Quote:

 

Just thought you would like to see a few photos.

Take care

Keith D. Wheelhouse

Quote:

 

Hi Keith,

What a surprise to hear from you! Great shots, thanks.

If you watched the trailer on the front page of our website for our upcoming release you know that we have been back to Arlington and have spoken with a lot more witnesses who were also at Arlington Cemetery .

The evidence is conclusive. They all corroborate each other and contradict your story. They all have the C-130 coming from a different direction than the attack jet about a minute or two after the explosion. We've spoken with dozens of witnesses and none of them have the C-130 shadowing.

They all saw the attack jet bank relatively slowly between the gas station and the cemetery proving it did not hit the light poles or the building. And in fact, we now have a Pentagon police officer who saw this JET (not C-130) fly away from the building immediately after the explosion.

The charade is over.

We know you aren't to blame for a deception on this level Keith. But things will work out a lot better for you if you come clean. Work with us. Tell us what you really saw and/or know. Help us nail the true perpetrators.

Tell us who told you to say the C-130 was shadowing to act as confusion/cover for the flyover. The more you are open with what you know the more protected you will be.

Craig

Quote:

 

You guys need to come clean and stop the charade. Being x-military I was their and know exactly what I saw. It is a shame that there are people of your caliber that want to try to put a spin on what happened. I do not care whether you believe me or not. Have the people who contradict my story call me. You have my cell and ok to release it. There are 52 additional photo’s to collaborate my story. From your video you do not believe an AA jet hit the pentagon. You had doubts that I was even their. Please have the pilot’s witnesses or who ever wants to contest it call. Best wishes in your search.

Craig you need help

Keith D. Wheelhouse

Quote:

 

52 photos?

Feel free to send them all. We'll be happy to publish them.

Of course neither of the 2 you sent so far show a C-130 shadowing an AA jet as they fly together south of the gas station in line to hit the building so I have a feeling none of the 50 others will "collaborate" your story either.

Perhaps you don't understand the gravity and extent of the evidence we have uncovered. We are not theorizing Keith.

Whether or not you were really there your shadowing story has been proven false by ALL other witnesses AND the official alleged radar data released in 2007.

So even the government threw you under the bus Keith. But all the other witnesses independently prove your story false as well as that the plane could not have hit.

Why should anyone believe you when nobody supports your story and everyone else says something completely different?

Yes we do need help. The nation and world is in peril as innocent people are murdered every day during a fraudulent "war on terror" based on this false pretext.

Please help do something to help expose this deception. I believe you have a conscience and want to help but are afraid.

This is perfectly understandable Keith and I don't blame you but the cat is out of the bag and attention to the conclusive evidence we have is only going to grow.

Craig

Quote:

 

Hi Keith,

I think it is best you are honest now. Your whole account has been proven to be fabricated by video of the C-130 at the Pentagon on 9/11.

Here is video proof that the C-130 came in from the NORTHWEST as our Arlington National Cemetery workers saw and came in nearly 3 minutes after the explosion.

You, on the other hand, have the two planes less than a mile, 2/3 of a mile out approaching at the same time and as the attack jet allegedly drops it's nose to gun it next to the Navy Annex, you have the C-130 veering away at the same time over the Navy Annex.

Keith this just did not happen, click and watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV4jaijNqyo&feature=related

Close-up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXj066J4JUQ&feature=related


There is really nothing more to discuss unless you want to confess, Kieth. We now believe there was a "second plane" cover story employed utilizing ambiguity to cover up for the attack jet flying away. Your role in this mess was accurately predicted. We know the plane did not hit the building, Kieth. We know it was a flyover/flyaway. We have witnesses who prove this.

The question is, did you see the flyover and were coerced/prompted to say that the plane you saw flying away was a C-130 or are you a complicit operative put out there to help sow the confusion of the "second" plane story which, partly thanks to you, slowly is eventually confirmed as a C-130. We prefer to believe you are innocent and were coerced to lie.

Either way, things will work out better for you if you are honest. The video proves you are not telling the truth, Keith.

Citizen Investigation Team

Grit1645

Dec 5 2008, 09:28 PM

How do you see that things will "work out better" for him if he is "honest"? All that sounds pretty threatening, IMHO.

Bitterman

Dec 5 2008, 09:37 PM

Put yourself on a scale of 1 - 10 for me please.

Humor me for a second......

Bitterman

Dec 5 2008, 09:59 PM

lol, just fuck off.

Grit1645

Dec 5 2008, 09:28 PM

How do you see that things will "work out better" for him if he is "honest"? All that sounds pretty threatening, IMHO.

m0n3yman

Dec 5 2008, 07:25 PM

The videos of the C-130 are conclusive. You won't hear back from him.

Aldo Marquis CIT

Dec 8 2008, 09:55 AM

Grit1645

Dec 5 2008, 09:28 PM

How do you see that things will "work out better" for him if he is "honest"? All that sounds pretty threatening, IMHO.

You are such a psycho. Are you really insinuating that I was threatening him? Are you really that demented?

I was pointing out that it would be better for him if he was honest. Meaning either the perps would get to him or the if and when there was a real investigation into this matter it would be better to cooperate. We didn't believe he would confess to us, but you "people" would have crucified us if we didn't call him out and urge him to confess. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't with you "people"

The amazing thing is you haven't even commented on how it has been proven that Wheelhouse is lying.

Grit1645

Dec 8 2008, 12:33 PM

Aldo Marquis CIT

Dec 8 2008, 09:55 AM

Grit1645

Dec 5 2008, 09:28 PM

How do you see that things will "work out better" for him if he is "honest"? All that sounds pretty threatening, IMHO.

You are such a psycho. Are you really insinuating that I was threatening him? Are you really that demented?

I was pointing out that it would be better for him if he was honest. Meaning either the perps would get to him or the if and when there was a real investigation into this matter it would be better to cooperate. We didn't believe he would confess to us, but you "people" would have crucified us if we didn't call him out and urge him to confess. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't with you "people"

The amazing thing is you haven't even commented on how it has been proven that Wheelhouse is lying.

If he's doing what "the perps" want why would they bother with him, especially after 7 years? Wouldn't he be in greater danger if he were to "confess" to you now and go against what they ordered him to do? You can't offer him any kind of protection.

Aldo Marquis CIT

Dec 5 2008, 06:25 PM

As you most of you know, we have called out Keith Wheelhouse has having some involvement in the cover-up utilizing the second plane cover story.

Keith alleges that the he witnessed 2 planes approach the Pentagon; a C-130 and the attack jet. His story is meshed with others that paint a vague story about a second plane/jet being in the area and flying away over the Pentagon (in some cases) as soon as the attack makes it's alleged impact. He, with help from the gov't and "journalist" Terry Scanlon, eventually turns this second plane into the C-130, maintaining that it shadowed the attack jet all the way until the Pentagon. Even on its face, it seems untrue and absurd when considering that a C-130 can only travel 379 MPH tops versus the 500-530MPH the attack jet was said to have been traveling by the official story.



After interviewing him in person, on camera. His story stayed the same but was more detailed and seemed to be molded off of the new RADES data which has the C-130 departing BEFORE the Pentagon and over the Navy Annex. He has the two planes less than a mile, 2/3 of a mile out approaching at the same time and as the attack jet allegedly drops it's nose to gun it next to the Navy Annex, you have the C-130 veering away at the same time over the Navy Annex.

Here is the image he drew...



Well on 7/22/08 we received a short e-mail from Keith out of the blue. Apparently he was still either oblivious to our claims about him and his account or his MO was to play dumb on purpose to make himself seem innocent. In this e-mail he included a couple of photos...

Quote:

 

Just thought you would like to see a few photos.

Take care

Keith D. Wheelhouse

Craig wrote back...

Quote:

 

Hi Keith,

What a surprise to hear from you! Great shots, thanks.

If you watched the trailer on the front page of our website for our upcoming release you know that we have been back to Arlington and have spoken with a lot more witnesses who were also at Arlington Cemetery .

The evidence is conclusive. They all corroborate each other and contradict your story. They all have the C-130 coming from a different direction than the attack jet about a minute or two after the explosion. We've spoken with dozens of witnesses and none of them have the C-130 shadowing.

They all saw the attack jet bank relatively slowly between the gas station and the cemetery proving it did not hit the light poles or the building. And in fact, we now have a Pentagon police officer who saw this JET (not C-130) fly away from the building immediately after the explosion.

The charade is over.

We know you aren't to blame for a deception on this level Keith. But things will work out a lot better for you if you come clean. Work with us. Tell us what you really saw and/or know. Help us nail the true perpetrators.

Tell us who told you to say the C-130 was shadowing to act as confusion/cover for the flyover. The more you are open with what you know the more protected you will be.

Craig

He fires back...

Quote:

 

You guys need to come clean and stop the charade. Being x-military I was their and know exactly what I saw. It is a shame that there are people of your caliber that want to try to put a spin on what happened. I do not care whether you believe me or not. Have the people who contradict my story call me. You have my cell and ok to release it. There are 52 additional photo’s to collaborate my story. From your video you do not believe an AA jet hit the pentagon. You had doubts that I was even their. Please have the pilot’s witnesses or who ever wants to contest it call. Best wishes in your search.

Craig you need help

Keith D. Wheelhouse

Craig responded back...

Quote:

 

52 photos?

Feel free to send them all. We'll be happy to publish them.

Of course neither of the 2 you sent so far show a C-130 shadowing an AA jet as they fly together south of the gas station in line to hit the building so I have a feeling none of the 50 others will "collaborate" your story either.

Perhaps you don't understand the gravity and extent of the evidence we have uncovered. We are not theorizing Keith.

Whether or not you were really there your shadowing story has been proven false by ALL other witnesses AND the official alleged radar data released in 2007.

So even the government threw you under the bus Keith. But all the other witnesses independently prove your story false as well as that the plane could not have hit.

Why should anyone believe you when nobody supports your story and everyone else says something completely different?

Yes we do need help. The nation and world is in peril as innocent people are murdered every day during a fraudulent "war on terror" based on this false pretext.

Please help do something to help expose this deception. I believe you have a conscience and want to help but are afraid.

This is perfectly understandable Keith and I don't blame you but the cat is out of the bag and attention to the conclusive evidence we have is only going to grow.

Craig

So about a month later after a clear version of the Tribby video came out I sent the following e-mail...

Quote:

 

Hi Keith,

I think it is best you are honest now. Your whole account has been proven to be fabricated by video of the C-130 at the Pentagon on 9/11.

Here is video proof that the C-130 came in from the NORTHWEST as our Arlington National Cemetery workers saw and came in nearly 3 minutes after the explosion.

You, on the other hand, have the two planes less than a mile, 2/3 of a mile out approaching at the same time and as the attack jet allegedly drops it's nose to gun it next to the Navy Annex, you have the C-130 veering away at the same time over the Navy Annex.

Keith this just did not happen, click and watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV4jaijNqyo&feature=related

Close-up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXj066J4JUQ&feature=related


There is really nothing more to discuss unless you want to confess, Kieth. We now believe there was a "second plane" cover story employed utilizing ambiguity to cover up for the attack jet flying away. Your role in this mess was accurately predicted. We know the plane did not hit the building, Kieth. We know it was a flyover/flyaway. We have witnesses who prove this.

The question is, did you see the flyover and were coerced/prompted to say that the plane you saw flying away was a C-130 or are you a complicit operative put out there to help sow the confusion of the "second" plane story which, partly thanks to you, slowly is eventually confirmed as a C-130. We prefer to believe you are innocent and were coerced to lie.

Either way, things will work out better for you if you are honest. The video proves you are not telling the truth, Keith.

Citizen Investigation Team

After that...SILENCE. We never heard back from Keith.

pguillory

Dec 8 2008, 03:52 PM

You are basing this entire argument on what this guy said? Who cares what he said? You can't prove anything about what happened on 9/11 based on what he says he saw, alone.

Domenick DiMaggio

Dec 8 2008, 04:35 PM

the rest of your post was nonsense and babbling.........

Domenick DiMaggio

Dec 8 2008, 04:35 PM

pguillory

Dec 8 2008, 03:52 PM

You are basing this entire argument on what this guy said? Who cares what he said? You can't prove anything about what happened on 9/11 based on what he says he saw, alone.

wow!!!!!!

brilliant!!!

just highly unfortunate for you that cit has interviewed more than just keith and are proving things based on multiple people's accounts.

like 13 people prove keith is a liar.

see how it works?

the rest of your post was nonsense and babbling.........

pguillory

Dec 9 2008, 12:25 PM

If he is lying, it doesn't mean that he is working with the gov to cover anything up. People tend to try and put them selves closer to the event (Lagasse) or make it seem as if they are more important (Brooks) than they are.