YaHooka Forums  

Go Back   YaHooka Forums > The Chronic Colloquials > Politics And Current Affairs
Home FAQ Social Groups Links Mark Forums Read

Politics And Current Affairs Discussion on politics, current affairs and law. Do something today to make a difference.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-25-2009, 11:25 PM   #1 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
New 9/11 Video: National Security Alert



This particular video deals with the Pentagon attack. This avenue of Pentagon research has never been posted or discussed here.

In the earlier days of the movement, many suspected that a missile or Global Hawk crashed into the Pentagon, and they cited photographic evidence which showed a negligibly small amount of debris which could be construed to be from a large aircraft.

However there was a serious problem: Not one eyewitness claimed to have seen such a thing, and indeed almost all eyewitnesses did see a plane approaching the building.

So two men, Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis, fed up with the speculation, decided to travel from LA all the way to Arlington VA, canvass the area and search for people who were in the area and witnessed the attack. They call themselves CIT, Citizen Investigation Team.

CIT interviews witnesses, on location, where the witness was at the time of the attack.

In short: All of the witnesses, unanimously and independently, reported the plane flying to the NORTH side of Columbia Pike and OVER the Navy Annex, and, most importantly, the NORTH side of the Citgo gas station.

This might sound like a minor detail BUT... Does anyone remember the downed light poles and taxi cab with the speared windshield supposedly from the falling light pole?



These light poles could have only been downed by the plane if the plane approached the Pentagon from the SOUTH side of Columbia Pike and SOUTH of the Citgo gas station.



CIT's first video was called PentaCon, released in early 2007. Believe it or not I did not start looking into CIT's work until a few months ago this year.

Prior to CIT, there was one person, Pentagon Police Officer William Lagasse, who was on record testifying to the North of Citgo approach, but since he was the only one, his testimony was dismissed by most researchers as probably being mistaken. However, CIT's first video has live, on location interviews, with not just Lagasse but THREE other people who were on the gas station property at the time of the attack, and all UNANIMOUSLY place the plane to the north of the station, far from the downed light poles.

Now, in this new video, their number of witnesses has shot up from 4 to 13 (yes, the animated gif shows 8).









Imagine a traffic court case where 13 witnesses said the accident happened north of the intersection and not one witness contradicted that. What would the judge/jury believe?

The rather disturbing conclusion is that the light poles and taxi cab scene had to have been staged. (CIT believes the light poles were prepared and put on the ground the night before, which would make sense.) The other conclusion is that the plane, rather than impacting the building, FLEW OVER the building and away from it. This conclusion is due to the fact that the entire damage path, from the first light pole, to the last, to the outer ring of the building, to the exit hole in the C ring, are consistent ONLY with the SOUTH approach:



This new video even presents an eyewitness, Pentagon police officer Roosevelt Roberts, who testifies to a "commercial aircraft" flying away "ten seconds tops" after the explosion. He first testified to this in a recorded interview for the Center for Military History in late 2001. He confirmed it with CIT in 2008. At the time of both interviews, he was not aware of the implications of his testimony, thinking that what he saw was a second plane. He has since been made aware of the implications and is no longer talking.

Enjoy the video!

Last edited by kameelyun; 09-26-2009 at 02:09 AM.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to kameelyun For This Useful Post:
fenderbender (03-02-2015), Mafoo (02-22-2010), The Rev (02-22-2010), Štulic (10-05-2009)
Old 09-25-2009, 11:30 PM   #2 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
Hard to believe it was 8 years ago. But the repercussions are with us every day.

Those people who opposed the Iraq war but still believe the official 9/11 story often take the following viewpoint:

"Iraq was a big mistake, a distraction (etc)... oh, but I believe we started out doing the right thing in Afghanistan, since it was there that the people who murdered three thousand Americans are hiding... but then we lost our compass..."

Barack Obama is such a person. Hence the troop surge in Afghanistan. The other day on TV he cited 9/11 as the reason we're there. Five troops were killed in Afghanistan today.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2009, 12:02 AM   #3 (permalink)
Are you in?
 
Ego Tripping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,887
Thanks: 259
Thanked 870 Times in 507 Posts
Oh, I posted a very in depth thread about the 'smoking gun' of the Pentagon Crash man years ago. I got a great picture to post in regards, I'll have to dig it up.

9/11 was just another JFK. Obvious inside governmental involvement. I don't believe it was entirely inside...I do believe there's influences from all sides and that is a perspective that most people don't explore. The answer is not A or B, its somewhere in between.

Obama is the same old, same old...yet somehow different enough. I read an article at the grocery store today about the Bush Memos and how that administration was lawfully set up to perform a Coup d'état, yet somehow they were voted out in time where it never happened and now its exposed. No FEMA camps, no martial law, nothing that actually solidified into anything more than just pure scare tactics. I can't help but feel the truth will reveal itself about 9/11 in the same fashion.

"I've got to admit it's getting better,
A little better all the time"
- Beatles
__________________

God appears, and God is light,
To those poor souls who dwell in night;
But does a human form display
To those who dwell in realms of day.

Ego Tripping is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ego Tripping For This Useful Post:
Mafoo (02-22-2010)
Old 09-26-2009, 12:07 AM   #4 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ego Tripping View Post
Oh, I posted a very in depth thread about the 'smoking gun' of the Pentagon Crash man years ago. I got a great picture to post in regards, I'll have to dig it up.

9/11 was just another JFK. Obvious inside governmental involvement. I don't believe it was entirely inside...I do believe there's influences from all sides and that is a perspective that most people don't explore. The answer is not A or B, its somewhere in between.

Obama is the same old, same old...yet somehow different enough. I read an article at the grocery store today about the Bush Memos and how that administration was lawfully set up to perform a Coup d'état, yet somehow they were voted out in time where it never happened and now its exposed. No FEMA camps, no martial law, nothing that actually solidified into anything more than just pure scare tactics. I can't help but feel the truth will reveal itself about 9/11 in the same fashion.

"I've got to admit it's getting better,
A little better all the time"
- Beatles
I do remember back in 04 or 05 when you started what ended up being like a 15 page thread on the pentagon. I seem to remember it revolved around scrutiny of those infamous 5 frames. I don't think there's ever been a thread in here covering the findings of Citizen Investigation Team though.

Ah well, I'm off to bed, it's 2 am here.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 12:27 PM   #5 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
Bump - this is a truly excellent compilation of evidence.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to kameelyun For This Useful Post:
Štulic (10-05-2009)
Old 10-05-2009, 03:23 PM   #6 (permalink)
Mafutero
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PR
Posts: 784
Thanks: 41
Thanked 172 Times in 133 Posts
Sad thing that people today don't seem to understand what evidence is. People today think evidence is something you can disregard if its not supporting your side of an argument.
__________________
"I've seen people so poor all they got is money."

We have to learn to unlearn
Its not contradiction, its amendment
Not everything we see is reality
Not everything we hear is the truth
Not everything we're taught helps us grow
~Cultura Profetica

"La locura se lleva en la cabeza y las drogas en los bolsillos"
~Roberto Iniesta
zerodown is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to zerodown For This Useful Post:
Mafoo (02-22-2010)
Old 02-22-2010, 12:47 PM   #7 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
Bump for visibility

If you haven't watched National Security Alert yet, you owe it to yourself.

Remember that even though eyewitnesses can be fallible, it is the process of independent corroboration which ascertains the credibility of each witness.

If the plane flew on the north side of the gas station, as the witnesses unanimously report, it did not down those light poles or cause the directional damage at the Pentagon from the E ring to the C ring.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2010, 01:13 PM   #8 (permalink)
nice daze
 
Mafoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the anguish of anticipated transformation
Posts: 8,587
Thanks: 3,504
Thanked 2,624 Times in 1,668 Posts
sorry, but im kinda confused... are they saying there were 2 planes or 1 plane and a missile or what?
__________________
PLUR
For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return

Mafoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2010, 01:26 PM   #9 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
No missile!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mafoo View Post
sorry, but im kinda confused... are they saying there were 2 planes or 1 plane and a missile or what?
The conclusion based on the witness testimony is that there was a decoy jet - a large 757 - which flew over the Pentagon and was timed with internal explosives in the building to fool everyone into believing the plane crashed.

"But that sounds crazy! Everyone would have seen the plane flying away and would have reported it!"

Don't forget that Reagan National Airport is a mere 1 mile away from the Pentagon and low flying planes near the Pentagon are an everyday occurrence. In fact one can see low flying planes close to the Pentagon every 2-3 minutes. Here are a few examples:









By contrast, a massive explosion and fireball at our military headquarters is literally a once in a lifetime event. The explosion, fireball and subsequent wall of smoke would grab everyone's attention, and within even just a couple seconds the flyaway jet would appear as just an ordinary low flying plane.

There were two military planes which appeared within minutes, (first a C-130, then an E4B) but there was no military plane on the scene at the time of the flyover of the decoy jet.

However, anyone who DID see a plane flying away after the explosion would most likely reconcile what they saw with the reports of a second plane.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to kameelyun For This Useful Post:
Mafoo (02-22-2010)
Old 02-22-2010, 04:28 PM   #10 (permalink)
YaHookan
 
flappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 925
Thanks: 45
Thanked 101 Times in 83 Posts
And now we've lost habeas corpus and gained warrantless arrests. I say they've done their job well. Problem is . . . they just started.

Imagine going to jail for NOT buying something (it's never been done before.) No, not driving licences,etc., you have a choice. I'm talking about the new Health Care Bill. Fines for now for not buying a policy; and we know what happens when you don't pay your fine.
__________________
<> <><><><><><><><> <><><><><><><><><> <>

Last edited by flappy; 02-22-2010 at 04:35 PM. Reason: s
flappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 10:28 AM   #11 (permalink)
YaHookan
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
"Don't forget that Reagan National Airport is a mere 1 mile away from the Pentagon and low flying planes near the Pentagon are an everyday occurrence. In fact one can see low flying planes close to the Pentagon every 2-3 minutes."

A flyover plane would have flown right across the threshold of the runways at Reagan airport. Do you think the airtraffic controllers in the control tower might be taking more than a casual interest in a plane that is flying right into their airspace ?- a plane that they were not in contact with and was not responding to their instructions. They would have a perfect view of it flying over the top of the building. Are they blind?
verbatim28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 11:07 AM   #12 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
What makes you think they DIDN'T see it? Have you talked to any of them? What's clear is that Pentagon police officer Roosevelt Roberts and others did see it and either wrote it off as "another plane" or are possibly too scared for their lives to talk. We know for a fact that Roosevelt Roberts is afraid to talk, now that he understands the implications of what he saw, and CIT have talked to at least one other witness who this is the case with as well. Before they understand the implications of their testimony, they aren't afraid to talk.

Bottom line: it is not logical to suggest that all the north side witnesses, Roosevelt Roberts, and the people reported by Erik Dihle were all hallucinating based on the fact that you have no idea what the Reagan ATC's witnessed.

True critical thinkers have a saying: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This is most definitely the case when it comes down to what you have chosen to accept on blind faith regarding the ATC's.

Last edited by kameelyun; 04-04-2010 at 11:12 AM.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 12:33 PM   #13 (permalink)
YaHookan
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The fact that the airtraffic controllers were following the plane as it circled and then saw it fly low towards the Pentagon and saw a large explosion and then immediately reported to the emergency services that an American Airlines Boeing 757 had hit the Pentagon. That, and also the fact that they are employed as airtraffic controllers demonstrates that they are not blind.
They would have to be blind to miss the same Boeing 757 flying over the Pentagon and not hitting it all and flying right across the approach path of their runway instead ,in which case they would not have reported that a 757 had crashed into the Pentagon.
How that plane gets to fly away from the Pentagon over the south parking lot at 100 ft ten seconds later going in a southwesterly direction without doing a sightseeing tour of Washington or flying right over the airport on the way , without anyone who saw the same plane crash into the building 10 seconds earlier even bothering to mention it ,is a bit difficult to work out.
verbatim28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 12:54 PM   #14 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
Well, the witnesses speak for themselves. 100% of the witnesses who saw the plane and have been interviewed on location place the plane north of the Citgo, north of Columbia Pike and directly over the Navy Annexe. Now yes it's true that witnesses can be fallible and subject to memory flaws, but it's not conceivable that all the witnesses are wrong in the same way. This is why, when it comes to the science of vetting eyewitnesses, corroboration is the scientific method in every law of the land. Imagine a criminal case involving a serious traffic accident and you're on the jury. 13 eyewitnesses independently corroborate that the accident happened on the north side of the intersection and not one places the accident on the south side. Where would you conclude the accident happened?

If you listen to the witnesses you will understand that the North of Citgo flight path has been corroborated over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

And if you accept the north path you have to accept the flyover because all of the physical damage is consistent ONLY with a straight line, South of Citgo (and south of Navy Annexe and Columbia Pike) flight path. There is zero physical damage consistent with an impact from the North of Citgo angle angle.

By the way, welcome to the yahooka forums but I have to confess I'm a tad weirded out by the fact that you seemed to join a cannabis site for your very first two posts to challenge Yours Truly on a 9/11 thread. I guess it's the good old fashioned conspiracy theorist in me.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 01:13 PM   #15 (permalink)
Victoria Aut Mors
 
Roach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,868
Thanks: 2,800
Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,780 Posts
there really is a Santa Clause too.

I've seen him.
Roach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 05:43 PM   #16 (permalink)
YaHookan
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks for the welcome- I didn't think it was a cannabis site, I've never smoked the stuff in my life!
Where you say
"Imagine a criminal case involving a serious traffic accident and you're on the jury. 13 eyewitnesses independently corroborate that the accident happened on the north side of the intersection and not one places the accident on the south side. Where would you conclude the accident happened?"
..if the vehicles involved and the damage they caused are found on the south side, I'd say the south side. I certainly wouldn't say there was no accident, especially since the witnesses say 'the accident happened on the north side'.
The idea that if the plane approached from the northside it had to fly over ... the plane flying from the northside has crossed the road and is halfway to the Pentagon ; the lightpoles are fifty yards or whatever distance away; they have already been 'staged' ,- the night before according to the CIT- and Lloyde England is already doing his gymnastic trick with the self-harming lightpole - what is stopping the plane hitting the building? Is there a forcefield protecting it? A plane flying at the 'northside' doesn't have to hit the lightpoles to hit the building. You can argue that a plane flying on the northside can't hit the lightpoles and then hit the building - you can make that arguement and you can still have a conspiracy - but that is not the same as saying that a plane flying on the northside can't hit the building. If the argument is that there is this directional damage to the Pentagon - that is outlined in a report by the ASCE which is a report into the damage done to the building by a plane crashing into it - when a plane didn't even crash into it. It's therefore a report that is wrong about the single most important aspect of what they are analysing. It is either totally incompetent or falsified. It's credibility is totally undermined -the CIT people even try to undermine it themselves by looking at a few photos and saying this damage indicates that a plane didn't hit the building etc. The two pillars that hold up the flyover conclusion are the witnesses and the report on the directional damage to the building. But the flyover conclusion undermines both of those - the same witnesses say the plane hit the building and the report is a report into a plane crash that didn't happen. It's a conclusion that undermines the evidence used arrive at that conclusion.
The idea that this flyover is a kind of magic trick/deception - flying the plane over the building is only the start - they have now pretended to crash a plane into the building , they have left the plane behind. People are now going to expect to find the plane in the building , wreakage of a particular plane and the bodies of particular passengers. The deception is only starting and by flying the plane over the building you now created the need for a hugely complex deception with cover-up and complicity required from all kinds of people, firefighters to rescue workers to engineers etc. with any number of opportunities for things to go wrong. I have heard someone from CIT being interviewed and his suggestion for why they would fake a plane crash instead of actually crash the plane was that the Top Brass didn't want to risk anything going wrong and their own lives being endangered. How about a meeting for the Top Brass somewhere away from the Pentagon on 911? - how about a golf tournament? Too difficult to arrange that? Eight years on and the CIT come up with a lame effort like that.
I've gone on a bit ....
verbatim28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 05:44 PM   #17 (permalink)
Cold School
 
cantSEEme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,615
Thanks: 280
Thanked 238 Times in 511 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by verbatim28 View Post
Thanks for the welcome- I didn't think it was a cannabis site, I've never smoked the stuff in my life!
wat
cantSEEme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2015, 10:10 PM   #18 (permalink)
Decade Yahookan
 
kameelyun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Seattle, where cannabis is legal
Posts: 2,170
Thanks: 443
Thanked 450 Times in 236 Posts
A dialogue I'm having with someone right now on Facebook inspires me to bump this one. Please, set aside 80 minutes and watch the information contained in the OP's video.
kameelyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 11:22 AM   #19 (permalink)
Derp?
 
fenderbender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: new jersey
Posts: 12,067
Thanks: 22,108
Thanked 6,844 Times in 3,928 Posts
and this could all easily be put to rest.... if some of the surveillance video shot from the pentagon or nearby businesses were released.

Still to this day we only have those couple of blurry frames from one single vantage point correct?

fucking absurd.

The fact that they wont let us see what happened is proof enough IMO.
Regardless of what may or may not have happened, it is clearly obvious that things did not happen the way they say and that they are still hiding what actually happened. You dont need anymore information than that honestly,
__________________
<3
fenderbender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2015, 12:12 PM   #20 (permalink)
bougeman
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,482
Thanks: 5,410
Thanked 6,542 Times in 3,685 Posts
Nothing would happen anyway. Look what has happened since and still no one goes to jail. James Clapper commits a felony and doesn't even lose his fucking job. They are immune from prosecution.
stoneric is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design