The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

a reply to: Salander

And if you are not aware that all the flight 77 related footage that was seized was released through freedom of information requests and court battles after its been posted over and over again indicates you are here for only half truths. To push half the narrative instead of arguing facts.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: D8Tee

Through a certain lens, you are right.

Perhaps wrongly, I operate under the assumption that 15 years after it happened, most posters are informed about what happened.

The FBI seized the videos from several nearby civilian facilities including at least one hotel.

If you are not aware of that I'm sorry, and apologize for thinking you were informed. Apologies.

Nice try. Where is your evidence, you seem to be missing that part.

Never any evidence from you, just false and misleading claims, do you have no shame?

Some people search for the truth, others just want to be right.

Do you believe the Maguire Declaration to be fraudulent and if so why has no one in the truth movement pursued that via the court system then? Gage pulled in 600,000 dollars in 2014 and their group only spent 1,300 on legal fees, you'd think they would actively pursue the 'missing videos' that some think still exist.

a reply to: D8Tee

Where is YOUR evidence friend?

What evidence do YOU have, have YOU presented, that proves the official story true?

Frequent repetition of the official talking points do not make them true. That might work for you, but it does not work for me.

a reply to: Salander

Are you just going to say the eyewitness accounts of individuals seeing a large commercial jet hit the pentagon are wrong with no proof or evidence? Again.

a reply to: Salander

What about first responder reports from the inside of the building describing wreckage and aircraft parts you backed the wrong horse but you can't admit it your pride wont let you.

a reply to: Salander

Funny you make straw man arguments that people defend the official account. Quote were I totally believe and defend the official accout. Quote from any 9/11 thread are government is without fault.

Again, what AE 9/11 Truth theory that brought down the towers do you champion.

I support inward bowing and collapse at the towers. Is that the official stance of NIST?

People answer your questions with honesty, openly, with integrity, cite sources, use quotes in context, and knowledge based on science.

What cause for the towers collapse do you champion? You avoid questions proposed to you by ignoring them, and play "what about this". Example. What does your false belief in there is flight 77 video yet released in the context that groups other than the truth movement fought and forced the release of all flight 77 footage have to do with the legitimately of flight 77 passenger DNA evidence, pictures and accounts of flight 77 wreckage, personal effects in the wreckage, radar data, flight recorder data, the entrance hole, the funerals for the passengers of flight 77, issued death certificates, and eyewitness accounts?

Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate
www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

There is no evidence at this time that the government is withholding other images of the event captured by the surveillance cameras.

I have quotes this before.

You only have the false claims of who backs the official account and innuendo they lied.

When Steve you going to state what brought down the towers and the pentagon. When area you going to cite sources and individuals. When are you going to stop saying they lied and provide a logical argument based on facts? Not false claims they lied and are hiding this and that.

a reply to: Salander

The FBI seized the videos from several nearby civilian facilities including at least one hotel.

My evidence that the videos have been released is the Maguire Declaration, you are aware of that, quit playing games and try to debate properly please.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Are you just going to say the eyewitness accounts of individuals seeing a large commercial jet hit the pentagon are wrong with no proof or evidence? Again.

Yes, I am going to say that, because there was nothing at the scene that suggested that an airliner had just crashed there, just as Fox News Jamie Somebody noted.

And to be clear I have read and watched many stories about those in the vicinity and what they saw. Many saw the airplane, none saw it crash into the building. Ooops, early FDR stuff from the government showed fly by, not crash.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Salander

The FBI seized the videos from several nearby civilian facilities including at least one hotel.

My evidence that the videos have been released is the Maguire Declaration, you are aware of that, quit playing games and try to debate properly please.

Yes, I do understand that the confiscated videos were finally released, years ago.

And they showed precious little as to aircraft movement, rather like the parking lot video frames.

The question for the curious is: what motivates the government agents to do that? Do they or their bosses want to keep something secret? Why don't they do it on other days of the year? Why don't they just contact the hotel and request the hotel send copies for the investigation, and I'm sure the hotel would be happy to comply.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Salander

The FBI seized the videos from several nearby civilian facilities including at least one hotel.

My evidence that the videos have been released is the Maguire Declaration, you are aware of that, quit playing games and try to debate properly please.

The question for the curious is: what motivates the government agents to do that? Do they or their bosses want to keep something secret? Why don't they do it on other days of the year?

What motivates them to do what? I am not understanding.

Why don't they just contact the hotel and request the hotel send copies for the investigation, and I'm sure the hotel would be happy to comply.

Not following you here. What are you trying to say?

a reply to: D8Tee

What motivates them to go seize it quickly, instead of requesting the hotel to send them copies? They act like they are hiding something.

Everybody knew (assuming it was true) that an airliner crashed there, who gives a GGD if they have the video of it?

If the story were true, who cares what might be on some video across the street? If the story were false.....?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: D8Tee

What motivates them to go seize it quickly, instead of requesting the hotel to send them copies? They act like they are hiding something.

Everybody knew (assuming it was true) that an airliner crashed there, who gives a GGD if they have the video of it?

If the story were true, who cares what might be on some video across the street? If the story were false.....?

It was a criminal investigation. It's how they are trained to do it, they don't deviate from the Standard Operating Procedures, they follow protocol. What a very weak argument you have presented.

a reply to: Salander

You are wrong.

Works cited that prove so. Again.

Can you provide a logical and fact based argument to refute them?

www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

stj911.org...

www.journalof911studies.com...

a reply to: Salander

What motivates them to go seize it quickly, instead of requesting the hotel to send them copies? They act like they are hiding something.

I agree.

There was an explosion of some kind at the Pentagon, people killed, and people in power were more interested in confiscating surrounding business videos, instead of tending to the victims.

To be an investigator one MUST be open to conspiracy theories, because many times, a conspiracy theory has been proven true in solving a crime.

Any Homicide detective will tell us that.

a reply to: Informer1958

There was an explosion of some kind at the Pentagon, people killed, and people in power were more interested in confiscating surrounding business videos, instead of tending to the victims.

WOW, just when I think I've heard the weakest argument ever along comes this!

Do you think there was a shortage of people attending to the victims?

There was no shortage of manpower, this happened in DC dude, it's crawling with feds.

a reply to: Informer1958

A jet full of fuel isn't going to explode when it hits a building? So yes, there was an explosion. Care to be more vague in you speculation?

a reply to: D8Tee

WOW, just when I think I've heard the weakest argument ever along comes this!

There's nothing weak about it. Feds running all over the place confiscating nearby business video cameras, and later, we are told nothing to see on the videos.

For the Feds to be scrambling to all the nearby business, I believe the Feds were following orders to a higher power.

Take the words of authority, and in America, we don't have the freedom to question any of it without ridicule, as if authority in government is God. I don't buy the properganda crap our government pushes mainstream properganda media sells as the OS.

The fact is, there is only two sides to the 911 story, and that is the official properganda, reported by properganda mainstream media, the proven lairs of today same media, and the truth.

a reply to: Informer1958

For the Feds to be scrambling to all the nearby business, I believe the Feds were following orders to a higher power.

It's called crime scene investigation, I don't know how you could see this as anything out of the ordinary for a major investigation like this.

a reply to: D8Tee

It's called crime scene investigation, I don't know how you could see this as anything out of the ordinary for a major investigation like this.

Investigation? You mean the investigation of Feds picking up some kind of evidence on the front lawn of the Pentagon, right after the explosion?

The feds destroying evidence of a crime scene, without so much as tagging and photographing any of it. The video in question was all over the News, showing men in suite lined up across the pentagon lawn, picking up some small things, and putting them in large black plastic bags.

What the excuse are you going to give to get these men off the hook?

a reply to: Informer1958

Yea, cause you have to tag and photograph every scrap that is on the lawn in the middle of fighting a building fire and structural collapse right? I don't see them as being on a hook. When you need to move emergency service vehicles into the area, the last thing you want is a bunch of sharp objects laying around that are going to puncture the tires. BTW, what is your source for this, I'd like to know more about it.