I am going to break down a couple of the topics from our trip to the Pentagon so that thread does not become too distracted.

This is what we discovered about video cameras in the area. The first quote is from the FBI in regards to the FOIA filed by http://www.flight77.info/ .

The documents can be viewed here too at full size: http://www.pentagonresearch.com/video.html

Now the FBI says, "I also conducted a search of the FBI's Electronic Case File System, Investigative Case Management System, and other evidence databases for any videotapes in the possession of the FBI from the Sheraton National Hotel in Arlington, Virginia. I did not locate any such video tape." (Maguire Documents)

This is purely B.S.. Also, the notion that the FBI missed getting that camera after acquiring 85 total videos that they admit to having is B.S.. It would have had a very valuable view and would have been in the top two most obvious non-military locations to check first - the other being the Citgo (I'll deal with that in the next post). The following photo is to locate and document the video camera that was at the Sheraton.





This is the exact same location now. Note how the old camera is missing and the new camera appears to be the same model as the new camera at the Pentagon wall, the Annex and the same as we saw at the military buildings in Pentagon City (in the following posts).



This is taken from the room. The importance of this is that the camera would have been nearly the closest one and would certainly have been able to confirm or deny what all of the eyewitnesses on Columbia/Pike told us. But it is mysteriously removed?

Trying to give the benefit of the doubt we attempted to investigate this. Dylan and I both had tried many calls to the general manager Paul Giovanni prior to the trip. Then while there in person I went to his office 3 times. Once Dylan and I went together and left a handwritten note with his assistant explaining the request to see him.

I watched his assistant go talk to him and he lied and made excuses just 40 feet away from us. She finally ran into me in the lobby and said he refused to talk with us. She was very nice. He knew what I looked like and I was in a situation twice to catch him out of his office but he avoided me.

I tried the security manager too. He had only been there two years and referred me to the offices upstairs. So I went to the offices for a forth time and was able to catch the assistant manager. I can't remember her name right now. She was very diplomatic and guarded. I told her after my refused phone calls I had gone to Sheraton corporate and legal departments and was also refused even an official statement. She told me that the National Sheraton was a franchise Sheraton and that Paul Giovanni was the highest level of authority there. That might be a research path for somebody to investigate - who the franchise holders are and their affiliations!

I explained to her the implications of Paul Giovanni appearing to be hiding something in such an important situation. I also explained that the FBI had published documents regarding the video and all I was doing was trying to do was confirm the veracity of the statement.

Really all he had to do was meet with me and lie and say they had no video taken. But the fact he took the avoidance path makes me 90% sure he didn't want to tell the truth and conflict with the FBI. Then I said I would ensure this information and Paul Giovanni's name was broadly disseminated via film, radio and articles. She wrapped up our conversation with his business card and suggested I try writing him. I will do that registered mail later to see what happens.

I then asked her if it was possible to go to the roof of the Sheraton to get an overall photo. She said I would have to gain permission from the Pentagon police. I thought that might be bull but it was later confirmed when we were detained by the Pentagon police and their special agents. One of the things they were most concerned about was what photos we had taken from the Sheraton. That is supposed to be a civilian location and none of their business. That is why I think it would be interesting to see who holds the franchise. The ridiculous thing about their obsession with photos of the area is that the Pentagon website itself has more photos and details posted than we could have recorded ourselves.

My assessment in regards to the Sheraton video is that we are being lied to. The camera is well documented to have been there before and after 9/11. The tape is "missing" now and the camera has been physically removed. The general manager Paul Giovanni is terrified to talk about it and everybody there is tight lipped and don't even want you to take photos from the Sheraton. It is all wrong and does not add up.

Something is being hidden without a doubt!

Now if one "missing" critical camera isn't enough for you, then read the next post coming up. Because the next most critical camera is also gone.

Russell

Russ! Russ! Russ!

[wavetowel]

Russ, words can't explain my excitement and respect for you guys that are doing this work. I hope the government can feel the walls closing in, with each new piece of evidence against them.

[worthy] [rock] [respeckt]

...Once again, a legitamate straight-forward terrorist attack is apparently SO authentic, the FBI nor anyone else finds it necessary to even TALK about other cameras catching the attack occuring. <_<

This is just ridiculous. I could pontentially somewhat believe that a plane hit that building, but if it's so cut and dry, why not just release the evidence? What's so hard about showing a clear video of events?

...now that it's been 5 years, I wonder if a video did come out, would it be altered? But of course we have all those pesky eyewitnesses that could tell us the validity of the "tape" (but given the recent analyses of them, I'm not so sure anymore).

Keep up the good work on this issue. I'm a man of facts & evidence, and the biggest piece of evidence is apparently too much for me to handle. [nono]

I'd like to see some of these idiot's, who buy the official story, tell us why they won't show us the video's....it's pretty cut & dry if you ask me.

It was an American plane flying into an American building wasn't it?
How can it be an issue of National security when everyone knows what happened right?
We want to believe it was a plane and we all want to be an official story believer right?

The only catch is we just want to see the 3 f*cking videos first!

Anyone who can't believe it was an inside job needs help....bad.

Now for the next most critical camera that has also gone missing.

According to the manager of the Citgo who was very kind and informative with us, their video was not actually taken away in minutes as the famous quote has told us. They were evacuated for about two hours from the Citgo and minutes after they reopened the camera was taken. She never viewed the video herself. Her account was interesting as an audio witness. She recalls the rumbling sound and 3 distinct explosions. Merc has a lead on an employee who was outside the station and may place the aircraft for us.

The first day I was detained by the Pentagon police I was able to capture some photos that made it home. The Citgo manager physically took me out under the canopy and showed me the location of the removed camera. It was pointed at pump 2. My website page on this is in error and will be corrected as time allows (trying to locate the camera with her on the phone originally led to the misunderstanding).



ALL of the cameras are under the canopy. I did not see any that were external. The manager described this one as having had a clear view of the Pentagon wall and quite a bit north as well. You can see where the impact was and the higher angle of the camera that may have captured it.



You can see here on the south canopy that they have two cameras. So now on the north they have only one? The two most critical cameras in proximity to the flight path and the impact are denied by the FBI and mysteriously missing?

"Among the eighty-five (85) videotapes described in paragraph 11, above, I located one videotape taken from closed circuit television at the Citgo Gas Station in Arlington, Virginia. Because of its generally poor quality, the tape was taken to the FBI's Audio-Video Image Analysis Unit (AVIAU).....to determine that the videotape did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001." (Maguire Documents)

Full sized documents here: http://www.pentagonresearch.com/video.html

Note that they use the word "impact" as a word game to comply with the verbiage of the original FOIA. They don't say whether or not the film showed an aircraft!

As you read in the account of Dylan, Lyte, Merc and myself (two days in a row for me) being detained by the Pentagon police and special agents, they were absolutely phobic about us having photos from the gas station and on the grassy hill nearby.

Coincidence that both cameras are gone?

Next we'll look at THE most critical camera.

Did we only have cheap parking lot cameras from the Pentagon?

NO.

There was a destroyed piece of equipment on the Pentagon facade just north of the impact area. I have had a hard time finding and analyzing close photos of it from that time frame. Some people had suggested it was a light or something else.

I have never made a public commitment on what it was until now.

One of the goals of this trip for me was to correctly identify it as a camera.



Here it is and its proximity to the impact zone.



Here is the replacement today. I was unable to get a good context photo of it because we were driving and the Pentagon memorial construction was obstructing the wall from the road. But trust me when I say it is the same camera.

I am now 100% sure that they have footage from right above and to the north of the impact. This is also a high quality piece of equipment - not a cheesy little camera from a parking booth.

Where is this footage???

Since it does not technically show the wall of the Pentagon because of its placement, it may not have showed the "impact". I'll bet 10-1 that it would have showed an aircraft though. It probably sees all the way to the Citgo from my guess and would have had more time to catch frames than the security shack cameras.

If this is released in the second wave of FOIA releases then we might have an image or if it is suppressed then we will know they do not want to show clear footage of any aircraft in the area that morning.

Russell

Is that not also a camera directly above the open door on the side of heliport building?

OMG WOW!!!

[worthy] [worthy] [worthy]

I can't wait to read the reponse to f77's FOIA :D

Now for the Navy Annex.

Photos of the annex on that day are hard to come by since obviously everybody was facing the Pentagon. But I have the one below showing the same model of camera on the north side of the building that was on the Pentagon wall. If anybody knows of photos (maybe satellite?) indicating cameras on the Annex on 9/11 it would be a good addition to confirming their location.



This is the same model of camera that was on the Pentagon wall and on the south wall of the Navy Annex that I took a photo of on our trip below.



I can't prove this camera was here on 9/11 until I get another image. But if they had one on the north wall and it is the same model that was on the Pentagon wall, I feel it is safe to assume that this one was there too.

The front part of the Annex has been demolished since 9/11. They may have had a camera on that corner too since it was lower and more forward. The blue monstrosity thing to the right is a new memorial sculpture they are building.

There were several other cameras at various locations on the Annex as well. I didn't want to take a chance of photographing them though. This one I told the first officer that detained me was of the sculpture (I have cropped it here - the original showed the whole sculpture as I made sure to only clip the edge with the camera) and he did not make me delete it. He had me delete two that I took from the Annex parking lot of the flight path but they were no big deal and I got better ones later.

This same model of camera was all over the military buildings in Pentagon City. There were two buildings we saw with military security and armed guards. Those two buildings had no less than 12 cameras between them. They were also the same model as on the Annex and the Pentagon wall. They were up high and would have had clear views.

I don't know if the video from them would have been confiscated or not. The footage might have just vanished since they were under military command. I can see the Citgo footage being taken because of "civilian" employees. But then again we saw the footage from the parking cameras at the Pentagon so I don't know.

The point I am 100% convinced of is that there were multiple views that would have at least caught an image of an aircraft. If these are included in the rewrite of the 85 (now 83 undisclosed) video FOIA request, we may see them or not. If we don't see them it is because they don't want us to or the footage is destroyed.

Doubletree Inn next.

Russell

We went to the Doubletree Inn since it is rumored that this is the location that employees actually watched the video prior to it being confiscated. The quotes about employees watching the film never names the Sheraton specifically. It has just been assumed to have been the case.

Dylan had heard suggestions it may have been the Doubltree Inn and I confirmed this to my satisfaction in a phone call prior to the trip with a security employee. Their video according to my phone call was confiscated on the 12th and the FBI "canvassed" the area through the 13th. So we went there to see for ourselves.

We actually got our foot inside the camera office and I scanned all of their monitors. There was no camera showing the Pentagon at all now. But the security guy we talked to indicated there may have been camera changes since 9/11. This would make total sense in light of the fact that cameras have been removed from the Sheraton and the Citgo. My guess is he was correct.

He was helpful and called the security supervisor who could not meet us at the time. Then while on the phone in my opinion he toned down and ushered us out of the office and shut the door on us. After he was off the phone he said the security manager would call us and took my number. NO CALL BACK!

Hmmmmm...........



If they did have a camera pointed at the Pentagon on 9/11 it would not have been able capture the "impact". But it may have been able to capture an aircraft.

Russell

VIDEO CONCLUSIONS:

There is or was ample video evidence to have documented an aircraft in the area. Period.

The FBI played a word game with the FOIA request by only selecting videos that showed the "impact" per the initial verbiage of the request.

Remember the two videos they did release were altered by changing format and reducing the size and quality. http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Article...n23May2006.html

We will either get surprised by video of an aircraft in the area if they release the other 83 videos or we will not. If we never see a video of one it is NOT because they don't or didn't have it. It is because there wasn't an aircraft or it was not what we are told.

But be absolutely CERTAIN video did exist at one time!

I made an attempt while in D.C. to have an in person meeting with the Penttbom investigation team. I was denied any return phone calls from the FBI in my attempts to contact agent Maguire and they would not give me her direct number. The public affairs officer would not return my calls either.

Russell

[wavetowel]

You're a true American hero. We will get those videos if you keep this up. The pic of the empty mounting bracket says it all.

Ben,

Thank you. Everybody here who cares about this is a hero in my eyes. This trip was a collaborative effort and was thanks to the Loose Change crew. IF we stick together and quit arguing we will get to the bottom of this.

Russell

Absolute stellar work Russell! Fantastic.

Fantastic work Russell and team!

If it's any use, I have a book called At Ground Zero: Young Reporters Who Were There Tell Their Stories, edited by Chris Bull and Sam Erman. It has an account by Sandra Jontz, a reporter for European and Pacific Stars and Stripes (the U.S. military's daily paper for overseas service-members), who was working in the Pentagon when it is hit on 9/11:

This is on p. 281 of the book.

Hope it's of use to you [thumbsup]

wow


Hat's off to you and to everyone reading this.. I don't think I have to say this, but save every single bit of this thread, every bit and on external hard drives, many many of them. Now !

Absolutely brilliant work Russell!

So many 'coincedences' :D

Russell,

Although I agree with the Sheraton, Navy Annex,, Pentagon and the Citgo camera sitch.

I think 400 Army Navy Drive and the Doubletree would NOT have caught the attack. Those highrise cameras would likely be pointed down toward the street.

Wow. Fantastic work.

Just out of curiosity, you mention a revised FOIA request to get around the "impact" loophole they've been using. How did you phrase your new request?

I don't know how these things work, but could you file two FOIA requests - one for videos that Dont show the plane, and one for videos that do? Would that catch everything?

Great work Russell.

It's looking more and more like a "fly-over" scenario every day.

Russell, you said:

A quick bit of investigation reveals the following.

The National Sheraton is owned (the building) by National Hospitality, and I couldn't find anything on this outfit as a public company, corporation or REIT. So I called the contact name and number given to me from the hotel folks today. National Hospitality is basically a privately held investment company, as I suspected. There is no public information on them that I could find. They are not a REIT (real estate investment trust). The contact wouldn't tell me if the firm was incorporated or a partnership. He got real suspicious real quick, which is typical of private investors. Not much else there. Just some fat cats who own some real estate among God knows what else.

The "operator" or the company who actually runs the building as a hotel is Interstate Hotels, Inc.. They get the franchise to use the Sheraton name and logos. They have to keep the hotel up to Sheraton's standards and pay Sheraton a fee for the name usage. They also pay National Hospitality rent for the building. Here's a link that shows the Sheraton National as one of the properties in their portfolio. This is the company that Paul Giovanni almost certainly works for.

http://www.ihrco.com/Portfolio/va.htm

The Sheraton employees gave me a local (D.C.) contact number for Interstate Hotels as well. It's a publicly traded company, and here's a blurb from its Investor Relations page.

I'm happy to give you the D.C. contact number via PM or skype. I'm also happy and willing to call Interstate Hotels or Paul Giovanni with a line of questionning, couched inside of an investment or investor context. Less suspicious that way. Giovanni doesn't know me from Adam, so he may take my call. Shouldn't be that difficult to speak with if requested in the right way.

I also did some searching for Paul Giovanni in connection with the hotel, the corp., 9/11 and other topics. Came up with zilch. I found that odd. Someone in his position should have come up something connected to the hotel or Interstate Hotels. There are several Paul Giovanni's in the VA area. Do you know if he has a middle name or initial, or maybe a first name or intial? We could really narrow it down on a Zaba search if we had that. You might want to keep the guys detailed info private, as we don't want him getting pinged by everyone who reads this.

Hope this helps.

Outstanding work on all the D.C. locations. Congrats to you and the LTW crew for all your hard work.

Wow, just incredible!!! The truth movement will always be indebted to you guys for all your hard work!! [thumbsup] Who knows, maybe one day we'll get to the truth. [rock] rockon guys!!!

Having read the above thread, I would like to raise a few associated points.

I have read a lot about the possibly/likelihood of a flyover – in other words, a decoy plane flew over whilst the real object impacted The Pentagon. Surely the decoy would then have had to clear the area making it fair game for all the other myriad of cameras in every direction of The Pentagon, i.e. not along the approach flight path in question. If this is an accurate assumption, have checks been made of all cameras in each possible direction to establish if all footage was removed from these too?

In addition, once the object had hit The Pentagon, all those people on the opposite ‘blind side’ of The Pentagon not influenced by any smoke and mirror tactics, would then be focused upon the area by the fire/smoke and sound of the explosion. A large jet (the decoy) could not then be missed attempting to flee the scene. Is it logical to assume that the conspirators could be certain that this would not be captured on film by either a security camera or tourist as it climbed steeply or hugged the ground? This to me is a big flaw in the flyover scenario. To get everyone for miles around intently scrutinizing an area and hope to get a huge noisy aerial vehicle safely away without being recorded is highly questionable. Am I simply missing something here?

Also, given the number of non-military personnel that all the buildings encompass, the security staff, senior hotel staff etc etc, is it conceivable that every single one would simply have been compromised to the point that they are terrified enough to never speak about it? The FBI/whoever could never possibly hope that every staff member has a family to potentially threaten 'if you talk', not every single person that knew something would be able to keep their mouth shut, this is just not feasible.
I find it very difficult to accept given the huge numbers of people that know ‘something’ that would potentially throw a spanner in the conspirators’ works (a good percentage being non-military/bureau) none have come forward as yet. Is it just me thinking this?

A link to the original article from the internet archives.


http://web.archive.org/web/20020614174400/...ring092101.html

Inside the Ring
by Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough

September 21,2001


Video of attack

The electronic news media have broadcast repeatedly the attack on the World Trade Center. They are perhaps the most dramatic news images since the explosion of the first atomic bomb over Hiroshima. Now word has reached us that federal investigators may have video footage of the deadly terrorist attack on the Pentagon. A security camera atop a hotel close to the Pentagon may have captured dramatic footage of the hijacked Boeing 757 airliner as it slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon.

Hotel employees sat watching the film in shock and horror several times before the FBI confiscated the video as part of its investigation. It may be the only available video of the attack. The Pentagon has told broadcast news reporters that its security cameras did not capture the crash. The attack occurred close to the Pentagon's heliport, an area that normally would be under 24-hour security surveillance, including video monitoring. Now word has reached us that federal investigators may have video footage of the deadly terrorist attack on the Pentagon.


Note: The archive link above to this article worked on August 29,2006. This morning the link included a statement to check back later.

Cary,

Great work!

I appreciate it.

My goal was to see if there was a Pentagon/military tie.

Some of that may fall under contracts. They just seem to be heavily under the influence of the Pentagon and Pentagon police. There were lots of dignitarys picked up by military staff at the Sheraton too. I assume this would be normal because of its proximity.

The not taking pictures of the Pentagon from the Sheraton rule is what made me curious.

Thanks,
Russell

TELE,

I agree with your assessment.

We had a thread on the flyover idea here: http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...?showtopic=6420

Russell

Oh I have answer for that my friend.

Remember first that planes take off in that direction ALL THE TIME. Right over and near the Pentagon.

Finally confirmed the presence of Annex cameras on 9/11. There was a shot of the Annex in a new batch of photos we received.

Damn.

That would have been one hell of a view!

This thread has pretty much confirmed that they would have MANY perfect views of the plane and impact.

This pretty much buries the impact hypothesis IMO!

[thumbsup]

Geiz,

Please PM me as I would like any and all photos you may have.

Russell

A quote and my reply to our new friend Geiz in the Welcome New Members Forum...

If you were in Arlington Cemetary.. .and saw it fly overhead.. you are in direct conflict with the official story as the airplane flew up to the pentagon well south of there...

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myp...altfpmpaint.jpg

Sure you dont want to change your story a bit?

;)

And how loud was it? Because a Marine pilot saw a 737 which may have had JT8D's which are ALOT louder than RB211's.

Can you tell the difference between a 737 vs. a 757?

Merc said - Oh I have answer for that my friend.

Remember first that planes take off in that direction ALL THE TIME. Right over and near the Pentagon.

However;

Whilst I fully appreciate the concept of what he says, you only have to look at the 'out of the ordinary nature' of any flyover type approach to acknowledge that this would not have been just another aircraft.

Simply look at 'when that f*cking plane flew over. Goddamn was it loud and was it fast.', in the post before last. It wasn't the fact that the explosion made people think back and say, 'Yes that plane WAS low', they thought it as it passed. BY Merc's assessment, every plane would then be 'loud and fast' and be ignored, but this would not have been the case - this one would by its very actions and timing - be different.

Any plane leaving the scene following a 'boom', would be noted, included simply because it was in the sky at the time. To simply say it would be dismissed as 'being just another plane because we get lots of those around here' is in my opinion, shortsighted. It would be like, immediately following a bank robbery with lots of shooting, you ignore a fast moving car because you get lots of those in that street anyway.

But to the main thrust of the thread being, that of cameras and what they might have recorded.

I am not in any way an expert on surveillance equipment, but I must question the value of any of the missing footage? By this I mean, if the quality of the images captured at The Pentagon are anything to go by, in other words, if the visual characteristics are representative of what you would expect across the board, only the cameras extremely close to the point of impact would show anything worthwhile.

The cameras that recorded the released footage weren't exactly that far away from the scene and it was broad daylight - yet we are left with nothing whatsoever definitive due to the poor quality. This of course may be deliberate and the result of making the images far noisier than they actually are. I do find it difficult to accept though, that The Pentagon would have such incredibly bad quality cameras installed, they appear bought from the local DIY mall for $10 a pop. I have a cheapish camera in my porch and although it is perfect at rendering detail of objects in the porch, if there is say a cat in the front garden, it is simply a 'shape' even in daylight.

Does anyone know if the cameras in question are industry standards, and someone can duplicate the approximate distance of the impact and compare the results regarding quality? It may have been suggested and even done via other studies/threads, apologies if this is duplication.

geiz's acount may be entirely accurate, from his perspective. if he was in arlington cemetary then that makes two people that have claimed to see a jet approaching from that dirction the other being the anonymous cameraman who shot the white plane footage found on the bbc.

this would also fit with the picture and accounts of a jet flying towards the white house. if my approximations are correct then linda brookharts photo places the white jet in a south westerly trajectory that could fly near enough to arlington cemetary to fit both geiz and the bbc footage. i never got an answer about the origin of dylans footage of the white plane. anyone know? btw, on the subject of linda brrokhart i got a reply from her...

"I will reply to you, but I have to find my map to give you the actual whereabouts and building id’s.



Linda L. Brookhart
Vice President
Taxpayers' Federation of Illinois
430 E. Vine Street, Suite A
Springfield, Illinois 62703"

im hoping shell give me a more definitive answer soon.

one of my closest friends is an installer of security and control system equipment for residential, commercial and governmental customers. upon loking at the cameras he gave a few opinions that i thought noteworty... first its almost impossible to tell what sort of camera and what sort of quality for sure resides inside the domed cameras like the ones on the pentagon. sometimes there is nothing in the dome and it is just a decoy. he was of the opinion that they were most likely NOT decoys, as decoys are a cost cutting measure and the pentagon seems to have access to unlimited wealth. he also noted that the cameras were most likely high quality, and of a high resolution and prolly even low light if not night vision. he also pointed out that the cameras prolly have a nearly 100% range of motion. this can be evidenced by the hanging design of the post its attached to. since these cameras are most likely solid state they would have survived a few moments to even a few seconds after the impact, depending on severity of the damage. so at the very least there should be video up to the exact instant of impact.

Geiz is now saying it didnt fly "overhead" meaning over his head.. he is saying it flew overhead as it hit the light poles...

ugggh.... i dont know what the hell he's trying to say...

Go look in the Welcome forum.

well he seems a lil overly adamant about how tragic it all was and has that air of 'you should feel ashamed for questions' about him. consequently i think hes bullshitting all in all.

And the hand was grasping a copy of the Koran too right?