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.

 

Pentagon 5 Frame Anomaly Solved?, maybe.

page: 4
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
PEOPLE WATCH THE VIDEOS ON PAGE 2 POSTED BY SPRESTON!!!!!!
IN THE 1ST ONE AT 25 SECONDS LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER AND IN THE SECOND VIDEO LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER AT 1MIN AND 27 SECONDS! WHAT ARE THOSE!!!




posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


What gets me about the video is that you don't see any plane debris bouncing back from the building. Surely an explosion that powerful and a building that hardened would have sent some pieces of wing or tail section flying back into the grass. No plane in the video, no parts on the lawn. America you make the call- plane? or no plane?



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustJoe
reply to post by astronut68
 


Well...if it's on National Geographic it MUST be the truth! Seriously? Well, I'm not going to pretend I have anything more to add to this post cause I don't, but when someone makes a comment like you did I feel compelled to call you out for being lazy and brainwashed. At least do some research...Watching a TV program and then forming an opinion about something as important as this is exactly why The Powers That Be think they can give us half truths and lies and we will just slurp it all up...Wow...



Little thing about National Geographic - back in the 1980's I
was interviewed by NG senior write Priit Vesilind for a story
he was writing on religion in America (this was around the
time of the JIm Bakker PTL scandal).

Needless to say I was kinda amped about the article and I
waited and waited for it to come out. Months later Mr. Vesilind
was coming through town and asked if I could meet him. He
told me over lunch that they had killed the article due to political
pressure.

So if they won't cover 9/11 or represent the facts correctly it
might not be the first time. Apparently they knuckle under
just like every other media outlet.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by astronut68
at first i wanted to believe the truthers were on to something but i watched the natl geo doc about 9/11 .....pretty much took all the air outta the truthers accusations ! truthers to me are about as fanatical about this subject as the hoaxers who believe we diddnt land on the moon ! cultural vandalism , historical denial of the facts to meet there twisted agenda ! ignorance is bliss !


Hey anyone see Astro nut. No! He went to the movies!
And to the moon.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by usmc0369
1) Why does the frames say Sept -12? I think someone made these up and they are fake. First off I was at the Pentagon on that day, I did search and rescue there, and spent 30 more days there doing security. A plane did hit I can tell you that much
2) The camera being used is a RDISS System. The RDISS does not put the date and time on the bottom of the pitcher. The date and time group goes in the top right hand corner. Trust me this is what I do for a living now and have been in Afghanistan for the last six months installing the RDISS system, and other cameras.


Can you tell us why you belive a plane hit the building. Any idea what type plane? Were you inside or outside?
Thanks donny semper fidelis



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   



[edit on 2-9-2009 by ChemicalSubstance]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Oposted by kingoftheworld

PEOPLE WATCH THE VIDEOS ON PAGE 2 POSTED BY SPRESTON!!!!!!
IN THE 1ST ONE AT 25 SECONDS LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER AND IN THE SECOND VIDEO LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER AT 1MIN AND 27 SECONDS! WHAT ARE THOSE!!!


25 seconds corresponds to this still frame;



Don't see anything except the glare on the left. We have every reason to believe that the Defense Department has photoshopped both videos and the still frames. Whether they photoshopped something out or something in or both is debatable.

Regardless, the actual aircraft flew Over the Naval Annex and North of the Citgo and could not possibly have flown the official flight path down the hill and through the light poles and low and level across the lawn.

As an infamous ATS government loyalist has stated;


posted by jthomas

Isn't it interesting that I have never claimed that the "security camera video shows any aircraft hitting the Pentagon." Just so we're clear about that, I want you to show everyone here any post I have made on any forum in which I have said that the security camera video shows anything hitting the Pentagon.

If you can't do that, then you will issue a public retraction right here, correct? What's that, you can't? C'mon, be a sport, just try.


In fact, as we rational people have said for years, one cannot conclude by looking at the security camera video that anything hit the Pentagon.




posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Vitrio,
Does this fit your thoughts? They retrofitted three. Guess where the other two wound up? Add laser and or gps in the building and you gotca a no brainer.

« NPR, the IMF, and the Global Savings Glut
Remembering the Iranian War »
New Documentary - 100% Proof - No Plane Hit Pentagon
By: plunger Tuesday June 16, 2009 5:26 am

A brand new Documentary irrefutably proves that a missile, fired from a jet, hit the Pentagon on 9/11 - the latter fleeing the area after the attack. The attack jet was an A-3 Skywarrior from Raytheon's fleet, flown by a crack, US fighter pilot, disguised as an American Airlines Passenger jet. The A-3 is designed to land on aircraft carriers, and eyewitnesses on this video recount that they saw a very low-flying aircraft flying very slowly, wings wobbling, then banking right on final attack approach to the Pentagon - then throttling-up and bugging out of the area (simultaneous with the explosion) after firing the missile. Karen Kwiatkowski and others instantly on the scene confirmed the aroma of cordite (high explosives).

Raytheon, maker of Patriot and Tomahawk missiles, watched its stock take off after the 911 attacks. Purchases of call options contracts on Raytheon stock increased sixfold on September 10, 2001. Americans (too many) do not know that Raytheon executives were killed on 9-11, or at least wound up permanently missing, which may be a more accurate way of saying it. It is who wound up missing that is most interesting.


Raytheon and 9/11

2001-09-11 Stanley Hall Raytheon Director of Electronic warfare program management. Raytheon did the retrofit of the A-3 that hit the Pentagon, where Bush claimed Flight 77 hit it. Disappeared on American airlines Flight 77, the one that supposedly hit the Pentagon but did not.

2001-09-11 Peter Gay Raytheon VP of Electronic Systems on special assignment at the El Segundo, CA division office where the Global Hawk UAV remote control system is made. Raytheon did the retrofit of the A-3 that hit the Pentagon, where Bush claimed Flight 77 hit it. Disappeared on American airlines Flight 11, the one that supposedly hit the North World Trade Tower I.

2001-09-11 Kenneth Waldie Raytheon Senior Quality Control for Electronic Systems. Raytheon did the retrofit of the A-3 that hit the Pentagon, where Bush claimed Flight 77 hit it. Disappeared on American airlines Flight 11, the one that supposedly hit the North World Trade Tower I.

2001-09-11 David Kovalcin Raytheon Senior Mechanical Engineer for Electronic Systems. Raytheon did the retrofit of the A-3 that hit the Pentagon, where Bush claimed Flight 77 hit it. Disappeared on American airlines Flight 11, the one that supposedly hit the North World Trade Tower I.

2001-09-11 Herbert Homer Raytheon Corporate Executive working with the Department of Defense. Raytheon did the retrofit of the A-3 that hit the Pentagon, where Bush claimed Flight 77 hit it. Disappeared on United airlines Flight 175, the one that supposedly hit the South World Trade Tower II.

These are not only the type of people but they are the people that would be assigned to UAV type projects involving Mode 4 and Mode 5 upgrades. Why would they be in Boston and those planes coming from that direction and from north of Manhattan Island?

That 16 foot tunnel through three rings of the Pentagon is only made by a directional blast weapon. Rumsfeld has even slipped up and mentioned the missile that hit the Pentagon.

Some have seen the Pentagon parking lot camera video and the white trail of smoke. Jets do now leave white trails of smoke at sea level, but Thiokol powered AGMs do, at all altitudes.

When you see the security camera footage at the Pentagon, note that it does not include a plane, but does include a low-level white contrail, precisely what would be expected from the exhaust of a Thiokol solid-fuel rocket motor - fired from a very low level.

FAA Chief, Norm Mineta, testified under oath before the 9/11 Commission that he personally witnessed Dick Cheney in the bunker beneath the White House on 9/11 directing the events as the plane approached the Pentagon for at least the final 50 miles of its flight. Despite frantic calls from his subordinates to do something, Cheney allowed the plane to approach the world's most highly fortified building, uncontested. Following Mineta's testimony, he was fired.

The cab driver who claimed to have had his cab struck by a light post, allegedly sheered-off by the approaching jet-liner, admits on camera that his wife works for the FBI, and the entire incident was staged to create a cover story for what ACTUALLY occurred at the Pentagon on 9/11. No jet hit any light posts on 9/11. That was all staged the night prior.

The Inside Job is in fact, proven.

Attacking the messenger without actually watching the film is unacceptable. Watch this film and share it with everyone you know. The coverup is as vast as the conspiracy. Everyone in Congress knows the truth. ALL OF THEM.

Spotlight

[edit on 2-9-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Awesome post Donny, it merits it`s own thread bud.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by kingoftheworld
 


This?.



.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
No need to confiscate the so called missing videos.

Hundreds of people saw the passenger airliner crash into the pentagon.



[edit on 9/2/2009 by Classified Info]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Originally posted by Classified Info



No need to confiscate the so called missing videos.

Hundreds of people saw the passenger airliner crash into the pentagon.



[edit on 9/2/2009 by Classified Info]


No need to confiscate videos that showed nothing, but confiscated them.

8 years and still no Al Qaeda high ranking operatives brought to justice from what must be a huge network, operating from inside America for years, most intricate acts of terrorism ever, learning to fly Jet airliners using Nintendo Gameboys and the Arabic Boeing for Dummies (martyrdom edition) flight instruction manual.

And we`re nuts lmfao.

Amazing.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   
What is amazing is that nutjobs like you continue to ignore the hundreds of witnesses that saw the passenger airliner crash into the pentagon.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


That is what I was referring to as well. There is a similiar shot in both vids... looks kinda of small in in relationship to the building.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Classified Info
No need to confiscate the so called missing videos.

Hundreds of people saw the passenger airliner crash into the pentagon.



[edit on 9/2/2009 by Classified Info]



As I've said before, more than hundreds of people see a magician saw a lady in half at a magic show.

You are in your car, when out of the blue a large jet flying at 500+ MPH moves about 40 feet above your head. In the time that it takes your head to move from left to right, the plane streaks into the pentagon. If you're lucky, you had all of 5 seconds to see anything.

The explosion would draw everyone's attention. Nobody is looking at the other side of the Pentagon after that if the plane keeps going.

>> AS I remember, there were rumors people who said one thing -- and then changed their story to fit the government message later on. I didn't forget that.

There isn't this huge consensus of people singing the same tune at the Pentagon.

>> Add to that the hiding of so many confiscated tapes which could EASILY prove the governments story if they in fact, did tell the truth. If they aren't telling the truth -- we'd never get the other tapes.

Seems straight forward to me.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


And I thought this thread had no value other than to rehash things....

.... good stuff.

>> I don't know why I thought it was a Plane flying over and a rocket strike at the same time -- an explosive charge would be much easier to pull off. But people are around and they probably needed SOMETHING to hit the building.

Some of the more fantasical claims of a white airplane, over the WTC, where flight 93 was hit by an Air to Air missile (let's call it as we see it; the people onboard the flight took control of the airplane and they shot it down AFTER they realized these guys won the day -- but having live terrorists, or maybe some things they can't explain had to be taken care of).

Probably the most important target for Bush and a bunch of kleptocrats was building 7. It had court documents that were ruling against the Bush family on a multi-billion dollar federal note scam, documents for the case against ENRON, and various other cases.

>> Anyway, the best rumor I'd heard was that the white airplanes were the top of the line electronics planes that protect the President's airspace. They have electronic countermeasures and command and control -- but I don't offhand remember what type of plane.


>> The benefit of having very state of the art equipment, and resources, is that it makes anyone accusing you of foul play sound all the more looney.

>> But it also helps fill in the puzzle of why the head of security for the FAA destroyed all the radar tapes of that day with NO explanation other than he did it.

If countermeasures were used to confuse the one F16 deployed and NORAD -- then, those echos would probably show up on the FAA tapes. Also, they might have an airplane leaving the Pentagon.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:00 AM
link   
I've no idea if this has been brought up; too many posts.
Why is the date September 12th? ...Just wondering if that is just a anomaly or....a mistake? ..Just interesting is all...



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

As I've said before, more than hundreds of people see a magician saw a lady in half at a magic show.



True, but everybody know that it is fake, no human being can survive being cut in half. Smoke and mirrors. I truly hope that you are not going to imply that the two airliners that slammed into the WTC's was smoke and mirrors. Real people suffered and did indeed die.

But then again maybe you hold to the no plane theory, if you do, seek psychiatric help, immediately.

Face it! Hundreds of people witnessed the event.




Seems straight forward to me.


This is only more proof that you are in dire need of medical attention.

By the way; Now that Obama is in charge do you feel the war has somehow become a just war? Is it no longer a war for oil? What happened to the Police State?

it amazes me how silent the Radical Left has become about our "unjust" war overseas.

Your hypocrisy has been noted.

[edit on 9/3/2009 by Classified Info]



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by antmax21
I've no idea if this has been brought up; too many posts.
Why is the date September 12th? ...Just wondering if that is just a anomaly or....a mistake? ..Just interesting is all...


I think there time stamping was wrong, hmm. I really don't know why it would have been wrong though.. You would assume that cameras - In a commercial environment would be right otherwise you could have some problems presenting them as evidence in the court of law.

That makes me think though, We can't be 100% sure though.. If wrongly time stamped footage in court is not really preferred then why the hell did they release something that's wrong? I've read that there were heaps of cameras that had caught the insident that were confiscated... never to be released. But as it goes, those organisations have lost the footage!


Edit - I'm not a lawyer so I don't know the laws on CCTV in court are.. but I've gathered that generally what I've said is right. If I'm wrong, please correct me.



[edit on 3-9-2009 by SkipStorm]

[edit on 3-9-2009 by SkipStorm]



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Reply to post by Seventh

YES what is that? To me it seems like a missle



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join