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: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2006 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
I cannot believe anyone is so stupid as to think after nearly five years and this is all we get for proof? A supermarket has better video than that pointed at the parking lot! You think the petagon is going to have that kind of bad quality and nothing else?!?!


From watching shows like COPS, America's Most Wanted, and others of the same genre, I've noticed that the security cameras at most places are of a far lesser quality than those of the Pentagon's.

Also, why would there be a need for higher quality? Two frames a second is plenty of a refresh rate to see any suspicious goings on. Also, there are probably hundreds of cameras around the building, storing data all the time. A higher frame rate would mean larger file sizes and increase the amount of data that would need to be purged for new recordings to come in.



I am saying WHY ARE THEY RELEASING THIS CRAP>!!! Somethng is very suspicious about this video release.


Because a lawsuit had finally been lobbied against the administration to release the video. Maybe they didn't release it before because of possible leaks in national security when it comes to the design of the Pentagon.


Originally posted by Wolfpack 51
Until undebateable proof is produced, I will remain set that it was not a passanger airliner.


It's a pity that you would so willingly wallow in your own ignorance in thinking that. :shk:

At least I've tried to understand the conspiracy theories, but once you put a little bit of logic into them you can see that they're just bunk.


Originally posted by CCB299
I don't care who you are, it would be rather difficult to just make a couple hundred people disappear.


I doubt you'll get an answer. Earlier in the thread I asked what happened to the plane, and if it just vanished into thin air. So far that has gone unanswered.

Some people will say that it was shot down though, but then were is the wreckage from that crash or eyewitness reports of the plane being shot down? Then again, maybe they used a mininuke to atomize the plane. Of course, no one would notice the Sun-like flash of a nuclear weapon from the ground. Also, those countries who have satelites looking for evidence nuclear weapon explosions (both visually and radioactively) were in on the cover up of that part as well.

It's funny, how illogical this whole idea that it wasn't a plane is once you actually think for your own about it.


[edit on 5/16/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]




posted on May, 16 2006 @ 11:57 PM
link   
That plane that is supposedly flight 77 could be making daily trips between ORD and DFW today and nobody would know any different. Who here knows the registration number of that jet? And would you know if the number was changed on that jet on 9/12/01? Who would know? I doubt anyone in the general public would have a clue. We've all seen what AA 757's look like. We've all seen the exterior of the Pentagon. SO where is the concern to national security? If what they are saying is true there should be no reason to hold back the video from the gas station and the hotel. Unless of course the video shows something else. If that video shows anything else but an AA 757 flying in low I think you'll see the military go in to Washington and arrest many leaders in our governemtn. You'd see the heads of the CIA, FBI and even the leadership in the WH arrested and charged with treason. The only thread to national security is that many in leadership would face certain arrest. If you don't have anything to hide then show the video.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith

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?


ROFL I know what you're saying but you've never been in a Defence related establishment have you? Like most Government buildings they're crappy, backward and the stuff people have to work with are piles of antique junk.


You may be correct here but that belies the fact that a major attack on the pentagon would do a lot to cripple the functioning of the US military. If that attack could not be sufficiently analyzed to know what happened then how would a repeat be sufficiently prevented?



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 01:11 AM
link   



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:02 AM
link   
If that is what they want to show us to "put the conspiracy theories to rest" then they fail. I guarantee if I had walked out into that field and started to do something, they would have pixel rich color photos of my face for court. It's the PENTAGON! The assertion that a choppy edited video is all they have is preposterous in my opinion.

As far As to wheather it was a plane or not, I don't know. Personally I think it was a smaller plane with explosives on board.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Could it also be possibly they released this crappy stuff since Osama Bin laden hasn't been caught, and assuming he does get caught they will still need evidence for his trial that has yet to be shown to any potential jurors?


They must have better evidence then this because I doubt this crap evidence would ever be able to convict anyone of a crime. The quality looks like a 25.00 webcam.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Part of the reason it's hard to believe what our government tells us is that on Sept 11th 3 buildings fell in near perfect fashion, straight down, even the third tower, which didn't have the same type of impact as the other buildings.

Troy



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:39 AM
link   


I mean, are those guys in Pentagon KIDDING?



Because this Sure is Funny as hell!



And THIS Video is supposed to shut down and remove all Conspiracies?

ARE THEY FOR REAL?!?

It is practicly the SAME as the video that was always out!

If that is a Boeing757 on that video, then people who belive that, need either:

a.) better glasses
b.) a course in airplane technology
c.) a serious Therapy
d.) all of the above

Anyway - Where are those CONFISCATED videos, which FBI and other goverment agents took away just minutes after Pentagon was hit by a "Boeing"? Where are those confiscated vidoes from the gas station, from the Hotel - which were both haveing a perfect view of the Pentagon and the alleged "Boeing" hitting it?

Why doesn't Pentagon want to show us that material?

I know why - it's a case of NATIONAL SECURITY.



[edit on 17/5/06 by Souljah]



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by solidstate
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?


I think the more appropriate question is..
if a plane REALLY did hit the pentagon..

why arent they releasing video footage that 100% backs that story up?
instead of some grainy, flipping frame stuffed footage.

there must be countless amounts of footage, and snaps of the plane going in.

How does this supposid plane factor into the trial of moussani?

I think they got a missle, and disguised it, either with a casing, or added on metalic items to make it RESEMBLE a plane.

but there is no doubt that a boeing plane DID NOT hit the pentagon.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 03:08 AM
link   
this video shows no more than a missle exploding on impact is my belief, its the other videos to confirm this belief that should be released for public veiwing under FOIA the gas station across from the near by high way/road will show a more definitive answer, but what supposedly happened is that within half an hour of the attack on the pentagon some FBI goons confiscated it



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 03:21 AM
link   
first of all i'd like to say that these images are just to unclear to say for sure what hit the pentagon (at least for me )
but what i can say is to big to be a cruise missile to small to be a passenger airplane (from what i can see )

what points against a cruise missile :

the explosion occurs outside the walls (unlike cruise missiles that penetrate and detonate after entry ) , the smoke is thick and black ( points to some type of petrol based combustion)

what points against a big passenger plane :

why only one entry point in the building before it collapses ? (the engines are the most resistant part of a passenger plane not the body, it makes no sense that the engines haven't left any trace of impact ) where are the engines ? the wings should have been ripped off by the lamp posts and the explosion should have occurred at that precise moment when a lot of kerosene turns into aerosol and is ignited by the engines , the plane would have then probably slid on the ground causing some sort of ellongated crater and it the building


what can i say ? i have no clue , but that video just doesn't bring any new clear evidence that could wipe off one version or the other

i call it a draw



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 04:44 AM
link   
no way in hell was that a passenger plane its to small


to me going through the video lots of times it looks like a missle with a wing tip at the end if you know what i mean,

think i read in another thread that some frames are actually missing from this.

if the goverment think this is going to stop the consiracy theorist then they are wrong this only adds fuel to the fire, if its the passenger plane they said it was why not show us and lay this to rest,

my mind wonders what they have to hide, i always wondered if they blew the pentagon up themselves to hide the truth about what was going on, would be good to find out if i was right or wrong though



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Sorry people but it was an American Airlines 757, made of high grade aluminum, with two engines and wings full of jet fuel that struck the Pentagon. The plane flew down the Potomac River, skirted Rosslyn, VA, (witnessed by those office workers in those tall buildings there) came in over Arlington National Cemetery (it's across Route 27 from the Pentagon) and slammed into the outer E Ring of the building.

In the process it took out several cars on Route 27, knocked down the tall street lamps there, tore across the ground and came to a rest at the C Ring.

Also lost in the discussion is the fact that airplanes are like beer cans. They are hollow. The outer two or three inches of the fuselage is high-grade aluminum. It's strong, light and flexible. The interior is air, seats, and people. A plane is not solid, nor is it made of steel. That would make it too heavy and unable to fly. There may be some steel reinforcing braces but the majority is aluminium and composites. When the plane hit the Pentagon, the aluminum was crushed like a beer can. The wings disintegrated when the fuel exploded.

Also lost in the discussion were the teeth found at the site. My dad had to identify two National Geographic Society employees by their dental records. Their teeth were found in the wreckage at the Pentagon.

Sorry people, no missle. No missile was needed. An airplane, full of fuel, piloted by fanatics, is the perfect kamakazie weapon.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Hey Arctaurus26us - where's the logic in your post? You explain very nicely that



Also lost in the discussion is the fact that airplanes are like beer cans. They are hollow. The outer two or three inches of the fuselage is high-grade aluminum. It's strong, light and flexible. The interior is air, seats, and people. A plane is not solid, nor is it made of steel. That would make it too heavy and unable to fly. There may be some steel reinforcing braces but the majority is aluminium and composites. When the plane hit the Pentagon, the aluminum was crushed like a beer can. The wings disintegrated when the fuel exploded.


Then you leap to the conclusion, which your preceding explanation debunks, that the flimsy "beer can" portion of the "plane" punchs a hole all the way through the multiple walls of the Pentagon. Yet the two high mass jet engines wich could not have gone through the center hole cause no discernible damage.

How do you explain that?

There were people inside the building who were killed. They had teeth too before they died.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arctaurus26us
Sorry people but it was an American Airlines 757, made of high grade aluminum, with two engines and wings full of jet fuel that struck the Pentagon.

Yes, ofcourse.

Then please explain the following points to me:


911 in Plane Site

  • Why were America and the world never shown the video and photographs of the Pentagon, BEFORE the outer wall had collapsed showing only one 16 ft. hole. Many people do not realize that the outer wall did not collapse until a full 20 minutes after the initial impact!

  • Given that the outer wall of the Pentagon had not yet collapsed and the only hole is approximately 16 ft. in diameter - how does a jetliner over 44 feet tall and 125 ft. wide fit into that hole as shown in the crystal-clear and close-up photographic evidence from the Pentagon? Furthermore, can physics explain why there is no damage to the Pentagon's upper floors where the tail section would have hit?

  • In the aftermath, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 ft. crater was plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash? Why does photographic evidence overwhelmingly show that this was absolutely not the case? Why no crater? Why no skid marks? Why no burn marks? Why was the entire world deliberately mislead?

  • How does a Boeing 757, constructed from lightweight aluminum, penetrate over 9 ft. of steel reinforced concrete?

Still MANY questions remain Unanswered.

Especially, how the Boeing757 made a 16ft hole in the wall, when we all know, that a passenger jet is over 44ft tall and 125ft wide.

And how the hell, didn't the big tail, demolish the upper floors of the Pentagon?

And how the hell did it penetrate all the walls and made a hole in reinforced steel concrete?

Have you seen a 100ft crater in front of Pentagon when the Firemen were putting out the fires?

Have you seen ANY debris from the Boeing757; like Engines, Seats, Luggage - you know PARTS and PIECES of a JET AIRLINER? Oh yeah - it Disitingrated! Just like they do in the Movies, right?


And you are trying to tell me, that there are only these PATHETIC two videos available of that Boeing crash to Pentagon?

How the hell si that possible? Were there only 2 cameras working in and around the Pentagon? Isn't that like, one of the most important buildings in Washington DC - so are you trying to tell me, that it is "Secured" by TWO CAMERAS?

And why the hell don't they release the CONFISCATED viedoes of the gas station and hotel camera, which had a perfect view of the Pentagon, as the "Boeing757 struck" it? If there is NOTHING to hide, why not show American people and the World Community these videos and shut-up these Conspiracies forever?

Too many WHY's - not enough answers...

[edit on 17/5/06 by Souljah]



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   
This video neither confirms a Boeing 757, or dismisses it. The quality is not sufficient.

This is a very small part of the footage available from that day. For complete transparency, they should release the rest of what they have in their possession. The Sheraton Hotel, the Virginia Department of Transportation and the NEXCOMM/CITGO Gas Station all may have caught the incident on their surveillance equipment, yet the tapes were confiscated on that fateful day, never to be seen again.

Something to hide maybe?
After this fiasco of releasing this extremely poor quality web-cam shot from the parking lot, it certainly looks that way.


Dae

posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I would like to make a few points about all of this.

1. Agent Smith and some others have tried to point out that the US government is a bumbling goofy fool that doesnt know its arse from its elbows, that technology and security is not like in the movies with all the high tech gizmos. and whathaveyou.

Are you joking right? The absolute uber amounts of money the US spends on defense and military and they dont have any visuals or camers to watch out for such an attack!

An attack I maight add that could have happend since the time airoplanes and terrorists coexsisted! Yes! Hijacking a plan and crashing it into the Pentagon is not a hard thing to imagine. So the most uber headquaters in the world has nothing, no visual recordings, just some cams over 20 years old...

2. I came to this thread and expected a New Video. I see its just a couple of more frames added to what we already have. Right. Oh and this is supposed to quell conspiracy? Not likely! Its addeing fuel to the fire as someone has already pointed out. So WHY? Why do this? My gut is telling me that this is a final,"whos with me" call out, possibley to the fence sitters.


Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid Because a lawsuit had finally been lobbied against the administration to release the video. Maybe they didn't release it before because of possible leaks in national security when it comes to the design of the Pentagon.


Leaks of national security on the designs of the pentagon?!? LOL Its in the shape of a pentagon. Aint it a bit late for national security now? Are you suggesting that showing how the terrorists did it may give ideas to other terrorists...?

Maybe they didnt want to get into the habbit of giving information to the general public, now you wouldnt want Joe P getting used to being treated with respect when you want take freedoms and create a police state now do ya?



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arctaurus26us
Sorry people but it was an American Airlines 757, made of high grade aluminum, with two engines and wings full of jet fuel that struck the Pentagon. The plane flew down the Potomac River, skirted Rosslyn, VA, (witnessed by those office workers in those tall buildings there) came in over Arlington National Cemetery (it's across Route 27 from the Pentagon) and slammed into the outer E Ring of the building.

In the process it took out several cars on Route 27, knocked down the tall street lamps there, tore across the ground and came to a rest at the C Ring.
You seem to be missing the fact that the instructor who taught these guys said they could barely fly in a straight line.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Honestly I'm not really in the tin hat camp on this one, but seeing this video makes me go hmm. It raises doubts, not answers them. Like, why is the plane riding parallel to the ground, as if it were traveling on its landing gear? Is there really the room for a plane of that size to 'land' and then race across the lawn into the walls?



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Did anyone see the interview with the guy from Judicial Watch that's running on the networks regarding this video? He says, and I'm paraphrasing, "...any reasonable person who sees this video will see that a plane hit the Pentagon. Only those who are unstable or crazy will think otherwise." Are you kidding? Did this chucklehead actually see the video?

Also, regarding the other surveillance videos (Sheraton, gas station, etc.) the government said there will be no further video releases. Don't we have to ask why? No reasonable person could make a case on this video release. Why would they not release those videos? What possible reason could they have for sitting on them?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join