How come the JFER's are already watching it and its not even posted here yet?

http://video.google.it/videoplay?docid=6090580274514984618

im goin be 100% honest


that looked absolutely incredible!

i am so ready for this movie!

Google Video Italian?

Graphics look great. I won't lie.

Looking forward to seeing the eyewitnesses.

Hey those graphics are sweet.
The information they are explaining is still a big bag of hairy bollocks though.
Exactly this kind of s*** will be turned against us one day.

All based off already debunked information, it just flew over the pentagon and nobody noticed. Apart from your people who had an explosion between themselves and the plane? You obviously have to agree with that statement to agree with the premise of this fairytale trailer.
The makers of this film and the pillocks for truth bunch know this is based on lies and fabrication so I have to ask why have they spent so much time and effort on something that everybody but their little group is just going to laugh at?
Actualy I can answer that for you, money, fame and self importance.

I am on the truth movements side normaly but this kind of stuff, well, it will bring us down, mark my words.

Please, if I am wrong oh holy investigators, please, please sue me.

Edit :
If this breaks the rule of the board, sorry, just had to be said.

Thanks man!

I really appreciate it.

And thanks for the suggestion!

A bit higher quality youtube version is embedded into our site.

Check it out!

www.ThePentaCon.com

Oh my god, lol. What a load of turd; please I'd love to see those eyewitnesses.

Great stuff, cant wait.

Phoenix Wright, just who the hell are you? You come out of NOWHERE and what seems to be your only purpose is to convince us a plane hit the Pentagon. Do you have any other qualities besides getting us to stop asking questions?

Meaning no disrespect, I thought the whole project was supposed to be based around the eyewitnesses?
Where are they?

Those shaking letters are really annoying...!
Nothing interesting in that trailer except for the nice graphics.

So what i see in this video trailer is that you have a witness (or a dozen of them) who saw a different flight path then we have been told of. It then jumps to the somewhat unfounded conclusion that it flew OVER the pentagon. Did any of the witnesses see it fly OVER the pentagon?

Aside from that, the video looks interesting.

The evidence we will present will demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that the plane could not have toppled the light poles or caused the damage to the building as stated in the ASCE report.

What is unique about our film over any other is that we are the first to present eyewitnesses to the plane filmed on location.

This fact alone is monumental for 9/11 research.

Beyond a shadow of a doubt? :lol: Haven't you made this bogus claim before?

Monumental? Pffffft... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why didn't the trailer show any of the eyewitnesses you claim to have?

Easily beyond a shadow of a doubt.

No I have not made this claim before about other evidence.

If you fail to see the importance of eyewitness testimony filmed on location then you are clearly not a 9/11 Pentagon researcher or someone that is interested in 9/11 Pentagon research.

That's perfectly ok. Most people aren't.

But yes this is monumental for people who have questions and truly want to know what happened.

Dylan suggested we post a trailer last night and I instantly thought of the animation which I could get out quickly.

It was perfect.

The witness testimony will be released soon enough.

Thanks for your concern.

Interesting, over a dozen eyewitnesses confirming the data retrieved from AA77's fdr and animation put out by the NTSB based on information they received out of AA77's black box is what is going to turn people against the truth movement?

That's actually funny if you think about it. People turning against the truth movement because they're telling the truth and backing it up better than the Government.

What has the government done to prove AA77 hit the Pentagon that cancels out AA77's fdr data?

If nobody noticed why was it filmed and reported on? There's film of the plane in the sky above the Pentagon after impact, there's news reports about the Secret Service scrambling around outside pointing up at it. Just because you can't put 2 and 2 together.........

i cant wait!

the graphics are amazing and the eye-witnesses thing is a good premise for the movie

So, it's suddenly exploded to over a dozen witnesses now, huh? I have heard different numbers from the same people. So, let's clarify this. Exactly how many witnesses are there?

More precisely, how many witnesses saw a flyover?

I'd like to clarify some things here.

We will present 13 eyewitnesses total but only 3 were at the citgo and make the north of the citgo claim with a fourth just up the street who has it passing over to the north side of columbia pike and the navy annex in essence corroborating the other 3.

Also....

The eyewitness flight path does not perfectly coincide with the FDR.

BUT......both the eyewitness flight path and the FDR are 100% irreconcilable with the physical damage/official story flight path.

You really think THE plane remained above the pentagon AFTER the impact?

Seems absurd to me...

As for the pentacon trailer, the animation is nicely done, has the merit of explaining their point very well. cant wait to see what the witnesses actually said...

Only 4 of the 13 eyewitnesses place it north of the Citgo?

Are you saying the other 9 collaborate the official flight path?

<_<

There was a plane flying around above DC (not just above the Pentagon) at the same time.
There are news reports about the SS pointing at it.
There's Mineta's testimony regarding the stand down order (because Cheney knew the plane wasn't going to hit).
The NTSB's animation based on AA77's black box.

Interesting that 2 anonymous people believe they can debunk the NTSB and have it taken as fact, end of story, and at least 1 of them believes million of people are incapable of debunking the 9/11 Commission, the authorities on __________ (NOTHING, that's right).

It didn't disapear and it didn't hit the Pentagon so therefor the logical conclussion is that after the event it was still airborne. I believe someone filed an FOIA regarding records from the Cleveland Airport in regards to the UA93 theory. Off the top of my head I don't recall what specifically they filed for but it I believe it was billing data which would show the documentation time of landings for all planes on that specific day. Someone should see about doing the same in regards to Reagan International and see if any landings occurred around the time of the Pentagon event.

So which flight path are you going with? The minority eyewitness accounts placing the plane north of the Citgo or the animation?

How many witnesses are there that have the plane going down the flightpath as indicated by the damage and the lightpoles? Are all of their accounts mentioned?

Absolutely not.

There is no testimony in the entire investigative body of evidence that directly conflicts with the north of the citgo claim.

That is to say that no single witness definitively puts the plane on the south of the station in anywhere close to certain of the levels that the multiple witnesses we present place it on the north of the station.

In other words...............nobody but the people at the citgo were in a position to tell for sure AND everyone at the citgo place it on the north.

Dig?

Do you really have to ask? Why would I accept an anomalous government supplied black box over honest American citizens? For you to deceptively phrase the question with the utterly incorrect use of the word "minority" is a rather transparantly deceptive shameful attempt to demonize the eyewitnesses.

No witness in the entire investigative body of evidence definitively places the plane on the south of the citgo.

None that we have talked to and very few that are published.

A mere handful.

Only 2 specifically mention that they actually "saw" the light poles being hit.

Wanda Ramey and an anonymous military man.

They were either deducing it......like many of the witnesses we spoke with have admitted......or lying.

So, you admit that now there are 3 flight paths that we have to choose from:

1) your eyewitness account's path,
2) the animation's path, and
3) the flight path confirmed by physical evidence and other eyewitness accounts.

How do you condradict yourself in the same post and still claim to be honest? You went from 0 witnesses to "a mere handful" in just 3 sentences who place the plane on the south side of the Citgo.

This is twice in one post in which you have contradicted yourself. So much for your faith in "honest American citizens" and don't forget about you calling Lloyd a liar and Father Stephen McGraw and everyone else who contradicts your claim.

Let me ask you this. Did you show the animation to those witnesses you questioned who supposedly put the plane to the north of the Citgo before you questioned them?

Did you guys do the 3d work your self? looks good. Everthing looks to scale as much as i could tell from just the trailer. What did you model it in? 3ds max?

Terrorcell can you please drop me a link to the movie that shows a plane over the pentagon as shown in this trailer? Thanks.


To clarify I do not believe the truth will ruin the truth movement, that would be a silly thing to say.
What I said was things like this will be turned against us, what I meant by that is false information being used to create a storm and a large pile of money will not go down well with those who do not yet believe that there is anything wrong with the official story. These people are the people I care about, not you, I or lyte because they are the future of any movement, the undecided.

You can only cry wolf so many times before the people stop listening, the information needs to be correct and 100% provable and if this is not the case it needs to be stated thus or you are merely pulling the wool over peoples eyes, somewhat like the government does and that will be counter-productive.

Look at that mad woman and her beam weapons theory, if you tried to use that theory to convince a non-believer of the CT and then they went and did their own research on the internet and they saw that bumbling interview, what do you think will happen to the trust they have placed in you? Regardless of the beam theory being true or not, that evidence and the people pushing it better stand up to detailed investigation or you have just created an anti-CTer.

One last question, why do you think the government promote the NPT?
To entertain themselves or to ensure a future action (releasing of footage for example) that will blow any trust the undecided may one day have in this movement out of the window and under a passing truck?
You (and I respect your efforts on this site) are walking into a trap simply because of your desire for evidence to fit your view. If this is ever proven I will no doubt use the film as I have others, to spread truth and awareness but this film is in no way provable.
A dozen witnesses are not going to convince mr public to discount a few hundred other witnesses, a concerted media campaign and the nist report. Full stop.
The evidence should have to be better than this and the conduct of those providing it should also be better before you are willing to jump behind it. It should at least need to be actual proof.

It is worthy of note that lyte posted 40 mins after my post but ignored it, it shouldn't be your job to pull me up, I want lyte to do that.

Just my two coins and I am sorry if that worries or upsets you in any way but my anger is directed to these charlatans, not you TC.

If you want to put it that way sure. But honestly I don't see the FDR as a valid "choice". The ENTIRE point of PFT's PBB is that the data they provided for us is irreconcilable with their own story. Not that the FDR is valid. We are simply demanding answers in regards to the discrepancies and they are refusing to give them.

No I did not contradict myself. Let me clarify for you. Zero definitively place it on the south of the station. But a very small handful do place it somewhere along the physical damage path. These are very very few such as Frank Probst. It would be foolish for someone to suggest that 9/11 was an inside job but completely write off the possibility that ANY of the witnesses were planted. Is this what you are suggesting Raven?

No contradiction here whatsoever. It is entirely possible that Wanda Ramey and the anonymous military man (like so many of the other witnesses we spoke with have admitted) merely deduced the light poles being hit and kind of embellished their account. McGraw is one of these that admits this straight up. I do not call everyone that contradicts our claim liars. Most are not. Most were simply fooled. To suggest that 9/11 was an inside job but that NO witnesses were planted at all would be foolish. Is this what you are suggesting Raven?

We made the animation BASED OFF their accounts so no. They describe it in detail and even illustrate it for us all on camera. You will see from the testimony that the animation is quite accurate as to their description. We will present another animation that is entirely from their point of view.

A VERY SMALL handfull??

Here is a sample of that very small handful. I believe there are 84 eyewitness acounts listed here but I know there are more.

How many of these people did you interview?

None? I thought not.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evide...esses/bart.html

In all fairness, I say let them finish their movie and take it from there.

We interviewed some of them and tried interviewing almost all of them.

Most of these witnesses were not in a postion to see the pentagon at all and therefore were not in a position to tell if it was on the north or south of the citgo or directly on the physical flight path. Some didn't even see the plane. Plus where is the proof that they were even present? Some may be completely fabricated accounts and there is will be plenty of evidence supporting this in our film.

The crucial witnesses we will present have proof they were present, they DEFINITIVELY place the plane on the north of the citgo, AND were in the perfect postion to be able to tell. ON THE CITGO PROPERTY!

So......your challenge is to find the witnesses in that list supporting your claim and:

1. Prove they were present at the time of the incident.
2. Demonstrate how their account supports only the physical damage flight path while directly contradicting the north of the citgo flight path.
3. Show where their exact location was proving their claim is even possible.
4. Interview these witnesses on camera on location to confirm their claims.


You'll be lucky to find one or two that fit all of this criteria.

My guess is that you won't find any and you certainly aren't going to interview them.

It's ok.

Their arguments are hollow.

Ours are supported.

Fair enough. But I was only addressing comments he made in THIS thread.

I'm not taking sides. I'm just saying.

So are you saying, the official police eye witnesses as your sources, will have definitive eye witness record that the police agencies have on file, and their testimonies are corroborative with the eye witnesses reports included with your film?

There is no "fly over" footage. What I am talking about is the footage of the unidentified airplane flying in DC airspace after the Pentagon was hit along with the collaborating news footage regarding Secret Service on the White House lawn pointing up at it in the sky afterwards. Both clips have appeared in numerous documentaries, but no one has ever alleged the plane in question could very easily be AA77 if it in fact didn't hit the Pentagon.

I don't know what to tell you, I know what you're saying. But after the 3 years I put into this I can't honestly tell anyone AA77 hit the Pentagon. I can honestly say UA93 was anywhere near PA and I'm not even getting into the other 2 planes. I'm not going to lie and go with "LIHOP" because that isn't what happened and if it was that can never be proved.......ever. I believe all 4 incidents involved an airplane for the record.

Can someone provide correct and 100% provable information that AA77 did hit the Pentagon?

Also, what is the official explanation that explains away the NTSB animation based on AA77's black box recorder? Is it "Incompetence" again?

I'm not pushing a 'beam theory'. Bottom Line : Everything inside of the Pentagon section that was being renovated was the target of the plane. The people behind the operation wanted to insure that it was successful. They made sure that what they wanted to be destroyed on 9/11 was destroyed on 9/11 and for the life of me I don't think they would have put it all in the hands of a couple half-retarded suicidal religious fanatics nor an airplane that might not achieve the desired result.

Once again, I am not a 'No planer'.

There isn't going to be a film on this side or the other side that is ever going to be 100% provable. What we need is one that will spark a new investigation.

"A few hundred witnesses".......?

I just had this argument not long ago about "a few hundred witnesses" who saw UA93 crash in Shanksville. SO I challeneged the person who made the claim to prove it. They couldn't even find 1 eyewitness who saw it, let alone one who described it as a huge commercial airliner. Most people in Shanksville called it a 'jet'. Anyone in Western PA can tell you 'jet' around here isn't a 757.....

I'm not upset, this is a civil discussion between two individuals without any condescending tone or insults. And you're right, I absolutely have nothing to do with this film, Lyte or Merc and it isn't my place to seem like I am in someway defending them because I am not. All I am defending is what made me start looking into this whole deal, what my first focus was on, and that is whether a huge commercial airliner with some half assed pilot pulled off one of the most amazing feats in all of history all the way down to flying a 757 inches above cars at 500+MPH and that having no effect on the vehicles what so ever.........

I don't believe and the very small number of pilots I have spoken with in my lifetime regarding that last point alone, say it isn't possible. And common sense tells me that they're right. Like being broke down on the road and having a semi trucking by you at 80MPH. Increase it's size ten fold and it's speed by around 400%.........and you thought that truck doing 80 kicked up a strong wind?

No we had some help from a really cool Italian dude named Pier.

Unfortunately I don't know what software he used.

But thanks and yeah.........he did a great job!

Strange how networking really works on the net. What does the Italian guy Pier think about the whole MIHOP LIHOP thing?

Here is the flight path that Merc posted according to "The Pentacon" eyewitnesses...



Here is the truth about the FDR data and the animation...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...topic_id=125586

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66047