The Pentagon spin doctors EXPOSED !!

On other boards, on the internet and even on some threads here, a few people have tried to explain how a Boeing 757-200 was made to fit in the infamous first frame of the pentagon CCTV footage. In order to prove their point, these people have zommed in on the area in question, they have obliterated the context that the rest of the details in the picture provide.
Here are the two animations in question:





Notice how they have both zoomed in and how they have both ommitted any context and contrast by showing the size of elements such as the building to the left.
This is indeed a masterful deception, so to demonstrate this, I simply rebuilt the two animations within the full frame and here's what results from it:

external image

The two flashing objects over the box is how the deception masters and the spin doctors depict the projectile aircraft.
Now here's a 3D artist's rendition of a Boeing 757-200 TO PERFECT SCALE parked in front of the crash zone:

external image

Go ahead, visuallize the two pictures above back and forth and see if you can detect the deception.
The Boeing depicted by the spin doctors isn't even the third of the size of the actual Boeing.
Indeed, when zooming in close enought, they could hide a 100 ton Boeing behind a toothpick but are you going to buy this poop?
When you need to resort to lies and deceptions to make your case, that might indicate you were willingly attempting to deceive the public.
Isn't there a rule on this forum about willingly posting wrongful information?

The "official story" of the Boeing-pentagon crash is full of deceptions such as this one, not all of them this flagrant and some far worst than these ones exposed here.
I will attempt in this thread to expose them one by one.
If you want the truth to be exposed, stay tuned!

Cheers,
Guy Cotnoir (aka PepeLapiu1)

[edit on 093131p://u12. by PepeLapiu1]

Nice presentation Pepe. I have always believed that they were planes that were flown into the pentagon and WTC, but I have to admit, your analysis does show something that is very out of place. You have a good eye to have caught that.


If it wasnt a 747, what do you propose it was? It does still look like an airliner, only a very small one. Maybe a DC 10?

I can't see any contradictions concerning the scales of the supposed or real aircraft.

The "small" plane is close to the impact zone, which is far away from the camera, while the faithful scale rendering is closer to the impact zone. It is normal that an object appears under a bigger solid angle when it is closer.

Or do you argue the rendering is not only scale-faithful, but is also taken from the same viewpoint ? are there unique landmarks that we can compare in order to reconstruct the rendering's viewpoint ?






[edit on 28-5-2005 by Moretti]

Originally posted by Kidfinger
If it wasnt a 747, what do you propose it was? It does still look like an airliner, only a very small one. Maybe a DC 10?

In order to answer your question with accuracy, I would need to obtain the evidences that have been confiscated from the public.
Such as analysis of the debris, other frames from the CCTV camera that have been removed, the footages from the hotel near by, the footages from the pentagon roof top CCTV that were never released and the footage from the CITCO gas station that was confiscated mere minutes after the attack amongst countless other evidences that were never released.

At best, for now I can only make an educated guess and say it is probably a F-16 with a missile combination or a Global Hawk with a missile combination.

One thing for sure is it just was NOT a 100 ton Boeing 757-200 that folded it's wings upon impact (however ridiculous that may sound).
I don't care how many parts they show me and claim it is from the alleged Boeing, this CCTV footage prooes those parts would have to be either planted there or extrapolated to be originated from the said Boeing.

I have always wondered about the missing footage. It should be relased to the public. It would put all this to rest one way or the other. The thing that always pulls me away from the fighter jet theory is all the eyewitnesses. They all (there are quite a few of them) who claim to have seen the boing with there own eyes. Im not sure about the fighter jet, but your presentation above definately shows something out of place with what we have been spoon fed.

Agian, good eyes Pepe

Originally posted by Moretti
I can't see any contradictions concerning the scales of the supposed or real aircraft (?)

Really? You don't see it?
Very well, I'll get to the drawing board and show you that the plane seen in this animation below is less than 60 ft long while the actual Boeing would be 178 ft 7 inches long.
I'll get back to you on that!
Stay tuned.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here I thought you were going to list the names of all of the people at the Pentagon in charge of "spinning" the news.

Perhaps what people worked on what media projects. Maybe some examples of how they spinned things.

Instead, I get rehash of the same old conspiracy about something other than a plane hitting the Pentagon.

Bummer.

-O

Originally posted by The Big O


Instead, I get rehash of the same old conspiracy about something other than a plane hitting the Pentagon.

Bummer.

-O

Then why did you reply if this was not what you expected?

Originally posted by Moretti
Or do you argue the rendering is not only scale-faithful, but is also taken from the same viewpoint ? are there unique landmarks that we can compare in order to reconstruct the rendering's viewpoint ?
[edit on 28-5-2005 by Moretti]

While the rendition is taken at a different angle, it is basically at the same distance from the Boeing as the CCTV camera. (I know it doesn't look that way but it is .. more or less)
Also, the rendition was created by the Purdue Institute which was attempting to prove that it was indeed a Boeing.
I verified it's scale many times with many different techniques and the scale is accurate.

However, the Purdue Institute did not provide an exact CCTV's viewpoint of it's model ... ask yourself why?

Any way, I will now get back to making this drawing of mine which will prouve to you that you are being lied to by the spin doctors who made these two lame, out of perspective animations.

I am also working on a fully interactive 3D reconstitution which will allow the user to place the viewpoint wherever he may see fit, even the CCTV's viewpoint will be available.
However, this kind of 3D rendition is rather complicated and tidious for a layman such as myself so that should take some time before I finish that project

"The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself... Almost inevitably, he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable."
~ H.L. Mencken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by The Big O
I get rehash of the same old conspiracy about something other than a plane hitting the Pentagon.

Yeah! Don't you just wish those crazy conspiracy theorists would shut the hell up already!

Besides, my thread was not intended to prouve it was a Boeing or that it wasn't a Boeing.
My sole point is that those who created these two animations (out of context and out of scale) are lying to us.
Their lies have been exposed (peroid)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, don't invest too much effort, i already know perfectly well that the US and Israeli governements are the worst liars that ever walked the face of earth. One lie more or less wouldnt change that picture in any kind of way.



[edit on 28-5-2005 by Moretti]

this is ridiculous, nothing new here and there are already millions of posts on the subject.

what about all the eyewitnesses who saw an american airline plane hit the pentagon ??

why is there not a single eyewitness who saw a missle or anything other than a AA Jet?

why are you all so convinced that there has to be a conspiracy involved?

If this was all a government conspiracy, why bother using a missile or fighter to hit the Pentagon when a 757 would do the job and there would be no need for a cover-up?

Do you really think bush has the intelligence to be able to pull off a cover up of this size? He can barely write his own name without help, it's totally beyond belief.

instead of wasting all your time and energy on this why dont you spend the time finding out why Bush let it happen and campaining to get him out of office and all his buddies in prison where they belong!

This has been heavily discussed in This 54 Page Thread

It is Massively full of information, took me 3 days to read the entire thread. But all this info you have posted has been provided in many different ways in many different posts. By the header, i was thinking you had facts and names about the people that did it.