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: 20
3
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Like I said above... If it bothers you so much do something! Instead of trying to convince half of these brainwashed and or disinfo loyalist on forums.
Truthfully I don't really find much of this stuff funny at all... it just is kinda ironic how goofy they screw up and mess up when they are pulling all these things...

[edit on 24-5-2006 by nihilanth]




posted on May, 24 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Organic Shadow
Wow, thats it huh? Some new image frames? Same old shaZzzzz....Anyway I was wondering if any of you watched the BBC footage and saw the time stamp in the bottom left corner? No...you missed it? Look back, not sure what time but the security footage clearly said SEPT 12, 2001. Now im not quite sure, but didnt they get caught the same way with the supposed airport footage of the supposed hijackers, with incorrect time stamps?
I say the govt. craps on the FOIA not to mention our Constitution....what constitution?


Ummm... I just wonder if everyone corrects for things like power outages, daylight savings, and leap year? I know they are the government and they should, but honestly, people forget, people get busy, people have more important things to worry about. Oh no, it is off by a day. What will we do? Mabe we should change the forum to 9/12 conspiracies, because the pentago was attacked on the 12th, not the 11th.

Give me a break people! It is one thing to believe in conspiracies, it is another to believe that EVERYTHING is a conspiracy. Got a good site for you to see Russians baffled by missing lake. My goodnes, the US has weapons that can eliminate lakes overnight! It is obviously a conspiracy, the Russian villager said so.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I went to google video to see the video clearly and i noticed something odd at about 2:41 on the tape an odd black object apears and then vanishes exactly a second later, this is after the explosion, whatever it was. It is at the bottem right, near where the plane comes from, keep rewind and playing with your eyes trained on that area you should see it eventully. video.google.com... Could someone check it out on their copys and tell me their findings. its odd, the object is only there for 1 second, not debris as that would sit on the ground and it isn't smoke.

Also I know this has been said before but where was the fusalage? Where was the wreck of the plane? video.google.com... The Cnn footage dosn't show that the medics were exactly rushing to help does it?
[edit on 26-5-2006 by joecool280]

[edit on 26-5-2006 by joecool280]

[edit on 26-5-2006 by joecool280]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by eagle eye
Lol think about it, on the wtc both boeing leave a clear 50-60 feet hole in the structure. On the pentagon a 8 feet hole in a window b4 they tear the wall down, most of the ppl think the wall fell from itself but not.


Yeah, think about it.... Did you see the engine parts all ove rin the pictures provided?....

If any of you had any common sense you would realize that it is probable that that hole was made by one of the engines which probably fell off as the plane crashed and made that hole...

The excuses some of you people make trying to make this into a conspiracy is hilarious and at the same time outrageous...


[edit on 26-5-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

What? How can you tell how big it is? Don't take the time to answer that. I don't believe you can tell how big it is without precise mathmatical calculations.

...................


Really?.... Could you give us your mathematical calculations proving it was the plane you are claiming hit the Pentagon?...

It has to be a really "precise mathematical calculation btw"......

I would also like to know how "your mathematical calculations" would dismiss the facts given by "real experts" such as the link I gave about a "real auronautical engineer" explaining and pointing out the facts about the engines of a 757, and proving that the parts of engines found inside the Pentagon were those of a 757....

[edit on 26-5-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by joecool280
Could someone check it out on their copys and tell me their findings. its odd, the object is only there for 1 second, not debris as that would sit on the ground and it isn't smoke.


Someone else made a similar sighting on the far side I think it was Souljah not sure to be honest.

In that case as in this case I think what you are seeing is a shadow of the smoke. Note where the sun is on the left, consider the time of day 9:40 am would put the shadow of the smoke or object on the right side as it passed threw the suns light path.



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   


This is the object, hard to see on that but it sort of has a reflection, on the video it is clearer to see-that sport of white on the left a reflection, as far as I know smoke dosn't reflect light but i might be wrong

[edit on 26-5-2006 by joecool280]



posted on May, 27 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
OK, so i could not real all 20+ pages, but i have a few questions.

1) There seems to be a trail of smoke in the 2nd video. I htought planes would not leave this when close to the ground?

2) The plane/missle seems to be only 1 story high, most large planes sit one story high before the fuelslage starts, so in my oppinion this was too low to the ground. Please provide facts as these are only questions

3) When wathing the 2nd film in the frame where the explosion is you can see teh outer edges of teh case move but teh camera itself does not. This seems weird initself. But then i bring up the question of the sonic blast which is what would have moved teh case, if speed travels at 800ft per second, how did it take less than half a second to reach that camera (assuming 1/2 refresh rate)

I also want to point out there is alot of video footage taken apart on videos.google.com under the search "loosechange". The video i saw shows pictures of 2 burning cars being moved froom pictre to picture as well as the firetruck and most important, 2 pictures after the crash, one with a light post and another wihtout. I know to some this may prove nothing, but you should always question results as evidence can ALWAYS be scewed to make a certain point viable.

For instance, thre was a study done where the person interviewed people and told them hydrogen dioxide can cause you to suffocat, cause car brakes to work bad and can even burn you in the form of a gas. He asked the people if this substance should be banned. The majority said yes.


Good luck with this guys and keep an open mind on the subject thanks.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 11:08 AM
link   
So..to put to rest those that could not identify an airliner in the original short, grainy, low quality, CCTV footage...the government has kindley released a ner longer, grainy, low quality, CCTV video so we can all rest easy!!!

Madness! What could be proven from this video.



From what I can see the 'object' looks white. Almost like a frame before this one



It is interesting comparing the two videos.... those that claimed that you could see the tail section of the plane in the original... (look below)



...must be wrong, the two just don't match up in that way with the perspectives and with the shadow. The 'nose' that can be seen briefly in the new video is bright white and the 'tail' people claimed to see is black or in shadow.. Can't be smoke either really because there doesn't appear to be anything in front of it to be making smoke.....and anyways 757's dont make smoke!!!!

What a pile of b/s ......

Need to find out the distances between the camera and the 'object' ...see if it would match a 757 in size from that perspective.

More analysis of my own here at the 9-11 emergency research project page:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Edit: whoops!




[edit on 23/7/2006 by earthtone]



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Again, it was a 757. And an engine that has just knocked over light poles, and ingested at least one IS going to smoke. It's going to be severely damaged, and it's going to smoke like crazy.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 02:35 PM
link   
My apologies for the 757 mistake....doh!


Originally posted by Zaphod58
It's going to be severely damaged, and it's going to smoke like crazy.


Sure, but if the white object in the new video is smoke, how can it come into the frame before the actual aircraft?

The 757 had distinctive blue/red stripes and a silver body. The nose of whatever is heading for the pentagon in the the 2nd video appears to be a thin white fueselage...and it can't be smoke.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Why can't it be? Depending on which way the winds were blowing the smoke could easily come into frame before the plane did. And nothing else out there has such a high tail like a 757. What is that if it's not the tail? It comes into frame, then dissapears again. If it's smaller than a 757 then it has a terrible design because the tail is way too big for the fuselage. If it's BIGGER than a 757 then it should have shown up better in the video.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Why can't it be? Depending on which way the winds were blowing the smoke could easily come into frame before the plane did.


I couldn't imagine that an object trailing smoke out the back, travelling at hundreds of miles an hour in one direction, could possible force smoke infront of itslef?? Come on!

In terms of the the tail....think about it, that is a split second image of a blacked out tail shaped object. Considering that the FBI ahd these tapes mere hours after the attacks, surely they could have been adjusted to 'help' the official story? For me it doesn't add up. The smoke, the plane being so low to the ground, (the islam dudes must've been the best pilots in the world) and just the fact that we are not allowed to see any footage which shows us a good view of the plane.......c'mon!



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I've seen weirder things happen.

I'm not surprised to see the "It's been altered argument come up." I've been expecting that for a long time. No matter what happens at this point the videos are pointless, so there is absolutely no way to prove that it WAS a 757 anymore.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 03:26 PM
link   
There is no way to prove it either way.....I suppose that's how they want it, we argue amoungst ourselves while 'they' get on with the business of controlling us, the worlds resources, and the future of the planet......it's called politics....dividing us when we should be fighting together.....



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone
There is no way to prove it either way.....I suppose that's how they want it, we argue amoungst ourselves while 'they' get on with the business of controlling us, the worlds resources, and the future of the planet......it's called politics....dividing us when we should be fighting together.....



Fighting together for what if I may ask?.... I guess it has nothing to do with your own "political views".....



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib



Fighting together for what if I may ask?.... I guess it has nothing to do with your own "political views".....


Fighting for equality, justice, for our dying planet....for freedom of information.......I don't see these things as 'political'.....politics is mass distraction.



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Oh my god! How can you believe that? HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A PLANE?
That is flying way, way, way to low to be a plane... and it is way way way too small to be an airplane. WAY too small. This is absolutley ridiculous... and it is flying way way way too fast to be plane.
My husband is a pilot and he looked at this and just said, this is so sad. Doesn't anyone have any idea? That is not an airplane anymore then I am a kangaroo. It also blew up the wrong way to be a plane



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Personally i liked the land crabs with tap shoes....
A)wouldnt the engines be dragging a streak across the lawn if the aircraft was at the indicated hieght in the video?
b)Doesnt ground effect actually throw the plane back up in the air at that speed that close to the ground?
c)Wheres all the wreckage strewn about the virtually unblemished lawn?
Not to mention the drag marks the engines would make if the craft fit into that little bitty hole at ground level?
Where are the gigantic engines that hang from the wings of the craft?
They survived to fly right on through the towers didnt they?
Surely the tiny rotor they showed on the films (barley knee high to the firemen)
Cannot be the powerplant of an airliner...and wheres the other?
The engines are in the eight foot diameter range are they not?
This is another red herring, and a layer of the disinfo they are heaping on us...
bergle



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 04:06 PM
link   
I don't know what hit the pentagon, tbh I don't really care, I'm just wondering why didn't and wont they release the FULL unedited video, and stop giving us FRAMES?

wanna kill the conspiracy theories? quit screwing around and just release it all I mean its a crappy camera what does this video show on it that they don't want us to see?
if the answer to that is nothing, then release the FULL video....


also, there were multiple cameras covering that section of the pentagon one over a highway looking right at it, where those videos?




top topics



 
3
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join