Why Does The Citgo Video

Why Does The Citgo Video

dylan avery
Advanced Member
dylan avery
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 17 2006, 11:25 PM

Aug 9 2007, 07:21 PM #1

Here's why.

3MB Animated GIF:


Here's the frames of interest:





How does a plane flying on the North side cast a shadow and cause reflections that correspond with a plane flying on the South side?

The answer cannot be "the video is fake" You have to do better than that.
"No one said the air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe."
-Mark Roberts, 11/5/2007

"I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breathe and their water is safe to drink."
-Christie Todd Whitman, EPA Press Release, 9/18/2001
Quote
Like
Share

Aldo Marquis CIT
Advanced Member
Aldo Marquis CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Aug 9 2007, 04:15 PM

Aug 9 2007, 07:31 PM #2

Oh you mean the video that was released 10 days after I spoke with Robert, 5 days after I posted what he had told me?



You mean to tell me that you trust video that was held for over 5 years and released 5 days after I spoke with a Citgo employee who blows the whole thing wide open?

Faked? Dylan, Russell already proved that they removed a camera the day of 9/11 and the video and released the footage WITHOUT said camera's view.

PROVING THE CITGO VIDEO WAS TAMPERED WITH AND THEY MANIPULATED WHAT WE ARE SEEING.
Strangely; Russell has been virtually silent about some of the most important, and in my opinion, best work that he has ever done.

Ultimately his research proves evidence tampering which is a Federal crime within itself.

On our first trip to Arlington last August Russell meticulously documented video cameras in the area at the Sheraton, Double Tree, Navy Annex, Pentagon, and most notably the CITGO station.

A complete report of his very thorough analysis can be found at the old forum here:
Video Findings, from research trip to the Pentagon.

Russell talked with the CITGO manager, Barbara, who told him that they removed this critical camera a couple of hours after the event:



Russell reported:
The manager described this one as having had a clear view of the Pentagon wall and quite a bit north as well. You can see where the impact was and the higher angle of the camera that may have captured it.
Russell continues:
You can see here on the south canopy that they have two cameras. So now on the north they have only one? The two most critical cameras in proximity to the flight path and the impact are denied by the FBI and mysteriously missing?

"Among the eighty-five (85) videotapes described in paragraph 11, above, I located one videotape taken from closed circuit television at the Citgo Gas Station in Arlington, Virginia. Because of its generally poor quality, the tape was taken to the FBI's Audio-Video Image Analysis Unit (AVIAU).....to determine that the videotape did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001." (Maguire Documents)

Full sized documents here: http://www.pentagonresearch.com/video.html

Note that they use the word "impact" as a word game to comply with the verbiage of the original FOIA. They don't say whether or not the film showed an aircraft!

Now realize......when Russell made this post on September 5th 2006, the CITGO video had not been released and it was also the first day that Merc had posted about our initial contact with Robert Turcios confirming the statement by his manager Barbara that he had seen the plane on the north side.


But guess what?

The government conveniently and suspiciously released the CITGO video a mere 10 days later on September 15th, 2006!


The release of this data poses SERIOUS problems for the official story in light of the research that Russell had just reported.

Why?

Because THEY MANIPULATED THE DATA TO REMOVE THE VIEW OF THE CAMERAS THAT HAD A VIEW OF THE PENTAGON THAT RUSSELL HAD JUST PROVEN WERE REMOVED AFTER THE ATTACK!




This in essence proves that the data was manipulated to remove these critical views.

This is particularly egregious since, as Russell also pointed out, their excuse to not release the other 80 or so videos is because they do not show the "impact".

2 questions:

1. Why did they all of the sudden choose to release the CITGO video (with zero notice or media coverage unlike the other releases) after having deliberately removed the view of the Pentagon even though not having a view of the "impact" was their excuse to not release all the videos in the first place?

2. Why hasn't Russell made a HUGE deal over the fact that he has proven evidence tampering which is a federal crime?

Obviously he would have understood this incredibly important fact because of the research he had just posted about just 10 days prior.

In light of the north side testimony filmed on location from Lagasse, Brooks, and Turcios obtained by CIT 2 months later the answer to both of these questions is crystal clear.

The release of the proven manipulated video data was done to discredit Robert Turcios since he is not visible in the video.

Russell remained silent about the serious implications of his own research because he also planned to use this government supplied manipulated data to discredit Robert and/or support the notion that the plane flew on the south side (the official story).

The fact that Russell has chosen to quietly ignore information that implicates the government in a cover-up in favor of using the same government supplied information to support the official story is the most perplexing behavior I have ever witnessed from somebody who claims to fight for 9/11 truth.
I hope this not going in FC, Dylan. Because we will prove how you are inaccurate every step of the way.
http://www.ThePentaCon.com

"CIT...we ain't playin'."

I'M BLIND TO YOU HATERS (fixed)
Quote
Like
Share

spcengineer
Member
Joined: Mar 27 2007, 09:25 PM

Aug 9 2007, 07:33 PM #3

The answer is, you have not accounted for the sun's angle or a hundred other little details. In reality, careful anaylsis of the solar angle, angle of wall, height of other obstacles, gives incidental evidence of both the northern and southern flight paths.

Neither is conclusive, but the case can be made for either. If you are serious in your inquiry (I suspect you are not), then you can find some rather indepth that I speak of here.

Citgo Video Analysis
Quote
Like
Share

Aldo Marquis CIT
Advanced Member
Aldo Marquis CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Aug 9 2007, 04:15 PM

Aug 9 2007, 07:57 PM #4

spcengineer @ Aug 9 2007, 02:33 PM wrote:
Neither is conclusive, but the case can be made for either.
Not when the video has been proven to be manipulated/altered before and after its released.

Not when all the witnesses at the Citgo did not see ANYTHING fly on the south side of the station.

The plane and the plane only was on the north side of the Citgo.

This was clearly a hasty, desperate response and poor attempt by the perps to discredit Robert Turcios AND the north side flight path.
http://www.ThePentaCon.com

"CIT...we ain't playin'."

I'M BLIND TO YOU HATERS (fixed)
Quote
Like
Share

Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 19 2006, 05:13 PM

Aug 9 2007, 08:09 PM #5

Hmmmmmm.....

Let me think for a moment.

Should we trust genuine witnesses who can prove they were there and independently corroborate each other or should we trust data that was sequestered and quietly released by the perps with dubious timing that has been proven to be manipulated?

I don't know.

It's a rough decision.
www.ThePentaCon.com

"The attacks of Russell Pickering would be much more convincing if he hadn't attacked and ridiculized the video material before its release. This was neither rational, nor did these pre-emptive strikes enhance his credibility. So as things are at present, his behavior after the release was pretty predictable." -Woody Box
Quote
Like
Share

Woody Box
Advanced Member
Woody Box
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 26 2006, 06:11 PM

Aug 9 2007, 08:18 PM #6

Craig Ranke CIT @ Aug 9 2007, 08:09 PM wrote: Hmmmmmm.....

Let me think for a moment.

Should we trust genuine witnesses who can prove they were there and independently corroborate each other or should we trust data that was sequestered and quietly released by the perps with dubious timing that has been proven to be manipulated?

I don't know.

It's a rough decision.

I've always preferred the authenticity of witness statements over 2 or 3 second video snippets from 9/11 because you never know if the clips have been manipulated. That's why I don't like the arguing of the no-planers.

But I can only speak for myself.
Accuracy*Honesty*Humility = POWER 911woodybox.blogspot.com
Quote
Like
Share

Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 19 2006, 05:13 PM

Aug 9 2007, 08:24 PM #7

Woody Box @ Aug 9 2007, 08:18 PM wrote:

I've always preferred the authenticity of witness statements over 2 or 3 second video snippets from 9/11 because you never know if the clips have been manipulated. That's why I don't like the arguing of the no-planers.

But I can only speak for myself.
Absolutely.

But this data is MUCH more dubious than any "video snippets from 9/11" because it was completely controlled by the government after being confiscated within a couple of hours, sequestered for 5 years, released 10 days after we announced the first north side evidence, and has been already PROVEN to have been manipulated.

Dylan,

Do you or do you not see how Russell have proven this evidence was tampered with?
www.ThePentaCon.com

"The attacks of Russell Pickering would be much more convincing if he hadn't attacked and ridiculized the video material before its release. This was neither rational, nor did these pre-emptive strikes enhance his credibility. So as things are at present, his behavior after the release was pretty predictable." -Woody Box
Quote
Like
Share

Terrorcell
Advanced Member
Terrorcell
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 21 2006, 06:44 AM

Aug 9 2007, 08:48 PM #8

dylan avery @ Aug 9 2007, 07:21 PM wrote: Here's why.

3MB Animated GIF:


Here's the frames of interest:





How does a plane flying on the North side cast a shadow and cause reflections that correspond with a plane flying on the South side?

The answer cannot be "the video is fake" You have to do better than that.
So let me make sure I understand this Dylan........


You don't consider this video to be the least bit suspicious even though 3 camrea angles have been removed from it which would confirm your south side approach?

You take this as a legitimate piece of evidence even though the camera's that would have captured the image of the plane on the side you believe it to be on are all removed from the video?

Really?

That must explain why they're withholding all the other video evidence too. Because it confirms that south side approach.

Amazing the government got multiple angles of a bridge falling apart in nowhere Minnesota and can't find a clear image of a 757 outside the Pentagon on the south approach path, isn't it?
REICHSTAG 911 : PART I : THE NEW WORLD ORDER & 9/11

REICHSTAG 911 : PART II : THE DEATH OF FREEDOM IN AMERICA
With such intense technical planning in other aspects do you not think they would have said we shouldn't :

A) hit the (light) poles
B ) blow up the WTC
C) blow up WTC7
D) fake hijackers
E) bomb the GWB bridge
F) fake bin laden taps

because the guys on the Internet will figure it out?
See if you can guess the correct answer for what came out of a "9/11 Truther"!!
Quote
Like
Share

Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 19 2006, 05:13 PM

Aug 9 2007, 08:55 PM #9

The alleged "shadow" is ONLY visible in the register two view.

You can't see it at all at register 1, the sales floor, or the single pump (south) view at all.
www.ThePentaCon.com

"The attacks of Russell Pickering would be much more convincing if he hadn't attacked and ridiculized the video material before its release. This was neither rational, nor did these pre-emptive strikes enhance his credibility. So as things are at present, his behavior after the release was pretty predictable." -Woody Box
Quote
Like
Share

UnderTow
Advanced Member
UnderTow
Advanced Member
Joined: Jul 3 2007, 01:43 PM

Aug 9 2007, 09:01 PM #10

Dylan wrote:3MB Animated GIF:
Thank you for at least warning me, so I could hit the Stop button.

Maybe Integrated Consultants or Purdue could solve this video mystery. oh wait...
Quote
Like
Share

Aldo Marquis CIT
Advanced Member
Aldo Marquis CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Aug 9 2007, 04:15 PM

Aug 9 2007, 09:10 PM #11

http://www.ThePentaCon.com

"CIT...we ain't playin'."

I'M BLIND TO YOU HATERS (fixed)
Quote
Like
Share

Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 19 2006, 05:13 PM

Aug 9 2007, 09:14 PM #12

The "reflection" simply comes from the sun off the chrome rim of the car as it moves.

Bottom line EVEN IF this video hadn't already been proven to be manipulated it still is not definitive evidence of a plane on the south side.


This, however, most certainly is definitive evidence of a plane on the north side:






I can't fathom how you could throw this testimony in doubt SOLELY based on this dubious government released data.

Although you have refused to comment on this testimony to this day you are directly involved with it.

You were there when Barbara told us about Robert.

Obviously he was sure about the north side since day one since this is what he told his own manager on that day.

The cops end it.

Robert was clearly remembering accurately.




Wait until you hear the newest north side witness we have.

VERY strong and he describes the bank in detail.
www.ThePentaCon.com

"The attacks of Russell Pickering would be much more convincing if he hadn't attacked and ridiculized the video material before its release. This was neither rational, nor did these pre-emptive strikes enhance his credibility. So as things are at present, his behavior after the release was pretty predictable." -Woody Box
Quote
Like
Share

Terrorcell
Advanced Member
Terrorcell
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 21 2006, 06:44 AM

Aug 9 2007, 09:18 PM #13

When you going public with it so all this bullshit can come to an end?

I can't believe we're even using this faked ass video as evidence of anything....all this video proves is THEY'RE COVERING SOMETHING UP BY REMOVING 3 CAMERA ANGLES.

Sure as hell can't support their bullshit story if they had to remove the evidence that would confirm it.
REICHSTAG 911 : PART I : THE NEW WORLD ORDER & 9/11

REICHSTAG 911 : PART II : THE DEATH OF FREEDOM IN AMERICA
With such intense technical planning in other aspects do you not think they would have said we shouldn't :

A) hit the (light) poles
B ) blow up the WTC
C) blow up WTC7
D) fake hijackers
E) bomb the GWB bridge
F) fake bin laden taps

because the guys on the Internet will figure it out?
See if you can guess the correct answer for what came out of a "9/11 Truther"!!
Quote
Like
Share

fretwire
Advanced Member
fretwire
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 19 2006, 07:14 PM

Aug 9 2007, 09:56 PM #14

The "reflection" simply comes from the sun off the chrome rim of the car as it moves.

This would be my guess as well. Because auto focusing lenses/cameras are going to close their aperture down when MORE light comes into the lens. So because a brighter light got into the camera's view, the lens closed up to allow less light in.

Think of it like your pupils, they are wide in the dark, and smaller in sunlight.
Quote
Like
Share

Finrod
Advanced Member
Finrod
Advanced Member
Joined: Feb 16 2007, 06:09 PM

Aug 10 2007, 02:58 AM #15

Terrorcell @ Aug 9 2007, 09:18 PM wrote:
I can't believe we're even using this faked ass video as evidence of anything....all this video proves is THEY'RE COVERING SOMETHING UP BY REMOVING 3 CAMERA ANGLES.

Sure as hell can't support their bullshit story if they had to remove the evidence that would confirm it.
110 % Agree with you Terrorcell !


....Its ok to dig deeper and deeper in every tiny details ...like a "presumed" reflection whatsoever , that could have been cause by anything , in a buggy , lower than cheap resolution video from a gas station. Witch tape HAD BEEN confiscated and tampered by the perpretors and released many years after !

But we should never try to fix a complex scenario with a such a "vague" detail.

The REAL evidence is to be found in what is missing ! The video confiscated , and the camera removed ( also the one on the Sheraton Hotel ) are CLEAR evidence of the NEED to cover-up the visual evidence.

The testimony of witnesses are the only "left" visual evidence we can get.

( To take with great caution ! Human being are not "reliable" as video or photos ( unedited of course ! )


Does anyone had try to get the testimony of Sheraton personnel ? Should be very interesting !
Quote
Like
Share

-Raven-
Advanced Member
-Raven-
Advanced Member
Joined: Feb 4 2007, 06:31 PM

Aug 10 2007, 03:05 AM #16

Dylan,

What am I looking for exactly?

Whatever it is, it has "some people" up in arms and very defensive. I think they know.

I think I see a reflection, but I am not sure what angle the camera has.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com

-----------------------------------------------
Quote
Like
Share

UnderTow
Advanced Member
UnderTow
Advanced Member
Joined: Jul 3 2007, 01:43 PM

Aug 10 2007, 03:09 AM #17

Finrod @ Aug 9 2007, 10:58 PM wrote:
110 % Agree with you Terrorcell !


....Its ok to dig deeper and deeper in every tiny details ...like a "presumed" reflection whatsoever , that could have been cause by anything , in a buggy , lower than cheap resolution video from a gas station. Witch tape HAD BEEN confiscated and tampered by the perpretors and released many years after !

But we should never try to fix a complex scenario with a such a "vague" detail.

The REAL evidence is to be found in what is missing ! The video confiscated , and the camera removed ( also the one on the Sheraton Hotel ) are CLEAR evidence of the NEED to cover-up the visual evidence.

The testimony of witnesses are the only "left" visual evidence we can get.

( To take with great caution ! Human being are not "reliable" as video or photos ( unedited of course ! )


Does anyone had try to get the testimony of Sheraton personnel ? Should be very interesting !
I think I agree with you as well Finrod. Well said.
Quote
Like
Share

SPreston
Advanced Member
SPreston
Advanced Member
Joined: Jun 23 2007, 12:46 PM

Aug 10 2007, 03:20 AM #18

dylan avery wrote:How does a plane flying on the North side cast a shadow and cause reflections that correspond with a plane flying on the South side?

The answer cannot be "the video is fake" You have to do better than that.
What kind of a stupid rule is that? Of course it is faked. They had over 5 years to bugger the video and then they released it right after witnesses started testifying that the Flight 77 flight path was really north of the Citgo. This corrupt Bush Regime manufactures evidence every time we turn around, from the non-existent Iraqi WMDs to the fake Osama videos and from the nonexistent 9-11 hijackers to these few altered or manufactured Pentagon security videos. To quote another famous piece of evidence:
Downing Street Memo wrote:C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memos.html
'Hindsight allows us to realize that
9-11 was the Bush Administration's
first shock and awe
campaign.'

..$$$ $$$ THE NEW WORLD ORDER $$$ $$$
..................322..................] $$$....................666.................] $$$................... 322
.....................THE ENDS ALWAYS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS
.........................ENDLESS WARS FOR ENDLESS PROFITS
...THUS 9-11 WAS JUSTIFIABLE TO THIS NECESSARY END
....
Quote
Like
Share

jfk
Advanced Member
jfk
Advanced Member
Joined: May 28 2007, 06:09 PM

Aug 10 2007, 03:56 AM #19

Finrod @ Aug 9 2007, 10:58 PM wrote: Does anyone had try to get the testimony of Sheraton personnel ? Should be very interesting !
The last I read there was a gag order. :unsure:
Quote
Like
Share

Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Craig Ranke CIT
Advanced Member
Joined: Oct 19 2006, 05:13 PM

Aug 10 2007, 06:30 AM #20

-Raven- @ Aug 10 2007, 03:05 AM wrote: Whatever it is, it has "some people" up in arms and very defensive. I think they know.

I think I see a reflection, but I am not sure what angle the camera has.

There is NOTHING definitive whatsoever in that video but Dylan's response has "some people" up in arms because Dylan with all of his influence has decided to break his silence about the north side claim in support of data supplied by the perps that has been proven to be manipulated.

He has done this just after he expressed support for Lloyd's legitimacy by asserting a proven incorrect speculative version of his story asserted by Russell about a year ago BEFORE we had Lloyd's first-hand account or any of the independently verified evidence at all in this regard.

This is a very significant and very public break from his previous stand-offish approach to this critical data.

He has refused to openly discuss the north side claim, Lloyd, or the C-130/2nd plane story until this break in silence.

Yet he has still failed to engage in open discussion/debate of the issue as of yet.

I am sorry to say that it makes me have serious reservations about the content of the Pentagon section of FC.
www.ThePentaCon.com

"The attacks of Russell Pickering would be much more convincing if he hadn't attacked and ridiculized the video material before its release. This was neither rational, nor did these pre-emptive strikes enhance his credibility. So as things are at present, his behavior after the release was pretty predictable." -Woody Box
Quote
Like
Share


Confirmation of reply: