New Pentagon Video - Real or Dodgy?

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by Shamatt


No OS'er here. The video is too blurry to be certain about anything. But...the thing I noticed, the object hits the building at a completely wrong angle. The OS claims the plane came more from the right angle. This looks like it hit dead on 90 degrees angle.

Interesting never before seen footage...if real.


edit:

here it is

It's fake in SOOO many ways not the least of which is why someone in a plane or helicoptor would have such a crappy camera and bother using it

reply to post by mikellmikell


actually the extensive zoom makes it much more crappy than it already is...

still, would be nice if we could verify this video.

That video was proven a fake some time ago. Sorry, no smoking gun there.
The global hawk painted up to look like an airliner was a photoshop job as well.
Ftr I don't believe the OS myself.

OK thanks guys. My reason for doubting it was that they showed the alleged exit hole as the alleged entry hole. This was a red flag to me.

Any links to the debunking of this would be interesting/useful

Thanks

About the Pentagon attack,I always wonder why theres no debri of the plane ??,...I MEAN THEY HAD CAMERAS ON IT AS SOON HAPPEND, RIGTH??......SO where are the remains,fuselage,wings,wheels,motors,the tale is always in most cases visible,,..but in this case looks like the plane went tru acid,non of it appear in the subsecuent pics.......................no plane parts??.........

Are there any truthers out there with deep pockets? Why not build a large concrete wall similar in construction to the Pentagon, somewhere out in the wilds. Then buy a used jet, and fit it with remote controls and fly it smack into the wall as per the "official story" and see what sort of a hole it makes.

I suspect a large proportion of us expect to see a completely different shape to that we see in the photos.

One thing about WTC7, was the way the very top of the building seems to collapse before the floors where the fire is located, a long way above where the fire is located. That looks decidedly odd to my eyes.

reply to post by rocha123

About the Pentagon attack,I always wonder why theres no debri of the plane ??,...I MEAN THEY HAD CAMERAS ON IT AS SOON HAPPEND, RIGTH??......SO where are the remains,fuselage,wings,wheels,motors,the tale is always in most cases visible,,..but in this case looks like the plane went tru acid,non of it appear in the subsecuent pics.......................no plane parts??.........

What lack of plane parts are you talking about.....?

Plenty of plane parts in this picture



and here



here



here



here




Here are the jet engines recovered from inside the Pentagon where they came to rest

www.aerospaceweb.org...

And parts of the landing gear

www.aerospaceweb.org...

As for the tail - it is a lightweight structure which would have been fragmented on impact. Tail does not have to
support heavy structural parts like the wings and can be built as light as possible to save weight

Let me guess...? Been trolling web sites which claim to offer the "truth" ....

Many of them are scam artists

What they did were show some long range shots of the Pentagon where the aircraft dfebris is not visible
do to the distance

Then claim are no aircraft parts.....?

reply to post by Rob37n

Are there any truthers out there with deep pockets? Why not build a large concrete wall similar in construction to the Pentagon, somewhere out in the wilds. Then buy a used jet, and fit it with remote controls and fly it smack into the wall as per the "official story" and see what sort of a hole it makes.

Just one problem - Pentagon walls are made of brick with the outer E Ring covered with a facade of limestone

The extensive use of reinforced concrete and non-reinforced masonry was one concession. Certainly the threat of any kind of terrorist attack on the building was far from the thoughts of the original designers. As a result, the Pentagon was constructed with a thin limestone facade over a brick infill between reinforced concrete floors, structurally supported by a reinforced concrete beam and column frame. Enough to protect from the elements but not from the potential forces of significant blast events.

reply to post by Rob37n





747 after brake fire....planes do burn.

Rich

Yeah my mother wears army boots too....If you believe the origonal BS from the gov boys you need to take the red pill......yer heads in a dark place.

Does anyone have link to the video that was originally posted? The person who started this thread got a warning or something and the video in question was removed.