The Pentagon Flyover: How They Pulled It Off

C

Craig Ranke CIT

Padawan Learner
Hi SOTT.

Sorry I haven't been around lately but I have been rather busy.

Get ready for a new full feature presentation further exposing the Pentagon deception.

We have new smoking gun interviews and have compiled a ton of data proving the NTSB and 84 RADES data fraudulent.

In addition to proving that the plane was on the north side of the former citgo gas station we can now also prove that it came from east of the Potomac River and actually flew over DC skies!

This is absolutely fatal to the official flight path that never has the plane over DC skies at all.

We will demonstrate how the C-130 and the white "mystery plane" or E4B were used as cover for the decoy jet that flew away from the Pentagon timed perfectly with the explosion.

Check out the trailer:

High quality divx version (looks great on full screen mode!)


Low quality youtube version

I'll be back in a few days with the full version.

Peace!

Craig
 
Hi Craig,

The trailer looks great!

Also, since you haven't released/uploaded it just yet, it might be worth mentioning there were a couple of typos.

"Proving 9/11 an inside job" -- missing "was".
"Proving the black box and radar data fraudulent" -- missing "was".

The up-beat music seemed to not quite match the content, but that's just my personal opinion! The footage itself was engaging. There are plenty of 9/11 videos/presentations out there that rely mostly on pictures, so it's good to have engaging cut-aways. If you want some smooth pans with the camera, you might want to consider a fluid-head tripod. Unfortunately, they are not as cheap as photography tripods but they don't jerk or drag the camera when you pan.

Another thing for future interviews, try not to give the interviewees too much head room. If there's too much space above their heads it looks like they're drowning in the shot. Go by the thirds rule (dividing the frame up into horizontal thirds), always keep one third of "head space" above the person's head. And there's also looking room too: if a person is not sitting front on (as is usually the case), you should have them on the opposite side to where they are looking, so two-thirds of the screen become the person's "looking room". But from what I can see on the trailer, you already know about looking room :)

I look forward to seeing the presentation in its entirety.
 
Nathan said:
Another thing for future interviews, try not to give the interviewees too much head room. If there's too much space above their heads it looks like they're drowning in the shot. Go by the thirds rule (dividing the frame up into horizontal thirds), always keep one third of "head space" above the person's head. And there's also looking room too: if a person is not sitting front on (as is usually the case), you should have them on the opposite side to where they are looking, so two-thirds of the screen become the person's "looking room". But from what I can see on the trailer, you already know about looking room :)

I look forward to seeing the presentation in its entirety.
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot for the advice Nathan.

I never had aspirations to be a filmmaker (and still don't) but our investigation has turned up so much important footage that it has simply led to that.

I am learning a lot as I go and have been teaching myself video editing.

That trailer was pretty much my first effort editing on my own other than this piece I did for practice:
http://www.thepentacon.com/Ingersoll-Collection.htm

But the new full length presentation has turned out a lot better than I thought it would!

As soon as I can figure out how to get a decent compressed version rendered it will be uploaded.

This has turned out to not be an easy task for some reason.
 
The full version is now released.

It's an hour and 40 minutes long and PACKED full of info so make sure you have some time set aside where you can pay close attention.

http://www.thepentacon.com/PentagonFlyover.htm
 
Craig Ranke CIT said:
never had aspirations to be a filmmaker (and still don't) but our investigation has turned up so much important footage that it has simply led to that.
I am learning a lot as I go and have been teaching myself video editing.
That trailer was pretty much my first effort editing on my own other than this piece I did for practice:
http://www.thepentacon.com/Ingersoll-Collection.htm
But the new full length presentation has turned out a lot better than I thought it would!
As soon as I can figure out how to get a decent compressed version rendered it will be uploaded.
This has turned out to not be an easy task for some reason.
Click to expand...
A very good source for all video related activities can be found here, http://www.doom9.org/guides.htm I used to capture from TV and encode dvds few years ago and learned very much about encoding and compression from there. Might want to take a look.
 
Just wanted to say great job with the latest production, Craig. Have you read Laura and Joe's book? While they present a different theory, which has been presented on the sott forum, I think the overall scenario they present can account for a lot of the weird aspects of the Pentagon strike that you've uncovered. It's looking more and more like it was a rushed, poorly planned operation with last minute damage control in the form of staged witnesses.
 
To be honest no I haven't read it.

But I made some significant efforts in disseminating Joe's "frozen fish" article.

The fact is that a lot of people had to have been and were involved with this operation.

Whether or not they have been convinced it's for the "greater good" or are plain old evil there are a lot of them.
 
Craig Ranke CIT said:
The fact is that a lot of people had to have been and were involved with this operation.

Whether or not they have been convinced it's for the "greater good" or are plain old evil there are a lot of them.
Click to expand...
Yes, there probably were a lot of people involved. Whether or not they actually KNEW anything at the time is debateable. It is more likely that only a very select few really knew anything at all about the 'big picture' prior to its staging.

The military (and many other organisations besides) are all about following orders and not questioning them.

Those in the military who question what goes on, usually leave it until they retire, where they can't be threatened by the 'system' in which they were previously immersed. Other organisations enforce compliance by threatening people's livelyhoods... so they don't question, don't rock the boat...

And that is how truth is supressed.

It is very efficient.

I think a person really needs to ask themselves how many people really KNOW anything before an event. Very few.
 
This is good stuff. My question is....how did they fake the flight plans and the people that supposedly died in the plane on that day? Did they fly it to another location to be destroyed?

This is the question that perplexes me. We recently visited the Pentagon 911 Memorial, and that question popped into my head; We saw a woman kneeling by one of the benches, sobbing. Until then I hadn't really considered it.
 
Hi Seeker,

Welcome to our forum. :)

We recommend all new members to post an introduction in the Newbies section telling us a bit about themselves, how they found the cass material, and how much of the work here they have read.

You can have a look through that board to see how others have done it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom