It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

*Hopefully* Video of Flight 77 hitting Pentagon soon to be released.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by NinjaCodeMonkey
Well they have had 5 years to create the perfect fake so i am sure it will look good. There is no reason for not showing it earlier if it was legit, they had no problem showing the ones flying into the towers. How was the pentagon any different?


If you check out www.flight77.info you'll see why. It is evidence in a trial that has just started for an AL Qaeda member. The trial only started on Monday though so don't hold your breath.


moussaoui's sentencing trial begins monday. the trial could last a few months and after it is over - after the govt has shown the jury the images of flight 77 impacting the pentagon -THEN, as the govt has stated, the images can be released to the public.

just to reiterate, i DO think 9/11 was an inside job. releasing the images of the impact will help end this tired 757/no-757 debate so that people will have more time to focus on investigating other issues, like WTC7.
www.flight77.info...



NEW YORK (CNN) -- Even though admitted al Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui was behind bars on September 11, 2001, the U.S. government blames him for the 2,973 lives lost in the attacks.

As punishment, the United States wants him executed.

More than four years after he was arraigned in a Virginia federal courthouse about 10 miles from the Pentagon, Moussaoui goes on trial for his life Monday, when jury selection begins.

Moussaoui, 37, remains the only person criminally charged by the United States in connection with the four September 11 hijackings.
edition.cnn.com...


Obviously you cannot show evidence before the trial is finished, it's just taken nearly 5 years for it to even start.
Besides, as I said, at the end of the day some people may make a bit of noise and whine a bit - but Bush still got elected a second term and there is no civil war - so what's the hurry for them?




posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
You can't see it? You are talking about exactly the same tactics as the Government use to push their agenda.
What are you going to promote anyway? Theories which have no proof that sway people's opinons into your favour? Cause civil unrest?


Woa?

No I'm just pissed at the government and their propoganda, I think it would only be fair if people were presented both sides of the story.

My aim? Fairness....overthrow the government.



posted on Feb, 5 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Presenting both side of the story is fair, but you suggested bombarding people with just one side which is probably as full of as many holes as the complete official version of events. Which is fair enough, I can understand why you feel that way perfectly well! LOL But we must try and hold the upper hand or we face an Animal Farm style situation.
In reality, any potential Government involvement is probably limited to groups of people and/or certain organisations within it. No point wrecking something when a lot of it works pretty well. You would probably find that the majority of people within it do not approve of or are even aware of any foul play.

[edit on 5-2-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I guess they are doing what they can to put the kabosh on that video release.

Go figure.

Government goof could save would-be hijacker


"In all the years I've been on the bench, I have never seen such an egregious violation of a rule on witnesses," Brinkema declared.


And I'm sure those government lawyers are saying "ooopsie.....we're sowwie......it was an aaaaaacccident!"


I can't believe any of you actually thought any of these videos would ever see the light of day.

Spare me.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   
So, here we have proof of a tape, the reason it was withheld and a possible release.

Folks, it only took 3 years to make the Star Wars movies, I am sure they could have called ILM or someone and had a CGI plane inserted and released days after the attack if they wanted. but they didn't. They knew it may be evidence and it turns out it was.

Now instead of demanding the tape, the propoganda about "Why didn't they do it sooner" will be the arguement. Go figure.....



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   
In what way could publication of those videos compromise court cases or national security?

I think you should have an explanation for that to approve of their classification...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   
This was one of the most curious things about 9/11. No footage of flight 77. Which is most peculiar.

Although I believe 9/11 was partly an inside job with the gov, I believe flight 77, and not a missile, hit the pentagon, and thus, I am quite certain a 757 will be shown, without computer modification.

I do find it really weird they have been supressing this tape, however.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:08 PM
link   
You people are on crack if you think this tape will EVER see the light of day.

Why would they release the first one and then deny releasing it???

Simple......BECAUSE IT IS FAKE.




There was no 757 at the pentagon.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lumos
In what way could publication of those videos compromise court cases or national security?

I think you should have an explanation for that to approve of their classification...


Exactly.

Furthermore.....what relevance does it have with Moussaoui who took no part in the 9/11 attacks at all let alone the pentagon?



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Moussaoui is long thought to and is prosecuted and the "other hijacker' and is tied to the 9/11 cell that took out the WTC and the Pentagon.

What is fake about the video?



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Care to answer the question why confiscation of the videos was necessary from a legal perspective?



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lumos
Care to answer the question why confiscation of the videos was necessary from a legal perspective?


I don't think anyone wants to answer that...because there is no answer. Well, except maybe if the hijackers of Flight 77 were waving a flag out the window reading "WE MISS YOU MOUSSAOUI!" as they flew into the building.

Really, there's no logical reason.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   

esdad71
So, here we have proof of a tape, the reason it was withheld and a possible release.


That sounded otherwise, don't you think?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join