Hi Joann,

Watch Cindy's interview again and you will see that I did clear that up. Later in the interview when I show her the pictures of the different planes including the C-130 I specifically asked her if she saw "propellers" and mention that she had said that and she said no. She then pointed out the turbine engine on the white 757 and said that was "exactly" what she saw. She was simply using the wrong terminology.

That's a good thought about a red and blue stripe but all of the witnesses in this presentation were on the starboard side of the craft INCLUDING Sgt. Brooks which proves the plane did not hit the poles or cause the damage to the building.

It's pretty clear that the first witness, Jamal, was TRYING to think of AA colors rather than what he remembered.

He is the only one who reported a red stripe.

Obviously all of them are fallible witnesses and we should not expect any of them to be 100% perfectly correct.

But CORROBORATION is the key and the white claim and the north side of the citgo claim are the two most independently corroborated details we came up with from all the confirmed first-hand testimony that we could find.

But congratulations will only be in order when the perps are brought to justice and then the entire movement deserves the pat on the back.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head with "Sollbruchstelle".

People tend to act like CIT has a tendency to accuse all the witnesses of being liars. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We accuse the MEDIA as being the liars.

They lie by omission, they lie by confusion, and they lie by straight up fabrication.

Think about it.....the media was TOLD by the government what was going on so they would obviously try to report the witnesses that support that story and write off contradictions as anomalous and never report them. So naturally there are even some honest reporters that would fall into that trap.

This is why the web of deception is so effective. We can NOT automatically consider media reports as valid evidence.

Of course there were operatives putting out fake "witness" accounts but most of the real people on the street who were really there are honest people who were simply fooled in the maze of confusion of this complex operation.

Thanks Woody. You are an inspiration and a great influence. Everyone can take a page out of your book.

I find it sad and aggravating that you European guys are doing way more than the majority of American truthers in the way of the slogan "Investigate 9/11".

I sometimes hope we aren't right. But the evidence is what it is.

I guess that means you clearly never bothered to watch the testimony provided in The PentaCon Smoking Gun Version either since that is a whopping 80 minutes!

There was no cherry picking. We knocked on doors, asked people what they saw, and reported what they said.

How can you possibly cherry pick previously unknown witnesses? You have to find them!

To accept mainstream media reports in favor of video taped first-hand testimony obtained via independent investigation from official story skeptics would be considered cherry picking.

We have demonstrated how 1 confirmed previously unknown witness is more valuable than dozens of mainstream media reports.

For those that haven't seen it yet please watch The USA Today Parade to see just how dubious some of the mainstream reports really are.

Which I think is why people are voting you down.

A True Skeptic is open, objective, and unbiased, or tries very hard to be so, as much as humanly possible.

Imo, you are increasingly closed-minded, subjective and biased. As your comments show. (as well as increasingly paranoid, to your detriment)

You can't even be bothered now to continue with good, skeptical research and analysis. (the implication being, in part, that your "mind is made up, and you aren't changing it, no matter what anyone says")

And you are not alone. Step back from the brink of the abyss before it's too late.

We need people to be True Skeptics. It's difficult, especially at this late date, but it's important.

Paranoia, especially hyper-paranoia, and particularly long-term hyper-paranoia, blinds people to the Truth.

And to fall into that trap gives "them" a big win.

----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Principle Investigator, Forensic 9/11ologist

To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men. — Abraham Lincoln

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein

At the time the only other plane that was reported seen in the area was the C-130 and that turned out to be a lie because nobody we talked to saw it and because we have had direct communication with the pilot, Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien, who says that he did NOT see the plane hit the Pentagon and was so far away that that he did not even know it was the Pentagon that got hit when he saw the smoke.

We didn't even think of the E4B as a possibility at the time and did not know for sure people would call the plane white.

But here are the reasons why we do not believe the plane people in Arlington saw was the E4B......

1. NOBODY we talked to reports 4 engines.

2. We have even more reports (still unreleased) that it was more like a two tone plane like this:
click for image

3. The report from CNET radio that there was a "light white jet circling the helipad area" AND one by the white house.
(no other reports have the E4B circling the Pentagon or being over Arlington at all.)

4. The fact that the E4B was paraded out in the open CLEARLY meant to be seen by everyone and has now been touted by the mainstream media as being THE white plane.

It's quite clear this plane was used as a cover story.

I didn't see that you mentioned a missile.

No.

There was no missile.

Nobody saw a missile.

The plane was on the north side of the citgo so even if it did fire a missile that nobody saw it wouldn't line up with the physical damage.

The downed light poles were staged.

The missile is disinfo started by Rumsfeld.

But that is because we drew the flight path based off the citgo witnesses' and all the witnesses' testimony.

The plane banked.

This is a fact and it is even reported by high profile previously published witnesses such as Mike Walter and Penny Elgas.

The very fact that it banked is contradictory to the physical damage flight path and security video.

My point was simply that none of the witnesses in this new presentation could distinguish if the plane was headed north or south of the citgo.

But it was still a good question!
:)

Yes it really puts it into perspective when you watch this new presentation with genuine witnesses.

The body language and overall energy of previously unknown witnesses is so obviously and clearly different from most of the previously published witnesses we interviewed.

Most of Jack White's photo analysis has been proven incorrect due to the Bob Pugh video footage.

We don't believe photo fakery was a factor at the Pentagon.

Yes our investigation continues and yes there will be more interviews.

;)