I have never put too much stock into the fact that the government would try to suppress the video footage of the Pentagon impact. Truthers usually
like to point to this suppression of footage as indicative of a government cover-up as to what actually hit the Pentagon and while this may be true,
there is also another very reasonable explanation that I'll put forward in a minute.
First, I'd like to point out that I do not believe the official conspiracy theory regarding 9/11. I do not believe that Al Qaeda, acting alone,
planned and carried out the attacks. I am not a "debunker", only a truth seeker, regardless of where ever that truth may take me. My ultimate goal
with this post is to possibly eliminate an often used argument so that we may try and get closer to the truth, whatever that truth may be and
regardless of whether it fits my over-all theory of what happened on that day.
It is not within the scope of this post to argue whether a plane [AA flight 77] did or did not hit the Pentagon. It is also not within the scope of
this post to delve into whether or not the government is lying to us about the events of 9/11. This post is only to give a simple and suitable
explanation as to why the government would not want actual video footage of the Pentagon impact to be made public.
With that being said, I'll explain why there would be a perfectly good explanation for the government to not release footage of the actual airplane
hitting the Pentagon, if indeed it was actually a plane, and why the government would confiscate all video tapes that were pointed at the Pentagon
during the time in question.
Now, we all know by now that this part of the Pentagon was freshly "redone" and that it was reinforced. Well, we first have to understand how the
military defines reinforcement. For instance, we know that there are technologies, such as
reactive
armor but certainly not limited to reactive armor that will lessen the damage or lethality of certain explosives and projectiles.
I could only assume that the Pentagon would have such technology, especially the newly reinforced side of the Pentagon. If the Pentagon had some
technology that lessened the impact of explosives or projectiles, I'm sure it would be kept very secret, as to not alert the "enemy" to what is
needed to penetrate or destroy such technology. This technology could be currently used on embassies or other US interests in hostile locations around
the world, which would make the need for secrecy even greater.
I myself was in the Army, so I do know that many of these technologies do exist and they are super secret for the purpose of the enemy not being able
to compensate for or defeat the technology. Just as reactive armor was kept very secret when it was first invented, so too would other technologies of
the same purpose.
When the first video of the Pentagon explosion was released by the government, I started to doubt whether this explanation could be used as a viable
excuse. However, there are enough frames removed from the video and it is at such an angle to where any kind of armor technology would not be given
away. Also, notice how the explosion gets pushed outwards and upwards that would seem to confirm some sort of armor technology being used. If no
technology was used, the explosion would simply follow the airplane through the building.
Of course, this does not prove that AA Flight 77 or even an airplane hit the Pentagon, only that some type of reactive armor or other technology could
have been in place, therefore giving a reasonable explanation as to why the government would suppress video footage of the actual impact. This may or
may not be the reason for this footage suppression but it is a viable explanation.
--airspoon
Edited to fix video.
[edit on 27-3-2010 by airspoon]
[edit on 27-3-2010 by airspoon]
[edit on 27-3-2010 by airspoon]
[edit on 27-3-2010 by airspoon]
. 
