OMG! HUGE Cache of New 911 footage released !!!

Where are the Pentagon Videos!!? That place was crawling with cameras as well as the surrounding cameras from gas stations, etc. that they confiscated. Why protect those Pentagon Videos? What is on them. What is on them!??

reply to post by Flighty


Why would you see this?
The plane is one solid piece, so it at least enters the building intact
I wouldnt expect a wing or something to fly off, until after impact perhaps, which at that point the plane is in the building and it has exploded.

Cheers

reply to post by thepixelpusher


This is something many of us would like to know.

The Pentagon is a highly secured place, so id think there would be tons of cameras focused on it at all times.

If theres nothing to hide, why dont the release a clear video of a plane hitting the building?

Cheers

reply to post by lellomackin


Here is a 50 and 100 mph crash with a car. See a lot of debris flying to the sides there.
videos.howstuffworks.com...

reply to post by TKDRL


No link there, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that it isn't a car crashing into a larger container.

reply to post by FoxMulder91


A plane is one solid piece? Don't know where you came up with that idea...

Personally im open to almost all conspiracies that have to do with September 11th.

The two that I dont buy into right now, would be the "No planes" or "Holograms were used" theories.

Im open to the idea that different planes other then the regular passenger planes were flown into the towers and that explosives were detonated to bring the towers down.

Like I said im open to pretty much all the others and believe some of them, but those two ive never really bought into.

Cheers

reply to post by TKDRL


You can clearly see in the videos the planes hit the buildings and they fully enter them, why would you expect pieces of the plane to break off?

The planes was flying hundreds of miles per hour into a building and it is pretty clear they fully enter them.

What I meant by one solid peice is, its all attatched and I wouldnt expect any pieces to break of when it slammed into a building.

Cheers

Originally posted by lellomackin
reply to post by Flighty

 

If you drove your car into a medium sized building would you expect it to do the same?

Yes, here is a crash test into a wall. Bits of door are flying out and other debris.

reply to post by Flighty


Did the car enter a closed container during that video? Not that I see.

Maybe try a video of a car running into a house, or the front of a business and see how much debris from the car is left outside.

reply to post by Flighty



I don't know if you are agreeing with me or not lol.

If not, it's a wall and we would expect things to bounce of of a solid object

The WTC was not a wall.

If you were agreeing with me then, yes you are right.

Notice the car not flying into a billion bits and pieces... Or even a few, for that matter.

reply to post by Flighty


If a plane were to fly into a building made entirely of concrete, then yes I would expect debris from the plane to fall all over the place.

This is not the case with the Planes hitting the Twin towers however, the buildings outer materials allowed for the plane to crash right inside of it.

Cheers

If I had the money, time and resources; I guarantee you with smoke, sunlight and angles you can reproduce a similar effect to the "holographic wings". On par with a magician making a 747 disappear into thin air. Truthers continue to provide useless arguments as to what happened that day. Disgust me more and more with each passing day.

One more point:
Everyone using cars crashing into buildings as examples. This is a useless point to make. Cars do not have a pointed nose or flexible wings that are also edged. Cars also fail to reach speeds of 300MPH + when crashing into these objects. A motorcycle slicing a animal or car in half perhaps is a better example, as there have been cases where its happened and the bike was fairly well intact afterwards.

reply to post by Highground


I think that was trough glass though no? If it was through a wall we would be seeing some studs and sheetrock flying in front of the car.

reply to post by TKDRL


And? The only point is that the missile is going fast enough to fully penetrate the container, so it will expand inside the container rather than outside of it. Chances are, the planes disintegrated once they actually penetrated the building. It just seems common sense to me that an object crashing into a solid concrete wall isn't the same as an object crashing into an amalgamation of different materials.

If the WTC was made out of pure concrete, I would expect to see more debris on the outside. Since it was not, I don't.

reply to post by AndrewTB


Someone asked specifically about cars, and I thought it was an interesting thought lol.
Anyways, here is the closest I could get, a fighter jet crashing into a building. Interesting footage, although surely not the same thing, a fighter jet has a pointed nose rather than a rounded one.
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Rahjian
Did you all seriously skip over my post and continue on with this nonsense about it not being a plane?

I KNOW SOMEONE WHO WAS ON THE SECOND PLANE THAT DIED.

Jesus christ people.

While I am sorry to hear about your loss and the loss of those you know, in reality you were not on that plane so you have no firsthand knowledge as to what really happened - neither do I. While people and planes certainly did disappear on that unfortunate day it does not mean those planes were what actually hit the towers. Some entertain the notion that the planes depicted in the media and by witnesses were holograms/advanced projections of some sort and that alternative methods were used to take down the buildings, I happen to be one of them. This is ATS...

OK back to 9/11!

Aha. thanks everyone for the enlightenment.
I just assumed that there would be steel or concrete pillars at the point of impact, that would've dislodged something and sent it flying.
Apparently it's not possible. Thanks for the legs up.
Sorry for taking this thread a bit off course with my comment too.