US to release Pentagon 9/11 video

[daniel_goldbloom]

Apparently it was requested in 2004 under the freedom of information act but wasn't released because of the Moussaoui investigation.

read more here

[MotioN]

The group said it hoped to dispel conspiracy theories about the crash.

"Finally, we hope that this video will put to rest the conspiracy theories involving American Airlines Flight 77," president Tom Fitton said.

But it only shows the plane crashing into the building at the same level of the building, I don't really know much about the conspiracies and stuff but thats surley not enough evidence to prove that it wasnt shot down etc etc

[Mugetsu]

That video still could be anything. Its a section of building. Even at the largest size of video if you pause it where they slow down the plane. It still just looks like a fucking missile.Hahaha.

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by Mugetsu

That video still could be anything. Its a section of building. Even at the largest size of video if you pause it where they slow down the plane. It still just looks like a fucking missile.Hahaha.

in none of these conspiracy videos/pictures does it look like a missile.

[kj]

Looking at that video, i wouldnt be able to say what the object is.

[Mugetsu]

Ok, Ill concede that im not a missile expert. Thought that might have been obvious. Plus since its not been proven to be any one thing, it can surely be up in the air as to what it is.

My conclusion was drawn from the fact that its so thin and streamlined and not bigger like a commercial airline. All assumption.

Also, theres a flash right before the explosion which kind of obscures the object when it comes into full view, or when it should.

Alan, are you suggesting that it does infact reseble a plane then? Apart from the fact its in the air, I cant see much resemblance.lol.

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by Mugetsu

Ok, Ill concede that im not a missile expert. Thought that might have been obvious. Plus since its not been proven to be any one thing, it can surely be up in the air as to what it is.

My conclusion was drawn from the fact that its so thin and streamlined and not bigger like a commercial airline. All assumption.

Also, theres a flash right before the explosion which kind of obscures the object when it comes into full view, or when it should.

Alan, are you suggesting that it does infact reseble a plane then? Apart from the fact its in the air, I cant see much resemblance.lol.

you havent seen the actual photos of the hole in the pentagon then. Or the comparitive videos of what planes look like after theyve hit buildings.

[Rosco the magnificent]

To me it still looks a bit thin to be a plane. Furthermore, you'd have to be one hell of a pilot to hit the building at that trajectory and not hit the ground first, especially with a commercial plane.

[Mugetsu]

Originally Posted by Alan G

you havent seen the actual photos of the hole in the pentagon then. Or the comparitive videos of what planes look like after theyve hit buildings.

To be fair I never said I had seen either of the afore mentioned things.
What I said was in relation to the video and nothing else.

[johnny?]

Has everyone seen Loose Change?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...q=loose+change

and

http://www.loosechange911.com/

?

The evidence mounts up on the Pentagon incident, like.

[humndislocation]

The hole made in the Pentagon was far too small to be a missile. What actually happened, is that the government fired a bullet at the Pentagon.

If you look at the wreckage, you'll notice that there are no missile parts, that's because it was a bullet.

Also the trade towers fell just like in a controlled explosion. You know how in a controlled demolition, all the rubble goes everywhere, and severely damages surrounding buildings? yeah it did that.

[kj]

Originally Posted by Rosco the magnificent

To me it still looks a bit thin to be a plane. Furthermore, you'd have to be one hell of a pilot to hit the building at that trajectory and not hit the ground first, especially with a commercial plane.

The plane did hit the ground first, and then apparently bounced / skidded into the building.

[humndislocation]

Yeah, surely you wouldn't need to hit the building exactly without hitting the ground. All that forward momentum isn't going to just evaporate when you hit the ground.

Also, unlike in cartoons, a plane crashing into a building doesn't leave a plane-shaped hole in the side of the building. Not to mention the fact that the wings on the plane were not designed to handle the kind of stresses that would allow them to stay on the plane when it hits a building.

This 9/11 conspiracy nonsense is just like creationism. It doesn't matter how many hard facts you provide, people will always try to poke holes in it, so that they can continue believing whatever they want to believe.