skullaria wrote:
] Okay conspiracy whackos here's a flash movie about 9-11 and
] the plane that hit the pentagon. Most compelling to me is the
] fact that there was no wreckage of a plane in any of the
] pictures.
]
] Me too- and why not release the films? There was wreckage found, scroll down on this link for pictures: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ppfinal.html The whole in the back ring was most likely caused by the engine. The engine was not made out of the same material that the fuselage was, it was much more substantial and had 500+ mph of intertia behind it. I could run the physics on it but that explanation should appeal to common sense. As for the movies being confiscated, you forget what the target was. This is the Pentagon. The heart of planning for the US Military Industrial Complex. They did not want the footage out to be aired repeatedly. It is militarily significant information. The plane hit the area of the Pentagon that was most recently fortified with steel beams, mesh material similar to Kevlar, and thicker blast resistant windows. For foreign militaries to have these videos would be a national security risk. Yes, I think they did it on purpose. I think it was a convenient time to run a live test on the structure. All that captured video has given them lots of data, I'm sure. I also agree with Michael Rivero's belief that if the 9/11 Truth movement gets too out of hand, they will trot out a "newly discovered" video of the plane hitting the Pentagon to discredit the whole thing. There are many theorists out there pitching this "no Pentagon plane" theory who also have EXCELLENT theory on WTC. Once their Pentagon theory is discredited, no one will take their WTC work seriously. That, in turn, will discredit the work of those who have been saying what I say all along. If you are going to fight for the truth, pick your battles carefully. Go with your gut. Do you really believe a plane did not hit the Pentagon? My gut tells me that no matter what I think, I don't have enough evidence. There are plenty of photographs after the fact, but as far as video of the actual attack, we only have 5 frames of video that the government have given us. They are of such a low quality as to be useless. My webcam takes better pictures. Why would you treat them as a trusted source? Because they come from the government who you believe did 9/11 themselves? Don't you think it would be in their best interest to feed disinformation? For me, I accept the "official story" of the Pentagon because there are more important battles to fight. All you can do is let people know the fishy circumstances surrounding the day, like the wargames that the CIA and NORARD were running on 9/11 involving hijacked planes.[1]
To give you an idea of what mentality some 9/11 researchers have, compare these photos: Photo 1: http://members.shaw.ca/fre... [ Read More (0.4k in body) ] | 
