Interview with Craig Ranke of Citizen Investigation Team - Part 1

Interview with Craig Ranke of Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) conducted on Oct 10th, 2010 by Adam Ruff. This interview discusses CIT's groundbreaking research into what really happened at the pentagon on 9/11. We also discuss CIT's remarkable presentation National Security Alert and the stunning eye witness testimony revealed in it which conclusively proves the official story of what happened at the pentagon on 9/11 to be false. We also discuss the ongoing disinformation and suppression campaign directed against CIT by the likes of 911Blogger and their chief detractors such as Victoria Ashley, Jim Hoffman, Michael Wolsey, and the anonymous entity Arabesque.

Citizen Investigation Team http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/
National Security Alert: http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html
Pilots for 9/11 Truth: http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• 9/11
• 911
• september 11th
• Pentagon
• CIT
• citizen investigation team
• national security alert
• craig ranke
• aldo marquis
• 911blogger
• disinformation
• censorship
• cointelpro
• cognitive infiltration
• Pilots for 9/11 truth
• witness

[999II0OlllO0II666]

LOL!!! A debate between the CIT cult and the 9/11 "truth" cult would be like watching a debate between those who believe in leprechauns and those who believe in gremlins... what's the point?

They're ALL wrong!

[centrino105]

@999II0OlllO0II666

Keep on drinking the kool aid buddy you are in the same league as the mob from the dark ages who swore the earth was flat. Anyone not completely brain washed by the TV knows that the Government and media are covering up massive evidence proving 9/11 was an inside job. Too bad that part of your brain washing was to convince you that you are not brainwashed. Oh the irony.

[centrino105]

The "honey pot" meme is laughable. If they had a trap to spring on the truth movement they would have sprung it by now.

[HardcoreJungFunk]

@999II0OlllO0II666 are you right then?

[Jugivadi]

How was the most protected military hub of the free world so easy to strick when by then the military was fully aware that America was under attack? Then the absurd kicks in. The Pentagon has no survailance video that shows the impact of an actual plane into the building. The most heavily survailed building on earth has no video of the impact. We all know the truth. They do have videos and they show that there was no plane. Show us. You showed us all the other ones. Show this one.

[punxsutawneybarney]

@centrino105 Your faith in the witnesses and your own judgment is not justified. OK, you wanna end the war and prove inside job. Fools rush in. "Come on, the prize is here! No fear!" WHOMP! What is your Plan B when they provide the tapes and the plane parts and the witnesses say they lied as a prank? All you can say is "It's all fake! They're all agents!" My agnosticism is based on an awareness of what I do not and can not know. When do they spring the trap? Not until they need to.

[punxsutawneybarney]

@centrino105 I don't claim the witnesses are wrong or lying. I don't know. You don't either. They have not been cross-examined under oath. The witnesses have reasons to lie and the Pentagon has reasons to pay them to lie--as I explained. Unless you are prepared with a plan B in case they swear they lied to punk an asshole truther, you are sticking OUR neck out.

[centrino105]

@punxsutawneybarney

Furthermore Brian my epistemology is just fine thank you, while yours is based on your faith in Jim Hoffman, Arabesque, Victoria Ashley, and their ilk's articles who Barrie Zwicker correctly described as "tricky and unreliable". Your faith based position is also founded partly on the laughable idea that the pentagon is some sort of a "honey pot" trap. When are they going to "spring this trap" Brian? It has already been over 9 years since 9/11 so what are they waiting for?

[centrino105]

@punxsutawneybarney

Brian don't lecture me about subjects I clearly know more about then you do. I have actually been to the pentagon twice and I have been investigating 9/11 since early 2002. Save the disinformation tactics Brian. The witness statements do constitute hard evidence that can be used in a court of law. Their testimonies are not imaginary, they are real, therefore I am not basing my reliance on them on faith. According to those witnesses the FACT is the plane flew NOC.

[centrino105]

@punxsutawneybarney

Save the BS Brian I think it is ridiculous for you to claim all those witnesses are wrong or worse lying. You do not have a leg to stand on. Let us just leave it here Brian, I know that the witnesses CIT interviewed prove beyond a reasonable doubt the plane was NOC. Your doubts are unreasonable and worse than that based on ZERO counter evidence. Have you shown even one reason to doubt the witnesses? No. Until you deal with the witnesses you can't refute CIT on anything.