both_new_pentagon_videos

These are two previously unavailable surveillance tape clips of the purported plane crash at The Pentagon. Released in response to a FOIA request by Judicial Watch.

This video came from UseNet (alt.binaries.documentaries). It is simply called "both_new_pentagon_videos.avi".

If you download this exact footage, then focus on frame 7152. Frame 7152 is when the "plane" comes into view, but is only half painted in. Frame 7153 then adds a white color to make the plane seem real. At the same frame 7153 a tree behind the plane also seems to grow, or something coming out of it where it was not in the previous frame before. Frame 7185 is when smoke magically appears before the plane seems to hit the building, and then the big fireball happens. Is this for real, or made up?

I am not suggesting either way, fake or real. I also want to make it clear I don't have a firm resolution on whether a plane hit the Pentagon, because there is evidence and witnesses, and testimony on both sides. I do want to suggest that photos released, and information released about these events is very manufactured.

WHY WOULD WE NEED TO MANUFACTURE EVIDENCE?

If there is so much un-deniable proof that things went the way the 9-11 commission report stated, why did it take a year for it to come out? Why are there still so many questions? We need a 3rd party investigation team. Please visit infowars.com and 911truth.org

Artist Name: Paris
http://www.daveyd.com/FullArticles/articleN1015.asp

Davey D.
http://www.daveyd.com/

Check out this URL too
http://www.911timeline.net/whatwouldyoudo.htm

Song: "What Would You Do?"

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• wtc
• 9-11
• pentagon
• judicial_watch

[Zapppo]

@Chenstrapftw

How the heck can anyone fly a 757 that close to the ground & not hit it?

& if the 757 hit any thing before it hit the pentagon, it would have been a rolling crash already in progress.

a 757 doesn't have a pointy nose, like the 'plane' in this pic

[zuluboyification83]

the american government is responsible for the attacks. there is just too much inconclusive evidence. i agree with "VENDARK" where is the proof. what is that explosion before the planes hit the towers. the fox reporter even said the plane looked different to a commercial plane. why did they only air that once. all the americans wanted was the oil to help a falling economy. its not the first time the american government has caused a diaster of this magnitude to help there economy.

[ssmusic214]

Proofs absolutely nothing. My Camera in 2001 was Sony FD series with less than 1 Megapixel resolution, slow shutter. Try to shoot anything with it going at 400 knots. You'll get nothing but the blur. Standard security cameras probably had far less than that.

[ssmusic214]

@MDalfig There are no "missing" frames. It is just low res camera with slow shutter speed and low frame rate. Typical for all 2001 security cameras.

[MDalfig]

This video looks as if half the frames are missing!

[MrRichardKranium]

@kevinfay94 Too bad you are the only one who thinks that, how's it feel being in the minority?

[kevinfay94]

@MrRichardKranium totally false!

[r4f4st4n1]

@PHILLYPHAN5118109 Too bad a camera and the FACTS say otherwise, Money makes you see shit you don't really see.

[Pippits]

@Stealth9331 Well if you did any kind of research you would know that the boeing that "crashed" in to the pentagon wasn't a 757-200ER it was a 757-223. And even if you were correct a 757-200ER doesn't have a pointed cockpit.

[MRBLACKPEARL04]

If you still think it was a plane then you might as well call yourself a shit factory with a non functional brain. Don't be a sheep and realize what's happening

[Coachrob36]

dont see a plane sorry, I was really looking for one..

[PHILLYPHAN5118109]

Guys, just ask the EYE WITNESSES what they saw. They all say plane. Im stickin with them