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.

 

New Video Footage of Flight 77 Hitting Pentagon Released

page: 15
3
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2006 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
You answered your own question. It clearly states the complex maneuver suggested the pilots had better training then thought.

Sure he was!




Who Was Hani Hanjour?

  • "...after instructors at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Phoenix found Hanjour's piloting skills so shoddy and his grasp of English so inadequate they questioned whether his pilot's license was genuine."

  • "...staff never suspected that Hanjour was a hijacker but feared that he posed safety hazard if he flew commercial airliner."

  • "Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "HE COULD NOT FLY AT ALL."

A guy, who could Not Fly At All, and whos Pilot license was doubted performed such a menuver with a Boeing757 which denies the Laws of Aerodynamis, Physics and Gravity? Was he some kind of Magician?



Also you are under estimating what a commercial airliner can do. Ask any pilot, or watch History channel where it shows the kind of tests they put a commercial liner through, you would be surprised what they are capable of.

I think you need to read the Quote from an Air-Traffic controller, which has to deal with passenger aircarft Every Single Day, about this Manuver:

[size=+3]The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane!

So again - can you explain, so how did flight 77 arrive at the pentagon at an altitude of about 2 feet 500MPH?




posted on May, 20 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Just anothe WTC Explosion!

The video is poor, no doubt. Sky colors are different, shadows are wrong. This is just another "cover attempt", to what really happend. Why did the government haul sand and rock and dump it onto a prefectly good front lawn AFTER THE ALLEGED 757 STRIKE?? To make it look like a Jumbo skidded on the grass? Also as a pilot, it would be extremely hard to force a 250 ton aircraft, doing anywhere from 250mph-530mph(no one knows how fast it is supposed to be, thats interesting)down to perfectly hit the bottom floor. There is simply too much lift to control a 757 in "Ground Effect" at a high speed! its not possible! if the plane were at stalling speed, there would be many people who saw the plane actually hit the pentagon. Let alone the long approach! Surely someone would have photos/ videos proving it really was a 757! Look at the perfectly round hole in the front of the building. What happend to the wings? Why did the wings not even damage the concrete structure near the hole? This was a missle or drone with an explosive head on it.

NOW WE HAVE THE MILITARIZED BORDER! NO ONE WILL COME IN OR GO OUT!
DUE TO THE WORLD BANK(FEDERAL RESERVE) THER WILL NEVER BE A GOOD CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT!!! WE AS CITIZENS NEED TO ARM AND BE READT FOR THE IMPENDING NWO!



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
So again - can you explain, so how did flight 77 arrive at the pentagon at an altitude of about 2 feet 500MPH?


Do yourself a favor and Deny your own ignroance. Go out and buy a good flight simulator with realistic feed back controllers. Pick any aircraft from the list you want, then practice with it for a while.

Any good software will give you all the bells and whistles right down to an identical cockpit of the real thing with all the buttons throttles etc you would have to use, you will hear a stall speed indicator, stick shakers etc. just like the real thing.

That is how real pilots do it only with commercial models prior to an aircrafts first flight.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Do yourself a favor and Deny your own ignroance. Go out and buy a good flight simulator with realistic feed back controllers. Pick any aircraft from the list you want, then practice with it for a while.

Any good software will give you all the bells and whistles right down to an identical cockpit of the real thing with all the buttons throttles etc you would have to use, you will hear a stall speed indicator, stick shakers etc. just like the real thing.

That is how real pilots do it only with commercial models prior to an aircrafts first flight.

And you are trying to tell me, that mister Hanjour was such an Expert pilot, to have performed such a complex manouver, that even a VERY experienced pilot could have alot of problems to do? How come, if he was just a Pathetic pilot? You think he bought Flight Simulator 10 and practiced that forever?


911Truth.org

How did AA77 hit a target known to be defended by anti-aircraft missile batteries? The flight executed a maneuver pilots have characterized as extremely difficult, descending from several thousand feet while making a 280∞ turn, banking at the last second and flying level with the ground to strike the first floor. The alleged hijacker flying the plane (Hani Hanjour) flunked out of flight school. The side of the Pentagon hit, opposite from the command center, had just been renovated to reinforce it against terrorist attack. The offices there were mostly empty; initial expectations of 850 dead were quickly revised to 130.


Rumsfeld's "Pentagon missile" hoax

Newsweek reported a few weeks after 9/11 that the "black boxes" from the plane were found, and that data would indicate how the plane was steered in its final moments in an incredible spiral dive into the nearly empty, recently reconstructed and strengthened sector of the Pentagon. The alleged hijacker, Mr. Hani Hanjour, flunked out of flight school and clearly did not have the skills to perform that maneuver. The fact that the plane flew around the Pentagon, past Donald Rumsfeld's office, past the National Military Command Center, and struck the least populated part suggests that whoever was at the controls wanted to ensure the minimal level of casualties. Would a "terrorist" have chosen to fly this way? Even an expert pilot would have had a hard time doing this. This is strong circumstantial evidence for remote control technology. Proving its use is probably impossible, but the technology is commercially available.This suggests that remote control technology of some sort was actually used to hijack the plane, and that the role of the "hijackers" may merely have been that of patsies. The black boxes would confirm or refute this theory, but most 9/11 "conspiracy" investigators have fixated on the fleeting hope that the surveillance videos would be released (which would merely prove the obvious) while ignoring the hidden data that could actually prove something.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
And you are trying to tell me, that mister Hanjour was such an Expert pilot, to have performed such a complex manouver, that even a VERY experienced pilot could have alot of problems to do? How come, if he was just a Pathetic pilot? You think he bought Flight Simulator 10 and practiced that forever?


Well we know for a fact that some of them did get actual flight time on real simulators in Florida, Don't we? Also in other states as I recall, so yes being realistic, I feel he could have become far more proficient they you may think.

As far as being a complex manuver it is not as complex as you try and make it out. I just used Micrsoft simulator 2004 using a 757 and managed to do the alleged turns no problem at all w/o crashing after several tries.

I know what flight simulators can do and I know that others have learned on them prior to actual hands on experience, so unlike you I have an open mind knowing even I could do it on a simulator given sufficient time.

And this same scnerio applies to more then just planes. The armed forces also use them to train Chopper Pilots and Tank crews before they get hands on just to save the expense should an accident occur during initial training.

You should really open your mind because your blinders and the other conspiracy sites are making you closed mined in case you do not know it.



[edit on 5/20/2006 by shots]



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aris
...............
What makes me even more suspicious is the fact that 90% or so of the plane can't be identified but 98% of passengers' DNA can?? That doesn't square with me. I could understand finding maybe half or less of the plane only in itty bitty parts and several positive DNA identifications but no plane ID'd yet 66 of 68 passengers ID'd???

At any rate, it's like you said, we can't tell what occured and this specific point doesn't help.


Again this shows how much people like yourself have research into this, I gave several links which provides photos and documentation on what happened that day, and in those pictures you can clearly see the parts of a passenger aircraft....



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aris

Originally posted by Muaddib
You need to present proof, otherwise all you are doing is making more wild claims and trying to be a victim to get some sympathy.


Sorry for butting in. I'm not taking sides in your argument with another member but I couldn't help but find your above comment ironic.

Have you, or anyone else for that matter, Muaddib, presented any proof that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon?

And when I say proof, I mean proof, not wild speculation of your own.

Show me one shred of proof.

You can't, can you.

So for you to accuse someone of 'wild speculation" when in fact you are wildly speculating yourself, is most ironic.


Yes, I have given links and photos which contradicts what many of you keep saying here.

Perhaps you should make a favour to yourself and check and read back in this same thread and you will find the links and photos....



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
No it doesnt, the proof lies in the people who claim it was a plane and they are the only people with the evidence.

I could claim I had pixies visit me every night and then tell everyone I was right because noone could disprove my claim.

Its a lot easier to prove something is there than something isnt.


.....extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence... In this case the "extraordinary claim" is that it wasn't a plane....when eyewitnesses at the scene said "it was a passenger plane which hit the Pentagon"...and more so when evidence has been given time and again which does shows parts of a passenger plane...



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
.....extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence... In this case the "extraordinary claim" is that it wasn't a plane....when eyewitnesses at the scene said "it was a passenger plane which hit the Pentagon"...and more so when evidence has been given time and again which does shows parts of a passenger plane...

BS, the only one is possession of all the evidence is the government, its their duty to release the evidence to convince everyone that their story is true, clearly they havent done that.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aris
Muaddib, I'd like you to read my replies found in the link I just provided in my previous post as well because you're repeating allegations that are wild speculation.


Your replies are nothing more than speculation...

You speculate that because the president wasn't immediately spirited away when the planes hit the twin towers, that "there must be something sinister going on and the government must have known" or some other nonsense....

First of all, planes weren't "raining from the skies" as you were trying to speculate...

Second, the government had no idea what was going on until the second aircraft hit tower 1, and that I know of there were no plans on destroying a hihjacked aircraft when it is already inside U.S. airspace and flying over an American city...

Third of all, unless there is specific knowledge of a direct threat to the president where he was at, moving him would more likely make him more of a target...

As for your "wild claim" that most of the aircraft was "vaporized".... The photos shows that you are wrong... 90 nor 99% of the aircraft wasn't vaporized....

The claim that it is strange that 98% of a persons dna survived and that this is some sort of evidence of some sort of conspiracy....is nothing but a deceit.... You only need to find one human cell, one small piece of hair, even a dead cell, to find the dna of a person... and yes, you can find dna on the burned remains of a person....

Many, if not most, of the people who are now claiming that because the other aircraft were not shut down by the U.S. military, and this must show it was some sort of conspiracy done by the government, would have made it more of a conspiracy theory if the military brought down civilian aircraft over an American city....



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
BS, the only one is possession of all the evidence is the government, its their duty to release the evidence to convince everyone that their story is true, clearly they havent done that.


Ah...I see, so i guess the people who saw the airplane flying directly to the Pentagon were all working for the government...

The only BS that can be seen in this thread is that those people who like yourself don't want to believe the evidence which has been shown time and again are in denial and you will only accept a lie that the government was behind it and it was not a passenger craft....



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Ok - if you watch this Video, watch the followind details:



First - if you watch the video and in the first half, there is No Road in the upper right corner, leading to the Pentagon. Then the "Boeing757" comes and crashed into the building, and then right the next frame a ROAD suddenly appears!

Second - observe how the sun changes rapidly in one frame, and the lens-flare change positions, and you can clearly see that in one frame, the pictures rapidly change - as if being put togather.

Third - do you see a car by the newly created Road on the last picture? Well it's pretty BIG if compared to the Boeing757 in the picture above?

I mean - Who Are They Kidding?!?




posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
........................
So again - can you explain, so how did flight 77 arrive at the pentagon at an altitude of about 2 feet 500MPH?


An altitute of about 2 feet?... Even in the latest video which we just saw, it can be clearly seen that there was more than "2 feet" from the aircraft to the ground....

Really souljah, you like to kill your own arguments lately...



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
.................
Third - do you see a car by the newly created Road on the last picture? Well it's pretty BIG if compared to the Boeing757 in the picture above?

I mean - Who Are They Kidding?!?



Wow...so since you claim it is only a car it must be one right?... i mean who in their right mind would think that a fire truck would go where there is a fire...


The fact is you can't see exactly what that is.. it could very well be a fire truck, and we can only see a small section of the front of the aircraft to try to compare it to anything else..

BTW, why didn't you show the frame where the tail of an aircraft can be clearly seen as the front of the aircrat hits the Pentagon?....

You are pretty selective aren't you souljah?



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
Wow...so since you claim it is only a car it must be one right?... i mean who in their right mind would think that a fire truck would go where there is a fire...

A Fire Truck?











Hey - What About That ROAD?!?!




posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Hey - What About That ROAD?!?!



That 'road' is the shadow of the smoke from the fire. Use your mouse to run the film back and forth and watch the 'road' change with the smoke.

I agree with you, the car gives us some perspective, adding to the evidence that the projectile wasn't a plane, but a road didn't appear.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Do you know how close was that vehicle to the actual crash site?

Do you know for certain it is a car?...

You people are acting like you have never seen how pictures can fool you as to the size of objects...

It is really pathetic that some people will try to claim such things and not take into consideration facts....



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Let me show you what I mean.

The following image is from one of the sites which claims that the plane was not a plane.

The picture is much closer to the Pentagon, but you can see even in this image how your perception can be fooled by distances.



Are those firefighters giants? What about the truck engines which are close to each other yet each one of them appears to be bigger than the other...

BTW, the claim in that image that "only the ground and first ring only was hit and demolished", shows the length of deception and lying will those who claim that attack was done not by a passeger aircraft and that the government must be behind it.


Despite the appearances of exterior photographs, the Boeing 757-200 did not "only damage the outside of the Pentagon." It caused damage to all five rings (not just the outermost one) after penetrating a reinforced, 24-inch-thick outer wall. As 60 Minutes II reported in their "Miracle of the Pentagon" episode on 28 November 2001, the section of the Pentagon into which the hijacked airliner was flown had just been reinforced during a renovation project:


"We made several modifications to the building as part of that renovation that we think helped save people's lives," says Lee Evey, who runs a billion-dollar project to renovate the Pentagon. They’ve been working on it since 1993. The first section was five days from being finished when the terrorists hit it with the plane.

www.snopes.com...



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Well, no. But it seems to be the same police car that drove across the camera at the beginning. Watch it. Watch the car appear on the left, after the explosion (at 2:29 on this video) and drive along in front of the pentagon, then out into the lawn. I'm 90% sure it's a car or a van... And it's between us and the crash site (judging by the shadow of the smoke). So that means it would be closer than the 'plane'.

But no, we can't tell exactly how big it is.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   
I already gave excerpts from people who were there and saw a passenger aircraft approach and hit the Pentagon...

Anyways, some more interesting information.


As eyewitnesses described and photographs demonstrate, the hijacked airliner dived so low as it approached the Pentagon that it actually hit the ground first, thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building; nonetheless, as described by The New York Times, the plane still hit not "just the ground floor" but between the first and second floors:


The Boeing 757 crashed into the outer edge of the building between the first and second floors, "at full power," Mr. Rumsfeld said. It penetrated three of the five concentric rings of the building.
Another account of the crash described:


The plane banked sharply and came in so low that it clipped light poles. It slammed into the side of the Pentagon at an estimated 350 miles per hour after first hitting the helipad. The plane penetrated the outer three rings of the building. The jet fuel exploded, which sent a fireball outward from the impact point. About 30 minutes after the crash, a cross-section of the building collapsed, but only after enough time had elapsed for rescue workers to evacuate all injured employees.

www.snopes.com...

If not much debris can be seen outside the Pentagon is because most of the plane penetrated the Pentagon and the remains of the aircraft and the passengers were found inside.

[edit on 20-5-2006 by Muaddib]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join