attitude, the more you try to find the evidence the more holes in the theory you come across. Someone I work with still believes Saddam bombed us on 911. Do you believe this as well?


Let's look at this factually.

First, there is no "official conspiracy." That canard was debunked 5 1/2 years ago.

Second, if there were in fact any evidence (meaning "actual" evidence) to support internet forum 9/11 conspiracy theories, the matter would have been resolved 5 years ago.

It's time for everyone who STILL believes these funny conspiracy theories to either produce actionable evidence or get back to real-world problems that we all need to solve, wouldn't you agree, infinityoreilly?

I hope so.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:28 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Why do you not post quotes of the members there who act like that? You have linked to threads on that forum where the people you defend are as bad - if not worse - than that quote.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 09:44 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   
On AboveTopSecret.com, we strive to encourage our members to focus on the topics, and not stoop to the lower-level knuckle-dragging of focusing on each other seen on many other online discussion venues. As we can now see, several "9/11 Madness" warnings have been handed out in this thread... there is no secret that we will deal harshly in this forum with regard to topical drift away from issues and on each other.

If you're not able to rise above the pettiness, then ATS is not for you.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Just clicked on this thread from curiosity as it'd floated up the board and I thought, "Why, for such a relatively straightforward and minor subject as announcing a video trailer?" only to stumble upon the aftermath of Gettysburg.

Craig, if your trailer can provoke this, the actual release should be met with nuclear flame wars. In the peculiar universe of 9/11 truth/debunk, this is a sure sign you are pushing very sensitive spots.

Fasten your seat belts folks...



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by gottago

Craig, if your trailer can provoke this, the actual release should be met with nuclear flame wars. In the peculiar universe of 9/11 truth/debunk, this is a sure sign you are pushing very sensitive spots.

Fasten your seat belts folks...


You better believe it.

Our announcement on 911blogger also got some people heated.

The fact is that a lot of people are threatened by what we present.

There is this very small but very vocal group in the "movement" who have put so much of a stake in supporting a 757 impact that they can't back down.

They are used to countering the "missile" disinfo and the usual speculation.

They are not used to dealing with hard evidence obtained on site that proves a deception.

People are realizing the only way to counter the north side claim is by suggesting that all the north side witnesses are deep cover government operatives sent out to spread disinfo. But this goes against their own logic since there is not a reason on earth to have such a complex lie complete with a team of agents on the scene when the attack was physically carried out as reported.

Plus it begs the question.....why aren't there any south side witnesses?

It's now clear that the missile meme was meant to distract from the real smoking gun which is the flight path.

It's all about the flight path.

North of the citgo was merely the final moment and the ultimate proof but we now have the entire loop fully documented and this exposes the entire plot.

The presentation is coming along great. I'll be working hard for the next few weeks but we are on track for a February release.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Keep kickin' at it Craig, the holes in the official version of events bug me greatly. Those who continue to dismiss the questions are choosing to remain unhindered by the weight of the realization of something difficult to believe.

911 madness indeed SO, thanks to the mods for cleaning this thread up somewhat.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
First, there is no "official conspiracy." That canard was debunked 5 1/2 years ago.


When 19 people conspire to hijack aircraft and crash them into buildings, that to me constitutes a conspiracy.


It's time for everyone who STILL believes these funny conspiracy theories to either produce actionable evidence or get back to real-world problems that we all need to solve, wouldn't you agree, infinityoreilly?

I hope so.


My real world problems are as under control as I can get them, I still have free time to keep an eye on what's happening in the entertaining world of "911 Conspiracies". These theories aren't really that funny, but I'm still able to laugh sometimes.

Some of your post were removed before I had a chance to review them. Again, do you believe Saddam bombed us on 911?



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

The fact is that a lot of people are threatened by what we present.


I'm not threatened in the slightest.


There is this very small but very vocal group in the "movement" who have put so much of a stake in supporting a 757 impact that they can't back down.


People like me know that the truth needs no "movement." Movements are political, not scientific.


They are not used to dealing with hard evidence obtained on site that proves a deception.


If you could prove it, you would be able to deal with all of the evidence. But you have actually discounted critically important evidence that I and others have brought to your attention.

Sorry, Craig, I know you have not been able to refute all of the evidence of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001. I'm afraid your new film won't accomplish what you want.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Hi jthomas,

Glad to see you are anticipating our new presentation!

Progress is coming along well. I'd like to say we'll have it finished at the beginning of February but closer to the end of the month is probably more realistic.

Craig



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Hi jthomas,

Glad to see you are anticipating our new presentation!

Craig


I am ready for your next sci-fi flick.



posted on Feb, 18 2008 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Ok so it's done but I'm having troubles getting a decent quality compressed version so it might still be another couple days before it's uploaded.

Surprisingly Prison Planet picked it up and is even featuring it on their front page right now!

trailer on PP

Hopefully AJ will finally have us on the show.

He needs to stop being so scurred of the Pentagon attack.



posted on Feb, 18 2008 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Yep, and the further we get away from the events of that day, the more discrepancies that Craiggie will find in witness testimony. Heck, 50 years from now, he will probably be able to find someone who saw little green men set up a laser cannon that day...........



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington-Dulles International Airport crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. William Lagasse, Chadwick Brooks, and Donald Brennan were Pentagon police officers on duty at the time of the attack. Lagasse was in the process of refueling his police car when the American Airliner flew past him so low that its wind blast knocked him into his vehicle. In an interview conducted in December 2001 , Lagasse described the secondary explosions and the search and recovery of injured Pentagon personnel. Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon and described the ensuing scenes of chaos in his interview, taped November 25, 2001.

Your witnesses prove your video wrong, and you wrong.
Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon and described the ensuing scenes of chaos in his interview, taped November 25, 2001.

Lagasse described the secondary explosions and the search and recovery of injured Pentagon personnel.
Your own witnesses prove your implied conclusions wrong.



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Craig, I look forward to seeing the full version.

I have one question for you that I will word very carefully.

Set-up.....

Your theories imply a conspiracy conducted by government insiders, or other dark, shadowy, and nefarious entities. Furthermore, your theories require the murder by planted explosives of all Pentagon employees, and one of the following:

1. The murder of all crew and passengers on AA77.

2. The unwillful abduction and imprisonment of all crew and passengers on AA77

or

3. The complicity of all crew and passengers of AA77.

I think we can easily dismiss # 3.

So that leaves us with a conspiratorial organization with wide ranging lethal abilities and no quams over commiting murder or abduction on a grand scale.

Here is my question...

If your theory is anywhere near approaching the truth, how do you explain your continued safety and ability to present your ideas freely?

Thanks



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Oops!

No, Brooks admitted he didn't SEE poles clipped, and Lagasse too, tho he remembers seeing them down IN THE WRONG SPOT, and Lloyd's cab too, moved north. He admits wind didn't push him in his car, but fear. AND they both put the plane north of the Citgo, so we have to take their (later) words with a grain of salt.


Lagasse did discount bombs, which are central to fakery. They both deny flyover... as does everything else... so one part of one version of these guys' testimony vs. the rest of it and the rest of the evidence = north side proven, time for next movie.

Now it's east of the Potomac because Collin Scoggins accidentally said it was '6 mi SE of the White House ... oops, 6 SW." It was southeast!



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Now it's east of the Potomac because Collin Scoggins accidentally said it was '6 mi SE of the White House ... oops, 6 SW." It was southeast!


That wasn't an accident.

He even confirmed it and THEN came back with an update of it being SW which makes perfect sense.

Plus Scoggins wasn't the only ATC to report a plane east of the river either.

But we don't rely on them. We would never rely on government provided data.

ABC news reported the plane over the White House as did many other published witnesses and of course this is exactly where O'Brien has the plane heading after it passed in front of him from his left to the right just after he passed The Washington Mall headed westbound.

But all of that pales in comparison to our new witness who corroborates them all and breaks the case wide open.


You are going to have a realllly rough time spinning this one!




[edit on 22-2-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by beachnut
 


Except that none of what they say in those interviews contradicts the north side claim in the least and Brooks ADMITTED that he did NOT see the poles clipped.

Lagasse said he saw the plane on the north side as early as 2003 and Brooks claimed the plane came from behind him on his LEFT in that 2001 interview further corroborating the north side claim.

As a rule cops ALWAYS back in to parking spaces so they can pull out fast if they need to and of course see what's going on in front of them.




[edit on 22-2-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join