Why was the toll booth footage on the plane hitting the Pentagon seized?

[TitanicWreck]

A toll both within sight of of the Pentagon had cameras which caught on film whatever it was that hit the Pentgaon. That film, and some civilan film of the impact was seized by the feds, and has yet to be published, WHY?????

I have also read numerous seemingly reliable eye witness accounts that black boxes of the planes thaat hit the WTC were found, but were seized by the feds, and the ground zero workers were told to keep quiet. The offical story is the wtc black boxes were never found-But I think they were.

This stinks of a coverup....

[helderheid]

1. They took all camera footage - from hotels and other buildings.

[TitanicWreck]

3. Why wasnt the damage to the Pentagon more extensive?

why doesnt the so called 'liberal media' follow this?

Why is the media in America so bloody docile????

The damage inflicted to the Pentgon was nowhere near what it should have been, had a jet liner actually hit it....Or perhaps the Pentagon was just just built of nearlly indestructable material...

[BootinUp]

11. reinforced concrete thick walls vs aluminum plane

Not hard to understand.

[tbyg52]

30. Because

1) The people with the money are happy to kowtow to (and finance) power to get more.

2) The people without are frightened for their jobs, with good reason.

3) This will not end until we get corporations under control, as they should be.

4) Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Nozebro]

2. WHY? Because of the implications of what's in the footage. That's why.

nt

[Ian David]

4. Because it showed Rumsfeld giving handjobs in the parking lot. n/t

[cementjungle]

5. Why was the toll booth footage on the plane hitting the Pentagon seized?

Maybe because a major attack/crime had just occurred and all evidence was needed to be colleced? Seems like a logical thing to do under the circumstances.

[Bonobo]

6. ......

[JohnyCanuck]

9. So now we know Osama and his band of evil-doers acting alone

and without help from the inside did it (according to the official conspiracy theory), why can't we see them?

[seemslikeadream]

10. Then show us the plane!

Just one picture of the plane that's all I'm asking for!



Who Killed John O'Neill Summary http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=100059&mesg_id=100059

[Traveling_Home]

7. Not hard to find

I did a search on "pentagon toll booth video" and found it in numerous places (Many of them disreputable). Here's one at least that questions its authenticity while many were simply accepting it as real. Didn't find anything about the film(s) being seized.

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/video.html

[BootinUp]

8. Why do you need a crappy out of focus

photo of a blurred object to know what happened? You don't believe the eyewitnesses that saw the plane strike the building?

[seemslikeadream]

12. Was there only one eyewitness?

How do you know that it would be out of focus?

[BootinUp]

16. There was a C130 flying overhead

that watched it hit the Pentagon. As far as other eyewitnesses I haven't researched but there were all kinds of people in the vicinity, on the roads.

This is what the 9/11 Commission report says:

Reagan National controllers then vectored an unarmed National Guard C-130H cargo aircraft, which had just taken off en route to Minnesota, to identify and follow the suspicious aircraft.The C-130H pilot spotted it, identified it as a Boeing 757, attempted to follow its path, and at 9:38, seconds after impact, reported to the control tower:“looks like that aircraft crashed into the Pentagon sir.” (9/11 Commission Report, Chapt 1, Page 26)

You can read more about the timeline of F77 on my website:
http://jimsdigital.homeip.net:8080/911hijacks/

It scrolls to show you all 4 flights and what the sequence of events were according to two sources, the 9/11 Commission report and the NEADS Tapes which were reported on in an articl at vanity fair recently.

[Nozebro]

31. Your facts are wrong.

The C-130H did NOT report having seen ANYTHING crash into the Pentagon, at least not in the quote you cited above (AFTER impact, the crew reported that it "looks like that aircraft crashed"...meaning they didn't see it crash. if they had seen it crash, they would have been certain and would have said they saw it crash.).

[BootinUp]

46. I don't agree at all. n/t

[Nozebro]

50. The facts in your post are wrong regardless of your weasel response.

NT

[Berserker]

13. I will tell you why

I have a very close friend that was convicted of murder and sent to prison in New York. He got 18 years to life. After 7 years the "eyewitness" came forward and admitted he lied. So the eyewitness excuse is sometimes pure bullshit. I don't buy it give me a picture of the plane hitting the building. There were enough cameras so show me.

[BootinUp]

19. why would anyone

expect a surveillance camera that was not built to track high speed objects to contain anything of value. There were some photographs released and they are so blurry as to be nearly worthless when attempting to id the type of plane.

In this case you had a C130 that followed the plane in the last couple of minutes and identified it and watched it hit the Pentagon.

Sure eyewitnesses may lie if they have motive or they may report inaccurate information. But why do you assume they lie? Why does it make your conspiracy compelling? THe governments story about the cameras not having caught anything else is very believeable. Besides there were peices of the plane identified.

[MervinFerd]

23. Pieces of the Plane, pieces of all the bodies, hundreds of witnesses AND

the plane and passengers are missing with no other explanation.

What more evidence could there POSSIBLY be?

Jeesus Christ on a Boat Trailer!

[Nozebro]

33. Why would anyone believe the sneaky BS in your post?

You're trying to make it seem as though there was only one surveillance camera that captured images of the Pentagon building. What's the point of trying to mislead people? This isn't a right-wing neocon sight, you know and efforts to try and turn it into one won't get very far. Give it up.

[BootinUp]

47. No, I did not try to make it seem

if the meaning of my post was unclear then let me clear it up. I believe that any cameras that are standard scene surveillance type of equipment will either miss the plane altogether or capture a fuzzy image that won't be that useful. (that is my opinion). I don't see why they wouldn't give you the images if they show anything. There is nothing to coverup by hiding them unless these people and their 757 were picked up by aliens.

[Ezlivin]

49. Of the many cameras that were operating that day, one of them would

have captured the approach with no problem.

If a camera is pointed in the same direction as the aircraft is traveling (for instance, head on) it will have no problem capturing the image. If it is 10-15° off-center, it will still capture a usable image.

Assuming that the camera has a frame rate of 30FPS, then many of the cameras would have several frames showing all or part of the approach.

Naturally, this is all speculation as the Pentagon has not seen fit to release any of the video evidence.

[BootinUp]

52. Not worth the time to argue

The disappearing 757 theory is a joke.

[Ezlivin]

53. But worth the time to insert a non sequitur

I said nothing about a "disappearing 757".

My remarks were strictly limited to the ability of a still or motion camera to capture something moving.

[Nozebro]

51. Let me clue you in: The Pentagon has better cameras than you think.

If your real audience for that nonsense is newbies, I can see why you might think you could fool THEM, but anyone that knows much about 9/11 would probably feel offended.

[John Q. Citizen]

38. I'll believe the eye witnesses who saw the plane hit the pentagon,

if you will believe the eyewitnesses who heard and felt the sencondary explosions in the towers. Deal?

[SledDriver]

14. Because it clearly shows a Global Hawk drone hitting the Pentagon...

and not a commercial airliner.

MIHOP

[Blackthorn]

15. DING DING DING

We have a winner.

[BootinUp]

17. lol. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

28. A Global Hawk? Really?

One of these?



It must have LOADED with ordnance to make an explosion like that.

[JohnyCanuck]

18. The Suppression of Video Footage of the Pentagon Attack

The Suppression of Video Footage of the Pentagon Attack

It is striking that there is neither video footage nor any photographic evidence in the public domain showing a jetliner approaching or crashing into the Pentagon. As of May, 2006, the only video footage of the crash that has been released are clips from two Pentagon security cameras north of the crash site, one the source of 5 frames leaked in 2002.

With the release of the two video clips, the Pentagon claims to have supplied all of the footage it has of the attack. Although the number and positions of security cameras monitoring the Pentagon is not public knowledge, it seems unlikely that only two security cameras captured the attack. Isn't it reasonable to assume that there were dozens, if not hundreds, of security cameras ringing the huge building that is the heart of the United States military establishment?

Videos Outside the Pentagon Seized

The Sheraton National Hotel may be the hotel from which the FBI seized a CCTV recording.

Not only has the government refused to release footage that would clearly show how the Pentagon was attacked, it has also seized footage not belonging to the military. The FBI confiscated video recordings from several private businesses near the Pentagon in the immediate aftermath of the attack. Those recordings, if they still exist, might provide decisive evidence about the attack.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/footage.html

The FBI is withholding at least another 84 surveillance tapes that were seized in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the Pentagon.

There is an ongoing lawsuit to get these tapes released via the Freedom of Information Act. The FBI has admitted in a statement to attorney, Scott Hodes, representative of Mr Scott Bingham who runs the website http://www.flight77.info/, that they have these tapes, that they have already analyzed them and are still keeping them under lock and key.

A great deal of speculation has surrounded reports that on the morning of september 11th, 2001 the FBI visited two private businesses near the pentagon and confiscated several security camera video tapes.

The first is said to be the Cigto gas station with several security cameras aimed in the direction of the pentagon. Flight 77 flew directly over the gas station at an altitude of roughly 50 feet, less than 3 seconds from impact.

http://www.infowars.net/articles/may2006/170506Pentagon_videos.htm

http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonAttackVideos.shtml

[Roland99]

21. Aren't there interviews of people from the Sheraton or the Citgo station?

You'd think *someone* would have come forward.

Heck, if I'd worked there I'd have been looking at the security cam footage right away!

[hootinholler]

20. What toll booth?

There's 'video' from a parking lot security gate that was released after editing about a year ago, but there's no toll booth near the pentagon.

As others have stated, there are quite a number of security cams that would have the images all were taken in as evidence and have not been released.

-Hoot

[never_get_over_it]

26. Only toll road in the DC area

is the Dulles Toll Road and I don't think it went down as far as the Pentagon - I left up there two years ago but lived in Reston for 14 years - and am having a memory problem with how far the toll road went I ususally got off and on at the beltway

This whole thing about a plane not hitting the Pentagon really upsets me because a woman I worked with was on that plane - so please all of you who think that the plane did not hit the Pentagon would you PLEASE explain to me what happened to my co-worker...because she is quite clearly GONE.

[hootinholler]

27. Sorry to hear about your friend...

That's a pressing question you ask. I for one just want an explanation of the impact footprint being smaller than one would expect. There are also questions about the engine parts that photos of show to be too small also.

The Dulles toll road ends at just outside the beltway, but the roadbed continues under the beltway and joins I66 inside the beltway. I'm not aware of any toll booth inside the beltway, but, I could be missing something.

-Hoot

[never_get_over_it]

35. Thank you

after I posted I had to think a bit about the Dulles toll road and there is no toll booth anywhere near the Pentagon - I took that road a million times to the beltway and often to 66 to go into town. I don't know what the hell happened on 9/11 - I was actually in NC at the outer banks that day - but I continued to live in Northern VA for three years after 9/11 and I never heard anyone in person question the plane hitting the Pentagon. I had lots of neighbors that worked at the Pentagon or knew people who worked at the Pentagon and it just was NEVER an issue - I just don't know how you could keep something like this from SO many eye witnesses.

Sad truth is we'll probably never know the truth

[hootinholler]

36. Well they're not really eye witnesses...

They would know something hit the pentagon. but how many people would have surveyed the damage before the sectional collapse? Those that were there were focused on rescue and firefighting, not observation. In my experience, there's a different mindset in that building anyway at least about talking about stuff. I bet there's been some good scutlebutt, so you have a point about it not getting out. A number of witnesses reported smelling cordite, which like gunpowder, is a pretty unique odor once you know it.

Still for me it boils down to 'great big plane, itty bitty hole' answer that and you're my hero.

I'm afraid you're right we'll know truth about this after we know truth about JFK.

-Hoot

[soulcore]

40. GREAT big plane, ITTY BITTY hole

And please remember that the outer wall didn't collapse until roughly 20 minutes after impact.

[Twist_U_Up]

29. So sorry about your friend.

there are plenty of family members of victims of 911 asking our government some of the same type questions.
no reply yet.

check out this link http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

[MervinFerd]

22. THE MOST IDIOTIC OF CONSPIRACY THEORIES. Go Away.

Too stupid to even bother refuting.

Go Away!

[BootinUp]

24. lol. n/t

[Junkdrawer]

25. You know, that worked for the first year or two...

Not any more.

[sabbat hunter]

32. cover up?

how many people would be compliciate in this? with all the people that would be involved dont you think someone would have spoken up by now. especially with so many of the ground zero workers getting sick.

[cassiepriam]

34. I think this is a toll troll. Funny :)

They are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

[Sinti]

37. All of the video footage was collected, and should have been

just in case there was anything on it that would help with a criminal investigation. This is one of the few areas where the government actually followed protocol on 9/11.

Why they haven't released any of it, IMO, is to keep people focused on the Pentagon. While people are going, hey, what happened there, they're completely ignoring the massive amount of investigation obstruction, the AWOL chain of command, and other elements, that enabled 9/11 to happen in the first place. If we really get our hands on a smoking gun, I'd put my hand to the fire that they'll release the hotel footage, or the gas station footage showing the plane (doctored or real it matters not) just to reinforce the idea that anyone who has questions is obviously insane.

Welcome to DU TitanicWreck :hi:

[OneBlueSky]

39. the only reason to not realease the tapes is to prevent us . . .

from seeing what's on them . . . the question is "Why?" . . .

whether you believe a jetliner hit the Pentagon or not, it's your right, (and mine) to see whatever the tapes show . . .

if they show a jetliner, case closed . . .

but if they don't, case open . . .

simple as that . . .

[Orrex]

41. If the collision was orchestrated

Why would they allow the footage to be shot in the first place? IMO it would have been easier to prevent videotaping of the event prior to its occurrence than to run around hoping that you'd snapped up all the "incriminating" footage after the fact.

[Minstrel Boy]

42. To keep us spinning our wheels about "what hit the Pentagon"

when it was, of course, Flight 77.

Cover-ups are abetted by misdirection. That's what withholding the tapes have done. The question isn't "What are they trying to hide?" but "Why are they perpetuating the fallacy that they're hiding a missile strike?" And the answer is to keep 9/11 researchers talking bullshit rather than following legitimate leads.

[Nozebro]

44. Please name some of those "legitimate leads" that aren't being followed

n/t

[leftofthedial]

43. what are you? One of those tin foil wackos that make us look bad

to all the right wingers?

how embarassing.




Pssst. 2000 was a coup. Behind the flimsy facade of freedom used to keep the proles in line, this is a police state.

[yodermon]

45. Others have said it on this thread but here it is again:

The footage is being kept as insurance against conspiracy theories that gain too much popularity.

If too many people start thinking a missile/drone hit the Pentagon, then they trot out the security camera footage, which shows nothing of the kind, and the CTers are "silenced".

[eleny]

48. We've seen footage of planes slamming into the Towers a thousand times

So why not ever the one hitting the Pentagon?

Thx for the thread.