first of all, i was trying to copy the whole page, pictures and all it didnt work. im not the best at that sort of thing. the point of all that is to show you that the 2 or 3 pieces of wreckage, from the whole 757, which didnt vaporize, classified as official evidence, doesnt conclude anything.
what other plane crashes are trotted out as evidence? what about yesterday when the media saw a plane lifted out of the hudson. is there a goose conspiracy?
90 % of people would tell you that even before the crash, light poles were knocked down… if the plane was flying that low of course we would have tape. if a wing clipped a pole the plane probably wouldve crashed right there. when a 125 ft diameter plane leaves a 20 ft hole (at best, ck out the pic taken immediately after impact), but then leaves a hole at ring C, doesnt this evidence contradict itself if the pentagon is built so tough like ford?
So now two times i have seen videos, which were supposed to show a plane, not show any hint of a plane. If this post is a troll-type post then I am sorry. I just find it perplexing that this is the only evidence people in this thread can show of a 757. The reason I made this thread was in the hopes of tapping some anonymous resource (like a pilot, or boeing employee) that might be able to provide something I’ve never seen before. That is all, it is not my intention to troll, hopefully I can contribute to other threads in the future given the chance. Thank you.
You have got to be joking. You were asked if showing the videos, even if they didn’t include a plane, would satisfy you. You said it would. And now you’re complaining they didn’t show a plane?
My theory for the allegedly missing tapes is the airlines pressure the FAA to not release footage of planes crashing. Your theory for the allegedly missing tapes is that a conspiracy consisting of thousands upon thousands of people is trying to cover up the fact there was no plane.
Your theory is stupider by several dozen orders of magnitude.
I have a query. I’m sure I’ve seen footage of a helipad in front of the wing where the plane hit, and was wondering, bearing in mind where it is located, why this area would not have been monitored up the kazoo? It seems as though anyone could have just plopped down in a chopper totally unchallenged. Any CCTV camera pointing in that direction would surely have seen the plane approaching. Or have I got my wings mixed up?
It is difficult to find a video in existence that shows something incriminating. I was hoping an anonymous source here might be able to do that. You are correct, the evidence of these such videos are unproven, but it is evident that the tapes that were confiscated were never released. This is what i am really questioning here. I really did not want to go into eye-witness accounts, I was trying to get real evidence.
Employees of a Safeway grocery store on Columbia Pike some three miles west of the Pentagon reported seeing a very large plane fly overhead, headed east. Columbia Pike is a four-lane road with no curves between George Mason Drive and the Navy Annex; viewed from a plane, it’s like an arrow pointed at the Pentagon. Buildings along that part of Columbia Pike range from low-rise retail to medium-rise residential.
Any video footage confiscated from these locations would have been viewed then returned to the owners. It’s up to the owners whether or not to release the footage.
Thanks for the link. Again we see a burnt rim and universal landing gear/nose cones which could never ID a specific plane. BTW I am not implying that there were no employees in the Pentagon doing their jobs that day. Nor did I ever really say a 757 never hit the Pentagon. I have always pointed to the lack of evidence and what caused this. It does bear mentioning now that it is a tragedy these people lost their lives.
What I would really like is to discuss the actions of government officials before, during, and after the tragedies, but this has probably been done here and I will have to sift through those threads first.
So far all the tapes mentioned are accounted for and were eventually released, after so many years those anonymous sources would had come forward already.
Sucks, but so far you can not produce evidence that supports your ideas, and the physical and witness evidence point still to a passenger plane hitting the Pentagon.
There is exactly one account of someone claiming they saw a missile hit the Pentagon. Problem is, this account is from one guy who was repeating something he heard two other people say–while in the Pentagon subway station, underground, on the wrong side of the building.
There is exactly one account of someone saying they saw a commuter jet hit the Pentagon. Problem is, this guy was in a high-rise in Rosslyn, a couple miles to the north.
the conspiracy is so big that it could never be organized without a whistleblower, were all the investigators in on the theory?
This is a theory that you will hear very often by the people who believe the 911 commission report is gospel.
The first rule of a conspiracy is that the fewer people who know, the better the chances are. The more people in on is increases the chances of a whistleblower either for money or conscience.
A conspiracy like this could be done involving very few people who have control of the reins. The first thing you do is hire a mercenary of middle easter descent. Give him $10,000,000 in a Cayman Island bank. He is not given the big picture in its entirety.
He only knows he is to recruit Jihad extremist, preferably college age students. One call to immigration and they are cleard to come to America. Then you facilitate them getting into college and take flight lessons.
Stand down orders are given and no one in that loop knows why, only that their duty is to follow orders given by a superior officer. By keeping things compartmentalized you can contain the amount of exposure.
Changing the topic via non sequiter is generally frowned upon in this forum.
It COULD be – but it wasn’t prior to 9/11 (whether it is now I don’t know). We were not looking for threats from our own civilian airliners. Even today, most security cameras focus on the interior of businesses or parking lots. What they catch otherwise is largely accidental.
With the recent water landing in New York City, the only cameras that seem to have captured the landing were from the city and Coast Guard and were located in areas where they scanned the piers and docks used by the ferries, their primary purpose was NOT to scan for airliners using the Hudson river as a runway. I’m assuming those dockside cameras were installed post 9/11 when we started worrying about our own vehicles being used against us.
Maybe I don’t get my panties in a twist because I am somewhat familiar with other crash investigations. It has been routine for some time that the NTSB solicits (even “confiscates” through legal court actions) video tape from businesses in close proximity to a crash for purposes of investigating that crash.
As an example, in early 2006 a twin engine Cessna crashed in Wheeling, Illinois. The NTSB obtained video from businesses all around the airport in question in hopes of getting images of the crash. This picture is the ONLY picture of that crash from all the tapes obtained. The only one. The frames before and after this one on the tape do not show anything identifiable as an airplane. That airplane was moving much slower than the 757 that crashed into the Pentagon. In other words, a B757 is fast enough to zip by a camera in between frames even if the camera happens to be pointing in the right direction.
Getting security camera tape from nearby businesses is standard procedure in investigating airplane crashes. You are making much to-do about routine procedures.
First of all even for people who are pilots identifying a low flying airplane from below while it is moving at high speed is difficult - for a layperson it may be impossible. We had a thread that discussed this phenomena in regards to the 9/11 Pennsylvania crash with the input of honest-to-Og pilots, including those who fly large Boeings. If I can find the damn thing I will link to it.
Some witnesses undoubtedly had better view than others. Some probably heard/felt a whooosh! and only had the briefest glimpse. Others just happened to be looking at the part of the sky that offered them a clear view. There is nothing mysterious about any of this.
Do you know what my position is? I think there is a misconception here that I am supporting a “missile” theory, despite the fact that Rumsfeld and other ex-officials have said the same thing several times in fact. Food for thought again.
Again, if anyone would like to discuss the actions of norad, the USAF, Dick Cheney and others that day then maybe we could get somewhere. But missiles and eye witness accounts were never my intention here.
Or maybe even why we don’t have records of the stock market the next day? Can anyone possibly explain that?
I don’t suppose you have evidence about the NORAD maneuvers or ATC tracking the plane for 40 mins deviating from the original flight path. Both would be critical in this instance.
