What's new

FBI re-releases dozens of 9/11 Pentagon photos when a plane crashed into it: See pics

But this shows plenty of cameras available. I think that was his point as well that why was any video not made available as it should have been. Other part was sarcasm.

What is you opinion of it anyway? With these cameras do you think video should be available??
THere were many cameras and as discussed CCTV doesn't necessarily give good enough result for any of them (due to low resolution and frame rate, which both impact data storage needs), relative to high speed target in question. And no, I don't see a good argument being made here yet why Pentagon/DoD/Government SHOULD release ANY footage (it may in fact be better - from the point of view of not making your opponents any wiser - to NOT release good quality footage IF available.)

Recommended reads:
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml
 
.
THere were many cameras and as discussed CCTV doesn't necessarily give good enough result for any of them (due to low resolution and frame rate, which both impact data storage needs), relative to high speed target in question. And no, I don't see a good argument being made here yet why Pentagon/DoD/Government SHOULD release ANY footage (it may in fact be better - from the point of view of not making your opponents any wiser - to NOT release good quality footage IF available.)

Recommended reads:
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml
Why shouldn't they?
How would it make things worse? People all over the world, even Americans have some concerns. The whole point have given birth to more conspiracy theories than Area 51! A simple relatively better video from one of those MULTIPLE cameras could have settled the issue. A couple of pictures of actual airplane parts (that were not as nonsense as the aluminum foil shared earlier) would have helped many understand the real events of the day. No engine or tail section was ever shown, no clear cut evidence EVER provided. Not saying that it was NOT a plane, JUST saying that enough was NOT DONE to stop people from claiming the same. IT SHOULD HAVE.


As for the low level passes by various planes you and others have shared, PLEASE do not compare the flight demonstrations by experienced well rehearsed pilots with a bunch of rag tag terrorists. You do not expect every RAF pilot to make it to Red Arrows, this is a totally different level.

Again, let me say it, i am not by any means saying that a plane was not involved and nor am i presenting some conspiracy theory, just stating that NOTHING was done EVER to stop me or anyone else from believing in those conspiracy theories.

This is new, will go through this one. Rest i have already read and it is the same story. You word against mine with no clear evidence ever provided to the conspiracy lovers. They should have been laid to rest easily with one two non security risk moves.
 
.
...just stating that NOTHING was done EVER to stop me or anyone else from believing in those conspiracy theories.
What do you expect us to do ?

The arguments that we presented we believes to be indisputable. There is nothing we can go beyond that. We cannot force you to believe. So for you to say that 'NOTHING' was done is absurd.
 
.
What do you expect us to do ?

The arguments that we presented we believes to be indisputable. There is nothing we can go beyond that. We cannot force you to believe. So for you to say that 'NOTHING' was done is absurd.
We are not talking about what you believe or what i believe. We are talking about what the doubters "claim" and what is being done to address those concerns. It would not have cost a dime to answer those "ridiculous" questions. All it would take is a couple of photographs of some actual plane debris, engine/tail section etc. May be some videos from CCTV cameras on site. Such evidence would end the debate once and for all but for some unknown reason people are allowed to continue with the conspiracy theories. I think this lack of conviction to prove oneself right in a matter such as this that have arguable changed the destiny of the world is what is absurd.
 
.
1. I would not question the speed of airplane, but if the aircraft was flying at the height of projectile, it is not a 90 degrees dip. It is not an agile craft like fighters so it had to align with the building a couple of miles away to reach this height in straight and level flight, unless it was a VITOL. I am sure most must have flown as passengers in commercial liner. Glide slope during landing can serve as a good guide to visualise the projectile in the video.
I pointed out the technical aids a relatively unskilled pilot might have at his/her disposal.

If it was an airplane (I have all my doubts) then it was not an amateur's job. Flying airplane at high speeds low altitude needs high professional skills.
Not necessarily, esp. not when flying with computerized assistance handling the controls
 
.
The terrorist pilots had more than just a few hrs. They finished ground school, which is more than a few hrs. Then they had actual flight time. Sufficient.

The 19 hijackers in the September 11 attacks were organized into four teams, each led by a pilot-trained hijacker with three or four "muscle hijackers," who were trained to help subdue the pilots, passengers, and crew.
The first hijackers to arrive in the United States were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who settled in San Diego County, California, in January 2000. They were followed by three hijacker-pilots, Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah in mid-2000 to undertake flight training in south Florida. The fourth hijacker-pilot, Hani Hanjour, arrived in San Diego in December 2000. The rest of the "muscle hijackers" arrived in early- and mid-2001.

As for the pilots who would go on to participate in the attacks, three of them were original members of the Hamburg cell (Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah). Following their training at Al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, they were chosen by Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda's military wing due to their extensive knowledge of western culture and language skills, increasing the mission's operational security and its chances for success. The fourth intended pilot, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a member of the Hamburg cell, was also chosen to participate in the attacks yet was unable to obtain a visa for entry into the United States. He was later replaced by Hani Hanjour, a Saudi national.

Mihdhar and Hazmi were also potential pilot hijackers, but did not do well in their initial pilot lessons in San Diego. Both were kept on as "muscle" hijackers, who would help overpower the passengers and crew and allow the pilot hijackers to take control of the flights. In addition to Mihdhar and Hazmi, thirteen other muscle hijackers were selected in late 2000 or early 2001.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks

Atta (American Airlines Flight 11 – World Trade Center - North Tower) in 1985 entered Cairo University to study engineering, was admitted into the very selective architecture program during his senior year, graduated in 1990 with a degree in architecture, and then joined the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Engineers Syndicate organization. For several months after graduating, Atta worked at the Urban Development Center in Cairo, on architectural, planning, and building design. In Germany, from 1992, he enrolled in the urban planning graduate program at the Hamburg University of Technology. He studied under the guidance of the department chair, Dittmar Machule.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta

After graduating from high school in 1995, Marwan al-Shehhi (United Airlines Flight 175 – Two World Trade Center - South Tower) enlisted in the Emirati military and received a half a year of basic training before he was admitted into a military scholarship program that allowed him to continue his education in Germany, where he first arrived in April 1996. While in Germany, al-Shehhi enrolled in the University of Bonn after completing a German course. In early 1998, he transferred to the Technical University of Hamburg. A poor student, he was directed by the Scholarship program administrators to repeat a semester of his studies back in Bonn beginning in August 1998. Al-Shehhi did not enroll back at Bonn until January 1999 and continued to struggle with his studies. By July 1999, he returned to Hamburg to study shipbuilding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_al-Shehhi

Atta arrived in the United States, together with Marwan al-Shehhi, in June 2000. Both ended up in Venice, Florida at Huffman Aviation, where they entered the Accelerated Pilot Program. Atta and Shehhi obtained instrument ratings in November 2000, and continued training on simulators and flight training.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta

Al-Shehhi was the first of the Hamburg group to leave for the United States. He arrived in Newark, New Jersey on 29 May 2000. Atta joined him the next month, and the two began to search for flight schools. Al-Shehhi posed as a body guard of Atta, who was also posing as a "Saudi Arabian royal family member" while the two of them took flying lessons in Venice, Florida. They received their licenses by December 2000. On 29 December, Atta and Marwan went to the Opa-Locka Airport and practiced on a Boeing 727 simulator. They logged hundreds of hours on a Boeing 727 flight simulator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_al-Shehhi#Flight_education_and_preparation

Atta began flight training on July 6, 2000, and continued training nearly every day. By the end of July, both Atta and Shehhi did solo flights. Atta earned his private pilot certificate in September, and then he and Shehhi decided to switch flight schools. Both enrolled at Jones Aviation in Sarasota and took training there for a brief time. They had problems following instructions and were both very upset when they failed their Stage 1 exam at Jones Aviation. They inquired about multi-engine planes and told the instructor that "they wanted to move quickly, because they had a job waiting in their country upon completion of their training in the U.S." In mid-October, Atta and Shehhi returned to Huffman Aviation to continue training. In November 2000, Atta earned his instrument rating, and then a commercial pilot's license in December from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Atta continued with flight training, including solo flights and simulator time. On December 22, Atta and Shehhi applied to Eagle International for large jet and simulator training for McDonnell Douglas DC-9 and Boeing 737–300 models. On December 29 and 30, Atta and Marwan went to the Opa-locka Airport where they practiced on a Boeing 727 simulator, and they obtained Boeing 767 simulator training from Pan Am International on December 31. Atta purchased flight deck videos for Boeing 747–200, Boeing 757–200, Airbus A320 and Boeing 767-300ER models via mail-order from Sporty's Pilot Shop in Batavia, Ohio in November and December 2000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta

Jarrah (United Airlines Flight 93) was born in Beirut, Lebanon, to a wealthy family. He was brought up in the Muslim quarter of the city, Tarik Jdideh, and received his primary and secondary education from schools in that area. In the spring of 1996, Jarrah moved to Germany with his cousin Salim. They were there to take a certificate course in German at the University of Greifswald required of foreigners studying in Germany who do not speak the language. In 1997, Jarrah left Greifswald and instead began studying aerospace engineering at the Fachhochschule (University of Applied Sciences) in Hamburg, while working at a Volkswagen paint shop in nearby Wolfsburg. Subsequently, Jarrah dropped out of the Fachhochschule and began looking at flight schools. He claimed that this was to fulfill his childhood dream of being a pilot. After looking in several countries, he decided that none of the flight schools in Europe were adequate. On the advice of a childhood friend, he prepared to move to the United States.
Jarrah apparently entered the United States on seven separate occasions, more than any other hijacker. On May 25, 2000, he applied for and received a five-year US B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) visa in Berlin. On June 27, 2000, he went to the U.S. for the first time, arriving at Newark International Airport. He then traveled to Florida, where he enrolled full-time at the Florida Flight Training Center in Venice. Jarrah was enrolled in flight school for six months, from June 2000 to January 15, 2001. He obtained his license to fly small aircraft in August 2000, and began training to fly large jets later that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziad_Jarrah

Hanjour (American Airlines Flight 77 – Pentagon) first came to the United States in 1991, enrolling at the University of Arizona, where he studied English for a few months before returning to Saudi Arabia early the next year. He came back to the United States in 1996, studying English in California before he began taking flying lessons in Arizona.
First staying with family friends in Miramar, Florida for a month before heading to Oakland, California to study English and attend flight school, Hanjour was admitted to the Sierra Academy of Aeronautics. But before beginning flight training, the academy arranged for him to take intensive English courses at ESL Language Center in Oakland. The flight school also arranged for him to stay with a host family, with whom he moved in with on May 20, 1996. He completed the English program in August, and in early September 1996, he attended a single day of ground school courses at the Sierra Academy of Aeronautics before withdrawing, citing financial worries about the $35,000 cost. Hanjour left Oakland in September and moved to Phoenix, Arizona, paying $4,800 for lessons at CRM Flight Cockpit Resource Management in Scottsdale. Receiving poor marks, Hanjour dropped out of flight school, and returned to Saudi Arabia at the end of November 1996.
Hanjour re-entered the United States on November 16, 1997, taking additional English courses in Florida, then returning to Phoenix, where he shared an apartment with muscle-hijacker Nawaf al-Hazmi. In December, he resumed training at CRM Flight Cockpit Resource Management for a few weeks, before pursuing training at Arizona Aviation. al-Hazmi and Hanjour stayed in Arizona, continued taking flight lessons at Arizona Aviation throughout 1998 and early 1999. In addition to flight training at Arizona Aviation, Hanjour enrolled in flight simulator classes at the Sawyer School of Aviation where he made only three or four visits (Lotfi Raissi would begin taking lessons at the same school a month after Hanjour quit). Hanjour gained his FAA commercial pilot certificate in April 1999, getting a "satisfactory" rating from the examine and then went back to his native Saudi Arabia to find a job as a commercial pilot. Hanjour applied to civil aviation school in Jeddah, but was turned down.
Hanjour arrived back in the United States in December 2000. He joined up with Nawaf al-Hazmi in San Diego, and they immediately left for Arizona where Hanjour took refresher pilot training. In January 2001, Arizona JetTech flight school managers reported him to the FAA at least five times because his English was inadequate for the commercial pilot’s certificate he had already obtained. His FAA certificate had become invalid late in 1999 when he failed to take a mandatory medical examination. In February, Hanjour began advanced simulator training in Mesa, Arizona. In April 2001, they relocated to Falls Church, Virginia and then Paterson, New Jersey in late May where Hanjour took additional flight training.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hani_Hanjour

We are not talking about what you believe or what i believe. We are talking about what the doubters "claim" and what is being done to address those concerns. It would not have cost a dime to answer those "ridiculous" questions. All it would take is a couple of photographs of some actual plane debris, engine/tail section etc. May be some videos from CCTV cameras on site. Such evidence would end the debate once and for all but for some unknown reason people are allowed to continue with the conspiracy theories. I think this lack of conviction to prove oneself right in a matter such as this that have arguable changed the destiny of the world is what is absurd.
If you google "flight 77" + engine you get plenty of pics showing engine parts found at the Pentagon crash site of Flight 77. Likewise for "flight 77" + "landing gear". Or "flight 77" + debris. But all we then get is "oh, well, that's not a 757 engine part / landing gear / debris" and on. But folks seem to completely forget parts have registration numbers that allow them to be traced back. See comments on my initial post. And around we go again.

Main landing gear section, apparent engine parts, and other aircraft and building debris, as collected.
00Pentdebris-full.jpg

PentagonDebrisMontagecopy1.jpg

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2

For anyone interested in the damage to the Pentagon, the ASCE's Pentagon Building Performance Report is essential reading. From page 35: "The width of the severe damage to the west facade of the Pentagon was approximately 120 ft (from column lines 8 to 20)."
The hole made by flight 77 extends along the wing line, left and right of the fuselage hole. It is not a cookie-cutter hole: that simply cannot happen when a plane hits a heavily- reinforced concrete building. Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at a 43-degree angle to its west wall. It came from the right of the photo below.
PentWingHole.jpg

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2

As for other CCTV footage,

Arlinton Double Tree footage
hqdefault.jpg
hqdefault.jpg


CITGO gas station
hqdefault.jpg


Could there be more Pentagon CCTV footage? Possibly, provided the three roof mounted (left building corner, mid building and right building corner) and 1 guardhouse mounted camera's were looking the right direction at the right time, and were fast enough to capture the high speed inbound. BIG if's, those are.

This is the vehicle entry point CCTV, which yielded inconclusive images
aerial-1-cctv.jpg


This is the guard house CCTV
pentagoncamera3.jpg


These are the roof CCTVs
63ax9xg


This is roughly the approach vector
pentagon-plane.jpg


That is, IF we agree on what the flight path was to begin with....
mcgrawlocat.jpg


flight-77-overheadpolespath.jpg


pentgon2.jpg


And why assume a straight line or nice curved flight path?
PentagonMissileoverview-full.jpg


That determines which camera's (besides the ones already mentioned on and off the Pentagon) could potentially have seen anything at all....
 
Last edited:
.
We are not talking about what you believe or what i believe. We are talking about what the doubters "claim" and what is being done to address those concerns. It would not have cost a dime to answer those "ridiculous" questions. All it would take is a couple of photographs of some actual plane debris, engine/tail section etc. May be some videos from CCTV cameras on site. Such evidence would end the debate once and for all but for some unknown reason people are allowed to continue with the conspiracy theories. I think this lack of conviction to prove oneself right in a matter such as this that have arguable changed the destiny of the world is what is absurd.
And what we found have been more than adequate, especially when there were some parts like the engine core, panels, ect...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Paris_Air_Show_crash

bnaDOiZ.jpg


That is from the 1973 Le Bourget airshow crash of a Tupolev 144.

As you can see, the reassembled aircraft is not entirely complete and the debris was from an airshow, which is as favorable a condition as one can get. But here we are talking about aircrafts that were deliberately flew into buildings at as high speed as the aircrafts allowed. What you demand is unrealistic and unreasonable.
 
.
And what we found have been more than adequate, especially when there were some parts like the engine core, panels, ect...

What you demand is unrealistic and unreasonable.

rb211-pentagon.jpg


All three of these pieces of debris are identical matches to or at least consistent with the components found in the Rolls-Royce RB211-535 turbofan aboard a Boeing 757.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
See also
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265a.shtml

pentagon-wheel-04.jpg

This investigation indicates that the only wheel matching that found at the Pentagon is the main gear wheel of a Boeing 757-200, the same model as American Airlines Flight 77. The key features of the wreckage--including the number, size, and shape of the cutouts and bolt attachments--perfectly match those found in a main landing gear wheel of a Boeing 757-200, as illustrated in the above comparison. None of the wheels of the Global Hawk, A-3, or 737 match the debris, which is not surprising since all of these aircraft weigh considerably less than the 757 and use correspondingly smaller wheels of differing design.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0290.shtml

flight-path.jpg

Probable path of Flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon
One of the most interesting quotes comes from Afework Hagos who commented on the plane see-sawing back and forth, suggesting that the pilot was struggling to keep the plane level in either pitch or roll or perhaps both. Hagos was stuck in traffic near the Pentagon when the 757 passed overhead. He reported, "There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance." Another eyewitness named Penny Elgas also referred to the plane rocking back and forth while Albert Hemphill commented that, "He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just 'jinked' to avoid something." These observations were further confirmed by Mary Ann Owens, James Ryan, and David Marra who described the plane's wings as "wobbly" when it "rolled left and then rolled right" and the pilot "tilted his wings, this way and in this way."
This question of whether an amateur could have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon was also posed to a colleague who previously worked on flight control software for Boeing airliners. Brian F. (he asked that his last name be withheld) explained, "The flight control system used on a 757 can certainly overcome any ground effect. ... That piece of software is intended to be used during low speed landings. A high speed dash at low altitude like [Flight 77] made at the Pentagon is definitely not recommended procedure ... and I don't think it's something anyone specifically designs into the software for any commercial aircraft I can think of. But the flight code is designed to be robust and keep the plane as safe as possible even in unexpected conditions like that. I'm sure the software could handle that kind of flight pattern so long as the pilot had at least basic flight training skills and didn't overcompensate too much."
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

landing_gear_complete.jpg

https://kendoc911.wordpress.com/pentagon-debris/'

Really DO read this: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/
 
.
And what we found have been more than adequate, especially when there were some parts like the engine core, panels, ect...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Paris_Air_Show_crash

bnaDOiZ.jpg


That is from the 1973 Le Bourget airshow crash of a Tupolev 144.

As you can see, the reassembled aircraft is not entirely complete and the debris was from an airshow, which is as favorable a condition as one can get. But here we are talking about aircrafts that were deliberately flew into buildings at as high speed as the aircrafts allowed. What you demand is unrealistic and unreasonable.
These LOOK like an aircraft. This is exactly the kind of pic that would have satisfied all the questions regarding Pentagon attack. That is all i am saying.

The 19 hijackers in the September 11 attacks were organized into four teams, each led by a pilot-trained hijacker with three or four "muscle hijackers," who were trained to help subdue the pilots, passengers, and crew.
The first hijackers to arrive in the United States were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who settled in San Diego County, California, in January 2000. They were followed by three hijacker-pilots, Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah in mid-2000 to undertake flight training in south Florida. The fourth hijacker-pilot, Hani Hanjour, arrived in San Diego in December 2000. The rest of the "muscle hijackers" arrived in early- and mid-2001.

As for the pilots who would go on to participate in the attacks, three of them were original members of the Hamburg cell (Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah). Following their training at Al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, they were chosen by Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda's military wing due to their extensive knowledge of western culture and language skills, increasing the mission's operational security and its chances for success. The fourth intended pilot, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a member of the Hamburg cell, was also chosen to participate in the attacks yet was unable to obtain a visa for entry into the United States. He was later replaced by Hani Hanjour, a Saudi national.

Mihdhar and Hazmi were also potential pilot hijackers, but did not do well in their initial pilot lessons in San Diego. Both were kept on as "muscle" hijackers, who would help overpower the passengers and crew and allow the pilot hijackers to take control of the flights. In addition to Mihdhar and Hazmi, thirteen other muscle hijackers were selected in late 2000 or early 2001.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks

Atta (American Airlines Flight 11 – World Trade Center - North Tower) in 1985 entered Cairo University to study engineering, was admitted into the very selective architecture program during his senior year, graduated in 1990 with a degree in architecture, and then joined the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Engineers Syndicate organization. For several months after graduating, Atta worked at the Urban Development Center in Cairo, on architectural, planning, and building design. In Germany, from 1992, he enrolled in the urban planning graduate program at the Hamburg University of Technology. He studied under the guidance of the department chair, Dittmar Machule.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta

After graduating from high school in 1995, Marwan al-Shehhi (United Airlines Flight 175 – Two World Trade Center - South Tower) enlisted in the Emirati military and received a half a year of basic training before he was admitted into a military scholarship program that allowed him to continue his education in Germany, where he first arrived in April 1996. While in Germany, al-Shehhi enrolled in the University of Bonn after completing a German course. In early 1998, he transferred to the Technical University of Hamburg. A poor student, he was directed by the Scholarship program administrators to repeat a semester of his studies back in Bonn beginning in August 1998. Al-Shehhi did not enroll back at Bonn until January 1999 and continued to struggle with his studies. By July 1999, he returned to Hamburg to study shipbuilding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_al-Shehhi

Atta arrived in the United States, together with Marwan al-Shehhi, in June 2000. Both ended up in Venice, Florida at Huffman Aviation, where they entered the Accelerated Pilot Program. Atta and Shehhi obtained instrument ratings in November 2000, and continued training on simulators and flight training.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta

Al-Shehhi was the first of the Hamburg group to leave for the United States. He arrived in Newark, New Jersey on 29 May 2000. Atta joined him the next month, and the two began to search for flight schools. Al-Shehhi posed as a body guard of Atta, who was also posing as a "Saudi Arabian royal family member" while the two of them took flying lessons in Venice, Florida. They received their licenses by December 2000. On 29 December, Atta and Marwan went to the Opa-Locka Airport and practiced on a Boeing 727 simulator. They logged hundreds of hours on a Boeing 727 flight simulator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_al-Shehhi#Flight_education_and_preparation

Atta began flight training on July 6, 2000, and continued training nearly every day. By the end of July, both Atta and Shehhi did solo flights. Atta earned his private pilot certificate in September, and then he and Shehhi decided to switch flight schools. Both enrolled at Jones Aviation in Sarasota and took training there for a brief time. They had problems following instructions and were both very upset when they failed their Stage 1 exam at Jones Aviation. They inquired about multi-engine planes and told the instructor that "they wanted to move quickly, because they had a job waiting in their country upon completion of their training in the U.S." In mid-October, Atta and Shehhi returned to Huffman Aviation to continue training. In November 2000, Atta earned his instrument rating, and then a commercial pilot's license in December from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Atta continued with flight training, including solo flights and simulator time. On December 22, Atta and Shehhi applied to Eagle International for large jet and simulator training for McDonnell Douglas DC-9 and Boeing 737–300 models. On December 29 and 30, Atta and Marwan went to the Opa-locka Airport where they practiced on a Boeing 727 simulator, and they obtained Boeing 767 simulator training from Pan Am International on December 31. Atta purchased flight deck videos for Boeing 747–200, Boeing 757–200, Airbus A320 and Boeing 767-300ER models via mail-order from Sporty's Pilot Shop in Batavia, Ohio in November and December 2000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta

Jarrah (United Airlines Flight 93) was born in Beirut, Lebanon, to a wealthy family. He was brought up in the Muslim quarter of the city, Tarik Jdideh, and received his primary and secondary education from schools in that area. In the spring of 1996, Jarrah moved to Germany with his cousin Salim. They were there to take a certificate course in German at the University of Greifswald required of foreigners studying in Germany who do not speak the language. In 1997, Jarrah left Greifswald and instead began studying aerospace engineering at the Fachhochschule (University of Applied Sciences) in Hamburg, while working at a Volkswagen paint shop in nearby Wolfsburg. Subsequently, Jarrah dropped out of the Fachhochschule and began looking at flight schools. He claimed that this was to fulfill his childhood dream of being a pilot. After looking in several countries, he decided that none of the flight schools in Europe were adequate. On the advice of a childhood friend, he prepared to move to the United States.
Jarrah apparently entered the United States on seven separate occasions, more than any other hijacker. On May 25, 2000, he applied for and received a five-year US B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) visa in Berlin. On June 27, 2000, he went to the U.S. for the first time, arriving at Newark International Airport. He then traveled to Florida, where he enrolled full-time at the Florida Flight Training Center in Venice. Jarrah was enrolled in flight school for six months, from June 2000 to January 15, 2001. He obtained his license to fly small aircraft in August 2000, and began training to fly large jets later that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziad_Jarrah

Hanjour (American Airlines Flight 77 – Pentagon) first came to the United States in 1991, enrolling at the University of Arizona, where he studied English for a few months before returning to Saudi Arabia early the next year. He came back to the United States in 1996, studying English in California before he began taking flying lessons in Arizona.
First staying with family friends in Miramar, Florida for a month before heading to Oakland, California to study English and attend flight school, Hanjour was admitted to the Sierra Academy of Aeronautics. But before beginning flight training, the academy arranged for him to take intensive English courses at ESL Language Center in Oakland. The flight school also arranged for him to stay with a host family, with whom he moved in with on May 20, 1996. He completed the English program in August, and in early September 1996, he attended a single day of ground school courses at the Sierra Academy of Aeronautics before withdrawing, citing financial worries about the $35,000 cost. Hanjour left Oakland in September and moved to Phoenix, Arizona, paying $4,800 for lessons at CRM Flight Cockpit Resource Management in Scottsdale. Receiving poor marks, Hanjour dropped out of flight school, and returned to Saudi Arabia at the end of November 1996.
Hanjour re-entered the United States on November 16, 1997, taking additional English courses in Florida, then returning to Phoenix, where he shared an apartment with muscle-hijacker Nawaf al-Hazmi. In December, he resumed training at CRM Flight Cockpit Resource Management for a few weeks, before pursuing training at Arizona Aviation. al-Hazmi and Hanjour stayed in Arizona, continued taking flight lessons at Arizona Aviation throughout 1998 and early 1999. In addition to flight training at Arizona Aviation, Hanjour enrolled in flight simulator classes at the Sawyer School of Aviation where he made only three or four visits (Lotfi Raissi would begin taking lessons at the same school a month after Hanjour quit). Hanjour gained his FAA commercial pilot certificate in April 1999, getting a "satisfactory" rating from the examine and then went back to his native Saudi Arabia to find a job as a commercial pilot. Hanjour applied to civil aviation school in Jeddah, but was turned down.
Hanjour arrived back in the United States in December 2000. He joined up with Nawaf al-Hazmi in San Diego, and they immediately left for Arizona where Hanjour took refresher pilot training. In January 2001, Arizona JetTech flight school managers reported him to the FAA at least five times because his English was inadequate for the commercial pilot’s certificate he had already obtained. His FAA certificate had become invalid late in 1999 when he failed to take a mandatory medical examination. In February, Hanjour began advanced simulator training in Mesa, Arizona. In April 2001, they relocated to Falls Church, Virginia and then Paterson, New Jersey in late May where Hanjour took additional flight training.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hani_Hanjour


If you google "flight 77" + engine you get plenty of pics showing engine parts found at the Pentagon crash site of Flight 77. Likewise for "flight 77" + "landing gear". Or "flight 77" + debris. But all we then get is "oh, well, that's not a 757 engine part / landing gear / debris" and on. But folks seem to completely forget parts have registration numbers that allow them to be traced back. See comments on my initial post. And around we go again.

Main landing gear section, apparent engine parts, and other aircraft and building debris, as collected.
00Pentdebris-full.jpg

PentagonDebrisMontagecopy1.jpg

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2

For anyone interested in the damage to the Pentagon, the ASCE's Pentagon Building Performance Report is essential reading. From page 35: "The width of the severe damage to the west facade of the Pentagon was approximately 120 ft (from column lines 8 to 20)."
The hole made by flight 77 extends along the wing line, left and right of the fuselage hole. It is not a cookie-cutter hole: that simply cannot happen when a plane hits a heavily- reinforced concrete building. Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at a 43-degree angle to its west wall. It came from the right of the photo below.
PentWingHole.jpg

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2

As for other CCTV footage,

Arlinton Double Tree footage
hqdefault.jpg
hqdefault.jpg


CITGO gas station
hqdefault.jpg


Could there be more Pentagon CCTV footage? Possibly, provided the three roof mounted (left building corner, mid building and right building corner) and 1 guardhouse mounted camera's were looking the right direction at the right time, and were fast enough to capture the high speed inbound. BIG if's, those are.

This is the vehicle entry point CCTV, which yielded inconclusive images
aerial-1-cctv.jpg


This is the guard house CCTV
pentagoncamera3.jpg


These are the roof CCTVs
63ax9xg


This is roughly the approach vector
pentagon-plane.jpg


That is, IF we agree on what the flight path was to begin with....
mcgrawlocat.jpg


flight-77-overheadpolespath.jpg


pentgon2.jpg


And why assume a straight line or nice curved flight path?
PentagonMissileoverview-full.jpg


That determines which camera's (besides the ones already mentioned on and off the Pentagon) could potentially have seen anything at all....
Bro, a pilot trained hijacker and professional pilots with years of experience and rehearsals (as in case of the ones from those airshows). How can you compare them both?

This is just to answer the first 8 or 10 words of your post. Rest i will read and try to revert back later, leaving for home now.
 
.
Bro, a pilot trained hijacker and professional pilots with years of experience and rehearsals (as in case of the ones from those airshows). How can you compare them both?

As was already indicated by professional pilots what conducted simulation flight of this event:
People need to realize that crashing a plane into a building as massive as the Pentagon is remarkably easy and takes no skill at all. Landing one on a runway safely even under the best conditions? Now that's the hard part!
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

From the same article:
This question of whether an amateur could have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon was also posed to a colleague who previously worked on flight control software for Boeing airliners. Brian F. (he asked that his last name be withheld) explained, "The flight control system used on a 757 can certainly overcome any ground effect. ... That piece of software is intended to be used during low speed landings. A high speed dash at low altitude like [Flight 77] made at the Pentagon is definitely not recommended procedure ... and I don't think it's something anyone specifically designs into the software for any commercial aircraft I can think of. But the flight code is designed to be robust and keep the plane as safe as possible even in unexpected conditions like that. I'm sure the software could handle that kind of flight pattern so long as the pilot had at least basic flight training skills and didn't overcompensate too much."
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

This is just to answer the first 8 or 10 words of your post. Rest i will read and try to revert back later, leaving for home now.
Better if you read the links with recommended reading I gave, yes.

Recommended reads:
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265a.shtml
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0290.shtml
https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2
 
.
Sometimes lost in all of the technical conspiracy debunking bouts is the epic failure of US intelligence and the breakdown of connectivity between the two big services and the DOJ.

To think that the breakdown in intelligence which was roughly costing $1 million in labor (give or take just as a guess) at the time, ended up costing over a $1 trillion and still rising along with all the uprooting and changes in the daily lives of US citizens and to some extent, millions of other people around the world. It certainly makes it appear that these scum achieved their objective in the end.

Considering the outcome and the monumental changes and costs incurred as a result of these attacks, not only can we begrudgingly say these filthy, subhuman cretins succeeded in the end, but the intelligence services were never really held accountable and essentially failed in the worst possible way.
 
. .
As was already indicated by professional pilots what conducted simulation flight of this event:
People need to realize that crashing a plane into a building as massive as the Pentagon is remarkably easy and takes no skill at all. Landing one on a runway safely even under the best conditions? Now that's the hard part!
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

From the same article:
This question of whether an amateur could have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon was also posed to a colleague who previously worked on flight control software for Boeing airliners. Brian F. (he asked that his last name be withheld) explained, "The flight control system used on a 757 can certainly overcome any ground effect. ... That piece of software is intended to be used during low speed landings. A high speed dash at low altitude like [Flight 77] made at the Pentagon is definitely not recommended procedure ... and I don't think it's something anyone specifically designs into the software for any commercial aircraft I can think of. But the flight code is designed to be robust and keep the plane as safe as possible even in unexpected conditions like that. I'm sure the software could handle that kind of flight pattern so long as the pilot had at least basic flight training skills and didn't overcompensate too much."
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml


Better if you read the links with recommended reading I gave, yes.

Recommended reads:
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265a.shtml
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0290.shtml
https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2
Flying this low? ground effect taken into account? still you think the hijackers could perform on par those flight demonstration pilots the videos of whom you shared?

As for the links you suggested earlier, i have read them all (all three) will go through these as well.

The only problem i was trying to point out here was the fact that while all the reads and research/studies take into account complex graphs, terms and linguist, better effect would have been achieved with a few simple photographs and vids. Lack of that will make people coming out with new stories everyday.

Since we are talking conspiracy here, do you think that the simple way of addressing this whole mystery have not been adopted so that the topic is kept alive, the people keep wasting their sources/resources and energies on this debate and the discussion about involvement of Al Qaeda, advance warning, intelligence reports and some other such factors do become table talk? :)
 
.
Since we are talking conspiracy here, do you think that the simple way of addressing this whole mystery have not been adopted so that the topic is kept alive, the people keep wasting their sources/resources and energies on this debate and the discussion about involvement of Al Qaeda, advance warning, intelligence reports and some other such factors do become table talk? :)
an analysis of the history of the 9/11 Truth Movement demonstrates the value of the no-jetliner theories in sidelining challenges to the official story as the product of lunatic conspiracy theorists.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom