Pentagon Releases 9/11 Security Video

probably they were waiting for Final Cut Studio for Intel Mac binary. They weren't able to render it until now.

^ ROFL

One of the funniest things I have read all day!

jmack02

It has been almost 5 years, why did it have to take this long? It was just a video.

From the article: "The Pentagon had previously refused to release the videos, saying they had been provided to the Justice Department as evidence in any criminal proceedings."

What criminal preceeding just ended with a life sentence?

Need I say more?

Full Throttle, FTW.

James Mack

Full Throttle, FTW.

And this means what?

Full Throttle, for the win!

This subthread just takes irreverence to uncharted heights.

Still looks like a missle. They should have released a better video that showed a plane....
It was only in the picture for 1 frame.

The second link on that page does not work

---------------------------
Download could not complete!
---------------------------
fl77-2_11094237.mpg from media.dtic.mil
---------------------------
OK ---------------------------

File name not valid.

The only one i have seen is the one on CNN. So if somebody has a better link to video 2 please post it.

the videos at http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/index.html use a streaming rtsp format which is allegedly playable in VLC and realplayer (among others.) I must be really stupid though as I cannot get either stream to play in VLC.....Perhaps the high-powered military servers are overloaded?

The videos are available here. Let me know if anyone can spot a Boeing 757...

Me too. When it comes to human misery, high resolution is the only way to go.

You would prefer a blurry end to the story of these peoples lives?

uh no....I would prefer a video clip that backs up there allegations of a plane hitting the pentagon, not a "blur". Is that all you gotta say?

Luis... I am on your side bud, I think a blur is an F'd up way to show what happened (especially when there IS better footage).
I was responding to yerfatma.

It's coo!

Were the 85 videos other security cameras?

I don't know but it was the freaking pentagon, a place like that doesn't suffer from lack of cameras.

They have two security cameras that had a direct view of the crash, and both have been released. 85 pointing towards the crash site? Please.

Please, James. This is correct. Judicial Watch is still awaiting a second FOIA request for the remaining 84 Flight 77 recordings — including the tapes from the gas station and the hotel. Hopefully, they'll be released soon.

Sorry, should be Flight 77 dot info. There are two different parties seeking to obtain the same videos.

Well it's been almost 5 years -- I guess we can hold out a few more days :)

If people think it was a "jumbo jet" that hit it, they are conspiracy nuts. No quotation marks needed.

Thank you. I thought I was nuts the way CNN was talking about this like there was something new. I'm not seeing anything "conclusive."

More fuel for the fire, I say.

The government is hiding the truth about that plane.

You should be thankful that we care enough to want to know the truth as opposed to just swallow whatever the hell the govt wants us to hear.

I'd like to know how the hell that plane (which your sister was on) was able to enter Pentagon airpace without "anybody knowing" where that plane was. Don't we have like 500 satellites in space? Why was this plane allowed to be hijack for this long?

Don't you want to hear the blackbox of that plane? Don't you have a right to know exactly what the hell went on that day in details concerning that plane and the pentagon?

If grief is stopping you from asking questions, I can't lecture you since I have not lost a sibling.

ps. my condolences to your sister.

Sorry to hear about your sister. Seriously, I don't know how you can still conclude that there was a plane that hit that building. Makes no sense. There were plenty of camera's on that spot where the pentagon got hit that would show conclusive evidence but yet none of this gets shown. Instead we get a one frame shot that shows nothing new.

Did they ever get the black box from this crash or did it "melt" like the rest of this plane supposedly did?

Velocity,

First of all, you have my condolences. And as I'm sure I don't have to tell you, please ignore the conspiracy nuts like Zaki and Pedro Gomez. The evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon is indeed overwhelming (literally, for you), and yet certain people want to cling to tiny slivers of doubt for some reason - perhaps to fill their humble, tiny existences with grand meaning and purpose that was otherwise missing.

Ok voiceofreason.

The evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon is indeed overwhelming

Where in the hell are you getting this evidence at? I think that 9/11 was a terrible day. The fact that there is no strong evidence for the pentagon crash site and the one for flight 93 is the part that troubles me. I would honestly like for you to tell me in the history of modern airfare where there was a land based crashed and there was not one shred of evidence left of the plane. No engine. No exterior. No nothing. I don't recall any. The grass at the pentagon was still green, surely a gasoline explosion would have charred this a bit. The crash site for flight 93 was just a hole. No plane. Come on. I am not looking for a conspiracy, I am just really wanting to see some better answers than the ones that are out there. Hell, who knows voiceofreason, maybe that will fill my humble, tiny existence then.

Besides the belittling comment about conspiracy theorists (voice), I am certain you would do well to have all the facts (which none of us have...yet).

As far as your sister, I have seven sisters, if any of them die in a plane wreck, I will be first in line to SEE, HEAR and KNOW the truth. I can't believe that was your response also, this kind of commentary about something so abstract, that you (having lost someone) can identify with, and is exactly the kind of thing I would WANT to read to ease my mind for accepting a half-a$$ed answer for my sister's death.

Well said eSantiago.

So, Pedro Gomez, you're saying that no plane hit the Pentagon, so Velocity's sister just... evaporated? Got lost in the airport? Volunteered to be a fake casualty?

The fact is, there were numerous sightings of the plane hitting the Pentagon, all in the public record. And to answer your question about the dynamics of the collision, I'm not a Ph.D. in aeronautics nor civil engineering, so I don't feel qualified to make such a judgement. Based on my graduate education in physics, however, I do know that high-energy collisions behave in unintuitive ways.

What was well said?

Newton paraphrase, Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Your a physics guru, calculate the amount of fuel that was in the aircraft at the time... public information, the speed at which the plane may have been traveling...public information, and how far from the impact grass must have been burned or how far from the central impact the flames should have spread. Few pieces to help you along... What temperature does steel (tempered construction steel) melt? How hot does jet fuel become when ignited and allowed to burn for extended time with more consumables? How far is the range of the heat from the initial blast and is said temperature enough to "brown or burn" the grass? plastic & copper telephone reels? glass? wood on the spools?

You're a physicist and you haven't wondered these questions?

You know what, Zaki and Pedro? You have no idea what my family has been through. You have no idea how the government has dealt with us personally. And you have no idea what it is like to have to relive that day over and over.

All I said was that I didn't think it was in good taste to be cracking jokes about this. Don't think you know where I stand on this, or my family for that matter. Whether it was terrorists or the government who was responsible it isn't going to bring my sister back.

I have spent a lot of time with other people who lost loved ones on flight 77. Some of them had been speaking to victims as the plane was in DC airspace, minutes and even seconds before the crash. Every person I have spoken with believes that terrorist flew that plane into the Pentagon. How may people have you spoken with?

You can believe whatever you want, but don't you dare assume you know where I stand and what I have done about this.

Mr nice guy is gone. The angry Phadrus is in full effect. You guys are complete idiots. You offer your condolences to a fellow newsviner for the loss of her sister on that plane and then you say, with a straight face mind you, that no plane actually hit the pentagon. Do you guys actually read what you write? You are a complete moron. Her sister died and was on that plane. Where did the plane go, Zaki, if you are so smart? Is her sister in the witness protection program? Is her sister a part of the government conspiracy? You're idiots, I tell you. My father in law works and lives in Northern Virginia and knows a lot of people. He knows people who saw the plane hit the pentagon. A lot of people did as the Pentagon sits right next to I-95.

If you want to be this stupid, please take it to Digg. Newsvine is supposed to be where we get smarter, not dumber. Kill the stupidity!!!

Dude, count to ten, then backwards....feel better?

Phadrus, I guess we're restting the clock?

I am starting over, afresh, anew. From here on out, I will stick to the facts and the facts only, and I will leave the personal stuff out. I will refrain from making statements that appear only to be designed to flame bait.

Too bad. You have got something to contribute here, however, your approach tends to be subverted by your passions. I don't think anyone actually feels anything but sympathy for the families of the 9/11 victims. With regards to the Pentagon videos released today... they simply do not show anything conclusive. If a person accepts the official version of Flight 77, they see that version unfold in the video. If, however, a person has doubts about the official version, their doubts are unlikely to be assuaged by this video. There is simply nothing either way.

I feel that the incredulous response by some viners to the video is not without reason. Many feel that after four and a half years, two wars, and many of thousands dead that a video of one frame of a gray blur is a disappointment. Was this the evidence that was supposed to condemned an admitted co-conspirator of 9/11? To wait so long to view evidence that was so readily available and, yet, was so inconsequential and incomplete comes across as insulting rather than respectful to the families of the 9/11 victims or to those families who have sacrificed their loved ones in an attempt to prevent such a disaster from reoccurring.

Even the people with the least deference to the government's description of that day have, every single one, offered their condolences to Velocity without hesitation. We have only Velocity's word, no additional proof whatsoever, yet we all accept Velocity's claim, if not for his or her sake (because the claim is unverified), then for who Velocity represents - the families of the victims. So whether Velocity's claim is true or false (and it doesn't matter to me), no reasonable person has ever wished that experience on anyone else. None of us recants our sympathies for Velocity or the many thousands of others who live with their unique and understandable pain.

We have only Velocity's word, no additional proof whatsoever, yet we all accept Velocity's claim, if not for his or her sake (because the claim is unverified),

By this same disgusting logic, the murder rate in the United States is 0.0 per 1,000. Because none of us actually saw the murders.

Twisted, disgusting logic.

Um, most people are either acquitted or convicted by the account of a witness to a crime. Your logic is gross and under-investigated.

Um, most people are either acquitted or convicted by the account of a witness to a crime. Your logic is gross and under-investigated.

I am not sure who you're addressing.

Um, most people are either acquitted or convicted by the account of a witness to a crime.

Since I'm assuming this is referring to me, let me rebut.

Witnesses saw the planes hit the Pentagon. Autopsies were performed on the bodies. The ones that could be identified went to the families because they were positively identified. Wreckage from a Boeing 757 was found in and around the Pentagon.

Foregone conclusion, Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

@ eSantiago: Both as a logician and physicist, your argument is wrong on so many levels.

First off: There was an explosion, and the soon-after-9/11 footage showed a gaping hole whose lower edge was maybe a dozen feet above the ground. Grass charring is largely a moot point when a fireball is documented. You can't dispute the presence of a fireball and burning, but you're gonna say "No one noted that the grass was burned, so it couldn't have been a plane crash, because then people would have noted the burned grass"? Without actually recreating the event (the official account), you have no idea what would actually happen. Your line of questioning has no factual backing.

Secondly: Have you even bothered to do any calculations, or are you going for the shotgun debating technique? Here's another one of Newton's laws: an object in motion will stay in linear motion at a constant velocity unless a net force acts upon it. If the plane is moving at 350 mph (or whatever the high number is), and the body crumples, the fuel is, at the point of impact, still moving at 350 mph. The frame of reference of the explosion will be moving into the Pentagon at high speed. Combined with the hundreds of tons of Pentagon below the impact site and the cylindrical body of the aircraft, there is no reason to believe that the explosion was anything like a "normal" spherical explosion. Burnt grass? Question your own assumptions before you question others'.

By the way, while I'm commenting on your "science," copper and glass don't burn well at all. Do a bit more research about basic science before asking others for credible evidence.

@ Zaki: The jokes really are disgusting. I think that was the main thing that Velocity was replying to, though I do like the sober tone in which you answered his comment. Seriously: Metal Gear Solid 9: Guns of the Pentagon WTF?

how far from the impact grass must have been burned or how far from the central impact the flames should have spread.

I was asking a question, I didn't presume to note anything of any consequence. I was asking if the physicist had actually asked himself these questions.

A volatile liquid within a pressurized container... how does that object react when moving at 350? mph and hits a steel and concrete re-enforced wall? I don't know but from a relatively similar perspective, the WTC, the flames charred the glass four floors up and two floors down (from the impact-side crater), let's not forget the jet fuel burned through steel beams designed to withstand the temperature of burning jet fuel fumes. However at the pentagon the fckin grass wasn't even burned... it raises a question (why is this so?), Now I ask for a logical explanation, i.e. in steps you physics gurus to do the talking (I wasn't supposing or inferring anything). Its just curious how that could happen, and what's worse is why wasn't anyone else asking these questions.

The fuel, even though moving in a specific path and at a high rate of speed, will still behave like a liquid. It will mushroom, or splash at its first contact with an impediment. Hence my question as to why the flames didn't burn the grass?

Here, have a look at some very detailed pictures of the Pentagon.

So, eSantiago... according to you, planes did hit the WTC, but a plane didn't hit the Pentagon? You're seriously entertaining the possibility that somebody orchestrated a fake attack on the Pentagon even though the attacks on the WTC were, as you admit here, real events? Let's just think about this for a second:

Conspirator A: "Okay, it's all set, then. Planes will be flown into WTC 1 and 2, causing catastrophic damage and thus furthering our agenda."

Conspirator B: "I dunno... the spectacular deaths of thousands of innocents and the collapse of one of America's most-recognized landmarks just might not be enough. We'd better also make it look like a plane flew into the Pentagon, too, killing a hundred or so more."

Conspirator A: "Good point."

That's easy. They didn't have a very, very large insurance policy on the Pentagon like they did on the WTC. Shock and Awe and all that rot.

And, if you want to be truly cynical and give the conspirators FAR more credit, you could say that it would serve a better marketing purpose if the Pentagon was to only be slightly damaged, then quickly rebuilt. Then people can write meaningful country songs about getting back up after taking a punch, etc.

24 is @!$%# and full of stereotypes. You want an excellent TV show about terrorism, watch Sleeper Cell.

How about LOST then?

here's an idea, start making arguments about the topic of this thread instead of wasting your time annoying moi.

"Zaki has been watching 24".

Wow, that was so profound Marky, you're a spokesperson for our code of honor.

I'm sorry Zaki. I thought your posts were being sarcastic so I responded with my (subjective) humorous replies. But if you are being serious with your comments sorry man I am not going to take the bait.

I hope to Jesus & Company you're not referring to my reply to Mr. Velocity, because I'm not going to act sarcastic to someone who just informed me of the death of his sister.

As far as the other two comments, I wasn't too serious, this stupid biology midterm is going to be in 30 minutes, and I'm sick of all these 400 terms.

Zaki, you offered your condolences all the while claiming her sister was not on a plane that hit the pentagon. Do you see the ludicrousness of what you are saying? Or are you high on the sauce?

If you read carefully what my comments said instead going straight to criticizing me, you will notice that I never said anything about her sister not being on the plane. If I did, I don't think people would have voted up my comment!

Anyway, have you ever heard of curiosity? I'm curious. I'm curious as to why "the most powerful military on the planet" took so damn long to locate all 4 hijacked planes. If you're not curious, that's cool.

I don't even smoke tobacco, let alone illegal drugs. Although I do listen to a lot of electronic music.

Zaki breakdances

"They" are planning "something Evil".

This kind of sh!t is what gives conspiracy theorists a bad name.

Conspiracy theorists is what gives @!$%# a bad name!

How are you sure it's a plane? Do you know something we don't? Or, do you just roll with the punches?

We know its a plane because that's what the government tells us it is, silly.

And yes, that's the tone of sarcasm. We really need an emoticon for sarcasm. Maybe: (8\)

How are you sure it's a plane? Do you know something we don't? Or, do you just roll with the punches?

Not at all, however I think it's probably a bit in-sensitive to start claiming wild things about missiles etc. when people (such as Velocity's sister) died that day, as far as we know, in that crash.

The reason I said "I'm sure it was a plane" was because I was trying to be slightly sympathetic to someone who had already posted saying his sister had died in the crash, so please don't take it so literally, of course I don't know it was a plane any more than you know it wasn't.

Thanks for clearing that up. I understand and I also express my sympathy to the gentlemen who lost his sister.

Don't forget the sympathy for the over 2450+ U.S. casualties of the war.

And the who 35000+ innocent civilians in Iraq.

Since 9/11 was the impetus for the war and all...

It just looks skinny due to scale. There aren't any shots of the tail of the plane, so this proves nothing, for either side of the debate. The resolution is too small to see any windows.

> I am amazed by how low to the ground the thing is. I can't imagine a big jetliner being flown by some amateur being able to do that.

How do we know he was trying to do that? Maybe he was trying to hit it mid-point... or maybe just over the top of the first ring to plow into the inner rings? He came in low... pointed at the target and hit where he hit... probably taking a quick dive a thousand yards out as he would have be high enough to clear anything in front of it.

I don't really understand the conspiracy theory people... there where people on that plane talking to their friends and family.. describing how what they could see.. their plane was over DC, if it didn't hit the Pentagon where did it go?

The blur... 350+mph... security cameras that are usually less that 30 fps to save tape.. seems like they are lucky to even to catch the blur.

The vector of the force would be traveling into the structure... not explode in a perfect circle around the entry point.

I've read / watched some of the conspiracy sites and I'm really amazed they are trying to make something out of this... What do they think about the NY strikes? Those were real but they wanted to fake one more explosion just for drama? Maybe they should switch back to the face on Mars or something...

I can't imagine a big jetliner being flown by some amateur being able to do that.

You mean hitting a large stationary object? What was the Pentagon going to do . . . dodge?!?

The motive: to manufacture consent amongst the American people so that the Bush Administration and his friends from the New American Century could invade Iraq – a goal that they had set out to accomplish in their September 2000 report:

"while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for US military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

Hope that helps clarify somethings, or at least shoots up some red-flags.

Look at it from a military point of view,

Pearl Harbor was attacked and we set straight off to war... however many (i mean a lot) of civilian cargo transports were sunk prior to the invasion of PH.

Its all about hard targets, people hate seeing military (our own) get killed in combat at home.

Think about it militarily, until the strike of the Pentagon, all the targets were soft, civilian targets. Then out of nowhere, a hard target is hit, makes sense to me to suppose that the order to launch a cruise missile to pave the road for the above mentioned "war in iraq". Then you shoot down a craft that "could" have been the intended "plane" to hit the pentagon (Flight 77), and one more (white house, intended) for safe measure to make heroes of the people aboard (Flight 93). Put the FBI on alert to confiscate video, release one close-up that is questionable/evidence to give people a topic to argue over. The tricky part that was entirely brilliant was protecting our own people... the side that was hit by the "plane" had just finished armoring, and was capable of withstanding substantial attack from the outside... is it also just a coincidence that the part of the building was cordoned off and inaccessible to civilians, but accessible by military (hard targets).

If you look at from the inside...it is perfectly plausible to have done this and done it without the public any wiser. What's worse is, its a better sell, I wish I had thought it up, maybe I'd have been promoted. Ha!

The motive: to manufacture consent amongst the American people so that the Bush Administration and his friends from the New American Century could invade Iraq

Wasn't that already done earlier in the day at the WTC?

That aside here is a little experiment for you "believers." Well, that should read "non-believers" I guess.

Take your still camera, place it on a tripod next to your nearest interstate with normal traffic traveling at 55-70 mph. Shoot up your entire roll as see what you get. Now compare those images with the Pentegon images of a plane going better than ten times as fast.

If you think the film would come up with anything but a small blurred image, hope is lost on along with reason, logic... I better stop there. There is a code of honor around here.

I'm not arguing that those photo's were doctored or other frames have been withheld, I just want to know why no statements / releases have been made pertaining to the two other known video sources at the site (both are referenced in earlier comments).

Full Throttle wrote: "Take your still camera, place it on a tripod next to your nearest interstate with normal traffic traveling at 55-70 mph. Shoot up your entire roll as see what you get."

You're not taking distance into account.

The pentagon camera was not right next to the crash, it was many hundreds of feet away. (From this picture, and the knowledge that each side of the Pentagon is 921 feet long, I would estimate approx. 700 feet from the camera to the crash site)

Now I'm not saying we should expect high-def crystal clear video, but comparing it to putting a camera next to an interstate is simply a misleading and inaccurate analogy.

Anyway, the frames from this video showing the crash were available years ago, and do not show anything that can be clearly identified as an airliner... so I'm afraid this will likely do nothing to silence any conspiracy theories.

Take your still camera, place it on a tripod next to your nearest interstate with normal traffic traveling at 55-70 mph. Shoot up your entire roll as see what you get. Now compare those images with the Pentegon images of a plane going better than ten times as fast.

be careful of how you use examples. your example neglects to consider shutter speed, iso, aperature, and zoom. if i set the shutter speed at 1/1000 seconds, i'll get a fairly crisp frame. at a 2 second shutter, i'll get a nice motion blur. at 1/30 second, i'll get a slight blur but a very recognizable image. all of these shutter speeds are at an medium distance and appropriate zoom. if it was up close or zoomed in, i might get a blur at 1/500 second. from very far away, i might not get a blur at 1/8 second.

Its good to have a professional photographer's opinion on this one (or someone who knows more than the average "full throttle"). Another aspect to consider is (quite overlooked) the specs on the supposed "other" cameras... what were they... oh, it hasn't been released.

As with all these things, there appears to be as many people disputing this article as there are supporting it.

If I remember correctly there was quite a bit of skepticism as to the researchers that were used and their dubious links to some interesting people.

If you search Google I'm sure it'll come up with some of the articles about it.

And I like this article that exposes the flaws in the (old) Popular Mechanics article.

It's an interesting article, and I have seen it before. It doesn't really convince me of anything, and from what I gather after a quick Google search there are some serious flaws.

And there's always Screw Loose Change.

That's a fckuing brilliant question, but the answer is gonna be about the same as the kennedy declassification. Same stuff, years later, and with no improvement on the actual knowledge of what really happened...bollocks.

RAGE.

What a broad generalization... its that kind of sentiment that makes people with sound theories sound insane. You know what, Maybe the government didn't have a hand in it and the terrorists are evil and coming to kill us... is that making my gas cheaper, is sending my kid to public school a wise choice, I mean WTF? Are you so consumed and simultaneously jaded by sensationalism that the few times the government has had a hand in it you're blind? Take a real stance for goodness sake, instead of just takin' it up the ... ok sorry that was mean. Listen, its a lot easier to suggest a full blown conspiracy than a half-a$$ one, which is what most conspiracy theorists think about 9/11. Terrorists did their thing with the planes, the government took advantage and made the situation worse to benefit intended plans... war in iraq (where prior to 9/11, terrorists were primarily hiding in Europe/Saudi Arabia/Africa).

…good point, but why don't they just release the videos? What are they hiding?

I dunno, elvis planned the whole shebang.... here's a clue, money! Think of the profitability to American corporations (all of them) with a fresh untapped market for the taking. Imagine it, McD's everywhere in Baghdad. Or a circuit city in downtown Kabul... I mean every corporation in America has something to gain from the war in Iraq. And people are questioning the OIL, phew, they have everything to lose by having more competition (or smart people from the mid-east making cheap fuel alternatives their choice, instead of gas).

I believe it was Hoover that came up with the term 'Military Industrialisation Complex". That is what we are as a nation. As eSantiago stated, there is so much profit involved with us going to war. Lots of money to gain. We spend more money on our military than all of our other programs combined. Oh..but wait..that's not an incentive to to devise a big illusion for a terrorist attack. Things don't connect.

It's amazing how anti-government people are (anything bad happens, they assume the goverment did it like with 9/11). This is only one video of many that they will end up releasing, nothing conclusive yet but honestly I don't think any of the remaining videos will please some of you.

I don't really even know how to respond to this. What a bunch of crap. Anti-government? How in the hell are you anti-government if you think that there was more to 9/11 than what was shown to the public? You don't have to believe every fcking thing that is told you, especially when things are as sketchy as they are. Show me something conclusive, that is all that I ask. Just have some footage that shows a passenger plane flying into that building. Show me that. Show me some wreckage from a plane crash site. You know...the wreckage that is always left behind at any plane crash. Oh wait, I forgot, because I am anti-government I have to believe that planes disappear from a crash site...wait not disappear, I meant decimate all together.

I am not a conspiracy theorist .I find it amazing that so many people Believe the government when they say something. These are not saints - they are people and people with power want to protect it.

So, I think it is NOT odd that its taken so long, to reveal so little. I don't necessarily think a cover up is about "a missile versus a plane" conspiracy. But, more about not wanting to reveal what we were doing to protect America against terror and who, if anybody is to blame for missing the boat on this day. Which is a by producct of our desire to find someone to blame for everything bad that happens. I personally think that they probably could not have prevented this tragedy. People willing to die - will find a way to meet their objectives.

And , I think we will not stop further acts of terror by trying to catch them all before it happens and by watching everybody, every minute of everyday.

We will move towards doing it, once we address the problem ( our over-involvement in the Middle east) and we can do that - by finding a way to be energy independent - and we reduce our need for oil - and thus our need to be a major presence in the region - Then, you will see America get safer from ( the current batch) of terrorists.

And, I Think it is time for the government to get full motion security cameras. They clearly have enough storage space on their hard drives - they are recording billions of our phone call records - maybe get better security video s of what is going on around the Pentagon ( I am not opposed to carefully monitoring our defense facilities - only our average citizens in their homes).

I'm right here, Phaedrus. But I don't think I qualify as a conspiracy theorist as I have no particular theory to offer. Nor do I support any of the existing theories fully — including the official one. But I do ask a lot of questions as I think the world deserves to know what really happened that fateful day. Unfortunately, the video presented by the Pentagon today was of no help at all!

As I said the video was released because of the freedom of information act. It was not a perfect video but it was what was asked for and the media got it. Now they are complaining about the quality. They got what they asked for. Keld, I contend we already know what happened that day. It's all as plain as day. No conspiracy! Sorry!

I don't consider it conspiracy to look for the truth, Phaedrus. Yes, it seems that the Judicial Watch got what they asked for, but as I said above: it wasn't of much help.

Nothing the government could do would be of help to you Keld, cuz you already have your mind made up that the truth is something else besides what we already know. No smoking gun would be good enough for you.

If you're looking for North by going South then yes there is a problem. You will eventually get to North but you are taking the long route.

If you're satisfied with the official version, why don't you just leave it to the rest of us to find our truth? It's out there somewhere, and it can't be hidden for ever!

Because, Keld, in this instance, there is no such thing as your truth and my truth. There is only the truth. 9/11 either happened and was perpetrated by terrorists or it didnt. Dont you understand? You can go South all you want, all the while claiming you are looking to find North, but you are going in the wrong direction? You say you are looking for truth, but you only seed articles that already conforms to your beliefs? I never see you seeding articles that contradict your views? Is that really searching for the truth? I think not! You want it to be a conspiracy and that is the only evidence you will look at. In other words, you are biased and therefore not objective.

I don't think anyone here is being objective, including you, Phaedrus72. We all came here with our minds made up, whether 9/11 was perpetrated by terrorists, the US gov't, or that we had made up our minds to not know.

The difference is that I have watched Michael Moore's crapumentaries and I have watched loose change. Keld and those like him are not willing to listen to anything that contradicts their conspiracy theories. Their minds are already made up. Truth is a misnomer to them.

A blind man was walking through the woods, and was quite lost. He didnt know which way to go to get back to civilization. He meets up with other people in the woods who offer to take him to safety, but he refuses saying, "Why dont you just let me find my own way out of here? you say I have to go West to get out of here, but I have to find my own way, I'm going East, and then North and then South, but I will not go West. Your way does not have to be my way." The people said to him, "Fine, do what you wish, but you will stay lost." The man says, "I"m just looking to find my way out of here, why are you badgering me?" "We're not, we are only trying to save you some time and agravation" "Well leave me be"

This little story reminds me of Keld and those like him.

And he thinks all those telling him to go West are all part of a vast conspiracy to lead him astray.

Wrong again, Phaedrus. I did believe the official story to begin with — except for a few minor 'coincidences' — but as time has past, and after having read the 9/11 Report, the Downing Street Memos, all the lies about going to war in Iraq, and some of the more serious 'conspiracy theories', I have come to the conclusion that things are not what they appear to be be. Today I'm convinced that 9/11 could not have happened without a 'little help' from the Bush regime. It's now up to the US gov't to prove that they were not involved, from my point of view.

Maybe some people come to different conclusions than you from watching Loose Change and Mike Moore's "crapumentaries" as well as the sources giving the official story. Does this mean they are mentally ill?

Your mind is clearly "already made up" as well. Keld, who seems to be the spokesman, somehow, of the group of 9/11 questioners here on Newsvine, probably has read the official story. I think we all have, and we all have probably done research, and come to our own conclusions.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they are wrong, it just means they reached different conclusions.

Once again, there is a right view of what happened on 9/11 and a wrong view. Me and Keld can not both be right at the same time. That is not possible.

Keld, it's not up to the US government to prove anything to you. Even in a court of law, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff, not with the defendant. You are accusing the Bush administration of perpetrating or complicity in 9/11. The burden of proof lies with you, my friend. So far, you have failed miserably to do so.

Agreed, Phaedrus. We can't "both be right". I'm not in the position to tear the official story apart. I'm just asking for some questions to be answered, and some convincing evidence to be released that I can believe in. That's all. And I don't seem to be the only one!

Phaedrus... the Judicial Watch requested the footage from the Sheraton and the Shell station, as well as the DoT CCTV footage of the plane... they got the "enhanced" version of the original release! When DO you start asking questions, when they are holding up a blue panel, telling you that this panel is "red", no matter what they have said before?

@ Phaedrus72: Though I do believe the official account of 9/11, your stance is absurd. It's true that there can only be one completely factual account of what happened. But, to extrapolate this into "If you're questioning anything, you're a foaming-at-the-mouth idiot" is a bit of a stretch, to put it very nicely.

Purely from Keld's comments in this particular thread, I don't believe he ever claimed "The gov't is totally s---in' us, dude! Missiles and trenchcoated men!" For a person who claims to want civil discourse (e.g. your comment about Digg) on Newsvine, it's curious and rather pitiful that you explicitly try to incite emotional debate with challenges bordering on personal attacks (Comment 20), and then sarcastically judge people to hell and back. (20.4, 20.10, 20.14)

Keld (not referring to Pedro Gomez or eSantiago at all) has only shown, in this discussion, that he has questions about the government's account. Is there something inherently wrong and despicable about not completely believing everything the government tells you? There must be a reason that the US has independent media, as opposed to a state-instituted media. Why is that? If everyone just believed the gov't at face value... well... we really wouldn't need any reporting on domestic politics, now would we?

From my point of view, your deliberate generalizations and characterizations are no different from me calling you a sheep. It seems curious coming from a person who wanted to reinvent himself as a nicer person on Newsvine.

Jack, no credible news source has ever put forth a credible conspiracy theory either. It's not just the official government story I believe, but all credible news. Loose change and Michael Moore and their types are not credible.

Plus, Keld is doing much more than just questioning certain aspects of the official story. Have you seen some of his seeds? He believes in a full scale government conspiracy to cover up either their complicity in 9/11 or their doing.

@ Phaedrus: I qualified my statements by indicating that my observations ofKeld derived only from his comments in this thread. Now, I've looked at Keld's last 100 seeds, and though there is a skeptical bent, I think there were 8-9 which were skeptical of either the gov't's competence or truthfulness regarding 9/11.

All things considered, I think this is a fair indicator of Keld's doubting opinion, but his comments here only raise questions, and he has yet to resort to personal attacks or sarcastic generalizations.

Also, do you really think your view on the matter is The Whole Truth? That's an interesting and very impressively lofty pedestal you place yourself on.

One nitpick: "... and their types" in Comment 20.18 can give you free reign to declare any opposing viewpoint ridiculous. Please explain who "their types" are. I doubt that everyone who has a shred of doubt as to the official 9/11, or thinks we deserve to know more, or believes that the gov't has been less than forthcoming about the issue, is what you mean by "their type."

Jack, I will say this one more time and I will say it slowly! Anyone who entertains the idea in their head for more than a split second, that the Bush administration either orchestrated 9/11 themselves or were complicit in the attacks by sitting back and letting them happen when they had foreknowledge of it beforehand is a nut and a lunatic and needs a psychological evaluation. And that's the bottom line, cuz stone cold said so!!

You're right, but then that brings up the question: Where are the rest of the tapes? I am sure if we saw them, then we actually can determine what Actually did hit the pentagon.

When I watched CNN, they mentioned it is 2 FPS, not 60.

When I watched CNN, they mentioned it is 2 FPS, not 60.

I said that they DON'T record in 60 FPS.

I was giving you the full number since you said:

they do much less (not sure of the full number).

Just providing more information for people that had not watched. I agree with everything you say. In fact, my comment definitely substantiates your last sentence :)

That footage will never be released, because too many "conspiracy theorists" want it to be. And too many people in power do not.

Ummm, the planes that hit the twin towers DID explode Reed. Where have you been for the past 5 years?!

I'm sorry but this explosion is TINY compared to the one at the WTC. I'm not saying anything other than that, but it seems soooooo small when the WTC made a humongous fireball.

So one guy says there was no explosion of the plane at the WTC, the other guy says it was much bigger at the WTC. You liberals and conspiracy theorists can't even get your stories straight. Hilarious!

mateoutah, the WTC is a steel building, the pentagon is not.

Phaedrus before you rip me a new one I never said that there was no plane or any other amount of this BS that is flying around. I just made a simple observation, and left it at that. The problem with this video is that there is no frame of reference to judge the size of things, and like you said I forgot to take into account the material of the building. I never said that this video was fake or anything, yet you still choose me to flame as a 'liberals and conspiracy theorists.' Please don't attack me because of other things people have said on here. I just wanted to bring up the point and get some input, which you did with your second comment. For that I thank you.

Actually the Pentagon released the video because of the freedom of information act. It's not as if they put this video out to quiet the conspiracy theorists. So if the video is less than perfect, it's what was asked for, and what the news media got.

How come this plane exploded, and the planes that hit the trade centers didn't?

Oh. My God.

Phaedrus,

I've been following this story in the media all day(because I am a 9/11 conspiracy nutjob)......and this video is *not* what Judicial Watch was asking for..... They were (from the accounts I have read) seeking the videos from the sheraton motel and also a citgo gas station (which were apparently confiscated by the FBI.)

What the govt released really does not "silence the conspiracy theorists", as judicial watch put it. This newly-released video doesn't seem to show us anything conclusive, unfortunately.

What happened to the other videos, uncle sam? That's the real question.

FIRST... Just for the record, Phaedrus doesn't believe in research, or for that matter anything that can be sited as fact. Take your silly browser and open a new tab or window and GO to Judicial Watch to see exactly what they requested... its public info, and quite well written. Then come back, apologize for EVERY erroneous statement you made without doing any research and read aloud he code of honor, five times before going to bed. Then maybe you will have 10% of an idea of how investigative journalism works.

Secondly, People speak out of place sometimes... for example...REED, mateoutah,... that doesn't give you the right to label or create broad generalizations about liberals or theorists. How dare you say that you make more sense?

Last, the explosions were each directly proportionate to the amount of speed and fuel in each type of aircraft, so says big brother, now shut up and take it. My boss was in the courtyard in the center of the pentagon when the "plane" hit, the flames came up over the top of the building and reached across the courtyard. Big enough?

Sorry. I remember seeing the footage live, but I don't remember seeing explosions. I just looked at some pictures, and yes, I am wrong.

moldor, my father in law lives and works in Northern Virginia and has first hand knowledge that it was indeed a plane. Stop listening to these lunatics!

Do you want to stop calling people names? It certainly doesn't add value.

Let people come to their own conclusions, instead of forcing them to believe what you believe at the cost of being called crazy.

Phaedrus72 -> How is it that it took you this long into the thread to let us all know that you're father in law has first-hand knowledge. Please, enlighten everyone to the entire incident. Please direct everyone to the proof so that we might all stop talking about this.

I've continued to read your rather flagrant reactions to those who still question, but I'd like to pose just one more to you. In all the photos that you've seen of the wreckage at the pentagon, have you ever seen the engines? I have to say, the most convincing parts of Loose Change are when they break down the composition of metals that go into making those particular airplane engines. They proceed to discuss the melting points of these particular metals, present the chemical composition of jet fuel highlight it's burn temperature. They don't even come close to adding up. I wouldn't consider that as much a conspiracy theory as 8th grade chemistry.

Nobody here is trying to be disrespectful to the dead; I frankly believe that you show the most respect to those who have passed by trying to find out how and why. I'd like to think that their legacy is worth the care and effort. If the government wished to silence all those who question, they could do their best to go through all the required channels to release the additional security cameras that documented the disaster, as well as provide documentation of the physical evidence such as the engines. Why not treat it like a court case, giving the public defense exhibit a-z with all the proof we could ever want?

60 watt, I have told everyone about my father in law before. I will repeat it again now and tell you where you can hear his own voice on the matter. By the way, he is a Democrat, hates Bush, but thinks conspiracy theorists are nuts. He lives and works in northern virginia and knows people who took part in the rescue efforts at the pentagon. They specifically told him that they saw plane parts. Just because you didnt see them, means nothing. Do you want the witnesses to come knocking on your door to tell you about it before you will believe it? If you have not heard these stories, blame the media which is totally obsessed with their Bush hatred.

here is the link to my podcast where I interviewed my father in law. Several people who have listened to this first hand knowledge still question and believe in conspiracies. It's a joke, 60watt. YOu are not making much sense about those who question. There are those in this thread here who lost loved ones at the Pentagon that were on the plane. What do you propose happened to these people if their plane did not hit the Pentagon? Did the plane just vanish into thin air? Was the plane abducted by space aliens? Really think about what you are saying and you will see that those who question the official story of 9/11 ARE nuts. It's not just the government official story. We all saw the attacks transpire on 9/11. We all saw the planes hit the trade centers, yet there are those, some in this here thread who still think missiles hit the trade center. I have no sympathy and no patience whatsoever for these people and I will not mince words in order for a conspiracy nut to think I'm nice. A nut is a nut and I will call it like I see it.

It's also quite disrespectful to the victim's families when someone suggests that their loved did not die in the manner in which they full well know they did. Some of the victims families dropped their loved off at the airport, never to see them again. Again, I ask you, what happened to these people, if the official story is not true and it was missiles that flew into the trade centers. A conspiracy of this magnitude would be impossible to keep silent for this long. You can not kill enough people to shut them up for this long. There are too many family members who know what happened, for it to have been a government cover up. It just makes absolutely no sense, and I'm quite surprised that anyone with at least a high school education could believe in such lunacy.