Cit Publishes Response To David Chandler & Jonathan Cole's Joint Statement About The 9/11 Pentagon Attack Options

[Craig Ranke CIT]

We've been put in the difficult position of having to defend ourselves against people whose work regarding the destruction of the World Trade Center we respect and appreciate. Although we had never spoken to David Chandler or Jonathan Cole prior to the publication of their "joint statement" on the Pentagon attack, we had always considered them natural allies, had never badmouthed them or had any inclination to do so, and had even praised their work.

Unfortunately they did not have the courtesy or sense to get in touch with us to see if we had any responses to their apparent serious issues with our work before publicly denouncing it. The result, as we have now documented in great detail, was a simplistic, horribly sloppy, and defamatory essay which reveals that, at best, they had barely spent any time at all on our website, let alone bothered to view our extensive catalog of video presentations to familiarize themselves with the full scope -- or even many of the basics -- of the evidence we present, or us personally, before rushing to judgment and aggressively attacking us.

Due to the frequent and extreme falsity of their claims, a very lengthy response was necessitated. Sometimes a single sentence would have multiple false and/or misleading claims requiring several paragraphs to untangle. We'd have preferred a shorter rebuttal, but there was no other way to do it if we were to remain accurate and thorough, as we strive to do in everything we publish.

While it was frankly quite obnoxious to have to spend so much time refuting a such a simplistic and shoddy essay that these two men clearly did not put much time into at all, the silver lining is that it gave us an opportunity to address their essay in the context of the dishonest and dishonorable campaign being waged against CIT by a relatively small clique which has gained control over 911Blogger.com, where we are not only "censored", but more importantly, attacked on a virtually daily basis with misinformation and disinformation and denied a "right of reply". For some reason David Chandler apparently has no problem with this situation considering that he published the "joint statement" by him and Jonathan Cole there and then further badmouthed us and our work in the comments section.

Given these circumstances, and the wide-ranging nature of our response to David Chandler and Jonathan Cole, we ask you to please set aside AT LEAST an hour or two to read our response in full so that you can hear our perspective. Unlike Chandler and Cole's essay, our response is heavily sourced, so if you can set aside extra time to REALLY dig into its contents and follow the links and sources, even if you do so over the course of several days, this will give you a MUCH more detailed look at the intricacies of what is going on here, and we feel that the reality of the situation will become that much more clear to you. This is an especially important thing for you to do if you are a regular reader of 911Blogger, since this means that you have likely spent hours over the past months or even years reading the frequent bogus attacks against us which we are forbidden from responding to.

I'd like to thank our webmaster for his critical help with writing this response and putting it together. Please pass it along to anyone you can and encourage them to read it. Thank you for paying attention to both sides of this manufactured controversy by reading our entire response:

http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/CI...agon-Statement/

Sincerely,
Craig Ranke
Citizen Investigation Team


P.S. There will also be a podcast forthcoming to address some of the additional points discussed by David Chandler in his recent interview with John Bursill on this topic.

Index and "jump to" links for our response:

• Pentagon Questions (What Hit?)
  
• The Honey Pot Theory
  
• Citizen Investigation Team
  
• Recommended Reading/Victoria Ashley
  
• Arabesque
  
• Jim Hoffman
  
• Library of Congress
  
• Jeff Hill
  
• Legge/Stutt FDR Paper
  
• Sandia F-4 Crash Test Analogy
  
• Conclusion/Debate Challenge

Originally published here.

[SanderO]

Tim....

David Chandler is a retired physics teacher and a Quaker. He began to study the motion of the collapses with a soiftware program that allows him to tag a pixel and trace its movement and the software computes its speed and acceleration.

He was the person credited with showing that one pixel on the roof on WTC7 traveled at free fall acceleration fro 2.25 seconds or a 105 feet drop of the entire 571 feet height of the tower.

He managed to get into an early NIST press conference and confront NIST in a Q&A and it turned out that NIST tried to ignore this simply starting the clock earlier, lengthening the duration, slowing the speed and acceleration. It was dishonest and unscientific and led them to admit the free fall period.

They have yet to explain it. This happens to be the one irrefutable smoking gun evidence of engineered destruction much like a controlled demolition.

Chandler and Cole and others have gone on to produce YouTubes which demonstrate what they believe is evidence of controlled demolition in the twin towers. Unfortunately not all of this work is showing this and it has been demonstrated that their work has errors. This doesn't dismiss all of their work, but enough to invalidate some of their conclusions. Not so fast guys...

The twin's collapse was quite a bit different from 7 and the truth movement is looking for the smoking gun in the evidence for the twins and Chandler has attempted similar analysis but it is not conclusive and it appears he is trying to fit the observations to his CD thesis... so he sees what he wants to see. This is a common problem in the truth movement As troubling as the molten metal and the iron micro spheres in the dust and the reg gray chips is and they DO need to be explained... this is not proof of CD.

The problem with the twins is that the collapse WAS a natural gravitational collapse. It was not caused by the plane strike and it was not caused by the fires... WE CAN'T SEE WHAT CAUSED IT BECAUSE IT HAPPENED INSIDE... HIDDEN BY THE FACADE. And it likely was explosives or cutting charges but the evidence of this is not there yet.... not in the videos. What we DO see is a gravitational collapse even though many have said it was too fast. This is pure hooey.

What Chandler and Cole and others are seeing is not what actually happened and they and others are telling us that the collapse... was not definitely not gravity driven... but some unexplained sequence of hi tech explosive and they have not even described how it may have been accomplished. It's a slight of hand science driven by the sloppy logic.. and poor observations.. if *they* did it at 7... 1&2 had to be CDs top to bottom.

They weren't CDs top to bottom and this may be a subtle distinction, but it IS an important one because the complexity and size of the attack helps us figure out who could of done it and how they did it... and that can lead to the planners.

And then there's the issue of "intellectual honesty" and science. We need to honor both of these if we intend to be taken seriously. And both Chandler and Cole don't seem to care at this point. This is hard to explain.

Since you asked... I thought I would share my thoughts about these two well regarded people by most in the truth movement. DRG cites Chandler's research all the time. So you can see why this could be a problem.