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.

 

Confiscated Hotel Video Released...No Plane

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Well even I must admit it seems rather odd that there is no direct footage, since the pentagon must have total surveillance coverage from all angles.

However, I would also like to go on record as saying that a very low trajectory of an aircraft coming in to hit the pentagon would look exactly identical to the footage seen in the clip.

I am not vouching for the validity of the clip or stating it is PROOF of anything, as it needs further analysis.

What I am saying however, is that this footage does appear to support the original claim that an airliner comes in on a very low trajectory, crash lands on the ground and slides into the side of the pentagon.

The real question should be is this video authentic or has it been prior doctored before release???

NeoN HaZe.




posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:45 AM
link   
In the first place

If there is a tail in the video, dont you think cnn experts would have seen it ??

Second

I dont think a tail would show with a plane going at top speed.
The 24 frames per second camera would not been able to capture the tail.
especialy not as clear as the so called tail you are trying to point out.
I'd say that is a truck comming by.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:46 AM
link   
But neon, there's nothing on the grass to suggest that.

The grass infront of the impact shows no 'sliding'

what ever hit the pentagon, didnt touch the ground...

And again, you'd figure the pinaccle military structure of the world super power would have camera's, even defenses setup to stop incoming threats.

So why did it take a LEGAL Act to MAKE the government release this?

This shows LESS than the original 3-4 frames released.

But Im with you, I cannot say with confidence WHAT happened.

But I can say, there's something significant that they DONT Want you to see.


[edit on 4-12-2006 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:46 AM
link   
[edit on 4-12-2006 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Bottom line..

If proof EXISTED of a boeing airliner striking the pentagon..

They would of showed you.... from the begining.

being they are showing something that DOESNT Show you proof, yet they declare it IS proof, says to me they have NO PROOF of a plane hitting.

If they DONT have proof of a plane hitting the pentagon, in the manner they state.........

What is it they have proof of, that they are not showing you.


why do you think that someone need to proof anything to you? isnt the eyewitnesses, debris, human remains are enough?!

and now maybe instead of asking empty questions you answer one:

why didnt they just fake a footage of the airliner crashing the pentagon? that should've been PERFECTLY aligned with the eyewitnesses to immediatly discredit any CT there is... so why not???



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:51 AM
link   
No i'd say it is a persons car that comes seconds before the van.
Note that it seems to go only twice the speed of the van.
And dissapears into the white color of the explosion.

Looking at the speed of this thing i can only say it's to slow for a plane at top speed.

By the way.
The plane did nt crash into the ground at the Penthagon cause it did't leave any skid marks on the lawn.

thewebfairy.com...



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 05:53 AM
link   
I havent seen photos of human remains.
I have seen debri's of 'something'
debri's can be planted.
eyewitnesses can be maniuplated, or even mistaken.

Hell my friend, stirnly believes a plane hit because he thinks hes seen photos of a plane hitting.

I said photos dont exist but he believes they do. He couldnt produce them, or tell me where they were but he honestly believed they existed.

ITs not his fault.. if your told something enough, and your not the sort of person to question an 'authority' figure... after 5 yrs.. you mind clouds and you honestly believe something.

I dont know where I stand.. I dont want to say people are lying or have been bought.. but that video, as well as the other video's DO NOT SHOW a plane hitting.
and everything thing else the united states GOVERNMENT declares evidence.. can easily be staged and setup, or even declared under FALSE pretenses.

But for them to declare this as PROOF, doesnt add up.
Its simply PROOF of a government coverup..

of what.. I cannot say!



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

ITs not his fault.. if your told something enough, and your not the sort of person to question an 'authority' figure... after 5 yrs.. you mind clouds and you honestly believe something.


can you see the irony?


Originally posted by Agit8dChop

But for them to declare this as PROOF, doesnt add up.
Its simply PROOF of a government coverup..

of what.. I cannot say!


i didnt see any offical claiming this is proof and i dont understand why would they say this. and how can you say that if somthing isnt adding up then there is a cover up? wheres the logic?
and what IS adding up? where is PROOF of a cover-up? should i just trust your common sense?



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:29 AM
link   
Because a Boeing Airliner, hijacked by an 'amateur-novice' arab pilot being flow that low, that fast into the most heavily secured military compound of the united states military wouldnt need to rely on 'witnesses' and 'cctv' footage to state the story.

A LEGAL act wouldnt be needed to release this footage.

Think what you will, because I obviously do.

I beleive if a boeing airliner that was hijacked slammed into the pentagon you'd have more than just a few frames of footage and a few small pieces of wreckage to backup your story.

Show me the footage from ALL THE CAMERA's
WITHOUT A LEGAL CASE needed...
AFTER IT HAPPENS.. not 5 YEARS LATER!
SHOW ME THE PROOF OF WMD's IN IRAQ
SHOW ME WHY THE PRESIDENT DIDNT ACT ON WARNINGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES OF THE IMPENDING ATTACK?

all this just puts very large question marks over EVERYTHING The government tells you to believe, with no evidence.

If your willing to beleive a plane hit the pentagon in the fashion they state, good for you.. Im happy.. your tyhe same person that believed IRAQ had wmd's... and that this was a surprise attack.

every day more and more people and evidence are brought forward showing major irregularitiees in the governments story.

the FBI even stated there's NOTHING tying the hijackers to the plot.
the HIJACKERS are alive for petes sake.

and your willing to beleive because the governemnt says a plane hit.. that a plane hit?


[edit on 4-12-2006 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

A LEGAL act wouldnt be needed to release this footage.


obviously not true.


CNN filed a Freedom of Information request for the video in February 2002, after the manager of the hotel disclosed its existence to CNN Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre and said it had been confiscated by the FBI. CNN's FOI request was denied because at the time the tape was considered evidence in the investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, who has since been convicted.


www.prisonplanet.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.prisonplanet.com...


Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Think what you will, because I obviously do.

I beleive if a boeing airliner that was hijacked slammed into the pentagon you'd have more than just a few frames of footage and a few small pieces of wreckage.


then your believes are wrong. all of the evidence there are pointing to the offical story, and there is NONE evidence to suggest otherwise so your claims are yours only as you are entitled to say and think whatever you want but you cant disprove somthing just by saying it doesnt fit your ideal scenario.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   
like I said,
your entitled to your belief, as am I.

hey its your president.. I hope for you sake your right.

unfortunately, everything suggests otherwise.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

all this just puts very large question marks over EVERYTHING The government tells you to believe, with no evidence.

If your willing to beleive a plane hit the pentagon in the fashion they state, good for you.. Im happy.. your tyhe same person that believed IRAQ had wmd's... and that this was a surprise attack.


im not even american so i doubt anyone told me what to belive. i saw the 911 CT movies then i researched myself and find it to be bunk.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop

every day more and more people and evidence are brought forward showing major irregularitiees in the governments story.


then i must be blind because i see none.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop

the FBI even stated there's NOTHING tying the hijackers to the plot.
the HIJACKERS are alive for petes sake.


care to share with me this "obviously" top secret information.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop

and your willing to beleive because the governemnt says a plane hit.. that a plane hit?


again im not american so i couldnt care about your goverment but when i look at the story and the evidence im pretty sure terrorists did this.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   
dont get me wrong, terrorists hit the wtc's and pensylvania..
as for the pentagon I dont know WHAT happened.

The better question, is why did the governent ALLOW it to happen?>



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
like I said,
your entitled to your belief, as am I.

hey its your president.. I hope for you sake your right.

unfortunately, everything suggests otherwise.


lol so i guess we are both not american.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:53 AM
link   
[edit on 4-12-2006 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeMitsuko

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
like I said,
your entitled to your belief, as am I.

hey its your president.. I hope for you sake your right.

unfortunately, everything suggests otherwise.


lol so i guess we are both not american.




Glad we agree on something!




posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
dont get me wrong, terrorists hit the wtc's and pensylvania..
as for the pentagon I dont know WHAT happened.

The better question, is why did the governent ALLOW it to happen?>


you dont have proof of that. how many times should we repeat this?
you cant say that they allow it because you dont have proof. the better question is how did it happen and what can they do to prevent it from happening again.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 07:01 AM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...'
politics.abovetopsecret.com...'

PLease refer to my two posts above.

Clearly, it was in the administrations best interests to allow this attack to happen.

After being warned by MULTIPLE Foreign intellegence services of arab terrorists planning to use airliners as missles..

after FBI reported suspicous happenins with ARABS in flight schools...

hell after KNOWN ARAB Terrorists being INSIDE THE US....

if the USA didnt know what was happening INSIDE, then they should of been impeached for incompitence.

You do not all the information stated above, and NOT know what was going on.

Please, read by two posts as stated above im hitting the sack.

australian daylight savings SUCKS!


Demistuko, we mightny agree, but thankyou for the debate!



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
www.abovetopsecret.com...'
politics.abovetopsecret.com...'

PLease refer to my two posts above.

Clearly, it was in the administrations best interests to allow this attack to happen.

After being warned by MULTIPLE Foreign intellegence services of arab terrorists planning to use airliners as missles..

after FBI reported suspicous happenins with ARABS in flight schools...

hell after KNOWN ARAB Terrorists being INSIDE THE US....

if the USA didnt know what was happening INSIDE, then they should of been impeached for incompitence.

You do not all the information stated above, and NOT know what was going on.

Please, read by two posts as stated above im hitting the sack.

australian daylight savings SUCKS!


Demistuko, we mightny agree, but thankyou for the debate!


first of all kudos on the effort. you seem to care about this alot more then i. and its a good research.

BUT, you cant convict a person in trial just with brining hes motives. and most of the things you listed can be looked at as faults not motives.

im not sure that the fbi KNEW 100% that there are terrorits in the US. im sure they were aware of arabs taking flight school but didnt have the evidence to arrest them. you cant arrest every arab that go to flight school.

you said: "if the USA didnt know what was happening INSIDE, then they should of been impeached for incompitence."

that is the correct attitude. that is what im saying.

oh and good night.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 07:26 AM
link   



Why cant they release the video's from other various security camera's AROUND THe pentagon?



Agit8ed.

The Pentagon is a military installation mate. Just casually releasing the security footage from around the building would be a serious breach in security.

I've stated this before, but I'll do it again. If you tried to get surveillance from a military installation which is part of an ongoing investigation (Khalid Sheik Mohammad) from any day of the year they wouldn't give it to you. FOIA will only get you so far.

Why don't they release it to silence the theories? Because it's not necessary. Anyone who looks at the witness accounts and the obvious pictures of the rubble can see a plane has hit that building. Anyone who claims after seeing these things that a plane didn't hit the building isn't worth convincing that a plane did hit the building. And between you and I, I think we can both agree that any video that did show a plane would be dismissed as 'doctored' within hours of its release.

The assessment you've made that over 150 people can be manipulated or mistaken is downright shameful. Aviation and Naval experts said they saw a plane coming in and specifically said a 757. Only one person said otherwise. In which case he stated a small plane but was over 2 miles away when it happened.

There is a photo of a body from Flight 77 on the Moussaoui trial exhibits. But I'm not posting it here because it isn't pretty. There is also a photo with the American Airlines logo on a piece of rubble.



The evidence that a 757 hit this building is enourmous. Yet I haven't seen any photographic evidence or witness accounts of anything else.




[edit on 4/12/2006 by doctorfungi]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join