Double Tree Video Released?

[beachnut]

Yes, the more I watch it the more it seems likely. I took a screen grab.

I think its possible that the circled object is the tail fin. It could just as easily be a car on the highway though.

Time the object. It could be the plane. It looks like he pushed it down and caught it before he hit early.

 

[Kryptos]

Ho hum... this is boring.

A while back, I posted some photos here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1930783

Here's where everything is located:

Here are some more photos.

Looking down Army Navy Dr., towards S. Eads, from the Doubletree. The highway (I-395) obstructs the view of the Pentagon:

This is looking directly across the street (Army Navy Dr.) from the Doubletree. Not much to see:

And here's another tour of the area:

This is slightly up the road (Army Navy Dr.) from the Doubletree, looking down S. Eads where it passes under the I-395 overpass from the Pentagon S. Parking Lot. Same overpass as seen in the first picture. This is the most you can see of the Pentagon from this side of the highway:

And this is a view of Army Navy Dr., from S. Eads (and down the street from the Doubletree). The buildings off in the distance (on the left side of the image) are Navy Annex buildings. Also note the construction cranes and spires (Air Force Memorial, which is now open):

If you continue down this street 3 blocks, you hit S. Joyce St. This photo is the view from Army Navy Dr. The plane passed overhead, just on other side of the overpass. The Citgo is visible down the street.

For some perspective, the Pentagon as seen from the Citgo:

And, the Citgo and Navy Annex buildings seen from along Washington Boulevard, next to the Pentagon(and the Air Force Memorial spires - now open):

End of tour.


Anyway, I'm finding this boring, tiresome, and absurd to keep debating the Pentagon no-planers. I've been compiling witness accounts (in progress) of people who saw the plane. I may plot their locations on a map and make it into Macromedia Flash presentation or something.

-Kate

 

[Earl The Tall]

And, the Citgo and Navy Annex buildings seen from along Washington Boulevard, next to the Pentagon(and the Air Force Memorial spires - now open):

Oh they are open. Crap I need to get down there before I head out to Texas.

 

[Hierosis]

my perspective

Let me just chime in here as someone who is likely that rare 9/11 conspiracy theorist who comes here to see the other side of the argument and not get into an argument.

First, my position. While I do think there is more to 9/11 than we'll ever know, I ABSOULTELY BELIEVE THAT FLIGHT 77 HIT THE PENTAGON. I often clash with "truthers" over this. But to me it's just basic logic. If such a nefarious plan was in place, wouldn't they want it to have been simple, untraceable and practical? Wouldn't it make little sense to switch planes or whatever and add any complicating elements to any plan? So, in my humble opinion, FLIGHT 77 HIT THE FRIGGIN' PENTAGON.

I'm glad that the video seems to refute the "flyover" theory. But otherwise I have some issues here. We had to wait 5 years for this? Why couldn't it just be released on September 12, 2001? What is the big secret here? There are legitimate questions about 9/11 that have yet to be answered. And for that reason, the administration has no one to blame but themselves for some of the conspiracy theories. Granted, they were bound to emerge. But the veil of secrecy that they have placed over 9/11 has acted like a steroid. Why the hell couldn't this video have come out years ago? And even if there is no clear footage of the plane, why can't they just release all the footage they have????? It would shut SOME people up, and offer closure to others who lost people there. But the big build up to this only throws gas on the fire (insert jet fuel doesn't melt steel comment here). I promise you more people will start to doubt that Flight 77 hit the pentagon after they see this. And maybe, like South Park portayed, that's what they want. Who knows anymore...

 

[Arus808]

I'm glad that the video seems to refute the "flyover" theory. But otherwise I have some issues here. We had to wait 5 years for this? Why couldn't it just be released on September 12, 2001? What is the big secret here? There are legitimate questions about 9/11 that have yet to be answered. And for that reason, the administration has no one to blame but themselves for some of the conspiracy theories. Granted, they were bound to emerge. But the veil of secrecy that they have placed over 9/11 has acted like a steroid. Why the hell couldn't this video have come out years ago? And even if there is no clear footage of the plane, why can't they just release all the footage they have????? It would shut SOME people up, and offer closure to others who lost people there. But the big build up to this only throws gas on the fire (insert jet fuel doesn't melt steel comment here). I promise you more people will start to doubt that Flight 77 hit the pentagon after they see this. And maybe, like South Park portayed, that's what they want. Who knows anymore...

5 years for soemthing that showed bupkis, is a non issue imho.

The government doesn't entertain these consipracy theories. Only recently the NIST decided to entertain it for a bit on wTC 7 and they are treating that as only a "highlight" to address why the CT surrounding WTC 7 is not even plausible. Why should the government put stock into every "theory" put forth, when its not backed by evidence?

I could say the moon is made of cheese. however, we've put men on the moon and they can whole heartedly discount my claims with the evidence they brought back, along with video footage taken of the event. Its my theory, but its a theory they never entertained.

The government doesn't OWE us anything. They investitaged 9/11 , put out three different reports, basically all coming to the same conclusion. These videos, wereprobably never releaesd becaues THEY Didn't support any theory that was beyond what the evidence and facts showed. The physical evidence was more than enough to prove that a plane hit hte pentagon, that it was AA 77 and the DNA evidnece found proved that it was.

THERE IS A THEORY ABOUT EVERYTHING, whether is a murder two blocks from your house or something as big as 9/11. The only "facts" are when peopel admit to the crimes they've committed and how they went about to plan it, then it no longer becomes a theory.

 

[Oliver]

5 years for soemthing that showed bupkis, is a non issue imho.

The government doesn't entertain these consipracy theories. Only recently the NIST decided to entertain it for a bit on wTC 7 and they are treating that as only a "highlight" to address why the CT surrounding WTC 7 is not even plausible. Why should the government put stock into every "theory" put forth, when its not backed by evidence?

I guess they would investigate everthing if their
reputation is down enough because CT-speculations...

Isn´t this the reason for the new WTC7 investigation?

 

[TheGrunion]

There are legitimate questions about 9/11 that have yet to be answered.

Welcome aboard Hierosis.

What legitimate questions about 9/11 do you considered unanswered and who would you like to answer them?

 

[Hierosis]

Ok, if it was all simple incompetance, how was NO ONE help accountable? These people would have failed us ON MASSIVE LEVEL! They don't even offer up one scapegoat (ie, Oliver Noth in Iran/Contra).

Did any of you ever read James Ridgeway's book "the 5 Unanswered Questions About 9/11?" If not, I would suggest you do. I promise that it's EXTREMELY practical and doesn't talk about pods, jews or the illuminati.

 

[TheGrunion]

Ok, if it was all simple incompetance, how was NO ONE help accountable? These people would have failed us ON MASSIVE LEVEL! They don't even offer up one scapegoat (ie, Oliver Noth in Iran/Contra).

Did any of you ever read James Ridgeway's book "the 5 Unanswered Questions About 9/11?" If not, I would suggest you do. I promise that it's EXTREMELY practical and doesn't talk about pods, jews or the illuminati.

Why do you presume that the cause of 9/11 was "simple incompetance"?

How can you state that no one was held accountable?

http://149.101.1.32/ag/moussaouiindictment.htm

 

[Hierosis]

BTW - major props for the Scott Hall picture.

 

[Alt+F4]

I've been compiling witness accounts (in progress) of people who saw the plane. I may plot their locations on a map and make it into Macromedia Flash presentation or something.

-Kate

That would be great, if you have the time to do it. BTW, thanks for the photos, I for one am not familar with the area around the Pentagon.

 

[TheGrunion]

BTW - major props for the Scott Hall picture.

Thanks.

However, I am much more interested in your thoughts regarding the questions I asked you, rather than my avatar.

 

[Hierosis]

I think you're misunderstanding me. Unless I missed something, the official story says, that we were basically caught with our pants down. Meaning the government completely dropped the ball in anticipating and stopping these attacks. I have yet to see a single government official held accountable for this "incompetence."

The Moussaouii trial? They tried someone who did not take part in the attacks and whose role in it is still unclear to this day. Regarding 9/11 the most he is, is guilty by association. I don't want to sound like I'm defending the guy, but he was in jail on 9/11 and didn't take part in the attacks. Does it makes sense to charge for a crime that occurred while they were already in jail?

 

[TheGrunion]

I think you're misunderstanding me. Unless I missed something, the official story says, that we were basically caught with our pants down. Meaning the government completely dropped the ball in anticipating and stopping these attacks. I have yet to see a single government official held accountable for this "incompetence."

Have you read the 9/11 commission report? The actual report? I think you should. You will have a much better understanding of the official story.

The Moussaouii trial? They tried someone who did not take part in the attacks and whose role in it is still unclear to this day. Regarding 9/11 the most he is, is guilty by association. I don't want to sound like I'm defending the guy, but he was in jail on 9/11 and didn't take part in the attacks. Does it makes sense to charge for a crime that occurred while they were already in jail?

Based on the above, I presume that you now acknowledge that someone was held accountable.

You seem like a decent enough person. I'm guessing that you have only been exposed to derivitive information filtered through pro-CT websites.

I know it takes a lot of effort, but do yourself a favor and read at least the 9/11 commission report. I think it will greatly assist in putting things in context for you.

 

[Hierosis]

Oh no no brother, I have read that incredible Tom Clancy feature. Curiously, have you read "Without Precedent?" This is the book that was written by Kean and Hamilton earlier this year where they talk about how much information they were DENIED access to, thus limiting the effectiveness of their investigation. If not, I'd make a trip to amazon.

As far as Moussaouii, so you're telling me that prosecuting someone who didn't take part in the ACTUAL ATTACKS is considered justice? Surely you jest sir. And I still think you're not quote getting the concept of GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR MISERABLE FAILURES ON AND BEFORE 9/11.

 

[Gravy]

I think you're misunderstanding me. Unless I missed something, the official story says, that we were basically caught with our pants down. Meaning the government completely dropped the ball in anticipating and stopping these attacks. I have yet to see a single government official held accountable for this "incompetence."

Specifically who do you think should be held accountable, and how?

 

[Hierosis]

Specifically who do you think should be held accountable, and how?

Gravy Train!!! I was wondering when I would be cited by you.

Well, why don't you tell me. You're the one who feels that the incompetence theory is all there is to it.

 

[Kryptos]

Ok, if it was all simple incompetance, how was NO ONE help accountable?

62,040,606 American voters (a majority) in 2004 did not fault the administration for failing to "connect the dots" and foresee the 9/11 attacks, and for various reasons were content with status quo.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/

Of course, 59,028,109 American voters were dissatisfied for various reasons, but that wasn't enough. I don't fault the government for failing to "connect the dots" or the "failure of imagination".

I'm not sure if you have a realistic idea of the government's capabilities. It's not at all like Hollywood, but is rather like a huge and very slow elephant. There are ~2 million employees scattered in offices all around the Washington area, FBI and other agency field offices across the country, and around the world. Combine that with government's slow adoption of technology to aid in information sharing, and bureaucratic/legal "walls" that inhibit interagency coordination, and failure to "connect the dots" is no surprise.

http://news.com.com/Critics+Management,+not+IT+money,+is+FBI+problem/2100-1028_3-5191646.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/17/AR2006081701485.html

As for holding officials accountable, folks like George Tenet and Louis Freeh are gone. On the other hand, if FAA and NORAD leadership lied to the 9/11 Commission to hide their incompetence, I wouldn't be sad to see them go. But overall, the problems are more systematic than anything, in terms of what the government could have done to prevent 9/11.

-Kate

 

[Gravy]

Gravy Train!!! I was wondering when I would be cited by you.

Well, why don't you tell me. You're the one who feels that the incompetence theory is all there is to it.

Don't put words in my mouth. It's your claim, and I asked a reasonable question about it. Specifically whom do you think should be held accountable, and how?

 

[Skeptic4Sure]