Fake 9/11 footage of cruise missile hitting pentagon

[TheGuyATX]

I'm sorry if this has been touched on before, but I could not find it.

 

[Leifer]

I doubt the footage is of the pentagon strike. The heli landing pad in the video is to the Right of the hit.....when in fact the heli pad was on the Left.

The video also has known fake images:

See: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-cruise-missile-painted-like-american-airlines.624/


If it was not a plane, why go to the risky use of a cruise missile ? Why not just use a plane ?

Seems like a foolish thing to do. Did "they" know nobody would be looking ?
Were "they" sure a missile could not be differentiated from a plane ?
How many trails of evidence would have to be covered-up ?
Is all of this even plausible ?

 

[TheGuyATX]

Well, because a cruise missile would be easier to control. A passenger plane would be hard to maneuver going that fast and low. They may not have known nobody would be looking, but they could assume no one was paying attention. Once the official story says it was a plane all over the news, then that's what everyone will say it was. The bigger questions to ask are still, why was all of the security footage confiscated? Where did it go? Why can't we see it still? One of the most highly secured buildings in the country and there was only one camera angle that could provide 3 frames?

 

[TheGuyATX]

Another thing to think about when it comes to the hole in the Pentagon, they say the hole wouldn't be the size of the plane because the wings ripped off (but oddly enough there was wing debris). But if you watch the videos of the second plane hitting the towers in NYC you see the wings go right through the steel beams, but some how a concrete structure can hold up better than steel.

 

[SR1419]

They may not have known nobody would be looking, but they could assume no one was paying attention.

I am confused by this comment given all the well documented eyewitnesses specifically identifying a plane hitting the pentagon:

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/witnesses.html

 

[Leifer]

Well, because a cruise missile would be easier to control. A passenger plane would be hard to maneuver going that fast and low. They may not have known nobody would be looking, but they could assume no one was paying attention. Once the official story says it was a plane all over the news, then that's what everyone will say it was. The bigger questions to ask are still, why was all of the security footage confiscated? Where did it go? Why can't we see it still? One of the most highly secured buildings in the country and there was only one camera angle that could provide 3 frames?

Most of this has been covered.....here and elsewhere.
A passenger plane is not that hard to control.......after all.....every passenger plane hits a runway strip within a few feet of landing target width, in normal landings.
If you think "normal landings" are slow and careful.....you are right. But they don't have to be, if they know they will crash and burn.

 

[SR1419]

Another thing to think about when it comes to the hole in the Pentagon, they say the hole wouldn't be the size of the plane because the wings ripped off (but oddly enough there was wing debris). But if you watch the videos of the second plane hitting the towers in NYC you see the wings go right through the steel beams, but some how a concrete structure can hold up better than steel.

The exterior of the WTCs were basically thin facades that were easily penetrated whilst the Pentagon was several feet of reinforced concrete specifically designed to withstand blasts.

watch this for a similar example to the pentagon impact:

 

[Leifer]

Another thing to think about when it comes to the hole in the Pentagon, they say the hole wouldn't be the size of the plane because the wings ripped off (but oddly enough there was wing debris). But if you watch the videos of the second plane hitting the towers in NYC you see the wings go right through the steel beams, but some how a concrete structure can hold up better than steel.

An office tower with windows and a light outer structure (spaced outer beams) is not the same as the thick concrete walls of the pentagon.

 

[Leifer]

.....They may not have known nobody would be looking, but they could assume no one was paying attention.....

"They" could not have assumed that.
"looking" and "paying attention"....that's a slight margin of perceptibility......This description separating the two sounds like a far-fetched idea..........an idea only taken in account without other evidence. There is other evidence.

 

[Leifer]

If I may add one comment...scenario.....
"If" it was a cruise missile sent from our gov't (USA), and falsely reported as a terrorist plane....wouldn't that revelation be the end of the US gov't ?....trust and control ?
In other words, if the gov't was found lying about this.......it would be anarchy.
It's logistically too risky.....it's stuff only found in films (movies).
(or on internet "what if" sites)

 

[TheGuyATX]

The exterior of the WTCs were basically thin facades that were easily penetrated whilst the Pentagon was several feet of reinforced concrete specifically designed to withstand blasts.

watch this for a similar example to the pentagon impact:

Sure, I can accept that, but if that's the case, where are the wings, fuselage and other wreckage? If the concrete could withstand the impact, and prevent the wings from entering the building, then 757 wreckage should be on the outside of the building. Does concrete have the ability to evaporate airplane wreckage? Just google "plane crash wreckage." Even at the beginning of this video he speaks of a pile up of wreckage. If the wings couldn't penetrate the pentagon to make a hole, they should theoretically break off backwards and still be there. If the impact can't break them off, then the plane should stop completely and the wings should still be facing outward outside of the pentagon.

Plain and simple, all that needs to be done to debunk this is release the 80+ videos that were confiscated, there were at least 3 other cameras in the vicinity of the impact point, why only give 5 frames of only one of them? Why won't they release them? Really, I guess even if they did release them now, they've had 12 years to doctor them. Not to mention the FEMA restricting photographs from inside (WTC and Pentagon). There should have been thousands of pictures taken from every angle, instead they swooped in and cleared everything out.

 

[TheGuyATX]

If I may add one comment...scenario.....
"If" it was a cruise missile sent from our gov't (USA), and falsely reported as a terrorist plane....wouldn't that revelation be the end of the US gov't ?....trust and control ?
In other words, if the gov't was found lying about this.......it would be anarchy.
It's logistically too risky.....it's stuff only found in films (movies).
(or on internet "what if" sites)

Not necessarily the end of the US Government, but it could lead to the end of those who have infiltrated the US government and are using the US for their own monetary political and power gains; the same people who are driving the US dollar into a valueless fall, printing money out of air, making bad home loans to people who shouldn't be getting those types of loans, only to wait for them to default so they can buy their home for pennies on the dollar and have the local sheriff assist in evacuating it at gunpoint. The united states was founded as a free country, you can't force a free country into submission, so you have to slowly take those freedoms away, which in my humble opinion has successfully happened over the past decade+. There's no representation in the US anymore, the rules have been changed and written to protect big business, not the citizens. It's not US government as a whole that is the problem, just the people who have bought their way into it and don't really represent the people they are supposed to represent.

 

[Leifer]

See here for Pentagon videos and analysis......
https://www.metabunk.org/search/790958/?q=pentagon&o=date&c[title_only]=1

 

[SR1419]

Sure, I can accept that, but if that's the case, where are the wings, fuselage and other wreckage?

This is plenty of photographic evidence of plane wreckage at the pentagon:

http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html

 

[Leifer]

Not necessarily the end of the US Government, but it could lead to the end of those who have infiltrated the US government......(etc)

Yes, it would mean the end of US govt....the end of trust, even to those that had it before.

Getting into "printing money", banks, big business.....is another subject.
This is all part of the fears of "general conspiracy theorists", where gov't is all bad and unbelievable. Every story is another conspiracy......connecting unrelated dots to verify a theory.
This is exactly what you are doing.
Discuss the matter at hand.....pentagon strike.

 

[MikeC]

Sure, I can accept that, but if that's the case, where are the wings, fuselage and other wreckage? If the concrete could withstand the impact, and prevent the wings from entering the building, then 757 wreckage should be on the outside of the building. Does concrete have the ability to evaporate airplane wreckage? Just google "plane crash wreckage." Even at the beginning of this video he speaks of a pile up of wreckage. If the wings couldn't penetrate the pentagon to make a hole, they should theoretically break off backwards and still be there. If the impact can't break them off, then the plane should stop completely and the wings should still be facing outward outside of the pentagon.

they could penetrate the Pentagon, for example through the holes made by the engines, and largely did - there was also a lot of debris on the lawn from both the fuselage and wings