Rare photo of Pentagon attack

[Guest RenegadeX28]

I saw this in the WWFWG.com forums, a photo taken at the exact moment the plane hit the Pentagon. Now, I wonder who took the photo?

 

[Guest WhenDanSaysJump]

It was a CCTV camera.

[Guest AM The Kid]

Security camera...

[Guest DeputyHawk]

if it's from a security camera, are there pictures from a split second before that which would prove those wrong who claim it was a bomb not a plane which hit the pentagon?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Like we need pictures for that...

[Guest DeputyHawk]

i don't believe for a second it wasn't a plane, there's just so many consistent conspiracy theorists who won't stop harping about it. a conclusive picture would shut them up once and for all.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Goodness, you're naive. <g>

[Guest DeputyHawk]

seriously though, if a security camera has footage of the moment of impact, the frames just prior to that would hold the conclusive proof, no?

[Guest EricMM]

No! George W. Bush himself airbrushed the planes in I SWEAR! The aliens told me...

 

In today's world, there is no such thing as proof, nor common sense, when it comes to some people...

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Like Eric said...

[Guest DeputyHawk]

No! George W. Bush himself airbrushed the planes in I SWEAR! The aliens told me...

 

In today's world, there is no such thing as proof, nor common sense, when it comes to some people...

and your point about the security camera footage is what?

[Guest Kingpk]

seriously though, if a security camera has footage of the moment of impact, the frames just prior to that would hold the conclusive proof, no?

Well, the plane WAS going, what, 400-500 MPH? You can't possibly get a clear image of a plane from that. If they did have a picture of the plane, it would probably be really blurry.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

and your point about the security camera footage is what?

I think what he was saying was that anyone who doubts an aeroplane hit the Pentagon wouldn't be convinced by any kind of proof, no matter how conclusive it might seem to a reasonable person. At least, that's my view.

 

Sorry for speaking for you Eric.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

i don't deny it, i'm not one of the insane conspiracy theorists who would doubt such a thing. my only point was that if the footage existed, why not just release it and shut up all the naysayers? saying people still wouldn't believe it is hardly a reason not to do so.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I never thought you denied it. The point Eric and I made which you are still missing is that there are people even in America who don't yet believe that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks. We have videotapes of him confessing. Why do you think a comparable videotape of the act itself would convince those who deny it ever occurred?

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

i don't deny it, i'm not one of the insane conspiracy theorists who would doubt such a thing. my only point was that if the footage existed, why not just release it and shut up all the naysayers? saying people still wouldn't believe it is hardly a reason not to do so.

Eh. How many people really want to see planes smashing into the Pentagon or WTC again? I've had my fill of that over the last year.

 

Then again, I suppose I wouldn't have to watch. Might even be a good idea to release the footage so that silly conspiracist types would have one less thing to harp about.

 

"They've got footage but won't show us all of it! There's something fishy going on here!"

[Guest evenflowDDT]

[conspiracy theorist]What's the point of this photo anyway? Why did it not surface until now? Ahh, a lame attempt to infuriate more people and drum up support for a war on Iraq. Plus, there's still no proof it WASN'T a bomb.[/conspiracy theorist]

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I like your new title. <g>

[Guest evenflowDDT]

I knew you would

[Guest LJSexay]

Can't you jusyt look up the records of those who died in one of the planes that *hit* the Pentagon? How can that not be proof?

 

<possibly naive>

[Guest Muzz]

It's hard for me to believe someone would doubt a plane hit. Conspiracy theory's are interesting to read, and maybe laugh at, but that's all.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

It's hard for me to believe someone would doubt a plane hit. Conspiracy theory's are interesting to read, and maybe laugh at, but that's all.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pen.../erreurs_en.htm

 

now, i'm not holding this wacky site up as representative of my beliefs, but it does raise some intriguing questions. my questions to them are what possible reason would there be to lie about the difference between a bomb attack and a plane attack, and what the hell do they propose happened to flight 77?

 

nevertheless, the damage to the pentagon does seem inconsistent with a boeing smacking into it, and the withholding of the security camera evidence does throw up some concerns.

 

i can see why some people would call foul on the pennsylvania passengers bringing their plane down story as a cover for it being intentioanlly brought down by friendly fire - although i do not personally believe it. but what possible reason would there be to lie about the pentagon?

 

i'm not being all "ooh - conspiracy!" here, because it makes no sense, i'm just curious to have the discrepancies explained away.

[Guest Flyboy]

I love snopes.com.

 

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

 

Nope... it wasn't a plane at ALL.

[Guest DeputyHawk]

I love snopes.com.

 

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

 

Nope... it wasn't a plane at ALL.

cool site. i'm new to this whole conspiracy theory game. they do make interesting points, but easily disproved ones upon further inspection. their photo 4 i think it was - why would they possibly cover up the lawns with sand??? - to counteract the highly flammable fuel perchance?

[Guest DeputyHawk]

the hell is all this stuff about two planes seen going in, a boeing and a much smaller aircraft? the usatoday.com editor claims he saw a second plane climb steeply away from the scene and bank away following the explosion. the fuck? sorry if this stuff has been trawled over a million times before, i'm just coming across it for the first time. it intrigues and annoys me in equal measures.