It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Oh I don't know because we are up against a trillion dollar propaganda machine and any and all financial support is needed and welcome.
Oh I don't know because we spent our own money on all of this research and we feel we have the right to recoup costs.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
Conversely...why would anyone need to sell these on DVD when "every one of them can be watched for free?
Originally posted by CameronFox
reply to post by Swing Dangler
Swing D ~
If you look into the silly flyover & around fantasy, you would see that the flight path that they make work would require the plane to fly in front of and to the right of the impact point.
Again...not a soul was witness to this flight path.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
Please take note the relative lack of time the plane is in sight and the relative quite engine noise after the initial pass and pull up.
posted by rush969
reply to post by SPreston
Two things. I don´t know why lots of people would buy those DVDs, I guess they are curious...they don´t or can´t download stuff...they have doubts...they want to have them...or collect them...
The fact remains you are selling those DVDs and making money. Having prooven NOTHING. They are just speculation and fantasy.
The second thing is I´m not a gov. loyalist.
Originally posted by SPreston CIT and P4T have every right to recoup their losses.
Originally posted by SPreston
CIT and P4T are spending their own money traveling across country, finding witnesses and interviewing them, financing FOIAs, and producing videos and documents. CIT travels all the way from California and they work for a living just like any other ordinary American. It took a lot of work tracking down the Center for Military History Arlington National Cemetery eyewitnesses which had been ordered released by FOIA lawsuit with their names STILL redacted.
Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
Please take note the relative lack of time the plane is in sight and the relative quite engine noise after the initial pass and pull up.
Hey Swing,
How about comparing apples and apples? Since your link was with a relatively low-speed flyby, how about a comment on this video?
This is the sound of a jet at full throttle an awful lot further away than what you're saying the Pentagon witnesses could've overlooked. Doesn't seem to wash somehow.
Craig and Aldo sure wasted a lot of money and their hard earned vacation time. John Farmer is the one that does all the REAL leg work. He was a real truther.... asked questions, funded many FOIA requests, went to the Pentagon... and found what he was looking for... the truth.
Originally posted by rush969
reply to post by SPreston
Just answer me this:
Why do you or CIT or P4T not report on any witness testimony that doesn´t agree with your own bias?
It shows very clearly that CIT, P4T, you, and some others are living in denyal. You decided long ago to pursue this conspiracy, and you deny everything about the true accounts shown in media, the web and numerous other sources. You deny photographs, you deny plane parts, body parts, ATC recordings, FAA reports, NTSB documents, NIST works.
All the media, all the government, all the defense institutions, police, fire
departments, the airlines, the cell phone companies, all the experts at NIST, EVERYBODY IS IN ON IT!!!
THIS SIMPLY CANNOT BE, you have to accept it.
You put up videos with no sound, why? Is it because then we will be able to hear that there are no explosions? Just the rumble of the progresive collapse as explained by NIST?
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
Fitzgibbon-by the way I like your profile pic if that is you and I'm assuming it is. It looks like something out of a movie.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
I've seen that video before of course. I choose that as not an example based upon the eyewitness accounts of the jet flying in slower than the official speed. Either way, both videos do not have daily city back ground noise nor the sound of a huge explosion,
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
The plane does disappear from site quite quickly in both videos doesn't it?
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
Now place a huge fireball and smoke screen in front of it, take into account perceptual/situational blindness, and you have the world's largest magic trick.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
1. Please determine the actual speed of both planes in the Youtube! videos in comparison to eyewitness accounts of speeds of the Pentagon attack jet.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
2. We now know based upon the eyewitnesses, the plane was not traveling the estimated 500 mph or more that the 9/11 Commission states.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
3. It is inconseqential as fly overs and jet traffic are a common part of the perceptal and audio environment. We do have reports of witnesses hearing the pilot gunning the engines prior to the alleged impact.
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
4. I think we both forget about the huge explosion and nosie accompanied with the apparent detonation of a device at the Pentagon and the audio effects that accompany it as well as additional explosion/s heard from within the building.
------------
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
6. Why would a NCOIC recovery team member near the alleged impact hole write a letter in support of the Citizens Investigation Team?
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
7. Why do you think witnesses in the Pentagon experienced more than one explosion?
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
8. Why do you think a personal friend of mine employed by the United States Army as a explosive ordinance specialist with a focus on nuclear disarmament tell me he and members of his unit do not believe a plane hit the Pentagon?
Originally posted by Swing Dangler
2. Why did the Air Force release Rades data that is false? What is the point?