The 3rd plane cover story.

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

The 3rd plane cover story.; Farmer admits north side flyover.
Topic Started: May 23 2008, 09:01 PM (599 Views)
Craig Ranke CIT	May 23 2008, 09:01 PM Post #1
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	The 3rd plane cover story We called it. The very first moment this shadowy character appeared on the scene focusing heavily on the research of CIT (while pretending to support us) we knew he was disinfo. We knew he was ambiguously pushing the notion that 2 planes were simultaneously approaching the Pentagon, one that hit the building and one that passed on the north side of the citgo and flew over the building. All this as a means to cover up and obfuscate the evidence that we present. We instantly rejected his pseudo-technical over-analysis of the government data and clear efforts to discredit witness Robert Turcios. More details regarding our history with this manipulative fake truth seeker here. We knew the importance of the 2nd plane cover story which is why Farmer reacted so harshly and irrationally (calling us "counter intelligence") when we recently released our presentation exposing this part of the plot. Well now that we have provided a true to life honest to goodness flyover witness, what does Farmer do? He is forced to suggest there was a 3rd plane! He admits that we have been right all along and that a plane DID fly north of the citgo and fly over the building but of course continues to insist that AA77 still flew on the south side of the citgo and hit the building exactly as officially reported at the same time! http://911files.info/blog/?p=70 Of course he is going to use Mark Gaffney's new E4B book (and no doubt has been in heavy communication with him) as support for this lunatic theory as they both try to suggest that this 3rd north of citgo flyover plane was an E4B. Naturally they are forced to admit that the 84 RADES data was altered to remove this plane which is part of the irony associated with their desperate claims. This is really nothing but validation that we are on the right track folks. They must put forth a wild conspiracy theory that is so convoluted, so complex, so ridiculous, and so unsupported simply as a means to cast doubt on the research we present breaking the case wide open. It's funny and scary at the same time. All I can say is that this is a clear sign that the shit is hitting the fan.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Bitterman	May 23 2008, 09:33 PM Post #2
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08	I don't know exactly what to say, but I support you guys 100% and will do anything to further the REAL truth. Screw the wannabe's and traitors. Fight the power guys.
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08


SPreston	May 23 2008, 10:40 PM Post #3
Patriotic American Posts: 1,229 Group: Members Member #122 Joined: 01/18/08	Craig Ranke CIT Naturally they are forced to admit that the 84 RADES data was altered to remove this plane which is part of the irony associated with their desperate claims. Really? How did Osama bin Forgotten do that?



Bitterman	May 24 2008, 12:09 AM Post #4
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08	A guy named "John Farmer" made a claim like.......there was 3 planes flying by the Pentagon all at the same time. lol. LOL. LOL! Really?
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 24 2008, 12:32 AM Post #5
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Bitterman May 24 2008, 12:09 AM A guy named "John Farmer" made a claim like.......there was 3 planes flying by the Pentagon all at the same time. lol. LOL. LOL! Really? Har har. Yep! Imagine that! AA77, an E4B, and a C-130! Farmer's star witness: So I guess he wasn't telling "war stories" after all right farmer?
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


SPreston	May 24 2008, 07:28 AM Post #6
Patriotic American Posts: 1,229 Group: Members Member #122 Joined: 01/18/08	Craig Ranke CIT Har har. Yep! Imagine that! AA77, an E4B, and a C-130! Farmer's star witness: So I guess he wasn't telling "war stories" after all right farmer? Let's get that 3 aircraft positioning correct ... ... ....................................................................... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .............................................................................................



Domenick DiMaggio	May 24 2008, 09:19 AM Post #7
Posts: 1,977 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08
Posts: 1,977 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 24 2008, 11:32 AM Post #8
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Do you guys understand how ironic and symbolically huge this is? One of our worst detractors has been forced to fully EMBRACE what we assert! He knows the evidence we present is so strong that he must try to somehow incorporated it into the official story! It's absolutely classic and a MASSIVE indicator that they are in full spin mode. Watch the dominoes continue to fall as we deliver more crushing blows to come.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Woody Box	May 24 2008, 03:34 PM Post #9
Posts: 118 Group: Members Member #109 Joined: 01/17/08	Craig Ranke CIT May 24 2008, 11:32 AM Do you guys understand how ironic and symbolically huge this is? One of our worst detractors has been forced to fully EMBRACE what we assert! He knows the evidence we present is so strong that he must try to somehow incorporated it into the official story! It's absolutely classic and a MASSIVE indicator that they are in full spin mode. Watch the dominoes continue to fall as we deliver more crushing blows to come. Hi Craig, great news, and it's actually very intriguing. This is obviously a new "defense line" after the old one has crumbled by too many witnesses for the NOC path. Just wanted to say that the NORAD tapes don't support Farmer's theory at all. The NEADS guys have clearly not as many as three planes on their radar at the time of the Pentagon impact. They have, however, a plane near the Pentagon at about 9:43, which is certainly the E4-B.
Posts: 118 Group: Members Member #109 Joined: 01/17/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 24 2008, 04:31 PM Post #10
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Woody Box May 24 2008, 03:34 PM They have, however, a plane near the Pentagon at about 9:43, which is certainly the E4-B. Yes. Thanks for that. Farmer is so desperate he is clearly losing it. I am all but certain that Gaffney's new book is going to be a joke. He'll try to push a multiple E4B claim and he has already told us that he believes in some extremely odd scenario where the plane flew north of the citgo and flew over the building timed with the explosion as the citgo witnesses claimed....but THEN looped around south (which is what Chaconas saw) and came back around and hit the light poles and building! As if there were 2 violent events outside the building and nobody noticed! We've got them scrambling hard Woody.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 24 2008, 04:38 PM Post #11
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Farmer's response to this thread: John Farmer I found this interesting link to this post by my old buddy Craig. I hate to break this to you Craigee Poo, but I told you about this over a year ago on the phone and you did not want to hear about it. Remember that? You know, the phone call you made wanting me to join forces with you? Ahhh! The legendary phone call that we had! Time to set the record straight. Me wanting YOU to join forces with us??? Phone call that I made? I gave you my number and offered to have a phone conversation like I do ALL of our detractors to see if they have the balls enough to discuss the info over the phone but YOU called ME. I had no intention of "joining forces" with you. We always knew you were disinfo and the reason I invited you to call was to document and record your BS so you couldn't come back and lie about it later exactly like you are doing now. So now that you have blatantly referenced the call as a means to lie here are the most relevant excerpts from the call for everyone to judge for themselves: http://www.thepentacon.com/JohnFarmer.mp3 Pretty entertaining isn't it?! So did everyone catch what Farmer is referring to when he says he told me about his 2 plane disinfo theory over a year ago? He actually suggested to me that Al Quada hijacked the planes and were "enabled" by the U.S. military but that AA77 with all the passengers (apparently piloted by Hani Hajour) flew north of the citgo and over the building while "some plane, whatever, comes in on the southern path, and does the actual impact.....and basically what they do is, recover the flight recorder out of the one that flew over, and take it to the scene." So is THIS what you are asserting now as well Farmer? All of this even though you emphatically state that both the FDR and Pentagon security camera are bogus?? "I've caught them lying out the teeth buddy! (laughs) I mean what really convinced me beyond a shadow of a doubt was the NTSB data. That is such an obvious misinformation campaign right there it isn't even funny. That stuff is so doctored. It just isn't even funny." [...] "The first thing I noticed in 3Ding is the Pentagon gate cameras....no way, no way. Ok that plane came in and hit those two poles, it had a certain angle of attack coming in. Ok...the Pentagon gate cameras have the thing sittin' on the ground. Naw naw naw that's not even reality. " So according to you the FDR was "doctored" and an obvious "misinformation campaign" and the Pentagon security camera is in "no way" reality even though it HAS to be to reconcile the physical damage and now you are forced to admit that the 84 RADES data had to be altered to remove this 3rd plane of yours yet you continue to vigorously defend the legitimacy of the CITGO video and a plane impact! There is no logic in this whatsoever! Even though you have identified all this government supplied "noise" you are completely ignoring the clear pattern that has been established as means to continue to assert there was an impact! Some "statistical process control" engineer you are! John Farmer I hate to bust yer bubble pal, but I never heard of you or your witnesses before your Italian comrade pointed me to your witness set at the Citgo. It must be rough to run around with all of that paranoia haunting you. Last I heard it was YOU that was accusing US of being "counter-intelligence" and being part of a "government sponsored" disinfo campaign. Yet I'm paranoid? I don't care who you claim told you about us. You were unknown within the movement yet had your disinfo blogs up about our research within a day or 2 after The PentaCon was first was released. All you have done is tried to cause drama and attack us personally while putting out your convoluted pieces of crap all out of pure desperation to obfuscate our research. John Farmer No, Craig, the reason I love to harrass you is simply because you decided to attack me when I dared to objectively evaluate those witnesses. I never denied the possibility of a plane to the north of the Citgo. Quite the contrary, I have always maintained that after my critical review of their accounts, there were things that only made sense if they did see something to the north (such as Lagasse’s yaw change). You LOVE to "harrass"[sic] me! Brilliant! My how mature, logical, and reasonable. Of course your "reason" is absolutely false since we did not "attack" you and you did not put out anything "objective". It was you who went over the top with the personal attacks way back in August 2007 on the Loose Change Forum by calling us "wackos" unprovoked and suggesting we are delusional. If you always supported the north side claim you have always supported our research and you haven't a reason on earth to attack us OR to dogmatically insist that the plane had to have hit the building based on NOTHING but the citgo video even though you believe the FDR and security camera were manipulated. There is zero logic in your behavior or absurd claims. John Farmer I don’t know if this plane was a “fly-over” plane as you suggest, an E4B which later flew over Washington, or a UFO. I’m just reporting the evidence and you can take it or leave it. But then again, the guys at the ANC garage must surely be government agents. No they are not agents. They support the north side approach and NONE of them report 2 planes heading towards the building at the same time. NO witnesses do AT ALL! Except ummm Keith Wheelhouse. Ha! If there is another thing we have definitively established besides the north side claim it is this. This new mysterious #428 witness that you just released was probably talking about the flyover. They could have easily chopped up the account. But not even he is talking about 2 planes approaching at the same time. Like Roosevelt he admits that he did NOT see the plane until after the explosion. He says he only saw the "aftermath" when pressed by the interviewer. Nice timing with that by the way. John Farmer I’ve had DPS Off Roberts LoC account on my hard drive for almost 6 months now, too bad it took you so long to find him. But you can be sure that a critical analysis of both DPS Roberts and the ANC witnesses will be forthcoming (in a month or so). If they survive the scrutiny, then wonderful. If not, then back to the drawing board. Because I have no problem in being wrong, because I am looking for the Truth, whatever that may be. If you were so aware of Roosevelt's account then why haven't you said anything? Why did you cover up this obviously extremely important account?? Yes I can't believe it took us so long either. We were blown away once we were alerted to it and got a hold of him instantly to confirm. Funny how you sit here and BRAG about how you have known about his account for 6 months and said or did NOTHING!! Go figure. John Farmer So now you can return to what you do best, malign people’s character, misrepresent eyewitness accounts, and delude yourself in endless fantasy. Told you this analysis would make you happy No Farmer. We provide evidence and reasoned analysis. It is you who have proven you prefer to personally attack, obfuscate, cover-up, lie, and twist the story any way you can to involve an impact. Your desperate disinfo doesn't make me the least bit happy. It simply exposes your agenda and proves that we are on the right track. Edited by Craig Ranke CIT, May 24 2008, 04:49 PM.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 24 2008, 04:56 PM Post #12
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Farmer's response in the comments section of his blog: Johh Farmer Now see Craig, Adam is going to study my analysis and rip it to shreds over at his place in a few days. But he is nice about it, nothing personal. That has to be done Craig, it is called peer review. That is how true researchers sort out fact from fiction. Apparently you haven't read much of Larson's blog. Nothing personal?! Ha! He is the king of personal attacks and emotional tirades against CIT. Desperation is oozing from every sentence you type. John Farmer You see there is a solid evidence set for the south of the Citgo approach to the Pentagon with eventual impact (the story we are all familiar with). But there is also this north of the Citgo evidence set. Two evidence sets for two entirely different paths. So in the real world of reason, both sets of evidence are examined and weighed by reasonable people who don’t have to resort to name-calling and lying. If Adam (or someone else) wishes to challenge the evidence, then I am grateful for that. But you have never done that, but only insist that people accept the evidence you deem is good and then label those who don’t as “detractors”, “disinformation agents”, or whatever. Ridiculous. The only evidence for an impact is government provided data most of which you AGREE has been manipulated! There is no reason to fake the security camera and fake the FDR as you claim if the plane hit! There is ESPECIALLY no reason to have a plane fly over the building if one hit. You can't explain why this would be necessary or something they would be willing to risk for no reason. The fact that you are going off as if I only attack you personally even though that's what you AND Larson have been doing to us for so long is pure hypocrisy. You are flying off the handle because you know we are right. The CMH interviews that ALL backed us up were the clincher so the only way for you to respond is with this off the wall 3 plane lunacy. John Farmer Now I call you names, but that is only because you are a lying fool who fabricates evidence. Other than that, good work in getting those witnesses on the record. Huh? Listen to how bad you contradict yourself! You are accusing us of "fabricating evidence" WHILE simultaneously claiming that you BELIEVE the evidence we present! How does that make sense? Please tell me WHAT evidence we fabricated Farmer. This ought to be good.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 25 2008, 04:03 PM Post #13
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	I find it interesting how in my phone call with Farmer he acts like he is interested in documenting the witness accounts to determine the flight path. And despite the fact that I urged him to look into Lloyd's account and told him about other witnesses we have spoken with he NEVER commented on Lloyd or any of the subsequent witnesses we presented further documenting the flight path. He has completely ignored the testimony we presented in "Flight 77" The White Plane. It's important to mention that he has never bothered to interview ANY witnesses himself and even though he told me that documenting POV's was important to him and he said he drove around with a video camera, none of this footage was ever published or analyzed critically in association with the witnesses. He said he was working on a 3D model in Maya but we never saw that either. He's really done nothing but post convoluted blogs typically attacking our research or focusing on the government data that he has ADMITTED is fraudulent!
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Bitterman	May 26 2008, 01:13 AM Post #14
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08	It's fantastic to see these people squirm. How do the people who have supported Farmer feel when he does a 360 on them? Wtf right? It's all ridiculous. How do the skeptics feel when NoC is now accepted and wasn't before? They found it so hard and called all witnesses delusional and or mistaken. Pfft. Now almost the flyover was a definite but there just HAD to be another plane doing the flyover.......AA77 still took out those poles and hit the building leaving nothing but a little bit of crap on the ground from A plane.......we all know it wasn't enough wreckage. So, we win.
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08


Bitterman	May 26 2008, 01:15 AM Post #15
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08	Oh and the whole took 2 passes possibility is FANTASTIC. Genius. Like, who does he think he's fooling? Only himself and any other poor sucker who has less then half a brain, and can't figure things out on their own.
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 26 2008, 11:38 AM Post #16
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Bitterman May 26 2008, 01:15 AM Oh and the whole took 2 passes possibility is FANTASTIC. Genius. Like, who does he think he's fooling? Only himself and any other poor sucker who has less then half a brain, and can't figure things out on their own. Exactly. This proves they will say ANYTHING other than admit a plane didn't hit that building. They would rather sacrifice whatever shred of credibility they have swindled and go out with the reputation of being a conspiracy nut case than admit a plane did not hit. Maybe Gaffney will be more smooth about it since he has his big book coming out and refrain from blatant proclamations regarding his "2 pass theory" but I'll bet you any money that Farmer will be soon exiting the movement forever much like we saw with Pickering. His usefulness has ran its course. He'll get his walking papers and be told to bow out after one last crazy rant against CIT proclaiming how we have destroyed the truth. Edited by Craig Ranke CIT, May 26 2008, 11:39 AM.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 26 2008, 11:41 AM Post #17
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	An interesting fact about Farmer: Have you ever heard of a guy who runs for congress but raises $0? Farmer campaign 2006 And why did he change his name from John Stephen Farmer in the 2006 campaign to John G Farmer in the 2008 campaign? Strange how his campaign has never raised a single penny. In his lawsuit against the NTSB he has himself as John Stephen Farmer: http://www.aal77.com/foia_complaint/08cv02051_complaint.pdf But 3537 Deerwood Ave seen in the lawsuit is listed as the campaign address under both names. And not a single picture can be found for him anywhere. A candidate for congress with two names who doesn't raise a dime and not a picture to be found. He's really nothing but a ghost. Edited by Craig Ranke CIT, May 26 2008, 11:46 AM.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Craig Ranke CIT	May 26 2008, 11:55 AM Post #18
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08	Of course he was trounced by democrat John Tanner 73% to 27% even though his district voted 56% for Bush in 2004! http://www.nationaljournal.com/campaigns/2008/house/tn.htm#08 My guess is that he is used as controlled opposition and was never meant to be a viable candidate at all.
Posts: 1,459 Group: Members Member #14 Joined: 01/14/08


Bitterman	May 26 2008, 11:03 PM Post #19
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08	I thought his name was made up. Sorry John.
Posts: 324 Group: Members Member #284 Joined: 02/07/08


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Pentagon · Next Topic »