The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: auroraaus

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

You too need to start what hit the pentagon, if anything did. Because of obfuscation by the pentagon, and withholding of video/photographic record, it cannot be proved what hit the building. Judging from crash debris, it appears it was something single engine, NOT a 757.

Can a single engine plane really cause so much debris and destruction? Did you not see how far the plane/craft/thing went through the building? I highly doubt a single engine plane could have enough power to plow that hard and fast through the Pentagon (of all places! You would think it had extra reinforced bits too!) and cause the resulting massive fire/s.

Thank you, you raise a very good point. Whatever penetrated through those several rings of the pentagon, assuming some flying object actually did that, it was not an airliner. No ordinary civilian airplane, single or multiengine, could have done that. A highly modified and strengthened craft might have, or perhaps some sort of missile might have.

The only reason I say single engine is because the pictures showed the debris from only 1 engine, not two. Same with landing gear debris.

Most all of the casualties were those congressional auditors in the building conducting an audit of missing pentagon funds. Mission Accomplished in that regard. The building was rigged with explosives, whether an aircraft hit it or not.

So you think that a guv involved in an inside job is gonna supply ambiguous evidence and not a slam dunk, even though they control everything?

Explain

a reply to: MrBig2430


Poster somehow made the conclusion that victims at the pentagon wearing jumpsuits must be wearing jail overalls.

a reply to: Salander

according to analysis by Dennis Cimino, an expert in such matters.

He's an expert in many things.
Moon landing never happened, Sandy Hook didn't happen, Aurora theatre didn't happen, mini nukes at the WTC.
Hangs out with his fellow as so accredited truther friends like Mr. no plane hit the WTC's Jim Fetzer, and the guy we were discussing, the chemist playing metallurgical engineer, Waterboy himself, Kevin Ryan. I'm glad Ryan got fired, I wouldn't want that guy testing my water.

a reply to: MrBig2430

Today we have the luxury of hindsight. 15 years later many people like yourself believe the official story, so empirically, their plan worked. Whether you consider their tactics good or bad, they worked. The entire news media believes the official story, repeats the official story, and some part of the population still believes the official story.

The seizure of video record from nearby civilian facilities worked, and the refusal to not release government video record from the front lawn worked too.

Imperfect if you wish, but eminently successful.

a reply to: Salander

The seizure of video record from nearby civilian facilities worked, and the refusal to not release government video record from the front lawn worked too.

Always back to the same old tired claims about the videos.

Put up or shut up, seizures from what nearby civilian facilities?

a reply to: Salander

If their is still video to be released, what legal action is pilots for 9/11 truth taken for their release?

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Salander

The seizure of video record from nearby civilian facilities worked, and the refusal to not release government video record from the front lawn worked too.

Always back to the same old tired claims about the videos.

Put up or shut up, seizures from what nearby civilian facilities?

I think he's talking about the service station CCTV but in it's unadulterated form. I think there could have been CCTV from nearby roads, but not sure.

I am starting to think though that the reason for non-release is due to the fact that the contents could possibly give others a clue on how to successfully destroy the Pentagon in future. Maybe. I don't know.

I need coffee.

a reply to: auroraaus

I think he's talking about the service station CCTV but in it's unadulterated form. I think there could have been CCTV from nearby roads, but not sure.

Not sure what you mean by unadulterated form, can you expound?

Have you looked at the Maguire Declaration?
Maguire Declaration

a reply to: D8Tee

Ah thank you for that!

I had seen in articles that the FBI didn't confirm or deny withholding videos.

I do note though that Maguire had investigated the evidence storage, for example, what was going to be submitted to trial for evidence.

Actual Pentagon videos from inside and just out - would be withheld right?

a reply to: auroraaus

All of the video has been released afaik.

There is the Pennington and Austin oral history as well.

oral history

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Salander

The seizure of video record from nearby civilian facilities worked, and the refusal to not release government video record from the front lawn worked too.

Always back to the same old tired claims about the videos.

Put up or shut up, seizures from what nearby civilian facilities?

If you are unaware of the video records seized by the FBI from numerous civilian businesses nearby, including at least one hotel, you are pitifully ignorant of details, and not worthy of efforts at informed public discussion.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Salander

The seizure of video record from nearby civilian facilities worked, and the refusal to not release government video record from the front lawn worked too.

Always back to the same old tired claims about the videos.

Put up or shut up, seizures from what nearby civilian facilities?

If you are unaware of the video records seized by the FBI from numerous civilian businesses nearby, including at least one hotel, you are pitifully ignorant of details, and not worthy of efforts at informed public discussion.

Where's your proof big talker?

Why is it that only one side of this debate ever links any evidence?

You were asked to put up or shut up, but of course you won't do either, pathetic.

I assume there were news articles at the time detailing that.

originally posted by: Xenogears
I assume there were news articles at the time detailing that.

News articles about the confiscated videos?

One of the guys that keeps ignoring the evidence and claiming there are confiscated videos that show the impact should dig them up, shouldn't be hard to find. Unless they don't exist....

a reply to: D8Tee

News articles about the confiscated videos?

One of the guys that keeps ignoring the evidence and claiming there are confiscated videos that show the impact should dig them up, shouldn't be hard to find. Unless they don't exist....

The video requested by Judicial Watch was taken from security cameras at the Pentagon, the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, and Virginia Department of Transportation traffic cameras.

www.cnn.com...

I don't know what's was on all the other videos that were confiscated from the surrounding business. No one publicly has ever viewed them.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: D8Tee

News articles about the confiscated videos?

One of the guys that keeps ignoring the evidence and claiming there are confiscated videos that show the impact should dig them up, shouldn't be hard to find. Unless they don't exist....

The video requested by Judicial Watch was taken from security cameras at the Pentagon, the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, and Virginia Department of Transportation traffic cameras.

www.cnn.com...

I don't know what's was on all the other videos that were confiscated from the surrounding business. No one publicly has ever viewed them.

A 2005 Freedom of Information Act was filed.

n Summary:
She determined that the FBI had 85 videotaptes that might be relevant. Of those, 56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."
Of the 29 remaining videotapes, 16 "did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."
Of the 13 remaining tapes which showed the Pentagon crash site, 12 "only showed after the impact of Flight 77."
The videotape taken from the Citgo gas station did not show the impact.
No videotapes were located from the Sheraton Hotel, though she located a videotape from the Doubletree Hotel.

If you wish to read the whole thing, just input 'maguire declaration' into google, it should turn up.

911 Forum Guidelines

in part...

Personal Attacks: Taking focus off the subject matter and toward each other will not be tolerated in any form. You will experience an immediate account termination with no warning.

Let's dispense with the sniping and member directed comments

All the videos were released long ago.
You don't hear much about them because they didn't show the plane.
But that shouldn't be a surprise as the cameras were aimed at the interests of the private business.

But if you think about it in the grander scheme what difference would multiple angles of video make?
You have many angles of the WTC impacts and the truther community still says it wasn't planes.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

If their is still video to be released, what legal action is pilots for 9/11 truth taken for their release?

If you're so bloody curious about that, ask them not me.

a reply to: D8Tee

Through a certain lens, you are right.

Perhaps wrongly, I operate under the assumption that 15 years after it happened, most posters are informed about what happened.

The FBI seized the videos from several nearby civilian facilities including at least one hotel.

If you are not aware of that I'm sorry, and apologize for thinking you were informed. Apologies.