reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A CNN correspondent reported from the Pentagon, near where a plane went down. The fire was still burning in some parts of the building. Upon close inspection, the correspondent saw a huge gaping hole in the side of the building, but no evidence of a plane crash anywhere near the Pentagon. The only pieces left were small enough to pick up by hand. There were no large tail sections, wing sections, or fuselage visible.

The speaker observed the Pentagon after the 9/11 attack while firefighters were still working. According to the speaker, the fire was still burning in some parts of the Pentagon. The speaker saw a large hole in the side of the building. However, the speaker claims that, upon close inspection, there was no evidence of a plane crash anywhere near the Pentagon, only the damaged side of the building. The speaker states that the only remaining pieces were small enough to pick up by hand, with no large tail sections, wing sections, or fuselage visible.

A CNN correspondent reported from the Pentagon, near where a plane went down. The fire was still burning in some parts of the Pentagon. From a close-up inspection, there was no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon, except for the actual side of the building that was crashed into. The only pieces left were small enough to pick up by hand. There were no large tail sections, wing sections, or fuselage anywhere around.

The speakers claim there were no planes on 9/11. One speaker says that people believe what they saw on TV, but there was no airplane at the Pentagon or World Trade Center. A credible witness stated the planes were remotely controlled. Another speaker says that remote controlling an airplane the size of a 767 is very difficult, and there was no wreckage from any airplane at the World Trade Center. Flights 11 and 77 didn't exist, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Flight 93 was allegedly spotted years later at O'Hare Airport. The crash site in Shanksville had no wreckage. Cell phone calls from the airliners would have been impossible due to technological limitations at the time. Pilots in a simulator couldn't hit the buildings at high speeds. An airplane can't fly above its maximum operating speed, and a hijacker wouldn't be able to fly with the "clacker" activated. At high speeds, the slightest pressure on the yoke will produce large changes in aircraft direction or structural failure. One speaker claims the planes passed through the buildings at uniform motion.

Speaker 0: Somebody finally found the confiscated video that the FBI took on the day of nine eleven, where it was proving it wasn't a plane. It was a scutt missile. There was talk amongst the community because I've been awake for twenty years since this happened. That there was a scud missile. The witnesses were silenced. The person who had this tape that turned it over to the FBI, the FBI concealed this information. And as you can see, that is not a plane. That is a scud missile as originally thought. Fucking deep state cabal. You sons of bitches. We already those who knew, we already knew you did shit. But this was the last piece of the puzzle for the evidence. With that whole entire crap with the 09:11 report, they said it disintegrated. That is a scud missile. So Swedish satellite saw that there was a marking target, and that was completely put aside, and you all bought the lie. Heavenly father, let truth prevail.

I'm a "no planer," meaning I don't believe planes were used in the 9/11 attacks. People believe what they saw on TV, but there was no plane wreckage at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon. Remotely controlling a plane that size to hit the towers dead center is nearly impossible. Flight 93 allegedly crashed in Shanksville, but there was minimal wreckage, unlike a typical plane crash. The plane supposedly went underground at 580 mph, yet a hijacker's bandana and a passport were found at the site. Also, cell phone calls from the planes at high altitudes wouldn't have been possible with the technology at the time. Experienced pilots couldn't replicate the attacks in a simulator at high speeds, and exceeding a plane's maximum operating speed like that would be extremely difficult and dangerous.

On 9/11/2001, 19 men directed by someone on dialysis used box cutters to penetrate US airspace. They commandeered four planes, flying them off course for over an hour. Hijackers, who liked alcohol and strippers, downed three buildings in New York. In Washington, a pilot flew a 757 into the Pentagon's budget analyst office, where staff were working on the missing $2.3 trillion announced by Rumsfeld the day before. The news quickly blamed Osama bin Laden, and evidence, like a hijacker's passport, was conveniently found. A delayed, underfunded investigation, based on torture and destroyed records, failed to mention key details and was allegedly lied to by the Pentagon, CIA, and Bush administration. Bush and Cheney testified in secret. The 9/11 Commission blamed a "failure of imagination," despite prior simulations of hijacked planes hitting buildings. Data was destroyed by the DIA and SEC, and NIST classified its WTC-7 model data. The FBI wants to keep its 9/11 investigation secret. Bin Laden evaded capture for years, releasing videos, before being killed in a raid, his body dumped at sea, and team members dying in a helicopter crash. Questioning this story makes you a "paranoid conspiracy theorist."

In this rare slow-motion video, Flight 175, which struck the South World Trade Center tower on September 11, 2001, is examined. The video, allegedly filmed by Michael Herzakani, a diamond merchant from Los Angeles, reveals two impossibilities. Firstly, it challenges the belief that an airplane could effortlessly cut through a building with a steel facade, reinforced concrete flooring, and 47 steel support beams. The media promotes this narrative, and despite evidence to the contrary, many still accept it.

I was near the Pentagon where a plane crashed. The fire is still burning, but there's no evidence of a plane crash nearby. Only small pieces remain, no large sections like wings or fuselage.

I walked up to the Pentagon after the plane crash. The fire was still burning, and I saw a big hole in the building. There were only small pieces left, no big parts like wings or fuselage. No plane crashed near the Pentagon, just the side of the building.

According to the speaker, the Pentagon is the most heavily defended building in the world. The 9/11 Commission stated that Hani Hanjour, the alleged pilot of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, was the worst pilot. Instructors wouldn't certify him to fly a single engine propeller plane. The speaker claims Hanjour supposedly flew a commercial jetliner, performed aerobatic maneuvers, and crashed it into the side of the Pentagon. The Pentagon had an active surface-to-air missile defense system and many security cameras. The FBI confiscated 80 to 90 videos of what hit the Pentagon but won't release them. The speaker concludes that 9/11 is the biggest lie of our lifetime.

They claimed it was a plane, but the building exploded randomly. It's not a plane; that side just blew up after the first explosion. They don't know what they're saying. How could a plane have caused that? It happened too quickly. The building was fine before, then suddenly it exploded. How did that happen?

Outside the Pentagon, firefighters are still battling the blaze caused by the crash. I observed the significant hole in the building, but there is no evidence of a plane crash nearby. The only remnants visible are small pieces that could fit in your hand; there are no large sections like tail or wing parts anywhere around.

A CNN correspondent reported from the Pentagon, near where a plane went down. The fire was still burning in some parts of the building. Upon close inspection, the correspondent saw a huge gaping hole in the side of the building, but no evidence of a plane crash. The only pieces left were small enough to pick up by hand. There were no large tail sections, wing sections, or fuselage anywhere around.

This video claims to show two impossibilities regarding the flight 175 that hit the South World Trade Center tower on 9/11. The first impossibility is that a real airplane couldn't have sliced through a steel building with reinforced concrete flooring and steel support beams. The second impossibility is a CGI glitch where the wing of flight 175 appears behind a building instead of in front of it. The speaker believes this proves the video is a fake and part of a series of faked videos released by the news media.

Speaker 0: Probably the best known builder, particularly of of of great buildings in the city. There's a great deal of question about whether or not the damage and and the ultimate destruction of the buildings was caused by the airplanes, by architectural defect, or possibly by bombs or or aftershocks. Do you have any thoughts on that? Speaker 1: Well, it was an architectural defect. You know, the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building. Don't forget, that took a big bomb in the basement. Now the basement is the most vulnerable place because that's your foundation, and it withstood that. And I got to see that area about three or four days after it took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building. And I said, I can't believe it. The building was standing solid, and half of the columns were blown out. I mean, so this was an unbelievably powerful building. If you know anything about structure, it was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the World Trade Center had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows, you had the steel on the outside. So you had the steel on the outside of the building. That's why when I first looked and you had big heavy I beams. When I first looked at it, I couldn't believe it because there was a hole in the steel. And this is steel that was you remember the the width of the windows in the World Trade Center folks? I think you you know, if you're ever up there, they were quite narrow. And in between was this heavy steel. I said, how could a plane, even a plane, even a seven sixty seven or seven forty seven or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this deal? I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steelers on the inside around the elevator shaft. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have, and it was almost just like a like a can of soup. Speaker 2: You know, Donald, we were looking at pictures all morning long of that plane coming into Building Number 2. And when you see that approach the far side and then all of a sudden, within a matter of millisecond, the explosion pops out the other side. Speaker 1: Right. I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think, obviously, they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast, it seemed to be coming down into the building. So it was getting the speed from going downhill, so to speak. It just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane because you're talking about taking out steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on a building. I mean, these buildings were rock solid, And, you know, it's just an amazing it's an amazing thing. Speaker 3: And it's not right to call up and then extrapolate and connect him to 09:11 when he came out on the day of 09:11 and the day after on Fox and on CNN and said, I believe there had to be bombs in those buildings. It was brought down by explosives. A plane doesn't do that. And then described the architecture of Tower 1 and Tower 2. If he was an insider, he wouldn't have said that. Speaker 4: A lot of people ask, how is it possible that, a Boeing plane would be able to destroy the or two planes would be able to destroy the Twin Towers because they were constructed to withstand like a 07/2007 Speaker 5: attack. It's tremendous power and tremendous heat, and people were willing to die. And when they're willing to die and when they're willing to become kamikazes of a sense, there's very little you can do about it. I mean, the the heat and the power actually, it was amazing that the the initial jolts didn't jar the building as much as people would have thought. But the the tremendous amounts of fuel that was dumped on the building and 1,600 degrees temperature, I guess that's probab

Here's a summary of the provided transcript: The speaker questions how a 757 could fit into a 14-16 foot hole in the Pentagon without leaving wreckage. Photos taken before the Pentagon's outer wall collapsed show a hole, wire spools on the lawn, and broken concrete facing. The roof shows fatigue but hasn't collapsed. The speaker points out the absence of wreckage like a tail, fuselage, wings, or engines. Engine 331 from the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority is visible in photos. The fire chief from this engine company initially agreed to an interview but canceled an hour before airtime, and two firefighters were reportedly placed on indefinite leave. Fire retardant foam is being sprayed on the front of the Pentagon, and the speaker reiterates the question of whether the hole is large enough for a 757 and where the wreckage is.

A CNN correspondent reported from the Pentagon, near where a plane went down. Firefighters were still working to extinguish the blaze, which was still burning in some parts of the building. Upon close inspection, the correspondent saw a huge gaping hole in the side of the building, but no evidence of a plane crash. The only pieces left were small enough to pick up by hand. There were no large tail sections, wing sections, or fuselage anywhere around the site.

"No seats, no luggage, no bodies, nothing but bricks and limestone." "The official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane." "Flight 77 had two Rolls Royce engines made of steel and titanium alloy and weighs six tons each." "it is scientifically impossible that 12 tons of steel and titanium was vaporized by jet fuel." "From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon." "The videos from security cameras, which would show what really hit the Pentagon, were immediately confiscated by agents of the FBI, and the Department of Justice has to this day refused to release them." "If these videos would prove that the Pentagon was really hit by a seven fifty seven, most of us would assume the government would release them."

A 125-foot wide, 44-foot tall plane reportedly executed a 270-degree downridge spiral before striking the Pentagon, despite the pilot being known as terrible. The crash site contained no seats, luggage, or bodies, only bricks and limestone. The official explanation claims the intense heat from jet fuel vaporized the entire plane, but Flight 77 had two six-ton Rolls Royce engines made of steel and titanium alloy, and it is scientifically impossible for jet fuel to vaporize 12 tons of steel and titanium. Bodies were reportedly identified by fingerprints or DNA, which raises the question of how a fire could vaporize aluminum and tempered steel but leave human bodies intact. There was allegedly no evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon, with only small, hand-sized pieces remaining. Government agents allegedly removed debris and covered the lawn with dirt and gravel. Videos from security cameras were confiscated by the FBI and the Department of Justice has refused to release them.

On 9/11, there were multiple explosions during the high-rise mission, including the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. Many videos of the first building collapse have been edited to hide the sound of the explosion. This clip reveals an explosion that can be heard, which is significant. The initiation sequence leading to the collapse is often skipped in public releases.

A CNN correspondent reported from the Pentagon, near where a plane went down. The fire was still burning in some parts of the building. Upon close inspection, the correspondent saw a huge gaping hole in the side of the building, but no evidence of a plane crash anywhere near the Pentagon. The only pieces left were small enough to pick up by hand. There were no large tail sections, wing sections, or fuselage anywhere around.

How could anyone fly a 60 ton, 125 foot wide, 44 foot tall plane through this obstacle course? The aircraft before striking the Pentagon reportedly executed a 270 degree downward spiral, and yet Hani Hanure was known as a terrible pilot who could not safely fly even a small plane. The official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane. From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. The videos from security cameras, which would show what really hit the Pentagon, were immediately confiscated by agents of the FBI.

The speaker questions how a 60-ton plane could navigate a difficult obstacle course. It's claimed the aircraft executed a 270-degree spiral before striking the Pentagon, despite the pilot's alleged incompetence. Doubts are raised about the official explanation that jet fuel vaporized the entire plane, including its Rolls Royce engines made of steel and titanium. Questions are posed about how bodies could be identified via fingerprints and DNA if the fire was hot enough to vaporize metal. One speaker states there was no evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon, with only small, hand-sized pieces remaining. It's claimed government agents removed debris and covered the lawn with dirt and gravel. Security camera videos were confiscated by the FBI and have not been released. The speaker suggests the government would release the videos if they proved a 757 hit the Pentagon.

The Pentagon is heavily defended and the pilot who crashed into it, Hani Hanjour, was considered the worst pilot by the 911 commission. Despite being unable to fly a single engine propeller plane, he supposedly maneuvered a commercial jetliner to hit the Pentagon. The building had surface to air missile defense at the time. The FBI confiscated around 80 to 90 videos of the incident but has not released them. This video is the only available evidence. The speaker believes that 9/11 is a major lie.