I watched the video the pentagon released yesterday about 50 times...excuse me, but they said it showed the plane... WHAT PLANE ??? Are they nuts? That skinny phelix symbol looking little thing???

Was that was a missile, or are you just happy to see me??? ...

Funny they had to educate the public that it was a plane

Now the eyes know what my nose knew then...something is rotten in the Bush administration and it is George Bush's version of the truth...

They must be nuts

Macademia
Acorn
Planters (because they plant seeds of doubt in every bit of disinformation)
peanuts (we should have kept Jimmy Carter)

Okay. I wrote about this in the J/K forums but I'm gonna say it again here.

I was visiting my sister in Virginia for a week .. the 9/11 week. I'd gone to work with her that morning. From her office window is a wide view of the Pentagon. We SAW the plane hit the pentagon. We took pictures. We shared the pictures we took from the office with the news media. It was a 757, 100% not one iota of doubt.. we were not hallucinating. I remember it as clearly today as I did then, and unfortunately will remember it the rest of my life. Mere seconds seemed like hours.. like watching a slow motions movie.

Anyone who tries to tell us differently - or turns this into it wasn't a 757 is flat not telling the truth. They can try and sell any kind of other theory they want - but that theory must include that the plane was indeed a 757. Period.

Hence, my caution in believing these "out there" theories. In the year that followed both her and I would shake our heads when we read about stories that it was not a 757 that hit.. case we damn well knew it was.

Why is this being released now? I don't buy the arguement that they needed it for trial. And where are the other surveillance camera tapes? Why is the timing on the video wrong?

It's being released now to get people in a patriotic 9-11 bullspit mood
so we can all go and die in Iran

(then they can claim it was a typo and the WMD were meant to be in Iran not Iraq)

Such crap

as said
My mother in law swears on 9-11 she saw the plane hit the WTC live waiting for Regis to come on...Live
first plane

One is conditioned to think a plane is a plane

and sorry, I don't personally know anyone here, so I would not trust them to tell me what my eyes saw and my ears heard and my nose smelled

Not for a second

And why was someone looking for a plane to crash into the Pentagon?
Why would you take a picture before the plane hit?

Seems kinda odd

Why not publish the photos?
As there were not many, it would seem you are sitting on a million dollar
photo, and one could retire and not need to work anymore with that

Reminds me of the Wendy's lady and Walter Mondale "Where's the beef???"

If you have a picture, put it up on the board
I don't know how to do it, but others can tell you

Let's see the proof ...that is what we are asking...show us the proof
time verified

But again why would you be taking a picture of a plane before it goes into the pentagon? Same as the first plane in the WTC

Nobody watched it on TV that morning live...(at least not a regular person)

Also- please let us know how you know one plane from the other

757 767 727 737 just a bunch of numbers, how would you know from a plane streaking by you in a flash what type of plane it was?

references are acceptable

I could personally care less if they can show us a clear picture of a 757 hitting the Pentagon. How does it change anything? Does this prove that 9/11 was not an inside job?

It was released because somebody sued to have it released under the Freedom of Information act, as the Mous-whatever trial was over.

Good point jimiray

Why get boggled in a non-issue

And that the plane hit where not too many people were working, way on the other side of ole' Donnie Rumsfeld and the gang...smoke and mirrors/ mirrors and smoke...like a David Blaine trick

I want to know what the hell was going on with Cheney and his aide running in and out that day telling Cheney "It's 20 miles out" "it's 10 miles out" "do the orders still stand"?

Graham , read the post again. No where does Terra say they took pictures prior to impact.

It's the thing that hit the building.

Of course the fact that no missile coming anywhere close to that description has ever existed anywhere in the world is an unimportant detail.

I'd sure like to see those pictures Terra. Can you post them here?

I'm leaving the Tin Foil Hat off... I'm not buying into the conspiracy theory about the Pentagon plane being a missile.

1. What would be the point ? (Weren't the WTC planes enough to create the desired response - if it truly were a conspiracy ?)

2. Wouldn't the government have picked a less vital target ? Why not the Sears Tower , The Golden Gate Bridge, or any number of other civilian targets ? If the goal was to incite a strong public reaction and cause a war wouldn't they have chosen targets in other areas.

Regardless.... the thing that I'm still P'Oed about is that we are being lied to again. The government said that this is the only existing footage of the crash at the Pentagon. From my understanding, these video/still images were from Pentagon surveillance camers.

This leaves other sources of video footage unaccounted for. From my recollection, there was a tape from a security camera at a nearby gas station that was confiscated almost immediately by the FBI. There was also a nearby hotel security camera tape that appears to have been suppressed as well.

So what is the truth regarding the videos ?

What is the truth ? I don't know, but I don't have to concoct any sort of conspiracy theory to know that the government blatantly lies to us... without reason or justification. That IS the truth.

So let me get this straight. You had time to grab your camera and take pictures of an airplane moving 500 miles per hour? Pfft. There's an old saying, "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."

Perhaps because so many people pushing these theories have made such an issue of it. If it is not key to their case, wouldn't it be logical not to pursue it so much?



Someone actually posted an article quoting Torri Clarke, the DOD spokesperson at the time, as saying that Rumsfeld's office was actually quite close to the impact, if not on that side. Now one could doubt the veracity of that quote, but before I would accept that Rumsfeld was actually so far away, I would want that confirmed as well. Now I am somewhat familiar with the Pentagon's reconstruction program, but I have no idea what areas were under reconstruction at the time and were vacated. But I know a few things. First off you have something like 30,000 people working in the Pentagon. You wouldn't completely vacate, or even mostly vacate, an entire side without causing major disruption. I would imagine that they would have avoided that, working on smaller sections. Certainly when I was last visiting the Pentagon between the Springs of 2003 and 2004, when the reconstruction program was still going on (I don't know if it has ended yet or not) I saw no evidence that there had been mass evacuations of huge sections of the Pentagon. Now it is one thing to hit the side of a big building like the Pentagon while going 350 MPH, it is another to be sure to hit just the right spot where few people were working. (And if it did happen to hit there, I would want to see the details supporting that fact.) And remember that the plane first hit, and caused the most damage to, the outermost ring, the E-ring. The E-ring is where the choice offices are because they have windows facing the outside. (Most offices have no windows at all, or just face another ring. The innermost A-ring has offices with views of the courtyard in the middle. Then you have basement offices, safer from planes hitting the building, but no views.) So the bigwigs are more likely to be vulnerable to a plane (or missile) hitting the Pentagon than the peons. Were all of the bigwigs at meetings that morning far away from the southwest side?

There was one and it was on an episode of Get Smart...that is what it looked like...would you believe....

and knowing its a 757 too!

In the blink of an eye.

Just a few weeks ago a coworker of mine told me of several people commuting on I-395 at the time who had seen the plane hit. Were those people lying to her? Was she lying?

And before you imply that Terra is lying, look at CO's post. Terra didn't say that she got pictures of the plane prior to or at impact. You could be nice and ask her what pictures she did get.

Face it people, especially if you tend to believe these CT's, this particular issue is just a big loser.

How funny -- 11 people on CGCS, 7 in this thread.

I guess one problem I have with the whole missile theory is -- what happened to all those people who were on the flight that "supposedly" hit the Pentagon? They just disappeared?

My problem is Karl Rove said Monday that everyone loves this president

What does he take to say a line like that and actually believe it?

Who loves this President?

anyhow, I am just waiting for some announcement of Karl Rove being indicted, as promised on Friday or Saturday...

today is 24 bus. hours since then...so may as well talk about something, no?

Post your pictures please.

Thanks

OK, let's recap

A missile the size of a jetliner carrying no warhead and propelled by jet fuel designed to sound like a jet instead of a missile hit the Pentagon and all the witnesses merely THINK they saw a 757.

727? 737? 757? 767?

I could identify these planes fairly easily. The 727 has three engines on the tail. It is a fairly old plane these days -- over 30 years old. The 737 is short, smallish, and most now have engines that look like they are a bit flattened on the bottom. The 757 is very skinny for its length (I used to hate flying on them for this reason). They actually have the same diameter body as the old 707s. With their big landing gear (when out) and skinny body they remind me of eagles with their big feet. The 767 is bigger, much wider body than the 757s. All but the 727 have two engines on the wings.

I agree with your assessment on the other surveillance videos that haven't been released. I also don't understand why it took a lawsuit from Judicial Watch to get this video. I do not buy the argument that it was needed for trial. All of the videos of the twin towers were available. Judicial Watch's suit was too narrow - I wish they had sought all of the surveillance videos and all videos that were confiscated by the FBI. Copies of the tapes could be easily made available. Not releasing them is only fueling the conspiracy theory debate, which can only thrive where there has been gross secrecy.

What did Kodak Coin "A Picture Tells a 1000 Words !!!"

its irreelevant

The video they released did not show anything resembling a plane or anything

Just a silver streak

Maybe it was THE SILVER STREAK???

Maybe it was an Amtrak train...they are low to the ground too, but where in that video did it show a wide body plane with wings???

It wasn't going at light speed, Graham. I'm sure she could have made out a plane, and its relative size and shape, a good indicator of what kind of plane it was. There are a lot of office buildings in that area that would have had excellent views of that side of the Pentagon.

Here's a link to an MSN map. The side hit was the southwest side:

http://local.live.com/default.aspx?wip=2&v...snculture=en-US

Again -- what happened to all the people on the flight if it wasn't really the flight that hit the Pentagon? I haven't taken a position on this issue -- I'm just wondering? It's a big hole in the conspiracy theory.

Sure, all of the people commuting on I-395 and looking out their northern exposure windows from Pentagon City only saw the video. No one was actually looking at one of the biggest landmarks of the area at that particular time, and anyone claiming to have is lying or hallucinating.

O COME ON! You KNOW you're talking Bushbrains! You couldn't see the people inside the Pentagon either, they must not have been there!

When they show side shots of planes making emergency landings from some side angles you don't see the wings then either, they've been showing emergency missile landings at airports on the news all this time?

Is this the best hallucination you can come up with?

That is more than I know...

How many people know that though?

And how many people who happened to be staring at a plane coming in and crashing into the pentagon early one morning who also have a camera taking picture of said event would also know the different airlines at the drop of a hat
at just that moment?

(as opposed to having been told by the media what it is they were looking at
when it happened later on like my before mentioned mother in law thinking she saw the first plane live time hit the wtc on tv while waiting for regis) (talk about a run-on sentence)

And there were people I remember at some point hearing or reading (maybe on this board's thread) who said they saw it and it WAS NOT A PLANE they saw, then they were shut up (or said to be nuts)

It takes the mind a few seconds to adjust to seeing something out of the norm,
especially while driving btw without crashing their vehicle

You do not just look and know what you are seeing at once

As 10 people who witness a crime in progress to describe the criminal, and you will get 10 different answers (beard, no beard, glasses, no glasses, black, white, Asian...)

Just look at the Rutger's rape case

But then, Britney Spears says she wants another baby. Now you will probably respond that often the traffic going over the George Washington Bridge is just horrendous, but that would be irrelevant.

I agree. I'm afraid the judicial watch FOIA request was too narrow. They should seek not only any videos/photos from the Pentagon, but also from the FBI and any other governmental agency that may have such evidence in their possession. It's too easy for the government to play "hide the tapes" and say they provided everything that was requested. Judicial Watch should KNOW the kind of games that the administration plays to hide things from public scrutiny.

What irks me is that there is NO reasonable justification for withholding the tapes. There is no breach of national security by revealing footage of a past event. There was plenty of news footage of the damage at the time... so what reason can there be to hide the images of the impact ?

In my estimation... there is no reason.

Silence the Critics ... POST THE PICTURES TERRA !!!



Then we can get back to the issues at hand ... Like CPI Inflation Worries, The Iran Bourse and it's potential on the Dollar Weakening, The NSA Scandal, Bob Ney, Is Gore Running in '08.

Post the friggin pictures you have !!!

I am trying to picture what you are saying from other reports...maybe you are right, maybe you are not right...I am thinking about it though

This is why a thorough investigation with warrants and supoena's is needed

We did not see OJ in the White Broncho, but the whole country knew and was watching

Again -- what happened to all the people on the flight if it wasn't really the flight that hit the Pentagon? I haven't taken a position on this issue -- I'm just wondering? It's a big hole in the conspiracy theory.

She is pregnant again.

I bet arne if you were her parent, you would not be that proud of her lately

I was in Manhattan this morning, and came home on the Bridge---traffic was a mess going into the city but I was going home at the time, and had no problem

I have seen Northern Flickers (a woodpecker the size of a Robin) flying at high speeds from a hundred feet out or more and clearly noticed it was that species, while just walking around or looking out the window from my house, when I was not focused on birds, to say nothing of being focused on Flickers, and I didn't see it reported in the media later.

And that proves my argument, it was a plane that hit the Pentagon. Case closed!

Those suckers fly 350 mph? Damn...

Strawman argument. As CO said, she said she took pictures, not that she took pictures of the plane before or on impact. She said that she saw the plane before impact.

I remember watching that, I was going to drive from OC to Phoenix that evening. I couldn't decide which annoyed me more, the traffic getting so snarled I'd have to wait til the next day, the fact that they kept showing one of the most boring things I've ever seen, or the fact that they didn't force him over (OK, fine, commit suicide).

Don't you think she should POST THE PICTURES?

I do ...

Mine is not to reason why (as one of those bathroom quotes used to say)...

When there is an official investigation, we get all the answers we want

I could suggest a few, but it doesn't matter really

I hereby admit 4 plane ful of people have disappeared
2 in the trade center
1 in PA
1 in DC

Where or what happened to them ??? We are told but it still is sort of irrelevant to whether Bush did it, Bush knew or what not. (And by Bush I mean the administration, not W himself, which is also irrelevant if he personally knew or not)

At their size and that close they seem to fly faster than I believe that plane seemed to be going (much further out and a much bigger size).

Only when they find the birdfeeder where someone stashed their meth.

I hardly see them as crucial. I took a picture of that side months later, but I think it was with a film camera, so I couldn't easily post it. I'm not sure that her picture would show all that much more, perhaps you could make out some of the debris.

She just might be angry at the idea of a few implying that she lied. Just a thought.

No it is not.

Because the point of her argument was that the poster (I have no idea if terra is a male or female, CO indicates female, however, I personally got into trouble sometime back with someone over that, so let's say a non-gender poster) saw it, took pictures and verified it was a 757 plane from a building looking straight at it

the question remains---

post the photos and let us all see if they are time verified

and if the poster did not see it actually enter, where was it after the fact?
Didn't they tell us it disintegrated instantly and there were no big pieces?

I think it is something like this that is the strawman
That is what I don't understand

I have seen plane crashes, and the whole plane is visible (albeit in many pieces)
but you can put it all back together again

I am not implying any poster lied

I am using what I witnessed with my mother-in-law
She said she saw on tv live time the first plane hit and would not budge for close to half an hour a few weeks ago from that statement

Even though I said the camera was not on the WTC on Channel 7 WABC at the time the first plane hit (why would it be)

I was not accusing mom-inlaw of lying (I am not that loco)...just having her memory play tricks on her, which it was