The 2nd Plane Cover Story (new CIT release!)

In this 34 minute presentation we expose dubious details surrounding questionable reports of a 2nd plane that was allegedly following or "shadowing" the Pentagon attack jet until the moment it reached the building. We expose how these false reports were blended with the fact that real planes were in the airspace soon after the attack as cover for the flyover. We present exclusive interviews with alleged 2nd plane witnesses Keith Wheelhouse, Joel Sucherman, & Vin Narayanan.

Aldo and I explain how the flyover witnesses would have been effectively deceived or extremely relieved to accept any possible explanation for the plane they saw flying away from the building.



I can't embed stuff hosted on megavideo here (request to mngt to add) so:
watch presentation here

Interesting! I'll watch the video and shall return!

It's quite possible that they saw *the* jet climbing away, rather than a *second* jet. Given everything that has already been said about the proximity of Regan National, too, that just adds to the confusion.

Anyone tried tracing anyone working at the airport that day (baggage handlers, dispatchers, etc..?)

[edit on 5-6-2008 by mirageofdeceit]

Back to pimp your video huh Craig?
Why did your star witness Levi tell you guys to

I don't want my voice or my picture in your documentary. Thanks."

So was Levi fearing NWO retaliatoin?
Was he worreid about losing his job?
Well according to Aldo it is a much more sinister reason

Levi is a good guy and doesn't want to get involved more than he already he has in that it might taint is his music career.

I call BS on both Aldo as well as Levi.
I do love this gem though by Aldo referring to Levi

What he believes and what he saw are two completely different things.

This sounds like something a snake oil saleman would say.

TOP FOR CRAIG!!!
Didnt you actually release this quite awhile ago?
This seems a desperate plea for attention.

I'll watch the videos when I have more time, but I'm more curious at this moment of what C.I.T. stands for.

Is it "Conspirator In Training"?

That's not a nasty or mean queston in the least, but being that I have never heard of this guy, I had to ask.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


If you go to his link it says it plain as day:

Citizen Investigation Team.

"So not only is their position with USA Today, and they were in this convenient location to report on and see the event dubious, but the fact that so many of these small concentrations happened to also be 2nd plane witnesses.

So this is a convenient situation as well. They happened to perpetuate the story that there was another plane. They don't all say that the plane was shadowing but the fact that they even mentioned the 2nd plane at all helped reinforce the fact that there was another plane in the area and ambiguously acted as cover for the flyover. So this implicates them. It absolutely does. "-from video

Not one of your better moments, Ranke. What "implicates" these witnesses? The fact that they saw AA77 and another plane? You're kidding, right?

To disparage people as being "implicated" in a plot to cover up a mass murder based on nothing more than pure speculation on your part is really abhorrent, in my opinion.

reply to post by jamie83


You are taking my statement out of context.

In light of the entire body of evidence we present, in light of the clear contradictions and suspicious coincidences in the accounts of the referenced witnesses, in light of the fact that we KNOW there was no "2nd plane" in the area within "3 to 5 seconds" of the explosion (the C-130 didn't come in the scene until a minute or two later even according to the pilot himself), and of course in light of the historical precedent of the CIA placing operatives in the media as deep cover agents (see operation mockingbird), and in light of the fact that we know how falsely claiming there was a 2nd plane in the airspace flying away from the Pentagon immediately after the explosion serves as perfect cover for the flyover......the fact that so many of these very high profile alleged witnesses conveniently work for USA Today and happen to make up a high percentage of the VERY FEW total amount of 2nd plane witnesses.....ummm yes this does implicate them.

Does this alone prove guilt?

Nope.

That is not what I said.

But in context of the evidence we present yes it does implicate them.

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
I'll watch the videos when I have more time, but I'm more curious at this moment of what C.I.T. stands for.

Is it "Conspirator In Training"?

That's not a nasty or mean queston in the least, but being that I have never heard of this guy, I had to ask.

Thats funny mate!"conspirator in Training" indeed!Anyways i dont take any of what i just saw as fact.Remember most of these videos are someones opinion of a certain event ,in this case 9/11.Al qaeda terrorists attacked the WTC on sept 11 ,2001.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

You are taking my statement out of context.

Does this alone prove guilt?

Nope.

That is not what I said.

But in context of the evidence we present yes it does implicate them.

Thank you for putting your comments into context, and for the thoughtful response. In terms of this context, I retract my statement and apologize for any offense. While I sometimes disagree with your conclusions, I applaud your efforts and enthusiasm. If it weren't for people like you, there would be little to stop the government from getting away from whatever they want.

Keep in mind that if somebody wanted to pull off a crime as large as 9/11 they would also plan the misdirection associated with it. This is not unlike the misdirection of a magician. They would also have a plan in place ahead of time to discredit those who got a glimpse behind the curtain. They may even bait those people into a position where they can be proven to be wrong.

I would suggest if you want to discover the truth, you direct your attention onto Lee Hamilton and Sandy Berger, partners at Stonebridge International. Just be forewarned. you may be find a trail that will lead to a place where you may be in over your head. That said, if you dig in this direction, you will uncover a new vein.

Best of luck.

It sounds to me like someone does not understand how one minute can seem like mere seconds in times of great stress. But hey why let something like that get in the way of good quality tinfoil hat wearing!

reply to post by jamie83


Thanks jamie!

Glad you were able to understand better what I meant after I explained.

I love it when people have questions and we are able to engage in productive discussion.

Cheers!

Originally posted by scotty18
It sounds to me like someone does not understand how one minute can seem like mere seconds in times of great stress. But hey why let something like that get in the way of good quality tinfoil hat wearing!

Sarcastic personal attack aside....

We have not cited a witness who turned one minute into a few seconds.

The witness in question did the exact opposite and turned 2 seconds into 60.

It would be IMPOSSIBLE for ANY witness to see the planes at the same time.

Yes times of great stress can make witnesses say weird things sometimes but the fact is that Wheelhouse's "shadowing" claim is false as confirmed by the C-130 pilot himself and all other witnesses in the area yet it servers as perfect cover for the flyover.

Sure you can write this off to "stress" but in light of the overwhelming evidence proving the plane was on the north side of the gas station we don't think that would be prudent.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by jamie83

 

Thanks jamie!

Glad you were able to understand better what I meant after I explained.

I love it when people have questions and we are able to engage in productive discussion.

I've been interviewed on video before so I know it's easy for things to come out different that what you were trying to get across.

You seem to have the energy and enthusiasm to leave no stone unturned. What you are looking for can be found at Stonebridge. It will take work and perseverance, but you seem to be resourceful in your approach. Mr. Berger destroys documents. Mr. Hamilton investigates Mr. Berger. Mr. Berger gives Mr. Hamilton a job.

Ask yourself: why?

Originally posted by jamie83
Mr. Berger destroys documents. Mr. Hamilton investigates Mr. Berger. Mr. Berger gives Mr. Hamilton a job.

Ask yourself: why?

Agreed.

It's 100% clear there is a cover up and I have no doubt that there is plenty of information that implicates and proves guilt/complicity of those at the top.

CIT can't do everything though!

You see jamie,

The original vision of CIT was to create an organization that would inspire others to realize that ANYBODY can do the kinds of hands on investigation that we have.

We are nothing but a couple of regular guys, concerned citizens who are forced to pick up where the media and government has failed us.

To be honest we never thought we would be able to take it as far as we have but it just won't stop.

What I'm saying is if you see a line of inquiry that you feel will help expose the 9/11 deception....pursue it!

We need all the help we can get.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
It's 100% clear there is a cover up and I have no doubt that there is plenty of information that implicates and proves guilt/complicity of those at the top.

CIT can't do everything though!

Ok great Craig!
So since it "proves guilt" and you obtained all of this evidence and you have been promising for well over a year and a half.....
Can you give a date when the trials will begin?
Do you think that going on the Howard Stern show is what a true investigator does?
I find it very interesting that when you get on a show like Howard Stern you start threads about on any forum that will allow you BUT when asked directly what media, authorites, courts, etc that you have presented the evidence to you and Aldo become very very defensive and attack.
Why is that Criag?

[edit on 15-6-2008 by TheBobert]

I recently uploaded an updated version of this presentation to google video containing 2 previously unreleased images sent to us from featured suspect witness Keith Wheelhouse.

Google Video Link

One of the images demonstrates how the trees blocked his alleged view of the alleged impact and the other is a previously unreleased image of the famous piece of debris.


Wheelhouse's alleged view from Arlington Cemetery:



Previously unreleased image of plane debris taken from other side of fence of ANC:



He surprised us by emailing these images out of the blue one day.

We think he did it as "proof" that he was really there....I guess he didn't realize how this only helped make the point that he couldn't have seen what he said he did!

He sure as heck would have seen a flyover!

What? He didn't? Those nasty necons fooled another one!!!

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


Obviously you didn't even bother to watch the interview.

Do you believe Keith Wheelhouse's story?