It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Still Think There should be Pentagon Video ?

page: 13
13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder
Take a quick trip over the Kremlin in a jet without announcing it and see just how far you get:-)


The Pentagon is about a mile from the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, so jets fly near the Pentagon all the time.




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Iwinder
Take a quick trip over the Kremlin in a jet without announcing it and see just how far you get:-)


The Pentagon is about a mile from the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, so jets fly near the Pentagon all the time.


And yet they don't supposedly monitor the sky with cameras, very interesting I think heads should roll.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder
Do you actually have proof that All security cameras that day were looking down?


Why would the be looking at the sky? To see the planes take off and fly over from the Ronald Reagan airport?


As others have mentioned where is the hotel and gas station footage?


It has been posted here many times before, do a search.


I am not trying to be antagonistic in my posts even if it seems so.


All the questions you ask have been answered here many many times before, do a search.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

Any air threat was thought to have to come from the outside and get past the air defense units. Or would be an ICBM. There was no reason to have cameras looking at the skies, so they didn't.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder
And yet they don't supposedly monitor the sky with cameras, very interesting I think heads should roll.


So what if they did? "There is a plane, and another one, and yet another one, and yet another one, and another one, and yet another one, and yet another one etc. etc.

What would be the point at watching planes in the sky?



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce




So what if they did? "There is a plane, and another one, and yet another one, and yet another one, and another one, and yet another one, and yet another one etc. etc. What would be the point at watching planes in the sky?

Here is the point, you get Lax in your guard duty something bad is going to happen or could happen. We live within 8 miles of one of the worlds largest Petrochemical sites at this time on the globe. I have learned to never ever be casual when you see smoke or hear an alarm. The danger is there and we monitor it to the nines. If you don't your chances of survival are not good if poop hits the fan.
Reminds me of stories from Vietnam, "yeah they are just planting rice ignore them" for over a year straight then one day out come the AK'S and a whole platoon is wiped out because they never paid attention.

Sorry but I cannot fathom a building housing the worlds military brains all in one place not even considering to look up and check the dangers.

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder
Sorry but I cannot fathom a building housing the worlds military brains all in one place not even considering to look up and check the dangers.


So they looked up and saw aircraft - then what would they do? It was near the flight path of a major airport, there would be a lot of aircraft there all the time....



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

Even if they saw it, from the time they saw it, and recognized it was heading for the building it would have been far too late to do anything.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete


Hi,

Honestly I found your post and links confusing as due to a language barrier, I thought. English seems your second language and I didn't really understand what your post and link was about. Sorry.

When I have more time I will look at it again, but can you briefly summarize your post and links?



That's very, very funny! Very, very interesting, too! You don't mind me asking, are you Canadian? Only a Canadian would come up with an excuse/legend like that, Cpl.! ...3 hours later!

Your post reads like a PO/PMO business card! Oh well...!



c u in SA
-dan
edit on Tue Mar 24 2015 by Jbird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder
a reply to: Zaphod58



No, but they're not going to spend a bunch of money on security cameras that can go to stealth fighters.


Here is something to see, gun camera footage from 1944/45

That above video is said to be over Germany





This one is of the South Pacific during the same time.

Interesting how good the quality was for 70 years ago but yet the Pentagon can't or won't produce anything this clear.

I may be a tad off topic but it makes my point clear as others have asked why no clear video? They could do it 70 years ago over seas and yet not at the center of the USA and the heartbeat of your Nation.

Regards, Iwinder




That is cool footage from the mid-40's but you have to remember:

In 2001, the US government didn't care about cameras. Sure they cared in the mid-40's but not in 2001, when they were happy with nonfunctional cameras.

Zaphod already explained it. Did you know he worked at the Pentagon in '01 during the attacks? He reports that the cameras didn't work in 2001, when they hired him to operate their broken cameras.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Uhm, where did I say that I worked there? I never said that.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Iwinder
Do you actually have proof that All security cameras that day were looking down?


Why would the be looking at the sky? To see the planes take off and fly over from the Ronald Reagan airport?


Well... Yeah. To record flights and make sure there were no imminent security threats from the planes. lol



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: peacefulpete

Uhm, where did I say that I worked there? I never said that.


Um didn't you just say that you worked there for a security company watching 4 checkpoints with broken cameras?



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

No. I've never said I worked there.I said that I was working at an airport, under government supervision maintaining their systems, and there were four checkpoints with broken cameras. I have never once said I worked at the Pentagon.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: danleonida

originally posted by: peacefulpete


Hi,

Honestly I found your post and links confusing as due to a language barrier, I thought. English seems your second language and I didn't really understand what your post and link was about. Sorry.

When I have more time I will look at it again, but can you briefly summarize your post and links?



That's very, very funny! Very, very interesting, too! You don't mind me asking, are you Canadian? Only a Canadian would come up with an excuse/legend like that, Cpl.! ...3 hours later!

Your post reads like a PO/PMO business card! Oh well...!

mybroadband.co.za...

c u in SA
-dan


I'm American and I still don't know what your posts mean. I have no excuse / legend. I don't understand your posts. "Cpl.! ...3 hours later!" I don't know what that means. My "post reads like a PO/PMO business card!" I don't know what you're saying.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 10:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: peacefulpete

No. I've never said I worked there.I said that I was working at an airport, under government supervision maintaining their systems, and there were four checkpoints with broken cameras. I have never once said I worked at the Pentagon.


It's funny. I went to page 9 to quote your post about working there... and your post is deleted. Well that was convenient.

However your next post is still there, which sounds like you're talking about working there on 9-11.

"The company I worked for on 9/11 was responsible for four checkpoints. Three of those had two lanes, with four cameras to a lane. Those cameras were over ten years old. Not one of them showed an accurate time stamp if it showed on at all. Almost half didn't even work."



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Salander

We had times when checkpoints were unmanned, and crews would try to slip through. Some airports didn't require crews to be screened. Ours did, but if it was a crew member we generally gave them a lot of slack.


From page 10.

I never once said anything about working at the Pentagon. We were talking about flight crews at the airport and cameras, and the timestamp issue from that day.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Salander

We had times when checkpoints were unmanned, and crews would try to slip through. Some airports didn't require crews to be screened. Ours did, but if it was a crew member we generally gave them a lot of slack.


From page 10.

I never once said anything about working at the Pentagon. We were talking about flight crews at the airport and cameras, and the timestamp issue from that day.


OK I might have misunderstood you.

WHERE did you work on 9-11 that you referred to as monitoring checkpoints???



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

I was working at an airport, responsible for checkpoints and FAA equipment among other things.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 07:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

Matias Rust ring any bells? You know, the German who landed a plane at the Kremlin?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join