Maybe Jason and I Will Have To Eat Crow Now

[Jared Kaufman]

According to this website (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50234), at 1:00PM EST today the government will be releasing one of the videos that shows the hijacked plane hitting the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

Submitted By: TJ Wells

[Isbu]

The alleged missile plane.

[Erkin]

im awaiting the screams all over the internet of "fake" lol

[[Brendan]]

im awaiting the screams all over the internet of "fake" lolDitto.

[Jared Kaufman]

I'm not sure how valid this is because I can't find it on any other site (i.e. CNN, Fox News, etc).

[DanEmo]

aaaahhh whatever...i'll keep hating Bush anyway :D

[mikeyystyles]

yea, i cant wait for people to start saying its a fake... its doctored up.

[shane hennessey]

i thought there has always been videos. i remember on the today show on 9/11, greg gumble or someone was hosting and they showed the plane hitting.

[pasthefence49]

well 10 to 1 i hope its a new video and not the one we saw on the news of the low tech camera thattake still frames. For one thing it kinda caught my intrest that the pentagon used such a low-tech camera on the side of the pentagon. You think it being one of the most important military buildings that it would have top of the line security.

Im really looking forward to this release

[eastcoast-fu]

i'm sorry but you have to be gullible as shit in order to think there is some conspiracy behind this.

[crit]

who'd they get to doctor it for them, industrial light and magic?

[Jared Kaufman]

well 10 to 1 i hope its a new video and not the one we saw on the news of the low tech camera thattake still frames. For one thing it kinda caught my intrest that the pentagon used such a low-tech camera on the side of the pentagon. You think it being one of the most important military buildings that it would have top of the line security.

Im really looking forward to this release
I'm not sure if you ever noticed, but that still-frame security camera they released was only five seconds / five frames long and two of them were exactly the same.

[Serenity]

hmm...

[jsteil]

What is the poiint to releasing it? I guess when your polls are down into the low 30's you need to remind the people why your there and fear them into to believing in you again. I guess next they will ask stations to play the movie black hawk down.

[Jared Kaufman]

i'm sorry but you have to be gullible as shit in order to think there is some conspiracy behind this.
Not really. I don't know what to believe because there's good reasoning to back either side.

Out of all the theories out there, I think the easiest one to believe is the Pentagon one due to the evidence of the lightpoles, grass being untouched, etc., but hopefully this video proves otherwise now.

[TJ Wells]

What is the poiint to releasing it? I guess when your polls are down into the low 30's you need to remind the people why your there and fear them into to believing in you again. I guess next they will ask stations to play the movie black hawk down. shut up. its called the freedom of information act. they have to release it...plus it was requested

[SC0926]

Not really. I don't know what to believe because there's good reasoning to back either side.

Out of all the theories out there, I think the easiest one to believe is the Pentagon one due to the evidence of the lightpoles, grass being untouched, etc., but hopefully this video proves otherwise now.
truth

[trustmeimokay]

I'm curious to see this.

[Jared Kaufman]

Ok, this is really happening.

www.foxnews.com

They have it listed as breaking news.

[cal1082]

apparently it's from a security camera that has 2 different angles of the plane and snaps a picture (i think) every half second.

[Isbu]

i thought there has always been videos. i remember on the today show on 9/11, greg gumble or someone was hosting and they showed the plane hitting.
They never released a video of the pentagon. They released like 3 frames of a video though.

[Steve Henderson]

Directed by Jerry Bruckheimer, right Jared? :)

I told you fuckers! Ha!

[Jared Kaufman]

Directed by Jerry Bruckheimer, right Jared? :)

I told you fuckers! Ha!
Hey, Jason and I always said if they proved it then we'd shut our mouths. Right? Exactly.

And I prefer it to be one of the videos from the gas station, highway or hotel that face the Pentagon.

It also seems a little weird to be releasing it now; either way, I'm interested.

[cal1082]

It might change a few peoples opinions but sadly for many it will be dismissed as a fake and Looose Change 3rd edition will help explain it away.

If you don't believe the facts that are out there what difference is a security video footage going to mean?

[Jared Kaufman]

It might change a few peoples opinions but sadly for many it will be dismissed as a fake and Looose Change 3rd edition will help explain it away.

If you don't believe the facts that are out there what difference is a security video footage going to mean?
I'm sure people will complain it took so long to get it, could've been altered / tampered with, etc.

Let's just say I think they should release all of the videos, especially the three I mentioned above.

[Jared Kaufman]

It seems odd that www.cnn.com hasn't made any mention of this at all / yet.

[histrionics22]

Hey, Jason and I always said if they proved it then we'd shut our mouths. Right? Exactly.

And I prefer it to be one of the videos from the gas station, highway or hotel that face the Pentagon.

It also seems a little weird to be releasing it now; either way, I'm interested.

It was used as evidence against Mussaoui. And it's still pictures again, not actual video. MSNBC just had a quick rundown of whatthe pictures contained.

[colorlesscliche]

You'd think FOX studios would put more man power into this to release it quicker.

[IHopeYourAlone]

It also seems a little weird to be releasing it now; either way, I'm interested.

they're releasing it now because some interest group(i think) took it to trial. also now that the moussaui case is over they arent afriad it will skew jurors opinions.

[ACA]

Direct (http://www.artificialarmy.com/video_01.html) link to the video.

[cal1082]

I'm sure people will complain it took so long to get it, could've been altered / tampered with, etc.

Let's just say I think they should release all of the videos, especially the three I mentioned above.

Why? So a small, foolish, minority of people can be satisfied and content (even then the conspiracy theory would still be there)? I'd rather honor the people on the plane died and their family members by not showing there last second alive, than to honor that small minority fools

[Jared Kaufman]

they're releasing it now because some interest group(i think) took it to trial. also now that the moussaui case is over they arent afriad it will skew jurors opinions.
Like I said, they should release all the videos now (then). I'll comment more once I see what they release.

[Jared Kaufman]

Why? So a small, foolish, minority of people can be satisfied and content (even then the conspiracy theory would still be there)? I'd rather honor the people on the plane died and their family members by not showing there last second alive, than to honor that small minority fools
Once again, we've seen both planes hit the tower, people jumping from the towers and the towers collasping. That argument isn't going to hold much water with me.

[cal1082]

Once again, we've seen both planes hit the tower, people jumping from the towers and the towers collasping. That argument isn't going to hold much water with me.

How about this argument..............

"So a small, foolish, minority of people can be satisfied and content (even then the conspiracy theory would still be there)?"

It wouldn't matter. Only way many of them would believe it were Al Qaeda is if we put them on those planes. So again why? To make a small, small, minority of people content?

[Stubby0918]

Is it going to be on tv or released online? Fox?

[shes.a.ghost]

ignorance is bliss. if I really believed that 9/11 was caused by our government, then I would probably go crazy. But, the whole thing about the pentagon is pretty questionable. There should have been alot more debris...

[Northstar1245]

Someone posted a direct link on the page before this.

[cal1082]

Is it going to be on tv or released online? Fox?

it will be given to the group that asked for it at the top of the hour......then however long it takes them to put it on air.

[Jared Kaufman]

How about this argument..............

"So a small, foolish, minority of people can be satisfied and content (even then the conspiracy theory would still be there)?"

It wouldn't matter. Only way many of them would believe it were Al Qaeda is if we put them on those planes. So again why? To make a small, small, minority of people content?
If you were accused of murder and had video evidence proving your innocence, wouldn't you want it released (even if it was only to satisfy a handful of people who felt you were guitly)? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I'd do anything within my power to prove my absolute innocence to anyone -- no matter if it's 10 people, a hundred people, a thousand people, or a million people.

[jynxedheart]

theyve had plenty of time now to edit everything and anything

oh, and i heard wes anderson took it on, not jerry

[WarpSpeedChewy]

Not really. I don't know what to believe because there's good reasoning to back either side.

Out of all the theories out there, I think the easiest one to believe is the Pentagon one due to the evidence of the lightpoles, grass being untouched, etc., but hopefully this video proves otherwise now.
My thoughts exactly. The Pentagon theory out of the 9/11 conspiracy is the most convincing. But like Jared said, maybe this will show otherwise. I doubt though we will ever know 100% what happended exactly on 9/11, even if you agree with the theories or not.

[cal1082]

If you were accused of murder and had video evidence proving your innocence, wouldn't you want it released (even if it was only to satisfy a handful of people who felt you were guitly)? I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I'd do anything within my power to prove my absolute innocence to anyone -- no matter if it's 10 people, a hundred people, a thousand people, or a million people.


If the video might help then you might have an argument, but fact is it won't matter to most because they want to believe the theory.

[Jared Kaufman]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html

The video requested by Judicial Watch was taken from security cameras at the Pentagon, the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, and Virginia Department of Transportation traffic cameras.

Jill Farrell, Judicial Watch's director of media affairs, told CNN she would not know which video will be released "until we see it."

[Stubby0918]

it's 1 o clock

[ajp7485]

theres a video on cnn now, but it is only after the "crash"

nothing of a plane in there

[Snails]

Yeah, it's true, I found it.

It's actually pretty convincing.

[jusscali]

conspiracy mother fuckers!!!!!

[cal1082]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html

The video requested by Judicial Watch was taken from security cameras at the Pentagon, the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station, and Virginia Department of Transportation traffic cameras.

Jill Farrell, Judicial Watch's director of media affairs, told CNN she would not know which video will be released "until we see it."

From what was said on FOX the other videos didnt have a fix on where the crash happened and didnt show anything.

Apparently this video will show the nose of the plane in the video.

[Jared Kaufman]

If the video might help then you might have an argument, but fact is it won't matter to most because they want to believe the theory.
I believe the theories produce a lot of questions that need to be answered, and if I were to see the videos from the gas station, highway and hotel, then it'd more than answer my questions -- I can't argue with legit, video evidence, can I? This is the easiest way for them to dispell any of the theories, so that's why it makes sense to me they'd just put them out there.

[jsteil]

shut up. its called the freedom of information act. they have to release it...plus it was requested


Sorry I didn't know that it was requested, I just thought they were releasing it to release it.

[beggingthesky]

did they really think their server would handle it? it was down by 12:59 lol no one gets to see it yet.

[Brett9]

i'm sorry but you have to be gullible as shit in order to think there is some conspiracy behind this.
100% agreed.

[fedhed7]

So where is this video?

[cal1082]

I believe the theories produce a lot of questions that need to be answered, and if I were to see the videos from the gas station, highway and hotel, then it'd more than answer my questions -- I can't argue with legit, video evidence, can I? This is the easiest way for them to dispell any of the theories, so that's why it makes sense to me they'd just put them out there.

Well think about............

We have video evidence of planes hitting the World Trade Center (yet there's still a conspiracy).
We have tapes from black boxes of the terrorists in the cock pit (yet there's still a conspiracy).
We have video of Bin Laden admitting the attacks (yet there's still a conspiracy).

Video or tapes don't mean a damn thing when you're blinded by disgust for the President.

[cal1082]

So where is this video?

at the top of the hour the video was to be handed over to this group Judicial Watch and then they would get it to a news agency.

[Jared Kaufman]

Well think about............

We have video evidence of planes hitting the World Trade Center (yet there's still a conspiracy).
We have tapes from black boxes of the terrorists in the cock pit (yet there's still a conspiracy).
We have video of Bin Laden admitting the attacks (yet there's still a conspiracy).

Video or tapes don't mean a damn thing when you're blinded by disgust for the President.
Haha. I see your point, but...

1). The conspiracy doesn't lie within what hit the Tower, but how it came down.
2). We have not heard any tapes from the black boxes!!!
3). The Bin Laden video is sketch.

The whole conspiracy about the Pentagon is WHAT hit it. So, if I see three or four videos of a plane hitting it from different sources, then I can't argue and say that's not a plane I'm seeing. Unless I see some video and it's a backdrop of the Pentagon and a paper airplane on a string, then I'm going to be convinced.

[brandnewcali]

Well think about............

We have video evidence of planes hitting the World Trade Center (yet there's still a conspiracy).
We have tapes from black boxes of the terrorists in the cock pit (yet there's still a conspiracy).
We have video of Bin Laden admitting the attacks (yet there's still a conspiracy).

Video or tapes don't mean a damn thing when you're blinded by disgust for the President.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

[SydBarrett 420]

Bring on the sanitizaed, doctored, govt. footage. People still believe things their government tells them at this point?

[cal1082]

Haha. I see your point, but...

1). The conspiracy doesn't lie within what hit the Tower, but how it came down.
2). We have not heard any tapes from the black boxes!!!
3). The Bin Laden video is sketch.

The whole conspiracy about the Pentagon is WHAT hit it. So, if I see three or four videos of a plane hitting it from different sources, then I can't argue and say that's not a plane I'm seeing. Unless I see some video and it's a backdrop of the Pentagon and a paper airplane on a string, then I'm going to be convinced.

1.) Exactly because amateurs and news happened to be covering it. Had they not we'd be having that same argument. Since conspiracy theorists had to deal with a live video they just turn to something else that can be questioned.

2.) Tapes were released about a month ago during the Moussaoui trial from the black box of the plane that crashed in the Pentagon.

[histrionics22]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

EVERYONE HAS FUCKING WATCHED IT BY NOW. These conspiracies are ridiculous and major stretches.

[cal1082]

EVERYONE HAS FUCKING WATCHED IT BY NOW. These conspiracies are ridiculous and major stretches.

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

[ACA]

Funny.. "plenty of time to edit the video".

If they wanted to edit it, it wouldn't take FIVE YEARS.

-ACA

[brandnewcali]

turn it to foxnews

[jawkneephighv]

this is real news, i just saw the news on cnn. but WHEN ARE THEY SHOWING IT?

[fentoozler]

lets think this through... ok has everyone seen....hmmmm, oh lets say... every movie ever made using any special effects at all? superimposing something in film is absurdly easy.

[histrionics22]

lets think this through... ok has everyone seen....hmmmm, oh lets say... every movie ever made using any special effects at all? superimposing something in film is absurdly easy.

I thought it through too. You're an idiot.

[Pass The Flask]

Yeah, thanks 5 years later release the video.

[Super Octopus]

...what if we rule out the conspiracy against the Towers being hit, and then explain the Pentagon plane and it's scattered debris as it being hit by a missile, because the government was not able to take control of the plane?

And no one would want to admit they shot down a commericial airliner.

(Also if this video is the one that's posted on CNN, it's nothing)

[Frank Giaramita]

The World Trade Center conspiracy is ridiculous, but The Pentago conspiracy actually seems legit.

[histrionics22]

Yeah, thanks 5 years later release the video.

Why don't you read the article, watch a news station, or even read some replies here before you spout off stupid statements.

[histrionics22]

(Also if this video is the one that's posted on CNN, it's nothing)

It HAS NOT been released yet.

[underoathfob55]

its on right now on msnbc

[jawkneephighv]

wtf THAT'S it??????????????

[xeroedhorizons]

I just fucking saw it on Fox News. This is bullshit. You can't see anything. You see a nose cone which can very well be a part of a missile.

[Imallout007]

this conspiracy is valid in some points.....but come on you guys, everyone wants to think of a conspiracy because everyone hates Bush. You guys believe what you want, but i mean there were phone calls to loved ones, people jumping out of buildings, and two of the greatest building in nyc were destroyed...hell they even made a movie about the ppl on flight 93 already. If they wanted to stage this it would of been on a weekend or whenever the death toll would be minimal, not killing 1000+ people.

[Jared Kaufman]

this conspiracy is valid in some points.....but come on you guys, everyone wants to think of a conspiracy because everyone hates Bush. You guys believe what you want, but i mean there were phone calls to loved ones, people jumping out of buildings, and two of the greatest building in nyc were destroyed...hell they even made a movie about the ppl on flight 93 already. If they wanted to stage this it would of been on a weekend or whenever the death toll would be minimal, not killing 1000+ people.
That makes no sense.

[xeroedhorizons]

Also may I add what that reflection is on the lenses. That's even going to raise more questions.

[Adeniz19]

is the video on the internet yet?

[madcappunk]

do eye witness accounts amount for anything? my friends dad worked at the pentagon at the time and was late for work the day of the attack. saw the plane. saw the explosion. that's good enough for me.

[Steve Henderson]

Haha. I see your point, but...

1). The conspiracy doesn't lie within what hit the Tower, but how it came down.
2). We have not heard any tapes from the black boxes!!!
3). The Bin Laden video is sketch.

The whole conspiracy about the Pentagon is WHAT hit it. So, if I see three or four videos of a plane hitting it from different sources, then I can't argue and say that's not a plane I'm seeing. Unless I see some video and it's a backdrop of the Pentagon and a paper airplane on a string, then I'm going to be convinced.
Okay, now that I have stopped giggling, answer me this. If it was demolished by bombs, why bother with the planes at all?!?!?! Why not just make it McVeigh Part 2? Just as easy to blame on whomever, no?

Oh, and I was kidding in the earlier post...just giving you shit man.

[Hidenothing27]

I dont understand why the gov would release a video that according to loose change is "clearly a missle"... that movie is whack, i have watched it 2 times and the things they say get even more and more crazy. Like flight 93 was empty?? so are those people alive or what? and please not lets say " they are dead because the gov switched the flight 93 people into another place that hit the wtc... So I guess only 2 planes crashed on 9/11 not 4. How much more absurd can you get. If it was the government it def was not planned by this administration.. bush was in office not even 8 months.

[Steve Henderson]

do eye witness accounts amount for anything? my friends dad worked at the pentagon at the time and was late for work the day of the attack. saw the plane. saw the explosion. that's good enough for me.
He'z in 0n It !!!!!11!!!one!

[Steve Henderson]

Oh, and for everyone that thinks they are being original with their comments, please see this thread. It has all likely been said:

http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=135136

[Adeniz19]

do eye witness accounts amount for anything? my friends dad worked at the pentagon at the time and was late for work the day of the attack. saw the plane. saw the explosion. that's good enough for me.yea well my friend's cousin's grandpa's lawyer saw it too and he says it's fake!

[cal1082]

do eye witness accounts amount for anything? my friends dad worked at the pentagon at the time and was late for work the day of the attack. saw the plane. saw the explosion. that's good enough for me.

Not in the fantasy world of conspiracies.

[nfggc10]

do eye witness accounts amount for anything? my friends dad worked at the pentagon at the time and was late for work the day of the attack. saw the plane. saw the explosion. that's good enough for me.
because in general people aren't that accepting.

[madcappunk]

yea well my friend's cousin's grandpa's lawyer saw it too and he says it's fake!

ha.ha. believe what you want to believe.

[xeroedhorizons]

I dont understand why the gov would release a video that according to loose change is "clearly a missle"... that movie is whack, i have watched it 2 times and the things they say get even more and more crazy. Like flight 93 was empty?? so are those people alive or what? and please not lets say " they are dead because the gov switched the flight 93 people into another place that hit the wtc... So I guess only 2 planes crashed on 9/11 not 4. How much more absurd can you get. If it was the government it def was not planned by this administration.. bush was in office not even 8 months.

It was planned years ahead of time before Bush was in office. I saw another video (I can't remember the title) proving this.

[Jared Kaufman]

Okay, now that I have stopped giggling, answer me this. If it was demolished by bombs, why bother with the planes at all?!?!?! Why not just make it McVeigh Part 2? Just as easy to blame on whomever, no?

Oh, and I was kidding in the earlier post...just giving you shit man.
I don't know, maybe because if they used the allusion of planes, then more people would be appalled, angered, etc. I mean, you tell me -- how much more horriffic is it to watch a plane going into a building than a building just blowing up? And it'd be hard to convince the public terrorist were able to wire a whole building with explosions, especially with security and everything.

[Adeniz19]

ha.ha. believe what you want to believe.i'm just messing with you. i think all of this conspiracy stuff is a load of shit

[Imallout007]

That makes no sense.

im saying that ppl views are skewed b/c the mass media or at least 95% of it hates Bush and will do anything to have everyone get to hate Bush. You have to look at the facts here...ppl were jumping out of building, calling home wishing loved one a final goodbye, and two of the most historic buildings in NYC fell.

[nicolerork]

I'm not sure how valid this is because I can't find it on any other site (i.e. CNN, Fox News, etc).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060516/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/sept_11_video

[madcappunk]

i'm just messing with you. i think all of this conspiracy stuff is a load of shit

i figured as much, but that's the thing with conspiracy theories like this, the people who believe them (in general) won't even be convinced by the strongest evidence.

[Jared Kaufman]

im saying that ppl views are skewed b/c the mass media or at least 95% of it hates Bush and will do anything to have everyone get to hate Bush. You have to look at the facts here...ppl were jumping out of building, calling home wishing loved one a final goodbye, and two of the most historic buildings in NYC fell.
That doesn't disprove the conspiracy theories at all, though -- watch the video.

[shantrainwreck]

My personal opinion is that the planes never hit the Pentagon or in PA. But, as soon as I get out of school, I'm gonna take a look at this "video." Judging from the previous comments, though, I really don't think it will change my mind...

[Jared Kaufman]

Ok, so a friend just told me they're watching the news and saw it and all it is is STILLS only showing SHADOWS and what they say is the TIP of the front of the plane (my friend squinted and said they could barely see anything). Anyway, I'll wait and see it for myself, but I'll be damned if that's considered "convincing."

[Imallout007]

That doesn't disprove the conspiracy theories at all, though -- watch the video.


im doing that once i get out of work

[jawkneephighv]

Ok, so a friend just told me they're watching the news and saw it and all it is is STILLS only showing SHADOWS and what they say is the TIP of the front of the plane (my friend squinted and said they could barely see anything). Anyway, I'll wait and see it for myself, but I'll be damned if that's considered "convincing."yeah it was on fox news like 10 minutes ago, where were you?

[Imallout007]

if anyone has the link to the video please post

[histrionics22]

My personal opinion is that the planes never hit the Pentagon or in PA

Try telling a family whose son or daughter died on those planes. You're an idiot.

[Jared Kaufman]

im doing that once i get out of work
I'm talking about the conspiracy theory video -- not the one that was released today.

[histrionics22]

Ok, so a friend just told me they're watching the news and saw it and all it is is STILLS only showing SHADOWS and what they say is the TIP of the front of the plane (my friend squinted and said they could barely see anything). Anyway, I'll wait and see it for myself, but I'll be damned if that's considered "convincing."

THERE IS NO VIDEOTAPE. The security camers take snapshots at 1/2 second intervals.

[Jared Kaufman]

yeah it was on fox news like 10 minutes ago, where were you?
I'm at work.

[rufiocardtime]

there's a really good reason why conspiracy theories are already circumspect, ESPECIALLY something like 9/11 or jesus christ being a fraud.

do you understand how IMPOSSIBLE it would be to pull off a hoax like that?

and second, even if it is a hoax, and somebody pulled it off, think about everything that would have had to go into it and think about everything that's still going on. it doesn't add up.

the loose change video is cool, until i bought the dvd and watched a ton of times over and over again and realized that, it's really a terrible dvd.

granted, he asks great questions that deserve great answers, but he hardly does a thorough job of seeking the truth

[Adeniz19]

My personal opinion is that the planes never hit the Pentagon or in PA. But, as soon as I get out of school, I'm gonna take a look at this "video." Judging from the previous comments, though, I really don't think it will change my mind...why would they fake two plane crashes and have two real plane crashes? that doesnt seem logical at all. if they used cargo planes or whatever you people think hit the WTC then why wouldnt the just crash 2 more cargo planes? you think they would cover up all the loose ends with something this big.... i dunno where's the common sense to things like this?

[xeroedhorizons]

Ok, so a friend just told me they're watching the news and saw it and all it is is STILLS only showing SHADOWS and what they say is the TIP of the front of the plane (my friend squinted and said they could barely see anything). Anyway, I'll wait and see it for myself, but I'll be damned if that's considered "convincing."

I saw it. Believe me, it won't change your mind only raise more questions. Also, its basically the same view as the previously released video.

[cal1082]

Ok, so a friend just told me they're watching the news and saw it and all it is is STILLS only showing SHADOWS and what they say is the TIP of the front of the plane (my friend squinted and said they could barely see anything). Anyway, I'll wait and see it for myself, but I'll be damned if that's considered "convincing."

So the tip of the front of the plane is not convincing?

[Imallout007]

I'm talking about the conspiracy theory video -- not the one that was released today.


ive seen the conspiracy video, and there are some really strong points that made me think twice about this whole thing not being a national tragedy but a hoax. But, i've talked to enough firefighters who were there and a couple ppl who lost sons and daughter to have my views that this was indeed a tragedy, and not a hoax.

If it was a hoax, then damm Bush, and fuck the American government

[Adeniz19]

THERE IS NO VIDEOTAPE. The security camers take snapshots at 1/2 second intervals.i guess people have never seen tapes of when people rob banks haha security cameras dont stream perfectly

[jawkneephighv]

there's a really good reason why conspiracy theories are already circumspect, ESPECIALLY something like 9/11 or jesus christ being a fraud.

do you understand how IMPOSSIBLE it would be to pull off a hoax like that?

and second, even if it is a hoax, and somebody pulled it off, think about everything that would have had to go into it and think about everything that's still going on. it doesn't add up.

the loose change video is cool, until i bought the dvd and watched a ton of times over and over again and realized that, it's really a terrible dvd.

granted, he asks great questions that deserve great answers, but he hardly does a thorough job of seeking the truthyou BOUGHT loose change? hahahahahahahahahaha

[Roboman]

It was planned years ahead of time before Bush was in office. I saw another video (I can't remember the title) proving this.

How convenient.

[xeroedhorizons]

there's a really good reason why conspiracy theories are already circumspect, ESPECIALLY something like 9/11 or jesus christ being a fraud.

do you understand how IMPOSSIBLE it would be to pull off a hoax like that?

and second, even if it is a hoax, and somebody pulled it off, think about everything that would have had to go into it and think about everything that's still going on. it doesn't add up.

the loose change video is cool, until i bought the dvd and watched a ton of times over and over again and realized that, it's really a terrible dvd.

granted, he asks great questions that deserve great answers, but he hardly does a thorough job of seeking the truth

What really needs to be done is someone needs to make something where they look at both sides whether it was a terrorist attack or not. It's very simple. It's like a science experiment. You see things you want to believe and you believe it however you really need to make that effort to disprove it. I highly doubt they second guessed anything in Loose Change. Loose Change is indeed interesting and what is the most important thing is that it raises good questions.

[mrzippo3]

What really needs to be done is someone needs to make something where they look at both sides whether it was a terrorist attack or not. It's very simple. It's like a science experiment. You see things you want to believe and you believe it however you really need to make that effort to disprove it. I highly doubt they second guessed anything in Loose Change. Loose Change is indeed interesting and what is the most important thing is that it raises good questions.
agreed

[Jared Kaufman]

So the tip of the front of the plane is not convincing?
When someone is squinting and can barely see something they're told is the tip of the plane I'm lead to believe it could be the tip of anything (i.e. missile), but I have to see for myself.

[cal1082]

How convenient.

You know.........that one movie with all those facts? It was made by that great director and had undeniable proof from all those sources. How did you not watch it?

[Burnout2888]

Is Loose Change on YouTube? YouTube is blocked at my school and I want to watch this when I get home... I heard it was, but I can't check.

[badstarsfall]

I doubt I'm the first to cry foul over this bullshit.
But this is only being released now because it took that long to edit shit down.

Say what you want, that's what I believe.

[xeroedhorizons]

Is Loose Change on YouTube? YouTube is blocked at my school and I want to watch this when I get home... I heard it was, but I can't check.

you can watch it on google video if you want...

[cal1082]

When someone is squinting and can barely see something they're told is the tip of the plane I'm lead to believe it could be the tip of anything (i.e. missile), but I have to see for myself.

I will say this, if it's a missile they must have launched it about 100 yards away because it's coming in at ground level. And it must be a pretty damn big missile.

You see something flying up then you see soemthing sticking out the corner of the video. Now it could be a missile skipping along the ground...........or maybe it makes sense with the story that has been out of how the plane hit the ground first.

And do you not see my point about idiots. No matter what this stuff will be dismissed. So far there's been multiple excuses on this thread alone explaining it away and the damn thing has only been out for 30 minutes! The exact reason why I would not bother releasing a bunch of stuff for a bunch of idiots who won't believe it.

[Crimson_Curse]

this is on the top of my list for most wanted of 2006

[Adeniz19]

When someone is squinting and can barely see something they're told is the tip of the plane I'm lead to believe it could be the tip of anything (i.e. missile), but I have to see for myself.if a missle is as big as a tip of a plane then that would of done alot more damage then what it did haha

[Imallout007]

a missle...kinda like what shot down TWA Flight 800?(another conspiracy)

[mrzippo3]

I urge the naysayers of the conspiracy to watch the Loose Change video, just so that you can say you did and you can back your points better, it's about an hour and a half long but def worth it. Once I started watching it, I couldn't stop, check it out here--

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=85019

[rufiocardtime]

you BOUGHT loose change? hahahahahahahahahaha

yeah, i watched it online and then bought it because the dvd version is slightly different. the version i saw online had different stuff.

i guess they've come out with a couple different editions of it.

but hell yeah i bought it.

[mikeyystyles]

Okkk.... the tip of a missile is about 1/8 the size of the tip of a nose on a airplane. I think all of you have been on a plane or seen one, and can tell the difference between the two. If it were a missile the size of it would be so small that you probably wouldnt be able to see anything. If it looks like a nose to a plane.... it probably is.

[thechrisformat]

even though i cant 100% believe that a plane went into the pentagon, it is also hard to believe that they can set up a missile (which has to be big if the nose of it was the size of the plane's nose) without anyone noticing... i think the area that they were talking about is somewhat near a big road. i dont know. its all very interesting though.

[jawkneephighv]

yeah, i watched it online and then bought it because the dvd version is slightly different. the version i saw online had different stuff.

i guess they've come out with a couple different editions of it.

but hell yeah i bought it.what a fucking waste of your money.

[jklo16]

Originally Posted by histrionics22
THERE IS NO VIDEOTAPE. The security camers take snapshots at 1/2 second intervals.

oh no. there ARE videotapes Caught by the local gas stations and businesses surrounding the pentagon. Those have been taken by the FBI, however, and will never be seen. Interviews with people working at these establishments, prove that NO ONE saw a plane hit the buiding. I'm not saying what is right or wrong here. I'm simply pointing out that there are holes in every story. As for why the 'video' took so long to be released? Thank the conspiracy theories for that. If everyone would continue to take the attacks for what the media and goverment are telling us (like everyone did in the days following 9/11) there would be NO NEED to ever release it. My thoughts? The government is starting to feel some pressure to prove Loose Change and all the other documentaries 'wrong'. No one knows what really happened that day. and no one ever will. Released footage, or not.

[Burnout2888]

I will watch Loose Change after I get home from school, but to think that Bush did it to start a war absolutely baffles me. Why didn't he just bomb an embassy? A ship was bombed before we jumped into Vietnam - why not now?

[Adeniz19]

Okkk.... the tip of a missile is about 1/8 the size of the tip of a nose on a airplane. I think all of you have been on a plane or seen one, and can tell the difference between the two. If it were a missile the size of it would be so small that you probably wouldnt be able to see anything. If it looks like a nose to a plane.... it probably is.EXACTLY! where has people's common sense gone?

[histrionics22]

They freezez framed it on fox news and circled the head of the plane. It's pretty clear.

If one more person posts a link to loose change, asking those saying its a terrorist attack, to watch loose change, they should be banned. I'm pretty sure everyone arguing against it has watched it.

[Imallout007]

everyone is going to have there own side of the story, and own believes...so some ppl might think they saw nothing, and ppl say they saw something like a plane, or they saw somethin that looked like a missle

[mrzippo3]

who really shot JFK?

[Burnout2888]

And I'm saying this in the case that he did it (although I still don't believe he did.)

[Burnout2888]

who really shot JFK?
Haha...

[cal1082]

if a missle is as big as a tip of a plane then that would of done alot more damage then what it did haha

What the hell are you talkign about, it's easy to confuse the two.
http://www.aviation.ru/contrib/jno/MACS99/images/Moskit_missile.jpg
http://www.aviacaobrasil.com.br/gallery/albums/Boeing-787/boeing787ai010.sized.jpg

[mrzippo3]

I say, unless you were there and saw it for yourself, your opinion on what happened is questionable

[Imallout007]

The fact was....it was the greatest terroist attack on our nations soil(as bad as that sounds) it was well planned and well executed by fanatical ppl who wish death upon america, not just Bush and the White House but you and me and our way of life...And i agree on tellin the ppl agrueing against this(like me) to watch loose change cause i've seen it 5 times already and i still disagree

[histrionics22]

Originally Posted by histrionics22
THERE IS NO VIDEOTAPE. The security camers take snapshots at 1/2 second intervals.

oh no. there ARE videotapes Caught by the local gas stations and businesses surrounding the pentagon. Those have been taken by the FBI, however, and will never be seen. Interviews with people working at these establishments, prove that NO ONE saw a plane hit the buiding. I'm not saying what is right or wrong here. I'm simply pointing out that there are holes in every story. As for why the 'video' took so long to be released? Thank the conspiracy theories for that. If everyone would continue to take the attacks for what the media and goverment are telling us (like everyone did in the days following 9/11) there would be NO NEED to ever release it. My thoughts? The government is starting to feel some pressure to prove Loose Change and all the other documentaries 'wrong'. No one knows what really happened that day. and no one ever will. Released footage, or not.

Security cameras do not film tape. They take freeze frame shots every 1/2 second. The other cameras do not show that area of the pentagon. Go ask some eyewitnesses whether it was a plane or not.

And yea I'm sure the government is feeling pressure from an amateur documentary maker with his phony claims. Did you even read as to why this was finally released today?

[Adeniz19]

What the hell are you talkign about, it's easy to confuse the two.
http://www.aviation.ru/contrib/jno/MACS99/images/Moskit_missile.jpg
http://www.aviacaobrasil.com.br/gallery/albums/Boeing-787/boeing787ai010.sized.jpghahahahaha yea they are exactly the same size

[cal1082]

Originally Posted by histrionics22
THERE IS NO VIDEOTAPE. The security camers take snapshots at 1/2 second intervals.

oh no. there ARE videotapes Caught by the local gas stations and businesses surrounding the pentagon. Those have been taken by the FBI, however, and will never be seen. Interviews with people working at these establishments, prove that NO ONE saw a plane hit the buiding. I'm not saying what is right or wrong here. I'm simply pointing out that there are holes in every story. As for why the 'video' took so long to be released? Thank the conspiracy theories for that. If everyone would continue to take the attacks for what the media and goverment are telling us (like everyone did in the days following 9/11) there would be NO NEED to ever release it. My thoughts? The government is starting to feel some pressure to prove Loose Change and all the other documentaries 'wrong'. No one knows what really happened that day. and no one ever will. Released footage, or not.

lol, I'm sure Bush gives a shit about a low-budget internet video. As explained above why don't you read the news as to why the video was released. Being informed about the situation can help 10 fold rather than assumptions.

[Imallout007]

And yea I'm sure the government is feeling pressure from an amateur documentary maker with his phony claims.

Isnt that guy named Michael Moore?

[xeroedhorizons]

What the hell are you talkign about, it's easy to confuse the two.
http://www.aviation.ru/contrib/jno/MACS99/images/Moskit_missile.jpg
http://www.aviacaobrasil.com.br/gallery/albums/Boeing-787/boeing787ai010.sized.jpg

Tips of all missiles are different so your right. It could be curved like the tip of a plane.

[jklo16]

yes i did. did you?

and why would anyone care that these videos were remaining unseen, if they believed that a plane actually hit it?

[mrzippo3]

Also, I think that if you believe everything that your Gov't and media tell you, you are not very intelligent

[Adeniz19]

also they said they didnt release this video until now becuase it was evidence in the trial to convict that terrorist

[cal1082]

Tips of all missiles are different

please show me a missile that could do that comparable of damage that's realitively the same size as a boeing plane?

[Steve Henderson]

What the hell are you talkign about, it's easy to confuse the two.
http://www.aviation.ru/contrib/jno/MACS99/images/Moskit_missile.jpg
http://www.aviacaobrasil.com.br/gallery/albums/Boeing-787/boeing787ai010.sized.jpg
Even worse - the plane that hit was a 767...bigger than the pic you show (a 787 which is not even out yet, and has a much more pointed tip than current planes). You fools that buy into this make me sick with your ignorance.

[jawkneephighv]

Also, I think that if you believe everything that your Gov't and media tell you, you are not very intelligentright, let's believe the amateur kid who made loose change.

[Imallout007]

please show me a missile that could do that comparable of damage that's realitively the same size as a boeing plane?

no....plz dont...cause those pics took up 3/4 of one page for me

[FrancesdaMute]

What the hell are you talkign about, it's easy to confuse the two.
http://www.aviation.ru/contrib/jno/MACS99/images/Moskit_missile.jpg
http://www.aviacaobrasil.com.br/gallery/albums/Boeing-787/boeing787ai010.sized.jpg

Those two photos are not even close to being on the same scale. The plane shot looks like it's 40-50ft away. The missle shot is about...10 max?

[jklo16]

lol, I'm sure Bush gives a shit about a low-budget internet video. As explained above why don't you read the news as to why the video was released. Being informed about the situation can help 10 fold rather than assumptions.

it's not about the video. it's about the million of citizens beginning to believe the theories expressed in it. how many threads have there been on this site alone about loose change? How many news channels have talked about it? how many americans believe whatever they hear?

like i said, i'm not believing everything i saw on loose change, but i'm also not believing everything the government said happened actually did, because that's what i'm being force fed. If you think politics doesn't come into play with this video's release, you're wrong. lawsuit or no lawsuit.

[phaedrus]

the legitimate conspiracies come from a lack of information, not a blind hatred of the president. it should be prefectly ok to question what you're told, thats whats great about america. the people who question the government shouldn't have to put up with condescending people like this guy.

by releasing information like this that should have ben released years ago, they are closing holes of the sotry that caused these conspiracy theories to begin with

[xeroedhorizons]

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/cruise-missile-intro.jpg

Remember its just a small tip of the plane. That can easily be mistaken for a tip of a plane.

[mrzippo3]

right, let's believe the amateur kid who made loose change.
I never said to believe the person who made loose change, I said you're an idiot if you think everything your Gov't and media feeds you is fact..

[UrOwNdISaStR180]

Freakin' media, put the tape on the internet already

[Imallout007]

I never said to believe the person who made loose change, I said you're an idiot if you think everything your Gov't and media feeds you is fact..


Thats why nobody cared about Michael Moore's film

[cal1082]

Tips of all missiles are different so your right. It could be curved like the tip of a plane.

I'll do you one better here's (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/index.html) a list of the missiles used by the US government. Now it would most likely have to be a ground-launched missile unless they parked a jet next to the Pentagon and put 2 palm trees in front of it so no one noticed.

But be my guest and go through that list and show me what you get?

[Imallout007]

I'll do you one better here's (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/index.html) a list of the missiles used by the US government. Now it would most likely have to be a ground-launched missile unless they parked a jet next to the Pentagon and put 2 palm trees in front of it so no one noticed.

But be my guest and go through that list and show me what you get?


that site just gives me an excuse to look at missles instead of working...damm you

[AnotherTale...]

Watch the BBC and you'll understand the truth. Don't listen to your own government that hides secrets from you.

Wait a minute, this sounds familiar....hmmm when did a government hide information from its citizens? oh yea! Germany....hmmm Bush, Hitler....hmmm

[cal1082]

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/cruise-missile-intro.jpg

Remember its just a small tip of the plane. That can easily be mistaken for a tip of a plane.

Again you're not using your head. The thing is comign in at ground level and you picture has no scale to see how large it is.

You are an idiot. Your picture is of a cruise missile and we are talking about a huge plane. If you can confuse the two in size than you are an idiot.

[Frank Giaramita]

The World Trade Center being "demolished by bombs" is quite possibly the most absurd thing I have ever seen/read/heard.

[Imallout007]

The World Trade Center being "demolished by bombs" is quite possibly the most absurd thing I have ever seen/read/heard.

thanks Frank...only us new yorkers know the truth

[jawkneephighv]

okay cnn is gonna show it right now [if you missed it on fox news].

[cal1082]

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/cruise-missile-intro.jpg

Remember its just a small tip of the plane. That can easily be mistaken for a tip of a plane.

This is a picture of the exact same missile you just posted. A Tomahawk cruise missile, and you can honestly tell me that you can mistake that for the tip of a plane?
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/9908tomahawk2.jpg

[MotionIsntMeaning]

cnn is finally showing the video......doesn't seem all that convincing

EDIT: actually, im pretty sure it was a plane. you can see it when they slow it down.

[Imallout007]

god dammit get the video online

[jawkneephighv]

This is a picture of the exact same missile you just posted. A Tomahawk cruise missile, and you can honestly tell me that you can mistake that for the tip of a plane?
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/9908tomahawk2.jpg
hahahaha owned

[AnotherTale...]

I still remember being in high school history class when i saw a small white plane circle the tower and then crash into it and i remember saying why does that plane look weird because of the fact that it was pure white even when u see a plane there is other color than just white. That alone seems weird.

[xeroedhorizons]

This is a picture of the exact same missile you just posted. A Tomahawk cruise missile, and you can honestly tell me that you can mistake that for the tip of a plane?
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/9908tomahawk2.jpg

Have you even seen the fucking new video? Don't even bother arguing with me if you haven't seen it

[mrzippo3]

cnn is finally showing the video......doesn't seem all that convincing

yeah, seriously, I see a smoking building..

[Jared Kaufman]

I will say this, if it's a missile they must have launched it about 100 yards away because it's coming in at ground level. And it must be a pretty damn big missile.

You see something flying up then you see soemthing sticking out the corner of the video. Now it could be a missile skipping along the ground...........or maybe it makes sense with the story that has been out of how the plane hit the ground first.

And do you not see my point about idiots. No matter what this stuff will be dismissed. So far there's been multiple excuses on this thread alone explaining it away and the damn thing has only been out for 30 minutes! The exact reason why I would not bother releasing a bunch of stuff for a bunch of idiots who won't believe it.
If the plane hit the ground first, then how come the grass is untouched?!? Go look at other photos of plane crashes and the impact they make in the ground and then check out photos of the lawn in front of the hole at the Pentagon. There's no way the plane hit the ground then the Pentagon -- simple as that.

[jawkneephighv]

If the plane hit the ground first, then how come the grass is untouched?!? Go look at other photos of plane crashes and the impact they make in the ground and then check out photos of the lawn in front of the hole at the Pentagon. There's no way the plane hit the ground then the Pentagon -- simple as that.okay, loose change, calm down.

[Roboman]

Weee.

[Frank Giaramita]

thanks Frank...only us new yorkers know the truth
My father and his friends saw the WTC Conspiracy video and pretty much laughed at it. He said when they were down there, there was so much smoke and debree from the first plane hitting, that when the second plane hit, they thought it was a bomb going off, and every time a large piece of debree would fall from 1000+ feet, it would make a huge explosion-like sound, so, upon hearing these sounds, it's very understandable how people could mistake them for bombs.

When anyone is surrounded by smoke, screaming and fire, they're not going to know what the hell is going on... and will most likely claim that any loud sound is a "bomb", since it's the most plausible thing that comes to mind at first.

[AnotherTale...]

okay cnn is gonna show it right now [if you missed it on fox news].

Just saw it and does not show anything to prove it was a plane. Plus, it doesn't show any of the plane flying to the sides which would obviously occur if it hit a building. Also, the object that hits the building is pointed directed at the building, it is coming straight down and could have not hit the ground like they said it.

[cal1082]

Have you even seen the fucking new video? Don't even bother arguing with me if you haven't seen it

Yes, I've seen it. And you see some larger than a missile (look at the tip coming out and comparign it to the size of the buidling). Also you see something coming in at ground level (perhaps even skipping because you see stuff flying up), so this tells me that the missile would have been fired at ground level close by and perhaps skipped the ground.

And I'm not the one who is easily confuses a tomahawk missile for a huge boeing plane.

[Imallout007]

My father and his friends saw the WTC Conspiracy video and pretty much laughed at it. He said when they were down there, there was so much smoke and debree from the first plane hitting, that when the second plane hit, they thought it was a bomb going off, and every time a large piece of debree would fall from 1000+ feet, it would make a huge explosion-like sound, so, upon hearing these sounds, it's very understandable how people could mistake them for bombs.

When anyone is surrounded by smoke, screaming and fire, they're not going to know what the hell is going on... and will most likely claim that any loud sound is a "bomb", since it's the most plausible thing that comes to mind at first.

pretty much the firefighters that i know said the same thing bout the debree falling and it sounds like a very loud gunshot or bomb going off

[AnotherTale...]

If the plane hit the ground first, then how come the grass is untouched?!? Go look at other photos of plane crashes and the impact they make in the ground and then check out photos of the lawn in front of the hole at the Pentagon. There's no way the plane hit the ground then the Pentagon -- simple as that.

Jared you're the man.

[Jared Kaufman]

okay, loose change, calm down.
Or do you mean common sense calm down? Maybe it's just me, but I don't think a ton of metal going 500 MPH would hit the ground and have the same effect as if I threw a Nerf football into the grass as hard as I could.

[mrzippo3]

I'm not gonna agree with either side, but the new video justifies almost nothing, you can barely see anything

[Imallout007]

Nerf Football = Harmless, might poke and eye out or 2
Ton Of Metal Going 500 MPH = Death, Destruction, Mayhem

[Frank Giaramita]

Contrary to the WTC Conspiracy video, when I first sw the Pentagon wreckage on TV, I said to my sister, "What the hell, there's no way a plane that big caused that little damage"...

http://gprime.net/flash.php/911pentagonstrikeconspiracy

...and then that video kind of confirmed my original suspicions. I still don't know what to believe about the Pentagon, but it just seems odd that a plane of that size, carrying that much fuel could leave little to no damage on the lawn. Hell, if it was a 757 like they say it was, it would HAVE to hit the ground since it is wider than the height of the Pentagon.

[cal1082]

If the plane hit the ground first, then how come the grass is untouched?!? Go look at other photos of plane crashes and the impact they make in the ground and then check out photos of the lawn in front of the hole at the Pentagon. There's no way the plane hit the ground then the Pentagon -- simple as that.

I dont know if it did or didnt. You do see something flying up in the video which looks like something knocking the earth from the top soil. Also you're assuming it would have to be some large gash into the earth.

Do this, consider in the video how close the "object" is to the building when you see the debris come up. Now consider how fast the plane is moving. Simply grazing the ground, at that speed, that close to the building would not necesarily leave a huge gash.

[Frank Giaramita]

I dont know if it did or didnt. You do see something flying up in the video which looks like something knocking the earth from the top soil. Also you're assuming it would have to be some large gash into the earth.

Do this, consider in the video how close the "object" is to the building when you see the debris come up. Now consider how fast the plane is moving. Simply grazing the ground, at that speed, that close to the building would not necesarily leave a huge gash.
I disagree. A 757 flying at 400+ MPH and "grazing" something as soft as DIRT would leave a gash. Hell, even if it grazed concrete, it would leave a gash, let alone dirt.

We're talking about soil and grass dude.

[Jared Kaufman]

I dont know if it did or didnt. You do see something flying up in the video which looks like something knocking the earth from the top soil. Also you're assuming it would have to be some large gash into the earth.

Do this, consider in the video how close the "object" is to the building when you see the debris come up. Now consider how fast the plane is moving. Simply grazing the ground, at that speed, that close to the building would not necesarily leave a huge gash.
I don't want to see a gash or crater for that matter; I want to see SOME sign of impact in the ground. There's zero marking on the lawn -- go look at the photos. Not a top layer of grass is missing, dirt isn't kicked up, there's no markings, etc. I don't need to see evidence of an A-Bomb being dropped, but I do need to see something that shows a friggin' airplane going 500 MPH at least somewhat grazed the ground.

[JTrain12]

quick question...are there other stories of people calling from planes on cell phones? like the relatives called on the Flight that crashed in PA...just wondering if there are stories of people calling from the planes that hit WTC and the Pentagon...

[Steve Henderson]

If the plane hit the ground first, then how come the grass is untouched?!? Go look at other photos of plane crashes and the impact they make in the ground and then check out photos of the lawn in front of the hole at the Pentagon. There's no way the plane hit the ground then the Pentagon -- simple as that.
Settle down, sensationalist. The hole in the Pentagon wall was caused by the landing gear, not the fuselage, so it did not hit the ground before the building.

[Steve Henderson]

I don't want to see a gash or crater for that matter; I want to see SOME sign of impact in the ground. There's zero marking on the lawn -- go look at the photos. Not a top layer of grass is missing, dirt isn't kicked up, there's no markings, etc. I don't need to see evidence of an A-Bomb being dropped, but I do need to see something that shows a friggin' airplane going 500 MPH at least somewhat grazed the ground.
PS - Airplanes do not go 500mph when they are in descent.

[cal1082]

Also it seems that Bush goons went around knocking light poles over to make it look like they were clipped by a plane. And then obviously paid off this cabby not to say anything.

http://www.worldnewsstand.net/history/911pentagon/pole1b.jpg

http://parodie.com/articles/e01.jpg

[Imallout007]

Contrary to the WTC Conspiracy video, when I first sw the Pentagon wreckage on TV, I said to my sister, "What the hell, there's no way a plane that big caused that little damage"...

http://gprime.net/flash.php/911pentagonstrikeconspiracy

...and then that video kind of confirmed my original suspicions. I still don't know what to believe about the Pentagon, but it just seems odd that a plane of that size, carrying that much fuel could leave little to no damage on the lawn. Hell, if it was a 757 like they say it was, it would HAVE to hit the ground since it is wider than the height of the Pentagon.

very good site...ive kinda been a little skeptical bout pentagon

[Frank Giaramita]

Settle down, sensationalist. The hole in the Pentagon wall was caused by the landing gear, not the fuselage, so it did not hit the ground before the building.
Do you understand what you're saying? If a plane of that size, going as fast as they say it was, hit the Pentagon straight on, without any interference from the ground, it would've went right through the entire builing...seriously. It wouldn't have just damaged one ring.

[AnotherTale...]

Also it seems that Bush goons went around knocking light poles over to make it look like they were clipped by a plane. And then obviously paid off this cabby not to say anything.

http://www.worldnewsstand.net/history/911pentagon/pole1b.jpg

http://parodie.com/articles/e01.jpg

doesn't prove anything.

[Imallout007]

stop being ignorant.

its not ignorance its supporting a side in a arguement

[Steve Henderson]

Do you understand what you're saying? If a plane of that size, going as fast as they say it was, hit the Pentagon straight on, without any interference from the ground, it would've went right through the entire builing...seriously. It wouldn't have just damaged one ring.
Ugh. From this source:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=6&c=y

Big Plane, Small Holes
CLAIM: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile--part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."

FACT: 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 tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide--not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.

[cal1082]

I don't want to see a gash or crater for that matter; I want to see SOME sign of impact in the ground. There's zero marking on the lawn -- go look at the photos. Not a top layer of grass is missing, dirt isn't kicked up, there's no markings, etc. I don't need to see evidence of an A-Bomb being dropped, but I do need to see something that shows a friggin' airplane going 500 MPH at least somewhat grazed the ground.

I've never seen good air photos of the site right after the crash?

[AnotherTale...]

I'm guessing 793 posts on this thread by 5pm

[jklo16]

Settle down, sensationalist. The hole in the Pentagon wall was caused by the landing gear, not the fuselage, so it did not hit the ground before the building.

where did the rest of the plane go?

i don't see how this is even debatable. the hole in the pentagon wasn't big enough for a plane to fit through. there was barely any wreckage found after the crash. and there was no damage done to the lawn outside of the building. my question: if they had just showed you the video, and you knew nothing about the WTC or the pennslyvania site, would it even be considered that a plane had flown into the pentagon? because that's not what i would believe based on the facts alone, and no 'confirmation' from the media and/or the government.

[Jared Kaufman]

PS - Airplanes do not go 500mph when they are in descent.
Haha. So baed on this comment and the one above, you think this wannabe pilot hijacker put the landing gear down and "descended?"

[Steve Henderson]

Please admit your silliness?

[Frank Giaramita]

Ugh. From this source:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=6&c=y

Big Plane, Small Holes
CLAIM: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile--part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."

FACT: 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 tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide--not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.


That's irrelevant to anything I said. I didn't say anything about the hole.

What I did say, however, is if a Boeing 757 (a HUGE plane) was flying 2 feet off the ground and hit the building without any interference from the ground it would've done A LOT more damage then puncture a hole and cause one wall to fall. It's common sense that an object that large, flying at400+ mph and hitting a stationary object head-on doesn't just puncture a hole and cause a wall to fall. Hell, look what planes did to the trade center.

[cal1082]

Do you understand what you're saying? If a plane of that size, going as fast as they say it was, hit the Pentagon straight on, without any interference from the ground, it would've went right through the entire builing...seriously. It wouldn't have just damaged one ring.

I believe they said it damaged 3 or the 5 rings.

[Steve Henderson]

Haha. So baed on this comment and the one above, you think this wannabe pilot hijacker put the landing gear down and "descended?"
Well the act of descending is to manage speed and keep the plane navigable. Slats/flaps to slow down etc or you could not "steer." As for the landing gear, who knows?

[thechrisformat]

the video theyre showing on fox right now shows a white trail of smoke behind (something). also, the guy talking says it "hit the ground". which also brings up that grass theory and how nothing was done to it. confusing...

[Steve Henderson]

That's irrelevant to anything I said. I didn't say anything about the hole.

What I did say, however, is if a Boeing 757 (a HUGE plane) was flying 2 feet off the ground and hit the builginh without any interference from the ground it would've done A LOT more damage then puncture a hole and cause one wall to fall. Hell, look what planes did to the trade center.
FYI - those planes were likely going a LOT faster.

[Imallout007]

has anyone of these websites posted the video online yet? cause im interested to see it

[Imallout007]

FYI - those planes were likely going a LOT faster.

Yea one of the planes damm nearly went through one of the trade centers

[Steve Henderson]

That's irrelevant to anything I said. I didn't say anything about the hole.

What I did say, however, is if a Boeing 757 (a HUGE plane) was flying 2 feet off the ground and hit the building without any interference from the ground it would've done A LOT more damage then puncture a hole and cause one wall to fall. It's common sense that an object that large, flying at400+ mph and hitting a stationary object head-on doesn't just puncture a hole and cause a wall to fall. Hell, look what planes did to the trade center.
Go to the page I linked and look at the pics. Or read this:

Flight 77 Debris
CLAIM: Conspiracy theorists insist there was no plane wreckage at the Pentagon. "In reality, a Boeing 757 was never found," claims pentagonstrike.co.uk, which asks the question, "What hit the Pentagon on 9/11?"

FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

[Steve Henderson]

the video theyre showing on fox right now shows a white trail of smoke behind (something). also, the guy talking says it "hit the ground". which also brings up that grass theory and how nothing was done to it. confusing...
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

[Frank Giaramita]

Put it this way, if two planes could cause two 1360 ft buildings to tumble in about an hours time, why would one plane hitting the pengtagon do so little damage? It just doesn't add up to me and youd on't need to be a scientist or the head of the NTSB to realize something isn't right with one of those two scenarios.

[Steve Henderson]

Put it this way, if two planes could cause two 1360 ft buildings to tumble in about an hours time, why would one plane hitting the pengtagon do so little damage? It just doesn't add up to me and youd on't need to be a scientist or the head of the NTSB to realize something isn't right with one of those two scenarios.
Cross-sectionally, the damage was about the same. The WTC just had more height to come down. If the Pentagon was a skyscraper, it would have done the same thing.

[Imallout007]

one of these days will know everything...the kennedy assisnation, the moon landing, and even this. but now its just a bunch of skeptic conspirators who dont like Bush, and the people who actually were affected and witnessed it

[Steve Henderson]

Put it this way, if two planes could cause two 1360 ft buildings to tumble in about an hours time, why would one plane hitting the pengtagon do so little damage? It just doesn't add up to me and youd on't need to be a scientist or the head of the NTSB to realize something isn't right with one of those two scenarios.
Anyways why do you ignore the perfectly rational explanations I am posting?

[Frank Giaramita]

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg
Awesome, so what you've provided for us in this picture is that a 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long plane left behind a piece of itself that is about the size of a shredded coca cola can...

that really helps your argument a lot...

[Jared Kaufman]

FYI - those planes were likely going a LOT faster.
A plane going a 100 MPH and hitting the ground would still leave some marking.

[Imallout007]

the pentagon wasnt as high as the towers.... im sure if the plane flew into the pentagon at WTC high the pentagon would of crumbled

[Imallout007]

A plane going a 100 MPH and hitting the ground would still leave some marking.

my truck going 60 would leave a mark....

[PlaCracktheSky]

I've talked to a person that was in the pentagon at the time it happened and he said that there was a ton of scattered pieces of metal from the plane. That it was obvious that a plane hit.

[Frank Giaramita]

Cross-sectionally, the damage was about the same. The WTC just had more height to come down. If the Pentagon was a skyscraper, it would have done the same thing.

The World Trade Center fires were the longest burning fires in the history of the United States Of America, tell me why The Pentagon, which actually has more rooms and offices than both Trade Center buildings combined, wouldn't stay burning for even .00001% of the time the Trade Center was.

[Steve Henderson]

Awesome, so what you've provided for us in this picture is that a 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long plane left behind a piece of itself that is about the size of a shredded coca cola can...

that really helps your argument a lot...
Hmm, so the plane gets absolutely shredded and ripped apart. Kinda explains why an intact plane was not found. How does that not help my argument? Any why does the first man on the scene picking up plane and body parts not mean anything to you? So far, I have provided about 10x the "proof" you have.

[idobi]

That's irrelevant to anything I said. I didn't say anything about the hole.

What I did say, however, is if a Boeing 757 (a HUGE plane) was flying 2 feet off the ground and hit the building without any interference from the ground it would've done A LOT more damage then puncture a hole and cause one wall to fall. It's common sense that an object that large, flying at400+ mph and hitting a stationary object head-on doesn't just puncture a hole and cause a wall to fall. Hell, look what planes did to the trade center.

WTC: Aluminum and glass.
Pentagon: Reinforced concrete.

[Adeniz19]

Put it this way, if two planes could cause two 1360 ft buildings to tumble in about an hours time, why would one plane hitting the pengtagon do so little damage? It just doesn't add up to me and youd on't need to be a scientist or the head of the NTSB to realize something isn't right with one of those two scenarios.the trade centers didnt fall down right away did they? if they stayed up it probably would of been just as much damage as the pentagon.

[Jared Kaufman]

The World Trade Center fires were the longest burning fires in the history of the United States Of America, tell me why The Pentagon, which actually has more rooms and offices than both Trade Center buildings combined, wouldn't stay burning for even .00001% of the time the Trade Center was.
Actually, there's been skyscrappers that have had 10 floors or so burning for 18 hours.

[Vil de Locke]

The Pentagon is not a normal building, it's obviously "reinforced".. That's not enough to explain the small hole though. I believe the Pentagon was hit by a missile or a small craft. edit: ..btw, I still feel that there's no evidence that the WTC collapse was combined or prepaired with explosives. There'd have been a big number of explosions -one for each floor- to let the two towers fall.

[Roboman]

Awesome, so what you've provided for us in this picture is that a 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long plane left behind a piece of itself that is about the size of a shredded coca cola can...

that really helps your argument a lot...

I'm sorry, but that fuselage piece is definitely larger than a soda can....

[ambulance]

Hmm, so the plane gets absolutely shredded and ripped apart. Kinda explains why an intact plane was not found. How does that not help my argument? Any why does the first man on the scene picking up plane and body parts not mean anything to you? So far, I have provided about 10x the "proof" you have.

If the wings of the plane were 'melted off' as in your other 'proof' what makes you think body parts would still be in solid form? You're taking word of mouth, from someone you've never met, that could have been paid off. Not saying he was, but anything is possible.

[cal1082]

where did the rest of the plane go?

i don't see how this is even debatable. the hole in the pentagon wasn't big enough for a plane to fit through. there was barely any wreckage found after the crash. and there was no damage done to the lawn outside of the building. my question: if they had just showed you the video, and you knew nothing about the WTC or the pennslyvania site, would it even be considered that a plane had flown into the pentagon? because that's not what i would believe based on the facts alone, and no 'confirmation' from the media and/or the government.

-The length of the outside wall on any side of the pentagon is 921 feet. (Source (http://renovation.pentagon.mil/history-features.htm#size))
-The wingspan of a 757 is 124 feet 10 inches. (Source) (http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=101)
-Now, everyone can agree that 921/125= roughly 7.4 right?

Now here is a picture of the pentagon with about 7.5 planes lined wing to wing. And the 2nd picture is of the pentagon on September 12th. Now you eyeball that and tell me there's no way!

[histrionics22]

If the wings of the plane were 'melted off' as in your other 'proof' what makes you think body parts would still be in solid form? You're taking word of mouth, from someone you've never met, that could have been paid off. Not saying he was, but anything is possible.

Use common sense. Not EVERY single person that died was incinerated.

[cal1082]

Put it this way, if two planes could cause two 1360 ft buildings to tumble in about an hours time, why would one plane hitting the pengtagon do so little damage? It just doesn't add up to me and youd on't need to be a scientist or the head of the NTSB to realize something isn't right with one of those two scenarios.

Think about what you're saying. Look at the impact of the planes on the WTC and side that it hit absorbed the impact. You didnt see it come out the back or sides?

It's about the exact same as the Pentagon. If anything that should be even more proof.

[Frank Giaramita]

Hmm, so the plane gets absolutely shredded and ripped apart. Kinda explains why an intact plane was not found. How does that not help my argument? Any why does the first man on the scene picking up plane and body parts not mean anything to you? So far, I have provided about 10x the "proof" you have.
Yeah, shredded and ripped apart like this?
http://www.sfu.ca/~qgrc/people/thomas/crash.jpg

or like this:
http://www.theaviationlawyers.net/Images/AviationAccidents.jpg

I refuse to believe the fact that a plane of that size hitting a building so low to the ground just "shreds apart".

[Roboman]

If the wings of the plane were 'melted off' as in your other 'proof' what makes you think body parts would still be in solid form? You're taking word of mouth, from someone you've never met, that could have been paid off. Not saying he was, but anything is possible.

Maybe because the people were INSIDE the plane and not sitting on the wings?

[histrionics22]

There is no debate whether it was a missile of airplane. NUMEROUS eyewitnesses saw a plane. The only debate is commercial plane or military one.

[phaedrus]

i dont see how a plane could possibly be piloted to the exact degree that it would have had to have been to not touch the grass

[Roboman]

I refuse to believe the fact that a plane of that size hitting a building so low to the ground just "shreds apart".

What does the height of the Pentagon have to do with anything?

[cal1082]

Awesome, so what you've provided for us in this picture is that a 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long plane left behind a piece of itself that is about the size of a shredded coca cola can...

that really helps your argument a lot...

Actually it's about the size of the front of a truck

[phaedrus]

What does the height of the Pentagon have to do with anything?
try throwing a ball at something near ground level, and then try throwing a ball at something much higher up. its easier to bit something higher up than something on relatively ground level without hitting the floor

[Jared Kaufman]

Use common sense. Not EVERY single person that died was incinerated.
I'm gonna use common sense and say that if the majority of the plane was incinerated aside from a fewjunk pieces the size of my ass here and there, and 184 of 189 bodies weren't -- something is fishy and not adding up. Do I have to explain what planes and human bodies are made up of and which is easier to incinerate?

[Frank Giaramita]

Actually it's about the size of the front of a truck
The first picture tells me nothing, and the second picture doens't load.

[jklo16]

-The length of the outside wall on any side of the pentagon is 921 feet. (Source (http://renovation.pentagon.mil/history-features.htm#size))
-The wingspan of a 757 is 124 feet 10 inches. (Source) (http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=101)
-Now, everyone can agree that 921/125= roughly 7.4 right?

Now here is a picture of the pentagon with about 7.5 planes lined wing to wing. And the 2nd picture is of the pentagon on September 12th. Now you eyeball that and tell me there's no way!

http://media.mnginteractive.com/media/paper106/20030405_FPG_TFRONT.JPG
this is a picture of a plane crash.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/precollapse.jpg
this is a picture of the Pentagon.

[sweethypocrisy]

I will say this, if it's a missile they must have launched it about 100 yards away because it's coming in at ground level. And it must be a pretty damn big missile.

You see something flying up then you see soemthing sticking out the corner of the video. Now it could be a missile skipping along the ground...........or maybe it makes sense with the story that has been out of how the plane hit the ground first.

And do you not see my point about idiots. No matter what this stuff will be dismissed. So far there's been multiple excuses on this thread alone explaining it away and the damn thing has only been out for 30 minutes! The exact reason why I would not bother releasing a bunch of stuff for a bunch of idiots who won't believe it.
CAL FOR THE LOSS

every argument ive read against the conspiracy theorists says "well, it wouldnt have made a big hole because the plane came down on an angle"

[Sycro]

Actually it's about the size of the front of a truck

You are the "smartest person"/"only one showing proof of anything" posting in this topic. Just thought you should know.

[ambulance]

Go to the page I linked and look at the pics. Or read this:

Flight 77 Debris
CLAIM: Conspiracy theorists insist there was no plane wreckage at the Pentagon. "In reality, a Boeing 757 was never found," claims pentagonstrike.co.uk, which asks the question, "What hit the Pentagon on 9/11?"

FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

Was that black box ever released?

[cal1082]

The first picture tells me nothing, and the second picture doens't load.

how does the 1st picture show you nothign. It shows the the part of the plane you assumed to be the size of a coke can next to an ambulance so that you can get some sort of comparison.

[histrionics22]

I'm gonna use common sense and say that if the majority of the plane was incinerated aside from a fewjunk pieces the size of my ass here and there, and 184 of 189 bodies weren't -- something is fishy and not adding up. Do I have to explain what planes and human bodies are made up of and which is easier to incinerate?

Not every person that died was exposed to the massive explosion. In much of the same way, not all 100 plus who died inside the Pentagon was in direct line with the tip of the plane. Maybe if you could somehow prove that the bodies from the plane were intact, then you could make an argument. But wait, what plane?

[Roboman]

http://media.mnginteractive.com/media/paper106/20030405_FPG_TFRONT.JPG
this is a picture of a plane crash.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/precollapse.jpg
this is a picture of the Pentagon.

Your point? Two pictures of plane crashes in circumstances that could be completely different...air speed, plane size, building material...

try throwing a ball at something near ground level, and then try throwing a ball at something much higher up. its easier to bit something higher up than something on relatively ground level without hitting the floor
I realize that, but that doesn't mean it's not possible.

[Frank Giaramita]

Think about what you're saying. Look at the impact of the planes on the WTC and side that it hit absorbed the impact. You didnt see it come out the back or sides?

It's about the exact same as the Pentagon. If anything that should be even more proof.

This actualkly hurts your argument in the sense that the holes in the WTC were approximately 153 feet (each WTC building is 207 feet wide and the holes were approximately 75% of the wide of the buildings)... yet I'm suppsoed to buy the fact that the plane that hit the Pentagon only punctured a hole 75 feet wide?...

not happening.

[Vil de Locke]

Frame of the footage. We saw this before. From what I see, it's NOT possible to assume that a 757 Boeing hit the Pentagon. This thing is too fucking small (in the red box).

[jklo16]

my point is this: there are pieces of a plane in the first picture. AND the ground seems to be damaged.

[phaedrus]

I realize that, but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
For hijackers who did poorly in flight school? For experienced pilots its damn near impossible what what I've heard, much less inexperienced pilots. to do that would take zero margin of error. im not saying its impossible, its just the closest thing to impossible i have ever seen

[cal1082]

http://media.mnginteractive.com/media/paper106/20030405_FPG_TFRONT.JPG
this is a picture of a plane crash.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/precollapse.jpg
this is a picture of the Pentagon.

You are completely ignorign what I just posted, and sourced quite well. Why dont you pull your ignorant head out of your ass and look at the difference between the crash site as compared to the size of a plane lined up witht the pentagon.