When will CIT take its evidence to the authorities?, page 1

This topic is in the 9/11 Conspiracies discussion forum. (rss)

When will CIT take its evidence to the authorities? << 1 2 3 4 >>

Topic started on 13-1-2009 @ 01:58 PM by adam_zapple
Just what the topic asks....CIT claims to have PROOF of a "military deception" on 9/11, yet thus far they have refused to take their evidence to any authorities. No trials, no grand juries, just CIT arguing back & forth on message boards. Is this where it ends or are you guys going to fight to get the real perpetrators punished? I created this thread so CIT can post a list of all of the authorities, law enforcement officers, attorneys, ETc that they have presented their evidence to and what the result was. If their goal is justice, we should see quite a long list.
copyright & usage
Click here for more 9/11 Conspiracies topics Hot Topics \| Top Topics \| This Week \| Subscribe \| Home
reply posted on 13-1-2009 @ 04:13 PM by SPreston
posted by adam_zapple Just what the topic asks....CIT claims to have PROOF of a "military deception" on 9/11, yet thus far they have refused to take their evidence to any authorities. No trials, no grand juries, just CIT arguing back & forth on message boards. Is this where it ends or are you guys going to fight to get the real perpetrators punished? I created this thread so CIT can post a list of all of the authorities, law enforcement officers, attorneys, ETc that they have presented their evidence to and what the result was. If their goal is justice, we should see quite a long list. It is really none of your business if, when, where, or with who or which authorities CIT and any other 9-11 Truthers are taking their evidence and witnesses to, since you are considered on the other side, or the enemy if you will. You and your partners in evading justice are certainly not to be trusted with privileged information. To present our plans or legal procedures to our enemies would be foolish, as any good attorney would tell you. Why give you or any other government loyalist or disinfo artist the opportunity to sabotage or otherwise interfere with our chances at obtaining justice for the innocent victims of 9-11? Do not assume you are fooling anybody with your frantic attempts at obsfuscation of the evidence and witness interviews or desperate denial of the original and necessary changing script of the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY. Despite the constant denials of an official storyline in the 9-11 fantasy tale, anybody with more than half a brain knows for a fact that indeed there is a 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY and it was set by the 9-11 perpetrators live on TV the morning of 9-11 and since then by the totally controlled Mainstream News Media and the Bush Regime and their propaganda organs such as Popular Mechanics, Integrated Consultants, the 9-11 Whitewash Committee, and NIST, among many others. You do not know what legal measures CIT nor Pilots for 9/11 Truth nor Veterans for 9/11 Truth nor Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth nor the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth nor any other organization within the 9/11 Truth Movement have taken with the authorites to date nor is CIT or anybody else required to inform you. Figure it out for yourself or if you are truly interested in justice; take it to the authorities yourself. Your feigned indignation simply displays your baldfaced hypocrisy for all openminded persons on ATS to see for themselves. [edit on 1/13/09 by SPreston]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-1-2009 @ 04:38 PM by cogburn
I think 2021 is a good enough deadline. If twenty years after the event and you can't present a valid legal case it's never going to happen. By then most of the conspirators may be dead, and too take much longer puts you in the category of JFK assassination researchers. For all of the hemming and hawing and gnashing of teeth, few twoofer organizations are willing to name names and make connections. To do so could expose such organizations to suits of defamation if their information is incorrect. One may infer that the information collected as to the actual individuals involved in an alleged conspiracy is rather thin. Not that it's not there, it's that their investigation is lacking. This would include such information as the names, employers and bosses of the black-bag men that planted light poles as inferred by P4T/CIT claims of a fly-off. I, for one, would be quite interested to hear how AE911, P4T, CIT, et al are planning on converting their pet theories of engineered collapse and fly-offs into legal briefs. It may take them until 2021 to do so. [edit on 13-1-2009 by cogburn]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-1-2009 @ 04:44 PM by Craig Ranke CIT
Originally posted by SPreston You do not know what CIT has done with the authorites to date nor is CIT required to inform you. Precisely. Even though this topic already exists here and again here and therefore will hopefully be locked I'll give the same answer that I often give every time I am pestered for an answer to this question. We HAVE gone to both media and authorities both local and federal and we will continue to work hard to force them to acknowledge this critical evidence as long as they continue to avoid and ignore it. Naturally the fact that they have chosen to ignore it has no bearing on the veracity of the evidence. We are grateful to places like ATS that provide a forum for us to present and discuss this critical information. The fact that the mainstream media and authorities are reluctant to even entertain evidence of a world wide psychological war crime that has permanently altered global politics and world history implicating the very people that employ them shouldn't be surprising. As far as litigation goes, we aren't fooling ourselves here and we don't expect that we can simply sue George Bush regardless of the validity of the evidence given the enormous implications. While we are certainly not opposed to the idea and would be willing to participate in any grand jury, lawsuit, or congressional hearing we simply don't have the resources to personally launch such an endeavor as we are merely a couple of regular guys with day jobs trying to get by.
copyright & usage
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
reply posted on 13-1-2009 @ 04:46 PM by adam_zapple
Originally posted by SPreston posted by adam_zapple Just what the topic asks....CIT claims to have PROOF of a "military deception" on 9/11, yet thus far they have refused to take their evidence to any authorities. No trials, no grand juries, just CIT arguing back & forth on message boards. Is this where it ends or are you guys going to fight to get the real perpetrators punished? I created this thread so CIT can post a list of all of the authorities, law enforcement officers, attorneys, ETc that they have presented their evidence to and what the result was. If their goal is justice, we should see quite a long list. It is really none of your business if, when, where, or with who or which authorities CIT and any other 9-11 Truthers are taking their evidence and witnesses to, since you are considered on the other side, or the enemy if you will. You and your partners in evading justice are certainly not to be trusted with privileged information. To present our plans or legal procedures to our enemies would be foolish, as any good attorney would tell you. Why give you or any other government loyalist or disinfo artist the opportunity to sabotage or otherwise interfere with our chances at obtaining justice for the innocent victims of 9-11? Do not assume you are fooling anybody with your frantic attempts at obsfuscation of the evidence and witness interviews or desperate denial of the original and necessary changing script of the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY. Despite the constant denials of an official storyline in the 9-11 fantasy tale, anybody with more than half a brain knows for a fact that indeed there is a 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY and it was set by the 9-11 perpetrators live on TV the morning of 9-11 and since then by the totally controlled Mainstream News Media and the Bush Regime and their propaganda organs such as Popular Mechanics, Integrated Consultants, the 9-11 Whitewash Committee, and NIST, among many others. You do not know what legal measures CIT nor Pilots for 9/11 Truth nor Veterans for 9/11 Truth nor Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth nor the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth nor any other organization within the 9/11 Truth Movement have taken with the authorites to date Court cases are a matter of public record, so if they HAD done anything, you would have no reason to keep it a secret. Originally posted by SPreston nor is CIT or anybody else required to inform you. Figure it out for yourself or if you are truly interested in justice; Already looked....no cases exist. At least Judy wood actually filed one...so did Kevin Ryan. Nothing from CIT or PFT though. Originally posted by SPrestontake it to the authorities yourself. Your feigned indignation simply displays your baldfaced hypocrisy for all openminded persons on ATS to see for themselves. [edit on 1/13/09 by SPreston] Hypocrisy? When someone says they have PROOF that the government killed hundreds of people and yet they fail to take this evidence to a court, THAT is hypocrisy. If I believed that I had such I wouldn't spend any time arguing with my enemies online...I would be getting justice. Seems like you guys ought to be concentrating on getting that court case ready to go instead of spending all of your days and nights arguing with people on the internet who you consider your "enemy".....that is....if justice is the goal. What does it matter what we think, anyways? Your behaviors make it seem like you're more interested in an internet popularity contest than you are in justice.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-1-2009 @ 04:48 PM by adam_zapple
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT Originally posted by SPreston You do not know what CIT has done with the authorites to date nor is CIT required to inform you. Precisely. Even though this topic already exists here and again here and therefore will hopefully be locked I'll give the same answer that I often give every time I am pestered for an answer to this question. We HAVE gone to both media and authorities both local and federal and we will continue to work hard to force them to acknowledge this critical evidence as long as they continue to avoid and ignore it. Naturally the fact that they have chosen to ignore it has no bearing on the veracity of the evidence. Why don't you provide a list of the federal and local authorities to which you've gone to? If they've chosen to ignore what you presented then there is no reason for you to withhold this information. Edit: Before you refuse claiming that you don't want people like me to sabotage your efforts...I'm only asking for the names of those who have REFUSED to act on the information you've presented...therefore since you've already received a negative response, there's no reason no to call them out. [edit on 13-1-2009 by adam_zapple]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-1-2009 @ 04:49 PM by jthomas
Originally posted by SPreston It is really none of your business if, when, where, or with who or which authorities CIT and any other 9-11 Truthers are taking their evidence and witnesses to, since you are considered on the other side, or the enemy if you will. You and your partners in evading justice are certainly not to be trusted with privileged information. That's truly funny. Now SPreston and CIT are claiming all this nonsense they've been trying desperately to convince humanity about has all of sudden become "privileged information." And just imagine all those hundreds of thousands of scientists who never endorsed CIT's wacky claims are now the "enemy." More Shakespearean comedy to entertain us!
copyright & usage

reply posted on 14-1-2009 @ 03:31 PM by adam_zapple
Bump for Craig: Why don't you provide a list of the federal and local authorities to which you've gone to? If they've chosen to ignore what you presented then there is no reason for you to withhold this information.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 14-1-2009 @ 11:33 PM by Make Speed Limit 45
Originally posted by adam_zapple Hypocrisy? When someone says they have PROOF that the government killed hundreds of people and yet they fail to take this evidence to a court, THAT is hypocrisy. If I believed that I had such I wouldn't spend any time arguing with my enemies online...I would be getting justice. The proof was obvious on 911 2001 when 3 NYC skyscrapers collapsed straight down at free fall speed. No way to explain that by planes hitting buildings esp since one of the three was NOT hit by a plane and was on a separate block!!. Unfortunately we live in a police state and have a totally corrupt media and having proof gets you no where in our "legal" system.
copyright & usage
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 12:13 PM by TeslaandLyne
The evidence is clear that some type of coincidental scheming was going on as I watched a History Channel show on how the Pentagon was being fortified. Well this would mean few people would be in that area. So my thoughts at that time ranged from sure now that's where something will hit, why the project in the first place, and Osama will hit there because its a set up. Who did this wonderful planning for the Pentagon, who was following orders.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 03:19 PM by jfj123
reply to post by SPreston yet you and other CT'ers freely discuss your opinions about "what really happened" on ATS constantly. If you really meant that CT'ers shouldn't share info with "the enemy" (pause for sinister music), then you wouldn't be giving the enemy your positions, opinions, etc.. here which according to you would allow them to use your own info against you. Facts are facts. If CT'ers really had any facts, they'd be contacting agencies left and right.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 03:38 PM by YourForever
CIT has no proof. Only varying testimony, what is contradictory is thrown out. They have one conclusion of many. That is not proof.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 04:52 PM by Gonenuts
reply to post by jfj123 Facts are facts. If CT'ers really had any facts, they'd be contacting agencies left and right. They have! Who told you they have not?
copyright & usage

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 05:12 PM by jfj123
Originally posted by Gonenuts reply to post by jfj123 Facts are facts. If CT'ers really had any facts, they'd be contacting agencies left and right. They have! Who told you they have not? Sorry, maybe I missed the area's where the CT'ers have posted what agencies they've contacted and with what proof and what responses they received. Would you kindly point me in the direction of those posts on this thread? Thanks !
copyright & usage

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 07:11 PM by Gonenuts
reply to post by jfj123 Sorry, maybe I missed the area's where the CT'ers have posted what agencies they've contacted and with what proof and what responses they received. Would you kindly point me in the direction of those posts on this thread? Thanks January 4, 2008 at 22:06:24 View Ratings \| Rate It Eight U.S. State Department Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 January 5, 2008 – Eight U.S. State Department veterans have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. “There is no question in my mind, that there is enough evidence to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of the kind we have not seen, with subpoenas, general questioning of people, releasing a lot of documents,” said Daniel Ellsberg, PhD, in a 2006 interview with Jack Blood. www.opednews.com... September 23, 2007 at 08:53:46 View Ratings \| Rate It Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report www.opednews.com... September 5, 2007 at 14:33:52 View Ratings \| Rate It U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11 September 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ pilot, Commander Ralph Kolstad, started questioning the official account of 9/11 within days of the event. “It just didn’t make any sense to me,” he said. And now 6 years after 9/11 he says, “When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story.” Now retired, Commander Kolstad was a top-rated fighter pilot during his 20-year Navy career. Early in his career, he was accorded the honor of being selected to participate in the Navy’s ‘Top Gun’ air combat school, officially known as the U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School. The Tom Cruise movie, “Top Gun” reflects the experience of the young Navy pilots at the school. Eleven years later, Commander Kolstad was further honored by being selected to become a ‘Top Gun’ adversary instructor. While in the Navy, he flew F-4 Phantoms, A-4 Skyhawks, and F-14 Tomcats and completed 250 aircraft carrier landings. www.opednews.com... September 6, 2007 at 20:48:25 View Ratings \| Rate It Former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member Calls for New Investigation of 9/11 www.opednews.com... Respected Leaders and Families Launch 9/11 Truth Statement Demanding Deeper Investigation into the Events of 9/11 www.911truth.org... New Paper in the Journal of 9/11 Studies Thursday, January 15th, 2009 Posted in \| No Comments » Steven Jones writes: The 116th peer-reviewed paper was published today in the Journal of 9/11 Studies: “The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis,” by Prof. Graeme MacQueen and Tony Szamboti journalof911studies.com... This fine paper underwent several months of rather arduous peer-review ... stj911.org... Scholars and Family Members Submit Request for Correction to 9/11 NIST Report Gaps and inconsistencies reveal fundamental flaws in NIST's building collapse analyses BERKELEY, CA (PRWEB) April 14, 2007 -- A group of scientists, researchers and 9/11 family members challenging the official reports of the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11/01 has filed a Request for Correction (RFC) with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The Request asserts that the NIST Final Report violates information quality standards, draws inferences that are inconsistent with its own computer simulations and physical tests, and exhibits a significant bias toward a preordained conclusion while ignoring available evidence contrary to it. The Request also says that if this bias is corrected, the NIST simulation clearly indicates that the Towers should not have collapsed due to plane damage and fire. The obvious alternative, which the group says should have been studied by NIST, is explosive demolition. The group submitting the Request includes 9/11 family members Bob McIlvaine and Bill Doyle, physicist Steven E. Jones, former UL manager, Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage, AIA, and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. stj911.org... A PDF of the Request for Correction is available here: stj911.org... Whitewash as public service: How The 9/11 Commission Report defrauds the nation www.harpers.org... 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, The A Critique of the Kean-Zelikow Report David Ray Griffin www.interlinkbooks.com... The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True www.911review.com... The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie www.911review.com... Propping Up the War on Terror Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories KEVIN RYAN March 28, 2006 www.911review.com... Matter of New York Times Co. v City of New York Fire Dept. In the Matter of The New York Times Company et al., Respondents-Appellants, v City of New York Fire Department, Appellant-Respondent. Catherine T. Regenhard et al., Proposed Intervenors-Petitioners-Respondents-Appellants. Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered February 13, 2003, which, in a CPLR article 78 proceeding brought by a newspaper and a journalist against the New York City Fire Department challenging respondent Fire Department's denial of petitioners' Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request for transcripts of interviews that respondent conducted of its employees (oral histories) concerning their activities at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 (9/11), and for audio tapes and transcripts of 911 calls and internal radio dispatch calls made on 9/11, (1) denied the motion of nine family members of persons who died on 9/11 for leave to intervene as petitioners (Family Members), and (2) directed disclosure of the oral histories albeit redacted to delete the employees' personal expressions of feelings, opinions and recommendations, and (3) directed disclosure of the internal radio dispatch tapes and transcripts albeit redacted to delete the opinions and recommendations of respondent's employees, and (4) directed disclosure of the 911 tapes and transcripts albeit redacted to delete the words of 911 callers other than those related to the Family Members, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant the motion to intervene, and to direct disclosure of respondent's employees' personal expressions of feeling contained in the oral histories, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. www.courts.state.ny.us... Court prevents release of most September 11 emergency calls The appeals court disagreed with families whose attorneys argued in a hearing last month in Albany that public interest outweighed privacy protection of those who died in the attacks. www.cnn.com... Court Denies Access To Firefighter's 911 WTC Opinions www.rense.com... 9/11 Scholar files "Qui Tam" lawsuit against NIST www.opednews.com... World Trade Center 9 11 Emergency Workers Lawsuit www.yourlawyer.com... 911 Career Army Veteran v Cheney Et Al Law Suit www.scribd.com... NY Judge Rules Against 9-11 Widow Lawyer says court’s decision designed to suppress Ellen Mariani’s quest for truth By Mark Anderson - American Free Press (Issue #51, December 17, 2007) unansweredquestions.org... TO THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: st911.org... The Judicial Hijacking of the 9-11 Victim Lawsuits engforum.pravda.ru... Scholars for 9/11 Truth petition to Congress proliberty.com... 911 Victim's Wife, Ellen Mariani, Files RICO Act Federal Court Complaint Against President Bush and Cabinet Members www.ratical.org... Victims' families renew request for 9/11 records edition.cnn.com... Legal minds respond to landmark 9/11 civil suit against Rumsfeld, Cheney www.prisonplanet.com... [edit on 15-1-2009 by Gonenuts]
copyright & usage
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 10:10 PM by pteridine
reply to post by Gonenuts It is not clear why people are asking for a new investigation. Many may not necessarily subscribe to any conspiracy, but may feel that the investigation was not done rigorously. I also note the sources. In your exterior sources you posed a Jones quote Steven Jones writes: The 116th peer-reviewed paper was published today in the Journal of 9/11 Studies: “The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis,” by Prof. Graeme MacQueen and Tony Szamboti journalof911studies.com... This fine paper underwent several months of rather arduous peer-review ... I would question the value of such a paper because the Journal of 911 studies is published by Jones' organization and the papers published almost exclusively support Jones' position. It would seem to need extra review when we see the primary author is a retired Canadian theology professor [Graeme MacQueen, PhD – Associate Professor of Religious Studies and founding Director, Centre for Peace Studies, McMaster University (ret).] The coauthor claims to be a mechanical engineer who has written on the Kennedy conspiracy. If Jones is to have any legitimacy to his claims at all, he will have to publish a paper in a non-captive journal subject to actual peer review.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 01:26 AM by Gonenuts
reply to post by pteridine I do not disagree with you, and you are right, but so fare no one has wrote anything to disprove Jones Hypothesis. I find it more credible, than what the government has given us and theirs does not stand up to simple science.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 07:44 AM by jfj123
Originally posted by Gonenuts reply to post by pteridine I do not disagree with you, and you are right, but so fare no one has wrote anything to disprove Jones Hypothesis. I find it more credible, than what the government has given us and theirs does not stand up to simple science. Could you please post the simple science here? I'd appreciate it.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 08:46 AM by Finn1916
ok i'm going to sound really really dumb here, but what is CIT? Second line
copyright & usage