mod edit: To all reading.. dont forget to click the share, like, and tweet buttons....


Here is the press release:

And of course, ALL detractors are invited so we can address their many "concerns"... Publicly... In front of cameras.

Wonderful, i wish i could make it across country to be there.
Looking forward to any videos of the event.

ditto !!

Still i am concerned now as to what is going to happen after ten years, are we just going to simply pack up our bags and go home?
I am concerned that people will stop caring, and stop paying attention to us which i think they will, i think interest is going to slowly
start slipping away, and that maybe members of the truth movement will give up and stop trying and that the movement will come
to a crashing end, by the way time is running out to prosecute anyone who was involved in carrying out this malicious crime.

Still i have not heard the duh bunkers attack this testimony not once not even once.

WTC victim, Jim Gartenberg, core blown out, WABC,09:32, 9/11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eSVsid7eKE

Wtc victim Jim Gartenberg describes the core of the North Tower i think it is blown out eight floors below
the point where the plane impacted, maybe the dont discuss this because the can debunk it, maybe it is
to inconvenient for them, and they cant just simply explain it away, i cant see how the plane could have
caused this damage and from what i have read neither can anyone on this forum.

Sometimes i think about it with great concern and think what could have happened if the cores where still intact
which they where not, i think maybe the buildings could still have stood maybe they wouldnt have fallen if the cores
where not blown out, the problem is most people make the assumption that the towers fell with the cores intact
and that they just simple buckled and twisted and came apart well atleast we know that this was not the case with
north tower.

I think his testimony implies that the tower where demolished weakened by attacking the cores, as we know or as i know
all you have to do is knock out enough of the core columns and you will end up with exactly what we saw or on 9/11 a top
down implosion, once you knock out those cores it is going to overload everything else in the building including the perimeter
columns and probably even the rest of the core columns i think depending on how many you damage.

Good stuff Craig.

To all reading.. dont forget to click the share and tweet buttons....

All the 'public' "servants" at truthfaction doesn't seem to happy about this .....

and which of course is a very good "sign" that the event will become a success.

Wish you all the best!

Cheers

lol... that place is a joke. Havent been there in a long while, but last time i was there, all they do is bash other people. I'm sure it hasnt changed much....

Reminds me of this quote...

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people."

Someone should go over there and thank them for the added publicity...

I'll be sending out a promotion starting on Monday as well.

Spread it everywhere and be sure to let people know that the above Toronto Conference organized by CIT is the only conference to hear actual evidence that can and will be admitted into a real court of law, unlike the "Toronto Hearings" charging 200 per head and have banned witness statements at the Pentagon from being heard.

At the Canadian "National Post", referring to the other conference, Frank Legge (posting under "Gravity32")
said this:



Nah Frank, you've singlehandedly made any reference to "peer review" from any truthseeking quarters a laughing stock. An inside "up their sleeve" joke for government loyalists and shills.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21025

National Security Alert - 9/11 Pentagon attack

Well done.

Right and then when they "prove" the three towers were brought down with explosives then NIST and other scientists/engineers will protect the fantasy with counter theories for the public to cling to. And if they do gain traction then they wil be stuck figuring out who planted the bombs while MSM and other start to suggest that al quaeda planted the bombs even going so far as to use Willie Rodriguez memory of one of the hijackers being at the towers right before 9/11.

Meanwhile lloyde England is walking around a free man with an obvious and traceable link to the perps who put him on the highway, namely the dress shirt and tie guys standing with him on the highway in photographs.

Sorry for going on about these people instead of concentrating on the positives of CIT's conference but how many times have you heard their trolls rhyming off the "strongest evidence" mantra?

Here's a sample from almost every member of Frank's bumchums over at TrueFaction on controlled demolition (I've the links if anybody wants to see for themselves):




















Yada, yada, yada..

Yay, 9/11 truth?

Well that's the big psychological operation that they have going on over there and elsewhere. They are slowly trying wear down activists and chip away at their confidence in the towers. Essentially it seems they want to get people to believe the LIHOP/incompetence crap as the strongest evidence.

My only point is it is obvious the towers were demolished and there is an abundance of evidence but they have layers of theory and scientific debate from govt scientists and engineers to contend with. And as long as the MSM can latch onto it they will and will ignore the evidence. Then they have an out being able to blame it on al quaeda. The north side flight path not only proves an inside job but actually bolsters the fact that the towers were not only demolished but brought down by US OPERATIVES.

Congrats to all involved putting this together!

It is kind of discouraging, reading this thread. P4T does a good job putting out its evidence, and I have a great deal of respect for and gratitude to you for opening up that whole world. AE911 does a good job putting out their evidence. And yet you both can't seem to get away from each other's throats, each insisting that the other is playing (consciously or unconsciously) into the hands of the MSM and other unspoken enemies. I'm an AE911 supporter who was dismayed to see their "technical" (and personal) attack on you and your data (and told them so), and was glad to see the part of your response to them that was detailed and substantive, and not vituperative. It helps those of us who are presenting to the general public to have that discussion available.

But I'm equally unhappy to see you attacking the CD evidence as somehow worthless, not even trying to give it a "technical" response as to what you see as flawed. AE911 gave you a (sadly vituperative) technical response, which allowed you to respond to them. Why not do the same to their CD evidence, so as to allow them to respond as you responded to their attack. All I see here (and maybe I'm mistaken) is general condemnation of the CD approach as being useless in approaching the general public. You're actually wrong there -- I find it extremely successful in presenting to just such a public.

The prevalence of vituperation over substance just continues and aggravates the us-versus-them infighting, about as useful and logical as high-school sports rivalries. Maybe it helps in a close-knit forum to keep up the morale of the troops, but it creates a destructive mind-set among the participants that damages anyone's ability to communicate clearly with the public. Why not just continue to do what you actually do best, which is to present your powerful data, and respond to attacks with analysis, not snideness and vituperation.

I'll be calling AE911 on this as well. They demand of their presenters that they stick to WTC issues when presenting on behalf of AE911, and perhaps they should expand that to their online work as well.

Hi mainer,

I think you may be confused. No one here is attacking AE911T or the CD approach. In fact most if not all of us support them implicitly. I think you may be reading the quotes above from OSS which is from another forum which is where you may want to direct your concerns.

@Mainer

You've definitely misread the posts mate.

The quotations I used are from the same people who have lead a vicious campaign against pilotsfor911truth and CIT claiming that the "strongest evidence" should be pushed in deference to the sterling work carried out by these two groups.

They (TruthAction.org) are the ones who are dismissing the CD evidence and who have openly attacked Richard Gage and other AE911T members (they've also harrassed Peter Dale Scott in the past and aren't too happy that DRG is talking at the Toronto event).

Some of those organizing the event are bedfellows of these people who have directly been involved in censorship and allowing disinfo in their positions as 9/11 gatekeepers.

The "strongest evidence" this group is referring to is some half-arsed, MSM friendly. easily controlled LIHOP narrative that can only hope to achieve the maximum charge of "incompetence".

CD is slowly but surely beginning to get the same dismissive treatment as the Pentagon NOC evidence and P4911T's dismantling of the official FDR data and the aerodynamic impossibilities of the manouevres of the alleged aircraft involved.

Hope that clears things up.

I am so proud of you guys for doing this! THANK YOU!!!

I have shut my website down since (am taking a political break), but, I couldn't help but notice a few months back that the Toronto event invitation list seemed to be missing some very important names!! So, I wrote this post, and suggested people actually boycott the so-called Toronto Hearings until Pentagon Truth researchers were properly invited.

If I were to try to embrace the whole injustice of what is going on in one, catchy phrase, I might suggest something like this: "No 9/11 Truth Without Pentagon Truth" or something like that. A saying ready for printing on bumper stickers, etc.

In this radio interview, Zwicker said one of his complaints was that a condition for including evidence at this so-called Toronto Hearing was that the research not be "controversial." Well, first of all, isn't any fact which contradicts the 9/11 Commission Report going to be "controversial?" Second, shouldn't the criteria be simply whether the information is true? For example, if it is true that nanothermite was found in the WTC debris, then should not that fact be presented to the so-called Toronto Hearing whether "controversial" or not? Essentially, IMO the "controversial" criterion is, essentially, a vague criterion that could mean anything they want, could be used to throw out almost any single piece of evidence at whim. All they have to do is say it was "controversial." So, I SALUTE Zwicker for speaking out against this injustice of Pentagon Truth. I APPLAUD Zwicker, the Pilots, CIT, and anyone else involved for putting on this "complementary" [Zwicker's word] event in Toronto for the peaceful and noble cause of simply representing for Pentagon Truth on the all-important tenth anniversary.

It seems amazing - inconceivable - to me that within the 9/11 Truth movement we have to have, effectively, a mini-movement for Pentagon Truth. But, effectively, as I see it, that's just what we have, and I say, then, and PROUDLY, that I am a PENTAGON TRUTHER as well as a 9/11 Truther.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU again for doing this important thing. Please, do it PROUDLY.

Pentagon Truth Mantras:

If they say we are splitting the 9/11 Truth movement, tell them it is they who are splitting the 9/11 Truth movement by TURNING THEIR BACKS on Pentagon Truth.
If they say Pentagon Truth research is "controversial," tell them so is the WTC research.
If they say the public isn't ready to hear about Pentagon Truth, tell them that a few years ago, the public wasn't ready to hear about the WTC and Building 7, either.
If people say we're crazy for believing a 757 didn't strike the Pentagon, tell them that ad hominem attacks do nothing to disprove years of careful Pentagon Truth research.

Just as Americans aren't supposed to demand justice for the people who died in Building 7 - but Barry Jennings told us that people did die there - so Americans aren't supposed to demand justice for the murders of people who died inside the Pentagon.

NO 9/11 TRUTH WITHOUT PENTAGON TRUTH!

To me, not just some corny words for bumper stickers. I really believe that. The detractors will attack hard but I know you will all be expecting their lies and be prepared for them. As an American, I hate watching my country go down the crap hole and I just really, really appreciate you guys taking this AWESOME STAND FOR JUSTICE and helping save lives!!! THANK YOU!!!!!!

wtc collapse/demolition debate split and moved here:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21572

Legend!

My take on the Toronto Hearings is this: There are only four days. They cannot cover the evidence they feel is the strongest thoroughly in such a short time. It was necessary to pare down.

I don't understand this pile-on attitude. Where do the supporters of one theory or another get off telling Gourley and company how to run the Hearings as he sees fit? He has plenty to manage.

Alternate evidence gatherers are free to set up their own hearings and present their findings in any way they see fit.

We all need to pursue our research independently, dovetailing as the opportunities arise.

All of you folks know I share my records with everyone. What they do with them is their own business. I am not on one side or the other. I'm watching and absorbing as much as I can from all researchers. Some I agree with, some not.

Can we please stop the sniping and concentrate on our own work? Can we stop judging others' motives? No one organization is going to be the expert on all sides of 9/11. This has to be a team effort. Let's all start pulling the boat, instead of jumping up and down in it.

Kawika, have you actually been following events?

Because of one clique of unqualified, bunch of gossips (who the f*k are they??) who've manouevred themselves into the position of gatekeepers, one organization who should be represented, namely Pilotsfor911Truth has been disgracefully sidelined and attacked. I mean, 9/11 attacks were carried out by aircraft..and they dismiss the experts in this field?? And instead turn to an alleged chemist with a surreally bad "rebuttal" who had to beg for an endorsement that he never got?

CIT have been maligned and attacked for 5 years for simply presenting witness evidence that contradicts the official story. That's it. Lies, disinfo and censorship is their only response to it.

It's not a case of "time restraints". It's a total blanket ban on Pentagon research regarding the operation itself. You're not stupid man so please don't play dumb with this excuse.



Who exactly is going to discuss the Pentagon at this event? This same clique has already bitched their way into disregarding a 9/11 Pentagon victim. I personally don't give a rat's arse about credentials. If you lie or condone a lie for the sake of some bullshit "PR exercise", you're in no position to represent "9/11 Truth". And yes, I agree these people should stick to what they know.

April Gallop was the first to actually knock on the door of the judicial system with all concerns from LIHOP to MIHOP only to be knocked back by George W Bush's inbred cousin on the judge's panel. And these aholes deem her or her story "unfit" to be there?? Fuck that.

I stick by my take because it is based upon what I know. I admit I have not absorbed every tidbit, nor analyzed the motives. I am ignorant of the details.

If the attacks on P4T and CIT are coordinated I am unaware of it. I am aware that a few researchers have teamed up to refute what CIT featured. But I don't spend my time keeping track of every post on the numerous forums. I spend most of my time trying to dig up new information.

You are aware that I try to share information with the members of this forum, dealing with the technical aspects of the flights. Many members refuse to look at these records. What am I to think about this?

It's frustrating, but what can I do if people won't look? I get the same response from the 911Blogger members. I chalked it up to being focused upon their efforts in Toronto or on new P4T videos. I can only guess.

Someone recently keyed me in on the goal of the opposition---To get the factions fighting amongst each other.

We need to work together.

Which is why your take is wrong mate.

There's a major difference between the research that CIT and P4911T works at and the campaign of disinfo carried out by elements at 911Blogger regarding the Pentagon.

It's not a case of "why can't we all get along". I've heard this argument over and over from other people and they usually ignore all of the proven, documented disinfo that still infests the net. It's not a "disagreement" between "researchers", it's political manouevring to marginalize and censor hard facts and evidence because they don't like the glaringly obvious conclusions that even a layman like me can understand.

CIT and this forum have repeatedly held out an olive branch to sit down and discuss the issue face to face and the response is more censorship and behind the scenes harrassment of the better known faces within "9/11 truth" to adopt this group's disinfo and illogical arguments.

I don't doubt what you say because you are a man of integrity. I still don't have the same knowledge base. That puts me in a unique position, because I have a working relationship with both groups. Maybe I can be of some service.

However, if the parties cannot agree, I suggest maintaining your research integrity and focus upon that which you know best. Pilots know aircraft and are the best spokesmen for that aspect of 9/11. The architects understand the structures.

9/11 is too big to fit into one hall. It is going to have to be investigated at various locations and synthesized down so that it will fit. Those of us on the periphery, without the network and means to secure the halls, will have to act in support positions. We can cooperate with each other without insisting our way is the only way.

You are probably right about the disinfo. I can't speak intelligently about it because I am unaware of the details and frankly find this cloak and dagger stuff very confusing to follow.

If we don't put these differences aside we are going to find ourselves even more divided as time goes on. We need to counteract this trend vigorously.

Find me some bright thinkers who want to focus on the radar. I'm busy trying to bring some new information forward, but I don't have the technical understanding to grasp this.

I am at your service OSS, Use me.

The excellent research by CIT and PFT being not only marginalized but ridiculed is very troubling. Even if this work is flawed in some aspects... it appears that certainly most of the work is rigorous and should be included in the discussion about what actually happened... or didn't happen on 911.

The less troubling explanation is the some self declared experts have their egos so deeply invested in their own views that admitting they were wrong is more important than getting closer to the truth. Of course this might also mean losing their positions of respect and power AND perhaps economic benefits they enjoy as leaders in the truth movement. While most work at discovering the truth with no economic interest, someone such as Gage pays himself north of $80K per year and this does not include having all his *expenses* paid. AE911T has one donor who sends them $10k per month! If the group or its leaders were discredited the cash would stop flowing for sure. So holding onto and bolstering their reputation and credibility and even keeping the truth movement going is critical to some people in the movement. And apparently they can't admit errors as a result.

One also needs to consider the import of the CIT presentation. This would be quite the *smoking* gun of a non AQ conspiracy and move the focus away from the WTC and the building 7 *campaigns*... which have been the central focus of all CIT critics. Not only would this rain on their parade... but it would shed a bright spotlight on the DOD and their role on 911.

Of course the perps would want to sew (sow) descent... and take the focus off the best case (pentagon deception) and even assist in making a flawed or overstated case... which is what we are seeing re the world trade center where the evidence of a non AQ conspiracy is completely circumstantial at best.

PFT has done excellent work casting more than reasonable doubt that the planes involved were standard commercial wide bodied jets hijiacked and flown into the twin towers. If this is the case it also destroys the AQ did it and becomes a much more ominous conspiracy with intel or the DOD types and resources involved. Both of these cases clearly falsify the AQ as perps.

The actions of the CIT and PFT critics could likely be economically motivated even if they are acting as agents of *confusion*. Criminals don't like to get caught and confusing those looking for them is in the cards.

Yes, good thread moderation, kudos.

So, who will be speaking about the Pentagon evidence at the so-called Toronto Hearings? Professor David Ray Griffin? Like David Chandler and Under righters Laboratories guy, will he also be saying that Pentagon Truth doesn't matter, that we "shouldn't ask" whether a plane hit the Pentagon or not? I don't anticipate having time to read Griffin's new book soon, but, from the billing it isn't positive for Pentagon Truth:

Quote: "Griffin... argues that the intensely debated issue about the Pentagon - whether it was struck by a Boeing 757 - is quite unimportant."

Source: http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1029/010/DA...cy_Succeed.html

Half a truth is still a lie.

If you're not a Pentagon Truther, you're not a real 9/11 Truther.

No 9/11 Truth without Pentagon Truth!

Agree with OneSliceShort.

Kawika: Fine, don't invite Pentagon Truth experts to speak at the so-called Toronto Hearings. And, please change the billing on all official website pages and literature accordingly. Call the event: "The International Hearings On The Events at the WTC on September 11, 2001." It is the absence of chocolate chips in your cookies whose package clearly shows pictures of cookies with chocolate chips in them that is at issue, sir.

And, while the iron is hot, in what way is this so-called Toronto Hearing "international"? It is as "international" as the "international" House of Pancakes. Where is Italian film maker Massimo Mazzucco? French author Thierry Meyssan? Japanese member of Parliament Yukihisa Fujita? Dutch demolition expert Danny Jowenko? Italian Nobel Prize-winner Dario Fo? Italian Europarlementarian Guilietto Chiesa? And, Canadian author Barrie Zwicker? Just to name a few.

To summarize:

What the so-called International 9/11 Hearings are NOT:
• "international" - they in no way represent 9/11 truth researchers of the world
• about 9/11 Truth in general. It is only about the WTC in particular. And, at that, does not even include the P4911T evidence which does pertain to the WTC. The Pentagon evidence is omitted, apparently.
• A body capable of producing an informed opinion, in the form of a report, to any organization or government for the purpose of recommending which 9/11 evidence is strongest.

What the so-called International 9/11 Hearings ARE:
• A decent-sized 9/11 gathering which would, in all fairness, rank "up there" with several other "good sized" 9/11 gatherings held over the last ten years.
• It will include several notable speakers.

It is, in effect, just another 9/11 event, no different from any other. Griffin, Gage, et al. have presented dozens of times, probably to far larger crowds.

So, what really is the problem with the so-called Toronto Hearings?

I suspect an agenda and foul play here:
• I suspect that the true purpose of these so-called hearing is to create a kangaroo court not unlike other famous kangaroo courts held throughout history for the purpose of carrying out an agenda. (Think, perhaps: Salem, massechussetts witch trials.)

I suspect that the real purpose of the so-called hearings is to:
• Hold a kangaroo court
• Omit Pentagon Truth evidence
• Conclude, in the most official-sounding manner possible, that "an unbiased panel of 9/11 experts, representing the worldwide 9/11 Truth movement unanimously agree that the best and strongest evidence is..."

and then list some weak evidence which omits:
• Pentagon Truth evidence

and, in my experience:
• evidence linking Israeli involvement in the crimes

Finally, to then publish the findings of the kangaroo court in an official-looking report. It will be:
• Hailed by its own members and their affiliates such as 911Blogger who endorse the kangaroo court
• Used to put down Pentagon Truth
• Likely also, IMO, be used to put down efforts to prove Israeli involvment in the 9/11 crimes

Conclusions:
To me, the kangaroo court reminds me of "damage control." "Acceptable losses" is a military term that comes to mind. That is, you hold a kangaroo court. Convince people that it is legitimate. Then, and importantly, you have to give the people a little something to make it seem real. (e.g., you must hang a witch.) Then, you let everyone go home, happy.

To make the analagy more clear: You organize these so-called Toronto Hearings. You try to make them seem worldwide, comprehensive, and legit. You hold your kangaroo court. Acceptable losses: you concede a few points, such as, perhaps, Building 7 freefall. This makes the people happy, and can be used to suppress criticism of the kangaroo court later. However, the kangaroo court will not under any circumstances allow certain other key pieces of evidence be heard. In fact, quite the opposite, it will arrange, like a script stage performance, for key individuals to make key statements at key times which limit the damage ("damage control"). These key statements, sound bites if you will, will of course appear in the kangaroo court's final report. The final report of the kangaroo court will cement into perpetuity the damage control boundaries established by the kangaroo court's organizers. Thus, the job done, the court held, the report made, the damage is controlled.

Let us keep in mind that for the last ten years, the US has been occupying Middle Eastern countries using 9/11 as a pretext. For the criminals, "victory" can simply be keeping the US Congress, authorities, and public arguing for ten more years over what "really happened" on 9/11. A stalemate can thus be like a victory, sometimes. (The war overseas keeps going on.) Thus, we see how a "damage control" strategy can be the perfect thing if one doesn't require an outright victory, but on a statemate in order to maintain the status quo.

I am not accusing the organizers of the so-called Toronto Hearings of deliberately trying to lie to the American people, impede the justice process, and perpetuate ongoing illegal US occupations overseas. However, coincidentally, it appears that their actions will lead to that same result.

We need not accuse anyone of anything. All we need do is:
• Help educate the public about what the so-called Toronto Hearings ARE, and what they AREN'T.
• Challenge the conclusions of the final report of the so-called Toronto Hearings as soon as it is released; and, relentlessly, just as we have done regarding the official 9/11 Commission's Ommission Report.
• Continue advancing Pentagon Truth by encouraging Pentagon Truth researches and leaders such as Barrie Zwicker, CIT, P4911T, and many others to further their important work; continue to hold more Pentagon Truth events such as the screening that Barrie Zwicker bravely is holding. He has put a flag in the ground for Pentagon Truth, and we must honor him and never forget his bravery for what he has done.
• I personally do not respond to the nay-sayers, although others do. It is a personal choice, to be sure. But, I do not recommend arguing with the nay-sayers. For example, why suffer mistreatment at 911Blogger, when anyone can simply start their own 911 news website and print whatever truth you like? (I proved that it can be done and anyone can do it.)

Sorry for the length. Please also support Craig's blog at TruthandShadows.wordpress.com. He is another brave Pentagon Truther.

Half a Truth is a Lie
No 9/11 Truth without Pentagon Truth!

Footnote: Example of evidence suppressed by so-called Toronto Hearings kangaroo court: Christopher Bollyn's book "9/11: The Deception that Changed the World."

Who are you addressing this to? I am not an organizer. Go to the source with your concerns. Better yet, organize your own event and invite whomever you please.

Dear P4911T readers,

I can't respond to the above remarks which do seem a bit insincere. I can, however, express my sincere desire for justice for ALL the crimes of 9/11. I hope that at least a few loyal Americans, Canadians, and other patriotic individuals around the world - the English speaking world, at least - will have a chance to consider my humble words of suggestion and advice.

I am humbly suggesting that Pentagon Truth is equally as important as WTC Truth. I am suggesting that, at least by appearances, it would seem - at least to me, IMO - that there is the possibility that the so-called Toronto Hearings have an agenda: an agenda to do "damage control." That is, to permit some "leaks" (i.e. building 7 freefall) in order to appease the public and hide other facts (e.g. explosion witness testimony of Barry Jennings who saw the lobby of Building 7 blown apart) according to an agenda. The strategy of damage control might suit the purpose of continuing the illegal US wars overseas. After all, as long as the US authorities are arguing with each other over what really happened on 9/11, then, no decisive action to recall the troops, end the war, and investigating the crimes would begin. The years of careful research done by the Pilots, CIT, Christopher Bollyn, and others are - I would argue - just as important - and possibly more important - than the years of careful research done for the WTC.

I have no time to argue with naysayers. I am simply making some suggestions for the Pentagon Truth movement.

A last word of caution: Do not sit back and allow the so-called Toronto Hearings kangaroo court carry out a damage control plan and publish their damage control report unchecked. I suggest and warn that to do so would be unwise. I would urge everyone who demands justice for the 9/11 crimes to take a very careful inventory of just exactly what the so-called Toronto Hearings is leaving out. (Minus the absurd, of course.) Barry Jennings, April Gallop, Christopher Bollyn, P4911T, CIT, etc. Wouldn't it be interesting to compile all of that knowledge and research together and to consider it AS A WHOLE? What facts do these researches have in common? What criminal acts and investigations do they suggest? Then, I would look at the final report of the so-called Toronto Hearings kangaroo court and analyze the report and try to determine their damage control boundaries of the report. One would ask, "What important 9/11 research is missing from this report (minus the absurd, of course)?" Attempt to discover the damage control boundaries of the propaganda device/controlled report. Understanding exactly what "they" are attempting to hide would actually help to guide a real investigation as it would tend to suggest directions for a true investigation and who the true criminals are. Yes?

Thank you and may there be justice for ALL the crimes of 9/11.

Half a truth is still a lie.

If you're not a Pentagon Truther, you're not a real 9/11 Truther.

No 9/11 Truth without Pentagon Truth!

Please quit calling a yet to be convened court "kangaroo". You (nor I) were not involved in the organization so we cannot speak intelligently about their agenda. They have a limited time and I believe they are doing the best they can under the circumstances. In two weeks, I may have a different take. Let's wait and see what they produce in their four days worth of intense investigation.

I understand your (and mine) desire for Pentagon Truth to be included. Just as soon as an equal effort is mounted, Pentagon Truth will take its rightful place.

I am working on Pentagon Truth every day. It is hard to find researchers willing to look at new evidence. This reluctance is not as strong in the study of the WTC. the end result is that WTC grows while Pentagon evidence remains buried.

Thank you.

What new evidence? I havent seen any new evidence from you.

The reason Pentagon evidence remains "buried" among those in the WTC crowd, is because of people like Legge, Chandler and Cole. Some of which clearly have an agenda and others who refuse to speak with experts on the matter.

Here are two new essays we just published on this topic:

1. Has Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) Been Invited to the Toronto Hearings?

2. The Toronto Invitations

When One speaks the Truth, when One is Truthful, the only recourse other people have to refute the Truth spoken,

is to lie, to deceive, to speak falsehood and to be utterly dishonest both to themselves, and to the public in general.


Such people should not only be pitied, but should also be deserving of our deepest sympathy, as they're obviously

completely unaware and ignorant of the fact that One can never escape from Oneself .... and not ever, even by the

sad and horrid act of "suicide"!


It's nothing but 'feelings' of either self-importance, self-admiration, self-righteousness and self-satisfaction, or any

combination of these 'passions' which drives the conduct by far, of most of the people Craig is referring to above.


Had they possessed the ability to listen to their conscience, they would never have allowed themselves to participate

in this ugly sordid denigration of PFT and CIT. Not one of them would have!


Accordingly, neither the Truth, nor the desire to pursue the Truth, resides within any of these self-appointed so-called

"VIP's".


Legge, rubbing shoulders with Wilson 'Ironbar' Tuckey (ex. Au. government minister), says it all!


One can see a 'farce' coming on .....

Where did you get that? Is there a source for that?

aldo - they were both in attendance at the 35th and 40th anniversary of the lunar "landing" crotrak gathering:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear...=clnk&gl=us

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear...=clnk&gl=us

Excellent pieces, Mr. Ranke. I just finished reading them! A very exciting development, to be sure.
• My, what excellent research skills you at the CIT possess. A gift, to be sure!
• I am heartened to know that the CIT is actively and publicly documenting the injustice of the so-called Toronto Hearings, and, in a larger sense, the entire anti-Pentagon agenda (or, at least, as pertains to the CIT).
• I am also heartened to know that, if I understand rightly, at a minimum, what we have here is cooperation among the Pilots, CIT, and Mr. Barrie Zwicker (at least for the purposes of the film screening on the 11th). If that is true, I am truly very excited about this development. Is there a longer history of cooperation among the Pilots, CIT, and/or Zwicker?

In particular, I found this Gourley quote to be telling:

In a recent e-mail (Aug 29), Gourley confirmed that the decision to exclude us and the widely-supported evidence we have uncovered (conclusively proving that the Pentagon attack was a false flag operation) was made from the outset. He wrote:

"Speaking on behalf of the Steering Committee of the Toronto Hearings, I can tell you that we have never, once, been interested in including any presentations that focus on the issue of 'what hit the Pentagon.' ... The Steering Committee has not wavered from its early decision to refrain from focusing on the question of what hit the Pentagon. [emphasis mine]"

Now, I am not privy to these inside emails, but, this was sort of my point all along. This is what I was saying earlier in this thread: if the TH would simply have come out and said this right from day 1, and called themselves the WTC Hearings or whatever, no problem. It is the way they bill the event as being all-inclusive, yet it plainly is not, that is the main problem. (That is just from a surface-level analysis, without the deeper understanding of the steering committee as shown by Craig in his pieces, above.)

I sincerely hope now that the CIT has released these two important, new essays, and that the CIT/Pilots/Zwicker event is just days away, that the "cat" is truly "out of the bag."

So I see now that the Building 7 campaign is giving away free copies of the so-called TH damage control report with every new donation pledge. I would just also like to comment on how sickening I think this is! Do the good folks at RememberBuilding7.org realize how DAMAGING this action is to Pentagon Truth? Are they so blinded by their Building 7 focus that they cannot see 200 miles south to the injustice of the crimes at the Pentagon which occurred on the very same day? Presumably, one would suppose, by some of the very same criminals who would have been involved in the Building 7 collapse? Surely, at least on some level, these criminals had to have been coordinating with one another, surely!

I liked the CIT piece's term "double edged sword" used to describe the so-called Toronto Hearings damage control report. Speaking of "double, "I find an alarming "double-meaning" in the obviously-intentional design of the cover of the report to look like the official 9/11 Commission/Omission Report cover. To those who believe the TH are valid, it appears to mock to official gov't lie. However, to those who challenge the validity of the TH, it is the most frightening thing in the world to understand that not only do the two reports A) limit investigative scope by design, B) have (allegedly) pre-determined conclusions, in some cases, to be sure, and C) now, similar-looking book covers!

We need more unity in the 9/11 truth movement. We need these peopled called out, by name, and peacefully removed of their positions of influence from within the truth movement. Why do we continue to use 911Blogger, for example? (A question I attempted to answer, and still beg.)

If it would be possible for the uniting Pentagon researchers to put together a "final report" of their own, I would recommend it. Also, a few minutes of Youtube video of the CIT/Pilot/Zwicker event Sunday night, of course, to reach those who could not personally attend. A web page wouldn't hurt in which to embed the Youtube, photos, words of unity and purpose from the events' organizers explaining why they did it, links to the Pilots/CIT and other participating groups'/members' websites, donation links, email sign-up, etc. Why? Well, in part because THEY'RE DOING IT. If WE (meaning, Pentagon Truthers) don't, then, who will stand up for the Pentgaon evidence? Presumably, no one.

So, in conclusion, I just want to thank, one more time, the Pilots, CIT, Mr. Zwicker, and anyone else who is involved in this courageous and fundamental first step (of sorts) toward really uniting together the best available Pentagon Truth evidence and really putting it out there to the public in a visible way that can reach people and really last for posterity and be part of the historical record and make a difference. Thank you!!!

[...Now, I am not privy to these inside emails, but, this was sort of my point all along. This is what I was saying earlier in this thread: if the TH would simply have come out and said this right from day 1, and called themselves the WTC Hearings or whatever, no problem. It is the way they bill the event as being all-inclusive, yet it plainly is not, that is the main problem....[/quote]

Just to clarify, but after reading Craig Ranke's articles, above, I would now not want to support the TH under any circumstances, no matter what they would call it. So long as the same BOD w/ veto power is in charge, the event is rotten to the core like a bad apple, IMO.

The sad sub-story there follows the principle of: when those who are truly guilty accuse others of being the guilty parties.

Clearly, that is what the organizers of the TH are doing.

The reason they do not truly care about the "best available evidence" is exactly because the accusations they make about CIT and PFT are actually the truth about the people making the accusations, the organizers of the TH.

YES, that's right, it is very clear from their disgraceful behavior that the organizers of the TH are themselves nothing other than government disinfo agents, what fantastic cover to hide behind the veneer of a supposed "Truth" conference (the TH) that will be of course nothing of the sort, and the same for their bogus Journal of 9/11 Studies.

There is no other reasonable explanation for their disgusting behavior, including most of all supporting the official story about the pentagon which has been proven 100% false, and vilifying honest people dedicated to revealing and disseminating the truth of what really happened.

It's my hope that Craig, Aldo and anyone else slandered by those fools does not get discouraged, does not give up, and does not spend any long amounts of time arguing against those disinfo agent provocateurs. Like their bosses the perps themselves, those jerks have a very unpleasant end awaiting them.

I would like to present for consideration another explanation for the behavior of the organizers of the Toronto event going on as I write this message.

The TH are largely an AE911T event. The organizers, several of the *witnesses* and the person who is writing the summery James Gorley are AE911T people, or have very strong ties to AE911T.

So what is AE911T? If one can understand the raison d'etre of AE911T and the motivation of Richard Gage it can explain a lot about what they do, or don't do and what's going on with CIT and their being excluded from the TH.

AE911T is a PR operation. They do not conduct research. They aggregate and package and present what they call evidence of explosive controlled demolition. Their petition and mission statement call for a new investigation:

MISSION STATEMENT

Our work at AE911Truth is dedicated to the victims, families and all others throughout the world affected by the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and its aftermath. We are a non-partisan association of architects, engineers, and affiliates.

Our mission is to research, compile, and disseminate scientific evidence relative to the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers, calling for a truly open and independent investigation and supporting others in the pursuit of justice.

and:

"Our organization is devoted to:

■ Dispelling misinformation with scientific facts and forensic evidence

■ Educating and motivating thousands of architects and engineers and the public at large

■ Procuring a truly independent 9/11 investigation with subpoena power

■ Achieving 9/11 Truth mainstream media coverage

"

yet they also CONCLUDE:

"We call upon Congress for a truly independent investigation with subpoena power. We believe that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that three World Trade Center buildings #1 (North Tower), #2 (South Tower), and #7 (the 47-story high-rise across Vesey St.) were destroyed not by jet impact and fires but by controlled demolition with explosives."

Their petition:

Please Take Notice That:

"On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7."

Their petition is signed by about 250 licensed architects plus licensed engineers and related building professionals and other engineers and students bring the total to over 1,500. There are about 100,000 licensed architects in the USA and their petition signers represent 0.25% of licensed architects in the US and likely a similar or less for licensed structural engineers.

What they do do... is make presentations (Gage being the main presenter) of their *Blueprint for Truth* which is intended to have an audience cast doubt on the official story (agreed) and then sign their petition and make a donation to support their effort to get others to sign their petition and make a donation. 99.9% of their effort is in gaining petition signers and getting donations to support their operations. Gage pays himself almost a 6 figure income not including his expenses. Several others in the organization are receiving compensation called *stipends* for their work on behalf of the organization. Of course organizations needs funds to operate so we can't expect them to be any different.

No one at AE911T wants the organization to be out of business... ie when the new investigation is on hand. The party would be over.

So in a sense they are in the business of 911 truth and have a vested interest in seeing their *brand* prosper. And this includes having the best brand.. the most respect and the least competition form anyone else in the 911 truth movement... regardless of what others in the movement are there for.

It seems an anathema to claim that they are in this to milk the issue... but if this were to be the case it would explain their behavior without having a single *infiltrator* steer policy decisions. Ego and greed even can be used to explain their behavior as a turf fight... and their explanations ring hollow because they have nothing to do with the search for the *truth*.

For example, there is very good research being done at the 911 Free Forums (http://the911forum.freeforums.org/) with respect to the destruction of the WTC. But you'll never see any of it mentioned by AE911T... and probably because it is more scientific and comprehensive that the AE911T talking points and conclusions presented above.

What would happen to AE911T if a substantial portion of their case was shown to be nothing more than *projection* or wishful thinking? What would happen if the Emperor was seen as having no clothes? To mix metaphors... Humpty Dumpty would have a big fall.

We've gotten to the point where so many people have put there trust in these guys that the idea of them peddling a somewhat flimsy case for explosive controlled demolition is untenable to tens of thousands of 911 truthers and many very intelligent and well educated people... After all Gage represents 1,500 building professionals who have put their reputation on the line so to speak. By the way have any of them received any sort of threat for signing the petition? I've not heard of a single case. Could there be self imposed censorship and intimidation? Of course. But I don't know of any actual cases. If anyone does... please speak up.

I would ask readers to consider not infiltration as the cause to explain AE911T, (Gage's) and the organizers of the Toronto Hearings in blocking CIT and the NOC and flyover theory, but protection of turf as the reason. These guys want to drive the narrative of the 911 truth movement... no distractions are permitted.

I would also ask readers to consider that many people have by now lost their ability to be objective about 911 as they are so much in the *thrall* of MIHOP or the *inside job*. They don't see that they are acting much like members of a cult.. and of course cults and their members don't see them as part of a cult phenomena. This is very understandable psychology and cults can snare many very intelligent and well educated people who have lost their perspective.

We were sold a bill of goods by the gov and the media about 911. We do want to get the truth as to what happened and who carried it out, how they did it and who was behind it. We need solid investigations to determine that... and a few theories and hypotheses are not verboten. But what we are seeing in the TH is nothing more than a turf war to "own" the debate and the *facts*.

I expect many of the *evidence* to emerge from the TH to be more of the same... largely restatements of the AE911T BFT. Expect no new revelations/evidence which have been truly independently vetted by several non partisan researchers. That is not going to happen. This is hardly different than the so called peer review engineering journal *Bentham* where you have to pay to get published and they have years where no articles have been published apparently.... So much for peer review they tout.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... it is a duck...

over...

JSO architect

Dear SanderO

There is an old saying.

The horse may be old, and 'mange', kick a lot, and make a lot of unpleasent noises.
But it is better than an empty stable.

We have a hard journey ahead.

Dont' deny them to be fed, even if they appear a little greedy, it may be the old horse gains due respect in time, by going the journey.

Robert

ps Thankyou for your summary, I have no doubt it is full of heart felt objectiveness and accuracy.

100% agree, 727 fan.

And, let me suggest:
• We publicize the names of the 'clique' and call for a general boycott all their organizations and properties.
• Question: How to deal with orgs such as RememberBuilding7.org which appear to be interlinked with one of their rotten projects (giving away TH 'final report' with each new donation')?
• We put into place new infrastructure (i.e. we make our own version of 911blogger, hold our own 9/11 hearing next year, in which we invite pilots and CIT, produce our own 'final report', etc.) - and take the 'clique' completely and peacefully out of the loop.

I don't take SanderO's comments too seriously. I think he's just here to disrupt.

I am here to disrupt what?

I participate in these discussions when I have something to contribute... based on my knowledge and experience. You, or others may not agree with what I have to say... and that is perfectly fine... and even better if you can provide a rational explanation for what is wrong with something I have written.

I have tried in my comments about the collapse of the twin towers to convey what I believe are accurate observations and information about the structure of the towers... such as the safety factor and how it can be related to a progressive failure of a structure. How else would you explain a progressive failure of a structural system such as a series of columns? If you can refute this or falsify it, be my guest. But this is not disruption, nor distraction.. it is an attempt to investigate and understand and get to the truth.

When I was at AE911T including being on the Board of Directors, I was accused of disruption for wanting to engage in open discussion about the same issues I am trying to discuss here - the structure of the WTC buildings and how this informs our understanding of how they were destroyed. Nothing disruptive about discussion... except for those who want to bury their heads in the sands of ignorance or are clinging to unfounded beliefs rather than rational supportable, scientific, data based ideas.

I commented on the thread about the Toronto Hearings and based my opinion on my experience with the group and people behind the event and i predicted it would be more or less the same presentation that we've been subject to for several years... by AE911T and its allies. There was no attempt, for example, to contact any of the researchers at the 911 Free Forum (http://the911forum.freeforums.org)... who have done very good research and produced very reliable data about the WTC. The work there which I have referred to numerous times, with citations, is completely ignored by the mainstream truth movement and of course the mainstream OCT because it contains data which undermines both of these narratives.

I also demonstrated the hypocrisy of the AE911T's basic position of calling for an investigation, but presenting the CONCLUSION that the WTC was destroyed by explosive controlled demolition. There certainly could have been engineered intervention to destroy the towers, but the AE911T case is extremely thin and circumstantial and has no data to support it. And the same circumstantial *evidence* is going to be presented at the Toronto Hearings as hard evidence of CD.

We know the NIST report was a cover up and clearly unscientific and produced what amounts to a great deception. That is not evidence of controlled demolition. What NIST did is evidence of incompetence, negligence, malfeasance or even criminal perhaps. But the fact that they got it wrong does not mean AE911T got it right nor Judy Wood, or Dimitri Khaselov.. or anyone.

You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. Evidence is like fact and not opinion. Conclusions can be opinion if you cherry pick and create a conclusion to match only come *evidence*.

I suppose in the end you could say that presenting a scientific approach is disrupting those who have settled into a position which is not supported by science and data. They are lazy and would rather cling to their beliefs then find the truth.

The Toronto Hearings, will not present the evidence for ECD, and it may not even present the best evidence that NIST's work was incorrect... it will be an attempt to give more gravitas to the same set of ideas that these organizers have been harping on for several years. it's a marketing tool which will be packaged and literally *sold*.

If Toronto is what this group envisions a new investigation to be like, there is no chance that the world will ever learn what the truth is.

Jeffey Orling RA

Exhibit A: The 1500+ A&E's are wrong, he says. Sorry, I think it's far more likely that they're all in agreement b/c their facts are correct and, in actuality, you are just here to disrupt. Have a nice day.

--- --- --- ---

I was watching that movie 'Avatar' today with the blue people in it. Interesting. It's complete fiction, but, they make reference to a scenario with the following points:

• Blue people planet has a priceless, fictional ore called "unobtainium" (lol)
• The humans want it

There's no false flag event. The humans just go invade the planet with bulldozers and guns to take it. However, also:
• They (the humans) use propaganda to tell the human marine soldiers that the blue people are "terrorists"
• The blue people are simply fighting to save their own lives and homeland from the humans invading them for the ore
• The blue people are made out to be monsters to justify basically killing them all and stealing their land and resources

James Cameron wrote/directed the film. I wonder if such efforts ever help to reach/wake up/alert the public? I hope so. I guess I just mention this b/c while some people may find one kind of evidence harder to believe, they might find another easier. For example, I think it's a fact that the war in Afghanistan is unpopular here in the US. Thus, maybe people would be more open to hearing about the false premise on which the unpopular war was started?

Thank you, Pilots and friends, and happy 10th anniversary.

George,

Perhaps you want to cite the actual data of the ECD case. As far as I can tell their evidence is based on observations and interpretation of them and I don't see much actual data. Some of the data they cite...such as: heavy steel girders were ejected at 70 mph to a 600' distance from the towers. That is a false statement.

Not all the statements are false. But statements such as symmetry being a fingerprint of ECD and not a natural collapse is not supportable. A natural collapse could appear symmetrical and I would argue in those building coming apart from top to bottom it is the predicted manner which the debris field distribution would take. Therefore symmetry cannot be used as evidence in support of ECD... that is speculation.

Jeffrey

10 years of war and deception exposed:



Tonight!

Sweet. Good luck tonight man!

Break a leg!

Cheers