Trailer for the upcoming presentation from Pilots For 9/11 Truth

reply to post by johndoex


Captain Bob,

Tell me what you think happened to flight 77. ok?

Thank you

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Tell me what you think happened to flight 77. ok?

What do you think happened, since you cannot post any evidence?

Hi Captain Bob!
In your video it appears that flight 77 hit the Citgo!
Is this new evidence that you uncovered?
I take it by your overreaction that Linkin Park didnt give you permission to use their song.
You should see if The Stems are available?

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt

Why don't you post the audio from when I called into to Craigs laughing stalk show. I had Craig ADMIT that civilian construction workers were in on it. I had Craig state that the bodies found strapped in their airplane seats were PLANTED. Yes... charred bodies planted in the Pentagon strapped to airplane seats.

I admitted no such thing. I simply said that IF there was legitimate evidence of this that the overall body of evidence proves it had to have been planted.

But there is no proof of charred bodies strapped to airplane seats at all.

In fact there is not even evidence of it.

One media quote from one person is not evidence.

It is hearsay.

Get me an interview with the person first-hand specifically stating this and you still won't have proof.

You will have singular testimony from one individual who could very well be mistaken from such a traumatic event, innocently embellishing, or certainly lying as a complicit operative.

One thing for sure is that no intellectually honest critical thinker could suggest this could have any bearing whatsoever on the overwhelming evidence proving the north side approach.

To suggest it does is a blatant logical fallacy.

You need a refresher course in critical thinking.

But thanks for revealing that you are Capt Obvious.

Figures.

Funny how you were all meek over the phone with your real name and voice as I easily made you look like a fool while your anonymous internet persona(s) put on a clear tough guy/bully facade.

reply to post by johndoex


Johndoex: I am fairly new here and have only posted a few things, but really wanted to congratulate you on your point by point rebuttal of TY (hiliarious handle, BTW, too bad he is..welll...him).

What continually amazes me is how, here on ATS, otherwise rational people turn into freakin' nutter lunatics when confronted with things that don't fit into their worldview. I have sifted through many of the 9/11 threads and it is kills me how often guys like TY ask for PROOF when that proof was given multiple times in previous posts. They just ignore it. I only bring him up because he seems to be the most consistently guilty of not addressing points that he...cannot, I guess. I also noticed that, like many "official" type folk, he tends to ad hominem attacks and the tired old standard of asking questions as answers rather than just anwering what was asked.

This is not to say that those who do not support the "official" story are saints by any means (ULTIMA!'s circular evasions come readily to mind). Many employ the same tactics and I find a lot of the language intellectually dishonest and condescending. What many of these people would benefit from is reading "How To Win Friends and Influence People". Guess what? It is impossible to bring someone to your view by calling them or making them feel, stupid.

I appreciate that you took TY on point by point and while you certainly aren't a 10 on the ol' common courtesy scale, I understand that your rancor comes from a loooooooong history with TY, his many AKAs, evasions and disingenuous tactics.

I find his refusal to debate live on film fairly typical, though, as he is one of those who KNOWS that he owns the truth, period, but needs time to "prove" his point by "researching" his views. In any case, it would probaly have been a drab debate when one side keeps saying," I don't have all that information, I'll have to get back to you", huh? And you called it: he, predictably, begged off with "lots of excuses.

Good ones, in his mind, though, I'm sure.

As for me, my take on 9/11 is very simple: This administration did everything in their power to stop an investigation into the greatest act of Terrorism ever committed on American soil. Once one asks, "Cui Bono" from just that one thing, the dominoes begin to fall.

While I find much of the "official" story reeks like week old fish, there are "Truth" elements that are equally suspect.

The Full Truth is something we will never know, IMNSHO and that's why so much of the arguing screaming, etc is just farting in the wind.

While I respect the efforts to find the Truth and agree that there are massive problems with the "official" story, I wish people would realize that, contrary to all their "Evidence" THEY DON"T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, WHO DID IT OR WHY, PERIOD. Watching people continually bang on, presenting conjecture as fact, gets old from either side, y'know?

Words like, "I think", "what I have researched points to", "in my opinion" and such would help to further intellectual debate instead of stimulating passion... I think.

If the purpose of ATS is denying Ignorance, then pretending to own the truth when you don't know what said truth is, does not serve that goal and is intellectually arrogant as hell..

Sooo...there's my two cents, eh.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


S&F for ya on this one!! Been waiting for something like this for awhile. Thanks guys!! Love the video!!!


I've had you guys on my sig since I join ATS .. in hopes someone would get a clue.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


Craig... you hear that????


It's your fantasy... collapsing. Besides a few hard core truthers, you and and PFT are done and you know it.

You will refuse ANY evidence that is against your fairy tale. AS USUAL.

You stated that IF there was proof that there were bodies strapped in seats, they would have to have been planted.

You also stated that the construction workers would have had to have been in on it. (not exact words)

Once again...I am not a whore for public attention like you and Rob are. I come here and other bloggers as fun/hobby. Doing phone-in radio debates are not my thing.

As I've said countless times before, it's all about Law of physics FIRST and "Cui bono" second for investigating purposes.

For those who HAVE NOT flown any any non-commercial airplane, I'd highly suggest you go take a ride in a Cessna 150 or Piper Colt for about 3 months and fly oh...3000 miles there and back again. Your 'eyes' will open when you realize that a 'commercial JET LINER' hit the pentacon and how things just can't not match up with what is reality and the official story..

Check out my links on my sig to get a deeper insight. If someone should ask me to produce evidence of this when the links in my sig already have discussed them...hmmm...yea.. they are the pros...I'm just the support.



[edit on 5-9-2008 by Komodo]

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CITPilots For 9/11 Truth

As a professional pilot i'm glad that my name is not on that list.
The bullying on the crew room would have been bad!





[edit on 5-9-2008 by Ivar_Karlsen]

[edit on 5-9-2008 by Ivar_Karlsen]

How cute....

Captain Bob has all his little friends coming here to play.

Take it to the authorities kiddies.

Originally posted by johndoex
To see many of their pretty smiles in uniform...
patriotsquestion911.com...

Interesting, Rob.

I'm only a few pages into this and already I've come across a number of your experts that claim no Boeing aircraft crashed at Shanksville.

I'm just wondering if you ran this one past Domenick "40 foot" DiMaggio.

Did CIT let him go because you all couldn't keep your stories straight?

Edit to add: No-planers and pod people! PffffffT.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by discombobulator]

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
...

One media quote from one person is not evidence.

It is hearsay.

Get me an interview with the person first-hand specifically stating this and you still won't have proof.

You will have singular testimony from one individual who could very well be mistaken from such a traumatic event, innocently embellishing, or certainly lying as a complicit operative.

One thing for sure is that no intellectually honest critical thinker could suggest this could have any bearing whatsoever on the overwhelming evidence proving the north side approach.

To suggest it does is a blatant logical fallacy.

You need a refresher course in critical thinking.

sounds an awful lot like your reasoning with Roosevelt Roberts, doesn't it?

fact: lots of witnesses stated they saw the plane hit the Pentagon. (more than one)
fact: no one has stated that they saw it miss. (this is important)

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
How cute....

Captain Bob has all his little friends coming here to play.

Take it to the authorities kiddies.

Please stop annoying and insulting the other members and keep on topic.

Thanks.



I must say though, I still believe a plane did crash into the building..but...the glory of America is to debate so..it's only fair to investigate.

Maybe a plane never did hit..maybe it WAS a missile...

Originally posted by leaderof theTFHbrigade
I find his refusal to debate live on film fairly typical, though, as he is one of those who KNOWS that he owns the truth, period, but needs time to "prove" his point by "researching" his views. In any case, it would probaly have been a drab debate when one side keeps saying," I don't have all that information, I'll have to get back to you", huh? And you called it: he, predictably, begged off with "lots of excuses.

At the risk of going off topic and getting a warn for speaking about other members here, I have to disagree with you here. I myself will not publicly and on camera debate with someone about anything. Even the sky being blue. Because I'm not a very good public speaker, I am camera shy, and a multitude of other reasons. TY could just be the same. I believe we should give him the benefit of the doubt as we would like the same applied to us.

At any rate, welcome to ATS and I hope to see you around.

Edit: I starred your post though because I agree with some of the stuff you said.

[edit on 9/5/2008 by Griff]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
When will you admit that you will never bring your fantasy to a court?
When will you admit that you disgrace the vitctims families with your fantasy?

When will you admit that you will never bring the official fantasy story to a court?

Please tell me you are kidding with this statement. What court would we bring this to? Kangaroo Court? Where would we file this case? Who would we file the case against? You could file a case against the governement. What judge would actually hear a case like that? It would be like me going to court to prove Denise Brown(Nicoles sister) didnt kill Nicole Simpson. You guys should really get Ultima to stop posting on your threads. He makes the truth movement look like a bunch of idiots. His posts make no sense. Movie looks interesting. Looking forward to watching it. Graphics look pretty cool.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by tide88]

I just want to point out how ridiculous it is to say it is "pissing on the vicitim's families" when someone doubts the OFFICIAL theory.

Anyone who believes the official theory or the other theories know that PEOPLE DIED and it was a horrible event.

Just because some people think it didnt happen exactly the way we have been told does not mean we have any less respect for those who died; as a matter of fact we may even have more because we are dissecting and analyzing as much as possible, to find out why they really were murdered, and by who and for what reasons.

Until I see the skeptics stop using the phrase "that is so disrespectful to the victims and their families" or any similar phrase, I will know they are full of it.

Suppose one of your family members was murdered. Then, the police find a suspect, convict him/her, and put him away. Justice is served. Then suppose, through your own investigation, you find that the evidence suggests somone else may have been the culprit, and they are still out free to murder again. If You try to analyze and find the real culprit, is that disprespectful to your deceased loved one? Absolutely Not.

Dont ever say those who question the official theory are disprespecting the victims and their families, especially when at least some of those people are skeptical about the official theory themselves.

Something interesting to acknowledge is the fact that all of the surveillance videos were confiscated. Why?

I'm sure they might provide some insight as to what happened. Why not release them? What are they hiding? They don't even refer to them... I'm sure they can come up with a million excuses as to why they don't want to show them.. but at least make it publicly known what was found on them. Or censor them and release them.

From the handful of photo's that I've seen ( I am still shocked as to the lack of coverage on the pentagon attack ) it doesn't look like a 757 hit that building. If I was just giving an opinion based on observation and completely un- influenced. I would suggest that it was hit by a missile.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by kreese]

reply to post by kreese


It was a 757 not a 575. Just kidding. The reason the videos were confiscated was because it is a federal invesitgation. This is normal. That is also why the 911 calls were confiscated. I agree that they should release them, it has been almost 7 years. Also I contacted the head of 911 emergency center in that area, the ones where the calls were confiscated. He emailed me back and told me it was an on going investigation and that is why the calls have not been released. I am assuming it is also the reason for the tapes. But I agree, not sure what they still are investigating. Release all the tapes already.

reply to post by tide88


A bit off topic but let me guess, is because of the ongoing Moussaoui trial?

from 9/11 Citizen's Watch

Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the Department of Defense for withholding a video(s) that allegedly shows United Flight 77 striking the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The Pentagon claims it cannot release the video because it is “part of an ongoing investigation involving Zacarias Moussaoui,” but this is a specious argument. Moussaoui already pled guilty in April 2005 for conspiring with al Qaida to fly planes into U.S. buildings.

reply to post by PplVSNWO


He claimed it was an ongoing investigation into the events that happened that day. Enough is enough already, just release the tapes. Of course I guess releasing them isnt really going to do any good because people will just say they are edited and doctored.