Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum _ Pentagon _ Doubletree Hotel Pics And Angles Thead

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 4 2006, 03:22 AM

Sources for images below. I'm just collecting them into one place. If you have higher resolution images, more that would be helpful or the originals that have been analysed here,etc. please feel free to add them.|+Hotel_ReviewText|+none|+US

Posted by: johndoeX Dec 4 2006, 03:47 AM

QUOTE (waterdancer @ Dec 4 2006, 02:22 AM)

Good eyes! That tree looks photoshopped in! It looks like a tree growing out of the pavement. Perhaps they needed to hide something on that side? hmmm...

Posted by: johndoeX Dec 4 2006, 04:01 AM

Watch the video again and pause it as it zooms in.. keep an eye on the tree. It looks fake.

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 4 2006, 04:24 AM

QUOTE (johndoeX @ Dec 4 2006, 08:01 AM)

Watch the video again and pause it as it zooms in.. keep an eye on the tree. It looks fake.

I wouldn't want to hang my hat on the reality or fakeness of that tree at that level of resolution, unfortunately. If it were a flyover they were trying to hide, seems to me they would probably just cut the top off of the video... I dunno what else they would be trying to cover up over there. I'm trying to narrow down the field of view and position of the camera using some of these, but once again it's not the easiest thing in the world with such poor quality. I'm tentatively thinking that is showing that the white area behind the freeway signs is a portion of the Pentagon. What I don't see yet, is why we wouldn't see more of the Pentagon than just that bit, if that's the case, though. Below is a crop from image 8, which does seem to show trees in that general area. I wish I had the original photo of that particular analysis instead of just the analysis...

Posted by: johndoeX Dec 4 2006, 04:28 AM

I agree its not something to hang your hat on.. but it is something to add to the growing mountain of anomalies.

As for a flyover, if the FDR altitude is accurate, it wouldnt be shown on this video as the top is 'cut off' or not high enough.

However, i did find a brief 'flash' in the sky to the west prior to the explosion... i'll be looking into that further as well.

Posted by: batmanchester Dec 4 2006, 05:37 AM


Posted by: Drakey Dec 4 2006, 07:12 AM

any explaination as why it was released early ?

Posted by: Tarya Dec 4 2006, 08:03 AM

I think who ever done the analysis on the "where's the tree" image is absolutely right about the location of the camera. Waterdancer, where did you find it? Here's my take:
The green arrow below suggests possible location of the tree back in 2001. Obviously is not there anymore. The camera was located on 1st floor level and most probably with an angle facing downwards in order to cover the entrance. That's why the Pentagon is not visible just the explosion. The white area behind the freeway signs is the overpass blocking the view.

Sorry if they are not clear they were done in a hurry since I'm at work.

Posted by: behind Dec 4 2006, 11:36 AM

There is such a coincidence that this tree should be here...

But why did they delayed the release of the video ? Not because they were blurring the faces of persons... there is just one person in it.

Why the delay ? What were they doing.

Posted by: Drakey Dec 4 2006, 01:23 PM


any explaination as why it was released early ?

this was ment to be on the 22nd was it not ? why grant an and then throw it out there without warning, maybe to mislead ?

Posted by: behind Dec 4 2006, 02:27 PM

It must be because they is hoping that the video will gett less attention if they throw it out now when noone expected it.

But it is very strange that still to this day, no photo is avalible of the "plane" flying somewhere around the Pentagon... it is just unbelivenble.

The only logical conclusion is... that it was no B757 at the Pentagon 9/11.

Posted by: paranoia Dec 4 2006, 08:42 PM

you know what seems rather odd to me? that the guy walking his dog (to the left of the frame) shows NO reaction to the massive explosion that he should have heard and seen (since they are infact in view from where he is standing/walking). Instead he just non-chalantly walks/watches his dog, then turns and walks away, showing absolutely NO interest in the spectacular event that has (supposedly/allegedly) just occurred across the highway.

my conclusion: the tape is NOT from 911. the explosion was added to a tape of the same area, but from some other day. thats why the guy just keeps going about his dog-walking business, cuz nothing noteworthy (definitely NOT an explosion) ever happened in the background.

Posted by: paranoia Dec 4 2006, 08:51 PM

another thing that is odd:

the dc-bound traffic on the highway is moving at a steady pace (note the truck(s) cruising by unimpeded), where as at 9:30 to 9:40 a.m. of any given monday thru friday traffic is always bumper to bumper at that location. that is a FACT. All the traffic headed into DC during rush hour ALWAYS bottlenecks on the 14th street bridge, and just prior to it (the area in the videotape). In fact, traffic usually backs up much further (south) than just there, it can start as far back as glebe rd or even duke st, it just depends. but traffic is ALWAYS slow with people on their brakes at that location, M-F from 6:30 am to 10:30am.

my conclusion: the tape is not only not from 911, but it is also NOT from morning rush hour, but sometime (est.) after 11am.

Posted by: paranoia Dec 4 2006, 09:57 PM

ok, so im stuck watching a shitty quality version of this video so after watching it again (many times), im not even sure the guy im referring to is walking a dog. what i thought was a dog, might be the dude's shadow. if anyone can post a link to better version of the vid, i would be much obliged.

none the less, my point still stands about the person in the vid, and his complete disinterest/disregard of what is supposed to be an explosion in the background.

this (coupled with a lack of traffic on the nortbound lane) suggests the possibility that the foreground is of some random day, and the background (with explosion) is footage from the same cam, but from 911, and the two have been layered together into one clip.

Posted by: batmanchester Dec 5 2006, 03:23 AM

waterdancer? anyone? paranoia makes some interesting points.

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 5 2006, 03:50 AM

QUOTE (batmanchester @ Dec 5 2006, 07:23 AM)
waterdancer? anyone? paranoia makes some interesting points.

dunno.gif BMC. Looks interesting to me also, but I'm mostly just a host on this thread. It's not one of my fields of research primarily and I certainly don't know the area in question like paranoia does.

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 5 2006, 03:52 AM

QUOTE (Tarya @ Dec 4 2006, 12:03 PM)
Waterdancer, where did you find it?

Found it here Tarya. Don't know anything about the source.

Posted by: batmanchester Dec 5 2006, 03:59 AM

I just wanted to say that you guys are doing a fantastic job of 'pulling' ( pun intended ) this thing apart. Keep going, prove this thing to be the fake it is! cheers.gif

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 5 2006, 04:10 AM over on LC has posted Rotating the view to seems to indicate no tree there currently, from what I can see. Was there one there 5 years ago? Dunno. I'm still not going to hang my hat on yet it at this point, though, given the poor quality of the video, the time lapse etc. Doesn't look promising for the tree story, though. included below are a few screenshots of livesearch pages and a few of my crude guesses as to camera field of view. Like I say, crude. It's entirely possible that I'm looking at the wrong section of the parking lot for the camera POV, in which case, all of those guesses are going to be incorrect.
Edit: looks like the images below were of the incorrect parking lot, so I've replaced the images themselves with links to those images to save on page loading time for this thread.

Posted by: Drakey Dec 5 2006, 06:10 AM

here are the 2 angles in full incase anyone needs to do some doodling thumbsup.gif

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 5 2006, 06:20 AM

Alternate parking lot field of view. I don't know which is correct. I'm sure with a better quality video I could tell. Sigh.

Posted by: Drakey Dec 5 2006, 06:21 AM

and, btw... your camera position is way off, its more like this:

Posted by: waterdancer Dec 5 2006, 06:22 AM

QUOTE (Drakey @ Dec 5 2006, 10:10 AM)
here are the 2 angles in full incase anyone needs to do some doodling thumbsup.gif


Posted by: waterdancer Dec 5 2006, 06:24 AM

QUOTE (Drakey @ Dec 5 2006, 10:21 AM)
and, btw... your camera position is way off, its more like this:

Could be. I can't tell for sure. Chances are you are correct. I did one for each parking lot. I can't see the flags in the video, maybe that's just my bad eyes.

Posted by: Drakey Dec 5 2006, 06:27 AM

QUOTE (waterdancer @ Dec 5 2006, 10:24 AM)
QUOTE (Drakey @ Dec 5 2006, 10:21 AM)
and, btw... your camera position is way off, its more like this:

Could be. I can't tell for sure. Chances are you are correct. I did one for each parking lot. I can't see the flags in the video, maybe that's just my bad eyes.

the 2nd ones u posted are better, the first ones have the lines comming from a diff parking lot - which i was referring to smile.gif

Posted by: Drakey Dec 5 2006, 06:34 AM

the question is now, if the tree was "put in" - which it seems likely it could of been.. how come ?

what does the tree cover ? cant we see the blast anyway ? distraction ?

Posted by: paranoia Dec 6 2006, 02:18 AM

ok let me start by recanting/retracting my statement about the passerby in the video. after watching it (zoomed in) about 1 million and 1 times, it appears that the guy definitely notices the explosion. in fact it looks like he stops, turns towards it, and possibly even takes a pic of it using his phone, and then he takes off. so i was wrong about that. regarding the traffic in that area, i still maintain my assertion that it is unusual for the trucks in the vid to pass by so quickly at that hour.

in case anyone is interested and has the time to do it, you can check the vdot traffic cam on this page:

to the far right, bring up camera 710, labeled "I-395 at Crystal City/Pentagon North" and/or camera 720, labeled "I-395 at 14th St. Bridge North", on any non-holiday weekday, anywhere from 9:30am to 9:40am (east coast time), and document just how much traffic there is at that location. i am personally unable to access a computer at that hour, so i cant post it myself. but im positive there is always bumper to bumper stoppage at that spot at that hour.

so the guy in the foreground is real and most likely filmed on 911 as is the explosion in the background, but the trucks moving steadily by dont fit. the camera is in such a shitty location, that even if clear, wouldnt reveal anything about the area in question (the pentagon). IF there was a plane, and it flew according to the FDR path or the "official path", then little to none of it would be visible from where this camera was filming at the time (so no need for the footage to be tampered with). BUT if on the other hand, there were other planes (or even helicopters shooting a missile as one story i've read claims) in the area, then they could have been visible from this camera's location on the original tape, thus the need to alter the footage.

i made time to go by and check the camera location out tonite, but unfortunately due to the darkness, i couldnt get a great perspective shot of what can be seen from that location.

what i did get were some shots of the camera and its exact (current) location, plus a pic of the area the guy in the video walks thru. here they are, along with some of you guys' earlier pics for referrence:

the actual cam that sits there currently:

im not sure how well the above pics depict or show it, but the way the camera sits currently appears as if it is filming much farther to the right than the viewpoint that appears in the doubletree video. the best way i can explain it is that camera is pointed in the same direction (12oclock) as the cars in the video, where the front of the cars would be considered 12 oclock on a watch dial. in the video the cam appears to be intersecting the cars at an almost 45degree angle, but as it sits now it faces forward at 90degrees.

the cam appears now to be facing people approaching the door, whereas before (according to the vid) it seems to have been pointed at the driveway opening to watch cars entering the lot. why the change? i dont know.

white arrows represent estimated path of where the guy in the vid walked by:

and here is my estimation of the cam's point of view (though i think you guys already have it figured out):

hope that helps at least a little. i will try and get some pics of what it looks like facing out from the camera's direction, but it has to be during the daytime, so we'll see if i ever make it there...


Posted by: waterdancer Dec 6 2006, 05:51 AM

Great pics, paranoia! Here's a smaller version of the with some rough camera perspective angles drawn in in red. They are tough to see, even with the thick lines I used on the original because of the compression of the image. Basically, it looks to me like the camera would have shown two full Pentagon's worth of view (more or less) to the right of the imact point. Of course, nearly all of that is obscured by our tree. The line between the camera and the area of impact seems to intersect the middle of the road sign visible over the freeway in the video. On the left side of the video, we can only see about as far back along the supposed flight path as the cloverleaf, i.e. not very far at all... As you can see, our tree covers up a lot of airspace. Simply put, the camera looks like it would have tracked about half the distance between the area where the Pentagon was damaged and what looks to me to be a runway for Reagan Intl. airport, had that tree not been in the way.

Posted by: paranoia Dec 7 2006, 07:58 AM

here is an overview map to give you a frame of referrence for the pics (travelling from left to right):

the red rectangles are roughly where the pics were shot from...

by chance on my way to the hotel i saw a plane landing at national:

it had to be landing at one of these 2 runways:

measuring from where i took the pics (red rectangle) to the plane, is almost equal in length to the distance from the doubletree cam to the pentgon impact point (depends which runway the plane in the pics was headed). Anyway, my hope is that you might get some idea of what a plane should look like from that distance.

while at the light waiting to turn left on to Army Navy Drive, i noticed VDOT cam 710:

here is its view on a tuesday (of this past week) at 6:30 am (traffic just beginning):

moving (left) on to Army Navy Drive towards the hotel i see the building adjacent to it has 2 rooftop dome-style cameras mounted at its corners:

too bad thats not the footage that was released. it might help see what really happened.

continued on next post...

Posted by: paranoia Dec 7 2006, 08:01 AM

arrive at the doubletree:


now, there was a dude in a suit standing near this door (just out of camera view, straight ahead) on the phone, and my presence seemed to unnerve him, so i also got nervous, and instead of getting out of my car, i simply parked and took the pics from there. so most of these next shots come from near this spot (red rectangle):

this is where it appears the camera is currently pointed (though it has a wider field of view than my cam does):

the above pics show the area where the big TREE in the video appeared to be.
btw- the cut out areas in the pics are the hood of my car (done to maintain anonymity)

the next couple pics are my attempt to capture roughly the same perspective as the one in the released video:

this one is taken with my car in the driveway (on my way out) at the spot where the guy on the phone in the video was standing, but looking further left than the released video shows:

continued on next post...

Posted by: paranoia Dec 7 2006, 08:02 AM

and back out on to Army Navy Drive, here is my return route (travelling right to left) with more points-of-referrence pics (the red rectangles are the locations (roughly) from where the rest of the pics were photographed):

the pics:

(note the 3-tiered metal sculpture is a tribute to the airforce, and it stands between the Navy Annex and the Pentagon on almost the exact area of the final approach of the “official” flight path)

If the official flight path is true, and a plane (allegedly77) passed the Columbia Pike area (note the Sheraton in full view), then it would/should have been visible from this road as well. You can see in the pics that both the Navy Annex and the Sheraton can be seen clearly from here.

After taking a right and getting on the Washington BLVD exit, the airforce memorial comes into better view:

SO there you have it, a little field trip to the DoubleTree and back. I hope the pics help figure out the “true” perspective of the released video, so that it can be ascertained whether or not the plane could even be visible and how much of it could/should have been seen and taped by the camera in question.


Posted by: johndoeX Dec 7 2006, 10:38 AM

Good stuff paranoia.. thanks for posting this..

Did you happen to talk with people at the Double Tree to see if that tree was there on 9/11? (sorry if i missed it in your above post)

Posted by: Tarya Dec 8 2006, 04:42 AM

According to

Overall, Judicial Watch received 37 hours of tape in DVD format from the FBI, including ten different Doubletree Hotel security camera recordings.  The video footage obtained by Judicial Watch has been made available in full to major media outlets.

Judicial Watch obtained the Doubletree Hotel videos in response to an August 14, 2006 “Stipulation and Order” in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit against the FBI (Judicial Watch v. FBI, Civil Action No. 06-1135).  Judicial Watch filed its original Freedom of Information Act request on December 15, 2004, and amended the complaint on June 29, 2006 to include the Doubletree Hotel video.

According to a letter from FBI Section Chief David Hardy accompanying the camera recordings, “These DVDs were reproduced from cameras 1-9 and 11 comprising the Doubletree Hotel’s surveillance system. Originally, it was thought that the system contained eleven cameras; however, it was later determined that a camera was not connected to the #10 input of the system.”

So where's the footage from the other 9 cameras?
Did you notice where the other cameras were located?

Also, something else I was wondering about. If an explosion happened at 9:32 (supported by the clocks that stopped and 2 FAA documents), wouldn't it be useful to see what these cameras recorded minutes before? unsure.gif

Posted by: Merc Dec 8 2006, 05:42 PM

QUOTE (paranoia @ Dec 5 2006, 12:51 AM)
another thing that is odd:

the dc-bound traffic on the highway is moving at a steady pace (note the truck(s) cruising by unimpeded), where as at 9:30 to 9:40 a.m. of any given monday thru friday traffic is always bumper to bumper at that location. that is a FACT. All the traffic headed into DC during rush hour ALWAYS bottlenecks on the 14th street bridge, and just prior to it (the area in the videotape). In fact, traffic usually backs up much further (south) than just there, it can start as far back as glebe rd or even duke st, it just depends. but traffic is ALWAYS slow with people on their brakes at that location, M-F from 6:30 am to 10:30am.

my conclusion: the tape is not only not from 911, but it is also NOT from morning rush hour, but sometime (est.) after 11am.


This is true, and in fact, Northbound 395 was supposed to be in a traffic jam..see Gary Bauer, Phillip Thompson, others.

But isn't that an exit or transition ramp?

Posted by: Merc Dec 8 2006, 05:45 PM


what up with that shot from the train?

Any score?

Posted by: midwestzero Dec 10 2006, 05:11 AM

Hats off once again to you guys, I have been busy doing duplcatiion for alot of 9/11 Truth groups, I just learned a few days of the "new" released video, I mean come on if they are gonna put fake trees why did it take them 5 years to do that, I could have put a fake tree in a pretty "CRAPPY" video in a bout 15-20 minutes, there are so many unanwsered questsions about this, hopefully something SOLID will pop up sometime soon

Posted by: paranoia Dec 10 2006, 08:25 AM

sorry peeps, time has been a rare commodity for me this past week, i didnt mean to leave the thread hanging. but im back....

jdx, i did NOT ask anyone at the dueltree hotel any questions. to be honest im not sure they wouldnt look at me like im crazy if i went in there asking about a tree from 2001. furthermore, i doubt i would find anyone there who could answer the question beyond any reasonable doubt. plus, the whole place is always crawling with "them" (military and dod peeps) all the time, so im freaked out about showing my face around there too much. the building next to the duel tree (the one with the roofcamz i posted pics of), at 400 armynavy dr. houses the OIG (office of the inspector general) of the dod, as well as several other gov. entities, so again, im paranoid about openly seeking information re:911 from anyone in that locale.

btw (not really relevant but inetersting)- just around the corner from there is the BOEING headquarters (check it and the other buildings out here: )

but what i did do is some research and i found that arl. takes major pride in their trees and i was led to believe (by this document: ) that they actually keep an EXACT inventory of how many there are, so hopefully somewhere there is a record of the info we seek. i also researched who would/should officially have information about the trees/forestry in arl. county, a position known as "County Urban Forester". i just emailed the current person in that position (minutes ago), so i will hopefully hear something by monday/tuesday when the county offices open back up. i also found the name and some (possibly outdated) contact info for the person who occupied that job/post back as early as spring of 2001. but im hoping the current guy will be able to hook me up so i dont have to go digging up the ex-forester. we'll see what kind of response i get, and i will keep u guys posted...

re: 9 other cameras, im not sure where they all are. the ones i posted pics of are highly visible, so they stood out readily. i'm sure almost all the buildings lining up with armynavy dr. (runs parallel to the pent.) have cameras mounted (either at ground and/or rooftop level), and some are more visible than others. if i get some time (and a sunny day) i will go back and try to document some of these other camz and their locations. im pretty sure that if nowhere else, pentagoncitymall has several rooftop and parking lot security camz that have the area in question in view, but their footage will likely be as limited and grainy as the dueltree vid.

anyhow, no footage has been (or will be- imo) released that is of any real value. you might get another below street level camera view from one of the other buildings, though i doubt it. notice the dueltree hotel is at the FARTHEST end of the armynavy dr. strip? the other buildings on that road are all much closer to the area in question and thus they should/could contain views of the "flight path", and thats exactly why they released the dueltree vid and not the others, and they likely WONT release any other vids.

personally, im willing to dismiss the tree as a non-issue, since it does not obscure the would-be flight path. to be honest, im not even convinced that it is in fact a tree we are looking at. what appears to be the base and trunk of the tree is actually (by my estimations) a "NO PARKING" sign (check my earlier pics). That leaves us with what appear to be leaves dangling without any base/trunk. i didnt take pics, but i did look closely at the ground and sidewalk of the exact area in question, and there is no trace of where a tree could/should have been planted. there isnt any dirt-area or cutout in the sidewalk for a tree to have been planted in. they would not have planted the tree in the street, but either way, there is no sign of any place to plant a tree (in the street or on the sidewalk). maybe the tree was planted in the planter (where the hedges are now), but again i cant seem to find a base/trunk of a tree in that planter, in the video. at one point (while watching the clip for the 2millionth time) i began to wonder if maybe there is some dirt or birdshit covering the camera lens. of course the actual lens is behind a protective glass in the encasement, so that glass is what i think might have some sh*t on it. look at the video and see what you think. just remember, the reason i dont think its a big deal is because there isnt anything to hide in the area obscured by the tree. due to where the explosion is, the tree area could not have contained any object (even a missile fired from a helicopter- for example).

if anything the most suspicious part of the video is the rectangular "help" box they used to "highlight" the explosion area. im not saying it explicilty implies wrong-doing, but it makes it harder to see wtf you are looking at. without it, we might be able to figure out if that is or isnt a tree we are looking at it. without it, maybe the "flight path" area would be clearer. so for me that box is what stands out as most questionable. that and the fact the the explosion seems like it is too far to the right in the field of view. but im wondering if thats the result of some sort of light-bending camera angle. im hoping to actually get in that building and gets some shots from the windows above the camera (it is a stairway with one window per floor). This should help get pics from the exact angle as the camera, and to see above and over the highway, to see exactly where the explosion should line up in the field of view.

so im not entirely convinced the tape is 100% legit, but its not the tree that i base my suspicions on. soon enough i will have an official answer for the tree hopefully, so at least that can be put to rest.

it is indeed an on-ramp, but even then the truck should not go unimpeded. it would eventually have to merge and hit a dead stop, but it does not appear to. plus the vehicles in the background, which appear not to be in the merge lane lane but in the regular traffic lanes, they also appear to moving at cruising speed. so something about the traffic does not seem right. im never near a computer at the hour in question so i cant document the VDOT cam (and the tarffic at that location), so the invite is still out there for anyone who can to please do so and post it.

as far as the pic from the train, sorry i havent had the time to get on the metro merc. it requires parking and riding the train to the airport and then back to where i parked. my bigger concern is security at the airport station. i dont want to stand out, since everyone who arrives at that stop usually catches plane, but i would instead be getting off one train and getting on another headed back away from the airport. im concerned that i might fit the profile of a would-be terrorist (im middle eastern) and that if they wanted to, they could claim that im staking out the place for an upcoming "plot". maybe my fears are unfounded, but in the immortal words of kurt cobain:

"just because you're paranoid, dont mean they're not after you..."

anway, im working on it (the pic from the train), and i may solicit some help to get it done, but just so you know, i havent/didnt forget about it. i'll be in touch...



p.s. i have to run (its 723am and i havent slept yet), but i did not get a chance to proofread this post. i will be editting it for content and clarity later, so please forgive any errors and or confusion caused as a result. thanx

Posted by: Merc Dec 10 2006, 01:27 PM

Excellent, P.

Good job on everything.

Honestly, whatever that thing is, it had to have made it easier to hide the flyover.

Yes, if you can get a shot from the train & platform asap, it will be used in the information we are presenting.

We might even be able to use a few other location shots if you'd like to help.

Lyte Trip has made a contact and even interviewed an employee with the Doubletree. He used to be a DoD employee, and worked in the B-ring on 9/11. He saw the fire and debris shoot out fromt the C-ring hole. Anyways, I told Lyte to get in touch with him and see if he can get in touch with the Doubletree landscaping staff or contractor and see if they can shed any light on the matter. But it looks like you have a good lead as well.

PLEASE stay in touch...and stop being so paranoid wink.gif...the worst is now over.

Posted by: paranoia Dec 11 2006, 07:14 AM

re: the tree, who would be in charge of it, depends on where it was planted. if it was in the planter, it would belong to the hotel and they would be responsible for it. if it was on the county's sidewalk or street, they would be in charge of it. so between the two avenues we are pursuing, we should be able to come to a definitive conclusion regarding this tree, one way or another.

but anyway, pm me about the location shots you need, and i will do my best to oblige.


Posted by: Ashoka Dec 12 2006, 07:50 PM


before refreshing the, Judicial watch showed this image

It's not another cam but the same they released before cropping the video (it only shows the high left angle) and darkening that rectangle around the "Pentagon"


Posted by: Robyn623 Dec 12 2006, 11:14 PM

Great analysis, everyone. This is a very interesting read.

Ashoka, I just went to JW and saw the pic you were referring to. I would love to see the full video rather than this one with the helpful box telling you where to look. Great find!

Posted by: paranoia Mar 1 2007, 05:42 AM

new pics from inside the double tree (5th floor) and directly above where the cam is (and was) placed:

continued on next post...

Posted by: paranoia Mar 1 2007, 06:07 AM

more from the 5th floor:

this next pic is interesting:

this (above) is what is on the other side of the door below the camera. its locked outside, but does open from the inside. though its just of the frame, the magnetic alarm sensor (the one mounted on the door itself) has been disconnected, so i was able to exit here instead of having to trek all the way back through the stairs and the building. though you cant see it in the pic, on the ground in front of me there at the bottom of the stairwell, there was a space heater plugged in! it looked as if someone was living there. strange.

anyway, am i wrong, or were people coming in and out of that door in the doubletree video? i seem to recall people entering the scene from directly below the security cam, thus i thought this was a working and regularly used exit/entrance. finding it in the shape i did was a bit of a surprise to me, it seemed so dirty and unused, yet the space heater was there, so i couldnt make any sense of it.

btw- notice there is bus parked in front of the door. in the earlier pic of the outside of the building i framed the shot from above the bus, so the camera wasnt in view. so the second pic in the first post is an OLD pic.

this (below) is a very rough attempt by me to try and line up the 2 places. but i did NOT scale down the new pic to fit the security cam pentagon dimensions, hence it is a rough estimate not an accurate one:

here are the two pics:

feel free to line them up yourself and perhaps even scale down the one pic so it is more accurate. hopefully the pics may be helpful in some way or another.


Posted by: johndoeX Mar 1 2007, 12:35 PM

salute.gif thumbsup.gif

Posted by: SwingDangler Mar 2 2007, 04:55 PM

I posted this elsewhere but this seems to be the best place.

I just finished speaking with a friend of mine who is in the Army Nuclear Weapons Proliferation Program and has been at the Pentagon the past few weeks. I will not offer his name as he is scheduled for a promotion to a higher security clearance level and informed me the FBI maybe contacting me as they did with another friend who was in the Navy 10 years ago and went through a similiar background check. I let him know I had been through the process before so he knew I knew what to expect.

We talked about old times for a bit and he noticed I had a picture of the Pentagon aerial veiw up on the computer screen. He walked over and said yeah that one is the flight path, pointing to the yellow line. He mentioned reading a 'report' on the event (Army, DOD? he didnt' mention the name of the report or anything along those lines, but after stating "I read the report and you didn't here this from me but a plane hit the antenne on top of the hotel."
I wasn't sure what hotel he was referring me to, but he pointed it out on the map.
I assumed it was the Doubletree, but could it have been a Sheridan hotel?

This was news to me about the antenne. I was wondering if any of you had come across this information in the public domain or elsewhere?

He did state "they" referring to himself and his friends he works with know a plane DID NOT hit the Pentagon because of the lack of debris, damage to the Pentagon, etc. I used my hands to show him the flight path and the potential of a missile being launched from underneath as the plane diverted to north of the Citgo, concurrent with Pandora's Box and Pentacon.

He smiled with this big sh*t eatting grin and I asked him what he thought. "We think it was an AGM but I didnt' say that." I replied,"And people think I'm a crazy conspiracy theorists." And he stated, "Yeah and I'm working in it!" and we both laughed.

I asked him who he thought blew up the towers with explosives, and got a bit serious and replied, I don't know anything about that, but suggested looking up Comp B explosives.

He said there would have to be a lot of it and if deprived of oxygen would burn for sometime afterwards, as it doesn't need O2 to burn. I believed him as that was part of his training at Redstone and with the noookweapons he works with now.
He suggested finding out if there were any large shipments to the WTC a day or two before the attack. I then told him about the FBI thinking it was a truck bomb, etc.

So so sum this up, is there anything in the public domain regarding the downed attenne on top of the hotel?

And is there anyway to find out if there were large shipments to the WTC a couple of days prior to 9/11?


Powered by Invision Power Board (
© Invision Power Services (