Pentagon releases AA77 video

[Cylinder]

In response to an FOIA request, the Pentagon will release seized surveillance video showing AA77 striking the west side of the Pentagon today at 1PM EDT.

[gfunkusarelius]

interesting. i went to the news sites to confirm this cause it sounded so unlikely. has the CT crowd actually ruffled that many feathers?

[Gravy]

It's actually JudicialWtch, a right-wing group, that filed the FOIA request that was finally granted. http://www.judicialwatch.org/5772.shtml

[senorpogo]

“Now that the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui is over, we are able to complete your request and provide the video…”

Wow. It's almost like the government had a legitimate reason to not release this video to the public.

[senorpogo]

It's actually JudicialWtch, a right-wing group, that filed the FOIA request that was finally granted. http://www.judicialwatch.org/5772.shtml

On those grounds, this evidence will be deemed "unacceptable" in the court of conspiracy kook law.

[Cylinder]

Stop it.

You're making the Pod People cry.

[bob_kark]

Ooooh, its almost time!! We can finally prove that a giant talking Elmo doll attacked the Pentagon!

[Cylinder]

Ooooh, its almost time!! We can finally prove that a giant talking Elmo doll attacked the Pentagon!

I predict it will be a 400 ft. Stay-Puft marshmallow man.

[bob_kark]

I predict it will be a 400 ft. Stay-Puft marshmallow man.

Randy better get the $1M ready.

[bob_kark]

Well, its 1:09 and I still don't see it. Conspiracy!!!

ETA: the Judicial Watch website isn't responding either. Conspiracy!!!

[Tirdun]

Judicial watch dot com is up and running, although they seem to want me to buy a watch or something. Conspiracy? :p

ETA: Got through to judicialwatch.org, no updates as of 1:15

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

So any bets on how soon after the video is released the first Looser posts "It's obviously computer generated!"? I'm guessing within an hour.

[AK-Dave]

It's on cnn.com

-David

eta: The story that is, not the video ... yet.

[kookbreaker]

So any bets on how soon after the video is released the first Looser posts "It's obviously computer generated!"? I'm guessing within an hour.

100% of Loosers will declare 'It must be faked'

80% of Loosers will declare themselves to be image experts 3 minutes after the video is released.

75% of Loosers will claim that their experience with Photoshop Elements lets them dectect anomolies in a security camera.

60% of Loosers will complain that these are not the videos they wanted.

90% of Loosers Will claim they are going to march on Washington to get the 'real videos'.

1% of Loosers will actully get out of their chair, the remainder will complain about satellite spies being able to spot you easier if you move.

EDit to add: 88% will blame Judicial Watch for altering the video since they are a conservative (and thus obviously NEO_CONS) group.

[Tirdun]

All I'm seeing on CNN is news that it "will be released". There's nothing new to look at AFAICT

[Anti_Hypeman]

LC3E will be out by the end of the month. I Predict they will be up to version 5 by the end of the year. You dont have to defend your mistakes just ignore them.

[Hutch]

CNN said that it would be released first on the Judical watch website. I just tired to access it but couldn't get in--maybe an overload on the servers..or maybe something more sinister...:eek: :cool: ;)

[Azrael 5]

WHats this about a plane? You mean it wasn't ac ontrolled explosion?!
I'm shocked. ;)

[Cylinder]

The video should be airing any minute now for those with access to cable news.

[Luke T.]

Something to read and watch while you wait. (http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002834.htm)

UPDATE: Judicial Watch plans to post the video on their site sometime after they receive it at 1 pm ET today. Their site is getting hit pretty hard right now. If we can obtain a copy of the video we will re-post it here.

[Luke T.]

100% of Loosers will declare 'It must be faked'

80% of Loosers will declare themselves to be image experts 3 minutes after the video is released.

75% of Loosers will claim that their experience with Photoshop Elements lets them dectect anomolies in a security camera.

60% of Loosers will complain that these are not the videos they wanted.

90% of Loosers Will claim they are going to march on Washington to get the 'real videos'.

1% of Loosers will actully get out of their chair, the remainder will complain about satellite spies being able to spot you easier if you move.

EDit to add: 88% will blame Judicial Watch for altering the video since they are a conservative (and thus obviously NEO_CONS) group.

I predict the first reaction will be that the plane in the video is not a Boeing 757.

[Azrael 5]

Watching on Sky News now.Cannot see anything resembling a plane.Looks just like existing time frame stills previously seen.

[Azrael 5]

Double post!

[Luke T.]

Watching on Sky News now.Cannot see anything resembling a plane.Looks just like existing time frame stills previously seen.

Are you sure its the new video? CNN played stock footage during its report in the link I gave above.

[Mercutio]

CNN still saying "we'll play it when we get it". One expert just on was saying that there is no doubt that a plane hit the Pentagon, for [list of reasons], but that some people just don't want to hear that. I wonder who he could be talking about.

[Azrael 5]

Are you sure its the new video? CNN played stock footage during its report in the link I gave above.

Yes according to Sky it is.Apparently a nose cone can be seen according to Pentagon.Ye right:rolleyes:

[Nyarlathotep]

On those grounds, this evidence will be deemed "unacceptable" in the court of conspiracy kook law.

Eh, no matter who filed the request, they would just declare it a fake anyway.

[dubfan]

They've showed it on Fox several times. Two different angles. Multiple frames, each frame 0.5 sec apart.

It doesn't show anything that's recognizable as an aircraft. Supposedly there is an artefact at the far right edge of one frame that someone at the Pentagon has identified as the nose of the aircraft. They showed the still briefly on Fox, and it looks like a smudge. Very hard to make out, at least on my 27-inch TV.

Underwhelming, and not likely to discourage any of the woo. Probably make it worse.

[Azrael 5]

I agree,its playing into the hands of woo.Where's the video footage the feds took from the nearby hotel?
Im no Looser BTW just saying it shows nothing not seen already.Neither does it show anything remotely looking like a plane.

[Hellbound]

Hmmm...

So your saying, the video shows a very blurry, indistinct object striking the Pentagon?

BIGFOOT IS BEHIND THE PENTAGON ATTACKS!!!!!!!!

:D

[Ramooone]

where have you guys seen this? ive had my tv on cnn and they said they're going to show it as soon as its available. the video they've been showing is the old video.

[Cylinder]

where have you guys seen this? ive had my tv on cnn and they said they're going to show it as soon as its available. the video they've been showing is the old video.

The new video looks very much lke the old. The way to identify between the two is the lack of a auto gate in the direct foreground of the new video.

[Gravy]

Something to read and watch while you wait. (http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002834.htm)
A quote from that blog
It supposedly only shows "the tip of the plane which may not be enough to satisfy the conspiracy theorist," says Williams.
And that's exactly what the CTs have been looking at: the tip. They completely ignore the iceberg of evidence, although their ship has collided with it.

[Luke T.]

Update from the last link I posted:

UPDATE #2: MSNBC's Pete Williams is reporting that the newly released video is a series of frames that are similar to some previously released video frames showing a fireball exploding on a exterior wall of the Pentagon. The new video frames show the same fireball exploding from a different angle. It supposedly only shows "the tip of the plane which may not be enough to satisfy the conspiracy theorist," says Williams.

[dubfan]

where have you guys seen this? ive had my tv on cnn and they said they're going to show it as soon as its available. the video they've been showing is the old video.

Fox has shown it a couple of times. It's underwhelming, though, so they've moved on to other coverage. They embarassed themselves pretty badly -- their Pentagon correspondent Brett Baier was claiming before the video was released, that he had seen it, and that the nose of the aircraft was clearly visible. Then they rolled the frames, and there was no such thing. You might be able to see the nose -- but if you can, it certainly isn't clearly visible.

[chipmunk stew]

*sigh*
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4283&view=findpost&p=4483512

dubfan, would you please let these clowns know that I'd be happy to oblige popol vuh if he lifts my suspension?
I'm sure Gravy would be happy to as well, if they lift his ban.

And would you please remind Zor that Roxdog aka conspiracybeliever still has an active membership here that's been neither suspended nor banned?

Thanks.

[senorpogo]

I think others have mentioned this before, but doesn't it seem like the U.S. government is it's own worst enemy when dealing with these 9/11 conspiracy claims? If they have clear video evidence of a plane striking the Pentagon, why not release it or at least some still frames of it? By not doing so, they play into the hands of the conspiracy crowd.

Granted, there may be logical reasons that prohibit them from releasing such evidence, but, assuming there aren't, why not squash the conspiracy bug?

[HarryKeogh]

I think others have mentioned this before, but doesn't it seem like the U.S. government is it's own worst enemy when dealing with these 9/11 conspiracy claims? If they have clear video evidence of a plane striking the Pentagon, why not release it or at least some still frames of it? By not doing so, they play into the hands of the conspiracy crowd.

Granted, there may be logical reasons that prohibit them from releasing such evidence, but, assuming there aren't, why not squash the conspiracy bug?

the camera took one frame every 1/2 second. If the government had clear 24 or 30 fps video I'm sure they'd gladly release it.

to the conspiracy theorists...there are dozens of witnesses of different political leanings who witnessed a plane hitting the pentagon. Are there any people willing to testify under oath that they were there and it was a rocket?

[dubfan]

*sigh*
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4283&view=findpost&p=4483512

dubfan, would you please let these clowns know that I'd be happy to oblige popol vuh if he lifts my suspension?
I'm sure Gravy would be happy to as well, if they lift his ban.

And would you please remind Zor that Roxdog aka conspiracybeliever still has an active membership here that's been neither suspended nor banned?

Thanks.

Done.

[dubfan]

Observe the woo in its natural habitat (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showforum=1). Check under forum topics. Pentagon video threads are multiplying like bacteria.

[Pardalis]

foxnews.com is showing it.

[chipmunk stew]

Done.Thanks. It's funny that the likes of popol vuh (who has the power to suspend and ban) and Zor, who've been around since the beginning, would engage in such tough talk and accuse JREF of trying to keep them out.

[bob_kark]

Ahhh, much ado about nothing. You couldn't even make out Elmo's face...

[gfunkusarelius]

gee, that was useless. oh well. i am sure the sub spot will be the source of many CTs

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Did anyone actually expect a camera system designed to catch guys breaking into cars or throwing rocks at streetlamps to reliably capture an object moving at over 400 miles per hour?

It's almot like the CT's deliberately crafted an argument to be self fulfilling, They've been whining for years to see the tapes knowing damn well the whole time they'd all be blurry as hell.

[dubfan]

Did anyone actually expect a camera system designed to catch guys breaking into cars or throwing rocks at streetlamps to reliably capture an object moving at over 400 miles per hour?

It's almot like the CT's deliberately crafted an argument to be self fulfilling, They've been whining for years to see the tapes knowing damn well the whole time they'd all be blurry as hell.

If the video had clearly shown a 757, they would've claimed the video was faked. Now that the video has been released and is inconclusive, they believe the video is genuine.

[chipmunk stew]

If the video had clearly shown a 757, they would've claimed the video was faked. Now that the video has been released and is inconclusive, they believe the video is genuine.In fact, they were already preparing for either scenario ahead of time.

Now, oddly, they're insinuating that the fact that they're having a hard time downloading the video (due to the high traffic) is intentional obstruction:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4294

GOD, they're irritating!

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

They've (LC forums) made the call for JREF members to come to LC and debate. Will see if they are truly willing to allow the registration, and ensuing discussion to occur.

News at 11.

[Correa Neto]

Hmmm...

So your saying, the video shows a very blurry, indistinct object striking the Pentagon?

BIGFOOT IS BEHIND THE PENTAGON ATTACKS!!!!!!!!

:D
Bigfoot is one of THEM!!!!!

Don't tell this to LAL and Huntster or they will freak out!!!!
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The above sentence proves that I am one of US, the reptiloids that control THEM!

[kookbreaker]

They've (LC forums) made the call for JREF members to come to LC and debate. Will see if they are truly willing to allow the registration, and ensuing discussion to occur.

News at 11.

We played that game. They banned nearly all takers. They've had their chance and played petty tyrant games.

[gfunkusarelius]

yeah, honestly its not worth the time to debate such nonsense. all the arguments have already been made, documents referenced, etc. it wouldve been nice to see more conclusive video, but for any sane person, the dozens of citizens who witnessed and later described the events of that day are perfectly acceptable "proof" to me. if it isnt enough for someone else, then the debate will only degenerate.

[Ramooone]

i just like how they used to say that the original 5 frames were fakes, now this video comes out and its real. they don't know what to believe

[Red Siegfried]

Hmmm...

So your saying, the video shows a very blurry, indistinct object striking the Pentagon?

BIGFOOT IS BEHIND THE PENTAGON ATTACKS!!!!!!!!

:D

Damn, you beat me to it.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

We played that game. They banned nearly all takers. They've had their chance and played petty tyrant games.

I know. I fully expect my registration to be declined, as I made no attempts at subterfuge, using the same name as here. *shrug*

[chipmunk stew]

I know. I fully expect my registration to be declined, as I made no attempts at subterfuge, using the same name as here. *shrug*Well, since "chipmunk stew" is under suspension, I'm trying a new account under "stipmunk chew". If they have any scruples, they'll either lift my suspension or let my new registration go through.

It's popol vuh, after all, who's calling for the "who's your daddy" session, and he has admin rights.

[chipmunk stew]

Here's something I don't get:

Why is there such celebration about this video not clearly showing flight 77? Are these people actually happy that their beliefs about an inside job have been strengthened?

I could have sworn many of them have insisted that they want badly to be proven wrong.

"Yay! My government really is a sinister cabal of murderous evil! Whoopee!!!"

[Regnad Kcin]

yeah, honestly its not worth the time to debate such nonsense. all the arguments have already been made, documents referenced, etc...And make no mistake, it is nonsense. Such conspiracy porn is to reality as real porn is.

[Overman]

I think others have mentioned this before, but doesn't it seem like the U.S. government is it's own worst enemy when dealing with these 9/11 conspiracy claims? If they have clear video evidence of a plane striking the Pentagon, why not release it or at least some still frames of it? By not doing so, they play into the hands of the conspiracy crowd.

Granted, there may be logical reasons that prohibit them from releasing such evidence, but, assuming there aren't, why not squash the conspiracy bug?

A conspiracy to keep conspiracies alive???

dun Dun DUN!!!!!

[kookbreaker]

A conspiracy to keep conspiracies alive???

dun Dun DUN!!!!!

There were some arguements when Flight 800 went down that the Insurance companies were actually encouraging conspiratorial nonsense. Such as the plane being shot down, terrorists on board, etc. The reason for this was that as long as they could keep mechanical/electrical failure off the table, they could avoid making huge payouts to the victims' families.

It was unlikely to be true, but it was fun to call the CTs submissive corporate shills.

[westphalia]

Here's something I don't get:

Why is there such celebration about this video not clearly showing flight 77? Are these people actually happy that their beliefs about an inside job have been strengthened?

I could have sworn many of them have insisted that they want badly to be proven wrong.

"Yay! My government really is a sinister cabal of murderous evil! Whoopee!!!"

Yes, they are happy about it. That's the issue I have with the CT movement. I can handle stupidity, inanity, lunacy, lack of education, lack of critical thinking skills, etc. What I don't understand - and never will - is the unmitigated joy with which these idiots look forward to having their worst impressions of our national government (and the people working in it) proven correct.

[Regnad Kcin]

Suffer the little children.

[gfunkusarelius]

Yes, they are happy about it. That's the issue I have with the CT movement. I can handle stupidity, inanity, lunacy, lack of education, lack of critical thinking skills, etc. What I don't understand - and never will - is the unmitigated joy with which these idiots look forward to having their worst impressions of our national government (and the people working in it) proven correct.

yeah, i have seen people i thought were pretty good people light up with glee when they hear news that makes bush look really bad, even when it involves a lot of casualties (civilian or military, either way, its still creepy). people just get so caught up in the "us vs them" mentality that it doesnt seem like it is reality to them.

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Observe the woo in its natural habitat (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showforum=1). Check under forum topics. Pentagon video threads are multiplying like bacteria.
Let's say I am the President, and I wanted to kill thousands of my own citizens by blowing up two landmarks in my country, just so I could justify a war on another country under the guise of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' (This is what the Loosers believe, right?).

If I was brilliant enough to pull off planting tonnes of explosives in two of the busiest buildings in the world, and smashing remote controlled planes into them at the exact moment these explosives went off, I think I would also be able to do the following:

1) Plant Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. I've got lots of them. I've got control of Iraq anyway. This would be awfully easy.
2) I'd release a crystal clear video of a plane hitting the Pentagon; even if I had to spend millions of dollars for a perfect recreation.

So far, we've got no WMD in Iraq, wire-tapping scandals, George Bush has a record low approval rating, the majority of Americans are against the war in Iraq, and the Vice President looking like an bumbling idiot for shooting his friend in the face. Ah yes, and now we have a video that's released as 'proof' of a plane hitting the Pentagon, which really doesn't prove anything.

So this is what I don't understand. Did the Administration start out being brilliant, then got really stupid? Is screwing up time and time again and turning the country against them PART of the plan?

[Regnad Kcin]

Ripley, you're asking for logic and coherence. Come now.

[Hagrok]

So this is what I don't understand. Did the Administration start out being brilliant, then got really stupid? Is screwing up time and time again and turning the country against them PART of the plan?
You really should read the 70 page thread here on this; it's really quite entertaining in a masochistic sort of way...

[Ririon]

So this is what I don't understand. Did the Administration start out being brilliant, then got really stupid? Is screwing up time and time again and turning the country against them PART of the plan?
NOW, do you understand that the Bush Administration is just a pawn? The conspiracy goes much deeper... :D

[Pardalis]

Even if we don't see the nose of the plane clearly enough for it to be unequivocal, I think the fact that they did allow this piece of video to be broadcast demonstrates that there couldn't be a missile hiting the pentagon. Otherwise, why would the government even risk showing anything, especially knowing that millions of people will be looking at these frames over and over again, analysing every pixel.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/8886446a489e4ebe2.png

[milesalpha]

Just a question, after watching this damn thing several times. I thought it was certainly a plane initially. Then, in subsequent viewings, it seemed a bit small for a 757. It's hard to establish a perspective from the video, that could account for it. Any thoughts?

[dissonance]

to the conspiracy theorists...there are dozens of witnesses of different political leanings who witnessed a plane hitting the pentagon.

I have an acquaintance who saw the plane just before it hit the Pentagon. She didn't see it actually hit (I guess because of the angle or the terrain from where she was in her car) but she saw the plane coming in and the resulting smoke/fire. As she put it, if that plane didn't hit the Pentagon, where the hell did it go?

Which is why the 'no plane' conspiracy is one of the dumbest. A hell of a lot of people saw that plane. Unless you want to get into the really whacked out crazy stuff ('it was a missile painted to look like a plane! It was a hologram!'), you can't ignore the hundreds of people who saw the damn plane.

[chipmunk stew]

Just a question, after watching this damn thing several times. I thought it was certainly a plane initially. Then, in subsequent viewings, it seemed a bit small for a 757. It's hard to establish a perspective from the video, that could account for it. Any thoughts?It's a fish-eye lens. Look at how distorted the curb is and the forced perspective on the outer wall of the building.

[Gravy]

A bit of perspective:
“Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C.

"I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Eric Bart's Pentagon Crash Witness List: http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html

Another Pentagon Crash Witness list: http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

Note that many of the witnesses specifically say it was a very large American Airlines plane. Some of the witnesses are experienced at aircraft identification.

Here's a partial list of the organizations that would have to be fooled in order for the Pentagon conspiracy theories to begin to make sense. Keep in mind that 8,000 people were on the scene after the crash. To my knowledge none of them have supported any conspiracy theory. Have the CTs made any attempt to interview any of these 8,000 people? If I thought my government was launching terrorist attacks against its own citizens, I'D REALLY WANT TO FIND OUT FOR SURE, AND NOT JUST SPEND MY TIME TWIDDLING A COMPUTER MOUSE.

the Pentagon Fire Unit
the Pentagon security staff,
the DOD Honor Guard
the Pentagon Medical Unit,
the Pentagon 2-person Crash Response Team
the Pentagon Defense Protective Service,
Four U.S. Army Chaplains
One Catholic Priest (Stephen McGraw)
Donald Rumsfeld and staff
the Arlington County Fire Department,
the Arlington County Sheriff's Department,
Arlington County Emergency Medical Services
the Arlington, VA Police Department,
Fairfax County Fire & Rescue,
Montgomery County Fire & Rescue,
the Alexandria, VA Fire & Rescue
the District of Columbia Fire & Rescue
the Metropolitan Airport Authority Fire Unit
the Military District of Washington Search & Rescue Team
the Fort Myer Fire Department,
the Arlington County SWAT Team,
the Virginia State Police,
the FBI's Evidence Recovery Teams,
the National Transportation Safety Board
the HHS National Medical Response Team,
the FBI Hazmat Team,
the EPA Hazmat Team,
the FEMA Incident Support Team,
the FEMA Emergency Response Team,
the FEMA Disaster Field Office.
the FEMA Virginia-1, Virginia-2, Maryland-1 and Tennessee-1 Task Forces
the US Army Reserves of Virginia Beach, Fairfax County and Montgomery County,
the National Naval Medical Center CCRF
Federal Disaster Medical Assistance Teams,
the Virginia Department of Emergency Management
the US Department of Defense,
the Federal Aviation Administration,
the U.S. Army 54th Quartermaster Company Mortuary Staff
the U.S. Army 311th Quartermaster Company Mortuary Staff
the U.S. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology
the American Red Cross,
the United States Secret Service,
American Airllines
North American Aerospace Defense Command,
the National Military Command Center,
the National Disaster Medical System,
the US Army’s Communications-Electronics Command,
the Northeast Air Defense Sector Commanders
the E-4B National Airborne Operations Center aircraft
the C-130H crew in D.C.
the Air Traffic Control System Command Center in Washington

[Manny]

A bit of perspective:“Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer...Feh. Everyone knows that all the structural engineers in the world are in on it. That's why none have come forward about the controlled demolitions. Why would they treat the Pentagon any differently. :D


Eric Bart's Pentagon Crash Witness List:This is another piece of evidence that the CTers are not deluded but rather are actively trying to cover up for al Qaeda. They take this list and cull Republicans, military people and "permanent government" from it. Then they publish that shortened list and say "See? All the so-called 'witnesses' are in on it!"

[Luke T.]

I really don't feel like wading through a bunch of crap elsewhere on a CT forum. Can someone just tell me where they say the passengers of Flight 77 and 93 are?

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

Aside from the hundreds of witnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon, there is also the odd coincidence of the remains of over 60 passengers on Flight 77 being recovered at the Pentagon.

It's pretty amazing, really, if you think about it. People assumed that AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, when obviously it was a CIA-launched cruise missile. And on that exact same day, all the passengers on the flight that people thought crashed into the Pentagon happened to be visiting the Pentagon, and died anyway. What are the odds? No more than 1 in 10, I'd say.

Some people find these types of incredible coincedences spooky. But for me, they are what make every day an adventure.

[Ririon]

Obviously the planes were filled with explosives and remote controlled by the CIA as a decoy. They even went as far as putting their Al Quaeda friends on the planes. But none of them knew that the Priory of Sion was behind all of it. :rolleyes:

[Zep]

It's all a massive publicity stunt for some Scientology movie with Tom Cruise and/or John Travolta in it, due for release soon. ;)

[valis]

You guys think you are so smart; the folks at Prison Planet see right through you. All the release does is prove they were right all along...um in some circular sort of fashion. (sorry if this has already been posted I didn't have time to read the entire thread).

Alex Jones and this website have always approached the Pentagon subject with caution because we were wary that it was a potential honey pot that would be used to distract and later discredit the 9/11 truth movement.

[dubfan]

I really don't feel like wading through a bunch of crap elsewhere on a CT forum. Can someone just tell me where they say the passengers of Flight 77 and 93 are?

You get one of several answers:

1. We don't know (this is the most common answer). This is often followed by a diatribe about "Why don't you ask the government? Why do you hold Loose Change to such a high standard of evidence but believe the government's absurd story? We don't need to provide answers. We're just asking questions."

2. They were off-loaded when Flight 93 landed in Cleveland, and held at a NASA facility near the airport. (never mind that 93 didn't land in Cleveland). No answer is offered for the passengers of 77, 11, and 175.

3. Some of them are walking around the fenced-off sections of Denver International Airport.

Those are the answers I've gotten anyway.

[Pardalis]

It's pretty amazing, really, if you think about it. People assumed that AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, when obviously it was a CIA-launched cruise missile. And on that exact same day, all the passengers on the flight that people thought crashed into the Pentagon happened to be visiting the Pentagon, and died anyway. What are the odds? No more than 1 in 10, I'd say.

The Loosers don't acknowledge that these people boarded these planes, that they were sent elsewhere and never seen again. (So if you cut throught their BS they basically say that they were killed by the Governement).

Maybe their remains were packed inside the missile that impacted the Pentagon so that their DNA would be found there?

As grotesque as this idea is, I'm pretty sure the Loosers would like it better and be willing to believe it over the official story. "Anything but the official story, no matter how insane" is their motto.

[Kopji]

Yeah. CNN and National Geographic maintain a memorial listing of Flight 77 passengers. The names are worth posting in the face of every conspiracy theorist. They need some evidence or SHUT UP.


CREW
Charles Burlingame... survived by a wife, a daughter and a grandson.

David Charlebois...

Michele Heidenberger... left behind a husband, a pilot, and a daughter and son.

[Husband and wife flight attendants Jennifer Lewis & Kenneth Lewis.]

Renee May

PASSENGERS
Paul Ambrose, 32, of Washington, was a physician who worked with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

and the surgeon general to address racial and ethnic disparities in health. A 1995 graduate of Marshall University School of Medicine, Ambrose last year was named the Luther Terry Fellow of the Association of Teachers of Preventative Medicine.

Yeneneh Betru...

M.J. Booth

Bernard Brown, 11, was a student at Leckie Elementary School in Washington. He was embarking on an educational trip to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary near Santa Barbara, California, as part of a program funded by the National Geographic Society.

Suzanne Calley, 42, of San Martin, California, was an employee of Cisco Systems Inc.

William Caswell

Sarah Clark, 65, of Columbia, Maryland, was a sixth-grade teacher at Backus Middle School in Washington. She was accompanying a student on an educational trip to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary near Santa Barbara, California, as part of a program funded by the National Geographic Society.

Asia Cottom, 11, was a student at Backus Middle School in Washington. Asia was embarking on an educational trip to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary near Santa Barbara, California, as part of a program funded by the National Geographic Society.

James Debeuneure, 58, of Upper Marlboro, Maryland, was a fifth-grade teacher at Ketcham Elementary School in Washington. He was accompanying a student on an educational trip to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary near Santa Barbara, California, as part of a program funded by the National Geographic Society.

Rodney Dickens, 11, was a student at Leckie Elementary School in Washington. He was embarking on an educational trip to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary near Santa Barbara, California, as part of a program funded by the National Geographic Society.

Eddie Dillard

Charles Droz

Barbara Edwards, 58, of Las Vegas, Nevada, was a teacher at Palo Verde High School in Las Vegas.

Charles S. Falkenberg, 45, of University Park, Maryland, was the director of research at ECOlogic Corp., a software engineering firm. He worked on data systems for NASA and also developed data systems for the study of global and regional environmental issues. Falkenburg was traveling with his wife, Leslie Whittingham, and their two daughters, Zoe, 8, and Dana, 3.

Zoe Falkenberg, 8...

Dana Falkenberg, 3...

Joe Ferguson was the director of the National Geographic Society's geography education outreach program in Washington. He was accompanying a group of students and teachers on an educational trip to the Channel Islands in California. A Mississippi native, he joined the society in 1987. "Joe Feguson's final hours at the Geographic reveal the depth of his commitment to one of the things he really loved," said John Fahey Jr., the society's president. "Joe was here at the office until late Monday evening preparing for this trip. It was his goal to make this trip perfect in every way."

Wilson "Bud" Flagg of Millwood, Virginia, was a retired Navy admiral and retired American Airlines pilot.

Dee Flagg

Richard Gabriel

Ian Gray, 55, of Washington was the president of a health-care consulting firm.

Stanley Hall, 68...

Bryan Jack, 48, of Alexandria, Virginia, was a senior executive at the Defense Department.

Steven D. "Jake" Jacoby, 43, of Alexandria, Virginia, was the chief operating officer of Metrocall Inc., a wireless data and messaging company.

Ann Judge, 49, of Virginia was the travel office manager for the National Geographic Society. She was accompanying a group of students and teachers on an educational trip to the Channel Islands in California.

Society President John Fahey Jr. said one of his fondest memories of Judge is a voice mail she and a colleague once left him while they were rafting the Monkey River in Belize. "This was quintessential Ann -- living life to the fullest and wanting to share it with others," he said.

Chandler Keller, 29, was a Boeing propulsion engineer from El Segundo, California.

Yvonne Kennedy

Norma Khan, 45, from Reston, Virginia was a nonprofit organization manager.

Karen A. Kincaid, 40, was a lawyer with the Washington firm of Wiley Rein & Fielding. She joined the firm in 1993 and was part of the its telecommunications practice. She was married to Peter Batacan.

Norma Langsteuerle

Dong Lee

Dora Menchaca, 45, of Santa Monica, California, was the associate director of clinical research for a biotech firm.

Christopher Newton, 38, of Anaheim, California, was president and chief executive officer of Work-Life Benefits, a consultation and referral service. He was married and had two children. Newton was on his way back to Orange County to retrieve his family's yellow Labrador, who had been left behind until they could settle into their new home in Arlington, Virginia.

Barbara Olson, 45, was a conservative commentator who often appeared on CNN and was married to U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson. She twice called her husband as the plane was being hijacked and described some details, including that the attackers were armed with knives. She had planned to take a different flight, but she changed it at the last minute so that she could be with her husband on his birthday. She worked as an investigator for the House Government Reform Committee in the mid-1990s and later worked on the staff of Senate Minority Whip Don Nickles.

Ruben Ornedo, 39, of Los Angeles, California, was a Boeing propulsion engineer.

Robert Penniger, 63, of Poway, California, was an electrical engineer with BAE Systems.

Lisa Raines, 42, was senior vice president for government relations at the Washington office of Genzyme, a biotechnology firm. She was from Great Falls, Virginia, and was married to Stephen Push. She worked with the U.S.

Food and Drug Administration on developing a new policy governing cellular therapies, announced in 1997. She also worked on other major health-care legislation.

Todd Reuben, 40...

John Sammartino

Diane Simmons

George Simmons

Mari-Rae Sopper of Santa Barbara, California, was a women's gymnastics coach at the University of California at Santa Barbara. She had just gotten the post August 31 and was making the trip to California to start work.

Bob Speisman, 47...

Hilda Taylor was a sixth-grade teacher at Leckie Elementary School in Washington. She was accompanying a student on an educational trip to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary near Santa Barbara, California, as part of a program funded by the National Geographic Society.

Leonard Taylor...

Leslie A. Whittington, 45, was from University Park, Maryland. The professor of public policy at Georgetown University in Washington was traveling with her husband, Charles Falkenberg, 45, and their two daughters, Zoe, 8, and Dana, 3. They were traveling to Los Angeles to catch a connection to Australia. Whittington had been named a visiting fellow at Australian National University in Canberra.

John Yamnicky, 71...

Vicki Yancey

Shuyin Yang

Yuguag Zheng

http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html



Two staff members of the National Geographic Society, along with three Washington, D.C., teachers and three students they were traveling with, were among the victims of the terrorist attacks in the United States on Tuesday, officials of the Society announced on Wednesday.

Ann Judge, director of the Society's travel office, and Joe Ferguson, director of the Geography Education

Outreach Program, were accompanying the three teacher-student pairs on an educational trip to California.

They were all killed along with the other passengers of American Airlines Flight 77 after it was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon at about 9:45 Tuesday morning.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0912_disasterngs.html

[Ramooone]

this is going to be the zapruder film of our time.

[monoman]

I've just done some rough calcs based on the plane travelling at 400 mph.
That's 587 feet per second.

Someone mentioned earlier that the camera took 2 frames a second.
The plane travells 293 feet in half a second.

I'd say it's quite fortunate that the camera even picked up the nose cone!

I'd love to calculate the chances of it picking up the whole plane in frame but my stats are not up to that.

[monoman]

Ok, i gave it a go anyway.

Assuming the field of view of the lawn is the same as the length of a boeing 757-a200 = 155 feet

Also, assume that the camera takes 2 frames a second.
Assume the plane is travelling at 400 mph, or 293 feet/ frame

I get...

The chance of catching 0% of the plane = 52%
The chance of catching >= 50% of the plane = 27%

A lot of assumptions here, not least my stats ability.

[bob_kark]

this is going to be the zapruder film of our time.

Yes, you can clearly see that the Pentagon goes back and to the right, back and to the right.

[HarryKeogh]

even if it did catch as much of the plane as possible wouldn't it just be a blur? This was crappy videotape not high speed film

[gfunkusarelius]

at this point i think i would accept the government actually being guilty and rounding up all the loose changers and silencing them just so i dont have to hear about it anymore, haha.

[Beerina]

“Now that the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui is over, we are able to complete your request and provide the video…”

Ya gotta love liers, sorry, lawyers, the words sound so close. Er, lawyers for the government. Any lawyers reading this I'm sure are wonderful human beings. :p

And what's up with "releasing" this video? All the important frames were released already anyway, years ago.

[Beerina]

I agree,its playing into the hands of woo.Where's the video footage the feds took from the nearby hotel?
Im no Looser BTW just saying it shows nothing not seen already.Neither does it show anything remotely looking like a plane.

The woo-ness of it all is exposed by simply noting there is no need to use a missle instead of a plane when you've used at least two planes that day already!

Why bother with a missle? You're already using planes on three other proven occasions! Why not use a plane for the fourth?

God damned moron idiots. By the way, my wife informs me my brother-in-law is sucked in by loose change. She comes to me one day and says, "Have you seen this loose change web site?"

[chipmunk stew]

By the way, my wife informs me my brother-in-law is sucked in by loose change. She comes to me one day and says, "Have you seen this loose change web site?"We're ready and waiting if you want to stage an intervention.

You'll sent him Gravy's critique at the very least, yeah? Keep us up to date--I'm curious to see how effective we can be at such a personal level.

[wipeout]

It's kind of surprising that the Pentagon has security cameras with far lower frame-rates than carparks, shops, etc. do.

Surely this can't be the best film they have?

[chipmunk stew]

It's kind of surprising that the Pentagon has security cameras with far lower frame-rates than carparks, shops, etc. do.

Surely this can't be the best film they have?Apparently, it's all they have that was angled to capture the crash. The Pentagon has live security--you can't approach the building without being stopped and questioned. I'm sure they have cameras at the entrances, but that's probably about it.

These two security cameras are at the parking lot gates. They're not there to monitor the outside of the building. Why would they need to be high-speed? They only need to capture images of people who have to stop and wait for the gate to be raised.

[ZouPrime]

It's kind of surprising that the Pentagon has security cameras with far lower frame-rates than carparks, shops, etc. do.

Actually, setuping security camera to only record 2 frames per second (for example) is standard practice. It's far from the first time I see this. For the kind of things you want to record (car jacking and other petty crime), it's more than sufficient and you can records much more hour on a single tape (30 fps vs 2 fps means that you need 15 times less tape to record the same timeframe).

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I know. I fully expect my registration to be declined, as I made no attempts at subterfuge, using the same name as here. *shrug*

No million dollars for me; I got approved.

[kookbreaker]

No million dollars for me; I got approved.

Should I start the clock or would you prefer to go by postcount until you get banned?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Should I start the clock or would you prefer to go by postcount until you get banned?

Postcount will do fine. I will, however, be the nicest person they've ever banned, should I meet my end there.

[geggy]

http://prisonplanet.com/images/may2006/170506doctored.gif

[Ramooone]

http://prisonplanet.com/images/may2006/170506doctored.gif


OMG ITS TEH TOTAL1Y HAXXOR0D P3NT4G0N FR4MEZ!!!

[Ersby]

http://prisonplanet.com/images/may2006/170506doctored.gif
words fail

ETA: I would've posted this before Ramoone, but Arsenal just scored.

[Manny]

ETA: I would've posted this before Ramoone, but Arsenal just scored.Now I know you're a government shill.

Arsenal never scores. They just bore the other team into submission and then change the scoreboard while everyone sleeps.

[chipmunk stew]

My first "real" post as "stipmunk":
I believe Loose Change is a load of BS.

I don't buy the idea that Dylan and co. are "just asking questions."
The slogan I hear over and over again is: "9/11 was an Inside Job!"
That's an accusation, not a question.

I believe Loose Change is not merely a vehicle for forcing a new investigation, but rather a propaganda piece pushing the Inside Job theory.
Case in point: In these very forums, before the "new" video of the Pentagon, the groundwork was being laid for how to keep the no-plane theory alive regardless of what the video showed.
Case A: The video shows very little, and we declare that the DoD is stalling because any video that shows what actually hit will prove that it wasn't AA77.
Case B: The video clearly shows AA77, and we declare that it was faked, since they've had plenty of time to do so, and the timing is very suspicious.
Either way you win, and the conspiracy lives on.
Now, with this kind of thinking, I don't see how a new investigation would possibly make any difference.
If you'll only accept one answer, then it's not an investigation, it's a rationalization.
I've had people tell me that they would love to be proven wrong, but I just haven't seen evidence that that's true in most cases.

I've also had people ask me, if I think this is all BS, why do I spend so much time arguing about it? Why don't I just ignore it and let them ask questions? Do I work for the gov't? Am I getting paid?

Despite what TheQuest believes, this is purely personal. And let me make one thing clear: I'm not trying to silence anyone, and I'm not trying to obstruct anyone from asking questions of the gov't.
I am fairly vocal towards the gov't on matters that are important to me, including 9/11. I was very supportive of the formation of a Commission to investigate 9/11.

Now, it would be one thing if I believed this was all true, or if it weren't an important topic. But since I don't, and it is, I find the perpetuation of the Inside Job theory both personally insulting (as a legacy of that day and as a failure of reasoning) and potentially damaging (as a distraction from real dangers and as an export to real enemies).

That's why I can't let it go without a challenge.
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4390

[Luke T.]

By the way, my wife informs me my brother-in-law is sucked in by loose change. She comes to me one day and says, "Have you seen this loose change web site?"

The average rational person can usually be dissuaded from falling for a conspiracy theory with one good question.

For the lunar landing hoax CT, it's, "If the government can't keep one guy's blowjob in the Oval Office a secret, how are they going to keep thousands and thousands of people from telling they took part in a lunar landing hoax going on more than 3 decades now?"

For the 9/11 CT, it's, "Where are the passengers of Flights 77 and 93?"

Anyone else is just too whacked to even bother talking to.

[Regnad Kcin]

Not just one lunar landing hoax, Luke. Several! And yet they keep blathering on.

It's a special breed of idiot, your average conspircacy theorist.

[bob_kark]

Not just one lunar landing hoax, Luke. Several! And yet they keep blathering on.

It's a special breed of idiot, your average conspircacy theorist.

Yes, I often wonder what the motivation would have been for hoaxing a lunar landing. It would appear that it failed to end communism.

[Gravy]

My first "real" post as "stipmunk":

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4390

That's giving 'em something to chew on, stipmunk!

[CurtC]

I've read some comments that the videos from the gas station and the Sheraton hotel were private property that the government confiscated as evidence in a criminal trial, so that explained why they were not released. But when I heard that they were releasing two videos, I thought one of them must be one of those two.

So is the reason that the Pentagon security tapes were released, that those are the ones the government owns? Are the other videos still in the government's hands, and is it up to the hotel and gas station owners to release them publicly?

[thaiboxerken]

This video shows the world that we have to be aware of terrorism. We must launch a pre-emptive strike against Antartica.

[Manny]

So is the reason that the Pentagon security tapes were released, that those are the ones the government owns? Are the other videos still in the government's hands, and is it up to the hotel and gas station owners to release them publicly?Dunno the answer to that. But I will say that it's not wholly unreasonble to believe that there may be a "cover-up" going on in this instance. It could be that the Pentagon has or had defensive systems that they'd just as soon not advertise on TV (which systems obviously failed if they exist). Alternatively, they may not have any such systems, and it's that that they're not eager to publicize. Either way, if I were the Pentagon I'd be eager to find some loophole not to respond to a FOIA request.

That doesn't change the undisputed fact that an American Airlines 757 hit the Pentagon, of course. It simply means that just because the Loosers are wrong and/or lying about every material thing about 9-11 doesn't mean that they can't have stumbled onto something correct about something non-material.

[Pardalis]

By the way, my wife informs me my brother-in-law is sucked in by loose change. She comes to me one day and says, "Have you seen this loose change web site?"

My god! This is like these Body Snatchers movies, where everybody is slowly being transformed into zombies. Only this time around, their saying "Open your eyes" and "wake up" instead of "sleeeep"!

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

My god! This is like these Body Snatchers movies, where everybody is slowly being transformed into zombies. Only this time around, their saying "Open your eyes" and "wake up" instead of "sleeeep"!

Ugh, does that mean the JREF forum will be the Donald Sutherland of the 'net, alone and crying in the middle of a sea of CT websites?

[Azrael 5]

Can someone explain a small query(at risk of sounding Loose)how does a plane go straight at ground level into the pentagon? I get the impression the plane didn't crash at a steep dive angle,but went along the ground(as in geggy's animation higher up).

[rjh01]

Easy. The building was the only big building around. So the plane could have almost levelled out before crashing in the pentagon.

[Gravy]

Can someone explain a small query(at risk of sounding Loose)how does a plane go straight at ground level into the pentagon? I get the impression the plane didn't crash at a steep dive angle,but went along the ground(as in geggy's animation higher up).
In the same way a plane lands, only with wheels up. The plane cleared highway 395 by about 20 feet, breaking lamp poles on the way. It had taken 2 1/2 minutes to dive from 7,000 feet.

[jj]

I predict it will be a 400 ft. Stay-Puft marshmallow man.

NO! NOT THE STAY-PUFF MARSHMALLOW MAN!

[Gravy]

I've read some comments that the videos from the gas station and the Sheraton hotel were private property that the government confiscated as evidence in a criminal trial, so that explained why they were not released. But when I heard that they were releasing two videos, I thought one of them must be one of those two.

So is the reason that the Pentagon security tapes were released, that those are the ones the government owns? Are the other videos still in the government's hands, and is it up to the hotel and gas station owners to release them publicly?
I've read that the gubbmint confiscated 84 or 85 tapes, but I have no idea if that's true. It makes sense that they would collect as many tapes as possible. The CTs like to repeat a story that "hotel employees" watched a tape over and over in amazement until the FBI came to take it away. That story never says what hotel it was or what was supposedly on the tape. The standard CT excuse is applied: they were told to keep quiet. Well, the investigation is over, and no one is under orders to keep quiet about the Pentagon crash, as far as I know. In their response to the FOIA request, the gubbmint said they only had one additional tape (the one released two days ago) that actually showed anything relevant.

[WildCat]

I've read that the gubbmint confiscated 84 or 85 tapes, but I have no idea if that's true. It makes sense that they would collect as many tapes as possible. The CTs like to repeat a story that "hotel employees" watched a tape over and over in amazement until the FBI came to take it away. That story never says what hotel it was or what was supposedly on the tape. The standard CT excuse is applied: they were told to keep quiet. Well, the investigation is over, and no one is under orders to keep quiet about the Pentagon crash, as far as I know. In their response to the FOIA request, the gubbmint said they only had one additional tape (the one released two days ago) that actually showed anything relevant.
And they've been repeating that claim for years now. You'd think, considering all the "research" they claim to be doing, someone from the CT movement would actually interview one of these employees (from the gas station, hotel, etc.) and get some corroborating evidence that this actually happened. But of course, they haven't. That's some hard research for ya... :rolleyes:

[dubfan]

I've read that the gubbmint confiscated 84 or 85 tapes, but I have no idea if that's true. It makes sense that they would collect as many tapes as possible. The CTs like to repeat a story that "hotel employees" watched a tape over and over in amazement until the FBI came to take it away. That story never says what hotel it was or what was supposedly on the tape. The standard CT excuse is applied: they were told to keep quiet. Well, the investigation is over, and no one is under orders to keep quiet about the Pentagon crash, as far as I know. In their response to the FOIA request, the gubbmint said they only had one additional tape (the one released two days ago) that actually showed anything relevant.

The FOIA and court documents at http://www.flight77.info are helpful on this. According to the FOIA response (which the claimant had to SUE in order to get, btw), there were 85 tapes which were found -- upon searching -- to be "responsive" (i.e., relevant) to the FOIA request. Someone in the government (her identity is revealed in the documents, I don't recall off-hand) was given the job of reviewing these 85 tapes. This is all long, long after the investigation, btw. So the review was undertaken in response to the FOIA request -- presumably the tapes were reviewed by investigators a while ago.

Anyway, after viewing them, the government official replied that two showed the plane and/or the crash -- these are the two we have now seen. Since the other 83 didn't show anything (or so it is claimed), they were deemed "not responsive" (i.e., not relevant) to the FOIA request, and not released. Suits were quickly filed to make the govt release them anyway, and they are still pending. One of the tapes is from the Citgo, the other is from the Arlington *Doubletree* (IIRC), not the Sheraton -- these are described in the government's response to the FOIA document since the claimant specifically asked for the Citgo and Sheraton tapes. Presumably, neither shows anything either or they would've been released.

Lots of "presumably"s in there, I know.

[kookbreaker]

I seriously don't know what the CTs expect from CITGO videos. Most security cameras are placed high and pointed down at the things they considered important: Potential thieves and robbers. They also tend to be focused for 'up close'. The exception to this would be parking lot cameras, and they what we seen so far is as good as it is likely to get.

[Rolfe]

This was shown on "Newsnight" on BBC2 last night, with the explanation that it was all because the CTers were a bunch of loonies. They did interview one of them who was doing his best not to sound like a looney, but it's a hard position to maintain.

I thought the film showed an aeroplane of some sort, though due to the framing and the focus it wasn't possible to say what sort. They also showed some good colour still photos of bits of aeroplane fuselage with the AA colours visible lying around the lawn of the Pentagon. They also asked where the passengers on that flight were if the flight hadn't crashed into the Pentagon.

Another item of interest was a computer simulation of the crash produced by a university, in which they looked at the structure of the building and the damage done and worked out how the plane had to have hit. This clearly showed how the wings were pretty much ripped off by structural columns, and concluded that the plane must have been pretty much daisy-cutting when it hit - essentially on a landing trajectory, close to touchdown. It was then pointed out that the video clip showed exactly what the simulation predicted.

But of course the BBC and Jeremy Paxton are all in the pay of the CIA or something, I suppose.

Rolfe.

[CurtC]

Someone named broodlinger at the LC Forum has taken the second Pentagon video, the one that has just a smoke trail visible in one frame, and has done a subtraction with the previous image. It's quite an interesting result:

The post is the third down in this thread (http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4476), and contains this image:

http://liquid-crystal.tv/pentagon/calcm_analysis3.jpg

[Azrael 5]

The woo-ness of it all is exposed by simply noting there is no need to use a missle instead of a plane when you've used at least two planes that day already!

Why bother with a missle? You're already using planes on three other proven occasions! Why not use a plane for the fourth?

*snip*

I think the consensus of (woos)opinion is that it was a U.S missile from a fighter jet that was scrambled to bring down the plane. :eye-poppi

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I think the consensus of (woos)opinion is that it was a U.S missile from a fighter jet that was scrambled to bring down the plane. :eye-poppi

I'm going to go out on a conjectural limb here and say that I don't think a AIM-9 Sidewinder, or even a AIM-54 Phoenix, (or their equivalents) would create that level of damage to the building.

[Gravy]

I think the consensus of (woos)opinion is that it was a U.S missile from a fighter jet that was scrambled to bring down the plane. :eye-poppi
...the same woos who scream at the people (with some justification) who sent the fighters in the wrong direction, resulting in the fact that no fighters were anywhere near flight 77.

[Azrael 5]

Being Devil's Advocate here,isn't it odd that most Americans and tourists have cameras(still and video) surgically attached to them,yet all we have of the crash is a few time lapse images?
The Pentagon crash is something that has always intrigued me,due to lack of evidence of a plane probably.

[chipmunk stew]

Being Devil's Advocate here,isn't it odd that most Americans and tourists have cameras(still and video) surgically attached to them,yet all we have of the crash is a few time lapse images?
The Pentagon crash is something that has always intrigued me,due to lack of evidence of a plane probably.:jaw-dropp Lack of evidence? Where have you been?

After two attacks on the WTC, do you think people are going to continue their visit to the capitol as normal, casually strolling along taking photos of the Pentagon? There is nothing strange about the scant photographic evidence of the crash itself.

How much photographic evidence is there of the first plane to hit the WTC?

How about all the other evidence? There's scads of it.

[Gravy]

Being Devil's Advocate here,isn't it odd that most Americans and tourists have cameras(still and video) surgically attached to them,yet all we have of the crash is a few time lapse images?
The Pentagon crash is something that has always intrigued me,due to lack of evidence of a plane probably.
Lack of evidence? What in the world do you mean?

And look at all the photos that were taken within a minute or two of the crash. Several people had cameras there. They just didn't happen to have them on and pointing at the plane as it approached at 600-800 feet per second.

eta: didn't mean to sound rude there. Check the "Pentagon" section of my "Loose Change" analysis, linked below.

[Azrael 5]

No offence taken Gravy.I was referring to pics of the plane approaching actually.But anyway its no matter as Im not a CT,just a thought...*goes to hide*
:D

[Regnad Kcin]

The average rational person can usually be dissuaded from falling for a conspiracy theory with one good question.

For the lunar landing hoax CT, it's, "If the government can't keep one guy's blowjob in the Oval Office a secret, how are they going to keep thousands and thousands of people from telling they took part in a lunar landing hoax going on more than 3 decades now?"

For the 9/11 CT, it's, "Where are the passengers of Flights 77 and 93?"

Anyone else is just too whacked to even bother talking to.I want to revisit your post, Luke.

A CTer would likely answer your question regarding the passengers with more (unverified) nonsense: they were whisked away and killed, or some such.

Let's instead try this: Given the enormity of what a US govt.-planned and executed event such as 9/11 would require Given its supposed rationale (to rally support for the present administration, as well as provide the groundwork/excuse to invade Iraq)
To me, two rather more persuasive questions regarding a 9/11 "inside job" present themselves:

- Where was/is the follow-up attack on this country, presumably necessary to keep its citizens on the side of the administration and their cause?
- Would it not be extremely easy to plant evidence of WMD in Iraq in order to justify the invasion after all?

[Rolfe]

As Paxman pointed out last night, the time available to catch the Pentagon plane was very short. And Washington has a lot fewer people around than central NY. There were only two catches of the first plane that hit the north WTC tower, one very bad indeed and the other an almost miraculous coincidence (the French documentary maker having a camera running and in line of sight of the tower when he heard the aircraft noise).

The many good shots of the second plane that hit the south tower tend to lead us into a false impression as to how likely it is that something like that might be caught on camera. Of course, many people were already looking at and filming the burning north tower (with the south tower in shot) when the second plane came in.

The matter for wonder isn't that so few images of the other events exist, it's that the north tower strike was caught at all.

Rolfe.

[Polaris]

Ugh, does that mean the JREF forum will be the Donald Sutherland of the 'net, alone and crying in the middle of a sea of CT websites?

And instead of Brook Adams shriveling into compost in your arms, her head spins around and she repeats "free fall, free fall, free fall" over and over again.

[Luke T.]

I want to revisit your post, Luke.

A CTer would likely answer your question regarding the passengers with more (unverified) nonsense: they were whisked away and killed, or some such.

Let's instead try this: Given the enormity of what a US govt.-planned and executed event such as 9/11 would require Given its supposed rationale (to rally support for the present administration, as well as provide the groundwork/excuse to invade Iraq)
To me, two rather more persuasive questions regarding a 9/11 "inside job" present themselves:

- Where was/is the follow-up attack on this country, presumably necessary to keep its citizens on the side of the administration and their cause?
- Would it not be extremely easy to plant evidence of WMD in Iraq in order to justify the invasion after all?

I was talking about the average rational person. Not CTer's. CTer's fall in the "too whacked to even bother talking to" category . :)

To reach the obvious conclusion that the passengers had to have been killed requires a level of belief beyond the pale. Thus, too whacked.

I think a rational person would see the point and realize the whole thing falls apart around that obstacle.

[Patricio Elicer]

Another item of interest was a computer simulation of the crash produced by a university, in which they looked at the structure of the building and the damage done and worked out how the plane had to have hit. You mean this one?

http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/gif/video-pentagon-boeing.gif

[Archangel]

You mean this one?

http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/gif/video-pentagon-boeing.gif


Am I imagining things or are the wheels out on that plane?
*(first frame of the animation)

if it was a computer sim why would they need to have wheels extended?

*After looking at it some more I think I am imagining that.


Edited to add: *comments

[Patricio Elicer]

Am I imagining things or are the wheels out on that plane?
*(first frame of the animation)I think you are not :D.

[ktesibios]

Another item of interest was a computer simulation of the crash produced by a university, in which they looked at the structure of the building and the damage done and worked out how the plane had to have hit. This clearly showed how the wings were pretty much ripped off by structural columns, and concluded that the plane must have been pretty much daisy-cutting when it hit - essentially on a landing trajectory, close to touchdown. It was then pointed out that the video clip showed exactly what the simulation predicted.

But of course the BBC and Jeremy Paxton are all in the pay of the CIA or something, I suppose.

Rolfe.

That would probably be the work done at Purdue University. First they used FEA simulations to predict what would happen to the plane and the building structure. Then they used CGI to create an animation of the results which looked more realistic than the FEA output.

One thing I found particularly interesting was the way in which they worked up from a relatively simple scenario (a mass of fluid striking a single column) through stages of greater complexity until finally running a simulation of the entire plane and the area of impact. Another thing that struck me was the way the computing power and time needed escalate as the models become bigger and more complex.

Anyway, the sims and CGI animation can be found here:

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/

[CurtC]

Something they didn't seem to account for in that analysis is the reinforced exterior wall. It seemed to be a simulation of the jet hitting the internal support columns only. What tells me this is that the wings enter the building, and they didn't on Flight 77. Also, the nose seems to go in deformed only by the columns it hits, withough accounting for the fact that the cockpit would have been mostly smashed just penetrating the wall.

[schplurg]

I think the consensus of (woos)opinion is that it was a U.S missile from a fighter jet that was scrambled to bring down the plane. :eye-poppiThen there was a plane! So where is this "plane" then?

[Azrael 5]

Then there was a plane! So where is this "plane" then?

Sorry? :confused: