Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

The 9/11 Planes and the Pentagon attack


  • Please log in to reply
2521 replies to this topic

#31    psychoticmike

psychoticmike

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 618 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 September 2011 - 01:11 PM

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Incorrect.

Footage from two separate Pentagon security cameras has been released (much more than five frames).

Footage from the Citgo gas station has been released.

Footage from the Doubletree Hotel has been released.

It has been available for five years!

Where have you been Scott?



I知 not going into a thing with you until you use your own brain and accept the flight path that Madelyn Zakhem describes from our past discussion: -

http://www.unexplain...dpost&p=3071491


see, i wasn't aware of that i searched for footage on youtube and all i could find is the footage in the one video so i guess I'll have to look harder.


#32    psychoticmike

psychoticmike

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 618 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 September 2011 - 01:23 PM

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Incorrect.

Footage from two separate Pentagon security cameras has been released (much more than five frames).

Footage from the Citgo gas station has been released.

Footage from the Doubletree Hotel has been released.

It has been available for five years!

Where have you been Scott?



I知 not going into a thing with you until you use your own brain and accept the flight path that Madelyn Zakhem describes from our past discussion: -

http://www.unexplain...dpost&p=3071491


are these the videos you mean?

My link

My link


I never really looked into this topic to much so a lot of this is new to me, but i still haven't seen anything substantial in these videos and i don't see why it took a law suit for them to be released. Isn't there plenty more they still haven't released?


#33    The Narcisse

The Narcisse

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 78 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010

Posted 15 September 2011 - 02:08 PM

View Postpsychoticmike, on 15 September 2011 - 01:08 PM, said:

yep, thats what i was thinking. It just does not add up and makes no sense as to why they would not release any of the others. I highly doubt that a few outside cameras would threaten the pentagons security and what about the nearby stores? why could they not release they're footage? if they have nothing to hide and there was a plane that went into the pentagon or it was the plane they say it was then they could release the footage to put the "conspiracies" to rest and if there was anything in the video that would jeopardize they're security i'm sure they could blur it out. Or was the other footage just too graphic for grown adults to see?  :rolleyes: yeah, not believing these liars. I know for a fact the gov has lied about many things and continues to lie, so when the evidence points to them lying i'm gonna have to assume that until they can prove me wrong, or show evidence that does so. Thanks for the videos.


Even if they DID release the other footage that they have it wouldn't put any conspiracies "to rest" because the argument would shift into "They had 10 years to doctor the footage! I'm not buying it! This is MORE proof that our government and thousands of others were involved in a plot to kill 3,000 americans for no real gain!"


#34    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 15 September 2011 - 02:33 PM

View Postpsychoticmike, on 15 September 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

are these the videos you mean?

My link

My link


I never really looked into this topic to much so a lot of this is new to me, but i still haven't seen anything substantial in these videos and i don't see why it took a law suit for them to be released. Isn't there plenty more they still haven't released?
Yes, they are the videos.
And there exists a further two sets of footage from the Pentagon security cameras.
You saw a bit of those showing the aircraft tail section on the other thread.

There is no available footage more substantial than that.

I don稚 understand why a lawsuit was required for those videos either.

Here is a list of the unreleased videotapes in FBI custody: -
http://www.911myths....Pentagon_videos

You will see that many of the tapes are actually from the WTC, or do not show the Pentagon, or only show the Pentagon after impact.

If there is further footage, which there may or may not be, I would suggest the reason it is withheld is possibly in relation to the specific aircraft identity rather than the actual presence of an aircraft.

There is a mass of eyewitness and physical evidence an aircraft was present but zero evidence of its identity.

The lack of air crash investigation on 9/11 is unprecedented in U.S. aviation history.

That is revealing on its own.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#35    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 15 September 2011 - 03:05 PM

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Incorrect.

Footage from two separate Pentagon security cameras has been released (much more than five frames).

I admit I was unaware of the second video camera feed that was released, but the fact remains that only one of them shows an object that the official story alleges to be Flight 77, never mind the fact that a 757 would have been much bigger then the small object that we actually see.


View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Footage from the Citgo gas station has been released.

Yes, it was. I wonder if you've seen this commentary on it:
Proof The CITGO Security Video Was Manipulated


View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Footage from the Doubletree Hotel has been released.

Indeed. I wonder if you've seen this analysis of it:
Doubletree Hotel  video released; shows no plane

The title gives you a big hint as to the problem with it...

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

It has been available for five years!

It's also not from the pentagon.

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

Where have you been Scott?

In forums that have been discussing such things while you've been.. here. I understand, really I do, but there have been things you've missed it seems.

Edited by Scott G, 15 September 2011 - 03:19 PM.


#36    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 15 September 2011 - 03:13 PM

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 02:33 PM, said:

Here is a list of the unreleased videotapes in FBI custody: -
http://www.911myths....Pentagon_videos

You will see that many of the tapes are actually from the WTC, or do not show the Pentagon, or only show the Pentagon after impact.

Thanks for bringing this link to my attention. If it's true (and I currently have no reason to doubt its validity), then it would appear that many people have overlooked this fact. Nevertheless, it omits explaining certain details which have been pointed out to me in the past. Most notably that while this FBI agent claims (and perhaps herself believes) that no video camera witnessed the pentagon impact, there were many video cameras that should have. You simply need to get some detailed pictures of the pentagon to see that they had numerous cameras on it at the time. I can easily imagine that the FBI agent that did the search was unaware of this. There's another thing to consider; she mentions that no video camera witnessed the impact of Flight 77. One has to wonder, what about -before- it hit the pentagon. Did any of the video cameras she mention see the plane before this event? Returning to the issue that many video cameras should have witnessed the impact, she mentions that 12 video feeds "only showed the Pentagon after the impact of Flight 77." Why is that? Were the video cameras turned off prior to the impact? If so, why is that? So yes, thanks for the info; amazing what you can find out, even from people who support the official story's view on what happened during the Pentagon Attack.

Edited by Scott G, 15 September 2011 - 03:15 PM.


#37    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 15 September 2011 - 05:34 PM

View PostScott G, on 15 September 2011 - 03:05 PM, said:

I admit I was unaware of the second video camera feed that was released, but the fact remains that only one of them shows an object that the official story alleges to be Flight 77
No, both security cameras show (part of) the aircraft.

And you were unaware that the second even existed after all these years?

Not to mention it痴 right there in my post you started this thread with: -



:unsure:


View PostScott G, on 15 September 2011 - 03:05 PM, said:

In forums that have been discussing such things while you've been.. here. I understand, really I do, but there have been things you've missed it seems.
Oh do be serious, Scott.

Someone asked a simple question: -

泥oes anyone know just how much footage has been released, and from how many cameras?

All your 僧arauding the forums led you to give an answer five years out of date.

I give the full list of footage released and you say I知 missing things.

The links you provided show that: -

  • There may be further existing footage potentially showing the aircraft - this I indicated in my previous post.
  • Stating the obvious - the Doubletree footage does not show the plane.


View PostScott G, on 15 September 2011 - 03:13 PM, said:

Thanks for bringing this link to my attention. If it's true (and I currently have no reason to doubt its validity), then it would appear that many people have overlooked this fact.
But Scott *despairs* this is the same information I brought to your attention 18 months ago.

http://www.unexplain...dpost&p=3335578

What can I do?

:cry:

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#38    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 15 September 2011 - 07:15 PM

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

No, both security cameras show (part of) the aircraft.

And you were unaware that the second even existed… after all these years?

Not to mention it's right there in my post you started this thread with: -



:unsure:

I do miss links at times. But it seems that the second video camera was practically right next to the first? If that's the case, no wonder I never noticed; the difference between the 2 feeds seems to be negligible. I notice that that video you're using doesn't seem to be persuaded that the video captured Flight 77 flying through. I wonder if you've seen the following 6 1/2 minute video:
http://www.dailymoti...rike_shortfilms

You may learn a few things from it...


View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

Someone asked a simple question: -

"Does anyone know just how much footage has been released, and from how many cameras?"

All your 'marauding the forums' led you to give an answer five years out of date.

I give the full list of footage released… and you say I'm missing things.

Laugh :-). I pointed out things that you have apparently missed. But I acknowledge that there's some things that I've missed myself.

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

The links you provided show that: -

  • There may be further existing footage potentially showing the aircraft - this I indicated in my previous post.
Alright.

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

Stating the obvious - the Doubletree footage does not show the plane.

Yes, that's the obvious part. I had imagined he had a reason for highlighting that fact, but he doesn't seem to mention one in his article. My own concern is this: why has no footage been released of the alleged aircraft other than the 5 frame video and perhaps another pentagon video that was almost at the same spot as the 5 frame one? If you take a look at the comments in the doubletree link, you'll see that one person suspects that a plane was edited out:

Quote

Hey Killtown, How come the same video posted on Youtube by Bronco2121  clearly shows what looks like a very large object (tail and wing?)  tumbling from left to right behind the freeway prior to the explosion,  and your video has some blurring going on in the same place, and what  looks like some editing on the left side of the explosion?  CIA plot to  distort the truth maybe??????

12/05/2006 1:19 PM

Source: http://killtown.blog...535355565663466

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

But Scott… *despairs*… this is the same information I brought to your attention 18 months ago.

http://www.unexplain...dpost&p=3335578

What can I do?

:cry:

Memory can play tricks on you. You weren't talking to me when you brought up that video, you were talking to frenat. I'd left the conversation before then. You -did- bring up some interesting points following the last thing I said in that thread though:


View PostQ24, on 18 March 2010 - 11:26 PM, said:

  • In response to a FOIA request to ascertain the 9/11  aircraft identifications through unique serial numbers, the NTSB stated,  "Unfortunately, the NTSB doesn't have any records regarding the above  requested information".
    Link
  • In response to a FOIA request to ascertain the 9/11  aircraft identifications through unique serial numbers, the FBI stated,  "RIDS has been unable to locate any FBI records responsive to your  request".
    Link
Finally, it seems you missed another point I made:

View PostScott G, on 15 September 2011 - 03:13 PM, said:

Returning  to the issue that many video cameras should have witnessed  the impact, she mentions that 12 video feeds "only showed the Pentagon  after the impact of Flight 77." Why is that? Were the video cameras  turned off prior to the impact? If so, why is that?


Edited by Scott G, 15 September 2011 - 07:16 PM.


#39    psychoticmike

psychoticmike

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 618 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 September 2011 - 10:27 PM

View PostThe Narcisse, on 15 September 2011 - 02:08 PM, said:

Even if they DID release the other footage that they have it wouldn't put any conspiracies "to rest" because the argument would shift into "They had 10 years to doctor the footage! I'm not buying it! This is MORE proof that our government and thousands of others were involved in a plot to kill 3,000 americans for no real gain!"


for no real gain? LOL thats funny. It may not put them entirely to rest, but it would sure help they're credibility. If they would have just released it all there would be far less suspicion. Imo there is no legitimate reason for why they did what they did. Why would they not release all footage of the outside of the building? for fear of security issues? when people can check out the whole outside with a pair of binoculars? If you can give me a good enough reason for why they did that, i may just believe you. I have looked into both sides of the story and so far the offical story just does not add up and none of these so called "debunkers" have been able to provide satisfactory evidence that the offical story is entirely true.


#40    psychoticmike

psychoticmike

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 618 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 September 2011 - 10:50 PM

View PostQ24, on 15 September 2011 - 02:33 PM, said:

Yes, they are the videos.
And there exists a further two sets of footage from the Pentagon security cameras.
You saw a bit of those showing the aircraft tail section on the other thread.

There is no available footage more substantial than that.

I don稚 understand why a lawsuit was required for those videos either.

Here is a list of the unreleased videotapes in FBI custody: -
http://www.911myths....Pentagon_videos

You will see that many of the tapes are actually from the WTC, or do not show the Pentagon, or only show the Pentagon after impact.

If there is further footage, which there may or may not be, I would suggest the reason it is withheld is possibly in relation to the specific aircraft identity rather than the actual presence of an aircraft.

There is a mass of eyewitness and physical evidence an aircraft was present but zero evidence of its identity.

The lack of air crash investigation on 9/11 is unprecedented in U.S. aviation history.

That is revealing on its own.


thanks for the link. I still find it highly suspect because we don't know who collected all these videos, we know the agencies, but do we know the individuals? I find it plausible that they could have taken the best footage and destroyed it.
You make a good point about the "identity" of the aircraft.


#41    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 September 2011 - 06:02 AM

View Postpsychoticmike, on 15 September 2011 - 10:50 PM, said:

thanks for the link. I still find it highly suspect because we don't know who collected all these videos, we know the agencies, but do we know the individuals?

I sincerely doubt it. That's the thing with agencies; it's all just one big agency, names of who did what within it is rarely given.

View Postpsychoticmike, on 15 September 2011 - 10:50 PM, said:

I find it plausible that they could have taken the best footage and destroyed it.

Yep, I wouldn't put it past them.

View Postpsychoticmike, on 15 September 2011 - 10:50 PM, said:

You make a good point about the "identity" of the aircraft.

This is one thing that Q24 and I agree on. There is tons of evidence that a 757 didn't hit the pentagon. Put what if it were a small drone that only -looked- like a 757? A small scale version perhaps. What if this piece of debris:
Posted Image

was actually part of the "windows" of the plane? Food for thought anyway.

Here's an article I just found regarding the Pentagon Attack:
Who Is This Man?: What Role Did Lloyd England Play In The 9/11 Attack On The Pentagon?


The author is clearly influenced by CIT's work. From the my skim through it, I thought it was pretty good. For more on the main subject of his article, you may want to see CIT's documentary on Lloyd England here:


Some recommend seeing CIT's National Security Alert first, up to you, but the video of theirs that captivated me the most was Lloyd England's.


#42    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 16 September 2011 - 10:54 AM

View PostScott G, on 16 September 2011 - 06:02 AM, said:

This is one thing that Q24 and I agree on. There is tons of evidence that a 757 didn't hit the pentagon. Put what if it were a small drone that only -looked- like a 757? A small scale version perhaps. What if this piece of debris:
To clarify:  I believe a Boeing 757 impacted the Pentagon.

What I see no evidence of, is that it was the same Flight 77 which departed Dulles airport, tail number N644AA, serial number 24602.

The plane was lost from radar in-flight (ATC did not even see the aircraft turnaround) and it has never been positively identified since.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#43    The Narcisse

The Narcisse

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 78 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010

Posted 16 September 2011 - 11:12 AM

View PostQ24, on 16 September 2011 - 10:54 AM, said:

To clarify:  I believe a Boeing 757 impacted the Pentagon.

What I see no evidence of, is that it was the same Flight 77 which departed Dulles airport, tail number N644AA, serial number 24602.

The plane was lost from radar in-flight (ATC did not even see the aircraft turnaround) and it has never been positively identified since.


That makes no sense. What would be the purpose of using a different plane for this part of the "conspiracy"? And also, if it wasn't flight 77 that hit the Pentagon then what happened to flight 77 and it's passengers? Did they redirect it and shoot all of them? Or did they take it to a nice secluded tropical island and give everyone millions of dollars and a paradise to live in in exchange for their silence?


#44    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,921 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 16 September 2011 - 12:24 PM

View PostThe Narcisse, on 16 September 2011 - 11:12 AM, said:

That makes no sense. What would be the purpose of using a different plane for this part of the "conspiracy"? And also, if it wasn't flight 77 that hit the Pentagon then what happened to flight 77 and it's passengers? Did they redirect it and shoot all of them? Or did they take it to a nice secluded tropical island and give everyone millions of dollars and a paradise to live in in exchange for their silence?
What makes no sense?  These are the facts.  Air traffic control never positively identified Flight 77 after it was lost from radar and there has been no air crash investigation to confirm.  FOIA request responses from the NTSB and FBI indicate they have no record of the plane identity.  The FDR serial number recovered from the Pentagon was not released in the NTSB report either.  This is all unprecedented.

Why use a different plane?
It was a good enough plan for the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Why did they not deem to shoot down the real plane?

From Operation Northwoods: -

8. It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA propriety organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will being transmitting on the international distress frequency a 溺AY DAY message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to 都ell the incident.


What is interesting about Flight 77 is that the passenger list consisted of many government officials or those affiliated with it and a large group of students with the National Geographic Society.  Also, according to Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Flight 77 was not scheduled to fly on 9/11.  The nearly 30 minutes that Flight 77 was missing from radar would be the ideal opportunity to swap the aircraft.  If you have read the above section of Operation Northwoods, you will understand how all of this is highly relevant.

Further, another FOIA request was made as to the process of recovery and identification of forensic evidence at the Pentagon. The request for disclosure of these records was denied.  Without this information, there is no true chain of custody for the forensic evidence or even if it exists.

Yet another point of concern is that the NRO (a Department of Defense intelligence agency) happened to be running a drill that morning whereby a simulated plane would take off from Dulles airport and at 9:32 a.m crash into a building only 30 miles West of the Pentagon.  You will notice the locations and timing are similar to real world events.

So are we looking at some variation of Operation Northwoods in action?  The facts of the event and opportunities that existed certainly indicate this as a possibility.  It does take some thinking about but I hope this suggests answers to your questions.

This is all only one half of why they used a different plane, but I think there痴 enough to digest above for now.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#45    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 September 2011 - 01:32 PM

Q, I'm glad you realize that there's no hard evidence that Flight 77 approached (let alone hit) the pentagon. What I don't understand is why you're so sure that a 757 approached the pentagon at all. The only official video that purports to show Flight 77 hit the pentagon is nothing more then a blur. What's more, some who have analyzed the video have determined that the blob that was seen was too small to be a 757. Do you have any evidence that the object had to be a 757? If, somehow, it -was- a 757, Pilots for 9/11 Truth and CIT have made it abundantly clear that it couldn't have hit the pentagon.

Edited by Scott G, 16 September 2011 - 01:33 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users