Newly released, never-before aired, Pentagon post-impact video shows NO plane

Mamatus
reply to post by gardener

 

At the risk of pissing off the entire club of 911 truthers I have to ask just one question. Have you ever before seen what happens when a plane hits a building at 400+mph?

Planes are remarkably fragile........ Slam one into the ground and all you have left is a black scorched spot and some unidentifiable debris.

I am gonna give you a star though as I have not yet seen that video.

Have you ever seen that a plane of this type cannot go that fast that low? It is physically impossible. Have you ever seen a plane crash before? ALL of the debris is right there, engines, seats, etc. There is no evidence of a plane at all at the pent.
Firepiston

reply to post by FirePiston

Physically impossible? Are you freaking kidding me?

Being a commercial pilot I can safely tell you that a plane can break the sound barrier when flying low. a passenger Jet that can fly at altitude at 400mph+ @ 40,000ft. can easily fly in the thicker air down lower.

Look up density altitude and do the calcs yourself. In all honesty that statement was the least defensible of all the "proof" I have seen re: 911. On that note I am done with you and wont bother to respond again. I have a rule, never argue with the unarmed.

IF...an airplane hit the Pentagon as claimed, then WHY are those light poles directly across from the impact point still standing?

BUT...they are still standing, so it could not have been an airliner as claimed, wide wing span and all...

reply to post by Mamatus


Lol so your "proof" is a picture form another site form the same day that has almost the same questions... Makes sense.


And i know where they hid the holy grail. But I can't tell you how I know.

reply to post by Sremmos80


My proof is a picture of a plane that impacted the ground at high speed. Take a few minutes and find some more..........

As I said, I am done now.

Don't forget the vid that cnn first showed that showed a streak of smoke like a missile coming in and hitting the pentagon.. I saw that on CNN but they never showed it again. Lots of people that I know also saw it. CNN denied ever showing such a thing. This also happened when that plane was shot down near NYC.

reply to post by Mamatus


Well its a debated picture of what happens when a "plane" hits the ground... All I'm asking for is a picture not involved in 9/11 but I guess that makes me "unarmed".

The Pentagon hit is the key to 911, follow the money trail. The other buildings were just the smoke screen and people spin their wheels arguing about the colour of a rainbow when the reality is this was a financial hijack pure and simple controlled by a very small cabal of people who basically pulled down America's pants and fondled ya's.

2.3 Trillion dollars by all accounts went into someones coffers unaccounted for, find that money and you will find out "Who Dunnit"!.

My younger brother and cousin are both on an urban search and rescue team with a major metro fire dept. Both deployed to the Pentagon on 9/11.

Inside one of the inner rings was a big round hole so it wasnt exactly rectangular everywhere.

Also when inside the main structure looking for survivors/bodies he found a womens shoe and an airplane seat belt and buckle. No body was recovered from that find though. There is a gruesome detail as to why but I will spare you.

I love this game! My turn!

Find the planes that allegedly crashed here:










Video of a C-130 into an apartment. Nope, I see no plane there either.

Ok, all kidding aside, do you really believe that a plane would remain intact after impacting a building full speed and burning inside the structure? Here is just a taste of what it looks like when a plane burns:



Thats a big plane. Notice the front where the fire was most severe. Now crash it into a building, let it burn inside for hours, and have the roof collapse on it while it burns. What will remain recognizable then>

Mamatus
reply to post by FirePiston

 

Physically impossible? Are you freaking kidding me?

Being a commercial pilot I can safely tell you that a plane can break the sound barrier when flying low. a passenger Jet that can fly at altitude at 400mph+ @ 40,000ft. can easily fly in the thicker air down lower.

Look up density altitude and do the calcs yourself. In all honesty that statement was the least defensible of all the "proof" I have seen re: 911. On that note I am done with you and wont bother to respond again. I have a rule, never argue with the unarmed.

As a commercial pilot, what effect would flying at 30 to 40 feet AGL as you approached the impact site of the Pentagon have on your plane, and your ability to keep it someone level ?

It seems the lift generated and the Wingtip Vortices effect would make it impossible for a plane to fly at a relatively level attitude to the ground for the distance that plane was said to fly as it approached the Pentagon.

GenRadek
I love this game! My turn!

Find the planes that allegedly crashed here:










Video of a C-130 into an apartment. Nope, I see no plane there either.

edit on 1/14/2014 by GenRadek because: Added video and fixed link

5 pictures.... no context for any of them...
2 are from the same site and in no way correlates to the 77 crash, it was sideways and hit a far different angle.
One is of what looks like a high rise with a chunk of it missing? Is that a plane crash? Seems like it wasn't boeing so not sure why that is relevant
You have the video that doesn't even really show much other then the panic that ensued after the c130 hit. I liked the title of the vid though, had NO COLLAPSE in caps. Thank you for showing me that, shows how a plane FULL of fuel wont bring down a building due to fires. Did that one have any super special fire proofing like towers 1 and 2? Or did it fall off when the plane hit.
And then the photo of a military plane that yes looks like it was on fire but for how long? Was it a training exercise where they just let it burn for as long as it could? Was that fire fought from the first available moment like 77 would have been as soon as fire fighters arrived?



I see the title to the last image is bombs and explosives/ emires state crash 2.
So was it about bombs and explosives or about plane crashes, do you have picture one?
Do you have a picture of the inside of the building to show if maybe the debris is in there?
Cant ask us to look at just 1 picture of each event and use that to debunk an entire separate event.
Most will say that no previous airline crash can compare to any of the ones of 911 cause they were all so unprecedented.

dp

I've made this comment in several other threads on this topic. I'll say it again.

I owned a house right off of Route 1 just north of Old Town Alexandria but south of Crystal City....maybe three miles tops from the Pentagon when 9/11 happened.

I saw the smoke.

On either the second or third day after the "attack", I drove by the side of the Pentagon that got hit. I drove up route 1, got off onto 395, and then got onto 27...right along side the impact site. As a rational and logical man, I cannot in all faith say that I believe what I saw was the result of a 757 slamming into a building. The damage was entirely too square. I saw ZERO debris. The lawn was PRISTINE right up to the building. I saw vehicles parked right next to the damaged section of building (like, within five or so feet) that were covered in dust, yet otherwise apparently undisturbed.

Remember Lockerbie? Remember how they laid out little yellow flags to mark all of the debris where it hand originally landed? Nope. None of that. Lightposts directly across the street, yepp, still there.

And, as some might say "somewhat conveniently", the hole in the building was covered by a blue tarp.


I, personally, do not believe for one hot second that a 757 hit that building.

Ill-trained pilots, who had troubles flying and landing single engine cesnas, came south along the potomac river...could have struck the whitehouse...but no. Could have struck the Congressional building. No. They went for the Pentagon. And, they came down roughly south by southeast, made a right hand turn in a J formation, around the Pentagon, and JUST SO HAPPENED to hit a section of the Pentagon that was under renovations with a skeleton crew inside.

Now, mind you, had they made a direct alteration by a few degrees off course of following the Potomac, and flown directly into the Pentagon....they would have taken out Generals and Colonels.

Nope.

Do a hard flying maneuver that by all accounts their instructors said they had difficulties performing less demanding maneuvers.

Oh, yeah. And all but ONE blurry assed video confiscated. No other photos or video.

I know people who worked in the wing that got hit. People who weren't there because it was under renovation.

I also know people who are so absent mindedly believers in the official story, that they will swear to you they saw the plane fly over their car.

I also know people who will firmly question the deciding factors involved in a stand down order. Andrews AFB, Bolling AFB....we could have taken that sucker out in a heartbeat. But, no. We let it do precisely what it "intended" to do.

Not to mention the fact that it is a widely understood "secret" that there are SAM installations throughout and around the DC area for just such a thing.

Yet, Cheney "allowed" it to happen.

Suuuuuure.


Sorry, to me, none of this adds up. Not one single bit.

tinner07
My younger brother and cousin are both on an urban search and rescue team with a major metro fire dept. Both deployed to the Pentagon on 9/11.

Inside one of the inner rings was a big round hole so it wasnt exactly rectangular everywhere.

Also when inside the main structure looking for survivors/bodies he found a womens shoe and an airplane seat belt and buckle. No body was recovered from that find though. There is a gruesome detail as to why but I will spare you.

I showed the photo of the inner wall that was breached by the "airplane" to a friend of mine, showing him how it was almost a perfectly circular cut into a brick wall.

He is an experienced Civil Engineer. Experienced, and runs an Engineering firm in Europe.

He said "Sorry, brick wouldn't break like that, you'd have something that looked "pixelated" in the way the bricks were punched out, that's just how it works.".

I, for one, absolutely agree with him.

Okay, I'm no pilot nor physicist but I mostly believe my lying eyes. If TBTB want to really clear up this question of whether or not a plane hit the pentagon, why oh, why, don't they just release one of the videos they have that shows the actual incident? A relative of mine used to work in the Pentagon and says that as early as the mid-90s the place was ringed with security cameras, not High-Def surely but good enough to see something as big as a plane hitting the building. I've yet to see any video but perhaps I've missed it and someone who is on the "official story" side can present one here just to stop this endless argument?
It has been 12 years and we apparently still don't have the complete story---and while I don't count myself as a "truther" I do have lots of questions about the "official" version of what happened that day.
As one of my favorite late night talk show hosts (Art Bell) said several years ago (and I'm paraphrasing here), I don't wamt to believe that members of our government would do such a horrible thing but big chunks of the official version of the events don't make sense to the logical mind. I believe the examples he used at the time were the absolutely astronomical chances of finding the ID of the hijackers, and reporting of the building collapse before it happened.

diggindirt
Okay, I'm no pilot nor physicist but I mostly believe my lying eyes. If TBTB want to really clear up this question of whether or not a plane hit the pentagon, why oh, why, don't they just release one of the videos they have that shows the actual incident? A relative of mine used to work in the Pentagon and says that as early as the mid-90s the place was ringed with security cameras, not High-Def surely but good enough to see something as big as a plane hitting the building. I've yet to see any video but perhaps I've missed it and someone who is on the "official story" side can present one here just to stop this endless argument?
It has been 12 years and we apparently still don't have the complete story---and while I don't count myself as a "truther" I do have lots of questions about the "official" version of what happened that day.
As one of my favorite late night talk show hosts (Art Bell) said several years ago (and I'm paraphrasing here), I don't wamt to believe that members of our government would do such a horrible thing but big chunks of the official version of the events don't make sense to the logical mind. I believe the examples he used at the time were the absolutely astronomical chances of finding the ID of the hijackers, and reporting of the building collapse before it happened.

They have the video, they just wont release it. The FBI then went around to any biz around the pentagon and took all tapes they had as well.
But we get stuck with the guard gate video that looks like dang near anything could have hit the pentagon.. Unfortunately doesn't seem like a 757 is one of those things..

a reply to: gardener
www.youtube.com...

My favorite ,,,

Donald Rumsfeld