New Video Footage of Flight 77 Hitting Pentagon Released, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times


reply posted on 16-5-2006 @ 09:43 PM by dubiousone
This video unequivocally shows the official story to be a lie.

Shots, your thread title says "New Video Footage of Flight 77 Hitting Pentagon Released". Where in the video do you see anything that identifies the thing that hit the Pentagon as Flight 77 or a jetliner of any make or model?

The object enters the video (Video 2) at frame 24. The explosion occurs instantly at frame 25. If these frames are 1/2 second apart in time, isn't that too fast for a bright yellow/white fireball of that magnitude to erupt from the fuel contained in the plane's wings?

There is no shadow of a plane or any part of a plane in frame 24. There is and cannot be a shadow of a plane in frame 25 because the entire object has already crashed into its target, the Pentagon.

The object that appears in frame 24 is much too small to be a Boeing 757. It is obviously not a 757. It is clearly something other than what the government is saying it is.

Where is all the other video evidence that was so quickly confiscated by the government on the day of the event? How were they able to get their act together so quickly and go to the locations where the other video evidence was confiscated if this event was unexpected?

As others have noted, the release of this video seems timed to give GW a boost at a time when he's facing serious flak over the NSA's trampling of our constitutional right to privacy. I predict this will backfire since it shows nothing of the kind that they claim it shows, but just the opposite.

What arrogance to think that publicly proclaiming this video shows Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon, when it clearly does not, will lead the public to think so. But, then, it has swayed members of the media who should know better, as shown by their ill-considered description of what these videos show.

The public may be all too willing to believe what they are told rather than what they perceive through their own senses, but this is just going too far. This may be the slap in the face that finally wakes the sleeping giant up.


reply posted on 16-5-2006 @ 09:55 PM by Indy
Interesting you should bring up the controllers. First off the transponder was turned off so they had no idea what was flying around. They had come up with flight 77 by process of elimination. In fact (and it has been documented) that some controllers thought it must have been a fighter jet flying around because of the moves it was making. Some have already spoken out about what they thought it was but people just choose to ignore it. Keeping the families quiet? Most think their loved ones were killed when the jet hit the Pentagon. They don't know any better. They believe what they were told. "Eye witness" accounts are just a rehash of what they have been told. It would be like you sitting on your porch and out of the corner of your eye you see a flash of something as it buzzes by you. Your neighbor comes over and says "did you see that plane just fly by?" Later on a reporter asks what you saw and you say "I was sitting on my porch and all the sudden the plane buzzes by me." You have no idea what it was. You took what your neighbor saw and add it to what your experience was and you create a conclusion based little on fact. That plane would have been moving so fast that people would have had a split second to spot the plane and accurately identify the make, model and airline before it hit the building. The point is they were told an AA 757 had hit the Pentagon so they just put 2 & 2 together. They have no idea what hit because none of them had the chance to spot the jet and make an accurate evaluation of what kind it was. The fact is something buzzed by them at speeds in excess of 500mph and exploded. Watch the Indy 500 in a couple of weeks and keep an eye out for the shots at track level and try and make out the cars as they drive by at 170mph. Those things buzz by so fast you can barely get a color let alone figure out whose car it is. Record it with your dvd player and play it at 2x or 3x speed and see if you can make anything out.


reply posted on 16-5-2006 @ 10:01 PM by cmdrkeenkid
Originally posted by dubiousone
If these frames are 1/2 second apart in time, isn't that too fast for a bright yellow/white fireball of that magnitude to erupt from the fuel contained in the plane's wings?


Have you ever seen a plane crash before? Look at this video of an F-16 of the Air Force's Thunderbird Group crashing.

As you can see, the fireball is instantaneously as it crashes. And the 757 would have a lot more mass and a lot more fuel.


The object that appears in frame 24 is much too small to be a Boeing 757. It is obviously not a 757. It is clearly something other than what the government is saying it is.


How can you say that? Do you know the distance to the plane? Do you know what its angular size would be at that distance? I would like to see your math proving that that is not a 757. As soon as I can get the videos onto my harddrive and do some screen caps, I'll point out how it is a 757.


How were they able to get their act together so quickly and go to the locations where the other video evidence was confiscated if this event was unexpected?


Uh... Because the Pentagon is right there and they probably already knew what video cameras on establishments pointed at the building?

Originally posted by Code_Burger
I thought there were only 66 passengers and 12 crew on 77? Isn't that extraordinarily low for that type of flight at that time in the morning?


No. Airlines fill as many as they can, if they can't fill the plane, they can't fill the plane. In the long run it's cheaper to just fly with a smaller load than to cancel the flight and bump people to other flights that will get them to their destination.

That all being said...

When was the Pentagon built? Ground was broken on September 11, 1941. It was completed 18 months later, in March, 1943. Now, following WWII and entering the Cold War. The Pentagon had been nicknamed "Ground Zero," as it was suspected to be one of the very first targets of a nuclear missile. Don't you think that during this time they did renovations to it to help the building withstand a near-miss of a nuclear attack? Well, couldn't it be that these renovations included strengthening the walls of the Pentagon?

They could have done something similar to the walls along the lines of how nuclear reactor encasements are built. Watch this test video of an F-4 Phantom II crashing into a prototype of one of these walls, at 500 mph. The plane literally disappears into thin air. Now, a 757 moving at 500 mph would have much more mass than the F-4, and therefore more intertia, allowing it to be able to penetrate along the lines where the most mass is, the fuselauge. The wings would have blown up from the force of the impact as well as from the fuel inside.

This theory would also explain why so little parts of the plane were left behind.

[edit on 5/16/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^