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.

 

Flight77.info - Pentagon video release imminent?

page: 24
1
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by commonsense4u
Hey, does anyone know how fast the 757 was supposed to going when it hit the pentagon? Do any reports estimate a specific speed? thx.



...


IIRC it was travelling at 534 mph at impact.




posted on May, 18 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
It's very clear now it was not a 757, way too little for a 757, looking at the pictures convinced me more than before that it's something else.



Way too little for a 757, I'm glad they relised the new frames, this proves more there was no 757




I have never seen a boeing shaped like this especialy the nose, it looks more like a fighter jet.


This shows very clear that it's too smal, the shape of the 757 in this picture would fit a jet fighter or a global hawk, comapring it to the walls of the pentagon it looks like an insect which would not be the case of a 757.
I think we can put this to rest
It's a conspiracy.



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrokenVisage

Originally posted by HardToGet

Originally posted by AdamJ
please note that we still have a second FOIA request active for the other 84 flight 77 recordings. we WILL get those also.


Are you positive? How can you be sure you will get them? Keeping my fingers crossed here...


Yeah, how sure are you just because they gave us these two POS videos? I'm of the opinion that they'll drag their feet even more some how and we won't see anything substainsial from this point on, this would have been the time to show us the plane and they don't show crap.


it should have been in quotes
its from the website that started this thread, flight 77
im not confident. I just hope now we can get some video. The FBI has already admitted the video shows NO flight 77, but we will see what we will see if its released.
i have a suspition only 'after impact' footage will be released or something ridiculous
presumeably anything seriosuly incrminating has long been 'lost' (destroyed)

[edit on 18-5-2006 by AdamJ]



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   
I took the source videos and picture from IgnoranceIsntBliss post


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Video Source:
Videos of American Flight 77 striking the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 (DOD):
Video 1 external video
Video 2 external video

Camera 1 Frame 1:
Normal Full Frame:
i24.photobucket.com...
Camera 1 Frame 2:
Normal Full Frame:
i24.photobucket.com...

Camera 2 Frame 1:
Normal Full Frame:
i24.photobucket.com...
Camera 2 Frame 2:
Normal Full Frame:
i24.photobucket.com...



And did visual compare the the picture by toggling fast between between

Camera 1 Frame 1: and Camera 1 Frame 2:

and

Camera 2 Frame 1: and Camera 2 Frame 2:

then I chekced about the videos the frames before the 'plane' appers and the one with the ''plane'

In both cases something importand seems to have been cuted out:

Here I put them together in scale 1 and zoomed * 2



visual compare them!

Do you see it?

1. The white smoke trail has a little black bar overlapping the yellow metall box.
This could be a video artiefact because you can see simulare when the police cra passes by.

2) You see the dark triangle just above the metall box.
That is hardly an artefact.. and hardly a peace of the object traveling at that speed (seekoff
....so edited away cuttet or placed in there to distract (I remember theroies that used this triangle as small plane)

3) the whithe smooking thing has no shadow on the ground

4) in the other camera right in front of the so called 'nose' you see like a thin white triangle standig top side down. above that a darkened color bar..far right in the same pic a brighter white dot. and between the triangle and that white dot it also seems as if it is faintly different then in the frame before.
This is of the size you can hide a whole plane in (probabily also the 757)

It strongly looks to me the object of desire has been cutted out What we see is maybe only the thrust of a single rocked engine or some fantasie of the creater.

So I am back to my very first stomach impretion. Did the gov deliver us not only unusuable but edited or completly faked pics after all????

what a sad world we are living in. lying fakeing lying
lNow I am really in a sad mood.


edit to add:
ohbyway IgnoranceIsntBliss can you create a difference pic of the two frame showing only the difference? would be good thing here.


[edit on 18-5-2006 by g210]

[edit on 18-5-2006 by g210]



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 08:38 PM
link   
here's a GREAT website on the Pentagon Research

www.pentagonresearch.com...

and I quote:


I don't know what they did but I will operate on the time separations being accurate because the action in the frames corresponds to what you would expect. I will only give a cursory evaluation of these frames since I lack video expertise. We have 5 frames which cover a 4 second period. The first 2 frames occur in the same second, the third frame is 2 seconds later, the fourth frame is 1 second after that, and the fifth frame is another second after that. This means that many frames are missing including any that show a clear profile of the aircraft. Security cameras shoot from 15 frames per second (fps) to 120 fps. We've only been allowed a fraction of a second view selectively controlled with the wrong date and time stamp after originally denying they had any video at all.



www.pentagonresearch.com...



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Iconoclast
Trust me, the standard went through the roof because of incidents like Oklahoma City and everyone has had to upgrade substantially. If the buildings in a non-critical region are subject to the stardard using the hi-res stuff since the late 90's, the Pentagon has been using much better.

Again, this isn't a building security camera....


That this is the best video they have. It isn't.

I can't recall them or anyone on this board ever claiming or believing this is the best video.


Right. The same bureaucratic excuses for everything. So when the Chinese or Russians or Iranians or Canadians finally get fed up and attack, they'll be able to take the country at their whim, because... there's too much red tape, we're all just too confused, and the defenses are not designed for what ever attack is coming.

What are you talking about? Another country attacking is no where near as complicated as hijackings. If another country attacks you know and can clearly identify which objects are hostile and what is the enemy. With hijackings (esepcially multiple like on 9/11) you're talking about your own citizens as well as sorting out which planes really are hijacked and which aren't.
Attacks from any other country would be dealt with before it reaches the border. With something like 9/11 you're talking about engaging in action over highly populated areas. Of course there's going to be multiple things that happen before any order is given to engage.

And again, our defense system IS designed for an attack from another country.



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
HI, just new here, and spent the last few days reading many of the threads here, and upon hearing the release of the Pentagon garage/gate film to the public, I just wanted to voice a concern that I think many people are overlooking.

The "gate" camera's are somewhat "fish-eyed". Has anyone ever taken into consideration that cameras with a "fish eye" type lens distort alot of detail? making things look out of proportion of which they are filming?

I for one dont believe that its nothing BUT a 757 crashing into the Pentagon, and that it was Flight 77 that did. But the "released" gate camera images only confirm that its a plane; distorted in size because of the type of camera being used there.

Just my 2 cents



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Security cameras don't record 1 frame per second.

there's cameras all over the freaking place.... even head on!

www.pentagonresearch.com...



Date: 9/14/01
Time: unknown
Photographer: US Department of Defense - Tech. Sgt. Cedric H. Rudisill

DESCRIPTION: Guard shack where the CCTV images were captured from. They must rely on that camera to cover that general area since I don't see any on the wall.

KEY NOTES: Just in case anybody was thinking that there were no other cameras I've added the following photo of the "SW Corner" of the Pentagon. It was taken by the same photographer on the same day. The flag is the one placed on 9/12/01 just to the right of the impact area. At least two of those cameras are facing the whole incident face on. Not to mention the one that was destroyed almost directly above the impact. Where is that footage?






C'mon, this is the pentagon! And the crapy 1 frame per second fish eye video released is what they used in court?!



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 11:31 PM
link   
The slow vid camera was just an assumption that Agent Smith seems to want everyone to believe is a fact because he thinks it it helps his argument.

Like a lot of the other asuumptions with 9-11, like a 707 is half the size of a 757



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 11:58 PM
link   
to the clip art job that someone else posted on here

members.shaw.ca...







SMR

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Again, given such already linked photographic evidence, there was NO Su-27 or similar aircraft involved, there was no Global Hawk involved, there was no cruise missile involved, and there was no other craft involved other than a 757, period.

Thats pretty bold there.Do you have 100% proof of this other than a few small chunks of metal, a hole, and 5 frames of video showing ABSOLUTELY NO PLANE?



Review the facts:

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
ME: Sorry, not a fact, thats an observation pal.

Rims found in building match those of a 757

Small turbine engine outside is an APU
ME: HOLY FRICKEN MOLY! Did we not just argue about this and your link ( Pentagon & Boeing 757 Engine Investigation ) said it was NOT from an APU of a 757 !! Now you post a fact that it is an APU.Which is it man.Make up your mind will ya!

Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine

Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
ME: Couldnt be from say, any other type of plane? Only the Boeing 757 has blue seats?

Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
ME: Fact? So that little piece of 'lettering' could not be from anything else? Or is this just an assumption since it is said it was an American Airlines jet that crashed into the Pentagon?

Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
ME: Now we have an engine? Maybe I missed that image? Link please?

Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
ME: Can you link to this image please so I know what image it is before I tear this fact up.

Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
How does this in any way prove a 757 hit the Pentagon? Well I guess that settles it! I got another fact that might just help backup the official story... The grass in front of the Pentagon is green!!
This fact is rubish.


Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
ME: And it is a fact that ONLY a 757 could do this?

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
ME: Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a small passenger jet

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
ME: First reports came out having witnesses say they saw a helicopter hitting the Pentagon

60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
ME: Government hearsay.Can you please link to any article stating from a family member who recieved the remains? As I remember, one family member, Frank Calley, lost his wife and only got back her wedding ring and driver's license in perfect condition no less, but no remains.I also remember, I will have to find it, one family member never got any remains or evidence back after asking if they could have their own autopsy performed.

seekerof


Many of those 'facts' suck and are FAR from FACT!

I would also like to add, are we all to believe that the Pentagon would intall a surveillance camera that only captures a few frames per second? LOOK! UP IN THE SKY,,,, ELEPHANT!



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   








posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:07 AM
link   
I don't give a damn what NIST thinks, you can look up the measurements yourself, the tail height (bottom of wheels down to tip of tail) is 44' 6" and the Pentagon is 77' 3.5".

en.wikipedia.org...

www.757.org.uk...

See for youself, you all say NIST is inaccurate when it suits you and the independant figures clearly show the difference in height between the two objects.
There's nearly 33' difference between the two for God's sake and that includes the wheels so technically it could clear the ground and still have 33' to spare.
That NIST/FEMA picture shows another 757 from The Land of the Giants because it's as tall as the building.


[edit on 19-5-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I don't give a damn what NIST thinks, you can look up the measurements yourself, the tail height (bottom of wheels down to tip of tail) is 44' 6" and the Pentagon is 77' 3.5".

en.wikipedia.org...

www.757.org.uk...

See for youself, you all say NIST is inaccurate when it suits you and the independant figures clearly show the difference in height between the two objects.
There's nearly 33' difference between the two for God's sake and that includes the wheels so technically it could clear the ground and still have 33' to spare.
That NIST/FEMA picture shows another 757 from The Land of the Giants because it's as tall as the building.


[edit on 19-5-2006 by AgentSmith]




On the scale of this picture, on what floor would the 757 be in hight, there are 4 floors.
Let's asume it has it's gears down, how tall would it mejure on the scale of the pentagon, floor 2 , floor 3, floor 4, above floor 4?



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Problem is Smith your perspective is wrong in that pic.

Where you're measering the tail is not where your plane is. Look at the nose and then measure the hight of the Pentagoon there...You'll find your plane is too small mate, or too far fwd in the perspective...



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Well, I had another look at the NIST photo and it seems to back up what I was showing anyway, if you have the tail next to the impact point it's size will be directly proportional to the height of the building as I showed in my image.



[edit on 19-5-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Well, I had another look at the NIST photo and it seems to back up what I was showing anyway, if you have the tail next to the impact point it's size will be directly proportional to the height of the building as I showed in my image.



[edit on 19-5-2006 by AgentSmith]

well eliminate the gears and the tail, I dont think the tail would leave distinctive marks, it's too thin and it would instantly be vaporised on impact unlike other componets like engines and the body of the airctaft.

I want to find a image with the hole in the pentagon , I cant seem to find it, most of the pictures are marked as external image and does not show the image.



[edit on 19-5-2006 by pepsi78]



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   
I think we agree that my image was not grossly inaccurate then? Because I got the niggling feeling some people were trying to imply I was attempting to deceive people... Maybe I'm just being paranoid.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I think we agree that my image was not grossly inaccurate then? Because I got the niggling feeling some people were trying to imply I was attempting to deceive people... Maybe I'm just being paranoid.

No, I'm trying to understand if that thing is even 1 floor high.



what I did is put copys of the aircraft until it was near the pentagon, that thing does not seem even 1 floor in hight.
There is no way that is a 757, I want a picture with the hole in the pentagon so we can see how many floors were directly afected, I want to see the bottom floor too si we can tell where the nose impacted on what floor.
I think we can solve the whole thing now, it's easy and it cant be debunked, now that we got the object, we need to see the hole in the pentagon first.




[edit on 19-5-2006 by pepsi78]

[edit on 19-5-2006 by pepsi78]



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 02:55 AM
link   
Your window lines are drawn wrong, they should converge together.

[edit on 19-5-2006 by AgentSmith]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join