Video's of Sept 11th Pentagon crash

[Parche]

Is there anyone out there that has a video
that the FBI did not confiscate on that day,
a picture of the actual plane or whatever
it was that crashed into the Pentagon.

Since the FBI confiscated the one that
was taken from across the street at the
gas station, and also the hotel one.

If there are anymore out there, maybe
one of our groups can offer a reward
to anyone who has that video.

Being that the FBI took both films,
they are trying to hide something.
As soon as we find out what really
hit the Pentagon, then we will be
one step closer into solving the
mystery

[VADem11]

1. No

But I know people who were on 395 or nearby that day and saw the plane hit the building. There's a picture of a piece of wreckage that clearly shows it's from an airline. You can search for it. I don't think that it's a mystery.

[mzteris]

2. Questions

"Given that the outer wall of the Pentagon had not yet collapsed and the only hole is approximately 16 ft. in diameter - how does a plane over 44 feet tall and 125 ft. wide fit into that hole as shown in the crystal-clear and close-up photographic evidence from the Pentagon? Furthermore, can physics explain why there is no damage to the Pentagon's upper floors where the tail section would have hit? "http://www.911inplanesite.com/

[Rosco T.]

4. I recommend everyone that 'thinks' they know the certainty of ...

... what hit the Pentagon get the DVD of 911 in Plane Site. News footage dosen't lie.

And the remarkable footage of Oklahoma City the day of the boming there of the local news teams, talking about the second and third bombs that DIDN'T go off and the Bomb Disposal people being interviewed..... strange that footage never got a national airing.

[longship]

16. Simple

The assumptions in the question are incorrect. You cannot believe everything you read on the Net. There are all sorts of kooks who love making things up. The crash of the plane was witnessed by people in the area, many of whom were driving to work at the height of rush hour. Are you saying that what all of these people saw is wrong just because there is no video of the plane hitting?

Where do you get your information that the hole was only 16 feet in diameter? I presume it's on the same site that posits that it was a missile or some other kooky thing. And if it wasn't an airliner, then what the hell happened to that big airliner and all the passengers, some of whom were speaking to their loved ones on cell phones *in real time* as the plane flew into the Pentagon.

I'm sorry. The MIHOP theories strain credulity far, far too much.

On 9/11, two airliners flew into the WTC, and one flew into the Pentagon. To say it was anything else creates a myriad of questions which no amount of hand-waving will satisfy.

[mzteris]

21. did you even look

at the picture?

BTW - I hold no opinion on whether this was a fake or not - though I would put absolutely NOTHING past the pukes in PNAC! - BUT - these are interesting questions, n'est pas?

[longship]

31. Nor would I put it past them.

But the facts just don't support the MIHOP conjectures. Instead, they cause all sorts of unresolvable problems which make the few questions about the events pale in comparison. Plus, much of the MIHOP facts have strawman issues, Occam's razor issues, and other logical issues. Plus, I just can't accept anything that so casually disregards the facts we *do* know.

[Parche]

59. conjectures

That is all good, but if everything was so normal
in an actual plane crashing, in which I do doubt,
then why does the FBI need to confiscate the film,
when they did not do that for the New York video's

[rman]

52. right, and the official story does not leave a miryad of questions?

Why are the videos that presumably do show what hit the pentagon, not released?

there are conflicting eyewitness reports regarding the pentagon hit; some say they heard the high-pitch sound of a missile or jet fighter.

photos of the facade before the collapse do not show a large hole, and do show intact windows right above the impact site (do take into account that a 747 (or 757) is almost as tall as the pentagon).

http://911review.org/Wget/investigate911.batcave.net/pentagon1.html

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VADem11]

7. Have you been

to the Pentagon? The walls are massive and the plane hit the ground first then hit the pentagon. If the 757 didn't hit it, then what happened to the people on board? Where's the plane then?

[mzteris]

10. good question

........ now I have another for you - where's all the wreckage?

[VADem11]

13. The wreckage

was probably destroyed by the fire or recovered. I'm not an expert on what happened so I might be wrong but I just think that denying that a plane hit the pentagon is absurd. Again, where are the people from the plane then?

[mzteris]

18. people go missing

everyday.

However the wreckage from a plane that big surely would be strewn about don't you think?

For comparison:

[VADem11]

25. Right

So I suppose the cell phone calls made to the ground saying that the plane was hijacked is rubbish? They recovered and identified the remains of all but 1 person on flight 77. How would anyone place nearly the exact amount of bodies as were people on flight 77? Furthermore, when could they have placed the wreckage so quickly?

[mzteris]

28. WHAT WRECKAGE?

Where is the wreckage?

That is what is causing me the problem. That and the miniscule hole.....

[Joe the Revelator]

37. Yeah...there was no wreckage....:rollseyes:

[mzteris]

39. one piece

in the first pic -

who knows when the second was taken......0

look at the pics I posted of the immediate aftermath..... note the pristine conditions of the lawn........

[mzteris]

41. pic link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4372175&mesg_id=4372577

[longship]

45. First pic is an engine nacelle shroud.

Second pic appears to be a compressor from an engine like those in airliners, i.e., high-bypass fanjets. There's also some other nacelle parts there including what looks like a rear shroud.

I don't think any missile uses this kind of engine. Interesting that the nacelle front shroud is painted red in the colors of a commercial airliner.

[mzteris]

35. Contradiction..........

you say: "they recovered and identified the remains of all but 1 person on flight 77."

But others are telling me there was "no wreckage" because the plane vaporized........

[VADem11]

40. The remains

obviously weren't in good condition. They had to use DNA testing. They recovered remains from the WTC yet most of the building vaporized. People have recovered remains from freaking volcanic eruptions. A plane hit the pentagon. It's been debunked over and over. Why don't we focus on more pressing issues.

[MercutioATC]

55. I think "vaporized" is a misnomer.

The plane didn't turn into a vapor, it just turned into very little pieces due to the force of the impact. Tissue, even in very little pieces, dan be DNA typed.

[longship]

24. At 400+ knots???

What the heck do you think happened to it?

Let's see aluminum alloy airplane travelling at 400+ knots...

Reinforced concrete walls...

Uhhhhh????

Have you ever seen a steel automobile after a collision with a concrete barrier at 60 mph? Not much left of the car, is there? Now multiply that by ratio of the mass of the airplane divided by that of the automobile and then by the square of the ratio of their speeds. That's how much more energy is dissipated in the collision. N.B., it is a very big number. Now, consider that the airplane has no steel in it, but is made out of much softer alloys.

Do you honestly expect any substantive part of the airliner to survive such a collision?

[mzteris]

29. it surely wasn't

ATOMIZED.... :rofl:
nor vaporized.

There would have been pieces - even ittybitty pieces but mucho pieces of that plane lying around. WHERE ARE THEY?????????

[longship]

36. Aluminum has a very low melting temperature.

The physics of such a collision are well within the reach of high school math. Work it out yourself. You'll be astounded at the amount of energy dissipated in the collision. Don't forget there were tons of jet fuel on that plane that would add to the energy when it ignites. The plane disintegrated. What little was left burnt up.

[MercutioATC]

56. Well, here are some of them:

" "On October 12, we started taking the stone off the building. We took down approximately 2,400 pieces of stone, a lot of which had melted aluminum from the plane embedded in it."

http://www.masonrymagazine.com/8-02/rising.html

If no plane hit the Pentagon, where'd the melted aluminum come from?

[rman]

51. "the amazing Penta lawn"

the lawn did not have a scratch, as can clearly be seen on photos taken before the lawn near the impact site was covered with gravel.

http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/exp.htm

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html

[petgoat]

63. " what happened to the people on board?"

A page that purports to be from WingTV claims to have investigated the
Social Security Death Index database and the 9/11 Victims Compensation
Fund recipients.

The writer, Vincent Sammartino, claims that on Flight 77:

"of the 64 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 14 are
listed in the SSDI (22%). Of these 64 people, only five on the 9-11
Compensation Fund list:

William Caswell
Eddie Dillard
Ian Gray
John Sammartino
Leonard Taylor"

He then says that the Final Report of the Fund says that only half the
people on flight 77 were subject to Victems Compensation Fund Claims--
though 98% of all the 9/11 family remembers took the money.

http://69.28.73.17/thornarticles/911passengerlist.html

Is this for real? I note that Oilempire lists WingTV as a disinfo
site, but perhaps that's because of WingTV's obvious feud with Mike
Ruppert.

[longship]

17. A 757 travelling at 400+ knots.

Yes.

[mzteris]

19. so you don't think

the holes a wee bit smallish then?

BTW - WHERE is that pesky wreckage?

[onehandle]

23. ATOMIZED.

Jesus! This has been DEBUNKED!

Over and over and over.......

[mzteris]

26. atomized????

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

sure. just complete vapor. Like that. wow. totally amazing.

[onehandle]

33. See my later post.

Minimal wreckage. Maximum impact. Fully fueled.

It was mostly melted into the underground floors of the Pentagon where a Friend of someone I work with was melted as well.

[mzteris]

30. see pics of plane crashes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4372175&mesg_id=4372577

[mzteris]

38. contradiction??

so how did they dna identify the bodies?

[longship]

43. Tweezers and test tubes.

n/t

[MercutioATC]

54. Look here (it explains how a 757 DID leave that):

http://www.pubs.asce.org/ceonline/ceonline03/0203feat.html

[philb]

48. No evidence the piece was from Fl 77; and there clearly is a mystery

about the piece. Apparently you haven't been watching much of the discussions/debates about that and other things.

[FreedomAngel82]

3. I think

that's what is so strange about that. They play the hell out of the WTC towers so why not the Pentagon? :shrug: Why did they take the footage right away? I do think it's suspecious anyways.

[moodforaday]

6. Because whatever hit the Pentagon was mindful

not to endanger Rumsfeld or do too much damage.

The newly-renovated and strengthened part was hit, which also happened to be on the opposite side of the building to Rummy's office. That would mean nothing if the plane flew directly into it, but apparently this isn't what happened. The plane was approaching from Rummy's side more or less, and had to do a tight turn to hit the opposite side.

This is what you get from most of the 9-11 lihop/mihop stories. All of this information should be verifiable, esp. the flight path.

[onehandle]

42. All of the footage you see of the WTC was shot by the media.

And by bystanders in the most photographed city in the world.

The DC footage was all security cameras and the stupid FBI (as far as I know) kept it.

No surprise that they didn't release it. Footage of a plane hitting one of the "most secure buildings in the world" on their watch over, and over, and over on CNN?

Of course they buried it.

[Old and In the Way]

49. They had no problem released those doctored security cam

pics within a day or 2 of the event. You know, the one that really doesn't show anything except the big fireball. So I can't see how or why better, clearer pics/vids aren't released. Why not put an end to all the speculation?

Why wasn't it part of the Commission Record? This belongs to the nation, not the administration. The videos of Pearl Harbor and the Arizona sinking didn't stop our government from releasing that....why is this different? Hell, for the propaganda value in the WOT, if for no other reason.

I find it amazing that 4 years after the fact, neither side can prove their case conclusively as to what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11/01. A few peices of metal and a couple of beat up compressors aren't enough evidence for me to believe beyond a reasonable doubt. All other evidence is circumstantial and secondhand.

[thewormman]

60. Why indeed?

>>>> So I can't see how or why better, clearer pics/vids aren't released. Why not put an end to all the speculation? <<<<<

I thought this too, till I looked at this site:

http://0911.site.voila.fr

It gives a pretty good argument against the plane story.

[moodforaday]

8. Is there a definitive source on flight paths

for all four of the 9-11 hijacked planes?

[Poppyseedman]

9. The mystery is really baffling

How did the Pentagon conspire to place a piece of fake plane wreckage right in front the bomb site without a soul seeing them.

Also how did they manage to convince eyewitness accounts that saw the plane hit the building was actually a highly sophisticated bomb the size of a 747.

Truly amazing

[elehhhhna]

12. The ONLY eyewitness was Jeff Gannon/Gueckerts BOSS, Eberle. Hmmm.

Weird/

[GregW]

11. Wow ... only *10* replies so far?

Usually the "what happened to the Pentagon" and "what caused the collapse of WTC 7" threads get 100's of replies within nanoseconds.

Let's see ... how long will it be until the "steel is harder than aluminum wings therefore they couldn't cut through the sides of the WTC buildings" guy shows up.

[MindPilot]

14. maybe they "accidentally" severed their typing fingers

with Occam's razor. :D

[mirandapriestly]

32. The guys like you are the ones who who up

more predictably

[rman]

53. we've been over this so many times

it becomes kind of tiresome to refute over and over again the same old official claims about what happened. everything said in this thread can be found in older threads in this forum.

[growlypants]

15. My friend works in a law office in DC and said that on 9/11

he was getting water from the water cooler when all of a sudden a plane, flying SUPER LOW, blew past their windows and the next thing you know, it hit the pentagon. he said he could see the smoke and all. He didnt SEE it hit the pentagon, but he sure as hell saw it fly by.

[MindPilot]

20. The more pertinent question is:

given the trillions of dollars that have been taken in taxes for defense, how did an aircraft that had been a known hijack for close to an hour even get near the very heart of said defense system let alone hit it?

[VADem11]

22. Exactly

I think that's the real thing we should be talking about. The failure to stop the planes and the decision to get planes from Langley AFB instead of Andrews.

[mirandapriestly]

34. The Slow Air Defense Response

is the most questionable part of that day. Both at WTC and the Pentagon.

[onehandle]

27. It was a plane. It vaporized. There were Many witnesses.

The Crash.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

The Witnesses.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm

Get the Hell over this!

[RC]

44. So many people just can't seem to wrap their heads

around the fact that our own government was in on 9/11/2001. So many unanswered questions. So many "facts" that do not fit the explanation. So many people wanting answers and are being are ignored and ridiculed.

[HughBeaumont]

47. Yeah, they think Cheney/Rummy/Perle/Wolfy/Rove

actually CARE about powerless, wealth-void, rank and file like vous et moi. PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Anyone who doesn't think this bunch of bloodthirsty, money-hungry voevods wouldn't bat an eyelash in offing a few thousand (or several thousand) citizens as a stepping stone to power, markets and empire certainly isn't paying much attention.

[HughBeaumont]

46. I find the whole thing fishy to be honest.

You know, if a plane did indeed hit it, why not show the security footage? Certainly if there was no doubt, you wouldn't have a lick of trouble releasing the security footage that showed this behemoth plane vaporize in it's perfectly circular hole. Why all the secrecy? Surely you aren't giving the impression that you're HIDING something, are you Rummy?

Besides that, I'm STILL wonderin'

a) who flew that plane, because people, no barely-English speaking hijacker from Puddle Jumper U (and SUCKED at flying their little ass Cessnas, I might add) pulled that complex maneuver off? It's kind of the same logical scenario as a third-string juco walk-on suiting up for the Bears and scoring a 70-yard touchdown against the Patriots the first time he steps on a pro field. You don't just jump from a Cessna to a Boeing and pull off air-show maneuvers like that. Sorry, but I'm taking the word of decades-experienced pilots over internet armchair analysts who say "no damned WAY could Hani Hanjour have pulled that off."

b) how DID a 757, which was known to have been missing from it's flight pattern and known to have been hijacked for 30-45 minutes, dropped off a radar for 20 minutes, then banked 270 degrees, descended 7000 feet not only INTO DC restricted airspace, but directly into the side of a relatively low-to-the-ground building and plow into the heart of America's defense with nary a shot/SAM fired?

c) how did the FAA and NORAD both laid wholesale eggs despite being repeatedly trained for just such a multi-tiered attack?

Those who don't at LEAST believe in LIHOP need to read more. The Terror Timeline is a good place to start.

[Old and In the Way]

50. I'm one of those internet armchair analysts!

And I agree with you. Frankly, I see no way Hans pulls that turn off. I've rigged up my Microsoft Simulator on "full realism" flying at 7000 feet coming in at cruise speed. I destroyed the airframe about 20 times before I figured out the right combination of power, brakes, rudder, banking, and wing control to even get it close to the Pentagon.

I don't know what happened on 9/11....but I damn well know that the story this administration tells us is not the reality.

[HughBeaumont]

57. Oh, I am as well . . .

But like you, I at least use logic and common sense. And the steaming pile known as the 9/11 Commission Report is so full of logical holes it's ridiculous, especially when it comes to Flight 77 and it's path.

Here's another question I'd like answered.

Save for one flight - why did no one on those planes try to physically subdue the hijackers? Judging by their airport security photos, only one or two of them looked physically imposing; these weren't hulking men by any means. I could see if they were armed with guns, but they had freaking grocery store cutters. Out of an average of 50-some people on each flight, no one took the initiative to step up? If we're talking ratio of people who are physically able, it's 4 against 25. On the flight with the least amount of people (Flight 93), they not only subdued them, but it was reported that at least one of the passengers (Andrew Garcia) could have landed the plane.

Wonder if that's why it was shot down . . .

[Old and In the Way]

58. Seems a reasonable question, particularly for 93/77

the word was out that 11 and 175 had crashed into the WTC....why wouldn't the passengers have rushed the hijackers at that point? What's to lose at that point?

The excuse for lack of interception bugs me too. Those planes were crossing all kinds of airfields that morning. Even if the fighters are unarmed, why don't that make visual contact with any of the planes? I find it hard to believe no plane would be vectored to intercept and see what's going on in te cabin.

And one simple question that the government can answer: Were any/all of those planes part of the exercise that morning? Why didn't the 9/11 Commission ask that question?

[VADem11]

61. Flight 77

took off before news of the WTC attack. 93 took off after.

[StrafingMoose]

62. Known tapes...

1) Two cameras caught the impact. Capture by cameras of 'private companies'

2) The picture frames obtained by AP, published in 2002 ( http://covert2overt.blogspot.com/2005/08/flight-77-and-pentagon-foia-request.html )

AND/OR SAME ONE AS 2)

http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm

"And it took about two weeks to discover in the parking lot of the Pentagon this entry camera for the parking lot, which happened to be oriented towards the Pentagon at the time of impact, and the recorded time is 9:37" (But clearly, the AP pictures don't have this timestamp)