Menu Bar
Needs Plugin: Flash | Not Working?
Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
A National Geographic documentary on what really happened in Arlington, VA on September 11, 2001. A scientific look at the structure and the people.
Feb 26, 2008 2:27 AM
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
Take that Loose Change opportunists and conspiracy theory propagandists.
By: spam_vigilante
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
Well, If a Boeing 757 did hit the Pentagon. This movie sure tries hard to explain how it might happen.
Although, I'm still waiting for some new footage of that "plane" going into the Pentagon. Funny thing, but I guess none of the many video cameras in the area with a good view of the Pentagon could show, once and for all, the "plane" that hit, BUT I guess they never got a better look than the 4 frame crap the government is showing us. Hmmm...
YEP! This video did it. I'm convinced. Thanks National Geographic! I'll shut up about 9/11 now and give all my rights and freedoms up so we can get those gall darn, trrists... (I think they actually spell "terrorist" that way in the Bush Administration.)
Although, I'm still waiting for some new footage of that "plane" going into the Pentagon. Funny thing, but I guess none of the many video cameras in the area with a good view of the Pentagon could show, once and for all, the "plane" that hit, BUT I guess they never got a better look than the 4 frame crap the government is showing us. Hmmm...
YEP! This video did it. I'm convinced. Thanks National Geographic! I'll shut up about 9/11 now and give all my rights and freedoms up so we can get those gall darn, trrists... (I think they actually spell "terrorist" that way in the Bush Administration.)
By: chawx
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
Of course they try hard to explain it, it is called investigative journalism. They try to give evidence as to what happened, not just make stuff up if it feels right to them.
It is weird that the Pentagon, which should be much more secure, didn't have more cameras around, but with their budget they need to cut back on luxuries, right? Film is expensive but if you have billions of dollars, I would think they would use DV film, at least. The American people, I think, would pay $5.00 and hour to secure national landmarks, of which Washington D.C. has none, according to Cherkoff.
Seriously, one camera for a front lawn is good enough under normal circumstances. You get the entire view and can see someone walking across the lawn, which is what they expect to happen. It may have served its purpose for security on the ground, but they should have prepared for any kind of attack.
There is a question, though. Why did the air traffic controllers continue looking west when they know that there is restricted air space over D.C.? If I worked their, my first thought would be a hijacked plane or that it would be a hijacked plane heading for a government target, the biggest in the area would have been D.C.. I do not see how experiences air traffic controllers could have been confused so easily.
But, if the government knew about the attack before hand, why would they murder some of their best and brightest defense personnel, those who work in the Pentagon? Many of them know so much information that they would not be replaceable. Why would our own government hit this target?
The conspiracy theory itself makes no sense, and though there are gaps, there are also gaps in evolution, but that does not mean that evolution didn't happen.
It is weird that the Pentagon, which should be much more secure, didn't have more cameras around, but with their budget they need to cut back on luxuries, right? Film is expensive but if you have billions of dollars, I would think they would use DV film, at least. The American people, I think, would pay $5.00 and hour to secure national landmarks, of which Washington D.C. has none, according to Cherkoff.
Seriously, one camera for a front lawn is good enough under normal circumstances. You get the entire view and can see someone walking across the lawn, which is what they expect to happen. It may have served its purpose for security on the ground, but they should have prepared for any kind of attack.
There is a question, though. Why did the air traffic controllers continue looking west when they know that there is restricted air space over D.C.? If I worked their, my first thought would be a hijacked plane or that it would be a hijacked plane heading for a government target, the biggest in the area would have been D.C.. I do not see how experiences air traffic controllers could have been confused so easily.
But, if the government knew about the attack before hand, why would they murder some of their best and brightest defense personnel, those who work in the Pentagon? Many of them know so much information that they would not be replaceable. Why would our own government hit this target?
The conspiracy theory itself makes no sense, and though there are gaps, there are also gaps in evolution, but that does not mean that evolution didn't happen.
By: TheNextDylan
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
I am making an environmental documentary and I hope to screen it at Milk & Cookies first. I had the chance to interview some great folks for the film.
As for this film, some of my friends believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theory. I happen to disagree with them. Though I believe that the Bush administration could have done more to combat terrorism in their first few months in office, I do not believe that they planned the attacks. The Loose Change fellows used loose facts to make their case, and their case is not backed up by science. Are these liberal conspiracy theorists like creationists, accepting the 9/11 conspiracy theory on blind faith and not on factual evidence? I know that I may face backlash for this post, but I still say that we should impeach Bush & Cheney for taking executive power to a whole new extreme.
As for this film, some of my friends believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theory. I happen to disagree with them. Though I believe that the Bush administration could have done more to combat terrorism in their first few months in office, I do not believe that they planned the attacks. The Loose Change fellows used loose facts to make their case, and their case is not backed up by science. Are these liberal conspiracy theorists like creationists, accepting the 9/11 conspiracy theory on blind faith and not on factual evidence? I know that I may face backlash for this post, but I still say that we should impeach Bush & Cheney for taking executive power to a whole new extreme.
By: TheNextDylan
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
You know something is wrong.
When Pan Am Flight 103 blew up over Lockerbie, forensic experts traced the clothes in the suitcase that housed the bomb to a Maltese merchant.
9/11's investigation was a joke. The material evidence was shipped overseas and disappeared.
More money was spent to investigate Clinton and Monica Lewinsky that on the 9/11 investigation.
And I guess that World Trade Center building 7 decided to collapse out of sympathy for bldg 1 & 2.
When Pan Am Flight 103 blew up over Lockerbie, forensic experts traced the clothes in the suitcase that housed the bomb to a Maltese merchant.
9/11's investigation was a joke. The material evidence was shipped overseas and disappeared.
More money was spent to investigate Clinton and Monica Lewinsky that on the 9/11 investigation.
And I guess that World Trade Center building 7 decided to collapse out of sympathy for bldg 1 & 2.
By: charlestonpaul
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
Give me a break.
You conspiracy theorists are all in need of getting the xylocaine out of your brains. There's a difference in the physical effects of an airplane slamming into a reinforced concrete structure at over 700 MPH and an airliner that explodes in midair. The simple effect of drag would make it that the suitcase on Pan Am 103 survived partially intact. Yet you're going to let the Loose Change idiots persuade you to believe it was a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon just because you see no evidence of a tail fin remnant?
You conspiracy theorists are all in need of getting the xylocaine out of your brains. There's a difference in the physical effects of an airplane slamming into a reinforced concrete structure at over 700 MPH and an airliner that explodes in midair. The simple effect of drag would make it that the suitcase on Pan Am 103 survived partially intact. Yet you're going to let the Loose Change idiots persuade you to believe it was a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon just because you see no evidence of a tail fin remnant?
By: spam_vigilante
Re: Seconds From Disaster: Pentagon 9-11
The point is, that, after the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, there was a complete investigation.
There should have been an investigation down to where each hi jacker was born and every aspect of their lives.
The collapse of World Trade Center 7 was neatly omitted from The 9/11 Commission Report.
YOU KNOW THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG!
There should have been an investigation down to where each hi jacker was born and every aspect of their lives.
The collapse of World Trade Center 7 was neatly omitted from The 9/11 Commission Report.
YOU KNOW THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG!
By: charlestonpaul
