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.

 

Missing/censored pictures of the Pentagon attack

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Missing/censored pictures/video of the Pentagon attack

As far as I know there are none, but I hear ATS members often complain of a picture of a tiny hole and no debris that was sooo telling and then 'taken off the internet.' The implication here is of enforced mystery, a government/media 'they' scuttling to cover their tracks. But it's my experience that nothing that was ever available has been or stayed removed. Maybe from one location or server, but someone's got a copy of anything you ever saw cited and over time all that's happened to the public evidence pool is that it's grown.

For example, there's this CNN video that was 'aired only once' - Jamie McIntyre's shocking revelation that there was no debris on the lawn. First, I'd need someone to show me proof - what all the channels have aired 24/7 since 9/11 - to see that it was never boadcast again. Then if this is so I'd wonder was it supposed to be repeated? Is it blocked? Will CNN send a video of this if asked and paid, or are they stonewalling? If this shocking video is being blocked from view, how does it have 8,387 views on Youtube without being pulled?

One member recently complained of a lost photo showing 'app four lemon lime rescue vehicles around a perfectly formed 10x20 or so smoking hole, no debris, no rugburn,' which they lost and were unable to recover. Something tells me this widely-published photo is the one meant:

I'm not sure who took this one, but I got it from the Hunt The Boeing site. If this wasn't the one, I have others that might be. True, as everywhere, no marks and little debris on the lawn (NONE visible in this mid-res long-shot from along the plane's path). This is because the plane was flying in the AIR (the lowest part of it but still) and flew it and its heaviest pieces INTO the building. The rest remianed outside as seen elsewhere, mostly having deflected to the north (left) and near the building.

See, I'm great that way. So if anyone has true regrets over missing photo/video or other evidence, lemme know. Give me a description and I'll check my personal files and bookmarked sites to see if I can help re-locate it. Submit requests here, and I'll help clarify the situation as much as I reasonably can.

If you want to maintain the mystery, then just ignore the offer.




posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 02:38 AM
link   
Good find.

Sorta says it all.

Star and flag .

Lets see them debunk this.

Cheers

Mungo



posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   


As far as I know there are none, but I hear ATS members often complain of a picture of a tiny hole and no debris that was sooo telling and then 'taken off the internet.' The implication here is of enforced mystery, a government/media 'they' scuttling to cover their tracks. But it's my experience that nothing that was ever available has been or stayed removed. Maybe from one location or server, but someone's got a copy of anything you ever saw cited and over time all that's happened to the public evidence pool is that it's grown.


Here is picture of hole in C ring wall - It is an EXIT hole!, punched into
exterior wall of C Ring by debris (landing gear strut) EXITING building
after travelling through.






Aircraft debris on Pentagon lawn





Question is not that there is no evidence of the Pentagon - it is that those
looking are trying to validate some particular agenda or fantasy they hold.
When such "evidence" is not forthcoming begin crying "cover-up" or
that some "dark forces" are suppressing it. It is all in what you are
seeking .



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Caustic Logic
 


Caustic,
My recollection of 911 during the Pentagon attack was this:

I was watching the news at work with other associates. There was a reporter outside the Pentagon and he stated that there was a large explosion. He mentioned the construction going on and at the time was unsure of what was happening. It was soon after that, that the Pentagon had been attacked.

I have no idea what channel I was watching.

Do you recall seeing this or knowing of where I may be able to archive this?

Thanks,
CO

[edit on 6-4-2008 by CaptainObvious]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Here you go Captain Obvious. 9/11 television archive. That link doesn't answer your question directly, but it is the most extensive news archive that I've been able to find.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Thanks guys..... I will have to look at this tonight.

Does anyone else remember or have seen the footage I am talking about?



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Regardless of all above "info," you can't tell me that they would show us all the different footage of the Twin Towers, non-stop for 2-3 days, but NOT show footage of the "plane" crashing into the Pentagon? And then the little footage (5 frames) they did release was worthless to analyze. You don't think cameras caught "whatever" happened from every angle imaginable? And then not to show us any, after showing us ALL of the Twin Towers footage... ?

Again, I apologize, but I return to my "lack of common sense" in this country on this topic today. It's quite obvious there was a "cover-up" here.

Caustic -- post some videos... hell, from just 2 different angles... that shows a plane being flown into the Pentagon... please?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Thanks for the extra links. It actually sounded like the memory was of a composite oof two or more photos, and so I didn't have that. Sounds like the A-E drive punch-out hole with fire trucks around it.


Question is not that there is no evidence of the Pentagon - it is that those
looking are trying to validate some particular agenda or fantasy they hold.
When such "evidence" is not forthcoming begin crying "cover-up" or
that some "dark forces" are suppressing it. It is all in what you are
seeking .


Agreed. Also when they get tired of misrepresenting the evidence they decide to just pretend the evidence always showed what they pretend it did but then went missing. I'll hand it to CIT they never do this, but keep valiantly accepting and misrepresenting all of it to the bitter end.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Cap't: - I hope Coughy and Boone helped you out enough because I don't actually have a lead on that and would have to do research... I will tho if you still need help.
Somehow CNN rings a bell - McIntyre I think was on-site and reported explosion before news of a plane. I watched ABC's live recently, it wasn't them.

Boone 870 and Coughymachine: Great contributions, good work.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by RabbitChaser
 


Originally posted by RabbitChaser
Regardless of all above "info," you can't tell me that they would show us all the different footage of the Twin Towers, non-stop for 2-3 days, but NOT show footage of the "plane" crashing into the Pentagon? And then the little footage (5 frames) they did release was worthless to analyze. You don't think cameras caught "whatever" happened from every angle imaginable? And then not to show us any, after showing us ALL of the Twin Towers footage... ?


Here's a scenario: 1) no one was filming live. Flight 11 was only flemd by one camera by coincidence, flight 77 by one less than that. This spawned mystery, idiocy... so maybe along the line they had a chance to release a couple low-quality vids that would help quell the idiocy - but they don't 'cause it's distracting too many people to say it was a missile, etc... Did you know those five frames were LEAKED ANONYMOUSLY in 2002? The DoD didn't agree to release that video until 2006.


Again, I apologize, but I return to my "lack of common sense" in this country on this topic today. It's quite obvious there was a "cover-up" here.


Quite alright and I agree. What else can we call this kind of secrecy? They covered-up the impact of Flight 77 or whatever exactly big 757-ish plane that was that everyone saw impact. Why? Who knows for sure...

messed-up... next post...



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by RabbitChaser
 


Originally posted by RabbitChaser

Caustic -- post some videos... hell, from just 2 different angles... that shows a plane being flown into the Pentagon... please?


I'll try. Open these in a new window:
gate cam 1 - could well be a large silver plane reflecting sunlight very low less than 1 sec prior to the explosion
gate cam 2 - techincally a different angle! But alright, basically the same...
Citgo video - possible 757 shadow on ground - low res, working on a clearer video to explain this - this post explains how this shadow lines up perfectly. I'm not making this up - it shows a distinct shadow the right size place and time for the official story.

That's the best it gets from what's been released so far. Now, with all the rhubarb about the prevalance of WTC videos, I challenge you - find me just THREE videos (I say that 'cause I'm afraid there might actually be two) of Flight 11 striking the WTC. Or else I might have to get suspicious about what happened there...




[edit on 7-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Caustic Logic
 


"1) no one was filming live."

Are you referring to the Pentagon? Meaning no footage of a plane hitting the Pentagon b/c no one was filming live? Are you serious?

How many surveillance cameras do you think point directly at all sides of the Pentagon? How many surveillance videos of surrounding businesses, etc. were confiscated? You really think in this day and age (including back to '01) of the "big brother" agenda, and surveillance cameras everywhere you look, that there is no clear footage of "whatever" happened? I'm still waiting for yours...



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:48 AM
link   
I'd be surprised if there were any cameras besides the security gate pointed at the exact area of impact. And if there are, which is possible, the chance of it actually capturing a 600mph plane would be next to impossible.

This notion that they would fly something other than a plane into the building with 1000s of witnesses and just cross their fingers and hope that no one watches and that no one happens to have a camera on them? pretty pointless.

And more impossible is planting evidence and damage paths and the bodies and belongings and plane parts of the actual flight at the scene at the exact moment of impact which was just shortly after the flight took off, meaning they would have to destroy it and ship it over in that short period, etc is more than impossible.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by RabbitChaser
reply to post by Caustic Logic
 


"1) no one was filming live."

Are you referring to the Pentagon? Meaning no footage of a plane hitting the Pentagon b/c no one was filming live? Are you serious?

How many surveillance cameras do you think point directly at all sides of the Pentagon? How many surveillance videos of surrounding businesses, etc. were confiscated? You really think in this day and age (including back to '01) of the "big brother" agenda, and surveillance cameras everywhere you look, that there is no clear footage of "whatever" happened? I'm still waiting for yours...


Oops! I'll let you read the above and go from there. Security cameras do not turn and look up no matter how close a plane flies overhead. God and an army of a thousand angels could descend from heaven 100 feet overhead and that camera will keep staring at that stupid patch of parking lot like an idiot. The only thing most sec. cams would see is things on or right above the ground. Like a plane 20 feet up, or its shadow when higher...

And we've seen... recorded live... what?

ETA to repeat:
Now, with all the rhubarb about the prevalance of WTC videos, I challenge you - find me just THREE videos (I say that 'cause I'm afraid there might actually be two) of Flight 11 striking the WTC. Or else I might have to get suspicious about what happened there...

Live pro-quality videos OR ever-present surveillance footage will both be accepted.

[edit on 7-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   
What a crock.
Where's the Boeing?
A Boeing aircraft would SHOW in the footage, size would be proper, damage would be estimat'able

Look at the two youtube movies.

the frame BEFORE the 'object' enters from the right, a new sequence is cut in. You can see the frame bounce the instant the plane enters the image, a camera wouldnt cut and slice like that, it would be continous.

look at the image below?



A boeing wouldnt leave a SMOKE trail behind itself like that.

Look at the bright WHITE flash taht blinds the camera... jetfuel burns ORANGE, look at the towers, there's no bright white flash there that saturates the area.


look at the initial explosion, How can a boeing slam into a building WITHOUT throwing debree around from the initial imapce BEFORE The fuel manages to explode.

Boeing doesnt have FUEL in the nosecone.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:03 AM
link   
It is completely unbelievable to assume that the Pentagon has no video (good quality) of what happened.

I think that assuming the Pentagon was only equipped to film "a robbery on their front door" to be one the most ludicrous claims I have heard.

Security of this kind is 24 hours. Moreover the Pentagon most likely would be struck by the air if in the event of a missile attack or military invasion, having no video capablity for such is simply not believable.


[edit on 7-4-2008 by talisman]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
I'd be surprised if there were any cameras besides the security gate pointed at the exact area of impact. And if there are, which is possible, the chance of it actually capturing a 600mph plane would be next to impossible.


This is in line with what I'm sayinng, but it's not toally right and I should mention that there are some cameras that would have a great view. As the others are mentioning, the ones released ARE NOT all that was recorded.

The missing views from the Citgo station were probably too far away to show anything usable, given their low resolution.

However the Pentagon itself sports at least these three exterior cameras, wide angle I'd guess and situated over 70 ft above ground. I can't find the panoramic shot with all highlighted, but one at each corner of the west wall, and this one in the middle, almost looking straight down the flightpath.

At any frame rate this should show us at least a glimpse of what hit. Nothing released, lawsuits and all...
The VDOT had a camera mast that was actually app. scraped by the plane's wingtip but left standing.
Pickering's findings
This is traffic cam 740 which I once found is viewable in real-time on the internet with a view like this (old graphic - my arrow is way off - from about the left corner is closer)

Would have seen about 1-1.5 sec of the plane. No link handy but I hear the VDOT says these cameras were not recording on 9/11. With the 'smart traffic' center just up the hill, this seems odd and not too smart. Why have cameras up there and not recording? What is their purpose?

Ranke re-posting Pickering's findings about actual removed cameras in the area. This seems like they might be hiding something...

So I agree that to some extent there's a cover-up happening, whether or not it's intentional. I suspect it is.

If we ever DO see a clear view of what happened, the evidence strongly indicates it will be a big silver plane plowing into the building very low and fast.


[edit on 7-4-2008 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:48 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join