Slashdot Mirror


US Releasing 9/11 Flight 77 Pentagon Crash Tape

Robotron23 writes "The BBC is reporting that the US government has decided to release the videotape depicting the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon building, nearly five years after the 9/11 attacks. The government had previously withheld the tape due to 'ongoing investigations' into al-Qaeda's Zacarias Moussaoui. A government representative commented that they 'hope that this video will put to rest the conspiracy theories.'"

15 of 1,098 comments (clear)

  1. You can't stop the paranoia. by Kelson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can't put the conspiracy theories to rest. They already believe you're covering something up, so if you release a report that shows...

    • No reliable evidence of alien spacecraft has been found, ever.
    • The Cydonia region on Mars (the "face") appears to be a natural formation, and not ruins of an ancient Martian civilization.
    • We really did land astronauts on the moon.
    • An airplane hit the Pentagon on 9/11, not a missile.

    ...the conspiracy theorists will just claim you've fabricated or altered the "new" evidence.

    1. Re:You can't stop the paranoia. by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah. Bush being eeeevil, has dedicated the last four and a bit CPU-years of the Pentagon's secret beowulf cluster of Crays to rendering the snazziest pseudo-real computer graphics since that Final Fantasy movie they made so much fuss over a few years back. All in order to cover up the huge Texaco oil truck backing up to the wall, a guy in a ten-gallon hat getting out, unreeling and lighting a fuse, and scarpering in an unmarked black helicopter full of G-men.

    2. Re:You can't stop the paranoia. by KarateExplosions · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well at least it didn't manage to get through every single defense available and crash directly into the headquarters of the most advanced and expensive military on the planet. Because THAT would have been embarassing.

  2. Re:Probably not by DaHat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Any evidence of a 747 hitting the pentagon would be quite a surprise and likely fake given that Flight 77 was a 757.

  3. Re:Absurd by christopherfinke · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If the Government wants to disprove these theories
    Regarding conspiracy theories, I believe the burden is on the conspiracy theorists to prove their theories, not for the targeted group to disprove all conspiracies directed towards them. If I say "George Bush is an alien," should he undergo a medical examination specifically to prove that he is human, or should I offer undeniable proof of his extra-terrestriality?
  4. The official story is a conspiracy theory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hope you realize that the story about 20 or so Arab men conspiring to hijack planes and fly them into various landmarks is a conspiracy theory, as well.

    Many people who rant on and on about 'conspiracy theorists' follow beliefs that are just as questionable. Their position may be supported by certain governments or the mass media in various nations. But on the basis of evidence alone, their stance is often far weaker than that of even the so-called 'conspiracy theorists'.

    Talk negatively about conspiracy theories all you want. Just realize that the story you hold dear is just that: a conspiracy theory.

    1. Re:The official story is a conspiracy theory. by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, there's also a big difference between "The government used hologram missiles and controlled demolition to blow up WTC" and "The government used certain bureaucratic mechanisms in order to increase the likelihood of that a known terrorist plot would be successful for ultra-cynical political gain."

      Of course, most people in the Conspiracy Theory world don't really understand the difference and there's very much a "ends justify the means" attitude where any crazy idea is good if it will raise doubt on the official theory, and that approach tends to cast the whole lot in tinfoil.

      And it still doesn't change the fact that an official conspiracy theory was put forward, and acted on, without a whole lot of evidence. (Not just "religious extremists", but the whole "Al Qaeda==Worldwide Terrorist Network", when the reality is that the conspiracy theory created Al Qaeda rather than visa-versa.)

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
  5. Mad props for the National Security Archive by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Informative

    Love that place, and love the Freedom of Information Act that allows it to exist -- one of the true strengths of our Democracy.

    If you haven't read it, and if you are at all prone to dismissing "conspiracy theories" on the basis that our government wouldn't do that kind of thing, you have to read it. If you've ever wondered: Did the CIA really know and approve of the Contras funding their war by selling drugs in the States? Did the U.S. really know that Iraq was using chemical weapons against Iran and the Kurds at the same time Donald Rumsfeld was shaking Saddam's hand and providing cover stories for him? Read it.

    Nothing that I know of that is relevent to the current situation, but it is still a fantastic archive and a great resource for putting to pasture any remaining naivete you may have about the nature of governments.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  6. On the other hand, by Peter+Trepan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's dangerous to discount all conspiracy theories. The Tuskeegee Experiment was a real conspiracy. The Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish doctrine is a real conspiracy. When landlords get together and change a neighborhood's zoning laws, that's a conspiracy too.

    These are the kinds of conspiracies that occur without the protection of the federal government. What kinds of schemes might people think up if they're free from any oversight whatsoever?

    I'm just saying that a little paranoia is a healthy thing. I'm not saying that our government hides aliens with guitar pick-shaped heads, or that they orchestrated the 9-11 attack, or that they conspired to fool everyone into thinking Iraq had nuclear...

    ...oh, wait.

    --

    Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.

  7. Black Ops by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why don't they release the black box recordings of the inflight data?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  8. Re:It certainly does tell something by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work in DC, and lived -- at the time -- in Old Town Alexandria. On Sept 11, given the general state of confusion, I opted not to take the metro home that day, and instead walked home along the GW parkway ( it was such a beautiful day, actually -- and the ten mile walk allowed me to really think about the situation, and how this was pretty much the end of freedom in the US for a while at least, but that's another story ).

    Anyway -- here's the thing. I was upwind of the pentagon, maybe a mile away, and I smelled ( what smelled to me like ) burning kerosene. LOTS of burning kerosene. As in, I personally stank of kerosene smoke after walking past.

    Frankly, that's enough for me. I understand that jet fuel is more or less like kerosene, and I would expect a crashed airplane to burn up whatever's in its tanks. Hence, the stench of lots of burning kerosene.

    Now, regarding the "another story"... as I was approaching National airport ( I will never call it "Reagan National" ), I came across a bunch of toddlers and little kids, surrounded by military personnel. There was another civilian ( like me ) walking past, she had a camera, and took a photo of the pentagon smoke, and another of the military types and the children. The officials immediately stormed her, confiscated her camera and tore out the film. Very rudely, I might add. I saw all this, and after the lady left, I walked up and said to one of the friendlier looking guards "What was that all about?". She said the kids were pentagon employee children from the daycare facilities and they wanted to respect their privacy -- which is commendable, so in principle I understand. But the way they went about it was unnacceptable.

    I saw one of the opening acts of our descent into a police state, right there.

    --

    lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
  9. Re:Probably not by equack · · Score: 5, Funny
    The best solution:

    3) Release it just prior to the attack. That way the media can preview the tape but still present it as a live broadcast.

  10. Re:Futile task by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Not that I doubt the Pentagon was hit by an aircraft, but it is documented fact that several security camera tapes were confiscated after the crash. Release them in their entirety.
    The videos are property of the companies they were confiscated from. It's up to those companies to publically release the videos, not the government.

    2. Explain to me why standard operating procedures for NORAD that would normally require specific orders to disregard, were disregarded that day.
    What procedures were ignored?

    3. Explain to me how WTC-7 came to be the only steel-framed structure in recorded history to suffer a complete collapse as a result of fire alone. (FEMA's own report offers an elaborate theory which they say has a "low probability of occurance")
    The FEMA report was preliminary. Further investigation, not to mention some pictures and some interviews with firefighters on the scene, indicate that WTC7 also suffered severe structural damage, not just fire.

    4. In light of the signifigance (particularly to insurers, architechts, engineers) of WTC-7's collapse-due-to-fire, why were the building remains sold to China for scrap before they could be fully analyzed?
    This is just plain wrong. http://911myths.com/html/recycled_steel.html

    The building had been evacuated hours before the collapse, it was not necessary for rescue crews. This is a major event in the building industry: if steel structures can collapse from fire alone, insurance rates would have to be adjusted, architects would have to reconsider the design of thousands of structures.
    Well, if a building couldn't collapse due to fire alone, then what's the point of fireproofing the steel columns?

    5. If Flight 93 was destroyed by being crashed (intentionally or accidentally) into a field in Shanksville, PA, why did it leave a debris field over 8+ miles?
    It didn't. Indian Lake is not 6 miles from the impact site, as some people would like you to believe. Popular Mechanics has some bits about Flight 93 (continues on next page, too) in their "9/11: Debunking The Myths" article.
    --
    People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
  11. Re:Incredibility by metamatic · · Score: 5, Informative

    > What happens when the people who release the evidence have been shown to have been lying about everything else important during that time period? .... Like Iraq WMD

    To say that Iraq never had WMD is pure non-sense.

    That's why he didn't say it. You introduced the word "never", and yes, your straw man is nonsense.

    He was referring to the claims that Iraq had WMD circa 2001-2003, which were used as justification for the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq. Those claims were lies.

    Yes, we know Iraq had WMD in the past. Of course we know that, we sold them the WMD. But Iraq had used or destroyed all its WMD prior to the illegal invasion.

    > ... Like cheaper, more plentiful oil.

    I'm guessing you are hiding in a cave somewhere. You obviously haven't bought gas recently.

    Oh, do pay attention. He was saying that the claim that oil prices would be controlled was false. The current high prices are demonstration that he's right.

    And as for bringing up Bill Clinton: Did anybody claim that the problems started in 2000? No, I don't think so, so once again you're erecting a straw man.

    In fact, if you look at the people who complain about the lies used to justify the invasion of Iraq, you'll find that almost all of them were also deeply critical of the Clinton era sanctions that resulted in the lingering death of tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and their children.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  12. The Origins Of al-Qaeda by WombatControl · · Score: 5, Informative
    And it still doesn't change the fact that an official conspiracy theory was put forward, and acted on, without a whole lot of evidence. (Not just "religious extremists", but the whole "Al Qaeda==Worldwide Terrorist Network", when the reality is that the conspiracy theory created Al Qaeda rather than visa-versa.)

    That is completely untrue.

    Al-Qaeda is Arabic for "the Base" or "the Foundation" - but it's actually a shortened form of the Arabic term "qaedat bayanat" - or database. Al-Qaeda started in the mid 1990s based on Osama bin Laden's personal database of Arab mujihadeen who had fought with him in Afghanistan against the Soviets. His number 2 man, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri was recruited in order to merge al-Qaeda with the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

    As a side note, the CIA did not fund bin Laden, although they knew of him and knew that some fighters they did fund were also working with him. The CIA's main group in Afghanistan throughout the 1990s was led by a man named Ahmad Shah Masood. Masood was assassinated by bin Laden on September 9, 2001 as a symbol of al-Qaeda's commitment to protecting the Taliban. The group that Masood founded was the Northern Alliance - the same fighters who fought with the CIA in 2001 against the Taliban.

    Al-Qaeda has existed as a terrorist organization since at least 1998, and probably earlier. It was 1998 when al-Qaeda launched the attacks against the US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and bin Laden declared his fatwa against the presence of American troops on the Arabian peninsula.

    So, no, you are not correct. Al-Qaeda has root well before 9/11, and to insinuate that it was invented afterwards is simply not correct.