Why did the Pentagon bother to release the footage?

Question

Couple of weeks after Charlie Sheen started talking about 9/11, the govt released the footage where the plane allegedly crashed into the pentagon. No matter how hard I try, I just cannot see the plane. Personally I don't think anyone can.

So my question is, why did they release it? What's the point? The people who are questioning 9/11 are not after the explosion; they've already seen it. They want to see the plane. But where is it?

Answer 1

I've seen a few different videos, and you CAN see a plane (if you pause at the right moment) but it looks more like... I don't know, NOT a plane. It's just way too small to be a plane. I don't know if it was faked or not, but they need some better footage to persuade those that don't believe it, into believing it.

Answer 2

The Pentagon is the most guarded government complex,other than NORAD, and that is the only footage that they have or will show??

.....that is the only footage they WANT you to see

ask yourself why

Answer 3

with a city as big as NYC, Someone would have noticed that there were no planes. There are video clips from many sources that show the planes. How the bldg collapsed needs to be investigated, but any conclusion that leaves out facts already in evidence is strictly fiction. The construction companies are well known for taking shortcuts. They never expected their claim that "those buildings were built to take a hit from planes that big" To actually be tested.

Answer 4

It doesn't look credible to me either.

It may be a media stunt--release "something" so the corporate media can run with it and convince people that the Pentagon actually released something of substance.  That's how the media works, and that is why so many people still believe the government's fairy tale.

What would clear it up better would be for the Pentagon to release the many confiscated surveillance video tapes from the surrounding area.  The unwillingness to release that footage only adds fuel to the fire.

I see it as unimportant at this stage to debate whether it was a plane or a missile that hit the Pentagon.  It is just a detail.  The evidence for government foreknowledge and complicity is compelling and clear.  That itself is enough to justify a new investigation.  The new investigation must, unlike the 9-11 Commission investigation, not be stacked with Bush Administration insiders, and it must not be permitted to cherry-pick the evidence to support the desired conclusion.  Also unlike the 9-11 Commission investigation, it must have a mandate to apportion blame where blame is due.

Answer 5

IMO, I can't help but wonder if "part" of the tape wasn't cut and spliced, then given to the public just to shut them up.

( like: "See? We're not hiding anything..."). I've watched it in slo-mo, and cannot see a plane; maybe something more like a "missile"? I mean, come on, these were BIG planes...there would have been a heck of a lot more damage than what there was. And, what, did the plane totally disintigrate after impact? Oh yeah, all that "jet fuel"...riiiight!! These gov'ts sure take us all for a bunch of uneducated,ignorant fools. If they ever told the truth about certain things once and for all there would no doubt be a mutiny!!

Answer 6

I guess in response to claim about no plane theory. Why would they release the footage if it is so obvious to prove no plane theory? When they're trying dispute the theory.

Answer 7

There's many more cameras on the Pentagon than there were on the twin towers that day. We could see the planes go into the towers. Why can they not show a plane going into the Pentagon?