ashitaka said:
As for the pentagon, you can see footage of a plane hitting....they played it on CNN over and over. It was a parking lot camera that caught the plane crashing. If that was faked, they must've hired Steven Spielberg for the job.
Well, I watched that video (it is available on the Internet), and I watched it several times, and I have yet to see the Commercial Jet in the Video. You can clearly see the Pentagon exploding, but I have not seen where the Commercial Jet is in that Video.
Everyone can watch that Video Online at MSNBC at this Address: http://www.msnbc.com/news/720851.asp?cp1=1
You can also watch it at CNN.com at this Address: http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen.pentagon.pictures/ (Although, now it appears that you have to sign up and pay $9.95 a month in order to watch the CNN Video Online.)
And you can see the Photos on CNN at: http://www.cnn.com/interactive/us/0203/pentagon.crash.gallery/frameset.exclude.html
Also, here are some very interesting quotes from another Website (http://www.nerdcities.com/guardian/SeptemberEleventh/Schmid/PentagonPlaneCrash.html):
"the body of the plane was taller than one floor of the Pentagon. Therefore, the body of the plane should have punched a hole through at least two floors."
"We are told the plane came in low to the ground, which explains the lack of a hole in the upper floors of the building. However, the distance between the bottom of the engines and the top of the cabin is more than 18 feet (5.5m). From the bottom of the engines to the top of the tail is about 41 feet (12.6m). The Pentagon is 77 feet (23 meters) tall. Therefore, the plane was 53% of the height of the Pentagon.
Pentagon specs: http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pentagon/facts.html "
"In order for the plane to hit only the first floor of the building, the engines would have to be below ground level, and we have to ignore the tail."
"Also, the plane was 155 feet (47m) long; the only way such a long plane could slip into the first floor is if it were perfectly horizontal and perfectly level. The slightest tilting would cause it to take out the second floor or dig into the dirt."
"Considering there is very busy freeway in front of the crash site, along with road signs, light posts, and trees, how did the plane get so close to the ground? Those Arabs were great pilots!"
"On 7 March 2002 the Pentagon released five images from a security camera to prove the Arabs flew a Boeing 757 into the Pentagon. Obviously they lied when they said they did not have any video of the plane crash, but now they feel they must release it, probably to counteract that French site.
Here is the video: http://www.msnbc.com/news/720851.asp "
"Since they lied about the video, can we trust them on other issues? How many times does a person have to lie to you before you question his other remarks?"
"Why [did the Pentagon] not release all of the video frames [instead of only 5 frames]?"
"The Pentagon is a very large building, but it is low to the ground. The plane the Arabs were flying was more than half the height of the building. The easiest thing for the Arabs to do it would be to hit the top of the building while diving down at an angle.
However, we are told that the Arabs decided to hit the front of the building. More amazing, instead of hitting while diving down at an angle, we are told that they flew only inches above the ground to hit the ground floor of the building in a nearly horizontal manner."
"There is a busy highway in front of the Pentagon, along with a railing, trees, and other objects. We are suppose to believe the Arabs flew only slightly above the cars along the highway. One witness claims that the airplane was so low that it knocked down a light post along the road."
"To make this more absurd, after passing over the highway the Arabs had only a fraction of a second of flight time remaining, and in that brief time the Arabs dropped the plane even lower to a few millimeters above the grass."
"The pilot's view of the ground in a 757 is not very good. For the Arabs to fly so low was a tremendous achievement. Especially when traveling at 345 mph (555 km/hour), which is the speed the flight data recorder supposedly shows. (The Pentagon claims to have found the flight data recorder, but the other parts of the 100 ton airplane vanished. I can believe that!)"
"Furthermore, airplanes never fly in straight lines; rather, they roll and tilt. Therefore, flying only inches above the ground without crashing is a tremendous achievement for inexperienced pilots!"
"Do you realize that the 757 was behaving as if it was a cruise missile?"
"The reports claim that the Arabs flew around the Pentagon a while before hitting the building. By coincidence, the section the Arabs chose to hit did not have many people in it, so casualties were much lower than if they had hit elsewhere. That particular section was being renovated, and the people who normally worked there had been sent to other offices."
"The Pentagon is said to be the largest office building in the world, and the Arabs decided to hit the small section that was being renovated. What a coincidence that the Arabs did not hit Rumsfeld's office. What a coincidence that the Arabs did not hit a section of the building that was full of people."
"Did the 'nice' Arabs fly around the Pentagon a while in order to find the section with the least number of people in it?"
More Quotes from the same Website (http://www.nerdcities.com/guardian/SeptemberEleventh/Schmid/PentagonPlaneCrash.html) are below:
How rapidly did the fireball expand?
The date and time is displayed in the lower left corner of the five frames of video that the Pentagon decided to let us see, although the time is incorrect by about 32 hours.
The time is shown only to the nearest second. I suspect the real video has IRIG time code recorded on an audio track, in which case the military could precisely identify each frame of video.
The first and second frames have identical times. The first frame shows the building before the plane hit. The second frame shows a fireball that is at least 50 percent taller than the pentagon. This means that within 1 second the plane crashed and a fireball grew to a height of at least 100 feet (33m).
If we could see the frames between those two we could estimate the rate at which the fireball expands. This would also let us determine whether the fireball was from jet fuel or an explosive. Jet fuel fireballs, as with automobile fireballs, do not expand very quickly. By comparison, the fireball from an explosive can expand at an enormous rate.
Why does the Pentagon allow us to see only five frames of video rather than the entire video? Note that the video of the planes hitting the World Trade Centers and the collapse of the towers were broadcast by American news reporters at least 2 million times during September in order to stimulate anger towards the Arabs. Why did they not broadcast the video of this plane crashing into the Pentagon at least 2 million times?
I think the Pentagon refuses to release the entire video because it would show a small missile flying close to the ground, and then it would show the fireball expanding at such an incredible rate that even the "ordinary" Americans would realize that it was from an explosive.
If the video proves that a 757 hit the building then the Pentagon officials are idiots for keeping the video a secret. They are also idiots for hiding the remains of the plane, the dead passengers, and the luggage. Their secrecy is allowing conspiracy rumors to run wild.
Do you think the Pentagon officials are so stupid as to hide proof of the 757? I doubt if any human is that stupid. I say their behavior is evidence that they are involved in this fake "Terrorist Attack On America".
If it looks and acts like a bomb...
When an airplane crash has all the characteristics of a bomb, there is a good chance that it was a bomb.
I think a more sensible explanation for Flight 77 is that it never crashed into the Pentagon. Rather, the Pentagon fired a missile at the building, and they selected a section of the building that was being renovated in order to reduce deaths. I think they also set the missile to explode before it hit the building in order to reduce damage.
The plane that witnesses saw flying around the Pentagon may have been Flight 77, but that plane did not crash into the Pentagon.
What happened to Flight 77?
There were pieces of an airplane scattered around the Pennsylvania countryside. Everybody assumes that all of those pieces belong to Flight 93, but maybe Flight 77 crashed (or was shot down) over there, also.
This would explain why so many people are asking why the Flight 93 debris was scattered over many miles, as this site explains:
http://www.flight93crash.com/
Do you still believe the Arabs flew a 757 into the Pentagon?
Check out the photos at this site:
http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/news_1-1.html
On page 2 of that document is an image with the caption: "Damage visible in one of the open-air courtyards between building rings." The article doesn't identify the courtyard, but if it was one directly behind the crash site, the airplane did not penetrate it. That means the entire airplane compressed itself like an accordion in the outer ring.
[END OF QUOTES]
