What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
775 Comments
- WalterDirt, on 10/12/2007, -44/+470This video will show the true rendering power of the PS3 :)
- agentgonzo, on 10/12/2007, -29/+352But will it be the original one, or the Special Edition, where the pentagon shoots first?
- Cander, on 10/12/2007, -30/+210They will say it CG.
- berzerk, on 10/12/2007, -60/+190They definately had enough time to prepare the tapes
- tuna1, on 10/12/2007, -34/+129"This video is going to be cool to watch"
No, there is nothing cool about watching people die. - piper999, on 10/12/2007, -33/+121I remember seeing a video showing a test of the reinforced concrete used for nuclear power stations (and the Pentagon) which involved flying a jet into it. In the blink of an eye the jet disappeared - it turned to dust and there was nothing left of it. The slow motion replay showed how the thing just instantly turned into a huge cloud like it was exploding.
Obviously that is exactly what happened to the jet that hit the Pentagon. - kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -35/+99as opposed to all those way-more-plausible reasons for delaying a public copy for almost six years....
like?
1) I lost the batteries to the camcorder
2) Couldn't find a betamax deck
3) Ray Harryhausen dead, took 5 years to clone a successor
4) .... your idea here
5) The Bush Administration has never ever lied about anything important before. Why would they start now? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -82/+142This will be hard on the Victims of that day.
God bless those families lost in the pentagon. - buss, on 10/12/2007, -41/+101Many pieces of the engines were found and photographed. They were actually mostly intact. Oh..but that would make your conspiracy theory wrong, so you can't accept that proof!
- datagod, on 10/12/2007, -15/+73We will say "Cool! Glad they are releasing it now, not 25 years from now."
The truth shall set you free. - Gnascher, on 10/12/2007, -26/+83They will say that the delay was in order for the DOD media wizards to make a faked clip.
- iotadeltaphi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+59Well, anything's better than the 5 frames the DoD released before :-/
- Cander, on 10/12/2007, -19/+73Read
http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html
To see all the factual errors in Loose Change. Assuming you are really open minded. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -23/+74I find it interesting how people are already claiming it to be fake before seeing it.
- kmarchiori, on 10/12/2007, -18/+66@piper999 Yeah, want to talk logic? The twin Rolls-Royce engines on that aircraft weigh 6 tons apiece and are mostly solid titanium alloy. There was one 16 foot hole in the pentagon building, before the collapse of the wall. Given that the engines are placed at least 30 feet away from the fuselage of the aircraft (possibly more the wingspan is like 140 feet), There should be major damage to the structure due to the impact of each engine if not an additional two holes. Furthermore the melting point of that alloy is much hotter than the burning temperature of jet fuel. (you can check this, however it is a reasonable conclusion without any facts at all as the engines burn the fuel and therefore must be able to withstand such temperatures) This is a melting point, to VAPORIZE as you suggest is what happened to 12 TONS of titanium the force of impact would have involve forces that could not be generated by the airspeed of that aircraft. Logic is something you can argue quantitatively, not something you saw in a video.
- noclip, on 10/12/2007, -6/+49The original tapes were most likely VHS. At that resolution we'll be lucky to see a blob.
- SniperX, on 10/12/2007, -18/+59The pentagon must have some slow Adobe Premiere guys. It shouldn't have taken them this long to clean up the tape.
- ByteGuerilla, on 10/12/2007, -7/+47Way to go, DoD. Coming up to five years after the event. You could have done with letting us see this on the day so we didn't have any reason to suspect you have something to hide, but no you just HAD to lend credence to the conspiracy theories. Clearly didn't flunk How To Look Shifty 101 now did we?
- fgsfds, on 10/12/2007, -5/+43"How about that tape possibly pointing out security deficiencies in certain border areas of Washington or the Pentagon?"
NEWSFLASH! After years of studing the tapes involved, security experts have determined that the popular "building" structure type is vulnerable to a variant of the "Smashing large objects into it" exploit! The details of the incident where this was discovered will not be released until proper precautions have been taken to patch this exploit in affected structures.
Other shocking news comming to light today: Books are flamable, water is drinkable, it hurts to get struck by lightning, and earthquakes make people die!
"How about giving the world a "breather" before the terrorists have another video to help spread their nonsense (they already use the WTC video for recruiting, this will only fuel the fire)?"
I don't think that many people will say "Gee, I wasn't interested before, but this new video has completely changed my mind!".
The bastards have enough propaganda that this one isn't going to make much of a difference, but reducing domestic conflict over the issue gives us some tangible benefit. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+40Someone just flew a 747 into judicialwatch.org's webserver
- INMCM, on 10/12/2007, -18/+50Theory: The government is using the release of the this tape to take focus off of the NSA phone database debacle. It's an effective way to both buy some more time to think up defensive arguments and the tape itself is a moral "reinforcement" of why the government is doing the wire-taping/phone recording in the first place. Pretty sneaky.
- AHIGHERGOD, on 10/12/2007, -9/+40the older i get the more faith i lose in my government.
- manchld, on 10/12/2007, -34/+63I don't. Seeing a video or photo itself doesn't prove much these days; when you can recreate an artificial person in a video that can fool people, a plane is child's play. Plus, if you've seen some of the evidence surrounding these crashes you would be right to be skeptical.
- KyleRayner, on 10/12/2007, -71/+98I cant wait to see those titanium-ribbed engines completely vaporize before hitting the building. :-)
- Lord_oftheTrons, on 10/12/2007, -31/+58yttrx: The world does not revolve around you and NYC.
- kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -18/+45"How about giving the world a "breather" before the terrorists have another video to help spread their nonsense"
A vacation from the truth, as you have proposed, won't help any of the good guys. No matter what the administration would have you believe.
Considering that the vast majority of Americans have some very serious abuse-of-trust issues with the current administration, I think that full disclosure on a whole raft of issues is about the best thing our democracy needs right now. - osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -21/+45They will say "why did it take so long?" It's crap like "releasing" tapes that makes a conspiracy credible. If you just let us see the information at the time, there will be little question.
They will also say the planes were remotely controlled. - NewEvolution, on 10/12/2007, -12/+36@ noahhoward - there's a huge difference between "not stand up well" and "completely vaporized."
That's the official story by the way. That a 40 ton 757 was vaporized on impact. Yet somehow they managed to find enough human remains to identify every single passenger on board.
Hmmmmm. - axiomata, on 10/12/2007, -11/+35The only thing worse than blind faith in your government is blind faith in conspiracies.
- i64X, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32QUOTE:
For the people who don't believe a jet vaporizes when it hits concrete here is the video I was referring to:
http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2005/plane-v-concrete-p1.php
People who dispute the conspiracy theories surrounding the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon always try to use that video as proof. It takes about 10 seconds to realize that it's a total apples to oranges comparison.
First off that's a fighter jet. It weighs about 1/100th of what a 747 weighs. Second, that jet crashed in to a 10 foot thick slab of steel reinforced concrete that is used to line the exterior walls of a nuclear power plant.
The Pentagon isn't equipped with an exterior wall like that... why should it be? It's an office building. Plus - obviously the plane didn't atomize when it hit the wall - because there's a hole in the wall. They also found part of an engine from whatever hit the pentagon that was very much in shape. If the plane atomized, how did only that small piece of engine survive? That would have hit the wall before the tail section, and if it survived the atomization, why didn't the tail section of the plain survive?
Also, how were they able to identify 90% of the bodies that were on the plane? The official explanation in the 911 report is that the intense fires from the explosion caused the plain to disintegrate - not the initial impact as you'd have us believe from showing us that video of the jet and the wall from the power plant.
That video that the FBI released showed us nothing new. It proves nothing. if anything it makes it MORE obvious that what hit the pentagon wasn't a plane. It was just the same frames of what they had previously released with more filler between them and a lot of smoke at the end. If there was a plane in that video, the tail section would be as tall as the building itself - instead all we see is a trail of white smoke and then a huge explosion.
I call *****. - ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -24/+47NOOOOOO!!!! - my hat business... it's.. it's... ruined!
- master_of_fm, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29from the article,
"This is in response to your December 14, 2004 Freedom of Information Act Request, FOIA appeal of March 27, 2005, and complaint filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, wrote William Kammer, Chief of the Department of Defense, Office of Freedom of Information. Now that the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui is over, we are able to complete your request and provide the video" - piper999, on 10/12/2007, -8/+30For the people who don't believe a jet vapourises when it hits concrete here is the video I was referring to:
http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2005/plane-v-concrete-p1.php - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -17/+38@ yttrx
You said that nobody should have an opinion on what happened JUST based on the evidence presented. You're saying "Well, you had to be there."
Is that to say that serial rapists and murderers should be let off the hook because "Nobody was there to see it?"
You can't just call somebody with a different view from you a self-important redneck, especially when your argument has no rational basis. - Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27NEWS FLASH:
No airplane in video. Just a fireball. This won't change anything as far as conspiracy theorists are concerned. - hobophobe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+241. Who killed JFK?
2. Where are the missing 18.5 minutes of the Nixon tape?
3. Why did they cover up 9/11? (The evidence removed, the tapes seized, etc. Why did our government spend far more money investigating Clinton's blowjob than the largest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor?)
4. Who put the bop in the bopshebop?
I'm all for intelligent conversation to proceed. I just happen to think that 3/4 of your list are not relevant to the subject at hand. The remaining item is the one the discussion is focussed on, and therefore it would be very silly to require a specific point of view on it prior to discussing it. But, I guess since I am not locked down either way in the debate I don't meet your criteria and therefore am incapable of intelligent discussion? - mdamico, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25Yeah, damn CNN for quoting Judicial Watch's website verbatim. Those lying liberal bastards.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/about.shtml
"Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law...." - takitus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21THEY JUST PLAYED IT ON CNN... IT STHE SAME ***** THEY RELEASED BEFORE. NOOOO PLANE
- conedude13, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19i think we all just got punked.
- ByteGuerilla, on 10/12/2007, -7/+25Inxaddct,
As if the other videos we have of ATC imaging and Google Earth images being put together with the flight-path of the plane didn't show more than these videos ever could?
There's no reason for keeping these videos (remember more than 3 separate CCTV feeds were taken in as 'evidence') longer than a day. If they need the videos, they can copy them and give the videos out straight away the same day or the following.
Five years is simply too long to be keeping the videos under wraps for an 'ongoing investigation'. - artanis, on 10/12/2007, -10/+28What the hell is with all the trolls? In a car crash does one of the cars always get vaporized? When planes crash into the ground do they vaporize? There is always debris... two giant 6 ton engines dont vaporize...
- chembro84, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20After seeing this "new" video is it any wonder why there are some "conspiracy nuts" out there? They're trying to say say this is the only other video they've got? You've got to be kidding me, they confiscated tapes from nearby buildings right after the attack why aren't those being shown?
I'm not saying a plane didn't hit the pentagon, but i can see why you'd come to the conclusion that maybe one didn't, i mean it all just doesn't seem to add up somehow. - jpwhitmore, on 10/12/2007, -14/+31They are probably releasing it because the Musawi trial is over.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20The legal precedent is called the Freedom of Information Act
- manchld, on 10/12/2007, -32/+49^ close minded bipartisans
- daredevil73, on 10/12/2007, -12/+29So why release it now? Lets whip up some good press, since some of our privacy compromising monitoring programs have been outed. Lets see, AT&T shovels all their Internet traffic past the government, every phone company hands over the phone records to the government, and government watches reporters using their call records to squash any whistle-blowers. This is timed just right to remind the citizenry why it's a good thing to have all of this monitoring.
- Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -16/+33The government was wrong to let conspiracy fester for 5 years when all they had to do was release a stupid tape.
All this secrecy just makes them look guilty. - Konrad9, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Here's a shocking idea, release the footage from the place across the street that recorded the whole thing.
- timsco, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19This organization seems to be located in Washington. I'll bet it's Eastern.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22You need to RTFA.
from TFA:
...The Department of Defense admitted in a January 26, 2005 letter that it possessed a videotape responsive to Judicial Watch’s request. However, the Pentagon refused to release the videotape because it was, “part of an ongoing investigation involving Zacarias Moussaoui.”...
Now that the trial is over, the video comes out.
How is that odd? -
Show 51 - 100 of 779 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is