FBI Releases New Footage of 9/11 Pentagon Attack

[sabra]

http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/4821121.html

FBI Releases New Footage of 9/11 Pentagon Attack

(December 4, 2006)—The FBI released video Monday from a camera atop a hotel in Arlington, Va. that shows the moment Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

The video does not show the plane in flight.

The video was released in response to a freedom of information lawsuit filed by Scott Bingham, seeking the video, which the FBI seized from the Double Tree Hotel in Arlington after the 9/11 attacks.

The video is grainy and the focus is soft, but a rapidly-growing tower of smoke is visible in the distance on the upper edge of the frame as the plane crashes into the building.

[CountAllVotes]

1. yep that is crystal clear alright

Great photo! I almost mistook it for a parking lot! :D

[NoodleyAppendage]

2. Funny how NONE of the footage released actually shows a plane impact...how curious.

What are the odds that all of the cameras around the Pentagon would fail to capture at least a glimpse of a plane impact? We see pictures of the "after," but you're telling me that there isn't a video frame in existence that shows the plane pre-impact?

WTF?

J

[nashville_brook]

13. eventually these questions have to be put to rest

by releasing the visual evidence... or not.

[goforit]

22. Hmmm.... And how clear the planes were hitting the WTC.

[Javaman]

42. You hit that nail on the head.

When on a clear sunny day, if even the crappiest one chip or old tube job camera can't get a clear shot from a wide angle, then someone is fucking with the images.

This brings up another point, this image being "out of focus" is such complete and utter bullshit.

Virtually all "security" camera's use wide angle lens. That means, they have a very wide latitude on their stop setting. So therefore, you don't need as much light as if you were using a zoom lens. Not only that, but your circle of confusion increases dramatically, meaning that you have such a huge range of depth of field that if something existed beyond infinity, then it would be out of focus. I guess the boys at the pentagon figured out how to break the laws of physics.

But this is all basic camera lens theory 101.

[mirandapriestly]

120. The wtc images have been f*cked with, I agree

They are preposterous to the point of laughability. They are also different from one another.

[Shadder]

70. Pretty darn clear.

[vincent_vega_lives]

133. Yeah, pretty GD amazing!

there were cameras pointing at the WTC when the SECOND plane hit!

What a fucking coincidence huh?

[Javaman]

37. Interesting how that works huh?

Frames can be removed and time codes can be copied. Any editor worth their salt not only knows that, but knows how to do that.

More bad smoke and warped mirrors from the idiot in charge*

[dkofos]

46. No plane impact. No plane debris either

[Javaman]

48. Exactly, check my post #47. nt

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuffleClaw]

123. yes, very curious

they aren't fooling anyone.

[Javaman]

3. Amazing things can be done with After Effects now...

especially if the final product is to be "grainy and out of focus".

Black and white cameras on one of Americas most important instilations? Out of focus? Grainy? (are they still using film?)

Do they really think we are that stupid?

cough cough bullshit cough

[Dhalgren]

5. To paraphrase Rumy,

"We have what we have. We don't have what we don't have. We could have what we don't have. We could not have what we do have. Somewhere in there."

The Bush administration will tell you what happened and how it happened and who did it and how they did it. If you ask any questions, why, you're just a crazy conspiracy theorist or a terrorist supporter. At the very least, you hate America...

[0007]

18. Your right on!

[goforit]

23. And one of the most emptiest quotes ever.

[zann725]

25. Or another paraphrase, 'Sometimes you have to go with the pics you DO have, not the pics you'd like'

Um, I TOO would like to see some clearer images, as well as plane (or whatever impact). Hazy pics released SOOOO after-the-fact. Smell "fish?"

And aren't those "war crime" charges still pending in Europe against AT LEAST Rummy? Got to clear up the 'record,'...pics and memos quick!

[irislake]

41. Who cares what hit the Pentagon?

The question is why anything hit the Pentagon. Nothing should have hit the Pentagon after all that time elapsed. What was Rummy doing inside the Pentagon when he should have been protecting it? The official story is he was chatting to someone and they didn't even go watch TV after they knew the WTC had been hit. What he was doing was NOTHING. Deliberately. Like the others --- Bush and Meyers and Cheney. Why wasn't the anti-aircraft gun on the roof used? Why were no F16s from nearby Andrews Airforce Base up in the air over Washington? How could this possibly happen without that bunch sitting on their hands till the last plane had hit? According to the official story that bunch were the only folks in the world who weren't even curious enough to interrupt their unimportant activities at the time to either watch events on TV or defend their country. I know Tony Blair dropped everything and made a speech. Wouldn't surprise me if he made his speech while your pregtzeldent was still listening to some kid read MY PET GOAT. Most of all why were those do-nothings never asked these questions. They got away with murder and it was easy for them. Not in MY country would we let them off the hook. Not in my country would the Commander-In-Chief be a big hero and called "Churchillian" after such criminal negligence. Or worse. You can guess that I think the worst.

[Javaman]

47. The answer to your question is, they all knew. But also given all the evidence...

and there is a lot of it, it wasn't a airliner filled with people that hit it. All the available evidence points to a guided missile.

If that is the case then a whole other world of hurt comes to reality, such as what happened to the original airplane and the people on it. Where did this missile originate from? Who knew? Who had access?

This is why we need to know.

even moron rumsfeld the war criminal admitted in a press conference that the flight over Pennsylvania was shot down.

The pentagon was designed to withstand a direct hit from a missile. That is why it was build into five segments. If one is hit the rest will be fine. This is why rumspuke was on the far side of the pentagon from the hit.

They all knew.

[Canuckistanian]

99. And all the trackers at NORAD and elsewhere

Just sitting there in front of their screens watching a radar blip moving on a direct trajectory to downtown Washington.

Nope, no cause for alarm here.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

10. Are you suggesting...

...that they're intentionally faking footage of no plane hitting the Pentagon?

[Javaman]

11. I'm suggesting that putting anything out with that level of poor quality and

thinking we will believe anything they hand us is the truth, is utter and complete bullshit.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

12. Well...

...it looks pretty much like the video from my CCTV system at work.

[Zhade]

29. And it's piss-poor compared to the crystal quality of the CCTV at MY work.

So...yeah.

[Javaman]

34. I totally agree with you.

This footage looks like it's from a vintage 1985 CCTV.

[arewenotdemo]

85. yes

the bastards are THAT smart

...just kidding...

[Igel]

26. The Doubletree Hotel in Arlington, VA, is one of

America's most important installations?

Gee. My priorities are sorely misplaced.

[Zhade]

28. The poster said "on one of the most important installations".

The sentence obviously refers to the Pentagon (that being what the camera is on), not the hotel.

[dysfunctional press]

40. the camera isn't trained on the pentagon-

the pentagon just happens to be in the field of view of the camera...

:eyes:

[Javaman]

49. Check my post #31. nt

[dysfunctional press]

92. i have no doubt that it was a plane that hit the pentagon...

i know and have personally spoken to an eyewitness.

people who try to turn it into a wild conspiracy theory are thoroughly deluded.

[savemefromdumbya]

140. strange that

since there was no flight 77? or any other.

The Pent was blown with dare I say it - bombs

[Javaman]

31. Wow you certainly got me there, didn't you...

The video is supposedly of a plane hitting the pentagon. However what we get instead is nothing but crappy blotchy footage.

Regardless if this camera was mounted on the hotel, it was pointed at the pentagon and if the pentagon thinks this colossally crappy footage is so god almighty important then it's equally amazing to me that 1) they thought it was so important to hold it for 5 years and 2)(more importantly) they were able to pull a single frame this video. If this pic is representation of the rest of it, then it's worthless.

AND if out of the many camera's there are continually focused fully, partly or randomly on the pentagon and this is the best that they got, then we are in worse shape then I first thought. There is some much more to this than they will ever let on or ever tell the American public about.

Once again, if they are trying to pacify or put to rest or allay our fears or answer questions or put to rest conspiracy theories or just show something that may or may have happened; they have failed miserably.

And as like anything this failed administration spews out on a daily basis, I trust nothing from them, not their motivations, the ideas, their concepts, their missions, their feelings, hopes or desires.

they spit forth one doctored image after another all in hopes to pump up the idiot son* in charge.

So yes, oh boy you got me with the double tree comment, I'm still smarting from that one, ouch, but the point to this rant is that they (the moron* and his room full of dopes) do all the can to try and prove something that's it's not and they continue to fail in their very lame hearted attempts time and time again.

[humbled_opinion]

56. So whats your point? Is this a conspiracy?

Do you really fall for that crap?

I admit there are questions but the only sinister finds I make all point to terrorists.

Wait ok lets see Cheney, Bush can pull off such a vast conspiracy on 911 which made us believe 4 flights crashed but instead some were missles not planes. so where are the people on those supposed flights? Ok they are hostage by the government or murdered we will get past that.

Next Bush is so smart he can pull of this vast conspiracy of 911 but then he can't plant WMD in the empty deserts of Iraq to be found by such a small cadre of (in on it people) figure maybe 50 at best in that conspiracy that never happened and once found the WMD make him a hero for the invasion.

I just don't buy any of the conspiracy crap...

[Javaman]

61. All I'm saying is prove me wrong and give me evidence that at plane

actually hit the pentagon and I will go away happy.

Up till now there is no outstanding proof that a plane hit the pentagon, at least not the kind of plane they claim. A guided missile yes, a small jet packed to the brim with explosive, maybe. That would explain the powerful cordite smell some of the military personal smelled right after the explosion.

So until you can show me photos of the tail section, parts of the wings, a single seat, a cushion, someones passport, baggages from the luggage area, etc, I will never believe a plane has ever hit the pentagon.

[vincent_vega_lives]

135. No evidence for YOU!

I am the Evidence Nazi!

[silvermachine]

35. I was just there last evening...

...very nice martinis. And the rotating Skydome Lounge was very cool.

http://www.doubletreecrystalcity.com/

[Zhade]

27. Yes. They do. Even some here think we're that stupid.

We're not, of course.

[soothsayer]

4. they've had 5 years to photoshop something and this is the best

they can do??

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. You would think that if they a good video

showing an actual passenger jet, they would be running it on M$M 24/7 for weeks after it was 'discovered'.

Once again, all we get is more proof that there is no proof of 'Flight 77' or any passenger jet hitting the Pentagon.

[MrModerate]

7. I'm deafened by the sound of crinkling tinfoil . . . n/t

[kegler14]

8. Ain't that the truth.

[Dhalgren]

21. That's right, ridicule. That'll shut people up. And shutting people up

is the whole point, ain't it, MrModerate.... :eyes:

[slackmaster]

30. My brother knew several people who were in the Pentagon that morning

One of them died.

An airplane crashed into the building. I have no doubt about that.

[Dhalgren]

33. It is fine that you have no doubts. I have no real opinion, one way

or the other - I have seen no qualified evidence. But to ridicule everyone and anyone who even asks questions dealing with the attacks and the lack of any real investigations into those attacks is what I find to be ridiculous.

[slackmaster]

36. People who seriously question that there was a plane DESERVE ridicule

People who question who was behind the attacks or why they occurred do not.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[silvermachine]

66. Crickets

n/t

[Javaman]

68. No crickets, it's a good watch. check it out instead of making snide comments.

then tell us what you think.

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[silvermachine]

76. Still waiting...

...and waiting and waiting. Maybe the answer is in the Voynich Manuscript. You know, the one that Bigfoot stole on his way to Xanadu.

[Javaman]

78. I have no answers, that's just it, I want some...

Prove to me a plane hit the pentagon and I will go away delighted.

[slackmaster]

86. You want it handed to you on a platter?

Pathetic.

[karlrschneider]

81. Imaginary people! They never existed!!11!1!

And Flight 77s aircraft is buried in the desert at Area 51!!!11!!1!

SERIESLY!!11!

[Dhalgren]

43. I don't believe those doubters deserve ridicule, either. There has been

no hard evidence presented in any legitimate public forum for these questions to be raised and answered. These crimes should have been investigated professionally, legally, in the open, and without preconceived ideas. None of this happened. The whole point of the way this whole incident has been handled seems to be intentionally designed to create doubt and speculation. No DA worth his/her salt would ever handle such a high-profile case in this shotty, inept manner...

[Javaman]

55. Apparently you never read the 9/11 report. nt

[Dhalgren]

124. Actually I have read it (well, as much as I could stomach) and it was

a shoddy piece of shit - more cover-up in nature than an actual investigation. I assume by your question that you have read it. Do you find it to be a highly professional piece of criminal investigation?

[Alexander]

45. People who ridicule valid skeptics DESERVE ridicule.

For goodness' sake, they aren't making light of the tragedy, they just want answers, and are instead given ridicule and poor footage from the FBI.

I still want an answer to the "fat Osama" tape, myself.

[vincent_vega_lives]

136. "fat Osama"

http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/a_binladen.htm

Diabetes
A slim biography, published in Egypt in 1991 reported that about 1987 bin Laden had diabetes, for which he received insulin shots <1c>.

According to Time Magazine (July 1, 2002) "physicians who analyzed photos of bin Laden determined that he probably suffers from secondary osteoporosis, which is often related to diabetes and kidney trouble" ].
Kidney (i.e. Renal)
There have been reports that bin Laden requires dialysis because of kidney disease <6>.

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that bin Laden does not need dialysis, but does suffer from kidney stones ].

A journalist who visited bin Laden's camp in the 1990s reported camp members saying that bin Laden had a kidney problem requiring him to drink large amounts of water. The journalist witnessed bin Laden constantly sipping water and green tea in the time they spent together <2>.

On July 1, 2002, Time Magazine "reported that physicians who analyzed photos of bin Laden determined that he probably suffers from secondary osteoporosis, which is often related to diabetes and kidney trouble" <5>.

Comment: Renal failure can be a complication of diabetes (which he may or may not have -- see above). Interestingly, occasional persons may have their diabetes improve after renal failure occurs, because insulin is retained longer in the body when kidney function is impaired.


http://www.symmetry4u.com/Info/kidney-disease.htm

Impaired kidney function can also accompany or result from many other disorders, such as diabetes, lupus, hypertension, and liver disease. Bright's disease is a kidney disease marked by the presence of blood protein in the urine, along with hypertension and edema (retention of water in the tissues). Glomerulonephritis is an inflammation of the filtering units within the kidney. This may occur as a result of an immunological response to infection, such as a Streptococcus throat infection. Pyelonephritis is a kidney infection. Both glomerulonephritis and pyelonephritis can be chronic or acute, and can be very serious. Hydronephrosis is a condition where the kidney and the renal pelvis (where urine is released from the kidney) become filled with urine due to an blockage of urinary flow. Kidney stones are mineral accumulations (mainly calcium) in the kidneys.

Kidney problems symptoms may include: bloating, chills, fever, urinary urgency, fluid retention, abdominal pain, loss of appetite, back pain, nausea, and vomiting.

[Javaman]

54. Why? nt

[slackmaster]

83. I am only two degrees removed from eye witness accounts

I don't expect you to take my word for it, but if you really doubt that a plane hit the building I find it pathetic.

[DoYouEverWonder]

105. Please show me a report from any eyewitness

who saw both a passenger jet and the explosion who is not from the DOD or the M$M.

Thanks

[slackmaster]

107. Genetic fallacy

Why wouldn't ANYONE from the DoD be able to give an honest, accurate account of what he or she saw?

The Pentagon is, well, kind of filled with DoD people. That's what it was built for. People who aren't either in the military or working for it generally aren't allowed into most parts of the building.

:dunce:

[DoYouEverWonder]

125. There were no eyewitnesses inside the Pentagon

Most of the eyewitnesses were driving on I-395. I would expect that there would be a higher then average number of DOD personal on that road at any given time but there would still be many others from all walks of life. However, 'eyewitness' accounts from DOD personal may be subject to prejudice or suspect, since there may be numerous reason why someone from inside the DOD may or may not be completely truthful about what they did and did not see.

The other major source of 'eyewitness' accounts came from members of the M$M. Again, these may not be unbiased accounts.

Unfortunately, there are very few 'eyewitness' accounts from anyone who is not directly associated with either group who saw both the plane and the explosion. You would think that since I-395 and the other major roads around the Pentagon are public routes that there should be dozens of 'eyewitnesses' who saw the same thing that the DOD and M$M people claim to have seen. I'm just asking for someone to find me one credible witness not associated with either group because I've looked and can't find even one.

[Old and In the Way]

154. If the plane is moving along at full throttle, what is there to see?

I doubt anyone "saw" anything. The plane is moving at 600+ ft/sec. That's about 3-4 seconds max viewing time. Now, people are driving, listening to the radio focused on the 9/11 attacks. Those that are watching the road have about 1-2 seconds to process and register that something crosses their field of vision. About enough time to wonder, "what was that?"

So what level of detail could anyone be sure of?

[irislake]

62. Absolutely

I find it totally unbelievable. Great media you have there. No wonder it's 57th in the world for being "free". Your MSM have really managed to keep the lid on it.

[silvermachine]

38. Same here...

...A friend of mine was in the building at the time. Plus I went to the funerals of 2 others that died. A co-worker of mine SAW the plane strike the building. But you'll never convince some of the people here.

[Javaman]

53. Sorry for your loses...

It's pretty amazing however, that your friend was able to see a plane flying at ground level traveling at 450 mph.

[silvermachine]

63. It's far from amazing...

...being that the plane wasn't always flying at ground level. At least have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that. It circled/banked and then descended. My co-worker was driving to the library where I work. You have to pass the Pentagon to get there by traveling on 395 and exiting at Washington Blvd, just shy of the Pentagon. It is in plain view. She saw the plane hit, and phoned in to my department to describe what she saw. She said "I just saw a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon. I'm too upset to come in to work, I'm going home." So what do you think happened to Flight 77? Did it just disappear Philadelphia Experiment style? Or are you denying it ever existed in the first place? How about all those that lost their lives? Have you talked to their families? Don't you think they would be up in arms?

[Javaman]

67. Sorry, but I heard about your friend, she was reported on the news...

But again, I still don't believe the, "I had a friend" etc, stories. Many of these stories under questioning were proven to be claims and not reality.

A few other people that "saw" a commercial plane hit the pentagon went on to recant their claims as being unsure what they saw.

[silvermachine]

73. No ,she wasn't reported on the news.

Show me the recants. Show me how they were disproved. I'm waiting.

[irislake]

69. Too bad about those people with far-out beliefs

I'll bet those are the ones your MSM interviews so that anybody who has non-crazy questions gets tarred with the same brush. "This idiot thinks no planes hit the WTC so anybody who doesn't swallow the entire White House fairytale is equally crazy." If you stick to the facts there is no need for wild speculation. There are always people with wild ideas. There were four planes, people were on them. Those people died and so did many others as a result. As for the Pentagon. Who knows? But if so -- what did they do with the third plane. Too messy.

[Javaman]

52. What makes you have no doubts? nt

[slackmaster]

89. I trust my brother to be a good enough judge of character

To choose friends who wouldn't all lie to him.

[irislake]

60. Why do some people stray from the point?

Those who get side-tracked about what hit the WTC and Pentagon really muddy the waters. Also the stuff about controlled demolitions. Since all evidence was whisked away to foreign parts you can never find out if there were bombs. The point is there was a stand-down of your defenses and NORAD lied (yes they lied it is admitted) to the 911 Commission and those responsible for protecting you also lied. IN THEIR TEETH. Wake up, America! Nobody was fired or even demoted if they goofed-- in fact the opposite they were rewarded and the whistle-blowers ended up badly off--- and no heads rolled at all for the worst failure to protect the United States in living memory. Oh, except for a whole lot of negligible Iraqis who had nothing whatever to do with it.

[irislake]

50. Ridicule doesn't cut it

with anybody capable of being logical and using common sense. In the end these folks attack the one who thinks the official story is a lie by calling them such "whackos" that they are beyond the pale. Very seldom do they deal with the concrete evidence of official lies and obvious criminal negligence (likely worse)on the part of those responsible for protecting your country. But those who don't believe the official story are now in the minority everywhere. Whenever I present someone with the facts (not tin-foil theories) they all agree that it looks very bad indeed but they fall back on "but nobody would kill their own countrymen." Hah! As if murder isn't something that happens every day everywhere. Husbands kill wives, robbers kill innocent people on the street for a few bucks so why is it so completely inconceivable that three or for sociopaths might dispense with a few innocent countrymen for a "greater cause" --- like oil and power and so on? It happens in other countries why not yours? Such innocence. Such wonderful wonderful innocence and beautiful idealism! America "beacon of light and freedom to the world" indeed.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

88. No.

We are well aware that this crowd is never, ever going to shut up. Ever.

[GliderGuider]

9. Uh, right. Well, there you go!

Film footage of the Easter Bunny? Not much in there to stop me from HOP, HOP, HOPping along...

[daleo]

14. A station wagon, an SUV and a sedan

I can't really make out the first car, though.

[seemslikeadream]

15. Show me the plane

[HughBeaumont]

16. Oh my GOD. JUST RELEASE THE VIDEO.

It's been what, 5 damned years, and everything they've released so far has been still footage, from a huge distance and ridiculously grainy. I want to see proof positive footage of a plane going into a building. And DON'T TELL ME they don't have it.

Seriously. What's the problem? Why the cover-up? You want to shut everyone the hell up, just release the damned video. You want to provide closure to this tragedy/travesty, release the video. What harm can possibly be done? I mean, really, is there anything ELSE this government can lie about at this point? Very, VERY few things they've said to us about ANYthing has been proven true so far, what's one more lie on the elephant pyre?

I mean, it's not as if THIS lie's gonna bring down your administration or get anyone indicted or anything, is it? Nothing else these buncha criminal assholes has done so far got them so much as a wrist slap; what are they so WORRIED about?

[Javaman]

72. I'm right there with you. Show us what happened and I will go away. nt

[HughBeaumont]

108. Not releasing the vids implies cover-up. No two ways about it.

Confiscation within an hour and never releasing it implies cover-up.

What the usual ad-hominem masters (I see someone from my Red-X Toilet chimed in) don't get is that, like a poster above said, it doesn't really matter WHAT hit the Pentagon, it's that the Pentagon was hit PERIOD. Undefended. At least an HOUR after there were reported hijackings. At least 45-50 minutes after Flight 11 crashed. At least 40 minutes after Flight 175 crashed. And at least 37 minutes after the Pentagon was put on high alert.

Incompetence my ACE.

Oh yeah, you don't have to believe CD/Pentagate/Alien lizard people from the planet Nebulon to believe MIHOP. Bad people DO conspire together to perform evil deeds to suit the needs of the wealthy. Just ask Franklin Roosevelt and Smedley Butler.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

90. Simple.

By releasing videos that fail to prove that a plane hit the pentagon, they continue to feed the 9/11 truth movement, which makes the left look like a bunch of lunatic freaks.

IT

IS

ALL

A

BUSHCO

PLOT!

[TroglodyteScholar]

100. Methinks you give these assholes WAAAAAAY too much credit n/t

[frylock]

17. compelling video..

or not.

[Naipes]

19. That's shit...

... you can't see shit.

Then the next video in the queue is poppa Bush faking like he's cryin' over fuck-stick Jeb. what the fuck.

[Ian David]

20. I found this documentary narrated by Kris Kristofferson that explains the whole thing

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097883/

[Ezlivin]

24. Is that the grassy knoll to the left?

It boggles the mind that they waited 5 years to release this tape.

Sigh. Like the JFK assassination, the RFK assassination and the Murrah Building bombing, this is another government-sponsored crime swept under the table. I doubt we'll ever see justice.

[bikebloke]

32. Pentagon City view

The Pentagon is hidden behind a raised highway (I-95). The street in the foreground is Army-Navy Drive. The only thing the video shows is the flame and smoke of the initial impact.

[Alexander]

44. "The video does not show the plane in flight." - Maybe it wasn't a plane?

Is there any proof that a plane hit the Pentagon? Any at all? Any DUers have evidence of a plane hitting it that they can show?

And if it's not a plane, what is it, and where did the plane go?

[karlrschneider]

51. An old friend of mine who I taught to fly in 1963 saw the plane.

He has recently retired from the USAF as a Lt. Colonel and was outside the pentagon when it was hit.
I believe him without reservation.

[Javaman]

58. did he see passenger seats? Did he see engines or wings?

did he see the tail section? if so I would love to talk to him because 99% of the rest of the U.S. didn't see them.

[karlrschneider]

74. He saw the plane as it was descending and heading for the building.

By the way, far more than 99% of the U.S. weren't anywhere near it.

[silvermachine]

77. You are wasting your time...

...believe me. I've tried, with no results.

[mirandapriestly]

121. There were people being interviewed on the scene

that did not see it, they had to be told about it by the news anchors who were watching the footage being sent to them. Why should we believe you?

[vincent_vega_lives]

138. Miranda why should you belive anything you don't see firsthand? (n/t)

[silvermachine]

155. Because I'm a huge Syd fan also?

Had to interject a little levity in this discussion! Peace.
Actually, because I know the person who saw it extremely well. For many years. She wouldn't make it up. I trust her 100%.

[vincent_vega_lives]

137. "I would love to talk to him"

Better not. I doubt that would go very well. :yoiks:

[rcdean]

84. On balance, it probably was a plane.

I'm a believer in conspiracies. I believe that's how the real world works. People with allied interests get together and plot to secretly execute strategies that favor them.

I believe we knew the 9/11 attack was coming. I've seen the Pentagon videos and agree it doesn't look like a plane.

But whatever hit it was traveling fast enough to miss the frame speed of any surveillance video.

On balance I don't see why conspirators would fake a pentagon plane crash.

Plus, if you posit that it's a missile, you then have the burden of explaining what happened to the real plane and its passengers.

Yours is the first first-hand evidence, albeit indirect, that I've heard. Thanks for the information.

[Occulus]

94. Was there ever plane wreckage definitely found at the scene?

The $64,000 question nobody has asked.

Was there?

[slackmaster]

95. Yes, according to people my brother knows at the Pentagon, lots of it

Mostly in very small pieces.

Human remains too. Also mostly in very small pieces.

The cleanup was a horrible, dangerous, gut-wrenching job.

[durtee librul]

114. I am a a first responder

and responded to a plane crash here in Detroit about 12 years ago when a NW jet crashed....I got news for all you folks who SAW a bunch of small pieces......NO PLANE WILL DISINTEGRATE totally into small pieces. I am not a physics major, but I have responded to a horrific plane crash, and I can tell you, there should have been LARGE pieces of debris....and I agree with the other poster who says there should have been a trail of debris into the pentagon.

We saw footage ad nauseum of the WTC and the field in Shanksville...and saw wreckage (remember the engine on the street in NYC?) Well, how come nothing like that ever showed up at the Pentagon?

Regardless of what we want to think (that no american would conceivably think that their 'leaders' would intentionally KILL other americans, folks, it happens. And the present administration has shown us time and time again since 9/11 they are capable of just about anything.

Do I want to buy stock in tinfoil? Probably not, but facts are facts and they just don't add up. And with all the other personal pics of that day, where are there any of the pentagon? Something stinks about it and I think that is all anyone here is trying to say.

No-one is casting dispersion on anyone's credibility, but again, facts are facts and physics is physics. A plane did not hit the pentagon. Unrestrained greed makes people do bad things and there were a LOT of people who were on the verge of getting very very rich on the backs of this disaster....and THAT is an undisputable fact...like it or not.

[slackmaster]

116. Got your "large pieces of debris" pics right here

I'm disappointed that you introduced yourself as a first responder, but were not a first responder at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001.

[vincent_vega_lives]

144. No one is arguing

I am a a first responder and responded to a plane crash here in Detroit about 12 years ago when a NW jet crashed....I got news for all you folks who SAW a bunch of small pieces......NO PLANE WILL DISINTEGRATE totally into small pieces. I am not a physics major, but I have responded to a horrific plane crash, and I can tell you, there should have been LARGE pieces of debris....and I agree with the other poster who says there should have been a trail of debris into the pentagon.

There is plenty of debris. I have seen pics of both large and small peices of debris, thousands of peices. Why a trail? The plane wouldnt start to come apart until it hit the building.

We saw footage ad nauseum of the WTC and the field in Shanksville...and saw wreckage Acutally the very little wreckage at Shanksville has led to claims that there WAS NO plane at Shanksvill too.

Well, how come nothing like that ever showed up at the Pentagon?

Where are you looking? I have seen plenty of pictures of debris.

Regardless of what we want to think (that no american would conceivably think that their 'leaders' would intentionally KILL other americans, folks, it happens. And the present administration has shown us time and time again since 9/11 they are capable of just about anything.

Care to provide exactly what your precidence here is?

but facts are facts and they just don't add up What 'facts' are you refering to. Lots of people use the term 'facts' when they not agreed on facts at all.


No-one is casting dispersion on anyone's credibility Actually I am. ;) Credibility is somthing you can easily disparage with facts.


A plane did not hit the pentagon. Is that one of your "facts are facts"? :eyes: If so I am rather disapointed.

Unrestrained greed makes people do bad things and there were a LOT of people who were on the verge of getting very very rich on the backs of this disaster....and THAT is an undisputable fact...like it or not.

Well no, that is claim that would be backed up with facts to be accurate.


**Crikey, these HTML tags can be tricky.

[Alexander]

117. And there's no way he could've mistaken it for anything else?

I'm not one to assume misinformation, but some missiles out there look an awful lot like small planes, with wings and everything. Just like people heard the shot that killed JFK and assumed it was a car backfiring, so too could someone see something that looks like a plane but in reality be something else.

No matter what you believe, there are lots of questions. I'm tempted to believe it's a plane, but the stonewalling and covering up of information regarding 9/11 has left me rather skeptical.

If it was a plane - why the delay in releasing footage? Why is all the footage released grainy, incomprehensible crap? Why the stunning lack of plane debris? Why did Cheney say things like "don't dig too deep"?

If it was not a plane - where did the plane go? What hit the Pentagon? Who knew about this cover-up and who didn't? Are the passengers dead or alive? What about the terrorists? And why not use a plane in the first place?

Ridiculing people who pose valid questions like these is not going to cause them to suddenly see the light and support your view. I'd like to year your answers to these questions I have, based on what you believe.

[Javaman]

57. And that is exactly my point. Prove me wrong that it wasn't a missile

and I will believe you.

so far as of yet, no one has been able to prove a plane hit the pentagon.

[humbled_opinion]

59. Nuts!!

I admit there are questions but the only sinister finds I make all point to terrorists.

Wait ok lets see Cheney, Bush can pull off such a vast conspiracy on 911 which made us believe 4 flights crashed but instead some were missles not planes. so where are the people on those supposed flights? Ok they are hostage by the government or murdered we will get past that.

Next Bush is so smart he can pull of this vast conspiracy of 911 but then he can't plant WMD in the empty deserts of Iraq to be found by such a small cadre of (in on it people) figure maybe 50 at best in that conspiracy that never happened and once found the WMD make him a hero for the invasion.

I just don't buy any of the conspiracy crap...

[Javaman]

64. That is just the question...

Where indeed are they.

But once again, I ask anyone out there give me photographic evidence that a plane had hit the building and I will go away. Plenty of video was shot that day, plenty of photos, yet none, not a single one will show anything other than a big hole in the building. There are no wings that should have been sheered off when it created a hole much smaller than the profile for that particular aircraft. There is no tail section that should have been sticking out of the side of the building for a plane that size and the distance it traveled into the building. There are not a single seat cushion, seat, pieces of luggage or anything else to show that this was a commercial flight.

Any flight investigator with their salt will tell you that unless a flight comes straight down into the ground, there is always wreckage left over.

[slackmaster]

91. If someone hands you a photo of a plane about to hit the Pentagon,

I suspect you would declare it to be a fake, or at least demand proof that it isn't a fake.

[vincent_vega_lives]

141. Ahh no not quite

There are no wings that should have been sheered off when it created a hole much smaller than the profile for that particular aircraft.

The hole was 100' wide. Enough to fit most of hte wings, (fuel tanks) the outer tips exploded into aluminum fragments on impact.

There is no tail section that should have been sticking out of the side of the building for a plane that size and the distance it traveled into the building.

Ah no. The tail fin exploded and damaged the facade. I think you missunderstand the kinetic forces involved. The fuslage would not have retained its structual shape.

There are not a single seat cushion, seat, pieces of luggage or anything else to show that this was a commercial flight.

It all went into the building (magical powers of momenutum) and anything flamable burned in the subsequent fire. Even then there was DNA evidence recovered.

[karlrschneider]

75. 95000 DUers...a small percentage are nuts as in any large community.

It's amazing.

[silvermachine]

79. Too true..

...I knew better than to post in this thread because in the past, the same lunacy abounds. I can see why some people think this administration is capable of anything, but to deny this is utter nonsense. Doubters should give the Arlington Fire Department a call and ask them.

[John Q. Citizen]

128. Have you voted in the 9/11 poll at the 9/11 forum yet? you might be surprized just

how small that small percentage you speak of really is.

[Grateful for Hope]

129. Quite true, JohnQ. n/t

[praeclarus]

93. a few simple questions that the anti-tinfoi don't answer....

... 1) What possible reason is there to not release this
latest tape in it's entirety.

2) Why was it held for 5 years?

3) Why not release the tape from the gas station across
the street?

4) Why only 5 frames from the tape taken by the camera that
was on the Pentagon grounds?

5) Why not any other tapes from any other camera at the
Pentagon.


That's all. There is nothing to ridicule here. I haven't
said a missile hit the Pentagon. So the ridiculers will
please answer these questions.

[humbled_opinion]

153. answer

1. None
2. Investigations and Trials
3. ? and you know there is one because ?
4. and you know there is more to the tape because ?
5. and you know that those cameras show something because..

The facts are simple.

1. An American Airlines Boeing 757 flight number 77 took off from Washington enroute LA with 56 people onboard.
2. The plane never landed in any airport in the U.S. and 56 people remain unacconted for to their families and friends, including one famous commentator from CNN named Barbara Olson.

So I have one simple question if flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon then where are the people?

[TroglodyteScholar]

103. Popular Mechanics had an article about 9/11 myths...

...including the "missile hit the Pentagon" one. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6 Ths page contains a picture with some supposed airplane debris. The writeup on this particular myth, though, contains an appeal-to-emotion style argument...so I'm not really sure what to think.

[vincent_vega_lives]

145. If it was a missile

It would have had to have been a missile with no high explosive payload, containing airline parts, human DNA, thousands of gallons of jet fuel, and have a wingspan of 124'.

[kegler14]

150. Tell you what...

you prove to us that it WAS a missle.

[slackmaster]

98. The video doesn't show JACK SHIT

It's useless.

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bamacrat]

65. The camera on my phone takes better pictures.

But I guess cuts have to be made somewhere.

[Javaman]

80. And the inverse is true, trying to show people that something is not

right with the "official" version is impossible.

These people* lie to us, steal from us, send us to war for no reason. They fix votes, have corruption leaking from their very pours...

yet, people still believe the "official" version out of the WH. Go figure.

This is my final post on this subject, those of you who believe the official version, fine that's your right, I will believe my version.

And never the twain shall meet.

[silvermachine]

82. Final post

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

Peace. To all, no matter your point of view.

[superconnected]

87. Well, I can certianly see why they held on to that.

Not.

It should say, "FBI releases NOTHING", cause that's what they released.

[lovuian]

96. No plane did hit the Pentagon

it was a missile or bomb

[slackmaster]

97. Are you calling my brother a liar?

Or his fellow US Navy officers who were there, and SAW a plane hitting the building?

Or all the sailors, soldiers, firefighters, and rescue workers who sifted through piles of building rubble and AIRCRAFT WRECKAGE looking for survivors and recovering bodies?

Or the families of the people who were in the building or on the plane, and died?

[Shadder]

101. I want you to look at this photo.

Do you see the unbroken windows that the arrows are pointing to right below the hole that the plain is said to have made? A hole that is far too small for a plane of that type to have made. Show me in that photo any evidence of a plane hitting the building. Anything at all.

[slackmaster]

102. How the fuck can anyone tell whether those windows are broken from THAT?

Show me in that photo any evidence of a plane hitting the building. Anything at all.

The photo obviously doesn't even show the ground level of the building, so you can't ascertain the size of the hole from it either.

Here's your hole:



Pardon the violation of the civility rule, this post will likely be deleted, but you can go pound sand. My brother had friends who DIED in that building, and others who were traumatized by what they saw that day.

There most assuredly was an airplane. As I posted earlier, I am only two degrees from eye witness accounts, and the connections between them and myself are as trustworthy as any relationships I have ever had in my life.

[Shadder]

109. A much later photo

The photo you supplied shows the section of the building AFTER the section had collapsed. The one that I gave was one of the first photos taken after whatever happened there took place. You want to see the unbroken windows? Look at this one.



Your picture while quite graphic really does nothing to prove that it was in fact a plane.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Shadder]

112. Hey, GREAT way to ignore the glass

Do you happen to know what happens to even the strongest glass made when a plane hits it at flight speed?

[slackmaster]

113. I can't tell if there is glass in those panes or not

And neither can you. And it doesn't matter.

It's certainly clear that your image contains parts of the building that did not get hit by a plane (or anything else) but that is not evidence that the building was not hit by a plane. The Pentagon is a really BIG building. I've been there. I've seen it.

Do you see how that works?

Do you happen to know what happens to even the strongest glass made when a plane hits it at flight speed?

Sure. It breaks into billions of pieces.

And here is a Profound Revelation(TM) for you:

Glass that doesn't get hit by a plane does not necessarily break.

:dunce:

[Shadder]

118. Come on!

"It's certainly clear that your image contains parts of the building that did not get hit by a plane (or anything else) but that is not evidence that the building was not hit by a plane."

Your kidding, right. You can't tell that this is the same section of the building just at different times after the event? The section of the building in that photo is the area of the building that shows up in your photo as the collapsed section. You may not be aware of this, but that big hole in the building was not like that until a bit later when the section collapsed. You can start to see the section going down in the photo if you look at the roof line. You should notice that the roof is a bit lower in the collapsing section.

As to the glass, you should be able to look at that and see the flame retardant spray the the firefighters sprayed on the outside of the building sticking to those still intact panes of glass. The windows in question are directly above the hole in the building that is said to have been made by the plane. A hole I might add that is way too small to have been made by that type of a plane.

[slackmaster]

152. Photo does not show any of the ground floor

So it doesn't show the whole impact area.

[vincent_vega_lives]

148. It obviously didn't hit it (n/t)

[kerry_s]

130. And my sister KNOWS PEOPLE WHO SAW ALIENS

And my sister KNOWS PEOPLE WHO SAW ALIENS,

the windows above the hole are covered by foam so we can see them unbroken, m...n.

[Bolo Boffin]

131. You're comparing the hundred of Pentagon eyewitnesses...

...to alien abductees?

Wow.

[slackmaster]

157. Your sister's acquaintences are nuts

My brother's aren't.

[vincent_vega_lives]

147. If you look closely

You can see the dark hole through the foam where the wing punched through.

[vincent_vega_lives]

149. You can see where the facade of the building needed

to be propped up with stacks of 4" x 4" after being undercut by the wing, just to the left of the collapsed portion. Note the pile of metal to the left of that while you're at it.

[vincent_vega_lives]

146. 'Far too small"

How do you figure? It is 15-16 feet across. The fuselage of a 757 is 13' across.

The foam spray is preventing the hole made by the wings from being viewed. But you CAN see were the right engine went through the chain-link fence and struck the generator trailer at the right of the photo.

The windows were 2" think blast resistant windows.

[dailykoff]

104. The people who died there were deliberately murdered

by agents of the United States government including the President, Vice President, and Secretary of Defense.

Deal with it.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mirandapriestly]

122. I agree, dk.eom

[fujiyama]

127. You have evidence for that claim?

Where was the said missile launched from?

[0rganism]

111. question for doubters/skeptics -- what would be sufficient evidence?

If there were a plane in the video footage, would that in itself have been sufficient?

If the video footage were of a higher quality and the plane were in it, would that have sufficed?

There are people posting in the thread who claim to know eye-witnesses and victims. If their testimony is suspect, what testimony would not be?

It seems to me that any footage released this long after the fact invites suspicion (yet another colossally stupid move by the gov't), but what if this is really all they have? How could someone convince you the damage was caused by a plane, rather than a missile or a meteor or the divine hand of Allah Himself? I'm not disputing that there are huge problems with the way the "conventional" account is presented, just wondering what you think they could have done to tell you about it in a way that would have left little or no doubt about the events.

One thing remains consistent: I have not heard or read a single eye-witness account that mentioned a projectile other than a plane. Some insist they saw a plane, others weren't looking until they heard the crash or were simply at the wrong angle to see, or were inside the building itself.

[greccogirl]

119. NOTHING would be sufficient.

[John Q. Citizen]

126. I think it's reasonable to assume that a plane hit the Pentagon.

However, whether a plane hit the Pentagon or not really isn't the question, is it?

I hope you can find time to read this article that's currently up at common dreams. It's medium length and very well written. It addresses many of the bigger questions that 9/11 raises.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1203-21.htm

[Downtown Hound]

132. There are more cameras on the Pentagon than you can shake a stick at

There is no way this video is all they have.

[savemefromdumbya]

143. I'm sure there must be other photos and videos

[Infinite Hope]

115. Is it just me, or is the dark spot starting from the Pentagon...

I see no plane (dark object) coming from the sky and hitting the Pentagon. I see only something coming from the Pentagon...only an explosion therefore.

[savemefromdumbya]

142. yes because it was blown by bombs

Mr Rumsfeld went along to see how he'd done (extent of the damage)

[sgsmith]

151. Doubletree video

The "government conspiracy" folks won't see the airplane in the video, because they're convinced that it's not there. However, if you look at the second and third loops of the video, there is a white blue just over the horizon that moves quickly from left to right. This white blue preceeds what I'm calling the big rig that travels left to right at the top of the horizon. There's a substantial difference in the the amount of time that the big rig takes to cover the same horizontal width on the video compared to the white blur.

This white blur disappears from the video clip, but it seems to track very well with time until the explosion is seen.

But, I'm sure that if you don't want to see it, you won't.


BTW - the still image on the original post is badly clipped on the left hand side, which just happens to be the side that the airplane would have been coming from.

[DoYouEverWonder]

156. And the OCTers

will all see Flight 77.