Citizen Investigation Team: National Security Alert

[Hatha Sunahara]

Could this be another crack in the 911 deception? It's a long video--more than an hour. So I'll summarize it before I paste in the link:

This group did an independent investigation of the approach path of the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon on 911. Their analysis of the evidence leads them to conclude that the plane approached the Pentagon from a different angle that the official government (NTSA) investigation claims. When they prove the plane came in from a more northerly approach, then they build a case that the plane overflew the Pentagon, and flew away. But for those who saw the plane coming in low, their attention was captured by an explosion in the building itself, as they had expected, and they did not see the plane pull up and fly away. One of them did see it fly away. They don't say what they think caused the explosion in the Pentagon, but leave it open that it could have been a bomb planted in the building. In my view, this has proof that 911 was a black op. Very well done investigative piece.

Judge for yourself:

http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html

Hatha

[PatColo]

For some reason which is unclear to me, the 911 pentagon question has become an issue "dividing" real Truthers from the ubiquitous fakes, the latter who are identifiable by their insistence that a real airliner hit the Pentagon as the OCT alleges. Why they pick this topic as a battle is beyond me... but there must be a reason, as there is "unity" among the fakes in insisting that an airliner hit, and that anyone who's not sure or speculates otherwise is "hurting the truth movement". So in the past 1-2 years, this whole cabal of fake truthers have rallied around trying to demonize/ridicule/discredit Craig Ranke & CIT's pentagon research.

Anyways, Ranke was on in the first hour of Kevin Barrett's "Truth Jihad Radio" show last Saturday, & they discuss all this, commercials are 3 mins so just FF through them.

MP3 06/26/2010 (http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/archive/Truth-Jihad-32k-062610.mp3) Saturday - 1st Hour: With Craig Ranke.

Also see:
CIT conference in Arlington VA, latest video endorsed by Richard Gage, Peter Dale Scott, Ed Asner, David Ray Griffin & more. (http://911blogger.com/node/20738)

Pentagon Attack Disinformation Op Plans to Disrupt Upcoming CIT Events (http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2351)

[Hatha Sunahara]

This video claims that the Airliner made a low pass at the Pentagon and overflew it. The people who 'saw' the airliner shifted their attention away from it at exactly the moment it was supposed to hit because their attention was captured by the fireball, and the plane flew away unnoticed.

What these guys do is cast doubt on the flight path of the plane which people actually saw. They don't say it in the video, but I would conclude that the plane was a distraction because the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile that approached it from the angle that the NTSA investigation claimed for the plane. In other words, there were TWO flying objects at the scene of the Pentagon on 911. One was a decoy plane that took attention away from the cruise missile--both of whom got to the Pentagon at exactly the same time. The cruise missile hit the Pentagon, and the airliner flew away.

Keep in mind that 911 involved a great deal of deception. In New York, the planes that hit the WTC were graphic images video edited into the news videos that were shown on TV. The weren't real planes. People on the ground saw explosions only with their eyes. The saw planes when they watched it on TV. Ask yourself why there are no independent photos of planes other than what you see from news videos broadcast on TV. Surely, after the first explosion on the North WTC tower, millions of cameras would be pointed up at the towers, but none of them caught the second plane that hit the south tower. Ther should be millions of pictures of that plane--but all you can find are a handful of videos that were broadcast on TV.

So, why would it seem so strange that the perpetrators made arrangements for people to see a real plane at the Pentagon on 911?

If you look at the map of the flight path of the plane, it looked like it was following a path that would have it arrive at the Pentagon at exactly the right time that a cruise missile was scheduled to hit the building (from a different angle). The cruise missile flew in low beneath the radar so it was not detected, and the evidence was fudged for the 'plane' to make it appear that it came in from the angle that the cruise missile approached the building. Why would the people who did it go the the trouble of knocking over lampposts to establish the approach path of the 'plane? The plane passed over the Pentagon at 480 ft AGL--not possible to knock over lampposts.

If you have two objects in the sky at close proximity both flying fast, it would divide everyone's attention so badly, they would be thrown into confusion. What would straighten out their confusion is what they saw and heard on TV about the incident--just like what happened to the people who saw explosions in the WTC buildings in New York.

I don't know what the purpose of having a plane crash in Pennsylvania was. I presume that was just a 'bonus' hijacking to cement the idea of 'terrorists; in the minds of people watching the MSM. I don't believe any planes crashed into anything on 911. The plane stories are all hoaxes made believable by pre-arranged 'evidence' supporting the plane stories. Just as what we see in the National Security Alert Video in the OP.

911 was a masterpiece of a black op. It is where a large number of secret agendas intersected--boosting them all. It's had us fooled for almost 9 years now, but I think there are enough people closing in on it that it will not remain a mystery for much longer. The resistance to the truth is a psy-op, and that too is cracking.

Hatha

[keehah]

Hatha if the plane made a loop around the pentagon (to hit the section that would do the least damage) before coming in low, would this not explain it pulling away? Sorry I did not take the time to watch the video.

Pat Colo are you saying the Pentagon airliner hoax that Rumsfield started is a point of belief one must have before one can be accepted into some club of 911 truth?

You know over the years I more than most have posted against the games of Halo etal, but now you say I am the other because I have not seen anything suggesting anything other than a plane hit the Pentagon?

I've posted the pictures on GIM1 that show damage consistent with a plane.

Others, the good people you speak off, take a picture of a fireman's punch out from the backside of the building and say this is proof no plane hit (as example). Charactor assassination has not done much to change my mind either.

I've really been saddened over the last 5 years seeing this culture's investigation into 911 conspiracy. A focus on the unprovable speculation of the after effects rather than the means motive and opportunity. Admitted facts with agents and names involved in war games that day, other tools that could have be used.

Or the other political facts. Political corruption and crime needs to be seen and spoken of as a hollywood mystery/disaster film by too many having to look themselves for truth. Why should I be surprised. What other reality outside their daily life are many Americans capable of imagining?

A dumbed down North American culture focused on the elements of explosions, falling, fire and hidden planes rather than the agents responsible, tools, motive and their actions to cause the events.

[PatColo]

Hatha, I don't buy the CGI/hologram/whatever "no planes at WTC" story.

A Critical Review of WTC 'No Plane' Theories (http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200610/Salter.pdf)

Keehah, it's not an individual 911 truth seeker's belief that a boeing 757, even AA flight 77, flew into the pentagon, which is the problem. But there's been a shrillness, a willingness to employ the various rules of disinfo, from a cabal of "gatekeepers" who insist on the above despite the conspicuous absence of conclusive evidence, and they noisily insist everyone else ought to believe that too, or keep quiet so not to "hurt the movement". Check the 911blogger & wtcdemolition threads I point to above to get a feel for the game afoot WRT the pentagon question. You're welcome to believe the 757 story, I'm utterly unconvinced of it until further (video?!) evidence is forthcoming; just be cool about unproven beliefs you choose to hold, don't wield them like a club against those not on board. I'm not saying you've done this, but the "cabal" I'm speaking of has in many case blown their own "deep cover" by behaving in just this way as they labor to "steer" the movement in their bosses' desired direction.

[Hatha Sunahara]

Given the information you cited, I'm inclined to agree with you PatColo. The perpetrators would be taking a huge chance that something would go wrong if there were both an airliner doing a flyover and a cruise missile that were supposed to reach the same point at the exact same time. It had to be something simpler. So, I would be open to the idea that there was no airliner--but that there was a cruise missile. Just because there are a lot of people who believe that an airliner hit the building, doesn't mean it's what actually happened.

I still believe that there were no planes at the WTC for the exact same reason. Real airliners would introduce the possibility that something would go wrong. So for now, until I see evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe that the airliners at the WTC were digital images inserted into the news videos that were broadcast on TV.

I don't believe there was a plane at Shanksville, PA because there is no evidence of a plane crashing there. Just a fake news story with a smoking hole in the ground.

Hatha

[undgrd]

Let me first preface this statement with this...I do NOT believe the official story.

One of my BIGGEST hang ups with the "it wasn't a plane it was a bomb, a missile, swamp gas"...etc is this; what THE HELL happened to all the people on the supposed flight that hit the Pentagon if a plane full of people in fact did NOT hit the Pentagon???

FEMA Camp?
Sold into slavery internationally?
Witness Protect relocation and silence on pain of death?


I've heard a lot of people say a plane didn't hit the Pentagon but, I've never heard anyone give an opinion on what happened to all the people that (I assume) boarded the flight that hit the Pentagon.

[cedarchopper]

WTC 7 was an obvious controlled demolition...I have eyes to see and don't give a flock what explanations are given...it is what it is. A building just doesn't fall like that when it was a block away and minimally damaged from the twin towers.

The public will never fully believe the truth of what happened on 9/11 because they were psychologically traumatized by the event and the wars that followed...that is how criminals do the Big Lie.

The opposite is the truth...lies are truth and truth are lies in the criminal mind.

There is no hope for truth until things get so bad that it all becomes self evident.

[PatColo]

Let me first preface this statement with this...I do NOT believe the official story.

One of my BIGGEST hang ups with the "it wasn't a plane it was a bomb, a missile, swamp gas"...etc is this; what THE HELL happened to all the people on the supposed flight that hit the Pentagon if a plane full of people in fact did NOT hit the Pentagon???

FEMA Camp?
Sold into slavery internationally?
Witness Protect relocation and silence on pain of death?


I've heard a lot of people say a plane didn't hit the Pentagon but, I've never heard anyone give an opinion on what happened to all the people that (I assume) boarded the flight that hit the Pentagon.


Only the 911 perps know the full answers to these questions, everyone else is speculating. Truth seekers can't "solve the crime" with so much evidence withheld or destroyed.

On the pentagon speculation front, look into the plane landing & evacuation of Cleveland airport on 911 morning. It was reported by multiple sources, then the Cleveland events went silent by the MSM as the Mighty Wurlitzer scrambled to get everyone singing off the same song sheet. The Cleveland events could be speculated to have been involved in the "where did the passengers go?" question WRT the pentagon, OR the alleged (dubious..) Shanksville PA "crash" plane.

As I recall Eric Hufschmid's video "Painful Deceptions" does some plausible speculating about the pentagon, where the passengers might have gone, also speculating about the alleged accounting for all their DNA at the pentagon, how that could have been hoaxed, etc. But it's all speculation, again, absent the release of new hard evidence- and the question of that happening or not is unfortunately in the hands of the 911 perps (http://gold-silver.us/forum/general-discussion/the-zionist-elephant-in-the-room/msg2940/#msg2940).

[PatColo]

Kevin Barrett's always been controversial, he's had a couple past interviews on FAUX Nooz which is always a bad sign, he's friendly with agent Jim Fetzer, spoke positively of the "no planes at WTC" (or "focus on the pod/flash" nonsense, I forget) theory in one of the 911 "truth" vids which never got much traction.

But the recent couple years Barrett, and even Fetzer, have gotten friendly with the "zionists did 911" Truthers, and Barrett's been an articulate & effective advocate & dialog facilitator. Barrett was banned from 911blogger, which has become pretty openly co-opted by the Limited Hangout LIHOP shill/gatekeepers in the recent couple years, and the site has consequently lost much credibility due to their management's pattern of censorship & attempted discourse steering.

With all that said, Barrett recently put out this article re the controversy of CIT vs the 911/pentagon gatekeepers:


Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Tales of Hoffman (http://truthjihad.blogspot.com/2010/06/tales-of-hoffman.html)

I used to admire and respect Jim Hoffman (http://911research.wtc7.net/), whose classic studies of the WTC demolitions were among the best of their time. Then he and his girlfriend Victronix appointed themselves the 9/11 Truth Thought Police and embarked on an ever-accelerating course of destructive criticism of some of the best 9/11 researchers and activists.

They protested a David Ray Griffin event in Oakland because Griffin (along with at least 90% of the truth movement) doesn't support their claim that Flight 77 really did hit the Pentagon. They attacked Loose Change, 9/11 in Plane Site, and 9/11 Mysteries -- the three best 9/11 truth videos of their time, which collectively brought this issue alive for tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of people. They started attacking me with an endless barrage of false and distorted accusations. Now, they're at the core of the miniature lynch mob going after Pentagon investigators CIT (http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html).

Hoffman and Victronix have always refused requests for radio interviews and failed to return phone calls--a very bad sign, since sincere 9/11 truth advocates are always ready to talk out their differences. Nonetheless I hoped to meet Hoffman and Victronix during my recent West Coast speaking tour, and set up a talk with the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance in part for that purpose. I invited them very politely with my umpteenth peace overture. They didn't get back to me, and didn't attend the meeting.

Instead, their fellow 9/11 Thought Police officer, Brian Good (http://www.truthjihad.com/good.htm), barged into the meeting (of a group from which he had been banned long ago after sexually harassing a local activist) in a V-for-Vendetta mask and costume, looming over the meeting in rigid, menacing silence for the last hour or so of the event, in what he evidently thought was a protest of my visit. A couple of times he reached into his cape and made lunging motions as if he were reaching for his V-for-Vendetta knife to throw at me. When he finally took off the mask and glared at me, his eyes looked disturbingly like Charles Manson's. (If you put Manson on a rack, stretched him out to about six foot four, and gave him a shave and a trim, you'd have a pretty good image of Brian Good.)

Good continued to stalk me, and Hoffman avoid me, for the rest of the tour. At my final talk, held in a private house in Sacramento, Good stood outside on the sidewalk in mask and costume from 6 pm to midnight, barking out angry remarks about me to passersby.

What in the world does the Hoffman-Victronix-Good clique think they're doing with their empty, destructive attacks on fellow 9/11 truth-seekers?

Anyway, here are my thoughts about Hoffman's slideshow (http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentacon/methods.html) attacking CIT, originally composed as a long email to recent radio guest Ken Jenkins (http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/archive/Truth-Jihad-32k-061910.mp3):

"Debunking CIT Debunking: An Answer to Jim Hoffman and Other Defenders of the South of Citgo Theory" (http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2866)

[PatColo]

@ 911blogger, which has gradually morphed into a controlled opposition site,

Citizen Investigation Team (creators of Pentacon and National Security Alert) to tour Europe in September (http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-08/citizen-investigation-team-creators-pentacon-and-national-security-alert-tour-europe-september)

317 reader comments at this writing, demonstrating the battle to control thought re the official pentagon story (alleging scary moozlems really did fly AA flight 77 into the pentagon). The CIT haterz rely heavily on emotion tuggers: ridicule, derision, ad hominem attacks- rules of disinfo 101 stuff, which taints their case and says much about their agendas

Also see @ wtcdemolition:

More on 9/11 Blogger Censorship (http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2875)

That poster Adam Syed has been one of the more articulate critics of what 911blogger has become, as well as being a supporter of CIT's investigations & hypothesis.

[PatColo]

WOW very impressive from Craig Ranke/ CIT, they totally expose 911blogger's management and shill team here,
Barrie Zwicker Endorses Citizen Investigation Team, Censored at 911blogger (http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1412)

Also that Barrie Zwicker created such a ringing endorsement of CIT, and slammed the cabal tormenting & disrupting them... most the names in this cabal have been "deep cover" shills within 911 Truth, very active for years with their own blogs, orgs, radio shows etc. (see all the users who are active in ridiculing/defaming CIT in the reader comments of this 911B thread:
Citizen Investigation Team (creators of Pentacon and National Security Alert) to tour Europe in September (http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-08/citizen-investigation-team-creators-pentacon-and-national-security-alert-tour-europe-september)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu5wzJtSMhc&feature=player_embedded

Ranke will be on Kevin Barrett's radio show this coming Sat 8/7. (http://truthjihadradio.blogspot.com/2010/08/craig-ranke-enver-masud-on-truth-jihad.html)

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

Hatha, I don't buy the CGI/hologram/whatever "no planes at WTC" story.




Have you read The Third Truth? It's very compelling. Probably more so than anything Griffin has put out.

I haven't read the whole PDF you linked but based on the overview, I'm not sure I'm convinced:

There have been two no-plane hypotheses put forward: The first, that small planes or missiles hit the
towers and these were covered over in the videos and photos

[videos that could have possibly been forged. independent videographers have replicated this feat all over youtube. on top of that, no photos exist. all photos are stills from the same video sources which are controlled by the z.]

of the impact by synthetic 3D graphic
images of 767s (including real-time superimposition of these images on all live TV footage as it was
broadcast). The no-planers have labeled this scenario "TV Fakery." The second argument holds that the
planes (at least the second plane) was in fact a hologram generated by classified technology. This
hypothesis has since been abandoned. The proponents argue that anomalies in the visual record indicate
the fraudulent nature of the computer generated second plane and show that the plane in the Naudet
video of the first hit was not the size or shape of a 767.

[Not to mention that eyewitness accounts that vary greatly, more than is acceptable even considering the heaviness of the event. Eyewitnesses who attest to a bomb or no plane being seen (including on live tv) are disregarded. Curious.]

The over-arching weakness of the TV fakery argument is this: how could the perpetrators have ensured
control over all the images taken of the planes that approached the WTC?

[that's the point! they control the media and thus what is shown on the media! doesn't anyone realize reuters distributes all kosher news, including footage, and reuters was bought by the rothschilds in the 1800s??]

Only one unmodified image
posted to the web would have exposed the operation.

[if any images existed this could be possible. where are the security cams showing these planes, the security cams on every building in NY? the traffic cams? we are allowed to see a handful of suspect video sources including one that shows a horizon shot of the NY skyline that zooms in and suddenly THERE'S A PLANE. where was that plane 2 seconds ago on the skyline?]

New York is a media capital of the world, with national networks, local network affiliates and independent TV stations, international media bureaus, and many independent video companies like the kinds I've worked for, and professional photographers.
Professionals would have been rushing out to document whatever they could, through professional pride
or the hope for making a buck off it. Evan Fairbanks and war photographer James Nachtway are some
examples.

["we're from NSA and we'll be confiscating your footage for national security reasons. if you speak about this to anyone we will consider you a terrorist and lock you in guantanamo." look what happened to the video that existed all around the pentagon.]

And then there are also cameras in the possession of ordinary citizens and the thousands of
New York's ever-present tourists.

[exactly! i could understand no one having their cameras during the first explosion but when that second "plane" flew in, EVERYONE HAD THEIR CAMERAS READY. they were actively snapping shots of the tower smoldering. why isn't flickr or photbucket FULL of unique respective shots from of the second plane coming in from across the bay? Hundreds of cameras were going off. ]

In addition, one should consider the possibility of foreign intelligence assets acquiring their own images of the attack (which so many knew was coming) which could be used
for blackmail.

[sure, but that's no reason to disregard the theory altogether. maybe this theory is bigger and stretches farther than we think.]

[PatColo]

Kevin Barrett show last Saturday with Craig Ranke, they discuss the CIT evidence plus the strange, vigorous campaign to discredit them by a cabal of 911 truth gatekeepers.

08/07/2010 Saturday - 1st Hour: With Craig Ranke.

MP3: http://www.americanfreedomradio.com/archive/Truth-Jihad-32k-080710.mp3

[PatColo]

Dwain Deets endorses Citizen Investigation Team & their presentation "National Security Alert"

Aeronautical engineer Dwain Deets throws his support behind Citizen Investigation Team and their presentation National Security Alert.

For more details, see http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1460

Dwain Deets is an outspoken 9/11 truth advocate who is a core member of both Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth as well as Pilots for 9/11 Truth.

He has recently launched a very succinct website regarding the destruction of World Trade Center building 7 at: www.7problemswithbuilding7.info.

Dwain is currently retired after 37 years with NASA, where he worked as an aeronautical engineer and flight director for Aerospace Projects. In other words he is a literal rocket scientist.

We are honored to receive his endorsement for our work and conclusions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYGkiYmVUmg&feature=player_embedded



Although my involvement in the 9/11 issue has focused primarily on the problems with the "collapse" hypothesis for World Trade Center Building 7, my background as a retired NASA aeronautical engineer has often brought questions my way regarding the airplanes, including, of course, the flight that allegedly struck the Pentagon.

Examination of the official flight profile raised serious technical questions in my mind -- questions which led me to the view that it is highly unlikely such a profile could have been flown as reported. In other words, it seemed to be physically and aeronautically impossible.

My skepticism proved to be well-founded when I watched National Security Alert, the most recent video from the Citizen Investigation Team, or CIT. More importantly, I now realize that the flight profile data released by the government was a spurious smokescreen, and that the answer to the question of what really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 comes from applying logic, with very little involvement of aeronautical principals.

To be more precise, the answer comes from eyewitness accounts collected from individuals who had clear views of where the plane flew in relation to the Citgo gas station across the highway from the Pentagon. Several of these witnesses were recorded by the Center for Military History or by the Library of Congress shortly after 9/11/01. CIT followed up on this testimony, doing investigative video interviews at the various sites where each person made their observations, or, when this couldn’t be done, by audio recording.

In a nutshell, these key eyewitnesses independently agree that the plane flew north of the Citgo gas station as it headed toward the Pentagon. It is clear from viewing their interviews that it is simply not a reasonable consideration that all of the witnesses presented are incorrect about this simple detail. The plane was most definitely on the north side of the station.

The problem with this is that the official flight path requires the plane to have flown to the south of the station. The observed damage is wholly inconsistent with an approach from the north-side. This not only includes the damage inside the building leading to the round hole in the C-ring, but also five light poles which were supposedly hit by the airplane which were also in alignment with a south-side path. Given that the plane was on the north-side of the station, these light poles simply could not have been knocked over by it.

The only possible conclusion, if logic is your guide, is that the plane did not hit the Pentagon and did not cause the damage; that the south-path downed light poles were staged; and that the internal damage was done by other means, specifically internal explosives.

I am aware of efforts by a few to censor and marginalize the work of Citizen Investigation Team. Some have stated it’s because they feel the notion of a flyover at the Pentagon would be bad for the truth movement even if true because it would be off-putting to the public at large. This is contradictory logic since the very notion that 9/11 was an inside job is off-putting to the public. I strongly feel it’s important to follow evidence wherever it leads us and stand firmly against any effort to hide or control information that exposes the 9/11 deception.

I thank CIT for bringing this story together in a clear manner, and I endorse CIT as the best source of information on this matter. Furthermore, I agree with their conclusion -- the plane flew over the Pentagon.

-Dwain Deets
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Creator of www.7problemswithbuilding7.info

[Nitz]

thats a pretty significant endorsement if you ask me...wow. Thanks Pat

[PatColo]

thats a pretty significant endorsement if you ask me...wow. Thanks Pat


Besides perhaps providing the most plausible theory to date on the pentagon question (until PTB finally release those dozens of videos showing exactly what happened there 911 morning at least), CIT has also "incidentally" outed a whole cabal of deep-cover controlled opposition shills who've honed their names/reputations for years as "911 Truth Super-Activists".

It became apparent 3-4 years ago that the management of 911blogger.com had been usurped... but seldom has their (mods & "super-activist" clique) controlled opposition status been as conspicuous as it's been WRT their "unity" in trying to marginalize/discredit/silence CIT's work. The Deets' support announcement at CIT's BBS,
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1460
is dated 8/30. CIT principals & supporters (like Adam Syed) were all banned from 911B. I look back since before 8/30 at 911B entries both on their main news page and their blogs page, and the Deets CIT endorsement/interview is AWOL.

I really haven't figured out exactly why all the "deep cover" shills within the 911T movement are so unified over insisting that AA-77 really did fly into the pentagon (flown by a scary moozlemist..). I guess it just undermines the "scary moozlems really did 911" (blowback/LIHOP) lie again, which numerous of the "deep cover" controlled opposition shills (Jon Gold among several others) have made it their core mission to preserve & protect. It's similar to WTC CD in that it totally undermines the "scary moozlems booga booga" Big Zio-Lie; but some of WTC CD's biggest advocates like Jim Hoffman, have been singing with the shill-chorus when it comes to trying to silence CIT using every dishonest trick in the disinfo handbook. See some of the links on this I've posted in earlier replies for more history/background on the "wall of shills" which CIT has had to climb over to get their research disseminated to honest Truthers.

[PatColo]

It became apparent 3-4 years ago that the management of 911blogger.com had been usurped... but seldom has their (mods & "super-activist" clique) controlled opposition status been as conspicuous as it's been WRT their "unity" in trying to marginalize/discredit/silence CIT's work.


"911Blogger.com" Accused: Is Leading 9/11 Truth Site Working For The Other Side? (http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-27/911bloggercom-accused-leading-911-truth-site-working-other-side)
- Rock Creek Free Press called out 911B for protecting the OCT on the pentagon, and censoring CIT.


Original RCFP article: PDF File: Starts on page 1, continues on page 8:
http://www.rockcreekfreepress.com/CreekV4No11-Web.pdf


Also see: "John Bursill" Defends 911Blogger.com Against Rock Creek Free Press Criticism (http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/3027)
"Reposting this here so that Bursill's points can be rebutted on an unrigged forum... "

[PatColo]

Conspiracy Theory with Gov. Jesse Ventura- 911 Pentagon Attack(Full Episode) (http://911blogger.com/news/2010-12-18/conspiracy-theory-gov-jesse-ventura-911-pentagon-attackfull-episode#comments)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrZ14NRbT-s

I've watched this episode now, here's a separate GSUS thread (http://gold-silver.us/forum/911-28/conspiracy-theory-with-gov-jesse-ventura-911-pentagon-attack-(full-episode)/msg155812/#msg155812) on the episode.

Again, solid info presented in a melodramatic/tabloid way. But I do recommend watching it, to get a good overview of why "757 flown into the pentagon by Hani Hanjour" skeptics are so skeptical! At the 14:00 mark, they did give exposure to the C.I.T. flyover theory, which has caused so much divisiveness between 911 Truth Seekers, and 911 Truth Gatekeepers. But they don't dwell on the flyover theory, there's just a clip of one guy- NASA structural engineer Dwain Deets, saying that's what he thinks happened, then they move on.

Tabloid style aside, I give this episode a thumbs up and highly recommend watching! :D