New Video Footage of Flight 77 Hitting Pentagon Released

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
BTW, if you go frame by frame, I just kept hitting play and pause fast when the first image of the pentagon appears, you can see in a frame the actual image of the shadow of a plane....


Muaddib is that what looks like a tail section (that appears to be visable through the flames) after the explosion or the white tip (blurr) over the red pylon?




posted on May, 16 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   
it doesn't have the back tail stabilizer fin thing in the back.
it's just straight up silver and pointed like a missile.
doesn't show it hitting at an angle.

i want to see the video from the hotel surveilance camera,that would be best video for people to believe instead of this whackass video. the one on cnn.com and bbcnews.com
is a lil bit different too,they show more of the plane,a couple more frames.

-v3

and what is that blue light in the middle of the field?

[edit on 16-5-2006 by chinabean]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Muaddib is that what looks like a tail section (that appears to be visable through the flames) after the explosion or the white tip (blurr) over the red pylon?


It does appear to be the tail of a plane as it hits the pentagon. If you go frame by frame, you can stop it when the full shadow of the plane is in plain view, and the front of the plane appears in the camera, then you can enlarge the frame and viola. What is that shadow of? a bird? Superman? a missile? no you can clearly see the shadow of a plane...



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib


It does appear to be the tail of a plane as it hits the pentagon.


I did the very same as you with the frame by frame and that was my take on it also, just wanted to make sure we were talking at the very same time and it appears we are. Thanks



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Probably a silly question but are there any pictures of the "plane" captured a ANYWHERE over the city?
Or did it just materialise out of a vortex 500 metres from the impact?
If a Cessna was seen flying low over Sydney, every man and dog would be snapping shots with their camera phone.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
What might be confusing some people is that there is another shadow, probably from a tree, that is there all the time, and you see it as a long thing shadow, with no wings. But when you freeze the frame as the front part of the plane appears in the footage, you can see that the shadow is larger and it has wings. You can also increase the size of the image and clearly see that it is the shadow of a plane.

BTW, even the small part of the front of the plane seen in that image is huge, no missile is that huge, unless now people want to claim it was a ballistic missile....



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
The best evidence that an airplane and not a high explosive missile hit the Pentagon is the explosion, not the one frame in which the plane appears. I have said this over and over again--oh, and all the aircraft debris found at the site, which seems to be something many fail to acknowledge. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

[edit on 2006/5/16 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slaine01
Probably a silly question but are there any pictures of the "plane" captured a ANYWHERE over the city?
Or did it just materialise out of a vortex 500 metres from the impact?
If a Cessna was seen flying low over Sydney, every man and dog would be snapping shots with their camera phone.


I don't know where the film went, but i remember clearly that day that one of the tv networks did show a movie, in which someone seemed to be filming the pentagon, I am not sure if it was a tourist, and where the plane can be seen going fast over the highway and towards the Pentagon. There were people there who saw it as it approached and hit the Pentagon, yet still there will be some people who will believe anything they want to believe, and nomatter what these people will claim it was not a plane.

[edit on 16-5-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:22 PM
link   
It looked like a cruise missile scoring a direct hit on the Passenger Plane Parts Storage Room at the Pentagon.

Or was it an Explosion in the Passenger Plane Parts Storage Room at the Pentagon?



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   
It's amazing the ability for some people to dismiss info because they so want their precious low-brow conspiracy theories to be accurate. I half wonder if some of the people here aren't disinformation plants to make us all look bad.

A plane hit the pentagon. There is no doubt. There have been huge posts here and analysis. Wanting something to be a lie does not make it so. Don't clog your mind with non-issues. There are conspiracies, but not everything is. Better to pick and choose your battles than look the fool chasing top-hatted rabbits down holes.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:35 PM
link   
I disagree with you people trying to defend the official story here. You've all been sitting around trying to analyse this crap footage, yet you don't mention any of the confiscated footage. You think there were only two Cameras that would have seen what happened there? Why aren't you questioning why the other footage hasn't been released? Why are you allowing yourself to be spoon-fed explanations by a Government that have been proven time and time again to be liars and cheats so easily? Is it something in your water?

"This is all the footage there is. I'd better just accept that and be quiet. Hey, look, when I freeze-frame it I can almost see the shadow of a Plane. You conspiracy theorists are idiots. Who cares if you're repeatedly saying you can see a Plane of some sort too, I never listen to anything you guys say anyway! "*Sits down in front of favourite soap opera (or the next best one available)*

Is this footage supposed to be the definitive proof a 757 (or 747?) hit the Pentagon? Even if somehow that is what they say it is in the videos, are we supposed to now somehow question all the other 9/11 conspiracy 'theories' as well?


Pfffffft.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Recalling from that video, I can only say that it was such a beautiful sunny day that day.



Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Once again I'll have to set the world straight here...

Notice how an organization that can spend $thousands of dollars on a toilet seat has a crappy video surveilance camera watching its main headquarters?


If I recall of a particular Pentagon parking lot video few years back, there was an issue from people wondering the same thing you're saying, denythestatusquo. Finally, someone at the Pentagon explained that the video surveillance camera was for identifying people coming through the entrance gate of the parking lot by vehicles and it was not for watching the Pentagon's areas.

Every government building in Washington, DC that have a parking lot for employees or visitors driving in their vehicles in get their "mugs" recorded in hidden web cams or standard video surveillance systems at the entrance gates, the same thing you goes up to an ATM and there's a mirror part where the video camera is inside recording the entire time you pull up and start doing an ATM transaction. Video recordings or still-images from those systems are far from perfect.

Even top-rated, profitable banks have surveillance camera systems that are far from perfect. Don't buy into the fantasy that every government or business have enough money to purchase top-of-the-line systems like that entertaining hi-tech TV show, "Las Vegas" on NBC.


Pentagon's huge parking lots are look after by the Pentagon Force Protection Agency.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I just saw that piece of # video and LOL

Government officials are stupider than I thought. The nice shiny silver tube is not a 757, or 747, it's too small to be either. But it fits the profile of a cruise missile nicely.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Well, this was a nice move by the Pentagon to deflect all those pesky illuminations of Big Brother spying on America. The administration was probably thinking that it was time to remind America about 9/11 in an attempt to legitimize Big Brother tracking your every move. And if you call overseas, they'll be listening to.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
Despite the fact that there were people who saw the plane as it was about to hit the pentagon, and when it hit the pentagon.


Or the fact that we’re supposed to believe the passengers onboard Flight 77 along with the plane itself were abducted by the Gray’s. Unless of course they hit the building which would account for the plane debris recovered. But no, that is all wrong, we have video analysts and plane crash experts telling us it had to be a missile, no matter what the facts state.*Sigh*, why do I even bother?



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Or the fact that we’re supposed to believe the passengers onboard Flight 77 along with the plane itself were abducted by the Gray’s. Unless of course they hit the building which would account for the plane debris recovered. But no, that is all wrong, we have video analysts and plane crash experts telling us it had to be a missile, no matter what the facts state.*Sigh*, why do I even bother?


Actually I'm thinking they were on a smaller plane than a 747/757. There were only 66 passengers, weren't there? Did they have to be on a big plane?



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
But no, that is all wrong, we have video analysts and plane crash experts telling us it had to be a missile, no matter what the facts state.*Sigh*, why do I even bother?


It gets boring doesn't it? The very same people that says that a missile hit the Pentagon are the very same that will argue that the Earth is flat, we're the center of the Universe and we didn't go to the moon.

My sentiments are the same as yours.

It sure is nice to DENY IGNORANCE.


EDIT: Just watched the video on television. Pretty good quality (the one that was shown on t.v.). To everyone that will dare say that it wasn't a airplane, IT WAS AN AIRPLANE!

[edit on 16/5/06 by Intelearthling]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   
I have one, and just one question for all the people who believe it was a missile and not a plane that hit the Pentagon.

WHY?

Assuming this is one great conspiracy and the 'powers that be' are lying to us, why on earth would they choose to fly a missile into the Pentagon and then say it was a plane? Wouldn't it make more sense to, oh I don't know, fly a PLANE into the Pentagon if that's what they want the public to think??? Surely if you were responsible for orchestarting this great lie, you'd want to make it as authentic as possible (assuming of course it is a great lie). Why risk exposing the 'lie' by firing a missile into the Pentagon and then 'claiming' it was actually a plane. This makes no sense at all and it seems many people are quite happy to ignore this question. WHY A MISSILE???

A plane hit the Pentagon, I think as much has been proven. We can argue about the motives, the circumstances, the impact, the outcome, but surely this is one fact that should not be up for debate???



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Well I just saw on Fox News that there was a "Black Box" that was retrieved from the 757 that supposedly crashed into the Pentagon. I wonder why they never released or played those audio recordings to the Public? I for one would sure like to hear them!!! Hmmm... very interesting!

Interearthling - have you seen the video? Let me ask you another question - did you PERSONALLY SEE a PLANE hit the Pentagon in that video - or did you see a Blurry Streak of Smoke (and THAT is supposed to be a FUSELAGE) like the 90% of people of ATS did in regards to this matter?

[edit on 16-5-2006 by Seraphim_Serpente]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Maybe we are looking at this from the wrong direction.....
One thing that has just accured to me is that most of the time when Insurgents in Iraq/Afghanistan attack one of our patrols etc they film it - correct?
This brings me to the idea that THE BIGGEST ever attack as a terrorist organisation would have been a propaganda coup beyond belief but no-one thought enough, when planning the operation, to film it for that purpose?
Maybe in a cave in Afghanistan somewhere there is a home movie awaiting for an offer from Air Crash Investigation - Discovery Channel





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join