Pentagon imagery

All things 9/11
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4451
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1660 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Pentagon imagery

Unread post by rachel »

AA77 pentagon CCTV on 9/11 synced
17 May 2024
synced CCTV footage of AA77 hitting the pentagon on September 11 2001

It's curious, the two angles of the Pentagon explosion shown in the video. It looks like they pulled the same trick as the towers. We were led to believe there were multiple television feeds on the towers, yet in reality, it was the same feed with different distortion filters. The biggest clue we are seeing a similar thing is the car.

Pentagon-1.png
Pentagon-2.png

There are apparently two different types of lens filming a slight distance apart, but roughly the same angle to where the plane hits the Pentagon. the top image is a wide-angle/fisheye lens. A noticeable distortion curve is seen on the path edge. The bottom image, it's a lot straighter, though there does look to be a slight distortion curve on the path area too.

Pentagon-1a.png
Pentagon-2a.png

A closer look. We assume the camera taking the top image is mounted on the beige block nearest the car we can see in the second image. What is the white object at the bottom-right corner? From the second image we get the clue it's equivalent to a lens hood, but why is it only seen in the bottom corners? That suggests the top part of the first image has been cropped off.

Pentagon-1b.png
Pentagon-1c.png

If we look at the second pair, we see they are taken moments apart as the car starts to move off. With the strength of the fisheye distortion the downwards arc is quite pronounced on the car's blue and orange stripe, we would expect the top of the image to be just as distorted in the opposite direction. The car's roof slightly curves upwards indicating it's above the centre point of the lens.

Pentagon-2b.png
Pentagon-2c.png

A couple of interesting things. If we look at the second image above, the raised pole and its shadow are straight, equally, there is no distortion on the car. But if we look at the path edge where the bollards are and the two beige boxes, they exhibit a slight fisheye effect, this suggests a composite image.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4451
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1660 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Re: Pentagon imagery

Unread post by rachel »

Lets look at the two frames from the fisheye camera together. We see where the grass line starts, it's straight, but at the very left edge it curves up. Yet if we look at the other side, there is no similar curve on the car's bonnet. We are not looking at a real image, it's a composite, and likely the lens flare was added strategically to firstly obscure the corner of the building because likely the fake lens distortion fails badly at this point. And the big white blob to the right is probably to distract us from realising it's the same building source image being used for both cameras.

Image

Image

If we look at the second set we see a mystery shadow. In fact, there are three mystery shadowy shapes on the first image below. Behind the left bollard there is a blur with a shadow coming from it. Has something been removed? It's pretty obvious the street furniture has been pasted in...is it likely a manufacturer would purposely create those beige boxes to be two different sizes? No. So we know at least one of them has been added in after the fact to help sell a story. The orange bollards and the vertical pole also look fake.

Image

Image

Again in the second set of images, a dirt effect rather than a lens flare is used to hide the problem with the top left corner. The roof line shapes are the same throughout, and see how that white blob in the first set of images is used to hide the tree we see in the second set, so it's less obvious it's the same background being distorted.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4451
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1660 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Re: Pentagon imagery

Unread post by rachel »

I might have been a bit erroneous with the fisheye having looked at a couple of such pictures this morning. I'll get back to that later. But let's look further at the camera which shows the close-up of the car. What is the point of the camera being specifically set up at that location? Because clearly they didn't just go down to Home Depo to buy a couple of cameras to lash up. If we are talking about security for the Pentagon, then likely a top multinational security firm got the contract to install all the cameras around the site, together with the hardware/software interface that runs them. This would have a audit trail including meetings where the brief is discussed, preliminary sketches of locations decided upon, coverage and blind spots, then onto detailed map locations. This before installation which would need to be signed off by a public official. The system as a complete unit would be installed with a maintenance contract part and parcel to keep the cameras working 24/7. We are talking about what would happen in the real world.

So the camera is situated so security have a record of each car that comes in or leaves. To properly track, you'd want the camera to capture the numberplate, the number of occupants in the car and their faces. Let's run the gif, we are given one frame a second, you'd think security for the Pentagon, they could run to twelve frames a second.

full.gif
full.gif (961.36 KiB) Viewed 436 times

How well does it score?

gold_37.jpg
gold_38.jpg
gold_40.jpg

Even if the quality is better on the original, it's a rubbish angle for being able to isolate are read a numberplate. So a fail on that point. What about people, can we work out who is in the car?

gold_34.jpg
gold_35.jpg
gold_36.jpg

Nope, in fact it looks like, from the frames, a chimpanzee, a goat and a sheep in a formal suit.

gold_34a.jpg
gold_35a.jpg
gold_36a.jpg

So what was the actual point of that camera? It fails to identify the car or its occupants, and no one thinks to look at the image and clean the lens. I mean, it's not like it's set up on a roof, it's filming at pedestrian height.

But we know why...
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4451
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1660 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Re: Pentagon imagery

Unread post by rachel »

I found an aerial image of the Pentagon after the plane allegedly hit...I'm not 100% convinced it's not a model, but if we say it gives us the correct layout, we can find the location of the cameras examined in the previous posts.

The elevation and crop on the photo is soooo miniature village table-top angle.

Miniature Wonderland Hamburg
Miniature Wonderland Hamburg
Pentagon, September 11, 2001
Pentagon, September 11, 2001
Miniature Wonderland Hamburg
Miniature Wonderland Hamburg

Anyway...

Image

If I crop in, yellow arrow top corner, are we looking at the same scene from two different angles? If we look at where the grey tarmac meets the sandy coloured strip where the barriers are. It doesn't appear to correspond. The grey should extend to the curb where the black and white lines are seen, and there should be grey the other side, not the sandy colour.

gold_41.jpg
gold_42.jpg
Image

The other interesting thing to note, the shadow line I thought made no sense in an earlier post is actually the shadow of the barrier in its down position. But where is the barrier for this side? The aerial view confirms there should be one on the other box facing us. It's clearly not there. So, what's the point of having a barrier on one side when anyone could just drive through the other without the need to stop?

Image

The other thing I noticed, if we look at the shadow cast by the left hand barrier box, there is a black thing on top that is hard to see, but we see its shadow clearly. So, the full shadow of the box plus top is about one and a half times longer than the actual object, that is because the sun is low in the sky. But look at the car's shadow as it passes. It should also be around one and a half times the height of the car diagonally towards us. The central orange bollard should be completely in shadow. It's not, the shadow stops at the paved area...therefore what we are looking at is fraudulent. We don't even have to look at the alleged explosion to class this as disinformation.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4451
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1660 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Re: Pentagon imagery

Unread post by rachel »

I might as well add someone else's take on the cameras on 9/11, because the Pentagon is an actual place with actual security.

https://www.winterwatch.net/2023/05/the ... n-on-9-11/
The 9/11 Tale of the Pentagon’s Disabled Security Cameras
May 31, 2023 Russ Winter

thumbnail_Pentagon-cameras-on-911.jpg

Editor’s Note: In the lead up to the 20th anniversary of 9/11, Winter Watch continues a three-day running series that focuses primarily on the elements of deception and obfuscation around the events.

Part I: A Look at the Nonsensical Claim That Hijackers with Box Cutters Commandeered 4 Planes on 9/11
Part II: NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s Pants Were on Fire During 9/11: A Case Study in Lie Spotting


---------------------

One of the most revealing tells of a false flag and/or staged deception — beyond grainy and blurry imagery — is a blatant dearth of security camera footage. It’s gotten to the point that the Crime Syndicate doesn’t even bother to offer to explain this anymore, as it doesn’t seem to even occur to a neuro-linguistic programmed population to inquire about this MO.

Back in 2001 after the Pentagon was hit, people were still asking about such things. Accordingly, the criminals needed a story line.

The explosion occurs close to the Pentagon’s heliport, an area that normally would be under 24-hour security surveillance, including video monitoring.

In this document from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, we can read through an interview with the staff responsible for the cameras at the Pentagon. The interview is long and distracting verbal diarrhea, but ultimately we get to the who, what, where, when trivium bottom line:
  • “Many security cameras at the Pentagon that could have captured the building being hit were switched off or had been taken down due to construction work that was taking place and therefore do not film the attack.”
More specifically, this incredible story was offered up:
  • “There are a lot of cameras within the facility at any one time,” commented Steve Pennington, a private consultant responsible for the Pentagon’s security cameras. However, due to renovation work that is being carried out on the Pentagon, many cameras close to where the attack occurs are currently out of use. Some cameras have been taken down temporarily. “There were cameras on poles at the other end, along the roadway, but they were down for construction projects or being changed out during the process,” Pennington recalled. Other cameras that would normally focus on the area where the crash occurs have been switched off. “Because that area was being renovated, a lot of the connectivity of these cameras and the infrastructure that allowed those cameras to be connected back to the building had been removed or destroyed, so they weren’t capturing images and offering fields of view,”
    Furthermore, a number of cameras near the area of impact are either destroyed or lose connectivity when the crash occurs, he adds. “
The lugenpresse at CNN inform us that two cameras did miraculously survive and were operating that day, but the story has since been scrubbed from the Internet.
  • Two recently installed cameras north of the crash site are apparently the only Pentagon security cameras that capture the building being hit.
Without further ado, here is an analysis of the only images captured from the security cameras on the Pentagon exterior grounds. Note that when you hear Crime Syndicate narrative about this scene, it is usually prefaced with the words, “the plane hit the Pentagon.” This is neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) designed to answer the question for you. Always disregard the narrative and examine using your own senses, asking the fundamental trivium method: who, what, where, when, why and how. The question of what is not even remotely answered by this Pentagon video, nor any Pentagon video.

Further on the trivium question of when, the video shows the date Sept. 12, 2001, not Sept. 11. The time is also wrong: 17:37 instead of 09:37. To cover for this glitch in their matrix, the operatives explain in the interview above that this was when “they made the video.” What possible rationale is used to time stamp evidence with the date it was “made.” This is ludicrous on its face. Once again, the NLP trick is employed as the word “plane” is inserted on lower right on the first photo.

jo_00002.jpg

It continues, though I note Youtube deleted the Pentagon video it links to.
User avatar
Wahmeiman
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2024 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Pentagon imagery

Unread post by Wahmeiman »

Definitely no sign of any aircraft at all.
Post Reply