FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Pentagon - Overview
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Rumpl, for posting this. I read it at 4 am this morning (CET), and when I awoke I was sure I had been dreaming.... but no.

Agree, this is the crappiest piece of CCTV footage I have ever seen. I haven't studied it in it's minute detail, but their releases, which again really shows nothing, is so deliberate in it's obfuscation it's painful. Seems like too many CCTV cameras have the wrong date, which, I agree with C, would probably render the footage useless in a court of law (at least as time-related evidence). But the year '93?? Come on... Wink

I want to see the traffic cameras, and if there is any truth to the story of the Sheridan Hotel footage of the crash, that as well... Not to mention other cameras owned by the Pentagon, i.e. the Amercan people. I'm not sure where and by which means the Pentagon CCTV recordings are saved, maybe C can help me with that, but I would assume that it is recored onto one medium somewhere secure (i.e. somwhere not easily destroyed by outside forces), and if nothing of interest is displayed on the footage, the tapes are reused. If any of the rumered footage (over 80 cameras around the Pentagon, was it?) has been deleted, destruction of evidence again seems to be an important part of the MO of the coverup.

As for Judicial Watch, it would be strange if a FOIA request for the above mentined videos has not been filed. Does anybody know? Are they part of the over 400 open record requests filed by them?

The letter from the Dep. of Justice/ FBI:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2006/FBILtrCitgoVideo.pdf

-DL-

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Endlessly argumentable peculiarty #49:

If you look closely, you'll notice that a very small 9-11-01 timestamp in a small black box appears to have been strangely added in the top middle of the video.

So it has 2 timestamps, one normal sized and wrong, one tiny and "correct."

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."


Last edited by Rumpl4skn on Sat Sep 16, 2006 11:12 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DL said:
Quote:
I'm not sure where and by which means the Pentagon CCTV recordings are saved, maybe C can help me with that, but I would assume that it is recored onto one medium somewhere secure (i.e. somwhere not easily destroyed by outside forces), and if nothing of interest is displayed on the footage, the tapes are reused.

I don't know about the Pentagon specifically (of course), but I will say that *all* modern CCTV systems worth their salt do *not* use VCR tape anymore (certainly not in an analogue fashion). Anything even moderately hi-tech (or at least not bargain-basement) from the past 10 years uses digital media to store the images.

A few years ago, in the infancy of mainstream digital CCTV systems, I believe that a lot of them still used tape, but the data was encoded & recorded digitally upon them. Anything more modern than that will probably have a hard drive inside of it - to all intents and purposes identical to what you'd find in a PC. (coz they're perfect for the job, mass-produced and more importantly - *cheap*)

The ones that use digital means to encode & record the data have another great advantage - coz the data is now *digital*, it can be sent (either dumped later, on-masse - or real-time) anywhere and everywhere via 'phone line, microwave &/or quite commonly, the Internet.

A friend of mine who has a shop nearby has a CCTV system installed in it (nothing special) that allows him to log into it from home via the Internet, and look at images being recorded in the shop, real-time or he can also browse through what has been recorded & stored already. He assures me that this feature has been, and is invaluable when he's had alarm calls from the security company that the shop alarm's gone off, so he can just quickly check the shop to see if it's OK, and to see if he should rush down there, or not.

So, really, I would expect somewhere like the Pentagon & it's environs to have a hi-tech CCTV system that is digital, and this would mean that data from it could be sent/stored anywhere - multiple locations probably for redundancy.

The CITGO tape looks to me like it has definately been recorded onto old, worn out, re-used multiple times, old-fashioned VCR video tape in an analogue manner. If it were still VCR tape, but digital, I think that the interference and artifacting that we see in it would not look like it does. Digital video systems, if you lose data say with a worn-out tape, tend to either just blank-out, or produce more recognizable 'pixellated' noise, not like the analogue-looking noise that the CITGO tape seems to show.

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's another vivid example of how we are continually being conditioned with bullshit about things such as the Pentagon strike.

Here is the "entry diagram" from that "official" 3d recreation:



Here's the reality of the facade of the building before it collapsed. Note the incredible accuracy it lends to the Mike Wilson video diagram.



Horseshit. Unfortunately for the Pentagon officials: (a) support columns aren't hinged to snap back into place, (b) 6-ton steel and titanium engines make substantial holes in concrete, and (c) foam spray on a window does not qualify as "damage."

This is why I maintain that a Boeing 757 did not strike this building. Not in a universe still governed by the laws of physics.

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Jerry Fletcher



Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 837
Location: Studio BS

PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reversing our perspective? Reply with quote

Does anybody know of any pictures of the Pentagon just before the alleged attack? I think I've seen some, but I can't remember now.

Are there any pictures of the cable spools and other crap in the way? It would be interesting to see if there is a picture of the pentagon with all the current elements except the 'plane or no plane'.

We all know there were teams of people carting crap all over the place immediately following the attack.

Maybe they' weren't all taking things away.

Let's think about this from the reverse angle and see what the devil's advocates might have to say. What if we pretend to be the 'planners' of this psyop and see what - ... woah, what's happening? ...everything's getting blurry and wavy and ... oh god no, not a fantasy sequence..."

*sound of cascading whole tone harp glissandos...*


*ring ring*
"Hello?"
"Rump? It's Jerry, I need another little favor ..."
*CLICK... dial tone*
*sigh*


*ring ring*
"Hello?"
"WAIT! Don't hang up! C'mon, you'll like this one - it's a real thinker! I want to crash a 757 into the pentagon, but I don't want to take the rap for it. I've got kind of a bad reputation as a liar already, so if I say I didn't do it, everybody will assume I'm lying as usual. So, what do I need to do in order to pull this off, confess, and convince everybody my confession is a lie? When I say 'I did it', I want to look real dumb.

What's it gonna take to pull that off?"
*CLICK... dial tone...*
*sigh*

*ring ring*
"Hello?"
"Hey Continuity, it's Jerry..."
*CLICK... dial tone...*
*sigh*

*ring ring*
"Hello?"
"Donny? It's Jerry, listen, I need a favor, but, uh, hey, is your office anywhere near that new remodeled part, you know with the reinforced walls and ..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jer - as soon as my home brain augmentation kit arrives, I'm going to give that one another read through. Wink
_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8294

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reel Issues Reply with quote

Quote:
Rumpl4skn: Here is the "entry diagram" from that "official" 3d recreation:

One of the key points in that 3d reconstruction video is that the wings of the
plane (coming in from the right) could have passed over the reels in the
foreground. The only low part of the port(left) wing --the engine-- would
have passed to the left of the pair of reels without disturbing them.

The wings would have impacted the lower floor near its ceiling.

3D RECONSTRUCTION VIDEO HERE



There's the reels to the right of the tree. The path of
the plane will allow the engine to pass them on the left.

The remaining issue is the height of the tail --which should have damaged
one window on the third floor. Well, maybe the tail was 'clotheslined' (as
was pointed out in the forum) tilting back and entering the second floor.

(See photos in posts above.)

Another point is this: have we independent confirmation that the third
floor window was intact? It's an easy Photoshop to copy the window beside
and create an intact window in one photo. Maybe this is an old question?
Anybody?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks to me like the spools in the recreation are conveniently huddled together within 10 feet of the tree. In the pic below, one of those spools appears to be where an engine would have passed through.

Then again, it could have moved from the blast. But a picture from before the impact would go a long way to settling thius, as Jerry suggested. I haven't seen one. Who would have been snapping pictures before anything happened?

And it looks to me like there's foam on them there windows.


_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Jerry Fletcher



Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 837
Location: Studio BS

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry -

I'm trying a new medication to prevent spontaneous uncontrollable fantasy sequences - it doesn't seem to be working.

My point was yes, by appearances it is nearly impossible to believe a commercial airliner plowed into the Pentagon.

You don't need to convince me the official story is a bit of a stretch for common sense.

Now, just for fun, try to imagine what would be necessary to actually fly a plane into the pentagon, and then spin the evidence somehow so that curious liberals such as yourself become convinced that it couldn't possibly have happened.

I'm trying the old 'think like the perp' perspective switch to come up with other possibilities of 'where' the plane went.

The HTB theory just feels like it arrived on the internet in a Krispy Kreme box, and it never leads anywhere helpful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nat



Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Location: minime-rica

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow, that camera cover must have had some kind of pyrotechnically fired (and utterly pointless) zooming feature on it...

someone really wants this thing to cause controversy, but in a discreet way, the cover and/or camera lens locations just do not match

there's no way an atmospheric shockwave could have reached the camera location that fast

there's no way same shockwave could have left the cones unnaffected in the process

they may as well have had someone pulling a moonie for the camera in frame two, 'cos they are really taking the piss with this stuff

surely this is just another 'miracle passport' ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
elbowdeep



Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Comment: In respect to the "pilons", or "cones" mentioned above... I wouldn't put too much on those, I've seen them many a time FIXED to the ground, either on a short post, or with the four corners nailed down. (This became apparent when I went to kick one of them while visiting at a GM plant, so I've payed attention to that peculiarity from then on... but that's another story). Since we don't know if they are or aren't fixed to the ground, I wouldn't put much into the fact that they don't "blow" over.

(I cross posted, as the following is more appropriate here... I will attemp to delete the old post)

This is a page that I came across years ago, but has never left my mind...

Has this been disproven?

Because every time I see the originally released "frames", I see that deltoid piece of black debris (i.e. "tailpiece"?) fly over the building (in photo labelled #1) on the following site...
http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh2/Pentagon2.htm

To me, this makes a lot of sense. As the blast (upon impact) would be blasting back away from the building (fireball we can see, is obvious) causing anything (like tail) which is moving at high velocity toward the building, to be redirected upward, over the building. (Imagine an "airbag" going off in at the nose of the aircraft during collision, and the tails trajectory being changed to "upward".

NOTE: The video I am referring to is NOT the one from Judicial watch that was recently made available from the FOI request. I am referring to the ORIGINAL frames, which I am having a hell of a time finding, because the new Judicial Watch video has "bumped" it out of existance!. If you find it/have it, please post the link here.

Could they have done this to send the original with the clearer shot of the "tail section" down the memory hole?

_________________
One day the cows will sprout wings and fly away...
http://twitter.com/elbowdeep
http://elbowdeep.posterous.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nat



Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Location: minime-rica

PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:22 am    Post subject: toebreakers anonymous Reply with quote

hi elbowdeep

done the exact same thing myself, thought i was going to kick a cone, found it to be bolted down

i didn't explain/phrase that last so well, what i mean is that the scratched/dirty clear plastic or glass 'sneeze guard' clearly makes an instantaneous move in relation to the camera lens, this 'must' have occurred at explosive velocity, and yet, the top of the cone does not even so much as jiggle, so either the cones are full of concrete, or something there does not tally
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.