Trailer for upcoming CIT presentation about the Pentagon attack.

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky


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





Because we don't live in a totalitarian state yet.

If I suddenly died would you believe my claims?

This was a completely successful world wide psychological operation.

Killing off people in the 9/11 truth movement would not serve the purpose of the operation.

Now they fight that fight by ignoring, marginalizing, and ridiculing us.

As long as the mainstream media continues to follow suit of course they won't see me as a threat.

They know they can be infinitely more effective fighting that battle with neutralization and conitelpro.




posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Now they fight that fight by ignoring, marginalizing, and ridiculing us.


And don't forget associating us with extremists.



As long as the mainstream media continues to follow suit of course they won't see me as a threat.


Most likely part of the plan to "control" the aftermath, refuse to answer certain questions and dismiss others as "unpatriotic".


They know they can be infinitely more effective fighting that battle with neutralization and conitelpro.


Agreed, probably have people working on this side of "damage control" 24/7.



posted on Feb, 24 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
I have to remind Craig Ranke of his failure to interview the over the 1,000 people who saw and/or recovered the wreckage from the Pentagon.

This is a periodic reminder given to Ranke for several years now reminding him that they were witnesses and Ranke wasn't. It is inexplicable to rational people why Ranke has consistently refused to present the statements of those witnesses, those people who saw and /or handled the wreckage in the Pentagon.

What did those say the wreckage was?

Why have those people never contradicted the statements that it was AA77, a Boeing 757?

Craig Ranke knows but does not want to say. Why not, Craig Ranke?



posted on Feb, 25 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


1,000? Debris planted... all faked... fooled them all... and none of those people report which side of the station it flew on anyway.

Except star north-path witness Lagasse, who feels the plane impacted, was on the scene "15-20 seconds" after, with his boss recovering debris he felt was real, and as an explosives expert reported no sign of anything but jet fuel explosion. If debris WAS planted, Sgt. Lagasse, on scene within 'seconds' should be a prime suspect. Hmmm.... “I remember being on the scene and seeing a chunk of the plane that just said “Ameri” on it.”
- William Lagasse Dec. 2001



posted on Mar, 6 2008 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Just to bump this thread and keep this fictional film up front for analysis, many here may not know that Ranke's claims were completely debunked by serious people who actually understand the subject matter.

We all know, whether you are inclined to believe Ranke or not, that he takes a dim view of having to answer questions about his claims. In fact, he considers it downright impolite, much like Bush considers inconvenient questions impolite. But we're all used to that.

So let's start with this analysis. I would suggest to those truly interested in the truth to read most of the thread, rather long, but questions and answers are brought up and addressed. If you are not interested or are firmly opposed, don't bother.

Will start with this thread from JREF started on 10/13/2006, almost a year-and-a-half ago (Ranke was known as Lyte Trip there before he was banned for trolling):



AA77 FDR Data, Explained
I gathered up all the publically available flight-data-recorder information, looked at it closely. My initial intent was to properly analyze the data and debunk the variety of dopey conspiracy theories that abounded. After reading all of the NTSB reports, looking carefully at the data provided about the hardware, and the CSV file, I realized that virtually all conspiracy theorist attempts at using this data for sub-second accurate reconstruction is completely and utterly baseless. In the words of Pauli, paraphrased, they aren't even wrong.

What follows is a copy/paste of the bulk of a longer doc file I've been writing. This details, specifically, what flight data recorder data looks like, how it is recorded, how it is decoded, and what the CSV file flying around actually is (and how it was made). I'd really appreciate a proofread and some constructive criticism on any gaps. The full document contains some examples to illustrate teh concepts, but the tables don't translate very well, so I've gotten rid of several examples and paragraphs to do with those examples.

Contained in this document is a pretty thorough description of all the sources for error that pop up when using the CSV file as a "raw" fdr data output, and I explain how the real "fdr" data has few of these problems. I don't actually debunk any specific claims (ie, JDXs), entirely because almost all of the flaws in the analysis are simple and trivial to point out given a thorough understanding of what the CVS file is.

The meat of the paper is section 3. Sections 1 and 2 are scientific background and descriptions of the various technical aspects.

----
About Me:
MS Electrical Engineering, worked with the USAF (as a civilian) on F15s doing data recording and telemetry. I've designed, built, tested, installed, and maintained flight data acquisition systems, of which the FDR is a very low-bit-rate version. It also has the unique characteristic, among data recorders, of being crash survivable.
-------------

forums.randi.org...



posted on Mar, 6 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   


That quote fails to address a single claim made in our presentation!

Clearly you haven't even bothered to watch it.

Since this thread for the trailer has been bumped here are the links for the full version.

Thread on ATS about it.

Highest quality version is available on megavideo and can be viewed on our website here.

It's on google video too but their quality is terrible and when they compress it the sound goes of synch so I highly recomend the version on megavideo but here is the google version since it embeds:


Google Video Link



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT


That quote fails to address a single claim made in our presentation!


The thread quite clearly debunked you almost 1 1/2 years ago.

There is more coming.


[edit on 8-3-2008 by jthomas]



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
Collin Scoggins is the key to 911. He MUST be on the inside of this thing. Study his actions. Study his lies. There is the solution.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Netstriker
What's with the lame music always used in these videos?
It undermines their credibility.


Any video like this one, UFo video's etc with lame music are hoaxes.

So this video is just another hoax by the "CIT"!



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by DigItLosseJam
Collin Scoggins is the key to 911. He MUST be on the inside of this thing. Study his actions. Study his lies. There is the solution.

I happen to consider Colin a friend and your remark is out-of-line. He was one of the few in the system that rose to the occasion and performed exceptionally.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by DigItLosseJam
Collin Scoggins is the key to 911. He MUST be on the inside of this thing. Study his actions. Study his lies. There is the solution.


Just when one would think a "truther" couldn't stoop any lower, we get this. As usual no one from the "truther cult" has offered to condemn this insult that is totally out of line.... I don't consider 911Files a "truther", so he doesn't count....





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join