It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:28 AM
I feel the Pentagon is the Red Herring in all of this... It screams psyop disinfo campaign to me..

IMO they have intentionally left gaping holes in the story with the whole purpose of totally leg sweeping the entire event.

They have the videos... and they will release them at a time of their convenience.

It is the safety valve for when what happened in NYC gets too hot...

They will show the plane.. and all the details about what happened on that day will not matter... The entire movement will be flushed down the toilet.. all the evidence collected in NYC wont matter. all the happenstance military training drills won't matter.. The shoot down orders.. the Doomsday plane.. and our military "impotence" wont matter.. even the famous super difficult last moment flight maneuver at the pentagon will be meaningless.. and all the lapse of protocol and laws of nature being suspended for ONE day in the history of humanity colliding together into a super storm of FUBAR.

The devil is in the details.. and the thing about the Pentagon is we don't have many.. what we do have, ie the flight path.. etc.. is interesting..But it is nothing to build a case on.. It is nothing to advertise on the front page.. It is something for the filing cabinet... You cannot build a case because the Government is not showing its card... You are making a bet that you will most likely lose.

I wish people would seriously ignore the Pentagon.. It makes the environment of answer seeking a pool of muck... I mean with no planers.. DEW.. and the hologram psyop bull#.. we have gone out on enough of a limb.. and come back with some really really good fruit..

We do not need the Pentagon to prove anything... and laying a case on it is going into the lair ... I fear it is a trap... and I personally don't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

There is so much more about that day that is so much more provable, interesting, and damning...

posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 05:38 AM
I was in Wal Mart the other day and they had dozens of black domed cameras on the celing. As far as I could tell only the one in the beer department had wires coming out of it. So they have many fake cameras why wouldn't any other business. I work with a guy who worked on the cameras along the railroad tracks near the Pentagon after 911. I'n going to pick his brains some more.


posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:33 PM
Savage Henry, thanks for the thoughts.

Rabbit Chaser - I see no videos and no rebuttals. I take it that you concede the challenge?

posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 11:43 PM
reply to post by Agit8dChop

That camera is one or two frames a second. The plane was moving faster than 780 feet per second. The lens is fisheyed or worse and distorted, the ground rises, it does not go down, the plane was coming down the hill from over the road that is raised up, not level.

The smoke path, the wing tip vortices would be trailing close behind kicking up dust if not one of the engines ruptured, or damaged by ingesting metal parts of lampposts, causing smoke from engine damage, or streaming oil or hydraulics as smoke.

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 07:46 AM

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
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]

Thanks for sharing these again; I'm suspicious of this not having being tampered with? But, if we go with it as being real and not tampered, I see a silver object just in frame that is much too low and slim to be a 757 body (it would need to be flush with the ground) the other thing that is confirmed is that the impact didn't cause the collapse of the building as its still intact in the video following the explosion and no wreckage thrown up or activity following impact.

Sorry, nothing here makes me think it was a plane crash!

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 08:53 AM
Dear God, when will this ever end? There is NO debris from the WINGS and no debris from the TAIL anywhere at the Pentagon. The OP's post leaves this out of course. There are NO suitcases and clothes ever photographed...there are NO photo's of the holes where the massive engines would have proof at all. The first reporter said that there was NO evidence of any plane crashing, and he was right. No plane crashed. There is NO prof that a plane crashed. There are a lot of people who saw an explosion, but NONE that saw the plane actually entering the building. Impossible.

How come there are NO photos of the bodies of the passengers' strapped into the seat' as claimed by one lying drone? No photo's...just the hazy recollections of people who want very badly to believe that we are not really at the mercy of a band of blackguards in high office. There can really be no other reason to believe the official story. Either a person is in deep denial, or they are for some nefarious reason supporting the official lie.

Where are the wings? They just folded up and stuck to the sides of the body and slid right into the building, right? That is so crazy and impossible that it staggers the sound mind to imagine anyone actually buying that crap. The total abscence of wings outside the Pentagon is proof and of itself, to assume with confidence that no plane hit the Pentagon. Impossible.No bodies of passengers, no photo's of photo's of the TWO massive engines AND where they would have impacted the side of the wall...It is as if the ' plane ' just squeezed itself into the original 12/14 foot missle hole on purpose....and some people will believe that fantasy before they will the plain and hard facts: The Neocon perps with the help of Israel pulled off an inside job to advance their goals of territorial theft and oil theft, among others.

There really is no other answer, now is there? No debris outside means no jet hit. Simple.

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 04:46 PM

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.

Video of the crash was reportedly played for the jury in the Moussaoui trial.

One possible reason they won't show the video to the public.

It would show that "Hani Hanjour" didn't fly straight into the pentagon, but instead went out of his way to do a giant 270-330 degree cork screw turn so he could specifically hit the only side of the pentagon that was under renovation for bomb blasting. Not only that, but this incredibly precise maneuver was done at 400+ mph in a 757 by a complete novice.

The plane was flown by computer, not somebody who couldn't even fly a Cessna three weeks before 9/11.

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Markshark4]

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 09:47 PM
reply to post by Markshark4

Thats funny...since he had a commercial pilots license.

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 10:04 PM
@CaptainObvious: I saw a piece on BBC News 24 that was a close-up shot of a small hole in the wall, and the presenter was simply reporting that a "fire had broken out at the Pentagon". That's a long way from an aircraft having flown into it, considering the events in NYC. I haven't seen that footage since I watched it live on 9/11.

I remember the shot vividly - it was only 3 windows wide. About 30 seconds after that, they started saying they were getting reports of an aircraft having hit the Pentagon, and then cut from the scene.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in