Phil Jayhan

Thats an awfully scary statement you just made. What are you, a gatekeeper of the truth or a spreader of it? Or is it your job to only make sure we spread nthat which is pre-approved??

Tenents of the mainstream truth movement? What are you starting out a cult, in a cult or what? Who the hell talks like this? And who the hell listens to people who talk like this?

Cheers-
phil

Tenents of the mainstream truth movement ?? Thats a good one!!

__________________
Phil Jayhan 9/11 Blog | Phil Jayhan v666 Blog | Frederick Bastiats Audio of "The Law"

"In disquisitions of every kind there are certain primary truths, or first principles, upon which all subsequent reasoning must depend." --Alexander Hamilton

C7

Hi Phil,

I have been investigating CIT and I have discovered a few things that they left out of National Security Allert.

All 4 CIT witnesses who could see the Pentagon said the plane hit the Pentagon. Sgt. Brooks, Sgt. Lagasse and Sean Boger said they SAW the plane hit the Pentagon. They all had an unobstructed view of the impact. Robert Turcios said he couldn't see it hit but it was on a straight line into the Pentagon and it collided. He had a clear view of all but the bottom floors. When Craig asked Robert if the plane flew over the Pentagon, he said NO.

Roosevelt Roberts saw a plane fly away to the south-west. Craig insists he said it flew away to the north. It does not matter. A plane approaching from the west could not make either turn. Roosevelt is NOT a witness for flyover.
http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/4...tpathscrop.jpg
The purple path is what Mr. Roberts surmised from what he saw - the plane flying away to the south-west.
The red path combines what the north path witnesses saw combined with what Roosevelt saw.
The turning radius is about 350 feet. An airliner requires a 5,000 foot turning radius or more.

Erik Dihle
CIT misrepresented this second hand account by including the person who thought the plane kept going and left out the part where someone said the plane hit the building.
“The first few seconds it was very confusing, we couldn’t even tell . . . some people were yelling that a bomb had hit the Pentagon and a jet kept on going . . . somebody else was yelling no, no, no, the jet ran into the building."
It is not known if the people saying the plane kept going saw it themselves or heard it from someone else and no assumption can be made.

__________________
WTC 7 Was a CD

Rings of Saturn

I buy the hypothesis of a fly-over...but not an "official" Inside Job, fully implemented false flag op.

The only issue I have with a possible flyover is 3 questions:

1. How'd they get the flag poles down?
2. How was the inside detonated? Where, when and how?
3. How and who placed the wreckage?

They say they draw no conclusions, yet at the begiining explain how this video can pretty much prove 911 was an inside job. Inside job implies that someone and multiple persons orchestrated 911...perhaps like a high level military operation.

Never...

The skeptics are 100% right. There's just no way 20-30 people...Americans pulled this off....not even 10. One or two yes....along with FOREIGN entities and/or underground operators. The Northwoods documents is a fair argument...but the fact it was shot down is another. The logistics would be staggering...not to mention the liability of AMERICANS killing Americans.

This was 1-2-3 PNAC eels setting it up with foreigners....but the coverup is solid through our Govt. A coverup is easy to sell...beucase the emotional outrage still exists....people will focus on that...and scoff when the words Conspiracy theory are uttered.

The CIT Vid is good stuff....I just wont swallow an official US military/govt flase flagger on this level. Bombing the Cole, YES...911, no way. Someone else....sinister, was the vehicle for this...most likely Mossad or Israeli/Zionists undeground kook mercenaries...

Thats how I see it...

Sinister Dick Cheney

"Someone else....sinister, was the vehicle for this."

Sinister? That would be me Your Sinister VP

I was in charge of the entire operation and you're right I hired the Israeli Mossad to do the real dirty work.

I knew I could rely on the Zionist PNAC group at the Pentagon to help pull it off and cover it up afterward.

scott75

I just believe that there is a mainstream truth movement, and then there is the fringe elements (the idea that no planes hit the Twin Towers would fit here I believe). If you want to argue that the 'no planes hit the Twin Towers' argument is a perfectly valid theory, I'd love to hear you explain why you believe this, though.

I talk like this. I expected better from an administrator then to make fun of the way a person talks. And no, I'm not starting a cult.

A fair amount of people, actually, although I haven't posted all that much here. Feel free to see me over at AboveTopSecret.com, over in their 9/11 forum, where I usually post these days.

scott75

C7, you make some interesting points. I'd bring it up over at CIT, but I was banned from there a long time ago; no explanation was given, but I'm guessing it's probably because I was temporarily banned shortly before from Pilots for 9/11 Truth (the founder there thought I had lied; I hadn't lied, I'd simply made a mistake).

Anyway, I still go for CIT's theory, which PFT (Pilots for 9/11 Truth) backs up, but I certainly agree that there's a lot of issues that people have with their theories and it's not always easy to try to get them to explain these issues.

MikeR

You might be less keen on my Twin-Tower flyover hypothesis
relating to what happened half-an-hour before The Pentagon Missile Strike ...
so let's look again at your 3 questions. I'd only pretend I know answers,
so I might try responding with even more questions.
["Why do you architects always answer a question with another question?"
"Why shouldn't we?"]

1. Remembering that the entire World's attention is riveted on
the smoldering Pentagon, who is ever going to notice five bent metal poles,
planted on the grass beside a busy turnpike for several hours that mosning?
The driver whose cab was famously photographed, posed at stage center
beside a twisted pole early that morning actually confessed
(when he thought the camera sound was switched off)
to helping to stage-managing the thing.

2. Who knows? Who cares? This was a military op...
just like Boy Scouts... "Be Prepared", chasps...
so of course the back-up Cubs swarmed in underground....
backpax of NoNoThermite pre-prepared for inevitable MMT,
Missile Missing Target ... there musta been a BigPanick
for it to take all of 35 minutes to bring down a bit more
BigBuilding before BigMedia photogs photographed much more
(missing) evidence of a (non-existent) BigBoeing

3. see (1). Everybody's attention was focused on
e.g. "why are those fire truck guys damping down container reels
that the (non-existent) BigBoeing failed to touch?
"Why are those BigTrux bringing in all that dirt-n-stuff ...
"won't it make a mess of that lovely lawn?....
and while attention is 99.999% distracted towards stage-center,
the props boys on a golfcart just-happened to drop a coupla bits
of (wrong-airline) aluminum on the grass.

Imagine the scene at say 7.30am that morning: you have no idea
what's about to happen (you're not In on the Inside)...driving along,
you would NOT notice those downed lighting-poles: innocent items
about to be replaced in the normal course of maintenance procedure
would NOT register in your memory. And if you were the one person
who did half-raised an eyebrow, who cares?
Who's taking any notice of your testimony?

Think for a minute of how many people still presumably buy
the Official Conspiracy, are still convinced that 4 Boeings
actually left the ground that day....only 2 actually took off
according to Official Records, since faked.
(Doesn't official refusal to release the Pentagon security vid tapes
say everything we need to know?)

4. You didn't ask, but to answer your 4th (very vital) question:
This may at first seem a total paradox, but it is of no significance whatever
how many people said they saw UA175 fly into WTC2.
When all the evidence is examined, we can be 100% certain
it was impossible that we saw a real Boeing fly into WTC.
We can safely ignore why and how all the plane-spotters saw
whatever they thought they saw, because it is impossible for
the same Boeing videoed from 37 different angles and to this day
be measurable at 37 different speeds (from 225 to an aeronautically-
impossible 579MPH) all happening within a few frames.

It is also impossible for a Boeing to hit a glass skyscraper and
for nothing to break off, for no wings or tail or window glass
to fall on the ground (forget that bent Tupolev wheel...)

5. It is VERY possible for PhotoShop Color Code to be faked
virtually pixel by phony pixel, and for virtual video to be fudged in Real Time,
frame by fraudulent frame.

(5a. Incidentally, the camera computer crew gave themselves
a still-very audible 17-second delay before the RealTime 9-11 Show
went to air that day. Think they got it all in perfect synch? Think again. LINK)

Admittedly, the truth IS very improbable indeed, but we can very safely
eliminate all that's impossible.

Whatever else is left, however improbable must contain the Truth.

Pentagon Boeing, impossible.
WTC2 Boeing, impossible.
(Sharpesville Boeing, another distraction, the hole was dug years earlier)

Penn and Teller unwittingly reveal the Secret, how to pull off the 9-11 Great Illusion....
If you want to begin to know how to make a Boeing Vanish, in 7 Easy Steps, forget Copperfield,
Grab a BigMug of Coffee and Watch Penn and Teller Very Closely




Then if you find Mr Penn's explanation doesn't quite reveal any real-virtual Clues,
watch this account of what really happened when BigMedia rolled their cameras in Real Time:
Your very-virtual Fly-in the very-real WTC2 fly-over
(Link to "September Clues", THE Ultimate-Insider's Video View of 9-11)

(Y)our view of 9-11 (and the rest of our world) will never be the same again from now on.

It was ALL "Inside Job"... as phony as any flag ever flown. An Insider Flag to fly in their never-ending fraudulent War on phony Terror.

MikeR

Rings of Saturn

still aint buying the no-plane theory...to many people saw it...too many videos...

The Pent is another story...

MikeR

Hey, ROS.... do you personally know even one single person on this GFS planet, just one person upon whose opinions and values you can personally rely, who saw (which?) plane?

All the witnesses to the PentaPlane agree on a flight path that fails to follow the famous downed lighting poles... and one of them describes the same plane on the other side flying away from the Pentagon....

Any so-called witness who says they saw UA175 was either lying, or a paid actor, or there really was a decoy plane like the PentaPlane. Nobody saw UA175 fly into WTC2 simply because that actual Boeing 767 was still flying years later. Improbable, maybe: but provably 100% possible

Now we have endless faked plane-passengers... all phony names who will in the end be proven not to have been involved in any crash that day.

DON'T buy into the theory... do what we've all had to do and look critically at all the evidence. You won't be any more astounded than I was when I saw the last shred of incredible planer evidence disappear.

Watch "September Clues" and then watch this vid (first of 3 parts). I got to the stage where I couldn't see why I at first accepted the PerpeTraitors Plain Lie

Rings of Saturn

Been studying...

I don't buy into every single new theory thrown out there...

That'd make me a theorist...not a researcher...

The evidence supports many things..and yes, could support a no-plane theory. But there's still too mnay unanswered questions...

...and as for this:

Not even close...

We have a FEW....and you can't prove they're fakes. It LOOKS like they are fakes...but the EXIF evidence is cicumstancial at best....not a smoking gun in my opinion. YES...I believe there were fakes...and prolly from the EXIF files....but we have to stay objective and keep researching and put the pieces of the puzzle together WITH ALL the pieces....not half assed and in a rush because we're emotionally attached.

Nope...not buy a no-plane theory yet....possibly but not sold 100%. Sorry to disappoint...