Independent Investigation Into Pentagon Attack Yields Alarming Information

[futuristicallyspkn]

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/...ack-show-monst


August 30th, 200


Witness flight path vs official flight path

Researchers present new eyewitness testimony which they say proves the government's story to be a "monstrous lie"

A three year independent investigation into the September 11, 2001 attack on the Pentagon has yielded new eyewitness evidence which, according to the Southern California-based researchers who conducted the investigation, "conclusively (and unfortunately) establishes as a historical fact that the violence which took place in Arlington that day was not the result of a surprise attack by suicide hijackers, but rather a military black operation involving a carefully planned and skillfully executed deception."

They have compiled the most pertinent testimony into an 81 minute video presentation entitled National Security Alert, which has earned the respect and praise of a growing number of distinguished academics, journalists, writers, entertainers, pilots, and military personnel.
The investigation involved multiple trips to the scene of the crime in Arlington, Virginia, close scrutiny of all official and unofficial data related to the event, and, most importantly, first-person interviews with dozens of eyewitnesses, many of which were conducted and filmed in the exact locations from which they witnessed the plane that allegedly struck the building that day. It was primarily conducted by two men named Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis, also known as Citizen Investigation Team, or CIT.
"There were a growing number of people in the United States and around the world who were suspicious of the government's story about what had happened at the Pentagon that day," Ranke explains. "The doubts were initially fueled by the dubious damage to the building, which seemed incompatible with a 757 crash, the deliberate lack of transparency by the authorities, and many other issues, but they really intensified after a team of professional pilots (Pilots for 9/11 Truth) analyzed the data obtained from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) via a Freedom of Information Act request in 2006, which was supposedly from the black box of American Airlines Flight 77, and found that the last reported altitude of the plane was far too high to have struck the light poles or the building. This meant that either the plane did not cause the observed physical damage, that the government had released fraudulent data, or both."
"We were tired of the cover-up, but we were also frustrated with the dead-end theorizing that was taking place", says Marquis of the project's genesis. "We knew that the only way we were ever going to know what had really happened was if we actually went to the area, knocked on doors, and interviewed everyday people about what they saw."

When these eyewitness accounts are aggregated, they paint a very disturbing picture, say the researchers.



"To put it as concisely as possible, the plane had to have flown on a very specific flight path in the final seconds before it reached the Pentagon in order to have caused the observed damage, starting with the light poles that were photographed on the ground and ending with the directional damage to the building itself which was outlined in detail by the American Society of Civil Engineers," explains Ranke. "The government claims the plane flew on this flight path and hit the building. The eyewitnesses in all of the most critical vantage points, on the other hand, independently, unanimously, and unequivocally report a drastically different flight path, proving that the plane absolutely could not have hit the light poles or the building. It is a non-controversial scientific fact that a strike from this trajectory would have caused a very different damage path."
It wasn't just witnesses who watched the plane approach the building that the team spoke with, however.


"We've also published our interview with a Pentagon police officer who saw the plane flying away from the Pentagon immediately after the explosion", says Marquis. "We already knew that the plane could not have hit based on the testimony of the witnesses on the other side of the building who watched it approach, but it was still vindicating to get this kind of confirmation."



A 2006 Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll found that "More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East." Nevertheless, Ranke and Marquis acknowledge it is still quite controversial to claim, as they do, that "criminal elements within the U.S. government" were complicit in the attacks.



"If you are skeptical of (or even incensed by) this statement we do not blame you," reads a note on the front page of their website, CitizenInvestigationTeam.com. "We are not asking you to take our word for it, nor do we want you to do that. We want you to view the evidence and see with your own eyes that this is the case. We want you to hear it directly from the eyewitnesses who were there, just as we did."
Many people seem to be taking them up on this offer. Their video has already received almost 70,000 views online since it was first posted to their website a few weeks ago with only a grass roots promotional effort behind it.



Perhaps more notable than the size of the audience, however, is the caliber of some of the people in it. A newly-published compendium of endorsements on the CitizenInvestigationTeam.com website includes praise from a wide array of distinguished and well-respected Americans.
Emmy-award winning actor and former president of The Screen actors Guild, Ed Asner, calls the film a "reasoned, and methodical look at witness testimony the day the Pentagon was attacked on Sept. 11th".
Prolific non-ficition author Dr. Peter Dale Scott, Professor Emeritus of the University of California, Berkeley affirms that the film "successfully rebuts the official account of Flight 77's flight path on 9/11 as it approached the Pentagon".



"If you accept the placement of the plane as independently and unanimously reported by the witnesses presented in CIT's video National Security Alert, science proves that it did not cause the physical damage at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001", says FAA certified pilot Robert Balsamo.
Dr. David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé and many other titles, says he is "pleased to be able to recommend this important film with enthusiasm", while scholar, author, and radio host Dr. Kevin Barrett says that the film proves "that the official version of the attack on the Pentagon is false, and that the attack must have been a deceptive military operation, not the kamakaze crash of a hijacked commercial jet."



Scott McKinsey, an award-winning network television director, says "The DVD offers no theorizing or speculation; only corroborated eyewitness evidence contradicting the official flight data to support an overwhelming argument that a plane did not slam into the Pentagon on 9/11".
Architect Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth.org), a coalition of over 700 professional architects and engineers calling for a new independent investigation of the destruction of the three skyscrapers in New York on 9/11 (the third was World Trade Center 7), calls the film "long overdue, but worth waiting for" and says that it "deserves serious attention".



Retired Navy Commander and aviator James R. Compton calls National Security Alert "the best reporting I've seen in a long, long time" and "a must see for every citizen in our country".



"Government and media figures who dare ignore evidence this conclusive do so at their own peril", warns Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford, a retired Marine pilot who has flown 303 combat missions.



The full quotes from these individuals and others can be read at here.
National Security Alert can be viewed for free online here.

[MoGrace2u]

It is hard to tell what they think actually happened - was a bomb dropped or an explosion triggered inside the building? The undamaged upright building supports directly in the supposed path of the plane as well as the lack of any plane debris other than the few pieces shown seems highly suspicious. So are we to think that the twin towers was staged too, or just the Pentagon??

[futuristicallyspkn]

the buildings were brought down in a controlled demolition.

we know that two planes struck two buildings, but three buildings fell that day. official story says, fire damaged and weakened the steel structures which caused the buildings to pancake collapse at free fall speed, from top to bottom.

ok... now... its time for you to do your homework....

al persohn is supposed to talk about this stuff soon... so get acquainted with 911 truth and its relevancy....

September 11th Revisited: Were explosives used?

9/11 Blueprint for Truth presented by Architect Richard Gage, AIA


Loose change final cut

ok so you think i'm biased... hopefully you watch everything... yes it takes some time... but this is serious business ....


BBC The conpsiracy files 911

911 and the BBC

TRUTH AND LIES OF 911 - FORMER LAPD NARCOTICS DETECTIVE MIKE RUPPERT EXPOSES CIA DRUG RUNNING AND EXPLAINS THE CRIMINAL STRUCTURE BEHIND 911

[Rukado]

I believe the US chose not to be proactive enough to stop 9/11. After the fact, the US lied about Iraq being involved and the US covered up Israel's calculated failure to share its information about the plot with the US. But, I believe two planes flown by Muslims caused the damage to the WTC, one plane to the Pentagon, and one plane to an open field.

Those theorists who think bombs or missiles were involved do a disservice. Their nonsense evidence undermines the credibility of the real evidence against the US government's betrayal of the people.

[futuristicallyspkn]

for those of you that actually do some research:

http://www.infowars.com/coast-to-coa...d-dave-thomas/


and:


LOOSE CHANGE VS POPULAR MECHANICS

[Rukado]

Originally Posted by futuristicallyspkn

for those of you that actually do some research:

http://www.infowars.com/coast-to-coa...d-dave-thomas/

It seems superfluous to blame thermite when there was an extended burn of jet fuel. Then there is an issue of how tons of thermite was secretly planted, and in just the right location relative to the plane crashes. Many people would have been involved in planting it, and then government investigators (NIST, etc.) would have to have covered it up after the explosion. You ask me to take the word of one or a couple of people who say they found iron in the WTC dust which somehow proves thermite was used. Sorry, that's too tentative and unnecessary for me to go along with.

You should be concerned with what the US and Israel knew but didn't act on, before 911. You should also be concerned with Bush's shameless exploitation of 911 to lie the US into war with Iraq.

[futuristicallyspkn]

Originally Posted by Rukado

It seems superfluous to blame thermite when there was an extended burn of jet fuel. Then there is an issue of how tons of thermite was secretly planted, and in just the right location relative to the plane crashes. Many people would have been involved in planting it, and then government investigators (NIST, etc.) would have to have covered it up after the explosion. You ask me to take the word of one or a couple of people who say they found iron in the WTC dust which somehow proves thermite was used. Sorry, that's too tentative and unnecessary for me to go along with.

You should be concerned with what the US and Israel knew but didn't act on, before 911. You should also be concerned with Bush's shameless exploitation of 911 to lie the US into war with Iraq.

FABLED ENEMIES

there's a video for you that includes the israeli involvement of 911....

as far as NIST goes:


http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/

http://www.takeourworldback.com/911/nist.htm

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com...-cover-up.html

http://911review.com/coverup/

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com...-cover-up.html

http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/...p?q=1260637221

as far as the jet fuel theory goes:

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/...tc/how-hot.htm


by the way, i'm very concerned! ask loomis... i've been trying to put this information out for the longest! so hard to get others to listen, research, wake up, get mad, and take action!!!

[Rukado]

I have no doubt Israel knew and at the very least the Bush administration didn't care to know. Their after-the-fact behavior proves this. Israel has not been pressured to tell us what they knew and when, in spite of their fingerprints on this. Bush dishonestly exploited 911 and ignored urgent warnings prior to 911.

But, I cannot buy into the thermite. No one has come forward to say "I helped plant thermite...", "Thermite disappeared from a wharehouse..." All I have are two claims, jet fuel wouldn't do it and iron dust was found.

Steel framing is less resistant to fire than wood framing. Wood is self-insulating. Steel sucks up the heat and weakens. To be fire resistant, steel supports need to be insulated. If the plane's impact damaged the insulation, there is no reason to doubt the jet fuel fire caused the collapse.

[futuristicallyspkn]

all i can do is put the information out...

the rest is up to you....

[Rukado]

There isn't a shred of evidence that I can appreciate that thermite brought down the WTC. There isn't one suspicious fact. It's not an established fact that "thermite iron" was found in the WTC. And "thermite iron" (iron mysteriously engineered to burn hotter than regular iron) means nothing to me, because I can't distinguish that from regular iron.

It's not suspicious to me that a jet crash could bring down the WTC. I appreciate that steel weakens significantly when it gets hot. I understand that steel can expand nearly 1% per 100 degrees, making it plausible things cracked and bolts snapped from the expansion from heat. I understand the possibility that corners were cut in building the WTC. I understand that the building might have been weakened by metal fatigue, from years of swaying in the wind.

When Bush lied about Saddam having WMDs, Bush didn't plant any WMDs. Getting caught planting would destroy plausible deniability, plus it would be very likely that he would get caught. It also wasn't necessary to plant WMDs because the media and the public was so trusting. It wasn't necessary for thermite to be planted. Big jets crashing into major targets would have been enough to create public hysteria, even if the WTC didn't fall. All Bush and Israel had to do was sit back and watch the terrorists plot, and then exploit the attack to get the public to support a war against Iraq.

It's beyond my capacity to accept a conspiracy of such a large magnitude being pulled off so well. Anyone who thinks thermite brought down the WTC believes in a massive and perfect conspiracy. Can you you tell me of one flaw in the thermite planting conspiracy? (Allegedly leaving iron dust is not a flaw in the conspiracy. It's just a consequence of not having a cloaked galactic class starship in space with a tractor beam that could slightly shake the WTC until it fell.)

When Bush said Saddam sought uranium in Niger, the US investigator in Niger said it wasn't true. Western Intelligence agencies said the incriminating documents were forged. And, even Bush's hedging of his words shows that he was lying. "Saddam sought...", not "Saddam obtained...", even though Bush clearly intended the audience to hear "obtained". See, just that one sentence alone carried three flaws, two undisputed and fatal, and one suspicious.