interesting video analysis of flight 77.

[DemInDistress]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx78yBN6jrI&mode=related&search= run time 1:03 seconds

this video has 4 windows open showing some slow motion and other comparative angles. Surely can't be a commercial jet and take note of the top left window and follow the Pentagon roof line you can clearly see the building has already collapsed before the missile strikes.
What's your opinion?

[Bolo Boffin]

1. The building didn't collapse for nineteen minutes after impact. n/t

[DemInDistress]

3. no bolo...look down the roof line follow the roof line just past

the center of the picture. I'm saying the building is already collapsed. No? I know the story, Pentagon collapses 20/30 mins after the strike. We were given photo shopped frames by the BFEE.

[Bolo Boffin]

4. Let's be clear here.

Which of these things are you saying happened?

A. After the initial explosion, the Pentagon collapsed 19 minutes later. The security camera photos were built from post-collapse captures.

or

B. The Pentagon collapsed as soon as the initial explosion occurred. Any photos of a relatively intact Pentagon post-initial explosion were photoshopped.

[bushatbooker]

2. any aircraft flying in that low at that trajectory was fabbed

on there, even if it was a missile.

[mirandapriestly]

5. you mean, why even bother with any kind of aircraft at all -

might as well just rig it up to explode or send something out of the "generator"? There is a picture of the generator being guarded by an armed soldier somewhere- after the hit. They also didn't want anybody looking around there, they didn't care about terrorists, they only cared about people taking pictures. The photographer who took the first video said he went back to the scene and the military security didn't want his id or license, they just wanted his film.

[BuddyYoung]

6. AA FL 77 not scheduled for 911. Any planes in area couldn't be FL77

Obviously, if 77 wasn't a scheduled flight on 911, something funny was going on, and that makes a lot of people question the source of all that "confetti" at the Pentagon. Would the "confetti" from a missile and/or military jet look the same as "confetti" from an American Airlines B767?

Why weren't the Olsons warned not to take any commercial flights on 911? SF Mayor Brown was. Attorney General Ashcroft wouldn't get close to a commercial plane (afraid it might take off by remote control, with him in it?!), and most of the Pentagon's senior brass were also warned.

Was the public not told in advance that there would be no FL77 on 911?

If no such flight was scheduled, how could anyone have gotten a reservation/ticket for it?

Is there any evidence of people showing up at Dulles on 911 for FL77? Was any luggage checked for that flight?

Are there any records of the airplane that was allegedly AAFL77 having been fueled-up for a flight on 911?

The Bush administration's version of what happened at the Pentagon is unproven and after five years, it's reasonable to assume that the government's version can't be proven and must be rejected.

[DemInDistress]

7. yes buddy young I agree, the government's version of events

certainly can't be acknowledged as fact. I still say the building is already collapsed in the 5 frames they released to the public. Look in the top left window and follow the roof line.
Welcome to DU Buddy Young... :hi: :hi: :thumbsup: