Added: 5 years ago
From: mrsmith1981
Views: 16,922
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (146)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • i sow some smoke & some traffic cones but no planes or "noses" of any kind in those frames 

    but i guess if you say so i believe you

  • He could'nt wait to insert conspiracy theorist into the conversation.....Complete contradiction of his original statement.......Shame on him.

  • I agree why would anyone question this footage. I can clearly see its a 757 AA plane. I even see people in the windows. Kidding!! This is just like the bin laden death. No pics, we got rid of the body, no hard evidence only "we" say it happend and our long arm of the media begins to lay down the foundation for the lie. If anything conspircy theorist are detectives trying to search for the truth and put the puzzle pieces together. The public is living in the conspiracy, not the researcher

  • Where there is smoke there is Fire! Too many contradictions, not enough evidence. Smells like coverup of the truth - what happend there? Better yet: why?

  • this guy is a very very bad liar? i wonder how much money he took to change his story

  • @donutmoron Probably that of his and his family's lives.

  • @donutmoron Or maybe they just threatened his family ?

  • No doubt a plane???? What a joke there is no way in hell that was a plane! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!  No doubt a missile....

  • the object entering the screen is supposed to be a plane nose? ridiculous it is clearly a missle of some sort it is too thin to be a planes nose.

  • COMPARE THE FIREBALL AT THE PENTAGON TO THE FIRE BALL AT THE TOWERS....NO FUCKING WAY A PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON. THE PENTAGON IS ONE OF THE MOST PROTECTED BUILDINGS ON THE PLANET AND ONLY ONE CAMERA CATCHES A QUICK WHITE FLASH OF SOMETHING THEY CALL A PLANE? 8500 GALLONS OF FUEL AND NO SMOKE DAMAGE ON LEFT SIDE OF BUILDING. WOODEN DESKS, OPEN BOOKS UN CHARRED. HOW CAN THE AMERICAN PUBLIC BELIEVE THIS? i GUESS THE WARREN COMMISSION HEADED THIS INVESTIGATION

  • Hey Jamie McIntyre, AKA BUSH DICK SUCKER

    Can you explain to me...

    How someone can fly a plane 500 mph and hit the first floor of a 3 story building on the nose...

    AND NOT DAMAGE THE FRONT LAWN???

    WHAT A FANTASY!

  • AT 33 seconds of this video,

    You will see a long thin pointed object enter into the video,

    At 34 seconds its already hit and vanished into the Pentagon,

    Question,

    If it was as long as a passenger plane, then we should have been able to see the the plane as it impacted into the Pentagon?

  • If That was a plane,

    Then it was 6-10 feet long,Which is the size of Missile and NOT 200-300 feet passenger plane which they said hit the Pentagon!

  • The wingspan of a 757 is 124 feet 10 inches.The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.Structure was taken out right to the wingtips on WTC 1 and 2.Look at closeups B4 collapse of pentagon.Glass in window frames close to hole.How?

  • Blast-proof glass. They're designed to be able to take at least one high impact without shattering.

  • Yeah, they get him to contradict himself. Common sense - he didn't see a plane 7 years ago!

  • Funny, there was plenty of doubt in your mind "that day," wasn't there Jamie, old boy? Especially after your close up inspection.

    But, in "retrospect" and from much farther away, the truth isn't too appealing ti Jamie.

    Guess "common sense" for Jamie means selling his soul to Satan so he can keep his job. LOL!

    No balls at all, huh, Jamie?

  • McIntyre is a Bush supporter. No doubt about it. He recently posted a anti-Shinseki column on CNN. Or maybe he just hates Asian Americans. I don't know.

  • 86 videos tapes plus the hotels and gas station, still no plane and this is all we get? they think we listen to these lying hacks on tv. what a joke.

  • I would be convinced by now that it was really a plane... there is a lot of 'evidence' that says so.

    However, I can't forget the pictures of what was supposed to be an engine from the plane. The engine was way too small..  people familiar with airplanes who saw the picture said "that doesn't make ANY sense."

  • Check out RKOwen4's video on that, he manages to explain it. Of course for many truthers since he doesn't provided sources for some of his claims that's not enough, so after checking it out I would suggest you do some investigation of your own.

  • @Shaoken1 YOU AND RK OWENS ARE BOTH WORTHLESS SACKS OF SHIT,,,,,,,,,AND GOVERNMENT SCHILLS,,,,,,,,,YOU CAN BOTH LICK MY BALL SACK,,,,,,,,,CUZ THAT'S WHAT YOU FAGS LIKE TO DO,,,,,,,,,DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THE PENTEGON COULD BE HIT BY SURPRISE,,,,,,STUPIFUCK

  • What a dishonest video.

  • A missile? it was a missile? then where are the parts of the missile? I know it was a plane. Lots of wreckage turned up with serial numbers on the parts that were found which linked it back to the 4th plane that was missing that day. Get over it folks, it was a plane. Conspiracy theorists, relax, take some prozak.

  • @jdenicol would you mind telling all how you 'know' it was plane. look at the vid, i dont see a plane, or any plane parts, the smoke seems to be coming from the 1st and 2nd floors only. did the fire crews manage to drag out of the pentagon a 9 ton 757 engine and place it on the undamaged lawn? it cant have vaporised as fire doesnt melt titanium..

  • Jamie a former employee of the Clinton news network. Wake up America the media is biased against all things republican!

  • Em, no. That was not a plane. That was a missile. A guided missile. How can anyone think that was a plane?

  • Because hundreds of people saw it? Not one saw a plane, not one found any wreckage of a plane. The best the truthers can come up with is a journalist saying "it looked like a cruise missile with wings", and that's blatantly taken out of context (You can find his complete statement here on youtube, and he says he saw the plane).

  • Jamie McIntyre=paid liar

    We won't forget it either, Jamie. Hope is rests heavily on your conscious, if you have one.

  • Fuck You Jamie

  • If you have any common sense.... it's clear that a plane hit the pentagon. Then I must be common sense deficient.

  • Now if you want a good demonstration of how the CNN scum lies to you for their NWO bosses look at his 9/11 report first--- "911 CNN Jamie McIntyre - No Plane At The Pentagon"---- Then look at the clip on this page.....

    It will make you realize that these characters need punishment may we ever win this ..

    SEVERE PUNISHMENT I MEAN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!

  • Where are the tapes from the hotel, the gas station, and the freeway camera?

  • $ change

  • the evidence that a plane hit the pentagon is just a frame on a video . where are the ruins of the plane?

    where is your fredom express at ?

    once i used to beliave that usa was a dream nation now i bliave the same , that is a nation dreaming .. wake up .for the sake of the people who died and dying in the temple of money and new order.

    dont express your freedom on your remote control this is not freedom. this is convenience.

    dont let your life become a hollywood film backstage

  • Interesting, the reporter has NOW become a Sr. Pentagon Correspondent. Funny what a promotion can do to a person's memory. I banked on his account of a "no-show-plane" for years, now we see no one can be trusted to maintain the truth.

  • The truth:

    View this video and pay close attention to the blue/gray object (drone/cruise missile?)in front of the white vapor trail (which is not a 757's nose cone, BTW).

    Replace [dot] with a period

    youtube[dot]com/watch?v=0Om9_L­bco6A

  • this is what a liar and sold out whore looks like

  • Yes!!

  • Skull and Bones! Ok, it's clear for us that have brains, NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON! What about the Trade Center? Jet Fuel caused the 2 buildings to fall, where's the jet fuel at the pentagon? The pentagon is standing they can test it tomorrow. Anything left to test from the Trade Centers?!? NOPE! They through all the metal away before anyone ran a single test. T H R O W N A W A Y!! Evidence?? A Terrorist attack and they throw away evidence??

  • There are over two hundred and fifty cameras pointed at the Pentagon at any given time. Yet all we are allowed to see are six still clips.

  • That's a lie.

  • If they COULD show a plane they WOULD.

  • It's roughly a 100 ton airplane. And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building. There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. ... The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77. We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile." Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force, Retired commercial airline pilot.

  • There was clearly wreckage visable in clean up pictures. Why is it so hard to accept that there are people in the world who would like to see the U.S. destroyed. All of you black helicopter people, please seek therapy. Come back to Earth. Your families miss you.

  • Sure buddy. What about the ATM directly across the street or the traffic signal camera on teh corner. Both tapes confiscated the morning of. how about tower 7 of the WTC. how about Bin Laden and Bush families being business partners. How about Skull and Bones satanic worship and ritualistic sacrifices. Bin Ladens flown outta the country afterwards. Search HASHEMFILMS and ask yourself why would he be banned and 90 videos deleted. PEACE AND LOVE

  • "There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner." - Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret)

  • "One of my experiences in the Army [was measuring] pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, 'The plane does not fit in that hole'. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?" Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) -- Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command.

  • "When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile." - Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret) -- Former Director U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project.

  • Thats a very small large airliner! lol nice one

  • Common sense he says!!?? This video should calm conspiracy theorists, he says??!! The 'nose' looks as thin as a missle, not an airplane..not to mention way too low in comparison with the ground. What a crock! There is NO PLANE in that video and they won't release more of the videos because a plane did NOT exist!

  • They got Jamie McIntyre to read it out!

  • the biggest crock of shit ever, a total lie.

  • the front of the plane is not the pointed and sharp. it looks more like the front of a missle.

  • Thats a very small large airliner!

  • That is totally f*ed up. It's obviously not a plane, how can they think this bullsh*t is working? It's opposite land over there, they just keep slathering on more layers of lies and hope it sticks. Whatever's rotten underneth will come out one day...

  • That 'fuseluage' looks too small to be an airplane. Curious...

  • only one camera? i have more cameras around my school.

  • HOW and WHO NOW KNOWN--

    the latest film clips are now on my page

    and per air-force/commercial jet pilot Field McConnell, exposes clearly

    WHO and HOW 9/11 was accomplished, from the planes to the buildings-- just incredible, and factual

  • I think its amazing how the six ton engines didnt make any holes, while the hollow aluminum body penetrated several rings of the pentagon. Also how the six ton engines didnt leave any holes and managed to vaporize along with the wing tips outside of the building...

  • That is not a plane, it is impossible to fly a 757 that close to the ground, at that angle, at that speed. How can that guy say there is no doubt that a plane hit the pentagon. Why is this the only video released? There is only one video camera watching the most important building in the country? Wake up people!

  • And so by impossible wouldn't it therefor be never capable of crashing at that speed. It would just magically hit this little barrier and bounce off?? Wow what a safe plane ;o)

  • wow, what a SMALL PLANE THAT WAS! WHAT A SMALL NOSE FOR A 60 TON PLANE!

  • Fish eye lens on the security camera. "objects are closer then they appear!"

  • Its another phsyop attempting to tar all CTs with the missile theory.

  • The plane would have nearly filled at least one digital frame in passing through the field of view.

    Watch film by Evan Fairbanks on the second WTC strike. About the same distance in field of camera reference and NO DOUBT a plane!

  • 'It's not gonna be enough to convince conspiracy theorists but to anyone with any common sense and given all the other evidence we've got, there's really no doubt that a plane hit the pentagon'...

    Hmm... He sounds like an authority... Do I have common sense? YES!

    ergo, I must believe him. ahhh... now i feel safe...

    Still, I wonder if we will ever see a decent video of the 'plane' hitting the pentagon?

  • could be a car or truck Bomb?

  • I still don't see 60 ton plane in any of the frames.

  • agreed, but remember the lense is a fish eye. "objects appear farther away than they acutally are."

  • They cut the frames out from the nose entering the frame to the explosion!

  • For the people criticizing the framerate, understand how much this video had to be slowed down so you could actually see the plane in the shot at all. There are only a few cameras in the world that would have a high enough framerate to actually "WATCH" something going so fast... and that doesn't include security cameras. In fact, I think security cameras generally have a slower framerate than usual, and are lower quality than this. The Pentagon cams were above average, as they should be.

  • What satilight imagery? Where satilight imagery? O' THAT satilight imagery? Na! I don't want to think about the satilight imagery! Messes-up my day.

  • Wait, what? Just because satellite cameras are capable of zooming in so far doesn't mean they are CONSTANTLY RECORDING EVERY SQUARE INCH OF THE PLANET. Try again.

  • CONSTANTLY RECORDING EVERY SQUARE INCH OF THE PLANET? Give me a break! TazG2000 kinda over doing it a bit arn't you? The HQ of all U.S. Military not being monitered by satilight 24/7. Nodda folkes! It's monitered - by satilight - 24 hours daily.

  • If it was going SO FAST then why does it look like it's ZOOMing across the lawn at about equal height? But if you look around, say up Columbia Pike you will find this 150 tall hill with a 100 foot tower. How did 225,000 pounds traveling SO FAST that it flew down the hill AND THEN across the lawn? Just asking.

  • You can ask questions about how it flew all you want - but suggesting that it didn't brings up many more questions that are far more complicated to answer: Where did the parts come from? Why did most of the witnesses see a plane with "American Airlines" written on it? Where did the real plane go? Are all the passengers fake, as well as their families who helped identify the bodies at the Pentagon?

  • @TazG2000 im guessing all the parts were in that big box covered in a blue tarp being carried out by a dozen or so people. It cant have been a plane part it was a big box. This still has never been clarified as to what this was and why it was covered up..

  • @donutmoron Why are you replying to a 3 year old post? Anyway, The tarp HAS been identified. Nine years ago. Evidenced by the other photos of the location, it was a tent structure used as a base for the workers there. It wasn't there for several days AFTER the crash, but the Pentagon is next to a busy street and tons of people SAW the plane crash and saw the wreckage immediately after. It wasn't planted. The dead passengers were real people with real families who identified their remains.

  • "If it was going SO FAST then why does it look like it's ZOOMing across the lawn at about equal height?"

    At that speed the distance is pretty small - there is no way you can extrapolate the angle from a video like this - I'd go with all the witnesses who saw it come in at a steep angle.

  • First, you would think that a 60 ton plane traveling at 400 mph that low to the ground would damage the lawn. Even helicopters screw up the lawn. Second, a Boeing 757 is 155 ft long. This shouldn't be a guessing game to find the plane. Third, the date stamp for the video is Sept. 12? Fourth, pause the vid at 00:20 and look at shadow angle casted by the building compared to the yellow box. Fifth, commercial planes (turbofans) don't leave white vapor trails at low altitudes. Missiles do.

  • Planes do leave trails if their engines are damaged. Helicopters aren't planes. Look at the label next to the timestamp, which is formatted the same way; obviously the labels weren't put there in realtime, so it makes sense that they were both put there afterwards... the date is probably the time the pictures were archived. Come on, if this was a deliberate coverup, do you really think they would put the wrong date?

  • TazG2000, You're working alot of "what ifs." What if the engine was damaged. What if the date was stamped after the fact. Weird shadows? Also, the height of a Boeing 757 is 42 ft.The Pentagon has a height of 77ft. Do some simple math. In order for the plane to hit only the first floor of the building, the engines would have to be below ground level.

  • Those aren't "what ifs". They're conclusions based on facts and evidence. The labels "plane" and "impact were obviously placed there afterwards, and it's a FACT that security cameras don't archive their recordings in realtime. Evidently, something hit the light poles.

  • "They're conclusions based on facts and evidence" Facts, evidence? Where? Do you mean the vapor trail (damaged engine?). That could be "evidence" of a missile also. Funny, my security cam archives its recordings with real time and date stamp and it's a cheapo. Maybe the Pentagon should've went to Walmart to pick one up? One of the most secure buildings in the world and the security cams don't record the right date and time. Gimme a break.

  • "That could be "evidence" of a missile also."

    That conclusion doesn't match the observations of witnesses and investigators. No witness mentioned anything distinct that could only be attributed to a missile. On the other hand, many witnesses mentioned distinctive traits of a plane, such as the AA logo on the side.

  • Look, these security cameras usually archive recordings after 1 day. My point is that since both labels (the timestamp and the description) are in the same format, and the description obviously would have been added afterwards, they probably both refer to the archived file, not the video itself.

    If they faked the video to fool people, why wouldn't they put a 9/11 date stamp on it? That's what people expect.

  • "In order for the plane to hit only the first floor of the building, the engines would have to be below ground level."

    ...who said it only hit one floor?

  • "who said it only hit one floor?" The primary damage was the first floor (before the roof collapse) by viewing photos. The point is, there should have been some "drag" on the lawn if the plane was that low...logically.

  • "The primary damage was the first floor (before the roof collapse) by viewing photos."

    The primary damage doesn't represent the entire plane.

    "The point is, there should have been some "drag" on the lawn if the plane was that low"

    Only if the plane dragged on the lawn, muzicmaker.

  • Second guessing from your chair and monitor I see. Remeber that a 757 is only 12'6" tall from the bottom of the engine to the top of the fueselage. Also the engine is just over 6 foot tall and knowing the photos you are looking just to the side or above where the engines struck (more than enough speace to hit the 1st floow -- MORON! sry, tired of stupid CTers

  • TOO SMALL FOR A 757

  • It reminds me of the movie "Turner Show" when a piece of lighting equipment falls on the cement next to Jim Carry's character. The radio show then quickly makes up a lie, and says that an airplane lost a piece as it was flying over the city.

    I'll tell you what, the evidence is so overwhelming that the official story that a Saudi millionaire living in a cave in Afghanistan did it, I have no problem publically questioning the official story with co-workers, supervisors, strangers.

  • I don't see a plane in that photo the nose of a plane? Maybe The head on a missle ? Maybe

  • It's debatable just how much of a plane would be left, and how big the pieces would be, if a plane did actually hit the building. It would also make the pilot a genius. But why don't they just show us ALL the footage from ALL THE OTHER CAMERAS too and put an end to all the conspiracy talk!! That's what makes it so damn unbelieveable, the fact that they won't show us.

  • Don't forget the SATILIGHT IMAGERY that can tell you what mint a dime came from laying on the sidewalk - The U.S. Gov has a satilight pohot for every inch of ALL FOUR(4) FLIGHTS (or all non filghts) that day! Eye-In-The-sky ya know!

  • omg this guys a jerk wut a lier. right wen u see an object appear on the right side of the screen it skips. wut an asshol

  • they said the plane hit the pole, but when you watch the simulation, the plane is too high for it. and another thing djnrulez, is there only 2 cameras for the pentagon? what happen to the "High-security" place. my local station has 14 cameras. and the pentagon 2? wow, dosnt that make you think... and the two videos which they do release end up bad quality etc and you cant even determine it was a plane or a missle or anything else.

  • The CNN reporter (Jamie McIntyre) said he was INSIDE the building at the time of the 757's impact; therefore he did not see the 757 crash into the pentagon, he states "From my close up inspection, there is no evidence of a plane crashing anywhere near the pentagon" But You can clearly see large pieces of debris in the background. His inspection must not have been very close to have missed them and you have dozens of people who ACTUALLY SAW the 757 flying over and crash into the Pentagon.

  • PENTAGON EVIDENCE..Parts found at the pentagon from a 757 include..Rim and Tire, Large & Small pieces of the aluminum skin with A/A markings, Parts of (2) Rolls-Royce Engines, a 757 Landing gear, Seats & Luggage, Deceased Passengers identified by Dental & DNA testing along with personal belongings such as Jewelry, pocket knives, etc.

    Dozens of eyewitness's that specifically state seeing the A/A 757 fly over and/or crash into the Pentagon.

  • Can anyone tell me what parts were present at the crash site other than parts of a 757? Anyone???

  • @marksman500 except we never actually see them, we just have to take your word for it mate.

  • @donutmoron..."we never actually see them, we just have to take your word for it mate."....

    -----

    So are you saying there were not plane parts present?

  • @marksman500 whats a reporter doing inside the building moments before it was hit? that sounds like conspiracy big time! how would he know where to be in order to cover the story first? inside info for certain?

  • @donutmoron...." whats a reporter doing inside the building moments before it was hit? that sounds like conspiracy big time!".....

    --------

    How about doing some research?

    Have you ever heard of a Pentagon correspondent?

    Each major news agency has a Pentagon correspondent working at the Pentagon and they go to the various press offices in each military branch.

    Jamie McIntyre was the senior Pentagon correspondent for CNN and worked at the Pentagon.

    Anything else?

  • @marksman500 uhh yea, wheres the plane?

  • DJNRULZ shut the fuck up and show us the real tapes. No plane here.

  • I saw the plane... on the right, just before it hit

  • It seems you're ALL missing the point. McIntyre said he went "right up to the side" of the Pentagon and that he had just done a "close-up inspection" of the ENTIRE site. He claimed there was no large wreckage, "not a wing section, a tail section or fuselage." The same day this clip aired, he claimed on air that there WAS large wreckage, specifically saying that there was a fuselage -- and that he photographed it all. So which is it? Was he lying then or later?

  • I a lot of people don't realise that our Government... directly involving the Bush's owed Bin Landen a lot of oil... and we never payed him and his clan back... something Bush doesn't want people to know.

  • Some very good point were made here... if there wasn't anything to hide people we would have seen a clean video of impact... it's as simple as that.

  • people who believe that this was the work of a plane are in need of a reality check and a brain. Some comments on here are just typical pro-Gov't, mind controlled bollocks. Back in the day, it was good to back your Gov't.. but anyone who thinks that this should be todays attitude is either too stupid to research, or too scared to be informed. Get with it. Wake up and claim your freedom back you fucking muppets.

  • I don't see the wings and the tail, and why is it I only saw pictures of a wheel on the lawn when surely the engine block is more stronger to withstand the immense stress of thrust. Something does,nt seem right. Pictures can be manipulated or switched much the same as dental records and the titanics deck plans etc.

    Still no definative visual evidence In my opinion.

  • I don'tsee a plane. there are 84 cameras on that side of the pentegon and 2 from the gas station and hotel down the street. why did they show us this one?

  • good point..

  • retards, how the fuck is that not a plane? why the hell would the goverment do that? whats wrong with you? common sense you want to talk? common sense says thats an airplane, crashing into the pentagon, dumbasses looking for something to belive say its a giant white penis

  • That may be a plane, but it's not a 757. There are reasons why we don't see it from several hundred different angles, or at least one good angle. There are also reasons why special agents confiscated all videos from the are (gas stations/hotels/highway)

  • WOW, you are pathetic! Your opinion is shit. Its one big conspiracy huh? Go to hell. Let me know where all those people are suddenly hiding from the 757 that obviously has been reported missing that morning. I guess they all were in on the conspiracy.

  • come on still frame photography? thats a bunch of crap the gov't is trying to feed u. i am not trying to insult you. just want people to open their eyes

  • Its always the bright ones that call others names. How is it not a plane? Well, theres only footage of a nose. Its not that most claim its not a plane. Its that we know thats not a 747. Even if a 747 couldve cruched itself enough to fit through that small of an opening, the two 9 ton titanium steel engines wouldve hurled through the pentagon like two huge cannonballs. Theres no way they couldve vaporized.

  • That's right, you tell 'em. Don't think about it, just talk like an arrogant numbskull! Hell, it's people like you that make life easy for Dubya!

  • You are the dumbass. Even a conservative schmuck like Bill O'Reilly said he couldn't see the plane. That's because whatever hit the Pentagon wasn't a plane. You want to believe that an amateur pilots a jet 2 feet off the ground without crashing...go ahead and believe it.

  • so a plane didnt hit the pentagon? Ok so where the 4th plane missing? In fucking outter space? WHAT THE HELL IN THE TRADE TOWERS THAT DAY? Boy i bet you really know it all. You are a fucking piece of shit. You are an ignorant fuck head that actually believe this crap. Go to hell.

  • u said it man..

  • they could identify everything, geez just because a plane vaporizes do you think they cant still identify the bodies ...tsk tsk. the US government couldnt lie straight in bed. NASA put a man ON the moon, but never did it since that very first moonwalk. JFK was shot with a single bullet. Martin Luther King was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The US government has done more crimes against humanity than Hitler's Third Reich, we never hear of too many because they are "Clandestine"

  • Cymric, according to official explanation, entire plane 'vapourised' due to incredible heat from the burning fuel. I wonder, how is it possible for a couple of giant aircraft engines, two 6 ton piles of steel-titanium alloy, constructed specifically to withstand burning fuel without melting, let alone vapourising, to vapourise due to fuel heat??

  • oh and don't forget the fact that even though the plane vaporised, they were able to identify the victims...

  • Say that it was PLANE that hit the Pentagon. Say it on CNN, FOX, NBC and all the other major media houses. Keep repeating it for 5 years, and actually everyone will believe you although commons sense tells you something like that is impossible.

  • oh such bad words, how about saving it slowing it down and watching the body of the jet hit the building. You slept in science class or did you even go to school. You expect a big hole that is supposed to look like a plane. Take a coke can full, shoot it through a potato cannon into a brick wall at 300 miles per hour, then se what you have.

  • This is the PENTAGON. They have ONE crappy video camera filming it?

    Please.

    The Nike campus in Beaverton, OR has every square inch of that place covered with cameras. You mean to tell me that the Pentagon isn't covered by hundreds of cameras?

  • Common sense? Yeah, because someone with "common sense" just accepts everything that they see and hear on the TV, whereas these kuh-RAZY ass "conspiracy theorists" rely on empiracal evidence when formulating their opinions. The Enlightenment, what? Rational thought is a liberal conspiracy (didn't you know?)!

  • I think the simple fact that a "news reporter" on CNN used that kind of loaded phrasing is proof enough that CNN is essentially a source for editorials.

  • what is "all the other evidence we have?" You mean evidence like a plane? Or a picture of a plane? Or a plane sized hole in the building? The use of the terms "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy theorists" as they are used on news networks is derogatory. It is time the national news media stop controlling the tone of discourse, because they are apparently in league with everyone else who wants this covered up. We need to take back our media and our government!

  • AMEN!

  • Yeah a plane sized hole in the building... Sure

    It's not bugs bunny running through a door...

    Planes don't stay intact after hitting a concrete wall at 500 miles an hour...

  • Who did the cutting on this, it is worst have seen, his lips are not in time with voice. FAKEEEEEEEEEEE

  • No it's real, but for some reason the audio is out of sync

  • YouTube has a problem sometimes with the audio and video synching up. It happens on a lot of videos.

  • you dickhead Cymric - youre a paranoid delusional. The voice is out of synch thats all. If you don't beleive us then download it and shift the audio over in an editor. Idiot! Focus on the REAL FAKES!!!! YOUR GOVERNMENT!!!

  • that is essentially why people are questioning the original story, everyone watched planes hit the two towers, i think that people have a hard time believeing how these saudis with limited flight training, sure they were educated terrorists, but they all pulled off a highly difficult and technically challenging piece of piloting, and that is why ive always questioned the legit of the grass roots honest truth, but im open to the original story too

  • that has to be one of the greatest acts of flying/piloting ive ever seen....no doubt it was a plane but how could an amateur terrorist be so precise on a debut flight under so much pressure, the question being, how could the most secure military headquarters in the world not see that coming?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more