Peter Dale Scott withdraws endorsement of CIT

Peter Dale Scott has asked me to circulate the following statement:

Like Richard Gage, I too was impressed by CIT's assemblage of witnesses asserting an approach path of Flight 77 at odds with the official version, and said so. I have never believed that the 757 flew over the Pentagon, and have never stated that I did.

In the light of what Gage has learned about CIT's methods, I wish, like him, to withdraw my original endorsement of the CIT video.


Peter Dale Scott

Jim Hoffman discusses Pentagon Research

I'm not the most tech savvy dude. This is the reason that I have never posted stuff here, but I think this time I will give it a try. Below please find a link to an interview given by Jim Hoffman, 911 researcher and engineer. I think this interview is important, even though it is now over a year old, because it clearly describes the struggle in the movement over the pentagon, and forcefully defends the view that the debate is being used to destroy the movement from the inside. I think anybody listening to the podcast should go on to read about disinformation more generally. Visibility 911 has some great links on that topic, and is one of the leading cites for 911 truth IMO.

Here's the link

Complete Withdrawal of Support by Richard Gage, AIA, for CIT’s "National Security Alert"

February 8, 2011

In early 2009, I watched the “National Security Alert” video by the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) where recollections of 10 eyewitness accounts of the attack on the Pentagon were presented (of many more that were interviewed). These accounts included the witnesses’ recollection of the path being taken by the plane prior to impact. The path that many of them recalled was to the north of the former CITGO gas station. Based on these few accounts CIT presented its case that the plane flew over the Pentagon since the damage trail was not consistent with the north path.

Dr Frank Legge on Visibility 9-11: Mounting Evidence Shows Boeing 757-200 Impact with Pentagon Probable

In this podcast, Dr Frank Legge discusses his new paper which was co-authored with Warren Stutt and has been published at the The Journal of 9/11 Studies, titled Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon

Dr Frank Legge

Listen here:

In this lengthy and detailed discussion Dr Legge is careful to lay out clearly his way of thinking on the Pentagon issue and why it is so important to the 9/11 Truth Movement not to make unsupported claims about the events there. Legge looks at this issue from a purely scientific perspective and is only interested in what he can prove to be true based on hard evidence. It is clear to Legge and to the vast majority of scientists who have studied the issue that while the Pentagon is a mystery to a degree, it is most likely that AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200 did hit the building based on the physical evidence available.

David Chandler Talks About His New DVD “9/11 Analysis” and Rationalizes the Pentagon Debate on Visibility 9-11

Show notes and interview by: John Bursill

This timely and important Podcast is a MUST listen!

Listen here:

David who describes himself as a “pacifist” talks in great depth about his journey on the campaign for 9/11 Truth and Justice which he is passionately dedicated. Many of you may be aware it was David who is credited with getting NIST to admit WTC Building 7 fell at a an acceleration consistent with free-fall due to gravity; which I and many others view as the single most powerful debating tool for us as 9/11 Truth advocates! David disputes he is solely responsible for this and says that Jones, Ryan and others were central to this achievement but it was his question that drew the answer in the end so it seems. David also talks about the highly political timing and nature of the NIST Building 7 report.

“Debating” What Hit the Pentagon by Exaggeration, Namecalling, and Threats

Gregg Roberts

Published January 8, 2011

“The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.”

        Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, section 191

        German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

This article is a response to “Is Leading 9/11 Truth Site Working For The Other Side?”, credited to “staff writers” at the Rock Creek Free Press, November 2010 edition, available at:

The “leading 9/11 Truth site” being referred to is The authors of the article critiqued here chose to remain anonymous, and the article’s title doesn’t lend itself to an easily pronounceable acronym. Therefore I will refer to the article’s authors, along with their vocal message board sympathizers and Barrie Zwicker, as The Complainers. We will abbreviate Citizen Investigation Team as “CIT” and their video National Security Alert as “NSA” (noting the irony).

New Paper at The Journal of 9/11 Studies

A new paper by Dr. Frank Legge and Warren Stutt has been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies. This is entitled “Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon.”

Here is an excerpt:

“There have, however, been other interested parties who looked at the available data and came to different conclusions. Researcher John Farmer concluded that there was indeed a defect in the file and that about 4 to 6 seconds of data was missing from the end. If this is true it would be easy to find a flight path which would permit the plane to descend and pull up safely. Despite this finding the adherents of the contrary theories have remained adamant that the plane flew over the building or could not have survived the final pull-up. They continue to maintain that the official account of the path of the plane, which necessarily includes impact with the Pentagon, is false. A number of analyses have been presented which indicate that there are elements of the official account of the attack on the Pentagon which are false but it is our purpose to show that the FDR data is not one of them.”

Joint Statement on the Pentagon: David Chandler and Jon Cole

Overwhelming Evidence of Insider Complicity on 9/11

If you watch our videos and read the links on our site ( you will understand why we assert that the weight of the evidence points to the fact that 9/11 was orchestrated by insiders…

* with access to high tech military-grade nano-energetic materials (aka nano-thermite)
* with access to the infrastructure of some of the most highly secure buildings in New York over an extended period of time
* with the expertise to accomplish the most difficult demolitions in history
* with the ability to manage public perception of the event despite numerous contrary contemporaneous eyewitness reports
* with the ability to coordinate the take-downs of the twin towers with the airplane flights
* with the ability to coordinate with the military to not intercept the airplane flights
* with the ability to stage a highly coordinated cover-up, starting on the day of 9/11 itself
* with the ability to prevent ANY investigation for many months

T. Carter - Flight 77 Attendant (COPA Conference 2002)

T. Carter (COPA Conference 2002)

T. CARTER, flight attendant, was scheduled to fly on her regular flight, AA 77, on Sept. 11, 2001, but she instead opted out of duty that day, and her friend and fellow flight attendant, Rene, took the plane, replacing her.

Rene boarded AA 77 in Washington DC and on this regularly scheduled route, proceeded to Dallas. Over Ohio, Rene called her mother on her cell phone and told her to call American Airlines Operations and report that the plane had been hijacked. Rene said there were 6 hijackers. Press releases since then have only reported 5 hijackers, but that is a separate subject due to its size and scope. There were no sounds of struggle when Rene phoned her mother and Rene did not call her again.

In an affidavit, T. Carter states that she went to the crash site within 48 hours after the 757 hit the Pentagon, with her mother, to give support to the crews retrieving bodies and wreckage. Her visit could have been late in the day Sept. 11, or on Sept. 12. At the pentagon, she recognized the tail section of AA 77 that she had flown on many times, as she walked past it. The tail was on the grass,

Al Jazeera: Hollywood and the war machine - 12/23/10

Empire examines the symbiotic relationship between the movie industry and the military-industrial complex. Featuring interviews with Oliver Stone, Michael Moore, and Chris Hedges.

9-11 Pentagon Episode: Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura

 Conspiracy Theory With Jesse Ventura | Dec. 21, 2010

In this powerful episode, Jesse Ventura leads an investigation that will bring him to visit the Pentagon, meet with a 9-11 commissioner, pilots, a Pentagon whistleblower and other witnesses and will show that the very section of the building that was destroyed was where the evidence of the loss of 2.3 trillion dollars by the same Pentagon was sitting. The 2.3 trillion dollars of tax payers money was lost forever.

The idea that a missile or explosives—not a hijacked jetliner—damaged the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 seems the most unlikely of 9-11 theories. That is, until you look at all the factors, which include eyewitness testimony, crime scene video, expert analysis and the question why, with 85 cameras trained on the building, have only five frames of crash footage have ever been released? Jesse Ventura leads a serious investigation into a tangled web of clues that some say are too sacred to even touch.

Why have the 9-11 Pentagon tapes been scealed and why did the U.S. government never release any credible footage clearly showing that an airplane actually hit the Pentagon? We call on the Obama administration to release the 9-11 Pentagon tapes now.

Obama, Mullen, Gates Hold War-Justification-Ceremony at Pentagon for 9/11 Victims Family Members & Country on 11th of the Month

To my knowledge, this is the first time a 9/11 memorial by the highest officials has happened on an 11th other than September.

As covered by the Navy Times:

President Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen on Saturday (the 11th) remembered the victims of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon in a ceremony at the Pentagon Memorial.

I can optimistically think that this is in direct response to:

The Repeatedly Delayed Responses of the Pentagon Command Center on 9/11

The National Military Command Center (NMCC) is the most secure part of the Pentagon and, at the time of the 9/11 attacks, was "the focal point within [the] Department of Defense for providing assistance" to law enforcement efforts in response to aircraft hijackings in U.S. airspace, according to military instructions. [1] In response to the attacks on New York and Washington, the job of the NMCC, according to the 9/11 Commission, was "to gather the relevant parties and establish the chain of command between the National Command Authority--the president and the secretary of defense--and those who need to carry out their orders." [2]

Up a crooked creek: Censorship and civility in the truth movement

By Kevin Ryan 

I’ve been censored many times.  When I am completely honest with myself, however, I realize that some of those instances were not actually censorship but were forms of editorial discretion.   Other instances were simply attempts by propagandists to downplay the truth. 


Editorial Discretion:  When failed to respond to my article from 2003, it was making a decision that what I had to say was, for them, more of a nightmare than a shared dream. had published other articles that could be seen as related to 9/11 truth, but my approach was not to the editor’s liking.  In response, I did not begin a public campaign against them but instead found many other sites to publish my articles.

Censorship:  A leading alternative news site that regularly publishes 9/11 truth stories rejected one of my articles in late 2008, despite the fact that I had published there before.  The editor responded very emotionally to the article, and suggested that it “attacked solid progressives.”  The editor’s response was itself a great demonstration of what the article conveyed — that people have built-in mechanisms which keep them from seeing truth.  In any case, I did not start a public campaign against the site and would never have thought of wasting my time and energies doing so.  That’s because my goal is to reveal and communicate the truth.

Propaganda:  When, in 2007, Wikipedia promoted highly dubious sources like “Mark Roberts” in an attempt to smear me, yet on the exact same subjects openly ignored sources like The New York Times and Underwriters Laboratories, that was not censorship, it was propaganda.  But again, I did not start a campaign against Wikipedia nor did I try to strike back at the site despite the fact that it was intentionally working to defeat the truth.

I’ve found that, in nearly all cases, when faced with editorial discretion, censorship or propaganda, people will find other venues to share their information when they are not successful at one site.  Again, that is because they seek to reveal the truth, not simply to commandeer one particular venue.  Others, however, are curiously vindictive.