You HAVE to see this because it's just mind-blowing. Michael Moore opened the doors with Fahrenheit/911, and this just adds a lot more fuel to the fire about the plane that hit the Pentagon. Was it really a 757? Or was it a little Cessna carrying 8-12 people? Or a missile? You be the judge...... www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main quotagirl
Re: The Pentagon's 9/11... a conspiracy?/Now....... the other side of the coin No matter how flat a pancake is, there's always two sides........ I've just been sent this link to dispute the conspiracy theory. I'll warn you now, it can get long and technical, but it is also very well written, logical, and tons of photos to prove why they think this all actually happened. Check it out: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1 :-\ Quotagirl
the first one fitted more! I only scanned the second one, but was more convinced by the first ones evidence, Why do the US government keep everything from the public! ! !
Hey, I'm just glad you took the time to see both sides of the story. What totally boggles my mind is that both sound so true. I've now become an official "fence-sitter" on the matter! What I also believe is that you can manipulate film to do what you want it to do. Bottom line is, I feel sorry for all the relatives of this horrible, horrible tragedy. :-[ quotagirl
like you say, now aday's anything can be digitally enhanced and the rest of it! But it is a tradgedy however these people are still free to cause the same pain and suffering!
What about all the people who were supposed to have died on the boeing? They must have gone somewhere, that kind of evidnece you can't really hide can you? :-\
why wouldn't the government not want us knowing the truth? What do they need to hide, surely they would want the public to be at rest and understand what really happened!
i saw this vid, or one similar on another message board a few months ago and this is the post someone made to dismiss the conspircy theory Having watched the conspiracy clip, their points are too easy to explain away. 1. Small amount of damage done to the building when the plane hits it. The plane didn't hit the building directly and nobody has ever said it did. The plane ploughed into the ground in front of the Pentagon and slid into the building. The amount of solid plane left at this point is much less than a full plane and it's also going slower by then. 2. Eye witness account of a commuter jet. Any conspiracy theory that relies on an eye witness account is extremely flawed. Eye witness are notoriously inaccurate. Do you remember the first reports of 2 planes hitting the twin towers? Most people said they were light aircraft. It was only when news channels started showing the footage that people realised they were wide-bodied passenger jets. 3. The perfect lawn. It's clear to see that that picture is taken from an angle to the building and that the plane approached it from a diiferent angle. The lawn will only be destroyed on the planes path so of course that photo will show a clean lawn. No photographer would have been allowed to stand on that path as it was a disaster scene. 4. No plane left. Well the conspiracy theorists answer this one themselves later in the film with their own question. What happened to 60 tons of plane and 5300 tons of fuel? Well what do you think happens to it when it hits the ground at 530 miles an hour? It gets blown into smithereens. There won't be much of it left just the same as you won't get much left of other high impact/high fuel plane crashes. Look at the crash photos of Concorde (which was travelling about 3 times slower than the Pentagon plane) and see how much of it you can recognise. Showing a few photos of planes crashed at low speed with a low fuel load and having much of the shell remaining just doesn't compare enough to make a good theory. 5. The CCTV footage doesn't show a large plane hitting the building but zooms in on a small object. Just get a sense of perspective of the footage. It zooms in on an object which is clearly in the distance and not in line with the explosion. There is no object caught on film of the impact on the building. Why not? Well the plane is travelling at 530 miles an hour. That equates to 235.5 metres per second. The amount of space in front of the Pentagon caught on the CCTV is less than 100 metres. Ordinary TV footage captures at the rate of 25 frames per second. CCTV footage captures a lot slower than that. With the speed the plane was moving it would have covered the distance from the edge of the frame up to the impact with the building in less time than it takes for the camera to capture the next frame. The camera isn't fast enough to see it. 6. What about the fbi seizing nearby shops and buildings video footage? FBI seize CCTV footage of any crime they have to investigate. It's a vital part of the investigation process. And shock horror, it's not just the FBI that do it. The police here in the UK do it too. It only gets released to the public if there is a reason to do so e.g. to identify criminals still at large. It's only the media who think that it's in the public interest to show the moment of the very violent death of a few hundred people. Do you really want to see it? The FBI haven't released any of their footage from the twin tower strikes either but we know they happened as they were shown by the news channels from either home video or live as it happened (in the case of the second strike). hope that hasn't confused you all even more! :-X 8)
