IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
The Sliming Of Pilots For 9/11 Truth And Citizen Investigation Team, Michael Wolsey and Jim Hoffman call our research DISINFORMATION

Omega892R09
post Aug 24 2009, 12:43 PM
Post #41





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



QUOTE (aerohead @ Aug 19 2009, 02:03 PM) *
Some people dont understand that if you
cant fly this....................

You sure as hell cant fly THIS.................
and with fighter pilot accuracy ?
laughing1.gif

Heck I have never flown heavy metal for real (unless you count 5-10 minutes hands on in a Hunter T8) but I know how easy it is to break even a military jet by pulling the wrong maneuver, having had to fix Hunters, Sea Vixens and F4ks afterwards, some pilots were damned lucky to get away with it.

Then I have trouble with a Sea Vixen on MS flight simm let alone a 757 which breaks if you sneeze while diving. Both MS flight simm and google are a bit coy on detail around the Pentagon (the Pentagon isn't even drawn on GoogleMap) any chance of flying the exact course from the P4T material on a flight simm is out, unless somebody know a source of acurate terrain mapping for that can be loaded in.

Its been interesting flying a virtual Sea Vixen around The States though using IFR, getting a handle on the geography more as much as anything else. Following Goosenecks at 50 feet and 400 knots is fun though.

Pity I am not fit enough to do it for real anymore.

It is interesting to note that the Hoff has stayed away from this thread. Is it really him in that interview?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
woody
post Aug 24 2009, 03:18 PM
Post #42


Woody Box


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20



Well my take is that these gentlemen were shocked that CIT/P4T now enjoy the endorsement of 9/11 heavyweight Richard Gage (his is the most important one because he hasn't done it before).

You have to understand the gentlemen (and the lady). Losing more and more ground, they HAD TO react and kick off a campaign.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aerohead
post Aug 24 2009, 06:27 PM
Post #43





Group: Core Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 13-July 09
From: State of Heightened Awareness
Member No.: 4,476



Omega,

Its ridiculous ! Isnt it ?

And even if we disregard the engines being buried,
what about pulling out of the dive ?

The only thing that could have saved that
imaginary plane from not making a smoking hole in
the lawn from the dive.........was if the engines suddenly
turned into the space shuttle booster rockets........ laughing1.gif



bs_flag.gif



Aerodynamics, Gravity and Momentum are funny like that.

This post has been edited by aerohead: Aug 24 2009, 06:27 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Killtown
post Aug 24 2009, 06:31 PM
Post #44





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 170
Joined: 10-May 08
Member No.: 3,317



Just for the record, I think it is Jim Hoffman who is pushing disinformation and it is my opinion he is a paid shill.

I mean he still thinks Flight 93 was shoot down, even though no witnesses on the ground reported seeing a large aircraft in the air being hit or breaking up or smoking, then believes it crashed in the Shanksville field and left wing and tail marks in the ground, but didn't burn any of the grass around the crater and no debris was seen leading up to the crater (which would have happened if a plane was shot down before the crater).

Truthers who go around calling theories "hoaxes," or seem to spend most of their time trying to debunk other truther's theories should be suspect IMO.

This post has been edited by Killtown: Aug 24 2009, 06:32 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JimMac
post Aug 24 2009, 09:06 PM
Post #45





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 600
Joined: 13-May 09
From: West coaster now in Ontario
Member No.: 4,315



QUOTE (Killtown @ Aug 24 2009, 06:31 PM) *
Just for the record, I think it is Jim Hoffman who is pushing disinformation and it is my opinion he is a paid shill.

I mean he still thinks Flight 93 was shoot down, even though no witnesses on the ground reported seeing a large aircraft in the air being hit or breaking up or smoking, then believes it crashed in the Shanksville field and left wing and tail marks in the ground, but didn't burn any of the grass around the crater and no debris was seen leading up to the crater (which would have happened if a plane was shot down before the crater).

Truthers who go around calling theories "hoaxes," or seem to spend most of their time trying to debunk other truther's theories should be suspect IMO.


Hi killtown, just chiming in here because it was Hoffman's stuff that i found early in my search for awarness (i woke up 6 months ago). I thought he was one of the good guys then. Now I have my ears and eyes open, more or less for the reasons you just stated.

For the record, as you say, I came to this forum, because of all the places I looked at, I trusted this place, Rob and his posse, so to speak. So far nothing has happened to alter that trust. I feel very safe here, with a bunch of really genuine and good people, where I feel I am not watching my back. If Hoffman is attacking this crowd, he'd better think twice about it.

My 2 cents
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aldo Marquis CIT
post Aug 26 2009, 02:53 PM
Post #46


Citizen Investigator


Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,179
Joined: 16-August 06
Member No.: 10



Why were my posts deleted? Those were pretty important points that potentially protect PFT and CIT.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 26 2009, 03:31 PM
Post #47



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Aldo Marquis CIT @ Aug 26 2009, 02:53 PM) *
Why were my posts deleted? Those were pretty important points that potentially protect PFT and CIT.



http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=17876

Note to mods/admins, please leave a link and message in the original thread when you split out posts. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nagelfar
post Sep 3 2009, 06:42 PM
Post #48





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 32
Joined: 3-May 08
Member No.: 3,272



The CIT video was very good, very convincing.

After listening to the radio show where Wolsey interviews Hoffman. I can only conclude that Hoffman acts very suspicious. He sounds almost desperate. Don't know about Wolsey, probably just very gullible and not too bright.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 9 2009, 02:22 PM
Post #49



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



To review:

QUOTE (Arabesque @ Mon, 09/01/2008 - 2:47am)
Choose the wrong battles and you lose the war.

Divide and conquer strategy depends on retaliation. Throwing out the "bait" (i.e. name calling, straw-man arguments, accusations) is an occupation for provocateurs. The people who attack are only encouraged to attack more when you respond to them. This is basically their entire purpose.

Understanding how the 9/11 truth movement can be disrupted is important. It's not just theories, but also attacks and accusations. The whole purpose of these attacks is to waste energy and divert attention away from the goals of the 9/11 truth movement.

CODE
http://911blogger.com/node/17427


CODE
http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5405


CODE
http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5287


So does the blogging- errr- "actions" of several speak louder than/counter to the above words as of late? ohmy.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 17 2009, 06:26 AM
Post #50



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Here is an updated timeline on the activities of "Club Hoff:"

http://www.pict.com/view/1630464/0/hoffmanitetimelinesep16



"Sad"ly- it looks like because of recent errr... "activity," I might need to delete the earlier (~5 years) portion of this timeline, and I will likely start again at the 01 Sep 2006 Pilots' release of the NTSB data (so you may want to refer back to this version/post for the early timeline). Will update as "necessary..." rolleyes.gif
----------
"Every picture tells a story don't it?"- Rod Stewart
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 22 2009, 12:52 AM
Post #51



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (aerohead @ Aug 21 2009, 01:49 AM) *
This is too funny laughing1.gif

It seems to me to be a case of.................

"ive gotten myself in too deep and cant back out now
or ill suffer enormous public humiliation"

I seriously think it is above their heads. They obviously dont
understand aviation, physics of flight or put much weight on
eyewitness testimony. Even Pentagon Police officer testimony.

They dont understand that a 757, with its low hung engines, would have
been burying the engines up to the spinners in the lawn, causing the plane
to crash right there.............. if the awesome official video was real.

They also must not be familiar with the 1962 Operation Northwoods document
that called for using CIA operatives with alias' as passengers until the plane could
be swapped out for a drone and then destroyed over Cuba. Funny how the flights
on 9/11 were only 20% full, but normally ran over 80% .......... It would follow
logically that if they could do this in 1962........they could sure as hell do it in 2001.
So with plans like this in the past and the obvious cover up and confiscation of all video at the
Pentagon.......... i dont wanna hear anymore bullshit about disrespecting family
members of the deceased by questioning the impact of the plane.

But what is really sad here is that they don't realize that they are trying to discredit
one of the Truth movements greatest allies. We understand aviation, flight, G-forces,
black box info, autopilot operation and what disconnects it, radio altitude and an aircrafts
ability in general.

I watched all the videos that Rob sent me today with my co-worker, who has over 25yrs
experience wrenching on heavies (757,767,747,MD-11,A300 etc..) and he totally
agreed.......... the plane never hit the Pentagon.

Its ok Hoffman, Wolsey and the gang........ you CAN be big people and admit
you were wrong, we will forgive you and move on to unite the Truth movement
and bring Truth, Liberty and Justice to America.

I think you nailed the situation quite accurately here Aero. I have found that it is usually much easier to step in dog sh*t than it is to get that stench off of one's shoes. Now of course, "Club Hoff" has firmly dug in its heels with fervent gusto (dog sh*t and all), rather then getting a scrubbing brush (or a new pair of shoes) and working to remedy the situation. This seems to be a recurring theme with that small crowd- I think CIT is still waiting for "Arabesque's" "eyewitness" corrections now 2+ years later after pointing out the multiple errors. I am reminded of that old saying cautioning about pointing a finger at someone because it also points 3 more backward at yourself.

EDIT: Legge discussion was split to its own thread here:

Legge Paper, Ver 4+ and Counting, Split from Sliming
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=18055
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Sep 22 2009, 02:16 AM
Post #52


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,033
Joined: 16-October 06
From: dc
Member No.: 96



on a related note... my 2 cents...


revealing timeline...




interesting juxtaposition:

source: http://unauthorized link.com/n6da29


in 2000, they were 4th (<---link) overall in taking money from uncle sam, so they have bee seriously slackin' in recent times. looks like gov. funding reached an all-time low last year and maybe some of the cal-berkley "scholars" (like the hoff/ash tagteam) realized they need to be more vigilant in defending the hand that feeds if they want to get back to the glory days when money was just pouring in...


for the record:
http://www.msri.org/about/sgp/jim/index.html
http://www.msri.org/people/staff/jim/
http://www.msri.org/sponaff/Support_Federal

QUOTE
National Science Foundation MSRI was founded by the National Science Foundation in a national competition held in 1979. The NSF continues to provide generous support, and remains the primary source of MSRI's operating funds.

The material on this website is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DMS98-10361. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

The NSA has provided support for various workshops at MSRI, as well as support for participants in our programs, and computational facilities.


whistle.gif


eta:
DMS98-10361
http://unauthorized link.com/mravgl

eta2:
that is not to say that their funding was their only motivation. fortunately (or unfortunately?) for the dynamic duo, the shrinking budget at cal coincided with the release of cit's northside evidence, so one way or another they had to do something... they couldnt sit idle and lose the favor of both the government and the truth movement, now could they?

This post has been edited by paranoia: Sep 22 2009, 02:24 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
panthercat
post Sep 22 2009, 03:10 AM
Post #53





Group: Core Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 14-April 07
From: Pahoa, HI
Member No.: 952



http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pen.../erreurs_en.htm

How can you debate official imagery that does not show a large twin engine jet transport on the lawn of the Pentagon? The names on the photos are Department of Defense, US Army, Space Imaging and US Marine Corps. If they were lying, wouldn’t they have somehow inserted a 757 into their images? Until someone ordered the lawn covered with sand, it was immaculate.

Regarding the videos showing the aircraft attacking the twin towers, since their origin is unknown, I will always hold them in question. Even if aircraft struck the towers, they could not have pulverized thousands of tons of concrete, nor melted steel columns, all the way to the ground with insufficient and non contiguous fuels. Even with sufficient and contiguous fuels, it would have taken a horrendous down slope wind for fire to reach the ground and something else to make the fire burn considerably hotter. We’re not just talking melting temperatures, some sections of the steel columns disintegrated. Ordinary fire won’t do that. There were a number of things ordinary fire won’t do that it was credited with doing that day.

What fuels were available in the twin towers after the kerosene from the jetliners was expended, as that dramatic flash was most likely the majority of it? There was furniture, paper, carpeting and humans. Unless someone had an office with real wood furniture, most of it was probably cubicles: fabric covered sheet rock with metal cabinets and laminated particle board. Even if the building were filled with wall to wall call centers, there shouldn’t have been sufficient fuel to support combustion and the fabric, carpeting should have melted and the humans would be ash in no time flat. There was paper, but probably not a significant source of fuel, and it burns nowhere near the melting point of steel, as would anything one would expect to find in an office building. Even the paint should have been water based, therefore not flammable.

There were no reported down slope winds that day, as if there were, fire would have been exiting the building to greet the fire fighters. It takes a lot of energy to make fire burn downward, however it will run up slope eleven to sixteen times faster than the average person can run. The fire would automatically burn upward, so there shouldn’t have been much fire damage four to five floors below the impact point.

I’m taking it for granted these buildings were at least built to minimum code requirements, so whatever it was that brought them all the way to the ground wasn’t ordinary, everyday, garden variety fire, as these were office buildings and not a blast furnace. Whatever it was released an incredible amount of energy and had to have been placed there intentionally for this purpose, which means someone had to know in advance what to expect. Pulverizing thousand of tons of concrete takes an enormous amount of energy and since fire is an agent of mechanical weathering, that wouldn’t be the source.

I’m not going to mention a foreign intelligence agency by name, but it was interesting that a group of them were caught laughing and dancing on the opposite side of the Hudson River as the towers collapsed. First of all, they are not legally supposed to operate in this country, although they do, and since they are such a small organization having them here at that time had to be more than coincidence. We’ll never know, because they don’t share information. If you read Victor Ostrovsky, you’ll know they wanted us to get Saddam out of the picture. Hmmmmmm!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Sep 22 2009, 01:08 PM
Post #54



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (paranoia @ Sep 22 2009, 12:16 AM) *

Some more interesting MSRI sponsors, p:

S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation

The William Randolph Hearst Foundations

[globalist?] The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
http://brie.berkeley.edu/conf/participants.htm

http://www.msri.org/sponaff/Support_Foundation
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Sep 22 2009, 07:25 PM
Post #55



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



I found the Hoffman interview hard to stomach.
During my (never ending) searches through links and searching for info on Pentagon witnesses and general info
on most aspects of mainly 404ed pages, Arabesque´s blog on the total bs 104 impact witnesses arose.
I´ve seen pure disinfo on his and Victronix´s blog. Now this.

Can someone please explain to me how any of the findings made by CIT and Pilots has adversely affected ANY aspect of ANY other (real) truthers theories/suspicions?
I mean, what exactly have these organisations done to impede any progress towards nailing the perps´ asses to a mast?
The two sites have offered concrete facts and evidence towards dismantling the official lie in regards to the OPERATION itself.
We can go down the road of pointing the finger at who was involved and why but as always that has proven to be a very deep rabbit hole.
These sites have offered evidence that can be PROVEN and which could very possibly lead to a constructive, fruitful path to finally bring all of this to a head or at least open the eyes of those people who are still living in blissful ignorance as to what actually happened on September 11th.

Hoffman et al seem to be happy living in the intrigue and mystery of it all. It is a haven for writing books and making a personal career. Maybe they like the never ending circle?

The lowest of the low was using the assertion that these sites are insulting the victims of the Pentagon attack. F*cking low man.

These people should be debated in public. But I doubt they would show seeing as they haven´t had the balls to write a single counterargument here and are instead more likely to be reading the thread anonymously.

Keep the good work up CIT and Pilots. Fuck you Hoffman if you are reading this.
(Sorry Painter I kept it as civil as I could)

The guy, like most other detractors of this evidence aren´t even arsed to study it.

Rant over.
Cheers lads.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aerohead
post Sep 22 2009, 09:31 PM
Post #56





Group: Core Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 13-July 09
From: State of Heightened Awareness
Member No.: 4,476



QUOTE (panthercat @ Sep 22 2009, 02:10 AM) *
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pen.../erreurs_en.htm

<snip>
What fuels were available in the twin towers after the kerosene from the jetliners was expended, as that dramatic flash was most likely the majority of it? There was furniture, paper, carpeting and humans. Unless someone had an office with real wood furniture, most of it was probably cubicles: fabric covered sheet rock with metal cabinets and laminated particle board. Even if the building were filled with wall to wall call centers, there shouldn’t have been sufficient fuel to support combustion and the fabric, carpeting should have melted and the humans would be ash in no time flat. There was paper, but probably not a significant source of fuel, and it burns nowhere near the melting point of steel, as would anything one would expect to find in an office building. Even the paint should have been water based, therefore not flammable.
<snip>



The "fuel" has been found



Clicky--------> Nano Thermite

Nano Thermite cont.



-Aero
Reason for edit: shortened quote
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post Sep 23 2009, 09:53 AM
Post #57





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



QUOTE (dMole @ Sep 20 2009, 03:08 PM) *
Some more interesting MSRI sponsors, p:
The William Randolph Hearst Foundations

PS. Don't build any tree houses detailed in any of their organs. whistle.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ligon
post Sep 25 2009, 01:24 AM
Post #58





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 2-March 09
Member No.: 4,182



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Sep 22 2009, 07:25 PM) *
These people should be debated in public. But I doubt they would show seeing as they haven´t had the balls to write a single counterargument here and are instead more likely to be reading the thread anonymously.


Jim Hoffman has had an open invitation/challenge to publicly debate CIT since he first called them a "hoax" in 2007:

I personally e-mailed him a year ago imploring him to either back that up or debate CIT publicly and he never responded.

Michael Wolsey has also been challenged but also prefers to attack from the shadows.
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=662
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Sep 25 2009, 10:41 AM
Post #59



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE
[15:30] WOLSEY: If they can get you asking the wrong questions they don't have to worry about the answers.' And this is, in my opinion, one of the things that happens with the disinformation.


Just how many THOUSANDS of pages of theories and accusations have been doing the rounds for the past 9 years?
I am sure we have ALL been down the tunnel. We have all seen the dots connected, the ´coincidences´, heard damning evidence from whistleblowers, etc.
Where has this gotten us?
It has left the doorway open for disinformation, detractors/shills being able to put a spin on every debate, muddying the waters and generally tearing apart organised constructive examination of how best to bring the perps out of the shadows.
People are tired and disillusioned with how we have been splintered into ineffective splinter-groups going in opposite directions.
The ONLY two sites that have offered an alternative, bullshit free, fact-based, evidence PROVEN direction has been this one and CIT.
Any argument with shills I have had recently, I simply quote the facts proven at these sites and they have no answer. None.
I have noticed on the YouTube channel showing ´National Security Alert´ a wide spectrum of users who have been totally blown away by the evidence because it is solid, backed up by purely factual scientific research by the guys at Pilots.
Shills don´t even bother their ass there any more because their prize asset of bullshitting, play on words and quoting ad infinitum (now totally disproven) official stories has been removed by the quality, no-nonsense approach by Pilots and CIT as regards avoiding speculation and instead shoving the facts in their faces.

QUOTE
[60:19] WOLSEY: Yeah, it’s just, it’s unbelievable. And I mean, I’m not going to sit here and defend the official story, but at the same time, we have to... we have to follow the evidence where it leads.



Yep, follow the breadcrumb trail laid down by the government. Ignore proven facts.
Let´s give up and go down the cul-de-sac they have been shepherding us into for years. Twit.
Way to go, Wolsey.

Well done Ligon on showing them up for the cowards that they are.
smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
izzysykopth
post Jan 14 2015, 04:42 PM
Post #60





Group: Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: 20-June 10
Member No.: 5,105



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Aug 7 2009, 06:51 PM) *
yawn...

Yet another attack campaign. Its not the first, certainly wont be the last.

The only people attempting "divide" are those who coordinate such frivolous attacks.

They only end up discrediting themselves.

Meanwhile, we bring our concerns to court.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon_lawsuit.html

Heres a good speech done by Dave vonKliest a few years ago.. it still holds true today...

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=4427


It is my belief that those that attack Pilots for Truth are desperate to protect the media for their involvement. They simply could not (nor would they have a reason to) produce the horribly flawed videos as the attacks were taking place. This proves the media is not only involved in the cover up but also planning and implementation. Big difference between malice aforethought and accessory after the fact.

"When you see or hear an accusatory finger, it’s time to look at the finger instead of the direction it’s pointing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 14th October 2019 - 07:30 AM