A Ranke Perspective

So it appears I jumped the gun a little in my previous post when I said CIT haven't really put forward evidence supporting the alleged staging of Lloyd England's accident scene. I just came across a post on the PentaCon site posted back in August of 2007. It's probably been debunked already but I'll give my own unique take on it. Using a number of photographs taken by Jason Ingersoll, CIT claim to have proven that the scene was staged somewhere between 09:40 and 10:00 AM. Below are eight pictures from the post.



Full Sized Images:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]

They argue that since the light pole cannot be seen in pictures 1 and 2 but can be seen in pictures 3 onwards, it must have been planted on the road somewhere in between 09:49 and 09:52.

Now I don't really know what they are hypothesizing here. Maybe they think some truck carrying a forty foot light pole, was able to get through all the traffic, plant it and vanish without a trace within three or four minutes without anyone noticing. Or maybe they think the SUV and the white car had something to do with it. It doesn't matter anyway. Just because you can't clearly see the light pole in pictures [1] or [2], doesn't mean it isn't there. Those two pictures were clearly taken from a different perspective (from the Navy Annex Car park, as you can see from this image) and there are obstructions in the way. The difference in perspective is obvious when one looks at the cab. In pictures 1 and 2, the front side of the cab is visible to the left of the bush, but in pictures 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, it is completely concealed by the bush. From the perspective of pictures 1 and 2, the lightpole would be hidden by the metal box. In picture [6], the light pole is once again almost complete hidden by the railing due to the perspective.

Furthermore, the pole is visible in the first two images. It's just not very clear. When compared to a clearer image taken from a similar perspective, after the the collapse of the outer wall, by Sgt. Gary Coppage, you can see that the whitish grey blurs in Ingersoll's images correspond perfectly with what are clearly parts of the pole in Coppage's image.



So what sinister plot do Ingersoll's photos document? By the looks of it, just a few people taking control and directing the traffic!



Since Lloyd's cab is visible in the photo taken at 09:48, this proves that if the scene was staged it would have had to have been set up either before the attack, or in the 10 minutes prior to the attack. Either way it's pretty implausible if you ask me.

Related Info:

A Really Rank Response

CIT Stuff Is Disinfo - Wake Up!

I recently watched CIT's new movie on YouTube. It's basically just a two hour long compilation of the full length interviews on their website, which I had seen before, with some Pilots for 9/11 Truth stuff thrown in. People on the PrisonPlanet forum have been saying its one of the best 9/11 movies ever, as it conclusively proves the official story of what happened at the Pentagon is a fraud.

Now I'm not denying the interview with Lloyd at the end is weird. I saw the full length version of their interview with him on Google a few months ago and something certainly is up there but this whole north side approach stuff has been debunked over and over by Jim Hoffman, Arabesque911Truth and even Dylan Avery. And 9/11 Blogger doesn't want anything to do with CIT's stuff.

First off, let's look at Pilots for 9/11 Truth. A number of its members promote World Trade Center no-plane theories - arguing that the speeds at which the planes were travelling were aerodynamically impossible at the altitudes they were flying at. Rob Balsamo, the head of the group, has defended these people's opinions, saying they are qualified to have them. This was all debunked recently using a simulator. This fact alone is enough to raise serious questions about the credibility of Pilots for 9/11 Truth.

People have questioned what happened at the Pentagon since day one, primarily due to the lack of video evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon. A number of theories have been put forward ranging from missile theories, to 737 theories, to Tomahawk theories. All of these theories ignore the testimony of numerous eye witnesses who specifically say they saw an American Airlines Boeing 757.

So then a new theory was put forward by researcher Richard Eastman to account for this. This theory, known as the "flyover theory" or the "two-plane theory", argues that a Boeing 757, probably Flight 77, flew towards the Pentagon, but then pulled up and flew over at the exact same time as something else crashed into it.

The Citizen Investigation Team have given this theory new life by "proving" that the plane approached from the NORTH side of the CITGO gas station, as opposed to the official SOUTH side approach using the testimony of 13 eyewitnesses from strategic vantage points. Since whatever hit the Pentagon had to have come in from the south side in order to make the C-Ring hole. Then the plane had to have flown over, if it came in from the north. They assert that the witnesses stories have not changed since they were interviewed by officials a few months after the event and therefore their recollections cannot be due to faded memory. Of these 13 witnesses, all give a different flight path, some estimate drastically lower speeds and none actually saw the plane hit the building.

The problem with basing an investigation solely on eyewitness testimony is that the stories given by eyewitnesses on the day were so different. Some people saw a helicopter! That doesn't mean a helicopter hit! The team makes the opinions of these 13 people out to be the majority and claim that there is no evidence of eyewitness testimony confirming a flight path south of the CITGO gas station. This simply isn't true. They obviously ignore the work of Eric Bart who has compiled an extensive collection of eyewitness accounts - which can be viewed here and here. Here's some quotes CIT don't want you to see:

Eyewitnesses who confirm the official south side approach


"As we were driving into town on 395, there was an exit. We were trying to get off of the exit for the Memorial Bridge. On the left-hand side, there was a commercial plane coming in, and was coming in too fast and the[n?] too low, and the next thing we saw was [it?] go-down below the side of the road… coming down towards the side of the—of 395. And when it came down, it just missed 395 and went down below us”
- "Barbara"

"I had just passed the closest place the Pentagon is to the exit on 395… we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway. And it veered to the right into the Pentagon."
- Gary Bauer

“The jet came in from the south.”
- Mickey Bell

“I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down 395, right over Colombia Pike."
- Tim Timmerman

“The plane took a flight path straight up 395.”
- Michael Tinyk

“I saw a jumbo tail go by me along Route 395. It was like the rear end of the fuselage was riding on 395. I just saw the tail go whoosh right past me.”
- Dave Winslow

“I watched it come in very low over the trees and it just dipped down and came down right over 395 right into the Pentagon.”
- Don Wright

Eyewitnesses who SAW the plane hit the Pentagon

It "flew above a nearby hotel and drop its landing gear. The plane's right wheel struck a light pole, causing it to fly at a 45-degree angle"
"The right engine hit high, the left engine hit low. For a brief moment, you could see the body of the plane sticking out from the side of the building. Then a ball of fire came from behind it."
- Noel Sepulveda

"At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building."
- Penny Elgas

"Jet Fuel"

"The first thing you smell is the burning. And then you can smell the aviation fuel. And then you can smell this sickly, rotten-meat smell"
- Mark Kirk

"Once they stabilized Brian, they transferred him to George Washington Hospital where...the best, cutting edge burn doctor in the U.S. The doctor told him that had he not gone to Georgetown first, he probably would not have survived because of the jet fuel in his lungs(!)"

Even the CITGO video debunks the northern approach theories. The plane's shadow was caught briefly on a camera looking out the south side of the building. But that video was probably edited wasn't it?! They had already crashed two Boeing aircraft but they wouldn't crash a third into a section of the Pentagon reinforced to survive a jet impact now would they?! No, instead they flew the plane over the Pentagon, and at the same time launched a perfectly timed missile strike at it and used explosives to blow light poles out of the ground while agents planted pieces of plane debris on the lawn! Then they went through all the extra trouble of disposing of the passengers, repainting/disposing of the plane, faking photos of plane debris inside the impact hole and photographs of burnt passengers from Flight 77 and bribing all the witnesses who saw the plane hit the building, the forensic officials who positively identified all the passengers and all the firefighters who go into graphic detail in a book about how they picked up bits of burnt children! Honestly, and people wonder why we're called crazy!

I'll end on a quote from Prison Planet forum moderator jimd3100 posted on May 07, 2009, 11:47:04 PM

"In case you haven't figured this out. Recently Alex Jones was accused of being a racist due to comments made on the unmoderated infowars boards. Recently Alex Jones was associated with a nut that killed cops because he made comments on a AJ message board. (nevermind the fact that the comments were against AJ) Recently youtube eliminated an infowars account because they showed AJ defending himself(he showed the newspaper trying to smear him) meanwhile youtube has no problem hosting a video by "truthers" claiming the old cab driver nearly killed on 9/11 by a lightpole KNOCKED OVER BY A PASSENGER JET as it slammed into the pentagon, is actually an undercover mass murdering operative. Can you see what's coming down the pipe? I'll spell it out for you.....

Before the USS Cole was hit they tried hitting another ship....before the WTC were blown to kingdom come they bombed it. Guess what's coming down the pipe?

I'm one of the least "conspiracy" minded people on here IMO, and even I can see this one. Q: DO you believe that if the "powers that be" have a golden opportunity to not only give a devastating blow to Alex Jones, but the entire truth movement and Daniel Sanjata and Dylan Avery all at the same time that they wouldn't do it? Ans: It doesn't matter. We'd be idiots to sit here and let ourselves be put in that situation.
Here's a headline from the future that you are not going to see as long as I am moderating here......

Dateline Sept 22 2009
Arlington Loyd England the cab driver nearly killed on 9/11 was murdered today by a "9/11 conspiracy theorist". Mr Noplane Idiot was arrested at the scene reading a copy of Catcher in the Rye. Police Spokesman Capt NWO PIG said Mr Idiot made statements suggesting the act was carried out as a form of vigilante justice. "He believes based on movies and messages he saw on "conspiracy" message boards that Mr England helped carry out the attacks."
Internet searches showed that Mr Noplane Idiot was a frequent visitor to prisonplanet forum. The forum is hosted by the notorious Alex Jones who has made several films claiming the attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. Government. He was also producer of Loose Change Final cut. Search results also revealed Mr Idiot was also frequent visitor to the loose change forums, hosted by Dylan Avery maker of the "conspiracy series". His newest film Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup narrated by Rescue Me star Daniel Sanjata was released today. Mr Jones claims he has no control over who comes to the boards and what is posted. However investigations reveal the boards are moderated.

Think that's pretty unlikely? Yea, it is.

It's just as unlikely as Barry Jennings being dead 2 days before the WTC 7 report comes out.

Think that's just dumb? What's even dumber is sitting here allowing ourselves to be put in that position.

"I trust them, I don't think the folks that would blow Kennedy's brains out and murder 3000 Americans would take advantage of us like that." <----that's dumb.
Know what's even dumber? These DisInfo preposterous 9/11 truth killing movies, these idiots want you to promote.

I've never accused anyone of being an "operative", other than Gen Stubblebine. But if I was to make the accusation, it would be against these CIT retards. Why? For several reasons. They constantly use the exact same phrase James Woosley the former CIA head and NWO Bitch used to describe why no WMD were found in Iraq. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Meaning just because we didn't find WMD in Iraq doesn't mean there wasn't a sh*tload of it. And just because no one saw a passenger jet fly over the pentagon doesn't mean it didn't happen. How much BS are you willing to take?

Also, Russel Pickering, John Farmer, Mike Walter, Keith Wheelhouse, Father McGraw, Joel Sucherman, and Lloyd England are all according to the makers of these idiot films, undercover operatives. And those are just then ones I've seen myself them make publicly. Well I'll throw that accusation right back at them. They are either insane, or they themselves are the operatives. Wether they are or not is irrelevant. The results are the same. And they can be used in the same way. They are not helping the truth movement. They are destroying it. Driving people in the movement out with their insanity. I've seen it. You think they are helping? Yea, it's real helpful for independent honest researchers to get people to talk to us after these retards visit them and then accuse them of being mass murdering operatives if they don't tell them what they want to hear. That's real f**king helpful. Honest? They are self promoting BS artists. "It was planned"....OMG! DID you hear that? There it is smoking gun proof! And you fall for this BS? Everyone in the world knows 9/11 was planned but when the old cab driver says it, it means he helped plan it? They are either dishonest insane a**holes or operatives. It doesn't matter. It's the same results. I've seen their movies. All of them. They are a disgusting joke. What's pitiful is seeing you fall for this crap. And people fall for it because they are allergic to a passenger jet hitting the pentagon. How incredibly stupid. This disinfo BS has gotten so bad that we now have a remote controlled passenger jet at the pentagon, but it doesn't fly into it....no, you wouldn't want that...so it flys over it. That's f**kin stupid. They have no choice. Everyone that was there saw a large passenger jet fly into the pentagon. I've been telling you that from day one. They went there and filmed them. They have no choice but then make up this stupid idea of a flyover. Everyone was fooled. No one saw it fly away. But everyone drew the wrong flightpath! No they didn't. That's why England, Walter, Sucherman, Wheelhouse, McGraw and about 100 other people are all "operatives". Because they don't place the plane slightly off the path. And those that drew the wrong flight path? They all swear they watched the passenger jet slam into the pentagon. Your own 10 year old knows that every witness swearing in court that they watched with their own eyes a passenger jet hit the pentagon, is NOT proof a passenger jet didn't hit the pentagon. How much BS are you willing to take?

You should be helping us stamp out this disinfo not spread it. I thought you people wanted to expose the truth of 9/11? This Disinfo crap is getting out of hand. We're nipping this in the bud. We have no choice. It's gotten to the ridiculous point where we are willing to admit a jet was at the pentagon but it didn't go in, and the witnesses who were there are lying operatives. It keeps getting worse......and I'm not going to sit here and let it come on down the pipe. There are reasons for this disinfo.

There are reasons for the various disinfo BS that some of you seem to love to hear, and fall for.

Operatives or not the results are the same. How about giving a sane 9/11 truther a 7 page front page article? Here are your heros promoting 9/11 truth...

http://www.ocweekly.com/2008-08-14/features/pentaconned/"

For a critical review of all the Pentagon theories see http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/index.html. Flight 77 hit the Pentagon folks, they're just withholding the proof to distract the conspiracy theorists from the hard scientific evidence at the World Trade Center and focus on speculative no-plane theories. It's a psy-op. Probably the only good Pentagon theory I've seen is the plane-bomb theory.

Related Info:

A Clarification on Disinfo

The CIT Virus

DO NOT FEED THE DEBUNKERS!

I've been looking at the comments on some of the videos about the red chips and I've found that a lot of truthers are having the same old pointless arguments about freefall speed, modest fires, bombs in the buildings, etc. What is this 2006? You're commenting on a video that PROVES there was high-tech explosive nano-thermite in those buildings and you still consider those things important?

We have proof people. We don't need to keep rehashing speculative topics anymore. It just feeds the debunkers and distract people from the stronger evidence.

Even now I still read YouTube comments saying the Twin Towers came down in only 10 seconds. They didn't. It was more like 15 - which is possible. When you say 15 floors crushed 95 in only 15 seconds it does sound a bit far-fetched but in truth it wouldn't have been 15 floors crushing 95. It would have been 15 floors crushing the 16th, then 16 floors crushing the 17th, then 17 floors crushing the 18 etc. - in a kind of domino effect. As the collapse progresses, the mass and velocity of the so-called "piledriver" would have increased and the kinetic energy would have increased exponentially. And half way down when 55 floors of the building are crashing down at 50mph, the lower floors wouldn't slow it down much. Meaning that as long as the piledriver breaks through the first floor, a global collapse in under 15 seconds is inevitable.

There are alternative explanations for almost everything, take William Rodriguez's story for example. The release of the 9/11 Commission documents vindicated him from claims of debunkers that his story has changed over the years, but there is a simpler explanation for his story. The speed of sound in air is about 340 meters per second. The height of the 95th floor of the north tower was about 360 meters. That means that it would have taken a whole second for people on the ground to hear the enormous explosion of the fireball. But since vibrations travel much faster in solids, the impact of the plane would have been felt instantly. Down in the low levels of the building, the plane crash would have probably seemed like two different events because of the time delays. And when you consider the fact that elevators, debris and even bodies were falling, it's not surprising that people would hear multiple sounds.

Then there's all the witness testimony of explosions and bombs which seems convincing on the surface but in actual fact most of them were being interviewed after the south tower's collapse and before the North Tower's collapse. Debunkers will argue that at the time they simply thought the collapse of the South Tower was just one huge explosion. Now of course there are some more interesting quotes such as “I, uh, got a witness who said there was an explosion on floors 7-8, 7-8" and “It sounded like gunfire - bang, bang, bang, bang - and then three big explosions” along with talk of a strange van with a bomb and the testimonies of McPadden, Shroeder, Bartmer and Jennings, but let's be honest, it was a chaotic and traumatic day and none of this is really relevant to the demolitions anyway.

James Meigs has said many times that "conspiracy theorists love a vacuum". In truth, it's the debunkers that love a vacuum because we speculate too much. In the BBC hitpiece Richard Gage speculates that WTC7 was rigged for demolition when it was built and they immediately cut to Mark Loizeux patronizing him. This is what happens when we speculate.

Certain things about that day such as the Pentagon attack and the Flight 93 crash were deliberately left vague to promote speculation about missiles and things. Have you ever wondered why they even bothered attacking the Pentagon and crashing Flight 93? I mean, what happened in New York would have been enough to justify war on its own, right? So why bother going through the trouble of crashing two more planes? I believe they did it to promote speculation. These are the same people that killed John F Kennedy and Princess Diana and carried out the 1993 bombing, OKC and loads of other false flags. Because of the "conspiracy theories" surrounding those events they must have known some people would see through the illusion. So they attacked the Pentagon and withheld the evidence to promote "no-plane" theories. The Pentagon and Flight 93 attacks are psy-ops. And I'm starting to think this whole CIT/Pentacon/northern approach stuff is more disinfo. The mainstream media are more than willing to focus on those events, but they ignore the hard science.

We humans seem to have this mental illness where we love speculation and hearsay but ignore the proof. Alex Jones was talking about this a little while ago when Glenn Beck was "debunking" FEMA camps and when a video went viral on YouTube about DHS supposedly transporting bird flu. People seem to love watching videos of someone running up to a stationary train panting heavily or some woman saying "We have some actual proof that a trucker may actually be transporting bird flu" but when it comes to the real proof (often their own documents) no one seems to be interested. Back in February, truthers went crazy over the Beijing fire which "proves" WTC7 was demolished. Paul Watson of PrisonPlanet dedicated 4 front page articles to it. But now that we actually do have proof, the silence is deafening.

So please people, don't feed the debunkers! We have proof! This is all we should be talking about now. Post links to these videos and the paper everywhere, burn them to disc, get this bombshell proof out. If debunkers attack the journal or the peer-review process, tell them to write their own paper. If they say it's just paint and show you a paint spectrum that looks similar to the red chip spectrums, tell them four words: "nanosized particles, extremely explosive!"

Don't get distracted and start talking about things like bombs, squibs, freefall, "pull it" or whatever coz it's completely unnecessary now and you'll just be setting yourself up. Stick to what we can prove.

Addendum: Apparently some have misinterpreted this as me saying "ignore all the other evidence". That's not what I'm saying. The other evidence is still important and should certainly be brought up when we get a real investigation. But when debating debunkers or trying to convince people that the towers were demolished, this is really all we should be talking about.