DoubleTree Motel Footage Finally Released

I doubt the passengers knew that they were going to hit the Pentagon, they probably thought that they were being kidnapped or something. True though, there are a lot better ways to sort out the problem than to start calling around on your mobile.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
what I dont get is you have an airplane full of people calling their families telling them they are going to DIE, yet nobody had the guts to overthrow the terrorists with what, boxcutters? Sorry but thats what I don't buy out of all of it. That so many people would just roll over and willingly die, because some guys with boxcutter decided to jack their plane.

I can't imagine that 60 people collectively couldn't figure out how to get through a locked door to the cockpit.

Hey if the PA crash plane did it, then obviously it was possible for the other flights. So why didn't it? Are americans so complacent now that they will except their death without bothering to fight? How sickening such an idea would be.

I almost didn't want to respond to this post. You were NOT on that plane you DO NOT know what people's reactions are after seeing someones THROAT slashed. There were reports that they threatened that they had bombs with them.

Your post was disgusting and WITHOUT merit.

If your calling YOUR FAMILY, telling them your going to die, what are you going to do? Your telling me some 60 people or more would tell their families they were going to die, but do nothing?

No offense but thats more disgusting then anything else. To be able to call your family and tell them your going to die, but do nothing about it. Im sorry but either its not true or Im disgraced to call myself part of this race of beings. If 60 people sat around, called their families telling them they were going to die, and sat around as their lives came to an end, Im truely disgraced.

If the plane has a system failure and your freefalling to the surface and in your last moments managed to get off a call to your wife or something to say goodbye, fine, thats understandable.
Knowing your going to die from a handful of hijackers, but you sit around and do nothing, that makes me angry.

If you know your gunna die, you got nothing to lose. I simply cannot fathom those people on the aircrafts doing what they said they did.

Have ypu even considered that they may have had someone hostage...with a knife to their throat? OR...One of the highjackers claimed to have a bomb. Dude..you were not there. These scum bags planned for this for quite a long time, I'm sure they had all their bases covered.

Grim, the passengers were under the impression the terrorists had bombs strapped to their bodies. Any rebellion would of led to an immediate explosion killing everyone on board. They did what they had to do to remain alive. Unfortunately, they were not aware of their fate.

Calls from Flight 11 & 175 all indicate that none of them knew what was about to happen. Flight 77 was on the same time frame, they were not aware of the other events. They had no way of knowing that they were a passenger of a suicide mission.

Fortunately, Flight 93 was delayed and did not depart on time. This allowed the passengers a window of opportunity, which saw them uncover the truth behind the hijacking. They were informed of the WTC attacks, the attack on the pentagon, which indicated to them that this was a suicide mission. If they did nothing, they died.

These brave souls went out fighting.

To speak negatively of the passengers of Flight 11, 175, & 77 is uncalled for. They were not aware of what fate had in store for them.

I do agree with you, that if my life were in jeopardy, I would do my damnedest to save it. For myself, and for my family. But these innocent people were not in a position to make this choice.

For all they knew, they were simply returning to the airport.

I just see an explosion, no plane.

In the end, Im not saying the passangers were afraid or cowards, Im saying the calls never took place.

Anyone like to show me the transcripts of the calls made from the planes and how they were possible? Why fake the recordings? To prove it was arabs.

I simply don't think these people would have been allowed to call either. I could understand text messanging, but phone calls? That wouldn't make sense. Youve just highjacked a plane and you have another say 15 minutes to get to your destination. Letting people call around could jepordize the mission. If they went through months of planning, you think they might have taken cellphones into account?

Or maybe they didn't because the cellphones were never suppose to work at that point to begin with.

Originally posted by CameronFox
Have ypu even considered that they may have had someone hostage...with a knife to their throat? OR...One of the highjackers claimed to have a bomb. Dude..you were not there. These scum bags planned for this for quite a long time, I'm sure they had all their bases covered.

What gets me that out of 4 planes not 1 got out verbal call or use the 4 digit emergency code on the transponder to notify ATC of a hijacking.

I mean how long does it take to punch in 4 numbers on a key pad, or say Mayday over the radio ?

Also you had at least 1 of the pilots was a vietnam vet who not have given up the cockpit without some sort of fight.

[edit on 3-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by grimreaper797
Anyone like to show me the transcripts of the calls made from the planes and how they were possible?

Can you prove they were faked? We have actual recordings, you have...?

I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but you ask us for proof. Could you find some yourself?

Originally posted by grimreaper797
I simply don't think these people would have been allowed to call either.

Well I think we can agree they were a little pre-occupied. They would not be able to keep a close eye on each passenger, and with the noise level in the plane, it would be easy to duck beneath a chair and carry a conversation.

Your talking about a lot of faked phone calls, and a lot of workers, families in on this scheme.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
Or maybe they didn't because the cellphones were never suppose to work at that point to begin with.

To my knowledge, calls were being made from the phones on board the plane.

I respect your opinion, but I feel you neglect a lot of information to support it.

chissler send me the links of the recording of the people inside the planes. The phone call recordings I mean. Not just flight 93's cockpit recording.

Maybe I missed something, but cellphones don't usually work going at those speeds at that height.

Also you are right about possibly not being able to see somebody make the phone call. Let me say this though. If they were scared to act against the terrorists, why do you think they would risk being killed for making a telephone call if caught?

"Eight minutes earlier, emergency officials in neighboring Westmoreland County said they received a cell phone
call from another passenger who said the plane had been hijacked."

If thats true, then we should have the actual recording. If so, where is it? Or is it too "graphic" for the weak public to handle? Like the video, its just too much for our sensitive public to handle, therefor it shouldn't be released?

Well as most of us are aware, only one of the recordings of these 9/11 phone calls have been released to the public. The only one to my knowledge that has been released has been Betty Ongs phone call from Flight 11.

The call lasted 20+ minutes, but only 4 1/2 minutes have been released.

You can find the recording and the transcripts of her calls. This was the first call made from Flight 11, you can hear the confusion in her voice. None of them knew what was going on.

Some of the conversations were with onboard air phones, which contrary to the cell phones provide for good quality transmission. The report does not draw a clear demarcation between the two types of calls.

www.globalresearch.ca...

Some more transcripts:

* Flight 11
o Madeline Sweeney's phone call: Flight attendant Sweeney allegedly placed a cell phone call to her ground manager Michael Woodward starting at 8:21 and talked for 25 minutes, until the plane crashed. The caller related many details such as wounds by victims of the hijackers to seat numbers of the hijackers. 2 There are conflicting reports on whether the call was recorded.
o Betty Ong's phone call: Flight attendant Betty Ong allegedly called Vanessa Minter at American Airlines reservations at 8:21, and talked for 23 minutes, until the plane crashed. Nydia Gonzalez also listened in from 8:27. The FBI refused to release a recording of the first 4-1/2 minutes of the conversation, but during the 9/11 Commission's January 27, 2004 hearing, the recording was played. 3 4
* Flight 175
o Peter Burton Hanson's phone call: Passenger Peter Burton called his father and reported details of the hijacking. The call was repeated as he was cut off several times.
o Brian Sweeney's phone call: Passenger Brian Sweeney attempted to call his wife but could only leave a message. 5
o unnamed female flight attendant call: There appears to be no public evidence of this call.
* Flight 77
o Barbara Olson's calls: Barbara Olson allegedly placed two calls to her husband, Ted Olson. The only known evidence of these calls are statements by Olson, the first on September 12th.
* Flight 93
o calls to family members and friends: at least thirteen passengers made over 30 cell phone calls, most of them short and some repeated. 6
o the last call: At 9:58, a frantic passenger called from a bathroom to report an explosion and smoke. The tape of this 911 call was seized by the FBI. The 911 operator who took the call, Glenn Cramer, was told by the FBI not to discuss the call.

911research.wtc7.net...

The information stands, and it is up to us how to interpret it.

Madeline Sweeney's phone call spikes my interest. It was her voice who is supposedly heard as the plane enters the tower.

"I see, buildings, water, ... Oh my God!"

To be honest, I began this post in pursuit of providing information. I conclude this post in utter confusion. Skeptical of these phone calls to say the least.

I still believe they do exist, and they are legitimate. The phone calls could of been made from the on board phones. Also, too many people would have to be lying for this to work. We all know that people can not keep secrets.

Why would the families of the victims lie?

Anyways, I do thank you Grim for having me look into this.

It's something I never really considered.



[edit on 3-12-2006 by chissler]

Originally posted by LionHeaRT

Originally posted by CameronFox
One Witness does not discredit HUNDREDS OF OTHERS. One saw the landing gear down. Does that discredit ALL the others.

Seeker, could you please show me a picture the shows the lawn from an angle which shows the Grass leading up to the pentagon?

Thanks

killtown.911review.org...

killtown.911review.org...

killtown.911review.org...

Two of the photos you provide do not show the proper angle to see the grass where the alleged plane allegedly struck the ground.

The one photo that does show the proper angle shows the area where the alleged plane allegedly struck the ground covered by emergency vehicles and what appear to be tarps, plywood, or some other type of covering.

If you want us to believe in your theory please provide better photos if they exist.

families dont have to lie. Hell the people didn't have to lie either. Technology today could have you believe anybody was saying anything. Technology has its positives and negatives. For awhile technology gave us a better way to find proof, didn't take long for the system to adapt though. Now technology has allowed anybody to frame anybody relatively easily.

Whats sad is how quick technology can be used against us these days. What we once thought was proof of an event now turns into a way to fake an event, without much question of if its fake.

When technology is avalible that could make you believe you are having an actual conversation with yourself on the other end of a phone line, we see the true danger of such technology in the wrong hands.

This is an age where you can fabricate just about anything, including evidence, which you can hardly tell the difference between real evidence and fake. This is an age of deception and thats why its hard to say whats what.

Those people may have been on the plane, but what I doubt is the phone calls. The plane, which apparently was suppose to have hit with such force that the plane was broken into pieces no bigger then a calculator size, has a recording from the cockpit which implicates that arabs took over the plane. Those SAME black boxes though, we were told were destroyed in the twin towers though. How?

In this day and age, you don't need many people to be in the loop. All you need is a couple people who know what they are doing, a couple more to cover them, and the rest of the people don't need to know whats going on. The handful of people that did know, didn't care. All the others had no idea. All the passengers, the families, and everybody involved, they didn't know they were involved in it. As far as they were concerned they were either doing their job or they were living their daily lives.

That training exercise where most the scrambler jets were out on a test was planned, but 99% of the people didn't know why, or that it had any significance. All those people weren't "in on it" to make it so they weren't around. Most of them were simply doing their jobs. You get an order to run an exercise on a certain day, and thats what you do. 9/11 happened, but you don't question because its not your job to question. You have to settle for the excuse it was coincidence and nothing more.

Your part in the possible conspiracy is one where you had no idea and one where you have no right to question. The excuse of coincidence is more then enough to satisfy, because you can't prove otherwise. You did your job, nothing more. They tell you coincidence and what will you say, your wrong? What proof do you have it was planned for this reason? None. Then for the rest of your life you have to live with it because the sad fact of the matter is that nothing was purposely signed and done. It was done deliberately, but you will never prove that because excuses and coincidences will be all that you find.

Hell those guys that ordered the exercise to have all those scrambler jets away may even believe that it was a conspiracy, but what use is it to say so? They got their order from the higher up who whatever he says goes. You don't question why in that position, you do it.

All in all, you can be involved in something and not know it. You could be doing something because your boss tells you to, not knowing you are part of the conspiracy. You are on a need to know basis.

[edit on 3-12-2006 by grimreaper797]

Originally posted by CameronFox
Good Point.....

Yes it appears I took his post out of context. Sorry Flyer.

Flyer, please tell me why 3 of the floor planes were designated to attack an area....yet the 4th one was to be flown to a secret location, passengers eliminated....plane eliminated... so a Cargo plane can fly into it?

I think it was an AA plane myself but I'm just pointing out the reasoning of "100 people saw it so it must be true" is false.

If they asked, "was it a 4 engined plane" or "was it a cargo plane". The vast majority would have said yes and then come to believe that was the case and would swear blind by it.

Originally posted by CameronFox
One Witness does not discredit HUNDREDS OF OTHERS. One saw the landing gear down. Does that discredit ALL the others.

Seeker, could you please show me a picture the shows the lawn from an angle which shows the Grass leading up to the pentagon?

Thanks

External Link
External Link
External Link
External Link

and probably the best view of the lawn in front of the 'crash site'...
External Link


I don't necessarily have an opinion regarding the Pentagon theory of a plane vs. no plane or a missile vs. no missile, but using any sources of credibility that state the plane dragged across the lawn, whether it was a wing or the plane itself, before crashing is not only wrong, but relatively impossible as seen in the pictures above.

-----

PENTAGON BUILDING PERFORMANCE REPORT

3.7 SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT

At that time the aircraft had rolled slightly to the left, its right wing elevated. After the plane had traveled approximately another 75 ft, the left engine struck the ground at nearly the same instant that the nose of the aircraft struck the west wall of the Pentagon (figure 3.15)

and if that's the case.... then...



Where is this huge hole that should've been created by a left engine of a Boeing travelling around 500 mph?

I am just having a very hard time dealing with the concept that, via the official story, the Pentagon was hit in the fashion it was.. with the plane's left wing and/or engine dragging along the ground prior.

[edit on 3-12-2006 by TruthSeekerMP]

[edit on 3-12-2006 by TruthSeekerMP]

Getting back to the original topic, this video shows us nothing that can be considered as evidence one way or another. I liken this to many fuzzy UFO videos, you wouldn't blatantly say that it was a Grey spaceship in that cell phone video you have, so how can you definitively say what is in this video? If anything all it does is spurn more debate (which is actually good) and arguments/insults (which is bad). I mean do we really need ANOTHER "What the heck happened at the Pentagon???" thread where people debate all this cirumstantial evidence that really is not proof of a conspiracy OR a plane? No.

But I guess the release of this footage necessitates it. Maybe the powers that be just want this topic continually on our minds ...

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
And once again, as has been mentioned by myself and others many times, a security cam from a business around the Pentagon, is focused on the business propert, not the Pentagon.

Why didnt they release it before now? Because they knew it really didnt shed any light on the matter, so why waste the time.

But if there was nothing to hide, then why go through the trouble of taking the video from the hotel, then hiding it for 5 years. If they knew right away that there was nothing on the video, then why not let everyone see it? So from what you said, i conclude that there either:

Was something on there that they didn't want us to see
or
There is a reason for them keeping a video (maybe they wanted everyone to focus on the videos, and not something else) that has nothing conclusive on it from the public, if it's garbage why keep it secret?

doesn't look like that big of an explosion for a passenger plane.
Why was this classified for 5 years. Nothing can be seen except for
a bad view of the explosion. Or is that what they wanted?

SOSHOOTME

I've been looking at this over and over.

And I still percieve one of those "cars" is no car at all.
But rather the top section of a plane tail.
I just don't see it exiting the screen like other traffic.

But if there was nothing to hide, then why go through the trouble of taking the video from the hotel, then hiding it for 5 years. If they knew right away that there was nothing on the video, then why not let everyone see it?

Why did they take it? Because they were gathering all the possible (emphasis on POSSIBLE) video evidence. Hiding it? Sorry but seriously doubt it was a case of hiding it. More likely it was a case of someone cataloging it, watching it, seeing that nothing of evidentiary value was on it and then storing it away.

For your last question, some FBI agent watched it, typed his report and sent the tape to evidence storage. What was he supposed to do? Call CNN and give them the tape (and in the process get fired for violating the law)????

It wasnt a sinister plot, no one was hiding anything, hell Im kinda irritated that they spent taxpayer money to dig a video tape out of storage just to give a bunch of conspiracy theorists more to argue over.