I'm sure it was, I just found it strange there are no pictures of larger parts of the plane like the engines or wings or rest of the fuselage but we can identify which plane it was. Obviously others didn't like that comment.
Exactly, they might as well just put the whole damn plane stuck right there clearly visible--it wouldn't change a thing. It all could have been a real terrorist attack--all that matters is our disproportionate response ("shock and awe") on an unrelated country to know America and the powers that be have done some horrible egregious things and don't represent the thinking of the people had they not been brainwashed by propaganda. Had the mainstream media been toting a forgive and forget peace party line rather than war mongering propaganda, nobody would want war.
There have always been too many questions about the whole thing. There have always been too many questions about every single one of these things:
- No weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
- We can't see Bin Laden's Body?
- No evidence that Russia hacked the DNC and a report released by the DNI solely talking about motives displayed on social media?
-A year after Bush Junior is in the presidency we are back in Iraq where his father left off?
To me it's obvious something is up. You can get stuck on various discrepancies in evidence or not. It very well could have been a terrorist attack--that the powers that be were waiting on to counter-punch exactly as they had planned. It doesn't matter. Who actually wants us in the middle east and if we all as citizens wanted to get out, how easy would that actually be, or would the military industrial complex make that something that takes forever to happen. Wasn't Obama meant to have gotten us outa there. It hardly seems so. It seems like we're just using new more focused technology like drones to do the same with less actual boots on the ground.
If you're telling me, you think we belong over there, then you watch too much news by the mainstream media instilling fear in you. How many journalists on CNN are actually wandering around over there compared to how many report it? Exactly, it's a game of telephone with someone triggering the overall direction of their message, based on their own "biases." Perhaps that at their yearly Bilderberg group meetup they agreed to manipulate the public in order to more easily execute their plans of making the Middle East willing client states.
Not strange at all if you know anything about how systems like this are designed, built, tested, QA'd, shipped, monitored, & supported in the field.
I suppose it could look strange to a naive viewer, but their rational response would be "Gee, I really don't know much about this, where can I learn?", not "Gee, I bet something shady is going on!".
One of the reason airliners are so safe is that every single part is tracked for its entire lifetime. There are a metric shitload (technical term) of serial numbers on an airliner identifying all the various parts. Once you have the serial number of a part, it's trivial to link that back to the airplane it was in, since it's all tracked.
For comparison, consider that debris from MH370 was positively linked to the airliner despite the fact that the plane disappeared almost without a trace and only a couple of pieces have washed up on shore: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/world/asia/malaysia-airli...
The ONE piece of metal with the serial number on it, and the ONE piece of metal that clearly has part of an American Airlines logo on it (and the partially ruined american flag stuck in the debris) all remind me of that Dave Chapelle sketch where the cops "sprinkle crack" on the suspect they framed.
The one outlier is the Hitachi tractor rather than a John Deere one. Merica, land of false flags and wrongful world domination!
That isn't the one piece of metal left, there are literally other photos of parts in the collection. That is just one piece of metal that they happened to post a photograph of.
I will probably go to hell for this, but regarding the MH370 photo: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
In all seriousness now, I believe it is a terrible, horrible thing to have lost a loved one on that flight and be in agony of what happened to them and spend months/years without an answer.. no one should have to endure this :(
Imagine if every investigation simply ended with what it "looked" like.
"Well the victim was known to be connected to organized crime, and was going to testify tomorrow, but it looks like he simply fell down the stairs. Oh well."
You mean the thin bags of jet fuel attached to the side of the plane? The things that would almost certainly have folded back slighly before disintegrating?
You admit elsewhere to not being an expert so your expectations are built not on knowledge of planes but on your imagination.
Also have you actually looked at expert opinion on the crash for your answers or have you limited yourself to silly graphics like you added?
If you think nothing breaks into small pieces then I can understand why you're so confused.
What actual photography? Someone overlaid an image of a jet on the building and drew lines where a 5 year old would expect the wings to impact. Luckily(?) we don't live in the looney tunes universe do when a soft objecy hits a brick wall it doesn't leave an exact shape in the wall.
I'd never looked into it before now, but i just went searching for footage of this...frustrating there is none. I don't understand why this cannot be cleared up and instead we're left with people doubting the facts. It makes me doubt the 'facts', i want to believe we're not being lied to.
It's been pretty well cleared up save for the folks who won't accept a version of events that differs from their own personal beliefs.
Ultimately what's more likely? A handful of terrorists hijacked planes and crashed them into buildings or a vast government conspiracy, likely years in the making and involving tens of thousands of people made it look like the former while still managing to avoid a single leak after 16 years.
Apparently our government can't do anything except pull off massive conspiracies.
And please, do not confuse me with one of those people. I just feel more people could be brought around to the logical side of the argument here with a simple 30 second video release, instead we're left without the most obvious and simple version of the evidence that would clear this up - why?! It's so frustrating...
Why? Because there is no video. Easy answer. We got a couple of frames of footage from crappy security cameras, and that's it. In an age before ubiquitous camera phones, what more would you expect? The fact that there's video of the first plane hitting the WTC is pure luck.
Considering the current Administration can't even keep simply talking to a foreign gov't quiet, imagine how much info would be busting at the seams if the gov't had masterminded an attack against their country.
I feel like there must be hours of video of this event, this is the Pentagon! Yet none is released, why? It annoys me because it could so easily be cleared up, yet instead people are left to become skeptics and doubt the powers that be.
Yeah fair point, and i thought this while writing it. I just feel like by doing nothing we're not even allowing for the opportunity of people taking it seriously.
I saw this previously, which again adds to my frustration! It really just fuels the skeptics argument. Why can we not provide a better shot, why can we not clear this up!?
In 2001 there weren't high-resolution cameras pointed everywhere 24/7 like there are today. Nobody had a camera in their phone, the police didn't have red-light cameras at every intersection, we weren't all terrified of terrorists and school-shooters, and the only place you did expect to be filmed was at a 7-11 convenience store.
EDIT: One thing to ponder is that there are only a couple of videos of the first plane hitting the WTC that morning even though there were millions of witnesses. This is because back then things only got filmed when people were expecting things to happen.
But if there was a fire strong enough to vanish 90% of the fuselage, the passengers, and other stuff, then why is it we can still see pentagon furniture, and plastic stuff such as computer monitors?
Because vanishing 90% of the furniture and computer monitors in a large office building leaves 10% of it to show up in photos, especially on the periphery of the fire?
> When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
> Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
The first one you link to was a plane that skidded in on landing. Video of the crash is readily available, and makes it clear that comparing it to a deliberate, full-speed crash into a reinforced building is maliciously stupid.
As it has become clear your statement "I don't know what happened and I can only make conclusions based on the data I have access to" is a lie, I'm done here.
You'd see way more evidence than what they have provided. There is basically no video footage of the plane hitting the pentagon. That's very strange considering the building is stacked full of cameras--or so you would assume.
That building wasn't hit by a plane. At the very least we would have crystal clear videos of it happening. What I think it was is this: the false flag planners got a little overzealous and didn't pull the Pentagon attack off as well (no proper videos, planes in plain plain sight) so they have resolved to downplaying it. Now they're back showing photos to convince people that need very little evidence to believe something. You can just tell by the way they have 2 photos of a serial number and an american airlines logo. Of course it could be real, but don't tell me you can't imagine top players saying: "Make sure you put these clearly branded items in a few photos." If a plane really hit, what I expect to see is a all the plain parts that are there put back together in a chalk layout like a murder scene. I expect to see piles and piles of those pieces of metal with serial numbers on it. The problem can only be that they just don't have it. And not cuz every single piece but precisely one with a serial number on it was destroyed. If they have a piece with a serial number on it, that means they should have 100 pieces of the same metal type without the serial number on it.
There is an example of the types of phones around in 2001. So we're not going to have third party video. We're going to have shitty thirdparty security cameras(which we received footage from) or the pentagons own security cameras which they aren't going to release the footage from.
The OP was also ignoring what happens to aircraft traveling at high velocities and colliding with reinforced structures. Something like the F-4 test in 1988 is illustrative of what can happen [1] (note: only the wingtips survived, and only because they never impacted the target).
Of course, the immediate rebuttal usually offered by conspiracists is to suggest that the Pentagon was not a block of concrete, which is true, but it is still a reinforced structure with a stone façade. The design limited the travel of the 757 toward the interior rings of the building (though it still penetrated) but it was far less destructive being as 1) the 757 is a smaller aircraft than a 767 and 2) the reinforced structure of the Pentagon prohibited a substantial portion of the damage.
I'm still not sure why there are individuals who believe this to be some ridiculous conspiracy, because they're clearly retroactively applying our technological and cultural circumstances today to the attacks in 2001--completely ignoring evidence such as what you've presented of the phones available in that era. Not to mention that if the Pentagon was indeed "chock full of cameras" in 2001, they were likely monitoring exits, hallways, etc., and probably wouldn't show anything interesting: One moment, power and lights are on; next moment, everything is dark or the feed is off. A bit useless!
We need to leave the middle east immediately. It's another vietnam. It doesn't matter whether it was a false flag or not. What matters is what actions they used it to justify. That said so many things don't add up--and no, evidence doesn't add up on either side of the 911 issue--leaves no reason to trust the American government. If you do, you must need something to follow. Or you just can't believe the american government would do any wrong and lie to us.. Do you believe Russia's hacked the DNC? did you read the report they produced. There is absolutely no proof, yet US Intelligence can tell the media it happened and we all believe it. The same is true with basically everything. It's news produced by US Intelligence and the powers that be with no real evidence and you believe it. I read the report by the DNI on the Russian hacking. It covered only possible intent based on news they posted to social media and RT.com.
So yea my friend, all you doubters trust the US Government too much. 911 might not have been a false flag, what matters is what we have done since and what we continue to do. Now we're supposed to believe we have to stay in the middle east because we have to clean up our mess. More lies. They dont want us there. Americans wouldn't want us there if we weren't brainwashed by the fake threat of terrorism on the daily. We have killed hundreds of thousands in the middle east and less than 3k died in 911 and less than that in the 16 years since then in both the US and Europe. For something so big as attacking the entire Middle East for 16 years against everyone's will, I have no choice but to believe there is elite forces at work.
Anyway, the evidence of bits and bytes of wreckage matters not. It's all just too messy and not definitive enough to believe.
You tell others they are easily led while believing every youtube video and half baked conspiracy website you read. You're not some brave free thinker you're just someone that believes youtube videos.
Half baked conspiracy theory? You probably would have said that the CIA and NSA having the ability to listen in through cellphones, TVs, tablets, and computers was a conspiracy theory as well. WikiLeaks just proved otherwise and your response to this is? The same as it is for the 9/11 attacks... you back up what you don't know because its easier to do than face the alternative.
I've known it possible for people to easily listen in through computers since BO was released in 98. Why do you think I would expect it to be unlikely that the leading spy and security organizations in the world have the capability almost 20 years later?
I disagree. I think believing that some secret powers are causing all this bad shit is a lot easier for people to stomach than to just accept that the world is a big random and scary place.
> So yea my friend, all you doubters trust the US Government too much.
Err? I'm a conservative with libertarian leanings. Of all the things you can complain about regarding the US government and our idiotic foreign policy decisions (most of which I agree with you regarding), the September 11th "conspiracy" is one of the more absurd. It is indisputable that aircraft impacted numerous buildings that day. It is my belief that anyone who posits otherwise is living in a world of fantasy.
Don't be so hasty to make assumptions.
> It's news produced by US Intelligence and the powers that be with no real evidence and you believe it.
Not sure where this came from as this thread is a discussion about September 11th.
You're referring to the DNI report. And yes, I read it: There's nothing in the report of interest, only speculation. So no, I don't believe the Russian narrative.
Same reason a casino won't tell you if they caught the person picking your pocket on camera. You don't want to release where you have your secret security cameras when it will do nothing to help solve the crime.
All releasing the video would do would be attempt to quell the doubts of conspiracy theorists who would immediately claim it was a jet dressed up like a plane or CGI anyhow since they don't want the truth since the truth is generally mundane.
>Same reason a casino won't tell you if they caught the person picking your pocket on camera. You don't want to release where you have your secret security cameras when it will do nothing to help solve the crime.
I get it, but is it really a national security secret that the pentagon is surrounded by cameras.
Remember that everybody wasn't carrying around video cameras 24/7 the way they are today.
Security cameras don't tend to be aimed at the sky, and often use a low framerate, especially a decade and a half ago. The one "video" we do have was recorded at about one frame per second, and so is kind of lacking in detail.
What other cameras do you expect to have recorded video?
>Security cameras don't tend to be aimed at the sky
True, but this is the HQ of the most expensive, most technologically advanced military ever to exist.
>What other cameras do you expect to have recorded video?
Cameras every couple feet along the exterior of the pentagon. Cameras on every light pole in the lawn. Cameras on the fences. On buildings facing the pentagon. ...
There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area.
What would be the purpose of putting up so many cameras? Why would Congress vote to spend so much money on it? The place has guards with eyes, why would you need a ton of cameras too?
In any case, you can get pretty close to the place without any special permission. Various public roads go right past it, and there's a busy Metro station and bus terminal right outside the front door. I've been past there a lot and don't recall ever seeing this hypothetical mass of cameras on it.
The idea that the Pentagon is super-important and therefore must have had a ton of high-quality cameras surrounding it is common, but appears to be based on no real-world evidence. If they were real, surely somebody would have posted a diagram and said, "this security camera, circled in red, should have captured video of AA77."
> There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area.
This is absurd speculation. The US doesn't have live satellite coverage of the entire planet today, and certainly didn't in 2001. They wouldn't waste scarce resources surveilling the middle of a large American city. As for surveillance planes, people notice those when they're around, and as far as I know nobody has ever said they saw one on the morning of 9/11.
Nobody anticipated this kind of attack. You will find massive surveillance systems geared toward detecting attacks they did expect. There are gigantic radar installations and fleets of satellites whose sole purpose is to detect incoming nuclear missiles, for example. But nobody thought of watching for a rogue airliner.
There's no video. It's strange how different things were for photos and videos a mere 15.5 years ago. If it happened today, you'd have sixteen bazillion videos from everybody's phones.
There are, however, a ton of witnesses. I think a lot of deniers don't really grasp the geography and think the Pentagon is some distant, isolated military installation or something. In reality, it's smack in the middle of the sixth largest metro area in the country, and AA77 flew right over a busy highway on its way to the Pentagon, so low that it knocked over light poles and nearly impaled a hapless taxi driver who was almost in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The last set has all sorts of FOIA obtained photographs, documents, audio, etc., presented in video format, not just videos. As per the crappy video frames, that is my understanding as well.
86 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 146 ms ] threadOh no, I replied to a conspiracy theorist. I should go to bed.
- No weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? - We can't see Bin Laden's Body? - No evidence that Russia hacked the DNC and a report released by the DNI solely talking about motives displayed on social media? -A year after Bush Junior is in the presidency we are back in Iraq where his father left off?
To me it's obvious something is up. You can get stuck on various discrepancies in evidence or not. It very well could have been a terrorist attack--that the powers that be were waiting on to counter-punch exactly as they had planned. It doesn't matter. Who actually wants us in the middle east and if we all as citizens wanted to get out, how easy would that actually be, or would the military industrial complex make that something that takes forever to happen. Wasn't Obama meant to have gotten us outa there. It hardly seems so. It seems like we're just using new more focused technology like drones to do the same with less actual boots on the ground.
If you're telling me, you think we belong over there, then you watch too much news by the mainstream media instilling fear in you. How many journalists on CNN are actually wandering around over there compared to how many report it? Exactly, it's a game of telephone with someone triggering the overall direction of their message, based on their own "biases." Perhaps that at their yearly Bilderberg group meetup they agreed to manipulate the public in order to more easily execute their plans of making the Middle East willing client states.
I suppose it could look strange to a naive viewer, but their rational response would be "Gee, I really don't know much about this, where can I learn?", not "Gee, I bet something shady is going on!".
For comparison, consider that debris from MH370 was positively linked to the airliner despite the fact that the plane disappeared almost without a trace and only a couple of pieces have washed up on shore: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/world/asia/malaysia-airli...
The one outlier is the Hitachi tractor rather than a John Deere one. Merica, land of false flags and wrongful world domination!
Everything on a plane has a serial number except for the most basic commodity parts. For all I know, that could be the toilet paper holder.
Here's what the Concorde crash site looked like: http://www.concordesst.com/accident/englishreport/images/vue...
Germanwings 9525: http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150324150543-25b-pl...
MH370: https://static.pexels.com/photos/6644/sea-water-ocean-waves....
Well played.
In all seriousness now, I believe it is a terrible, horrible thing to have lost a loved one on that flight and be in agony of what happened to them and spend months/years without an answer.. no one should have to endure this :(
"Well the victim was known to be connected to organized crime, and was going to testify tomorrow, but it looks like he simply fell down the stairs. Oh well."
https://truthandshadows.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/pentagon...
You admit elsewhere to not being an expert so your expectations are built not on knowledge of planes but on your imagination.
Also have you actually looked at expert opinion on the crash for your answers or have you limited yourself to silly graphics like you added?
Nothing disintegrates my friend, that's science fiction.
> have you limited yourself to silly graphics like you added?
It seems you missed the actual photography.
What actual photography? Someone overlaid an image of a jet on the building and drew lines where a 5 year old would expect the wings to impact. Luckily(?) we don't live in the looney tunes universe do when a soft objecy hits a brick wall it doesn't leave an exact shape in the wall.
Here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhxuhTmGk
Most high speed airplane crashes don't leave any intact wings behind, much less anything else.
Ultimately what's more likely? A handful of terrorists hijacked planes and crashed them into buildings or a vast government conspiracy, likely years in the making and involving tens of thousands of people made it look like the former while still managing to avoid a single leak after 16 years.
Apparently our government can't do anything except pull off massive conspiracies.
I feel like there must be hours of video of this event, this is the Pentagon! Yet none is released, why? It annoys me because it could so easily be cleared up, yet instead people are left to become skeptics and doubt the powers that be.
We have hours and hours of footage of the moon missions and people still doubt that.
Pick any conspiracy theory: more information does nothing to stop the conspiracy theory.
Considering it was pre-iPhone and the FBI confiscated all of the security footage around that area, not terribly shocking.
EDIT: One thing to ponder is that there are only a couple of videos of the first plane hitting the WTC that morning even though there were millions of witnesses. This is because back then things only got filmed when people were expecting things to happen.
But if there was a fire strong enough to vanish 90% of the fuselage, the passengers, and other stuff, then why is it we can still see pentagon furniture, and plastic stuff such as computer monitors?
http://pop.h-cdn.co/assets/15/37/980x490/landscape-144199756...
Obviously those didn't go through the building.
https://truthandshadows.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/pentagon...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5659/debunking-911...
> When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
> Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
Anything else trivially answerable you're interested in?
http://clickhowto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/plane-crash...
http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/Images/2016/11/30/6860e5e92...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/8f/5a/cc/8f5acc115...
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01210/denver-pla...
See? There's a lot of fuselage still there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTXDalv7kNQ
The fourth you link to appears to be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_Airlines_Flight_14..., which didn't even get into the air in that crash - it just skidded off the runway.
The other two photos I can't immediately identify, but strongly suspect are similar cases.
I've linked elsewhere in the comments better examples.
Here's what happens when a Concorde hits a hotel: http://www.concordesst.com/accident/englishreport/images/vue...
And here's what happens when someone suicidal points a plane into the ground: http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150324150543-25b-pl...
As it has become clear your statement "I don't know what happened and I can only make conclusions based on the data I have access to" is a lie, I'm done here.
The plane is there, this group of pictures includes pictures of it. There just isn't much left.
That building wasn't hit by a plane. At the very least we would have crystal clear videos of it happening. What I think it was is this: the false flag planners got a little overzealous and didn't pull the Pentagon attack off as well (no proper videos, planes in plain plain sight) so they have resolved to downplaying it. Now they're back showing photos to convince people that need very little evidence to believe something. You can just tell by the way they have 2 photos of a serial number and an american airlines logo. Of course it could be real, but don't tell me you can't imagine top players saying: "Make sure you put these clearly branded items in a few photos." If a plane really hit, what I expect to see is a all the plain parts that are there put back together in a chalk layout like a murder scene. I expect to see piles and piles of those pieces of metal with serial numbers on it. The problem can only be that they just don't have it. And not cuz every single piece but precisely one with a serial number on it was destroyed. If they have a piece with a serial number on it, that means they should have 100 pieces of the same metal type without the serial number on it.
Why would you expect crystal clear videos of it happening?
https://nokiamuseum.info/category/launching-year/2001/
There is an example of the types of phones around in 2001. So we're not going to have third party video. We're going to have shitty thirdparty security cameras(which we received footage from) or the pentagons own security cameras which they aren't going to release the footage from.
You're also ignoring all the eye witnesses.
Of course, the immediate rebuttal usually offered by conspiracists is to suggest that the Pentagon was not a block of concrete, which is true, but it is still a reinforced structure with a stone façade. The design limited the travel of the 757 toward the interior rings of the building (though it still penetrated) but it was far less destructive being as 1) the 757 is a smaller aircraft than a 767 and 2) the reinforced structure of the Pentagon prohibited a substantial portion of the damage.
I'm still not sure why there are individuals who believe this to be some ridiculous conspiracy, because they're clearly retroactively applying our technological and cultural circumstances today to the attacks in 2001--completely ignoring evidence such as what you've presented of the phones available in that era. Not to mention that if the Pentagon was indeed "chock full of cameras" in 2001, they were likely monitoring exits, hallways, etc., and probably wouldn't show anything interesting: One moment, power and lights are on; next moment, everything is dark or the feed is off. A bit useless!
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV_baW5OERY
So yea my friend, all you doubters trust the US Government too much. 911 might not have been a false flag, what matters is what we have done since and what we continue to do. Now we're supposed to believe we have to stay in the middle east because we have to clean up our mess. More lies. They dont want us there. Americans wouldn't want us there if we weren't brainwashed by the fake threat of terrorism on the daily. We have killed hundreds of thousands in the middle east and less than 3k died in 911 and less than that in the 16 years since then in both the US and Europe. For something so big as attacking the entire Middle East for 16 years against everyone's will, I have no choice but to believe there is elite forces at work.
Anyway, the evidence of bits and bytes of wreckage matters not. It's all just too messy and not definitive enough to believe.
I disagree. I think believing that some secret powers are causing all this bad shit is a lot easier for people to stomach than to just accept that the world is a big random and scary place.
Err? I'm a conservative with libertarian leanings. Of all the things you can complain about regarding the US government and our idiotic foreign policy decisions (most of which I agree with you regarding), the September 11th "conspiracy" is one of the more absurd. It is indisputable that aircraft impacted numerous buildings that day. It is my belief that anyone who posits otherwise is living in a world of fantasy.
Don't be so hasty to make assumptions.
> It's news produced by US Intelligence and the powers that be with no real evidence and you believe it.
Not sure where this came from as this thread is a discussion about September 11th.
You're referring to the DNI report. And yes, I read it: There's nothing in the report of interest, only speculation. So no, I don't believe the Russian narrative.
All releasing the video would do would be attempt to quell the doubts of conspiracy theorists who would immediately claim it was a jet dressed up like a plane or CGI anyhow since they don't want the truth since the truth is generally mundane.
I get it, but is it really a national security secret that the pentagon is surrounded by cameras.
Now that doesn't adequately explain why they don't go ahead and release it anyways, but it's still worth noting, imo.
Security cameras don't tend to be aimed at the sky, and often use a low framerate, especially a decade and a half ago. The one "video" we do have was recorded at about one frame per second, and so is kind of lacking in detail.
What other cameras do you expect to have recorded video?
True, but this is the HQ of the most expensive, most technologically advanced military ever to exist.
>What other cameras do you expect to have recorded video?
Cameras every couple feet along the exterior of the pentagon. Cameras on every light pole in the lawn. Cameras on the fences. On buildings facing the pentagon. ...
There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area.
In any case, you can get pretty close to the place without any special permission. Various public roads go right past it, and there's a busy Metro station and bus terminal right outside the front door. I've been past there a lot and don't recall ever seeing this hypothetical mass of cameras on it.
The idea that the Pentagon is super-important and therefore must have had a ton of high-quality cameras surrounding it is common, but appears to be based on no real-world evidence. If they were real, surely somebody would have posted a diagram and said, "this security camera, circled in red, should have captured video of AA77."
> There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area.
This is absurd speculation. The US doesn't have live satellite coverage of the entire planet today, and certainly didn't in 2001. They wouldn't waste scarce resources surveilling the middle of a large American city. As for surveillance planes, people notice those when they're around, and as far as I know nobody has ever said they saw one on the morning of 9/11.
Nobody anticipated this kind of attack. You will find massive surveillance systems geared toward detecting attacks they did expect. There are gigantic radar installations and fleets of satellites whose sole purpose is to detect incoming nuclear missiles, for example. But nobody thought of watching for a rogue airliner.
edit: Apologies, I was incorrect.
There are, however, a ton of witnesses. I think a lot of deniers don't really grasp the geography and think the Pentagon is some distant, isolated military installation or something. In reality, it's smack in the middle of the sixth largest metro area in the country, and AA77 flew right over a busy highway on its way to the Pentagon, so low that it knocked over light poles and nearly impaled a hapless taxi driver who was almost in the wrong place at the wrong time.
p.s.
this set seems to be quite comprehensive: https://www.youtube.com/user/relapsed1/videos
Edit: I see your edit, still don't get it. Did you maybe miss the fact that we're only talking about AA77 and the Pentagon here?
If I'm wrong, I'd love to see the video in question.