9/11 Pentagon Video finally released...

Geck0 wrote: Then you would know about the security cameras installed in the Pentagon then?  Why has there only been released a very poor video from a carpark CCTV camera?And then the hotel opposite (as well as other places) had their tapes removed and have never been released... what's going on with that?Here are the two CCTV camera views they've released...http://www.judicialwatch.org/flight77.shtmlIt's inconclusive.

What difference does it make? Maybe the other cameras didn't get as good of a view. But that's neither here nor there.

The point is it would be impossible pull off an elaborate hoax like that at a moment's notice with all the parties that would be involved and not to mention all the potential witnesses.

Use some common sense.
    

marktheshark wrote: What difference does it make? Maybe the other cameras didn't get as good of a view. But that's neither here nor there. The point is it would be impossible pull off an elaborate hoax like that at a moment's notice with all the parties that would be involved and not to mention all the potential witnesses. Use some common sense.

Perhaps this link might shed a little light on how they could pull off an elaborate hoax at a moments notice.

    http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/13052/New_9_11_Documentary_Everybody_s_Gotta_Learn_Sometime

The more of these I see, the more uneasy I get about the direction we are being led.

marktheshark wrote: sleeper wrote: marktheshark wrote: Tony R wrote: I do not believe an airplane hit The Pentagon. Having scrutinised pictures of the lawn outside,the size of the hole in the building and the condition of exterior and interior walls,plus the fact that the Govt claims to have only this small video evidence,I can only come to one conclusion: one would have to be extremely gullible to believe the Govt's version of events. And one would have to be pretty paranoid to hang on to this theory. So I ask again, WHERE ARE THE PASSENGERS THEN?!        Were's the plain wreckage? Where was plane wreckage in the WTC buildings? They didn't come up with any major parts. The answer, according to an Air Force Capt. was they were disintegrated. These planes blew up as a cause of impact, not skidding down in a farmers field. There are no wings left because that's where the fuel is and I think the tail has an auxillary tank. When jet fuel is ignited in open air under pressure as opposed to inside an engine, it burns over 100 times hotter because it's exposed to more oxygen. The hottest point of the explosion is the white flash at the point of impact. Now, the shell of a 757 is not exactly an armored car. I forget the technical name of the alloy they use. But it's basically an eggshell. This isn't coming from me, I got this last year at a veteran's forum where they had this same discussion. And this Air Force chap basically just said that any kind of crash involving a jet impacting is not going to leave much. In fact I think I remember he mentioned that he was at the crash site of Dean Martin's son who crash his F-14 into a mountain and all they could find was some landing gear and parts of the engines and cockpit. Not even bones! I'm no expert on this, so just take for what it is.

Geck0 wrote: Then you would know about the security cameras installed in the Pentagon then?  Why has there only been released a very poor video from a carpark CCTV camera?And then the hotel opposite (as well as other places) had their tapes removed and have never been released... what's going on with that?Here are the two CCTV camera views they've released...http://www.judicialwatch.org/flight77.shtmlIt's inconclusive.

Very inconclusive. Nothing is proved either way in these films. In the first film you see something thin and white coming in very low on the right side of the frame, which then promptly vanishes before the explosion comes. I realise whatever it was was travelling very fast, but it's as if there are a number of frames missing from the film. We need to see that film frame by frame. The difference between a Boeing 757 and a cruise missile should be blatantly obvious at any speed.
    

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.

Thats true, but a frame by frame analysis should reveal more than that I would have thought. Certainly in terms of the size of the the thing. Maybe not. I guess we'll never know.

I'd like to hear the testimonies of the eye witnesses again.
    

Wow, you have the same ideas as I have.  I felt it a bit weird had the "object" just disappeared.  It's in the right corner and then there is a gap... and then a fireball.

I know this may sound odd... but I saw nobody on the scene, nobody running, no vehicles (except the Police Car and one vehicle driving away from the Pentagon after the "'plane" has gone in - which seems military to me, but it's so fuzzy and distant).

Edit: I must add... after reviewing the CCTV footage, it has become even clearer that it's not a 757.  The seemingly white fuselage of the object seems to be either on the ground, or a few feet or less above the ground.  Now, I'm no pilot, but to me to be able to fly any large aircraft at such a height and at such a speed, would be nigh on impossible.  Surely it'd be easier to come in at a shallower angle and at a slower speed?  The damage could have been greater this way.  The fact that the only major damage was caused to a refurbished part of the Pentagon, also sounds somewhat fishy.  And the whole thing was repaired in a year, or something like that.

Has anyone else had these same doubts?


Edited by Geck0 - May 18 2006 at 09:14

But there is doubt to whether they were military or civil 'planes Bob.  They may have even been radio controlled.

Watch video that I posted earlier - it explains how the planes were "abducted" and then modified for radio controlled operation.

I'm not saying that I'm convinced that that's what happened - I'm merely saying that they do have a point. In the end there will always be doubts - about both sides of the story.

This would have been so hard to fake ... radio controlled planes and all the passengers disappear.

I only said it was a possibility they could have been radio controlled of course.

I'm still unsure as to what conspiracy I believe, but I am pretty sure there is one to believe.