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.

# Exposed !! Hidden Video Showing What Really Hit The Pentagon !!

page: 3
38
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 10:53 PM

originally posted by: litterbaux
Were the wings sheared off from hitting light poles on the way in? Maybe.

If the wings were sheared off, surely the fuel would have ignited and set the ground alight big time exterior to the building, or at least left wing debris all over the place?

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 10:55 PM
a reply to: nerbot

If that plane hit that pole at 500 mph, the wing would have been sheared off due to physics. With inertia you have to figure in the weight of the object and whether it's moving. Even though that pole had shear bolts, which most do, the fact it's a stable object increases it's inertia. Objects in movement always need more force to keep them moving while objects at rest take zero energy.

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:02 PM

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: TheUniverse2
It can't be a plane because it crashed into the Pentagon horizontally. A plane would be coming from above. That can't be real...

Planes can fly horizontally you know.

It's how they go up and down slowly.

You can't be real.

The plane crashing going street level just seems really hard to do is all I am saying. geez

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:04 PM
a reply to: nerbot

The wing tips, even with less mass at a resting state would have more mass with velocity. The pressure of an impact at the wingtips would be minor, it would just shear them off, but to take down a light post would have to take a more direct impact to the wing. But even then, taking off even a small part of the wing would cause the plane to pivot. The rudder could compensate but it wouldn't be fast enough to make a difference at 100 ft altitude.

If the plane actually struck these light poles with enough stored energy, it would have been closer to the cabin which would sheer off the wings.

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:06 PM

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: cmdrkeenkid
An out of focus video of an out of focus security camera screen showing two or three frames on loop with a bonus of ear grating commentary? Groundbreaking!

Thanks for reminding me why I shouldn't bother with Bitchute videos, I guess.

Someone should be able to geolocate where that video was taken from. Looks like probably the highway interchange to the southwest of the Pentagon.

Glad I scanned this thread before watching the video. Your post saved me time. Thanks!

Bye

So you wasted the time by posting anyway....lol

cheers

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:10 PM
if its in the sky and you have doubt,

Zaphod it out

They know their stuff.

as he posted it's way too big to be a cruise missile and a ballistic missile gets launched in an arc.

There are loads of threads contemporaneous here on ATS where this was discussed and debated repeatedly

Most likely the actual jet and a 1 percent chance it was a remote-controlled mid-sized jet imho
edit on 30-11-2022 by putnam6 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:17 PM

originally posted by: putnam6
if its in the sky and you have doubt,

Zaphod it out

They know their stuff.

as he posted it's way too big to be a cruise missile and a ballistic missile gets launched in an arc.

So a commercial airliner, damaged wings and pilots that had no experiece flying this type of plane must be the answer.

Why would I believe this? Sell me the bridge friend.

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:25 PM

originally posted by: TheUniverse2

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: TheUniverse2
It can't be a plane because it crashed into the Pentagon horizontally. A plane would be coming from above. That can't be real...

Planes can fly horizontally you know.

It's how they go up and down slowly.

You can't be real.

The plane crashing going street level just seems really hard to do is all I am saying. geez

...and thus, you ALSO question the narrative of nine eleven...

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:27 PM

originally posted by: litterbaux

originally posted by: putnam6
if its in the sky and you have doubt,

Zaphod it out

They know their stuff.

as he posted it's way too big to be a cruise missile and a ballistic missile gets launched in an arc.

So a commercial airliner, damaged wings and pilots that had no experiece flying this type of plane must be the answer.

Why would I believe this? Sell me the bridge friend.

Referring to this video posted here it is way too big to be a cruise missile, sure I suppose the light poles could have been a completely staged event as something shear them off but it wasn't a missile.

#2 the explosion in the established security video shows an immediate fireball, whereas this "clip" has no immediate fireball, why cut the clip? let's see the aftermath as well as the proceeding film. ie the film is likely total BS as evidence to anything.

This of course just means this isn't the evidence that proves anything, it doesn't necessarily supersede some other BS going on but this the video doesn't prove that
edit on 30-11-2022 by putnam6 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:28 PM
One thing everyone forgets that if it was the plane they stated, the engines on the wing would have been in the ground before the plane made that perfect round hole! and the first news teams at the sight did not show major damage to the ground leading up to the entrance of the crash, was amazing how fast they had gravel put over the lawn in front of the crash sight?

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:29 PM
I did come across a group of similar videos to the one in this thread about 15 years ago. Some of them where clearly fake, others you had to look a bit harder. It was what got me started down that hole as what is going on with this?

It does look like a strawman attack on the psychological front. Having lots of fakes out and about does make it much tougher to find the real information and discredit it when it does surface.

One thing that puts me off this video being legit is the lack of a bright quick flash as the explosives went up. This can been seen with the video that was released at the Pentagon gate.

After getting dragged through the mud on this one trying to sort out the facts from the fiction, One on the suspect list for what exactly hit the Pentagon.

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:29 PM

originally posted by: putnam6

Most likely the actual jet and a 1 percent chance it was a remote-controlled mid-sized jet imho

Actual pilots say "no way" on the actual commercial jet option

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:32 PM

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: litterbaux
Were the wings sheared off from hitting light poles on the way in? Maybe.

If the wings were sheared off, surely the fuel would have ignited and set the ground alight big time exterior to the building, or at least left wing debris all over the place?

Pretty sure the fuel tanks don't run the complete length of the wings, pretty sure there is a schematic somewhere on the internet showing exactly this.

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:32 PM

originally posted by: kittywrangler

originally posted by: TheUniverse2

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: TheUniverse2
It can't be a plane because it crashed into the Pentagon horizontally. A plane would be coming from above. That can't be real...

Planes can fly horizontally you know.

It's how they go up and down slowly.

You can't be real.

The plane crashing going street level just seems really hard to do is all I am saying. geez

...and thus, you ALSO question the narrative of nine eleven...

Dude, I am as shocked as you!
edit on 30-11-2022 by TheUniverse2 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:44 PM
a reply to: litterbaux

Yes, MY logic failed me. According to yours, the light pole should have instantly ripped the wing off, and caused the plane to crash, while still standing there. And yet, at a much lower speed, light poles are knocked over by something with significantly less force.

And my logic is faulty.

posted on Nov, 30 2022 @ 11:46 PM

originally posted by: litterbaux
a reply to: kittywrangler

I know. If you believe the resident aircraft expert on this site you would believe these facts.

And if you listen to the people that can't tell a 737 from an A380, that like to put words in people's mouths, the planes should have just bounced off the buildings, and light poles can't get knocked over by one traveling at high speed.

Show me once when I said the wings were not damaged by the poles, or that the laws of physics didn't apply. Quote me, exactly where I said that, in any thread, at any given time. You know damn well you can't.

posted on Dec, 1 2022 @ 12:00 AM

originally posted by: kittywrangler

originally posted by: putnam6

Most likely the actual jet and a 1 percent chance it was a remote-controlled mid-sized jet imho

Actual pilots say "no way" on the actual commercial jet option

Just my opinion Kitty, this film of proof could be easily faked much more easily than the expanding conspiracy that includes staging the downed light poles and planting eyewitnesses that said it was a plane.

911 was one of the reasons I signed up for ATS, I perfectly can believe there was BS going on, however when they start saying it was holograms instead of planes it's BS too. We can both be suspicious together, and still not have viable proof. I do enjoy discussing this and have an open mind, I really dig this link below, for everything 9/11 if you have any other links Id read them if you shared them here too.

Some of these scenarios would just take so many people being involved, the wider it goes the less I believe it as being viable, not that it couldn't be true but it is much less likely to be true.

911blogger.com...

whatreallyhappened.com...

Below are excerpts from Pentagon eyewitness accounts. The highlighted accounts include a link to a page which contains an unsolicited phone call from Jeffrey Hill to the eyewitness in which he asks what they saw on 9/11. These people do not talk about hypotheticals based on the size of the hole in the Pentagon or the lack of aircraft debris, they relate what they saw on 9/11.
Listen to what they have to say, and take note of how racked off some of them are about cooked up hypothetical scenarios.

Steve Anderson:
Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke.

Deb Anlauf:

Anlauf was watching TV coverage of the Trade Center burning shortly before 9:30 a.m. when she decided to return to her 14th-floor room from another part of the hotel. Once in her room, she heard a "loud roar" and looked out the window to see what was going on. "Suddenly I saw this plane right outside my window," Anlauf said during a telephone interview from her hotel room this morning. "You felt like you could touch it; it was that close. It was just incredible. "Then it shot straight across from where we are and flew right into the Pentagon. It was just this huge fireball that crashed into the wall (of the Pentagon). When it hit, the whole hotel shook."

Arlington police transmission:

Motor 11: There is visible smoke coming from that area...high, visible smoke.
Dispatcher: Motor 11 direct.
Motor 14: Motor 14, it was an American Airlines plane, uh, headed eastbound over the Pike (Columbia Pike highway), possibly toward the Pentagon.
Dispatcher: 10-4. Cruiser 50 direct.

David Battle:

Earlier Tuesday, Battle, an office worker at the Pentagon, was standing outside the building and just about to enter when the aircraft struck. "It was coming down head first," he said. "And when the impact hit, the cars and everything were just shaking."

Gary Bauer:

I had just passed the closest place the Pentagon is to the exit on 395 . . . when all of a sudden I heard the roar of a jet engine. I looked at the woman sitting in the car next to me. She had this startled look on her face. We were all thinking the same thing. We looked out the front of our windows to try to see the plane, and it wasn’t until a few seconds later that we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway. And it veered to the right into the Pentagon. The blast literally rocked all of our cars. It was an incredible moment.

Maurice Bease:

Sergeant Maurice L. Bease had worked around Marine aviation long enough to know what a fly-by was, and it sounded like one as he stood outside his office near the Pentagon on Sept. 11. Turning around expecting to see a fighter jet fly over, he saw only a split-second glimpse of a white commercial airliner streaking low toward the building, and him! He did not even have time to duck before it plowed into the side of the Pentagon around the corner and about 200 yards from where he stood. Immediately, a ball of flame shot up the side of the building, followed by smoke, lots of it.

Paul Begala:

Paul Begala, a Democratic consultant, said he witnessed an explosion near the Pentagon. "It was a huge fireball, a huge, orange fireball," he said in an interview on his mobile phone.

Mickey Bell:

Bell, who had been less than 100 feet from the initial impact of the plane, was nearly struck by one of the plane´s wings as it sped by him. In shock, he got into his truck, which had been parked in the trailer compound, and sped away. He wandered around Arlington in his truck and tried to make wireless phone calls. He ended up back at Singleton´s headquarters in Gaithersburg two hours later, according to President Singleton, not remembering much. The full impact of the closeness of the crash wasn´t realized until coworkers noticed damage to Bell´s work vehicle. He had plastic and rivets from an airplane imbedded in its sheet metal, but Bell had no idea what had happened.

Susan Bergen:

Susan Bergen was sitting in a hotel room near the Pentagon on Tuesday morning, glued to TV news coverage of the World Trade Center attack. Out of the corner of her eye, she saw a plane outside the window of her 11th floor room. She turned just in time to see a big jetliner skim the treetops and slam into the side of the Pentagon, less than a half mile from her hotel room. It looked like the plane sped up just before hitting the building, she said.

Brian Birdwell:

LTC Brian Birdwell. He was just heading back down the hall to his office when the building exploded in front of him. ... Once they stabilized Brian, they transferred him to George Washington Hospital where...the best, cutting edge burn doctor in the U.S. The doctor told him that had he not gone to Georgetown first, he probably would not have survived because of the jet fuel in his lungs.

Ed Blunt:

Engine 101 actually saw the jetliner plow into the northwest side of the Pentagon. The radio crackled, “Engine 101—emergency traffic, a plane has gone down into the Pentagon."

Sean Boger:

Sean Boger, Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief - "I just looked up and I saw the big nose and the wings of the aircraft coming right at us and I just watched it hit the building." "It exploded. I fell to the ground and covered my head. I could actually hear the metal going through the building."

Donald Bouchoux:
Donald R. Bouchoux, 53, a retired Naval officer, a Great Falls resident, a Vietnam veteran and former commanding officer of a Navy fighter squadron, was driving west from Tysons Corner to the Pentagon for a 10am meeting. He wrote: At 9:40 a.m. I was driving down Washington Boulevard (Route 27) along the side of the Pentagon when the aircraft crossed about 200 yards (should be more than 150 yards from the impact) in front of me and impacted the side of the building. There was an enormous fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down. The car moved about a foot to the right when the shock wave hit. [Telephone interview]

Pam Bradley:

I work in Washington DC area, and was on my way to work, in my car, sitting on a bridge, and saw the plane hit the Pentagon. I am in a complete state of shock.

Chris Braman:

The lawn was littered with twisted pieces of aluminum. He saw one chunk painted with the letter "A," another with a "C." It didn't occur to Braman what the letters signified until a man in the crowd stooped to pick up one of the smaller metal shards. He examined it for a moment, then announced: "This was a jet."

Mark Bright:

"I saw the plane at the Navy Annex area," he said. "I knew it was going to strike the building because it was very, very low -- at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down." The plane would have been seconds from impact -- the annex is only a few hundred yards from the Pentagon. He said he heard the plane "power-up" just before it struck the Pentagon. "

edit on 1-12-2022 by putnam6 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 1 2022 @ 12:19 AM
a reply to: putnam6

Can We at Least All Agree that a American Airlines Boeing 757 Could Not have Hit the Pentagon as Claimed ? To this Day the Evidence of that is Still in Question IMO .

posted on Dec, 1 2022 @ 12:24 AM
What happened with those poles is a frustrating one. How can a falling pole smash a windscreen of a driving car, bounce off, leave the rest of the car intact and all come to a short stop?

As for what really went on looks a lot more like this:

posted on Dec, 1 2022 @ 12:43 AM
Definitely not a SCUD or a jumbo jet...

More likely a cruise missile or a remote controlled craft disguised to be civilian aircraft as the eye witnesses accounts saw a plane and the very limited wreckage at the site had red white and blue markings.

Some more interesting information about the pentagon attack and the identity of the aircraft here.

edit on 1-12-2022 by JAY1980 because: (no reason given)

top topics

38