9-11, The Pentagon, Steve Fahrney, Richard Gage - Architects Engineers 9-11 Truth

[Jeannon Kralj]

I found the article by Steve Fahrney on Dr. Fetzer's blog ( http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/08/confessions-of-911-truth-ac... )

 

 

and the interview of Mr. Farney on Dr. Fetzer's The Real Deal radio show (http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/ )

 

to be very interesting. 

There has been quite a dispute apparently among 9-11 truth activists / seekers regarding Richard Gage's refusal to allow inquiry into the events at the Pentagon on 9-11.   Steve Fahrney, though not an architect or engineer but a student, was allowed membership in that group by the direct permission of Richard Gage, and Steve volunteered and helped at A&E9/11Truth for a few years but recently gave up his membership.  Steve had concerns about some of the policies of A&E9/11Truth and now does his 9-11 truth work with San Diego for 9-11 Truth group.

 

Steve referred to an article by Sheila Casey wherein Casey found considerable evidence to support the thesis that no plane crashed into the Pentagon.  Steve said this article had a profound affect on his thinking about the Pentagon event and, eventually, about his remaining a member of A&E9/11Truth.

 

I have posted the link and article of April 2009 by Sheila Casey who is a jounalist for the Rock Creek Free Press, referred to by Steve Fahrney in his recent interview on Dr. Fetzer's radio show.

 

I also will post the link to the documentary about the Pentagon done by "CIT" referred to in the article...

 

This might be "the straw that broke the camel's back" area of information and inquiry in to what Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is really all about.

 

The video by CitizensInvestigativeTeam.org  (CIT)

Titled “National Security Alert”

May be viewed for free at this address…

http://citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html

“Be forewarned: Our findings are extraordinarily shocking and frightening. They are also deadly serious, and deserving of your immediate attention. This is not about a conspiracy theory or any theory at all. This is about independent, verifiable evidence which unfortunately happens to conclusively establish as a historical fact that the violence which took place in Arlington that day was not the result of a surprise attack by suicide hijackers, but rather a false flag "black operation" involving a carefully planned and skillfully executed deception.”

_________________________________________________

http://rockcreekfreepress.com/CreekV3No4-Web.pdf

April 2009 Edition of Rock Creek Free Press

Eyewitnesses Contradict Pentagon 9/11 Story

 

 

BY SHEILA CASEY / RCFP

 

Two California men who call themselves

the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) have

compiled impressive video evidence that the

plane seen flying towards the Pentagon on the

morning of September 11, 2001 could not have

caused the death and damage at the Pentagon,

nor the damage to five light poles outside the

Pentagon.

Frustrated with the inability of 9/11

researchers to do anything other than speculate

about what really happened that day, Craig

Ranke and Aldo Marquis decided to take matters

into their own hands. They have repeatedly

flown in from southern California, canvassed

the area near the Pentagon on foot to find people

who saw a plane just prior to the fireball, and

then quizzed these eyewitnesses extensively oncamera

to establish exactly what they saw, when

they saw itand where they saw it from.

Their research is summarized at their

website: thepentacon.com, as well as in four

DVDs containing interviews with 13 witnesses

who attest that they saw a plane fly to the north

of the Citgo gas station on Pentagon property,

not south of the Citgo station as required by the

official story.

CIT had each witness draw the flight path he

witnessed on a map; the compilation from all

the witnesses is shown below (see page 7). The

curved lines clustered together toward the top

of the map are from the witnesses; the single

straight line angling up from the bottom edge of

the map is the official flight path of the plane, as

described by the National Transportation Safety

Board (NTSB).

 

Taken together, the 13 witnesses deliver

a devastating blow to the official story about

the Pentagon attack. Five 40-foot, 247-pound

light poles were knocked down that day. If the

plane flew north of the Citgo station, it could not

have knocked down those poles. The west side

of the Pentagon was damaged as if it werehit

by a plane heading north, with the zone of

destruction angling north. If the plane flew to

the north of the Citgo station before hitting the

Pentagon, it would not have caused this kind of

damage.

 

CIT’s evidence is compelling for a number of

reasons. Three of their witnesses are Pentagon

 

police officers who were on duty at the time of

the attack. Most of the others were government

employees at their jobs, and their presence at

that place and time can be verified. This stands

in sharp contrast to the witnesses who claim

they saw the attack from their cars, as their

presence on the road cannot be confirmed.

CIT’s witnesses are quite sure about what

they saw. Sergeant William Lagasse, an officer

with what is now known as the Pentagon Force

Protection Agency, was fueling his patrol car at

the Citgo station when the jet flew past him. He

has stated that he is “100% sure” that the plane

flew to the north of the gas station, that he would

“bet his life on it.”

 

There is a remarkable degree of congruence

in the witnesses’ accounts. They are not 9/11

researchers and none of them seemed to be

aware that they were describing a flight path

at odds with the official story, thus they had no

reason to be less than forthcoming. Each was

interviewed separately, yet their stories are quite

similar.

 

CIT includes each interview in its entirety,

without editing. Although this makes for a

long video, it preempts any accusations of

misinterpreting or leading the witnesses. We

have the advantage of seeing the witnesses’

body language and hearing their tone of voice.

We get a glimpse into their personalities and

character, and are given the maximum amount

of information possible with which to assess

if they are telling the truth. We found the

witnesses credible and convincing.

 

After thousands of hours of painstaking

investigation and analysis, Ranke and Marquis

have concluded that the plane seen by so many

people did not hit the Pentagon, but flew over

the building at the same time that pre-planted

explosives caused a huge fireball and thick,

black smoke, obscuring the fact that the plane

was still in the air and flying away.

 

Several of CIT’s witnesses mentioned a

second plane that came along about 30 seconds

later, but media reports immediately after 9/11

talked about a second plane “shadowing” the

attack plane. The belief that there were two

planes in very close proximity serves as a useful

fiction to confuse anyone who saw the plane

fly over the Pentagon as the fireball exploded.

Rather than concluding that the plane never

actually hit the building, observers would

almost certainly conclude that they had seen the

“shadowing” second plane.

 

All of CIT’s witnesses also believe that the

plane they saw hit the Pentagon, although this

cannot be possible. This fact has been used to

dismiss CIT’s work as irrelevant, but it’s not a

compelling argument.

 

Less than an hour earlier, America had seen

the south tower of the World Trade Center being

hit by a plane and exploding into a huge fireball.

Most people were aware that an attack was

underway. If they saw a jet heading directly

towards the Pentagon, and next saw a massive

fireball, it is doubtful that one person in a

thousand would question whether the plane had

crashed and caused the fireball. To conclude

that the fireball was caused by explosives preplanted

in one of the most heavily guarded

buildings on the planet, in an intentional

false flag attack to justify war, would require

observers to have a degree of perspicacity that

was extremely rare in the pre-9/11 world, and

only slightly less rare now.

 

The most riveting segment in the CIT footage

is of the interview with Lloyde England, a taxi

cab driver who was photographed numerous

times just after the attack. In all the photos,

England and his cab are on Route 27, on the

bridge going over Columbia Pike. The front

windshield of his cab has a big hole in it and

the cab is at a stop and straddling the lanes. A

broken light pole lies nearby.

 

England’s story is that he was going 40 mph

when he felt the jet go over head, and then the

light pole came smashing through his front

windshield. He says he then skidded sideways

to a stop, and that a stranger stopped and helped

him remove the light pole from the windshield,

and then left without ever giving his name or

even speaking a word.

 

England’s story is suspect because photos

show the hood of his sedan untouched and

gleaming like a mirror, although his front

windshield was destroyed. England is quite

clear that it was not the smaller section at the top

of the light pole that impaled his windshield, but

the big, 40 foot, 247 pound pole. He contends

that after it pierced his windshield, with perhaps

five feet of the top end of the pole inside the cab,

that the other 35 feet stuck straight out into the

air, not touching the hood of the cab.

 

The question is, with the windshield

destroyed, what held the pole up the in air?

CIT drove with England to his property in the

country to inspect the cab. They hypothesized

that perhaps the narrow end of the pole had

pierced the back seat or floorboards of the cab,

holding it in place and not allowing it to touch

the hood of the cab. But their inspection showed

that there was only an insignificant rip in the

rear seat, and no damage to the floorboards.

Although the dashboard was damaged, no

part of the hood, including the edge near the

windshield, showed any damage.

 

What makes the story even more incredible

is that England claims that as he was removing

the pole from the windshield, he fell down, but

managed, even as he was on the ground, to keep

holding the pole in the air. Remember that the

pole is 40 feet long and weighs 247 pounds,

while England appears to be about 65 years

old.

 

Pressed to explain how it can be that the

pole never touched the hood of the sedan,

England said only “The car speaks for itself.”

Unfortunately for England, the car seems to be

saying that his account cannot possibly be true.

In addition, with 13 eyewitnesses saying that

the plane went nowhere near those light poles,

it seems clear that something else caused the

damage to England’s windshield.

 

The video with England validates CIT’s

practice of keeping the camera rolling as much

as possible, even during casual conversation,

as the most damning statements from both

England and his wife came out spontaneously

and unexpectedly. While Ranke and England’s

wife were chatting at the Englands’ home,

Ranke told her that they had determined that the

jet never hit the Pentagon, but kept on going,

and, amazingly, she agreed! The audio is hard

to hear and she then refused to say more, but her

meaning was clear. Mrs. England, who works

for the FBI, also said that she knows why her

husband’s car was not impounded as evidence,

but wasn’t going to tell.

 

England spontaneously offered this damning

statement: “You gotta understand something.

When people do things and get away with it,

you…eventually it’s gonna come to me, and

when it comes to me, it’s gonna be so big, I

can’t do nothing about it.”

 

CIT also kept the camera running during

the 90-minute drive to see England’s car, and

captured a few very interesting statements on

tape. Although England speaks generally and

indirectly, in the context of a conversation about

the attack at the Pentagon, his meaning is clear.

 

England: I wasn’t supposed to be involved

with this, this is too big for me, man, this is a big

thing. This is a world thing happening, I’m a

small man…I’m not supposed to be involved in

this. This is for other people, people who have

money and all this kind of stuff.

 

Ranke: Your point that these people who

have all the money…

 

England: This is their thing.

 

Ranke: This is their event.

 

England: This is for them.

 

Ranke: Meaning they’re doing it for their

own reasons…

 

England: (with conviction) That’s right.

I’m not supposed to be in it.

...

Ranke: They must have planned it.

England: It was planned.

...

England: You know what history is? It’s not

the truth. It’s “his story.” Has nothing to do

with the truth.

 

As someone who has been researching the

9/11 story for two years, and has experienced

mockery, abuse and denials from the government

and media, I was a thrilled to hear someone who

was directly involved in the cover-up admit

on tape that it was a big event, a world event,

planned by rich people for their own reasons.

Incredibly, once Ranke explained that 13

witnesses had all placed the jet at the north side

of the Citgo station on a trajectory that could

not have knocked down the five light poles,

England changed his story and declared that he

was not where all the photographs show him to

be, but actually well north of Columbia Pike.

 

Ranke showed England numerous photos of

himself, his damaged cab and the downed light

pole on the bridge over Columbia Pike. Even

faced with incontrovertible evidence of his

exact location, England resolutely maintained

that pictures don’t always tell the truth and that

the accident with the light pole had taken place

much further north.

 

The 90-minute video of the interview

with Lloyde England, completely discredits

England. Ranke points out that England may

well be a victim himself, in that he may have

been forced to tell the story of the pole impaling

his windshield. But his story is so incredible,

and his protestations that he was not in the

location where multiple photos and videos

place him on that day are so absurd, that Lloyde

England’s account now stands as perhaps the

most vulnerable point in the edifice of lies that

constitute the official story of the attack on the

Pentagon.

 

The entire body of work from CIT is a

testament to the tremendous power of dedicated

citizen journalists to uncover the truth behind

a government story. Using thousands of

dollars of their own money and thousands of

hours of unpaid time, Craig Ranke and Aldo

Marquis have performed a significant public

service. They have created a body of work that

definitively shows the government story about

the Pentagon to be a lie.

 

CIT’s next move is to consolidate their

research into a more concise format that edits

all the lengthy interviews into a single 60

minute video called “National Security Alert.”

The video will have no music or other artistic

flourishes, which will make it suitable for

informing government or media figures. Within

the next 30 days, they expect to go live with a

new website at CitizenInvestigationTeam.com.

That site will have a link for free downloads of

their new video, plus detailed information on

how citizens can use the video to get action,

including a series of steps to take if the

appropriate authorities don’t respond.

 

Ranke and Marquis will be returning to the

DC area to present a four hour conference in

tandem with Pilots for 9/11 Truth. The free

conference will be held at the National Rural

Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)

conference center in Arlington, Virginia from

12:30 pm to 5 pm on Saturday, July 11.

 

Sheila Casey is a DC-based journalist. Her work has

appeared in The Denver Post, Reuters, Chicago Sun-

Times, Dissident Voice and Common Dreams. She

blogs at http

 

 ___________

ADDENDUM:

 

Decided this letter to Mr. Gage by several well known 9-11 truth activists, as fallout from this dispute, would also be interesting to read.

 

http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/gage-ignores-challe...

 

Gage ignores challenge by 9/11 Truthers to justify Pentagon reversal

Posted: June 22, 2011 by Craig McKee

[Thoth II]

"seekers regarding Richard Gage's refusal to allow inquiry into the events at the Pentagon on 9-11.   Steve Fahrney, though nsot an architect or engineer but a student, was allowed membership in that group by the direct permission of Richard Gage, and Steve volunteered and helped at A&E9/11Truth for a few years but recently gave up his membership."

 

why should Mr. Gage or anyone for that matter be allowed to curtail research into anything?  Do they own the scientific method, do they own truth?  I just don't get it, and I guess I never will.  

[Jeannon Kralj]

Thoth, I sure don't get it either, but this is a textbook case of a major 9-11 "truth" organization made up of "professionals" being totally co-opted, censored and programmed.

 

Even though the Pentagon is a building and therefore is within the purview of architects and engineers, somehow A&E911Truth was channeled from the very beginning to focus only on WTC 1 & 2 dust sample studies by Dr. Steven Jones and company.  Any wondering off the reservation by members on subjects such as planes and no planes, energy weapons, the Pentagon, Shanksville, etc.., met with quick correction.

 

Rather sad that formerly highly thought of professions of architecture and engineering have been brought so low in the minds of those who see truth.

[Jeannon Kralj]

Corrections:

 

Any wondering wandering off the reservation

those who see seek truth.