9/11 Pentagon Video finally released...

Here's another conspiracy theory:
Why are Admins now coming out in favour of the official story? Has M@X been contacted by the official story wielders, like the rest of the media seems to have been?
This is just making fun... or is it?

Yes I have, but It still doesn't put to rest my unease, like the rest of the 'official' stories. I even know the link you posted needs to be edited to get to the word document.
[edit] What I haven't done is watch the video that it criticises
    
    

Edited by cobb - May 19 2006 at 20:53

Still too many questions, Fitzcarraldo. Why did they fall like a controlled demolition- no skyscraper has ever fallen down previously. Why didn't the top of the first tower to fall not fall into the city as it had started to? Why where a number of explosion heard pre the collapse of the towers. Why was the Pentagon hit 1 hour and how many minutes after the intial event (this in itself is a damning epitath to America's readiness to defend itself)? Why were high officials warned not to fly on the day. Why did the President continue to look nonchalant in a classroom after an aide had told him "America is under attack"? Why the stock put options? Why so many paper leads to the supposed hijackers and CIA. Why did the CIA and FBI gag so many of their own. Why did those who failed in their capacity and duty receive promotions?There are a myriad more questions. If something smells like sh*t, there's a fair chance that it just might be rotten.
    

Edited by cobb - May 19 2006 at 20:48

Tony R wrote: I read it. I might never read again!

It isn't easy going, is it? But the additional information on the large-scale fire and damage to the other side of WTC7 (as far as I recall, the other videos I have seen only show the undamaged side) is important. As is his analysis of the Pentagon attack, which is very detailed.

Ghandi 2 wrote: [QUOTE=Fitzcarraldo] In the interests of informed debate, there is a point-by-point rebuttal of the above-mentioned '911 Loose Change' documentary, posted at the following Web site:   http://www.911myths.com/911_loose_change_2_guide_1.doc [/QUOTE] After watching a significant portion of Loose Change and reading most of that document, I must say that I side with the document: It cites its claims and shows more than one photograph of each item in question, and Loose Change does not.

I agree with you.

The document is 146 (A4) pages long. It takes several hours to read properly and identifies clear errors of fact in the '911 Loose Change' video, supported by citations. It also provides textual references, quotes, media photographs and videos that provide further information, giving additional insight.

I do hope that the people posting in this thread will take the time to read the complete document. It is easier to watch a video then read such a document, but one cannot discuss these matters without taking time to study the materials.

I would be interested to know if Professor Jones of Brigham Young University has read this document, and what his comments are on it.

After watching the second video again, I now think the frame rate is correct, with no frames missing. But does that small white streak look like a commercial airliner?

Tony R wrote: cobb wrote: No, not in the video you linked to. There are two. Find the one that shows the frames in the made up video. The Pentagon footage is original, only the plane has been added. The video you linked to with the jet added is does not represent a plane travelling at 550 MPH!!

So I ask again, how quickly does an explosion occur. Look at the second video (new link in above post). Clearly 4 frames capture the explosion
    

Even if the plane went 500 miles per hour instead of 500 kiilometers, this is only a factor of 1.609. You should still be able to see the plane disappear into the building, even at 4 pics shot per second only.

Edited by BaldJean - May 19 2006 at 19:32

No, not in the video you linked to. There are two. Find the one that shows the frames in the made up video. The Pentagon footage is original, only the plane has been added.

[added] The 2 videos are here, but you will have trouble getting them- understandably they are having bandwidth problems on these.

    http://judicialwatch.org/flight77.shtml

Edited by cobb - May 19 2006 at 19:40

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ it should be pointed out that an object travelling at 500 kph moves more than 60 meters each 1/24th second. I don't know the exact speed of the plane, but even if it had been very slow (250 kph) it would still be 30 meters.

I have no idea what you are calculating, but 500000 meters/3600 seconds is approximately 138.89 meters per second, so a plane at 500 km per hour moves with a speed of 138.89 meters per second. Divide that by 24, and you get less than 6 meters for the plane to move forward per pic. Since a plane is more than 6 meters long, you should see it disappear bit by bit into the building. Even if the cameras take only 4 shots per second, you should clearly see the plane disappear into the building, since it is over 100 meters long. The official pictures suggest something smaller moving at a much higher speed.


Edited by BaldJean - May 19 2006 at 19:17