Flight77.info - Pentagon video release imminent?

Whats this on the new video?

On the new video here on CNN, could someone explain to me what this object is when the clip gets to 1min 9secs? As you look at the video, theres a traffic cone on the left with a box slightly to its right in the foreground. Look just between these two nearer the Pentagon and theres what looks like a white/silver post of some kind. At 1min 9secs on the clip, this post suddenly shoots up in the air, or should i say extends. The only way i can desribe it is as if there was a chopped off lamp post, then it suddenly shoots up or extends to it's original height again. Either that or it looks like a fire water hydrant going off as if a car has crashed into it, only nothing has touched it. Probably nothing, i just could'nt make out what it was.

By the way, am i the only one to think that the plane on that footage looks very small indeed?

Anyway, click the link below then click the Pentagon footage link onb the news site.

www.cnn.com...

CX.

Originally posted by Jack Tripper
So here is the extent of the "NEW" footage that shows a "plane".

to compare with this one:
www.sky.com...

must be the same camera. I dont see anything like that in that pic that matches....

I think the defense department are all around a computer right now reading this thread and laughing their a$$es off!

Originally posted by Jack Tripper
Or else he mistook the drone painted as a commercial airliner flying at 400 mph to be a commercial airliner.

There is no mistaking a drone from a commercial airliner moving at 400 mph, none.

Perhaps you need to hit the above link I provided to a 800km/h F-4 Phantom hitting a concrete wall and see if you might mistake that for a drone?

Link, again: Video

What is also undeniable is that SO's friend witnessed such an occurance while you did not but yet, ironically, you say that SO's friend "mistook"?





seekerof

[edit on 16-5-2006 by Seekerof]

Definitive proof, where is the conspiracy now? It shows how fast that thing was moving to go from part frame to explosion.
For all of you missle theorists, where did the missle come from? THe same secret CIA armory as the demo charges for WTC 1,2 and 7?

Pure junk

I just watched a CNN report on the Wold Blitzer show and they show a still from the 'NEW' footage and say you can see the 'nose cone' ... sorry, I see nothing but some 'shape' that could even be a bird close up flying by.All we see is a small blur.
They then show an old footage still of that 'wavy' smoke trail and have the nerve to say it is the fuselage of the plane X 1000

They could have released video from 3 other cameras that actually take VIDEO and not intermittent captures, but instead we get the SAME FOOTAGE from the SAME CAMERA and angle.

I knew this was going to happen.Either faked footage or just more junk.Them telling the public 'SEE!' here it is, brainwashing them into thinking there is something there that is not.Im willing to bet many actually believe they see something.Well not just something, but honestly believe they see a 757 flight 77 in those videos and stills.

Good feeling to see that our Government thinks it's people are idiots

Ive travelled in 757s many times and if that is a 757 they must have cut my legs and arms off to fit me in!! In this case SIZE MATTERS!

Originally posted by SMR
Good feeling to see that our Government thinks it's people are idiots

Something tells me they wouldn't get away with it if there wasn't a percentage of people who actually are. Reading some of the latter posts in this thread (not yours, SMR), convinces me of this even more.

Originally posted by SMR
I knew this was going to happen.Either faked footage or just more junk.Them telling the public 'SEE!' here it is, brainwashing them into thinking there is something there that is not.Im willing to bet many actually believe they see something.Well not just something, but honestly believe they see a 757 flight 77 in those videos and stills.

Whats even more ironic is that you, as with some others, go to other 9/11 conspiracy sites and believe their versions of "SEE, here it is, proof that the US government did it!"

Accordingly, the difference in what your saying above and what you and others have and are doing is what, exactly: none--nothing?

Good feeling to see that our Government thinks it's people are idiots

Just like that "good feeling" you get when you go to those other 9/11 sites and swallow their load of make-believe facts surrounding the Pentagon and WTC, huh? Ever wondered if those who authored or owned those such sites thought all those that came and come there to believe such garbage may be "idiots," like you assert the US government thinks of most US people?





seekerof

[edit on 16-5-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by mecheng
I think the defense department are all around a computer right now reading this thread and laughing their a$$es off!

probabily ..

But it was all to expect. They have nothing they can show and so they show nothing. That's at least helpful to convince the die hard official story believer that something simple isnt correct with their storry. If they had nothing to hide...

could have been worse.. with enough money they could have faked a perfekt video very hard or close to impossible to debunk...
But I think they had problem to match the 757 into the pictures the way that it didnt scartiching the ground off all the way in and still was low enough to create the hole at the bottom of the building. ..

Some Jackass on Fox News was saying that this video will silence all the nutcases once and for all. That idiot was dead wrong, this thread is already 8 pages in just 3 or so hours.

That can't be a plane, i'm still looking for good pics of the wing debris (not tinfoil).

Actually, Seekerof's video of the Phantom colliding with the concrete wall has made me reconsider the idea that a plane should leave some wreckage. However, I still can't quite reconcile the size of a Boeing with the 16' wide hole seen in the earliest photos of the Pentagon.

And as for the new videos...

The reporter in the Sky News clip DEFINITELY stated that the USG has now released every video in its possession: that is, as we know, at the very least sloppy reporting.

As for the videos themselves, I'm just not seeing a plane. I like the fake, though - rather better than the real thing. In one frame I can see a long nosecone/fuselage and it doesn't look like a Boeing to me. I can't say what it is but I'm just not seeing something that looks remotely like an airliner. Possibly some sort of cruise missile.

As Sherlock Holmes said, eliminate the impossible and what remains, however improbable, will be correct. It looks impossible for it to have been a Boeing based on that evidence and from the non-airliner-shaped hole in the Pentagon: you can't have it both ways. Either the plane vapourised on impact or there would have been holes where the engines were at least - much the densest part of the plane: let's not forget that most of the cross-section of the fuselage is empty space.

It's still looking like it was a cruise missile to me. That hypothesis takes care of the shape of the original hole, the deep penetration from that hole, the video evidence, and the otherwise bizarre and ironic coincidence that the pilot of that plane left a high-level job in the Pentagon NOT for a lucrative post somewhere in the military-industrial complex but to return to the simple, ill-paid life of an airline pilot, whereupon, almost immediately he is hijacked and his plane flown into the very building where, but a few short months earlier, he was running drills based on exactly that scenario.

And I've just watched the BBC coverage of the release of this footage, and I have to say: end to end propaganda. I was told what I was looking at - flight 77 hitting the Pentagon - despite the evidence of my own senses. Then at the very end of the report a nice, floppy-haired young man told us how timely the release of this footage was, given that, according to a recent poll, only 3% of Americans think that their most pressing problem is terrorism.

Oh dear. Have to frighten them a lot more then. Wonder how that's going to happen?

And - nearly forgot - there was mention of how the footage might not appease "those few conspiracy theorists"... well, I suppose it was at least an acknowledgement of the fact that it's all a bit debatable, but a slighting, tinfoil-hat aside nonetheless.

[edit on 16-5-2006 by rich23]

Originally posted by rich23
I still can't quite reconcile the size of a Boeing with the 16' wide hole seen in the earliest photos of the Pentagon.

The body of a 757 is only 12 ft 4 in (3.7 m) wide though:

www.boeing.com...

The wings had nothing behind them, it's the main body that had the punching power, 155 ft 3 in (47.32 m) of 12 ft 4 in (3.7 m) tube punching in at over 400mph.

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by Jack Tripper
Or else he mistook the drone painted as a commercial airliner flying at 400 mph to be a commercial airliner.

There is no mistaking a drone from a commercial airliner moving at 400 mph, none.

Perhaps you need to hit the above link I provided to a 800km/h F-4 Phantom hitting a concrete wall and see if you might mistake that for a drone?

Link, again: Video

What is also undeniable is that SO's friend witnessed such an occurance while you did not but yet, ironically, you say that SO's friend "mistook"?

As this video "release" reinforces.....there simply is no evidence that there is any legitimacy to his claim.

Why would you trust him over the witnesses that reported a small craft?

I would think the "friend" of a conspiracy forum admin wouldn't be the most reliable of witnesses.

And again.....besides mistaking it for a drone; he might have seen the decoy plane that was a commercial airliner that landed at reagan airport within the same minute anyway.

I watched the video on CNN's website...I didnt see any plane, just something blowing up on the side of the building. If you showed this video to someone without telling them what it was, they would probably think it was a bomb blowing up outside a building. To me it looked more like a bomb or missile hitting the pentagon. I was expecting more given that they have had almost 5 years to edit this video into whatever they wanted

Compare the new footage:

www.sky.com...

With the original five frames:

news.bbc.co.uk...


Are two cameras used?

Sky News say the new images are from the same camera as the original five frames.

Why is there more glare (green reflection) on the picture at the point of the explosion, when there's an orange fireball, compared to the original frames ?

Also note the curved sidewalk in the new footage. Where is that in the original five frames?

Seekerof... What the hell are you rambling about?
You are saying I goto other sites and see what they say, then come here and type it up? You know this how? or just making an assumption? Im guessing the latter

All I can say to your idiotic post is

WOW!

Now maybe we can get back to topic huh?

BTW....... calling me an idiot in your post, is that not a personal insult NOT allowed here? Is someone going to warn for that or is Seekerof in the 'cool' club?

Originally posted by Seekerof
Ever wondered if those who authored or owned those such sites thought all those that came and come there to believe such garbage may be "idiots," like you assert the US government thinks of most US people?

seekerof

[edit on 16-5-2006 by SMR]

There are two 'new' videos, one from the original camera as the already released footage and the other from a camera which is probably mounted closer. You cna see the patrol car drive by in both so not much closer.

Is it me, or in the second, and new view of the explosion does it look like the ejected debris doesn’t follow its initial path. It seems as if the second piece, on the left side, seems to come to a stop at a strange angle. It’s almost as if it was moved, or placed in that final position. This video is captured in “choppy” frames though, and not great quality so it probably isn’t really anything but it did catch my eye.

Originally posted by CX
Whats this on the new video?

On the new video here on CNN, could someone explain to me what this object is when the clip gets to 1min 9secs? As you look at the video, theres a traffic cone on the left with a box slightly to its right in the foreground. Look just between these two nearer the Pentagon and theres what looks like a white/silver post of some kind. At 1min 9secs on the clip, this post suddenly shoots up in the air, or should i say extends. The only way i can desribe it is as if there was a chopped off lamp post, then it suddenly shoots up or extends to it's original height again. Either that or it looks like a fire water hydrant going off as if a car has crashed into it, only nothing has touched it. Probably nothing, i just could'nt make out what it was.

By the way, am i the only one to think that the plane on that footage looks very small indeed?

Anyway, click the link below then click the Pentagon footage link onb the news site.

www.cnn.com...

CX.

could be a gate opening as the car goes past does look strange though