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.


Pentagon - No camera footage = No plane. A reasonable assumption.

page: 22
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 03:39 PM
reply to post by Malcram

And how may I ask would you debate the mere fact that there was plane debris spread all over the lawn of the pentagon? Or was that simply placed there by invisible rogue forces? An act perpetrated for the sole purpose of conspiracy debated?

And your proof of the pentagon Expecting an attack? Have any? Didn't think so~ Assumptions once again.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 03:41 PM
reply to post by GoodOlDave

As for the link, the point of a plane vanishing seems odd to me. Clearly in the photo you can see 2 workers there, and the largest piece of debris is no bigger than a shoe. They spent half the day covering the impact site. I was off that day and I was glued to the set for about 14 hours, observing, listening....

In the scenario of social engineering and cultural psychology, they can be a powerful tool. Whether they are used for info or disinfo, the motive remains the same... to persuade the majority of public opinion. One thing I noticed on the whole 9/11 event, is that there is such a vast amount of 'testimonial' and then there's what you see on mainstream TV. Nowhere in the MS did they ever mention that police and firefighters inside the towers mentioned multiple explosions before and during the crashes. The media stunt they pulled was to put a face on the american psyche at the time. People need to have a mindset type image of good and evil (the face of good and the face of evil). America was livid that day, and what did we see? OBL pictures everywhere. Media convinced us that day to hate muslims and to kill anything muslim or anti American. This also facilitates the perpetuation of the UN agenda of thinning the herd of independent governments. It was that day when Bushie declared war on terror, so off we went around the globe shooting at people and dropping bunker busters, killing civilians, assassinating 'suspected leaders' and pushing the NATO-corporate agenda on them. There's more to the 9/11 scenario than 3 planes hitting 3 buildings. But that is not the topic of this thread, so I digress....

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 03:44 PM
reply to post by OuttaTime

Once again....NOT your fault, but your source's....

.... crash forensics, check this link to compare crashsites of 2 similar incidents.

I followed that link, to the "veterans" site.

To make the claim that those two crashes (UAL 93 and the Polish/Russian Tupolev crash) ....well, to make the comparison as "similar" is ridiculous!! (Does everyone reading understand why?)

It does indicate, however, just how poisoned the well has become.

BTW, where is the "camera footage" of the crash in Russia??

Oh, no footage? Then it must not have happened.......? Oh, wait.....they have physical evidence, they have other corroboration (no ground-based eyewitnesses, though. Shame). SO, the Russia case has everything the Pentagon case has (except eyewitnesses). Seems the Pentagon is MORE likely than the crash in Russia? Is that the logic being used here?

edit on 28 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 03:56 PM

Originally posted by mikelee
The facts are:

* OS says an airliner hit the building yet no footage released shows any such thing.

...becuase it's only the conspiracy mongers who are claiming there is any additional usable footage to begin with. It's already established that the Citgo station and the hotel cameras didn't show anything so it's only your own false assertion that any other cameras would show anything.

* Barbara Olsen was said to have made a phone call from the airliner. That has been proven to have been a lie. That call from the airliner never happened as the FBI discovered. The box-cutter theory was developed from her faked phone call.

You are lying. There were quite a number of phone calls from the hijacked craft in addition to hers including the ones from the airphones, and they all corroborate each other. Besides, you do realize you're now claiming Ted Olsen is in on the conspriacy too, right?

* 2 Trillion dollars missing, gone vanished. The very next day, 911 happens. In the same locale of the Pentagon where those records as provided to Don Rumsfeld for his press conference stating such were kept.

Accusing the gov't of making money disappear is like accusing fish of swimming in the ocean or Rosie O'Donnell of eating chocolate cake.

* The footage released by the government has been tested and analyzed then judged to have manipulated and frames determined missing.

Good grief, stop it already. It was security camera footage. Of course it has frames missing. Security cameras run 24x7 so to save space on the tape they only record every other second or so. You can see right away this is how the footage was recorded from the security car driving through the gate a few seconds before the impact.

* In the video frames released of this attack there is a very noticeable and un-airliner like "corkscrew" pattern of white smoke that is common with munitions. An airliner of any type does not produce this.

Neither do cruise missiles nor predator drones. They use jet engines the same as passenger aircraft do. They're just smaller. All you've done is prove *nothing* hit the Pentagon.

All right, I gotta ask- which one of those damned fool conspiracy web sites did you get all this drivel from? I know full flipping well you didn't come up with this stuff yourself.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Yes, the well has become poisoned, yet the point I hasve been repeatedly asking is where is all the debris at? Engines? 200+ seats? Wing/tail sections? It seems as though physics has been thrown out the window on 3 anomalies that day. Good evidence? Bad evidence? The point in that link is 'look at the 93 site'. Is there any similarities between the 93 impact and the Czech plane crash? Almost every picture of a plane crash I have ever seen leaves a massive field of debris, both large and small. You could have fit all the pentagon plane debris in a pickup truck, same as the 93 site. Every other site takes days if not weeks to clear up.
I do agree that something crashed there, but what?

add: "where is the russian camera footage" you ask? That's pretty weak. That crash was in the middle of a forest. The Pentagon is in the middle of a huge business district and the military capitol of the country. No media photos or footage?
edit on 28-12-2010 by OuttaTime because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:07 PM

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by GoodOlDave

Your FBI (Freaking Bumbling Idiots) has stated that they do have additional tapes. In addition you posted in another post that they said they did have more footage.

Are children's games like this what I can expect from you, from now on? I said they didn't have any USABLE footage, as in footage that actually shows an aircraft. Of course the FBI has additional tapes. They're tapes of parking lots, entrances of local businesses, sidewalks, nearby highways, and the like, and not a single one of you has been able to show that they would contain any more footage of the aircraft. What benefit will it be to you to see a bunch of people standing in a parking lot and looking at something off camera? Please, explain that to me.

As it's been already stated...and I notice you constantly avoid it like vampires avoid that over a hundred eyewitnesses specifically saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon, from journalists to motorists to even an immigrant from El Salvador tending the lawn. If you can't get past that, then you're simply conspiracy mongoring for the sake of conspiracy mongoring, here.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:12 PM

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Malcram

And how may I ask would you debate the mere fact that there was plane debris spread all over the lawn of the pentagon? Or was that simply placed there by invisible rogue forces? An act perpetrated for the sole purpose of conspiracy debated?

I'd debate it by asking: What debris "all over the lawn"?

And your proof of the pentagon Expecting an attack? Have any? Didn't think so ~ Assumptions once again.

Please don't assume I'm making assumptions.

The plane was picked up again on radar fifteen minutes before before impact heading in the direction of the Pentagon. We have Mineta's report that Cheney was given regular updates on "flight 77" as it approached. They knew they were a likely target both theoretically and practically, seeing as the plane was heading towards them. You don't think they expect the Pentagon be to a prime target? You don't think they were prepared to be the next target? Please. That's just silly. They knew it was highly likely, thus they "expected it". Yet they couldn't get any footage, or they have it and - strangely - won't release it.

I wonder why.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Malcram because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by Malcram

Why is it that that video leaves out what happened a few minutes before, when the reporter, Jamie McIntyre specifically stated:

A short -- a while ago I walked right up next to the building, firefighters were still trying to put the blaze. The fire, by the way, is still burning in some parts of the Pentagon. And I took a look at the huge gaping hole that's in the side of the Pentagon in an area of the Pentagon that has been recently renovated, part of a multibillion dollar renovation program here at the Pentagon. I could see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport outside the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three feet long, it was silver and had been painted green and red, but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane. I also saw a large piece of shattered glass. It appeared to be a cockpit windshield or other window from the plane.

ETA: As for the number of videos, just out of curiousity, how many videos were there of AA11 hitting 1WTC? 2. That's right, in one of the worlds busiest cities, with several million locals and tourists, thousands upon thousands of businesses, and god knows how many TV crews, only 2 videocameras managed to film a plane flying straight into one of the most visible buildings in the city. And one of those video cameras weren't even aiming at anything in particular!
edit on 28-12-2010 by roboe because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:33 PM
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:44 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:48 PM
It is well documented in many reports (and articles) that FBI agents confiscated surveillance video tapes from the Pentagon gas station (confiscated within 5 minutes) Sheraton hotel (seized within 30 minutes)
and the Virginia Department of Transportation (DOT) so that's at LEAST three more tapes.

Ya think???????

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 04:51 PM
Look, do you want me to post the list of what's on those 85 videos again? I'll be more than happy to, even if it does mean violating the 'no spam' rule.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 05:41 PM

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

So what evidence do you have that she found anything more, other than 'none whatsoever'? Your own link showed that she only found one, and as you conspiracy people have so infamously showed, you didn't even believe that one. More to the point, why would you believe any video even if she did find another one?

I have no evidence nor have I ever made that claim. I only stated that 56 cameras were not viewed by her.
Not sure why you continually put words in other people's mouths. Oh..wait...yes I do.

All this bit about the videotapes is nothing but a red herring on your part anyway. As I've already shown, it wasn't just one, or two, or even three, people who specifically saw the plane hit the Pentagon. It was over a HUNDRED witnesses, including one who took photographs of the wreckage, and the link I showed listed them by name.

And which ones are we to believe?
Steve Anderson? He saw the wings hit the ground in front of the Pentagon.
John Bowman? He KNEW it was a bomb.
Mark Bright? He saw the plane hit
Lisa Burgess? She heard two blasts. One large and one smaller.
James Cissell? Claims the plane blurred past him yet saw faces of passengers.
Allen Cleveland? Didnt see 757 crash, but saw white cargo plane and then military jet (his testimony is quite curious all together)
Corley? Saw very little fire.
Steve DeChario? saw a small hole in the building. No tail. No Wings. Nothing.
Mike Dobbs? he didnt HEAR the crash
Penny Elgas? Saw the wings disappear INTO the Pentagon. And the tail 'slip' into the Pentagon.
Walker E Levy? Saw the nose of the plane come to a rest in the C ring. Crashed through the other walls in order to do so.
Ken Ford? Saw a 2 engine prop plane hit through binoculars
Gilah Goldsmith? Smelled cordite
Afework Hagos? saw the wings tilting up and down
Jerry Hanson? He heard a 'loud kathump'. Not what you would expect to hear.
Tom Hovis? saw the plane coming in from the North
Charles Krohn? saw a jet engine ricochet off the building into an adjacent parking lot. 10 minutes later heard a loud explsion.
William LaGasse? saw blinds down in the plane
William Middleton? saw the jet accelerate the last few hundred yards before impact
Terry Mitchell? claims the debris was NOT leftover aircraft
Peter Murphy? Heard the loudest noise he ever heard
Vin Narayanan? Pentagon walls held up like a champ. Plane nose curled up.
Obrien? Military plane
Mary Anne Owens? saw left wing clip the helipad. Saw fuselage hit ground and blow up
Steve Patterson? saw a commuter jet crash
Don Perkal? smelled cordite
Charlie Peterson? Two explosions
Frank Probst? saw starboard engine hit a low cement wall and blow apart
Ryan James? pilot tilted its wings, plane was moving slow
Noel Sepulveda? saw the plane drop its landing gear. Right engine hit high/ left-hit low.
Skarlet? airplane didn't crash. no debris. small hole in pentagon. seems plane banked up at last second
Mike Slater? seemed like a bomb went off
Jim Sutherland? saw a white 737
Tim Timmerman? saw the plane hit the ground
Keith Wheelhouse? saw plane similiar to C-130 flying directly above jet plane

The majority of the 'witnesses' listed in the link you provided only heard the explosion and did NOT SEE the plane impact. These are just a few conflicting testimonies.

You people will happily bleat out WITNESSES HEARD EXPLOSIONS AT THE WTC and insist on how important these eyewitness accounts are, but when it's an established fact that WITNESSES SAW A PASSENGER JET you turn around and say they cannot be believed. Trying to actually get you people to point out what you'll actually accept as credible evidence is like trying to nail jam to the wall, so it's clear that credibility has absolutely nothing to do with the source and everything to do with whether it happens to agree with you.

Again...which of these witness's do we believe? This is from your link to witness testimony.
You probably should have read it first.

Since you take such umbrage in my saying you are just mindlessly swallowing whatever drivel those damned fool conspiracy web sites are shoveling out, would you mind terribly explaining the rationale behind your double standard?

Thank you for mentioning this AGAIN!

edit on 28-12-2010 by DIDtm because: fixed missing words

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 06:20 PM
reply to post by DIDtm

Also, on that 'testimony' link is this little blurb:

Jose Velasquez : "It was like an earthquake" , "By the time I got outside all I could see was a giant cloud of smoke, first white then black, coming from the Pentagon," he said. Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. "I've never seen what the pictures looked like," he said. "The FBI was here within minutes and took the film. "

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 06:45 PM
reply to post by OuttaTime

The FBI was there within minutes is that a joke. That is exagerrated........

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by surfnow2

Not according to him. That (his) gas station caters to DoD vehicles only. I think I can find some credibility in that. The link is from National Geographic. I remember listening to the news as they interviewed neighboring businesses and a hotel, and I do recall hearing that line "FBI got the tapes" line a few times (on a few of the top news channels), and if my memory serves me correctly, they indicated it happened within 15 minutes. It is, after all, a national security issue. You gotta remember, it was a massive event, and the media was stammering for exclusive footage also, so the feds had to be a step ahead of them.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 07:59 PM
reply to post by mikelee

Watch this video then decide for yourself if the fence & vehicle should even be there at all. Or if this explanation per the OS is accurate.

What does the video have in common with the crash site? The plane did not impact the cars and the shockwave was mostly into the building. The cars didn't get caught behind the engine exhaust at full throttle. They got hit by shredded aluminum and flaming jet fuel splashes. And you can see how the fence was peeled back and tossed aside.
edit on 28/12/2010 by rnaa because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:09 PM

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
And your proof of the pentagon Expecting an attack? Have any? Didn't think so~ Assumptions once again.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

Lol , It's common sense and logic that Penthagon was expecting attack 30 min after second airplane hit the twin towers .Which building by your logic will expecting attack ? Mc donalds head quarters? D.C. Library ?

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:10 PM
reply to post by Human_Alien

Ya think???????

Yes I do. That's how I understand that the images you post are total invented hogwash.

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:47 PM
reply to post by GoodOlDave

Did you know people were allowed to take souvenirs with 'em?

Nah. Nothing suspicious here. Everything about that day was oh-so typical alright.


The Sheraton hotel

The cctv video of a "mysterious hotel", not so mysterious in fact as it would be the Sheraton National hotel, is said to have also registered the plane. The video has been viewed by the hotel employees, shocking them. Then the FBI came and took the video.

The Virginia department of transportation

The Virginia departement of transportation (VDOT) has video cams on main highways to monitor trafic. Two of these cams are near the pentagon, on Washington boulevard. They can be viewed on internet on TrafficLand web site. The pictures below show cams location. Click left to enlarge aerial view, click right to see actual view from cams.

The pentagon's gas station

The NEXCOMM/CITGO-gas station is the last place over which the plane flew before crossing the highway and diving onto the Pentagon. Jose Velasquez, the employee at this station heard the plane, just by the station, then saw the explosion on the Pentagon. Within the minutes after it, he said, FBI came in the station and took the video before he could even see it

And according to you GoodOlDave, you say there weren't any (more?) good videos. What are the odds? Oh wait! That's right. September 11th 2001 totally defied all odds, coincidences and physics that day!

Enjoy the delusion.

top topics

<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in