The PentaCon

Amazing video.
No for the real question.
How do you get this information publicly displayed and confirmed on mass media with out getting the old standard nut case interview representaion?

There needs to be someone who has contacts in the mass media like CNN or Fox who can get this information to the proper authorities with out it being looked at as just another theory.

Flagging Works

You guys flagged this thread right to the top of the site home page...

I can't get the video to work at all, and I just downloaded the newest version of DIVX Windows.

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Why divert to the north of CITGO?

Second, Are there any pilots out there with 757 time who can tell us whether the turn radii required to follow the blue flight path would be theoretically possible in a 757 @ 350 kts?

Good questions.

1. Our belief is that the plane was slightly off course and had to correct itself at the last moment in order to fly through the fireball. This was one of many mistakes that were made in this complex black operation. We simply happened to discover it.

2. Yes we have consulted with Pilot's in this regard. It is impossible. Especially when you consider the details of the damage to the building and the placement of pole number one.

Feel free to ask your question direct to actual Pilots at www.pilotsfor911truth.org

Originally posted by MrAndy
I can't get the video to work at all, and I just downloaded the newest version of DIVX Windows.

Try going direct to the divx site:

stage6.divx.com...

Google video will be up soon!

Excuse me, what is this video about? i don't have high speed and it would take a long time to stream.


Edit: I see now that it's about the attack on the pentagon.

Does it say that no plane hit the pentagon or does it say that a plane did hit it?

[edit on 22-2-2007 by selfless]

Originally posted by selfless
Excuse me, what is this video about? i don't have high speed and it would take a long time to stream.


Edit: I see now that it's about the attack on the pentagon.

Does it say that no plane hit the pentagon or does it say that a plane did hit it?

[edit on 22-2-2007 by selfless]

The plane flew over the pentagon.

If your connection is too slow maybe you can at least watch the trailer.

Read our front page for a description of the movie and click on the "trailer" tab to watch the trailer.

"You have voted Jack Tripper for the Way Above Top Secret award."

excellent piece! Guy Smith could learn a thing or two from you guys..
cant wait for the researchers editions, keep it up & spread the word

mr.J

I think you should leave your conclusions out of the film, and also remove the drama music. Just show the evidence.

How long till full version ..Good work Jack.

Good work guys, keep up the good work.

When is there gonna be a download able version of the video?

Thank you very much guys for all your hard work, this is undesputable proof that there is major flaws within the 911-report. Hopefully if people wake up to the idea that this has been purposely hidden from them, they will open thier eyes to other false-truth blankets spread accross our eyes through the media and government alike. Again, great work guys, i will now help spread this to the masses, starting with college tomorow!!

i hope that u will continue ur prescence within the forum comuity and keep us regularly updated with the progress of distrubution and overall acceptance of this documentry from any reputable media sources that may try to contact u.

peace out, spread the truth

Google video version

Google Video Link

(edit to embed video)

[edit on 22-2-2007 by SkepticOverlord]

How about making this into a torrent file.

OMG.... can someone PLEASE give me back that hour of my life that I lost???

First off, some non important things...

1- why the Michael Moore start to the video?
2- why did you play the 70's style disco music when the black police officer was drawing on the photograph?

Some things I saw:

1- The first witness that had limited ability to speak English was definatley lead.
Lets look at the way he was questioned..
-HE was asked 3-4 times if he only saw one plane. EVERY time he said YES.
-He was shown pictures of the airplane by the side views when CLEARLY he saw the plane from underneath.
-He stated that he could not see the windows or marking from his vantage point. The response from Jack was ... "So you didn't see any windows?"
- This witness tried showing with his hands where the plane was...and he said the center of the plane was in the street....and that the height was just over the height of the roof. If thats the truth, then why wasnt the radio antenna disturbed on the other side of the street?

Anyway... Id like to jump ahead to the witness that forgot where he parked his car......

This guy remembered exactly how the plane entered the pentagon. He is one of the three witnesses that SAW THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON....Not one of them saw the c-130 that they claim was there. If anyone would have saw it, it would have been the garage worker.

ALL 4 stated they saw only ONE plane. The three that were in view of the Pentagon all saw the same thing: THE PLANE THAT FLEW OVER THEIR HEADS HIT THE PENTAGON.

Sorry guys, this is the first 911 CT Movie that Debunks itself.

I told you, you should have only presented the evidence.

But in fairness, leading or not, all three witnesses saw the plane on the opposite side of the citgo.

The video, should be reduced to 5 minutes, accompanied with the literature of your research.

I applaud your effort and energy, so I'll WATS ya.

still loading on google could not watch it streaming and wayyy to long downloading it.
It seems to me that the end is at the beginning
I wont judge the content yet but you made (please take it as constructive) a few major mistakes.
I would totally rethink the concept of the movie at the beginning.
Its simply boring imagine someone defending your position and after 7 minutes inside the movie nothing has been said or done basically.
They know nothing on what you are talking about and they see weird flight plans that they never heard of.
You are assuming to talk to ppl that know about things but they actually do not.
You will get a lots of praise for the movie (probably) from ppl that know stuff.
You dont need to convince them you need to convince the others.
You can make your longer case on the documentary.
You basically will get them bored within minutes.
Take it as a constructive opinion.
Still need to watch it to judge the elements of the film.

Jack,

Just watched the film.

Firstly, like one of the guys above said, the audio on the interviews
is quite poor at times, I had my laptop speakers at the max and the traffic noise for example often interfered with hearing the interviewees talk.
(that was constructive criticism )

Overall I thought it was extremely well produced and I had never heard
of any of the people featured until I watched.

The police officers are clearly the most important imo, they were on duty, in exactly the right place to see the flight path and their position is corroborated
by the Citgo video.
However they do both state that they actually saw the plane strike the Pentagon which is what I feel many will pick up on in the next few days.
It is astonishing to see the deviation in the flight path from the official report.

JackTripper I commend you and your colleagues on this presentation.
Gets my WATS vote.

I sincerely hope your work does not go unnoticed and the mainstream media
finally picks up on this major flaw in the 9/11 Commission report HOWEVER
as was mentioned above, the CT surrounding the Pentagon concentrates on the idea that a plane could not have struck the building which your film in effect contradicts, I would imagine that most neutrals will be of the opinion as the film ends that a) yes there is a discrepancy in what the official report has put forward as the official flight path of AA 77 but b) that the plane did strike the Pentagon only that it came from a different angle.

[edit on 22-2-2007 by pmexplorer]

Cameron, I also mentioned that I thought the interviewer was leading the witnesses. However, I also pointed out that none of the witnesses took the bait. As for the movie debunking itself... why? Because the officers believed they saw the plane hit the Pentagon? That's a bit iffy if you consider the film makers' premise. IF the movie truly debunks itself then the plane somehow took down the light poles as reported. How did that happen? And the officer that 'saw' the plane hit the Pentagon emphatically said that the taxi and downed poles were on the other end of the Pentagon from where they actually were found. Huh? So we either throw out all four people's conviction that they saw the plane in the sky where they said they saw it or the film is in no way debunked. That's my take on it.

How is it that interviews of people years after the fact outweigh the physical evidence of the downed poles?

Which is more plausible, that the witnesses were led into remembering the wrong direction?

Or that a secret light pole breaking squad was dispatched to drop poles onto the freeway?

What purpose would such a plot serve?

And more importantly why do you ignore the eyewitnesses who saw the poles get knocked over, and yet didn't see a secret government light pole hit squad?