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.

 

FBI releases Pentagon attack aftermath video

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
It was shot late in the day apparently by an FBI agent getting on 395 from Columbia Pike at the ramp right before the Sheraton headed towards the Pentagon.

Watch 10 minute video here:


After he goes through the overpasses and gets to the point where a witness would have been able to see the plane and the Pentagon you can see how the trees that we have pointed out before really do block the alleged impact point rather thoroughly until you get up almost to the point where you would be directly under the plane on the official flight path.

As we have demonstrated in the past in our previous presentation, The USA Today Parade, there is only a tiny stretch of Route 27 less than a quarter mile long where someone would be able to see the plane and the Pentagon but tress block most of the view of the alleged impact point until you get underneath the overhead exit sign.




But at that point it would be approaching from behind you so you wouldn't have a view of it approaching at all unless you were looking backwards for whatever reason.

Here are screen shots I took from the video:









Frankly there isn't really anything else of much interest in the video to me other than the strange roof fires.

*I should add that the person who obtained this video from the FBI regularly works as a conduit for fraudulent government data and is a proven liar who furiously works to cover-up evidence proving a deception on 9/11 by deliberately planting disinformation theories, attacking CIT personally, and desperately casting doubt the information we provide. He is demanding credit for obtaining this video so for the record his name is John Farmer.




posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
So then what you're saying is that anyone that had their view blocked by trees, or signs, or whatever, wouldn't have been affected by the flash-bang hollywood special effects and would have had a clear view of the flyover. There must be dozens, since there was the usual traffic jam in front of the Pentagon.

This is great!

The truth will come out now, finally!

You must have dozens of interviews of people that saw the flyover then!

When will you publish your interviews of these people, and take the criminals to court?



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


Yes as a matter of fact Pentagon police officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr. saw it and you can hear his recorded account here.

No doubt others saw it as well.

But most were handled by others who claim they were there but lied about a "2nd plane" that flew away from the building immediately after the explosion as cover.

Like this guy.

And this guy.

So if they saw this alleged "2nd plane" flying away at the same time of the explosion then why didn't everyone?

If you aren't aware of the significant evidence proving a deliberately planted 2nd plane cover story please watch our video presentation here.

Thanks.



[edit on 17-1-2009 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


I thought you guys threw Roberts under the bus? No wait, that was Morin, right? Or was it Paik? I forget now, there's no way to keep up with the ever-changing stories y'all put out.

So just 1 guy out of dozens, or perhaps even scores of potential witnesses? Is that all? Have his story been corroborated yet? It doesn't look like anyone else saw it. I thought it was proven that he wasn't in a position to see it leave, since the building would have blocked his view? Wait, or was it that he had his times all wrong. Or was it that he didn't see the plane close to the building, but farther up.

No,no,no, now I remember, it was the impossible G load on the plane to make that turn over the Pentagon, right? Is that what debunked his claim? Again, it's so hard to keep up with the disinfo spread by y'all.

It changes every few months. First, the plane flew directly over the explosion, then it didn't. Then it was over here, then over there. then it dipped down out of the CITGO witness's sight and pulled up, then it was never less than 100' above the Pentagon.........

Hmmm, I see a pattern. This is exactly what a paid disinfo agent would do to discredit the twoof movement. Give ever changing stories, attack contradictory witnesses - like the cabbie and the priest - and sell barbecue aprons to make themselves look less credible to outsiders. I think you have exposed yourself as working against the twoof movement. You clearly have another agenda - to deflect attention away from the criminal Bush regime, and to attract attention onto yourselves and away from any real investigation.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


Your personal accusations are off topic and break the rules of this forum.

I haven't changed any claims.

You are lying.

The plane flew on the north side of the gas station proving it did not hit the building.

This is what we have always maintained that the evidence proves and this has only been validated repeatedly in the 2 years plus that we have embarked on this comprehensive investigation.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 



Give ever changing stories, attack


Like the OS right why don’t you start a thread how the truth movement changes their story, and I will start a thread of how the government believers who keep changing their story. You act so smug, as if most people believe in your version of the 911 lie.

You are in for a rude awakening, because most people do not believe in the OS lie.



Hmmm, I see a pattern. This is exactly what a paid disinfo agent would do to discredit the twoof movement. Give ever changing stories, attack contradictory witnesses


I see you are on top of what disinfo agents would do, seems to me you are well verse in their practices. One of the most famous words the disinfo agent likes to use is twoof, twoofers, twofers. Yes, they always resort to name calling, and belittling when they have nothing else to fight with. It is an emotional tactic, to upset the bloger, in hoping the bloger will retaliate, and get thrown off the blog or ATS, and then the disinfo agent has done his job. This is a fact, and one more thing, disinfo agents mostly “rant”, they do not have time to site sources, because they are very busy in other threads bashing the truth.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
So does this mean that now they will also agree to release the surveilance footage from the Pentagon security cameras?....maybe the closed circuit footage from the surveilance system that was connected to the convenience store next door?

You know...the ones that the government confiscated by force...never to be seen again? The ones that would (should) definitely show 100% proof without a doubt that a commercial jet liner crashed into the Pentagon like the official story suggests?


And to think it only took them eight years to rework and release this video that shows proof of absolutely nothing one way or the other.

My how very efficient our federal government is!! Surely they must be hard at work still trying to get to the bottom of what "really" happened



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Can I change the topic for a second please? it is related but not to the conspiracy that I am aware right now.

In your still pictures, what is that craft in the 3rd and 5th frame? in the 3rd it is at the top left, and in the 5th it almost centre left, I thought there where no planes in the area? or is that the white jumbo HQ I have heard about.

I can see the thread now (not mine) UFO spotted in FBI's own video
azz



[edit on 17/1/2009 by azzllin]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gonenuts

why don’t you start a thread how the truth movement changes their story,



Y'all don't have a story, nor an explanation.

Matter of fact, once you start examining all the different claims that troofers make as being "da troof", it becomes apparent that some are definitely lying, cuz in some instances, they are mutually exclusive.

Examples:

Pentagon flyover vs missle vs remote control plane vs no plane at all

Plane was shot down in Shanksville vs no plane in Shanksville vs missle at Shanksville vs small jet at Shanksville

Explosions are heard so that means explosives at WTC vs no explosions are heard so no explosives but thermite at WTC vs no explosions are heard so that means that quieter thermobarics are used vs explosions might be masked by the collapse so a natural FAE happened - and thus NO inside job

This is just a small sampling. And they prove that there are, in fact troofers that are NOT telling the truth. It is impossible to deny this. They are just too divergent. Someone is making it up as they go.

Besides, they've already been debunked. So why rehash the same subject and subject all the various believers of all the different stories to even more ridicule?

This is the troof movement in a nutshell - they are like the 2 yr old that throws his peas and carrots against the wall. It only takes 2 seconds to make a mess - or 2 seconds to copy/paste garbage from a conspiracy site..... but then it takes a rational thinking adult a half hour to clean up the mess they made.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

this comprehensive investigation.



What a joke this statement is.

A comprehensive investigation would include all witness statements and all physical evidence.

Just limiting this to your own witnesses, all that were in a position to see the plane hit the Pentagon, say that the plane hit the Pentagon. The others believe it hit the Pentagon. A comprehensive investigation would account for this. You do not, but rather, explain it away with some poppycock about them being mind controlled - LOL....

There is one conclusion.

You are not being truthful when you call your so called investigation comprehensive.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


This is the troof movement in a nutshell - they are like the 2 yr old that throws his peas and carrots against the wall. It only takes 2 seconds to make a mess - or 2 seconds to copy/paste garbage from a conspiracy site..... but then it takes a rational thinking adult a half hour to clean up the mess they made.


You are in a Conspiracies web site! This is a web site, which talks about different opinions, and different conspiracies.
It does not give you the right to belittle, ridicule, attack, and insult other posters, which you have been doing. You, and your “opinions” are not above everyone else’s.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gonenuts

You, and your “opinions” are not above everyone else’s.



Neither are yours.

Too bad for you though, I can back up my opinions about that day with facts. You cannot.

Here's the proof of that statement:

Just look at my last post. Are there various opinions? Sure. But it's also an undeniable fact that many are exclusive of each other, to the point that it becomes apparent that none of them have any convincing evidence to back their claims. They can't even come to any agreement amongst themselves. If they did, there would be some agreement on some of those points - like flyover vs missle, etc. Each camp has their own theories, and each are just as passionate about their point of view. But even though they all agree that "9/11 was an inside jorb" they can't even come together over even that issue.

What's that tell you when you can even come to an agremment amongst yourselves? How do you think that your views are correct when you are in disagreement over these issues?

You can't even convince each other. How do you expect for non Cterz to take you seriously? Do you even see WHY no one takes you seriously?



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 

The Official Government Story of 911 is a proven lie!
You cannot prove a lie to be a fact!



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gonenuts

The Official Government Story of 911 is a proven lie!
You cannot prove a lie to be a fact!



So rather than examine the awful truth that there isn't even any agreement amongst truthers, and what that truly means, you've given up and fallen back to this position.

Forget all that. Explain to me why anyone should take you seriously when you can't even agree on even the big issues : flyover vs missle vs no plane vs xxxx

My guess is that this is too painful to confront.

Priceless.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 



My guess is that this is too painful to confront.


For you maybe, but you, and the truth, have become enemies as you have demonstrated in most of your postings


So rather than examine the awful truth that there isn't even any


So why are you in here then? If there is no truth to be found. I see where your mind set is, and it is not very good. You have forgotten that you are in a conspiracies site where everything is open for disusing. If you are so convinced that the government is telling us the truth (lol) on everything about 911, then I would sagest you start proven that the government is telling the truth. Because most people, in here have no problems proven the government has lied to us in “everything” about 911. and they have proved it!



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Craig,
Is there anyone in this world who you believe is NOT IN ON IT?
Have you been diagnosed with paranoia at all?



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Just goes to show that CIT cannot even get who did the video tape right (it was not an FBI agent). I guess that is what happens when you take a video segment posted by someone else on JREF and then post it as if it is your own.

Just an FYI, this is only a segment of the entire DVD which I trimmed down for web use. The original DVD is much longer and was obtained through Court actions by Scott Bingham (the guy who got the Citgo and Doubletree videos released). It is one of many being released as a result of continuing legal work by Scott and myself.


[edit on 17-1-2009 by 911files]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gonenuts

1-If there is no truth to be found.

2-If you are so convinced that the government is telling us the truth (lol) on everything about 911, then I would sagest you start proven that the government is telling the truth.

3-Because most people, in here have no problems proven the government has lied to us in “everything” about 911.

4-and they have proved it!



1- It is YOU that needs to realize what the truth is, and it won't be found by staying here, where all manner of CT are believed without any critical thinking.

2-and if I don't, guess what happens? You still lose, cuz in order for truther's claims to be accepted by anyone that matters, YOU must prove an alternate theory.

3- yes, exactly. Everyone in here has no problems believing in CTz. that's why they are here in the first place, not to discuss these issues, but rather to stroke each other's egos and make each other feel like they have special knowledge that all the sheeple don't.

4- only to each other. that's NOT a very good group to be appealing to if - and I'm assuming here - that you feel like Bush, or the NWO, or someone other than OBL's guys were responsible and should be brought to justice.

Face it, nothing you prove to each other here means absolutely nothing in the real world. You must prove it to others, but you cannot.



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 



It is YOU that needs to realize what the truth is, and it won't be found by staying here, where all manner of CT are believed without any critical thinking.


You have no right-calling people, who do not believe in your twisted ideas, and your opinions, and the OS, a bunch of CT who has no critical thinking skills, save your smug insults, for your self.


2-and if I don't, guess what happens? You still lose, cuz in order for truther's claims to be accepted by anyone that matters, YOU must prove an alternate theory.


LOSE! How old are you? So this is a game of I WIN! And not a debate fourm?
I cannot debate with certain people when all they are doing is constantly ridiculing the messenger, in every thread, and refuse to answers questions, and site any sources, and only rants! Where do you fit in? Be very careful how you answer this question, you do not want to make a fool out of your self!


3-Because most people, in here have no problems proven the government has lied to us in “everything” about 911.

3- yes, exactly. Everyone in here has no problems believing in CTz. that's why they are here in the first place, not to discuss these issues, but rather to stroke each other's egos and make each other feel like they have special knowledge that all the sheeple don't.


This is not about my ego, I know who I am.


4-and they have proved it!

4- only to each other. that's NOT a very good group to be appealing to if - and I'm assuming here - that you feel like Bush, or the NWO, or someone other than OBL's guys were responsible and should be brought to justice.


So why bother coming in to these 911 threads just to bash the messenger, all you are doing is running good poster away, with your insults, and your ridiculing.
If you do not believe in this garbage, why read it then, and respond to it?


Face it, nothing you prove to each other here means absolutely nothing in the real world. You must prove it to others, but you cannot.


Here, you go again, prove, prove, prove, what? I do not know about you, but I like to come in here to talk to some people about 911 and share information, and discuss issues. I really don’t think you understand what ATS is. It is not a playground for children to come into, and railroad good topics, and insult and ridicule good people who are trying to have a civilized conversation. But, you are in here to get your ego stroke, nothing more.



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
So then what you're saying is that anyone that had their view blocked by trees, or signs, or whatever, wouldn't have been affected by the flash-bang hollywood special effects and would have had a clear view of the flyover. There must be dozens, since there was the usual traffic jam in front of the Pentagon.



Seymour....

EXACTLY what I was thinking when I read Craig's post. He shot himself in the foot with that one.

His entire argument has been that the hundreds if not thousands of people that were in the vicinity of the impact point were deceived.

The people with that vantage point would have been more apt to see the flyover and not get duped.

Craig...you just posted the nail in the CIT coffin with this one. Nice job!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join