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

[aerohead]

Everyone within the truth movement needs to realize
that..........WE ARE THE NEW INVESTIGATION.......ALL OF US.

The government will not provide one for us, they will not help us,
they will prolong it, they will resist it, they will fight it at all costs.
We are our forefathers' sons, we are the resistance to tyranny that
made this country great in the first place. We are the spirit of Liberty
and Justice that flowed though Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Adams and
Washington. We are the founding fathers of our country's future history. Let it
not be said that we did nothing when tyranny once again raised its ugly head and
tried to enslave Free Men. Our founding fathers didnt mince words and their
stand against tyranny was clear. There is a reason why George Mason
("The Father of the Bill of Rights") implemented this seal and motto for
the great state of Virginia in 1776..........................
(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Seal_of_Virginia.svg/220px-Seal_of_Virginia.svg.png)

Sic Semper Tyrannis- Thus Ever to Tyrants -Death to Tyrants


They didnt play around. And this issue with 9/11 is very serious.
We need to get to the bottom of it and bring those responsible
to justice in a court of law as our Forefathers would have. We cannot be strong if
we are divided and fighting against each other all the time.
People were murdered, our money was stolen and the frauds are
still rampant today. We are becoming the sick, the tired and the
homeless as we speak. Our land is being conquered by banks and
politicians just as Jefferson warned it would if we let what is happening
happen. I support CIT, P4T and all my brothers everywhere who are true
to the original idea of America- Liberty and Justice for all.

The longer we fight each other, the longer we let them prolong it,
the more it fades into history as a chapter won by the tyrants.

The real question in my mind is.............is their a Judge out there strong enough,
brave enough, with enough resolve to be true to his country and swing this
hammer of justice and do what needs to be done ? Or is the age of Great Men
a thing of the past.

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.

[Marigold]

I read the entire response from CIT to Chandler and Cole and it is superb! I knew that Chandler and Cole were lazily relying upon Hoffman's long debunked disinformation for much of their attack piece but I did not know they were also citing Jeff Hill. I also did not know just how bad Hill aka "shure" really was until I listened to the drunken, harassing, and repeated phone calls he made to Jay Maisel at 1 AM in the morning, that CIT cited in their response. That was a revelation to me akin to Troy's disgusting harassing phone call to Bob Mcilvaine. My God, anyone who cites Jeff Hill as a source for anything other then "how to be an absolute a-hole" has got some very serious credibility issues in my book. Chandler and Cole have just lost whatever credibility they had with me, that is for certain and my estimation of Jeff Hill just went from “poorly informed group thinking dupe” to “poorly informed operative participating in a disinformation campaign”.

I cannot for the life of me come up with a reasonable explanation for Chandler and Cole to have written this "paper" that does not involve some sort of malevolent intent. Chandler and Cole certainly are not stupid people, nor are they unable to perform basic fact checking yet obviously they did not fact check their sources or demonstrate any real mastery of the subject matter. I just find it hard to believe that this is all just a keystone cop routine being played out before our eyes.

As always CIT’s work has been excellent. They absolutely crushed Chandler and Cole's sloppy opinion piece, and along with it the disinformation they relied upon to write it! I am confident that Chandler and Cole will, like the other CIT/P4T attackers, refuse to debate the subject in public like honorable men would do, and will instead launch more attacks from inside the protective cocoon of 911Blogger and Co, where all opposing voices have been silenced. I am also quite sure they will, in stunningly hypocritical fashion, assert that CIT’s well thought out and reasonable response to their blatant unprovoked attack piece was itself an unwarranted attack upon them. I therefore wish to preemptively set the record straight when they start in with the crocodile tears about how abusive or disruptive or abrasive CIT is. Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cole it was you who initiated this attack on CIT, not the other way around, so let’s be absolutely crystal clear about that. Now that your lousy opinion piece has been thoroughly eviscerated don’t come looking for sympathy as though you are somehow the victims in this case. You are the attackers not the defenders and the response you received was well deserved.

Separately and for my own sake I want to say something to Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cole about your call to “police” the 9/11 Truth Movement. First of all neither of you, nor anyone else I know of, are qualified to do that in the first place. Secondly you do not get to control the thoughts of others or control the direction of research the 9/11 truth movement takes and you especially do not have the right to censor anyone else. Thought Police are not needed or wanted here sirs because there is already a natural process in place to correct errors and misinformation within the truth movement, it is called discussion and debate. Your shoddy paper has just been subjected to that process and has come up seriously wanting.

Sincerely,

Adam Ruff

Adam,
Your response is brilliant! You are the Keith Olbermann of the 911truth movement, and I say that as a compliment. Well, you say it all!! Your words are like "special comments" that we all need to really pay attention.
I agree with you, once I heard Jeff Hill's drunken calls in the middle of the night to a witness, I was just embarrassed. Yes, for David Chandler and Jon Cole to quote him or his "work" at all is inexcusable! Had Craig or Aldo made such utterly embarrassing calls, they would be the first to apologize or step down!
Keep up your special comments, Adam, they are sorely needed.
Marigold

[SanderO]

Adam Ruff,

Exquisitely crafted comment. I second Marigold.

It must be pointed out who are the "thought police" of the truth movement and where to they fit in.

Jon Cole is a board member of AE911T
Justin Keogh is board member of AE911T and runs Blogger
David Chandler has AE911T's logo on his videos

I do not want to dismiss the fine work AE911T has done.

I want to point out that 3 people who behaved irresponsibly in the CIT hit piece are in key positions to control (and censor) the discussion. This is not a good thing. The inmates are running the asylum.

I was on the board and ousted by Keogh and Cole for much the same kind of "thinking" which has been used to attack CIT. Of course I was accused of trying to destroy AE911T and nothing could be further from the truth. Dwain Deets was a board member at the time and fought against their nonsense and finally quit when he could no longer tolerate it.... and decided to focus on aviation issues and the pentagon "attack".

Something is terribly wrong, both with Blogger and AE911T when then act in in such a manner. These are two of the most respected and "visited" websites in the truth movement and AE911T is believed to be the professionals who have put their licenses and careers on the line. If only those professionals knew what has been going on.

If both of these groups don't "clean up their act" and engage in research not censorship, they will lead the truth movement nowhere fast and all the credibility they have built will be out the window. Mark my words.

If these groups had a small following like Fetzer and Woods, they could be ignored as quacks. But they don't and they trade on their "credentials".

Maybe, just maybe, the CIT response to these posers will awaken the truth movement and the fakes will be sent packing... or returned to their seats and let the adults take over... Justin are you listening?

Thank you Adam Ruff!

[GroundPounder]

when the cheshire cat says, "we're all mad here.." is that what you are getting at sanderO?

[Aldo Marquis CIT]

Hey guys & gals

It's very plain & simple!

WHOEVER attacks CIT's findings/evidence, which are the ONLY ones that warrant at least a Grand Jury investigation and indictment, IS the enemy. Period!!!!

Forget the 'flyover' debate or what Robert Jr saw or didn't see! It's irrelevant...The INDISPUTABLE north side approach is more than enough to set the wheels in motion!

They have a guy who ADMITS, on video, that it was all PLANNED, for fuck's sake!!!!!

Awesome post. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

[jfetzer]

The Sandia test bears no comparison to either the Pentagon or the
Twin Towers. The plane was composed of synthetic material, not
aluminum. It blew into millions of tiny pieces. An aluminum plane
would have crumpled and torn apart, but nothing like the Sandia
case. A point that seems to have gone under-appreciated is that
the alleged planes in New York carved cookie-cutter-like images of
their shapes (which showed up only after the had passed into the
buildings). No outline of any plane is discernible at the Pentagon,
even though its limestone facade is far softer and more porous
that the massive steel-and-concrete design of the Twin Towers.

In relation to Shanksville, the ground was supposed to be rather
soft and giving. Two reporters stated that the strange thing about
the crash site was that there was no evidence that any plane had
crashed there. One theory even has it that the plane disappeared
into an abandoned mine shaft. We know what to do with miners
who are trapped in abandoned mine shafts: we bring out the bright
lights and the heavy equipment and dig, 24/7, in the hope that, by
some miracle, someone might have survived. That was not done
at Shanksville. Instead, reporters were kept 1,000 yards away and
the singed bushes and trees were trimmed to make sure they could
not be subjected to chemical analysis to determine what burned them.

I sympathize over your concerns about infighting. But the emergence
of research on 9/11 had to be expected, when the dimensions of the
scam that was being perpetrated on the American people was of such
extraordinary dimensions. We should have a no-holds barred, all out
study of different aspects of the case. Those who are imposing bans
on discussion of "sensitive subjects" like the video fakery/no planes
or what happened at the Pentagon are being unscientific and closed-
minded. They have promoted the view that the Pentagon is fraught
with hazard, when it is actually far more clear-cut than what happened
in New York. It really is the Achilles heel of the government's fantasy.

The constant appeals to the alleged "witnesses", moreover, are much
about very little. I had three two-hour shows on "The Real Deal" with
Mike Sparks in which we went through the witnesses at the Pentagon,
where the mast majority were either too vague to be useful or were
otherwise not credible. So I think we have another case of bluffing
about the evidence by parties who don't want the truth to be exposed.
Those interviews were on 4 January, 18 January, and 1 February 2010
and can be accessed at the archives, http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com.
Phony witnesses is simply one additional form of fakery and deception.

Nice work guys. Im still in the middle of reading it all,
but it looks really good so far.

The F-4 test has plagued me for years and i see it is a bone
of contention here for these guys. Could it be that this test was
done to see how much evidence could be destroyed at a 500 mph
smash into a building ?
I think yes, BUT the Pentagon was no 5' thick solid block of reinforced
concrete, it had windows that were not broken, and no impact damage
from the heavy, mega tough wing/tail spars and supports. And the field
in Shanksville certainly wasnt a "non-movable surface". Something should
have been left, some evidence of human remains and certainly something
that could positively identify that plane. EVERY part on an aircraft has a part number
on it, and all the essential parts have serial numbers that can link that part
to that aircraft, ie- landing gear, wheels, brakes, engines and their parts, seats,
O2 bottles, 02 masks, life-vests,computers, CRT's, radios, fire-extiguishers, fdr,
cvr, actuators, pumps, reservoirs etc.......

Anyway, its sad to see all this in-fighting and ego powered bashing within such
a noble movement. Those of us who know what 9/11 really was, are hurting and
damaged to our very core. Something we all love dearly and have believed in and
tried to serve all our lives, was ripped from us the very instant we came into the
carnal knowledge of 9/11.
But whats worse, it may have never existed. Atleast not in my lifetime.

If we dont have each other, we are truly lost. I dont think some realize the
weight and the grave repercussions this event can have. To be honest, i have contemplated
abandoning my search for truth, due to my love of this country and my desire
to preserve it. But i know that it wasnt America that did this, it wasnt my countrymen,
or my brothers in the military and police. Justice must be served in order to make
America great again.

[Aldo Marquis CIT]

@ Marigold-that's what I thought! Nice one too Adam Ruff!

[GroundPounder]

sure, yeah, let's compare a 29535 lb empty weight f-4 to a 179082 lb empty weight 767.

[aerohead]

The Sandia test bears no comparison to either the Pentagon or the
Twin Towers. The plane was composed of synthetic material, not
aluminum. It blew into millions of tiny pieces. An aluminum plane
would have crumpled and torn apart, but nothing like the Sandia
case.
Im not going to argue with you about it, but you would be the
first person ive ever heard make the claim that the Sandia test was
with a composite F-4, not that it matters. Ive worked on many
F-4's in the Airforce and it appears to be a real F-4, but i dont see any
landing gear and the engine exhaust doesnt look right, which leads me to
believe the engines may not have been installed. I agree with you
that it doesnt matter, as i said in my post, because it was apples and
oranges. Please READ my replies BEFORE correcting me about something
i agree with you on. Both crash sites (Pentagon and Shanksville) should have
yielded ample amounts of evidence of what it was.


In relation to Shanksville, the ground was supposed to be rather
soft and giving. Two reporters stated that the strange thing about
the crash site was that there was no evidence that any plane had
crashed there. One theory even has it that the plane disappeared
into an abandoned mine shaft. We know what to do with miners
who are trapped in abandoned mine shafts: we bring out the bright
lights and the heavy equipment and dig, 24/7, in the hope that, by
some miracle, someone might have survived. That was not done
at Shanksville. Instead, reporters were kept 1,000 yards away and
the singed bushes and trees were trimmed to make sure they could
not be subjected to chemical analysis to determine what burned them.

Yes, and if you would have read my reply, you would see that this
was my point also. And the fact that no human remains, engines or
major parts were found. And the fact that rummy slipped up and said
it was shot down.


I sympathize over your concerns about infighting. But the emergence
of research on 9/11 had to be expected, when the dimensions of the
scam that was being perpetrated on the American people was of such
extraordinary dimensions. We should have a no-holds barred, all out
study of different aspects of the case. Those who are imposing bans
on discussion of "sensitive subjects" like the video fakery/no planes
or what happened at the Pentagon are being unscientific and closed-
minded. They have promoted the view that the Pentagon is fraught
with hazard, when it is actually far more clear-cut than what happened
in New York. It really is the Achilles heel of the government's fantasy.

My response was aimed at the people trying to discredit CIT's work,
which to my mind, has been flawless so far. I agree with you here,
the disinformation needs to stop. But it wont, until everything is compiled
and looked at by a real judge that orders a real public investigation.
The facts will separate from the disinfo at that point.



The constant appeals to the alleged "witnesses", moreover, are much
about very little. I had three two-hour shows on "The Real Deal" with
Mike Sparks in which we went through the witnesses at the Pentagon,
where the mast majority were either too vague to be useful or were
otherwise not credible. So I think we have another case of bluffing
about the evidence by parties who don't want the truth to be exposed.
Those interviews were on 4 January, 18 January, and 1 February 2010
and can be accessed at the archives, http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com.
Phony witnesses is simply one additional form of fakery and deception.

I agree with you. People will be "gotten to", intimidated, and turned for
sure. Evidence will "disappear", be lost and fabricated. The JFK murder set a precedence
for that. My problem is when ego's take the stage before truth. If we are all really on the same side,
and someone has a problem with someones work, they should go to that person and try to
work it out like adults and gentlemen before publicly denouncing their work.
We have no time for infighting for ego. CIT is leading the way at the Pentagon.
And some may not like that due to it trumping their own work. Who cares.
Are you trying to promote your own work, or are you here to stand with your
brothers ? I have been wrong about things in the past, but i havent let my
damaged ego stop me from standing with my brothers. I had a theory of
possibly an F-4 being used at the Pentagon, it failed the fact test so i abandoned it.
Simple as that.

This post has been edited by aerohead: Feb 5 2011, 05:45 PM

[jfetzer]

Adam,

Just to pick up on your theme condemning censorship in the 9/11 research
community, it seems to be endemic and from multiple points of view. Thus,

A noted investigative journalist, Robert Parry, savaged the 9/11 movement
as a "parlor game", basing his attack on false claims by the government:

(1) "The 9/11 Truth Parlor Game"
http://consortiumnews.com/2011/011511.html

I replied by taking him to task for his lack of knowledge about those events,
making many refutations of points he made based on the official account:

(2) "9/11 Truth is No 'Parlor Game'"
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/01/91...arlor-game.html

Kevin Ryan then attacked me on the basis of his own impressions about my
views on how the towers were destroyed, video fakery, and the Pentagon;

(3) "Robert Parry is Right about 9/11 Truth"
http://visibility911.com/kevinryan/2011/01...s-right-about-9
11-truth/

I had to explain that there is no evidence a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon and that I
SUPPORT THE STUDY of but DO NOT ENDORSE DEWS, among his confusions:

(4) "The Misadventures of Kevin Ryan"
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/02/mi...kevin-ryan.html

The situation is ridiculous. Kevin Ryan made no effort to determine whether or
not I held the views he attributed to me, some of which were completely absurd.

I AM convinced that video fakery was used in New York on 9/11 and have now
created a thread about it at http://www.atsadgrab.com/forum/thread659196/pg1

Before anyone draws premature conclusions about video fakery, they should visit
the thread and consider the evidence, which is always an appropriate thing to do.

It took me around two years to open my mind to the possibility that something was
wrong with the broadcast footage. Considering the evidence is the right thing to do.

I have no problem with being held responsible for my positions. But it is completely
irresponsible to go off on a rampage attacking others for views that they do not hold.

Jim

. . . .

Separately and for my own sake I want to say something to Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cole about your call to “police” the 9/11 Truth Movement. First of all neither of you, nor anyone else I know of, are qualified to do that in the first place. Secondly you do not get to control the thoughts of others or control the direction of research the 9/11 truth movement takes and you especially do not have the right to censor anyone else. Thought Police are not needed or wanted here sirs because there is already a natural process in place to correct errors and misinformation within the truth movement, it is called discussion and debate. Your shoddy paper has just been subjected to that process and has come up seriously wanting.

Sincerely,

Adam Ruff

[jfetzer]

aerohead,

Just for the record in relation to your reply, I was not attempting to correct you, if you
formed that impression. Surely the Sandia plane was some kind of composite. How
else could it have shattered into millions of tiny pieces? If I am wrong about that, I
would like to know.

I thought we were on the same page almost across the board, but you were inviting
more discussion of the Sandia case, which I was advancing, along with comments
about Shanksville and comparisons between the Pentagon and the towers, which are
incongruent.

Here, again, I was simply adding some additional reflections to your remarks. I am
not a pilot and have benefitted from what Pilot is doing for 9/11 Truth. And I could
not agree more that, before launching personal attacks, one should know a target's
actual views.

Jim

[gerryhiles]

Will Chandler and Cole recognize the negative and questionable motives of the latest annually regurgitated disinfo muppet following in the footsteps of Russell Pickering, Arabesque, "Frustrating Squad" aka Adam Larson, Eric Larson, John Farmer, etc..?

http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/CI...Statement/#hill



Ron Weick made a "surprise" appearance at 911Oz recently with his "doots up", after having been in contact with Hill and leading to a thread over at the govt loyalist site entitled (until subsequently altered) "Recovering Truther Jeff Hill Repents For His Sins In The Name Of The Truth Movement"

Weick called Chandler a "coward" and a "liar" at 911Oz. Hill kept his peephole shut. As did his minions, tripping over eachother to lay roses before his feet (I'm not kidding, it was disgusting..).

Is this really the low level that the authors of that "opinion piece" want to stoop to?

SwingDangler, I think the main reason that there has been so much effort into dismissing CIT and P4T regarding the Pentagon is that it doesn't require reams of technobabble to prove an inside job if this evidence were accepted from the start for what it is. If the flyover were proven 100% to the mainstream public, there'd be civil war and gallows being built in the morning. Why else would certain individuals who know perfectly that they are promoting disinformation because it has been repeatedly debunked and pointed out to them actually risk being exposed and feel safe in their positions while doing it?

Who the hell IS this bloke? I've been away for a while and my internal 'jury' on the Pentagon is still out, so I've shut up about it. But what this Weick character is saying is off the planet.

[jfetzer]

Well, I have had more than my share of interaction with Ronald Weick. He hosts a cable TV show
called "Hardfire" that is taped in Brooklyn. I appeared on a three-part show about 9/11 with Mark
Roberts, where he was aggressive on Roberts' side but nothing like he has become. A thread on
which a couple of dozen of us have discussed issues related to 9/11 was infiltrated by him, and it
has been impossible to get rid of him. He's been prominent on James Randi site, but, in my opinion,
he has gone off the deep end and rational exchange with him have become a virtually impossibility.

Who the hell IS this bloke? I've been away for a while and my internal 'jury' on the Pentagon is still out, so I've shut up about it. But what this Weick character is saying is off the planet.

[jfetzer]

The thread, "Was Video Fakery Employed on 9/11?", can be
found at www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread659196/pg1

Adam,

Just to pick up on your theme condemning censorship in the 9/11 research
community, it seems to be endemic and from multiple points of view. Thus,

A noted investigative journalist, Robert Parry, savaged the 9/11 movement
as a "parlor game", basing his attack on false claims by the government:

(1) "The 9/11 Truth Parlor Game"
http://consortiumnews.com/2011/011511.html

I replied by taking him to task for his lack of knowledge about those events,
making many refutations of points he made based on the official account:

(2) "9/11 Truth is No 'Parlor Game'"
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/01/91...arlor-game.html

Kevin Ryan then attacked me on the basis of his own impressions about my
views on how the towers were destroyed, video fakery, and the Pentagon;

(3) "Robert Parry is Right about 9/11 Truth"
http://visibility911.com/kevinryan/2011/01...s-right-about-9
11-truth/

I had to explain that there is no evidence a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon and that I
SUPPORT THE STUDY of but DO NOT ENDORSE DEWS, among his confusions:

(4) "The Misadventures of Kevin Ryan"
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/02/mi...kevin-ryan.html

The situation is ridiculous. Kevin Ryan made no effort to determine whether or
not I held the views he attributed to me, some of which were completely absurd.

I AM convinced that video fakery was used in New York on 9/11 and have now
created a thread about it at http://www.atsadgrab.com/forum/thread659196/pg1

Before anyone draws premature conclusions about video fakery, they should visit
the thread and consider the evidence, which is always an appropriate thing to do.

It took me around two years to open my mind to the possibility that something was
wrong with the broadcast footage. Considering the evidence is the right thing to do.

I have no problem with being held responsible for my positions. But it is completely
irresponsible to go off on a rampage attacking others for views that they do not hold.

Jim

[Shallel]

aerohead,

Just for the record in relation to your reply, I was not attempting to correct you, if you
formed that impression. Surely the Sandia plane was some kind of composite. How
else could it have shattered into millions of tiny pieces? If I am wrong about that, I
would like to know.

I thought we were on the same page almost across the board, but you were inviting
more discussion of the Sandia case, which I was advancing, along with comments
about Shanksville and comparisons between the Pentagon and the towers, which are
incongruent.

Here, again, I was simply adding some additional reflections to your remarks. I am
not a pilot and have benefitted from what Pilot is doing for 9/11 Truth. And I could
not agree more that, before launching personal attacks, one should know a target's
actual views.

Jim

Hi Jim And all -

The Sandia F4 was filled with water and propelled through the collision at 500+ MPH by a rocket engine.
It didn't as much shatter as it did "splash" as most of the weight was water.
We all know that this is not a relevant analogy to a hollow 757 "flying" at sea level powered by turbofans.

It is too bad the the authors of this joint statement, who I had thought were some of the finest scientists,
with brilliant work to their credit, are letting "truth movement" political talking points interfere with their
adherence to scientific procedure.

I am glad to see such scholarly and polite discussion here, as well as excellent science.

Kudos to P4T and CIT, you are definitely on the right track here!

Blessings, Shallel

[Aldo Marquis CIT]

Of course, here comes Jim Fetzer pulling his Killtown tricks, trying to blend in and associate his no plane, Judy Wood, Space beam disinfo with us.

Jim Fetzer, this thread is about the Chandler/Cole article. Please take your disinfo to the alternative theories forum and DO NOT dare try and associate your disinfo with us.

Rob, can we move his posts to the trash can?

DISCLAIMER: CIT does not support or welcome the "work" of Jim Fetzer. A common tactic disinfo operatives pull is trying to associate with their target so it appears they are on the same side. Hence, Fetzer is trying to blend in his crap with us and bring down this very important response piece and thread. CIT does NOT support no plane/video fakery/holograms/space beams at the towers, Fetzer or Judy Wood.

[Shallel]

Of course, here comes Jim Fetzer pulling his Killtown tricks, trying to blend in and associate his no plane, Judy Wood, Space beam disinfo with us.

Jim Fetzer, this thread is about the Chandler/Cole article. Please take your disinfo to the alternative theories forum and DO NOT dare try and associate your disinfo with us.

Rob, can we move his posts to the trash can?

DISCLAIMER: CIT does not support or welcome the "work" of Jim Fetzer. A common tactic disinfo operatives pull is trying to associate with their target so it appears they are on the same side. Hence, Fetzer is trying to blend in his crap with us and bring down this very important response piece and thread. CIT does NOT support no plane/video fakery/holograms/space beams at the towers, Fetzer or Judy Wood.

So much for "scholarly and polite discussion here, as well as excellent science." (!)

Pathetic ad hominem!

Bye.

[Aldo Marquis CIT]

So much for "scholarly and polite discussion here, as well as excellent science." (!)

Pathetic ad hominem!

Bye.

You mean like when I met Jim Fetzer at an LA 9/11 Truth Conference and I politely tried to inform him about the "mistake" (one of many) he made regarding the blue emergency responder tents at the Pentagon he was going around claiming was a "blue tarped box carrying out a plane part" and he turned to me in front of all his followers and literally got in my face and forcefully told me I didn't know what I was talking about like a complete maniac? That kind of ""scholarly and polite discussion"?

[wilddaddy]

Mr. Ranke and Marquis,

I just finished reading your reply to the Chandler/Cole statement. I wanted to take more time to think about it before replying but I know how that invariably ends....in no comment at all.

Something led me to the pilots from the beginning. I read one or two of the 911 books fairly recently. Mr. Griffin, Gage, etc., are true patriots to me and I am sure, if we survive this, will be seen in history as such.

The pilots to me had "IT." They (Mr. Balsamo) were able to explain the situation clearly, concisely, honestly, scientifically, and with a sense of "urgent humility," which ultimately led me to conclude, beyond any imaginable reasonable doubt, that 911 was a false flag operation. You too have done that. Perhaps even more so.

I think you should thank Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cole. Your response complemented your previous research and even added to that which really required no addendum. Your response was powerful and brilliant, IMHO.

Please do not even grace that Hill guy with one more electron from your brain, let alone with your valuable time. He is an opportunistic loser. Please never again grace him with your focus.

I have never heard of Chandler and Cole. Perhaps therein lies the crux of the problem (their problem that is). I am taking it on YOUR word that they are important. But, as a self appointed true representative of the mainstream sheeple, they are nothing. I will forget about them after I finishing writing this.

I have sent Rob's stuff and Your stuff to everyone I know. Whether you like it or not you guys are it. I think I am just intelligent enough to KNOW that.

Thank you for what you have done and continue to do. As a husband, father, a professional myself, and as an American, there isn't a day that goes by that I don't hope beyond hope that some "revelation" will be splashed across the headlines about the false flag that is 911.

I suspect that that isn't going to happen though. Chandler/Cole were correct when they stated that those that committed this crime are playing for keeps. The stakes couldn't be greater. I hope I will be up to the task and be able to emulate both you and Rob.

Thanks

Tim

[Aldo Marquis CIT]

Wow, Tim. That was a very moving letter of approval. Thank you. You definitely put fuel in my fire.

Bless.