How about Steve Vogels’ wonderful and brilliant book The Pentagon: A History, which has a whole chapter of eyewitness testimony as to what happened before and after the crash?
Here’s a couple good debunking site.s Though I’d assume since they’re dedicated to that purpose they’ll immediately tune it out, but it’s there.
I think there’s a pentagon page somewhere but I can’t find it offhand:
I’ll just give you the pentagon page on this one:
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon.html
Never mind, he found the pentagon ones too insane to believe so he doesn’t have a page ( In his FAQ he said even some of the conspiracy sites are even debunking it now.)
They were released. Nothing was on any of them. I believe on one or two you can see a flash and that’s about it. Surveillance cameras are, by nature, 1, pointed at the property they are surveilling and 2, low frame-rate.
I think the Pentagon missile nonsense was dreamed up by Thierry Meyssan on 9/11/01 as everything was happening and “evidence” for it was retconned as he went along with his pre-conceived quackpottery. The WTC and Shanksville loonies took slightly longer to conceive their batshittery and thus their nonsense is ever-so-slightly less transparent. Plus, the CTers love to fight amongst themselves - they’re all jealous that they didn’t think of any given CT or how to profit from it first.
I noticed there was a helipad on that lawn the plane went across. Are you saying there were no Pentagon security monitors pointing in that direction whatsoever? Nothing on the corners of each section, fish-eyeing the surrounding area? That sounds a bit weird for one of the most important buildings in the USA.
:dubious: Specious arguing at best.
He asked about the cameras at nearby businesses and that’s what I responded to. The fish eye from the Pentagon was released and is on Youtube, but you already know that.
No I didn’t. Which is why I asked. I’m just interested in the surveillance set-up at the Pentagon that day.
Google it, then. I tried to find a video for you but I’m not going to spend all day at work sorting through conspiracy videos trying to find the actual surveillance tape just so you can make up some reason not to believe what your eyes are showing you. My co-workers will think I’m nuts.
I just find it extremely hard to believe that you “noticed a helipad on the lawn the plane went over” but somehow missed the biggest piece of evidence to be released in the last few years.
We’ve been through this before, ivan. Don’t sit here and pretend to be “just asking questions” about a topic you long ago made up your mind on.
The only person who’s “mind is made up”, is yours on my motivation, it seems.
Loose change is scarily stupid. It is sad that the first time I saw it was recommended by someone whose opinion I normally respect.
The USPS one is pure comedy gold. Never heard that before.
As for the conspiracist being left free to conspire, my take on most conspiracies is that the US government is simply incapable of carrying out a successful conspiracy. More so the Bush administration that leaks like a laundry basket. But that is not an often respected position, so I mostly keep it to myself.
Those were a bit over the level I was hoping, but they made great reads for personal consumption. Truth is, this is not a topic that takes my sleep away and that is by far the most I have ever read on this topic. Very interesting, I must say.
Yeah, the second one is a good read. As you said, it is mostly logical arguments that are quickly zonked out by the CT crowd. Still, some good angles I hadn’t seen on the flight path and lawn issues.
Tell me about it, once they broke into our property and the PD made us watch hours of nearby security cam video that showed a whole lot of jerky nothing.
Well clearly this is a big joke to him and he leaves a glaring clue that he’s full of shit.
I liked the phrase “trifecta of stupid” later in that discussion.
Can you find me a witness in Washington that day who says he actually saw a missile, or a “small white plane”?
No, they weren’t released. The FBI grabbed 80-something surveillance videos in hopes some of them caught something. After the trial, there was an FOIA request for any videos showing the plane or the crash, and a person was assigned to look through all of them. Four videos were released: the two Pentagon parking lot security videos (five frames from one had already been leaked in 2001), the video from the Citgo station that Flight 77 passed nearly directly over (which showed a reflection of the fireball), and a parking lot video from the Doubletree Hotel across the freeway. This last one didn’t show the approaching plane because its view was blocked by the freeway overpass, but you could see the smoke plume of the explosion. The other 80-odd videos were not released because there was nothing on them that showed the plane or the crash.
There may have been monitors, we don’t know. The Pentagon probably relies more on real live guys with guns for its security rather than video, but even if there were monitors, they may have been displayed live but not recorded. If you’re saying there were monitors that were recorded, it’s you making the claim so you need to bring evidence.
Can I? No, of course. CT powerpoint emails, on the other hand seem to be loaded with them. I really don’t care to verify them to either prove or disprove them. The point remains, though, that eyewitness testimonies are hardly reliable.
Poor wording on my part, I guess, but this is what I meant.
The problem with a lot of those is that they’re literally just made up out of thin air. Others are taken way out of context.
Did you see the video where Dylan Avery says “[the guy who said] ‘it seemed as if the plane had let its passengers off beforehand’” and the interviewer has to explain to Dylan what a simile is, because he clearly doesn’t know? That’s pretty representative of how these CTers can pick out what they want to from quotes and eyewitnesses.
Pretty much every expert the 9/11 CT movement has ever quoted publicly denounces them or turns out not to be an expert after all.
Some people have taken him very seriously indeed. Even semi-famous tax kook Beecraft thinks this guy’s leading people dangerously astray. And he has concrete examples.
The reason I asked is that I’ve never heard the “small white plane” meme associated with the Pentagon hit. The “small white plane” that I’ve heard was a Falcon 20 business jet that was asked by controllers in Shanksville, Pennsylvania to scope out whether United Flight 93 had crashed there. Witnesses reported the small white plane there because, well, it was there. But this wasn’t the Pentagon crash.
The “missile” comment I’ve heard is from a witness who said he saw a passenger jet coming into the Pentagon like a missile, but the conspiracy kooks leave off the part of his statement where he describes it as a passenger jet and quote only the missile part. And as far as I know, this one quote-mine is the only missile reference having to do with the Pentagon.
True that. Obviously, and for my own sake, I haven’t been paying much attention to this quality topic. There are some comments about the plane on the Pentagon being a smaller plane, though. One of the links upthread even mentions specific plane models.
I think some CNN dude said the missile thing. I am guessing most people afterwards were just parroting him.