757 Plane Did Not Hit Pentagon - Hard Visible Proof!

page: 44
20
<< 41  42  43    45 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
The necessary correction of 11 degrees to the DFDR magnetic bearing puts the plane on the right course to take out the poles and consequently south of the Citgo.


But what about the police witnesses who saw the plane on the other side of the Citgo?

Also waiting for an explanation for the following.
The security camera video shows an object flying straight and level, the FDR from the plane shows the plane was in a nose down atitude.




posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
double post

[edit on 24-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Bush needed a reason to go after Hussein!!!!!!!
If you look in the latest issue of the Atlanta-Hartfield newspaper in A1 and A12, Bush clearly stated that" he had no intention and won't go after bin laden. And he will probably be dead before any of us figure it out." If a plane went into the Pentagon. I've been in the Pentagon. Its dense construction. The plane would be hanging out of the building.

Think about it!!!

Sept 2nd-A memo was left from Clinton to Bush. that he felt Bin Laden was responsible for USS Cole. Bush went to Camp David and sat on his ass. And sat on it again, hosting to the Saudi's and listening to children read stories on 9/11. Foreign policy kills!!!!

US went into Kuwait. Why?

Kennedy was killed because he saw no basis for Vietnam; Has anyone notice that the Vietnam government has not or just maybe made a deal with devil to counterattack us? Johnson is Bush; Bush is Johnson.

You can not make a dictatorship country into a democracy. Look how long it took the United States to be a democracy and we still haven't got our crap together.



posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 02:30 AM
link   
so if nothing to hide why run around collecting every bit of camera footage, and then months after release some footage that does not show much. hmmm i guess we will have to try and wait the 50 years till all that other footage is released.



posted on Dec, 10 2008 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Looks like there is more hard evidence that people are digging up. I have read quite a few threads now that are making me stand up and notice.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 10-12-2008 by Realtruth]



posted on Dec, 18 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Here we go again. Now we have a person inside the Pentagon that has filed a lawsuit because they don't think a Plane hit the Pentagon and that an evacuation order was not given.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Career Army officer sues Rumsfeld, Cheney, saying no evacuation order given on 9/11


rawstory.com

A career Army officer who survived the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, claims that no evacuation was ordered inside the Pentagon, despite flight controllers calling in warnings of approaching hijacked aircraft nearly 20 minutes before the building was struck.

Gallop also says she heard two loud explosions, and does not believe that a Boeing 757 hit the building. Her son sustained a serious brain injury, and Gallop herself was knocked unconscious after the roof collapsed onto her office.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Go to Youtube and search 757 low flyby then vertical and watch the pentagon strike flash movie. When I see the video of a 757 flying into the pentagon, I will believe the rest of the world.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Realtruth
 


Video links are now "gone".

Do you happen to recall the name of the video so i (we) can search for
it on YouTube?

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 05:55 AM
link   
757 vert then watch this. pentagon strike



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
This guy is kind of trying to make a good point IMO.

The fact that the plane also had to fly so low to make such an "attack run" at such a high speed...well, i'd most likley get sucked to the ground under the reverse pressure it has under it and crash tens of yards before it's target.

That's percision flying that even veteran commercial pilots can't pull off.


"Reverse pressure"? "Flux capacitor"? "interstellar transmogrifier"? What the heck are you talking about? What is "reverse pressure"? "Ground effect" is what wants to keep an aircraft in the air when they are low and a cushion of pressurized air builds up below the aircraft, but eventually gravity wins and no amount of ground effect air will keep something flying when lift over drag becomes nil.

"Crash tens of yards before its target?" Its amazing ANY aircraft can even land on a runway! "Reverse pressure" would cause them to crash tens of yards before the runway!! Its a miracle!



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
Its amazing ANY aircraft can even land on a runway! "Reverse pressure" would cause them to crash tens of yards before the runway!! Its a miracle!

Landing speed of a 757 is about 160 mph?
Alleged speed of Flight AA77 was about 460 mph?

What are you trying to compare, trebor?

In your self-alleged 25 year career working for the government DoD, were you ever taught that comparisons are only useful when they're relevant?



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by trebor451
Its amazing ANY aircraft can even land on a runway! "Reverse pressure" would cause them to crash tens of yards before the runway!! Its a miracle!

Landing speed of a 757 is about 160 mph?
Alleged speed of Flight AA77 was about 460 mph?

What are you trying to compare, trebor?

In your self-alleged 25 year career working for the government DoD, were you ever taught that comparisons are only useful when they're relevant?


You going to put on your whirly-bird beanie and tell us all about "reverse pressure", at 160 OR 460 mph? get TF to help you out. or Cap't Bob. he should be up on that "reverse pressure" that will cause an aircraft to crash "tens of yards short of its target".



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Great thread on Camera footage, it's what I said on this thread over and over for years.

Pentagon has 100's, if not 1000's of cameras inside and outside, since it's a top secret area, and only one camera angle release. Whatever!

Plenty of cameras in the Pentagon saw what came in, they release only what looked muddled on camera.

Why not lay all the cards on the table? well because someone or group is hiding something. Simple logic folks.


No Camera Footage


edit on 26-12-2010 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Pilgrum
The necessary correction of 11 degrees to the DFDR magnetic bearing puts the plane on the right course to take out the poles and consequently south of the Citgo.


But what about the police witnesses who saw the plane on the other side of the Citgo?

Also waiting for an explanation for the following.
The security camera video shows an object flying straight and level, the FDR from the plane shows the plane was in a nose down atitude.


Probably for the same reason that a plane flying slower can have a nose up attitude. A plane that is meant to fly most efficiently around 300 knots indicated airspeed, will be making a lot more lift at faster airspeeds, and will require some slight nose down.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Realtruth
 


Says who?

Pentagon doesn't need thousands of camera as you contend because it has a large permanent armed guard force who patrols the area 24/7

Cameras are used to watch an area(s) remotely

Also cameras are used to watch points of entry/exit - the main enterences for Pentagon are on opposite side of
the buil;ding deom the impact



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Realtruth
Great thread on Camera footage, it's what I said on this thread over and over for years.

Pentagon has 100's, if not 1000's of cameras inside and outside, since it's a top secret area, and only one camera angle release. Whatever!

Plenty of cameras in the Pentagon saw what came in, they release only what looked muddled on camera.

Why not lay all the cards on the table? well because someone or group is hiding something. Simple logic folks.


No Camera Footage



edit on 26-12-2010 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)


The Pentagon is not a top secret area. Besides, security clearances apply to people, not an object like a building. It is just the headquarters building for the DoD, not some clandestine base or flightlike with nukes. There would not have been a need to ring the outside of it with camera 9 years ago, and the highway runs right next to it also.

Conspiracy theorists like to suggest that it was some heavily guarded plane with ringed with surface to air missiles, etc and thats not the case. And actually, general aviation airplanes would fly almost right next to it when going into land at Reagan National

edit on 28-12-2010 by firepilot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 



Then why only one camera angle?

Explain this to us.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Realtruth
 


That particular camera, a slow frame rate, was monitoring a parking lot. Reason didn't catch more of the plane
was the slow speed. Dont need lot of frames to watch parking lot, saves on storage storage

Unfortunately sucks if want to capture jet airliner slamming into building, but that is reality in an imperfect world...



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


The burden of proof is not on the Truther's, but the people trying to convince us that there was a plane that crashed into the Pentagon. Whole story, not just a section.

Again here we go with .one camera, one angle.

Let's just say the camera's frame rate is slow, so what, leave the refresh rate out of it.

Where is all the other camera angles footage from before, during and after the attack?

One angle shot? Even the most logical mind would ask this question.

A major attack happened and they show one angle??????

Analogy again here folks:

Go to a movie and they show you a two minute clip, The End.....Where's the rest of the story?

Here are the camera's that where all over the outside of the Pentagon, since you post no facts or evidence your claims are weak at best. Slow frame rate means nothing especially if you have the cameras rolling after the attack also, let's see the hours and hours of different angles, after the attack.



edit on 28-12-2010 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by firepilot
The Pentagon is not a top secret area... It is just the headquarters building for the DoD,


"Just"?

"JUST"??

LOL.

Yeah, come on people! The Pentagon is just the HEADQUARTERS of the Department of DEFENSE. You know, the headquarters of DEFENSE. The HQ of DEFENDING the country. So why would you think it itself would be defended? It's not SPECIAL. It's just the HQ of the department charged with defending the worlds only remaining superpower. it's just a major symbol of US power known and hated around the world after decades of US military intervention and interference around the globe. Why would you think it would be defended heavily and ringed with cameras? Why would you think it was anything special. It's really just another building, not any kind of big deal. I mean, why would anyone want to attack the Pentagon? They couldn't have imagined anyone might want to target them, could they?



edit on 29-12-2010 by Malcram because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
20
<< 41  42  43    45 >>

log in

join