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: 14
13
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

And, if a plane DID turn off its approach into Reagan, you would not even have enough time for your brain to comprehend it before the plane hit the building. So, again, WHY would you waste the money?




posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: peacefulpete

And, if a plane DID turn off its approach into Reagan, you would not even have enough time for your brain to comprehend it before the plane hit the building. So, again, WHY would you waste the money?


Just think, if they did have a camera watching the sky and a guard watching the screen, conspiracy theorists would claim the government knew a attack was going to come from a airliner....



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: peacefulpete

And, if a plane DID turn off its approach into Reagan, you would not even have enough time for your brain to comprehend it before the plane hit the building. So, again, WHY would you waste the money?



Man it's just purely against common sense, to argue that it's better to NOT film as much surveillance as possible. These are supposed to be high-security locations. The more surveillance, the better.

And we're talking about a supposed plane attack here. Which validates that they should have been filming planes. Even if they couldn't prevent an attack that way, they could maybe FILM an attack for evidence of what exactly happened!



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete
Even if they couldn't prevent an attack that way, they could maybe FILM an attack for evidence of what exactly happened!


"So here is a film of a plane attacking us."
" Wow, we never knew what happened until we saw that video"

As opposed to a plane attacking, eyewitnesses seeing the plane attack, all the physical evidence of the plane after it attacked and all the DNA etc evidence to show who died, and what plane it was.... but remember, according to some people "unless there is a video it did not happen"!



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: superman2012




You would think that security would want cameras covering every inch of that place!


Or the exact opposite. Likely whatever the average person thinks about security is wrong. What seems like common sense security to a taxi driver for instance has nothing to do with the reality of what should be done. It is likely that cameras would be pointed at the entrances to the building. Anyone who thinks a plane didn't crash into the Pentagon will believe anything. Reality hardly matters to them.

V



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete




And we're talking about a supposed plane attack here. Which validates that they should have been filming planes


Huh? what would filming the sky help with exactly? Let's think clearly and logically about that shall we? Pray tell, how would filming the sky help prevent a plane attack or be useful in any way? Please... why do people who have no job in security say things like this are "common sense." Common sense to who? To people who nothing about security? Well why would they know anything useful? Why does your opinion matter, and why do you think your opinion is "common"?

V



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer


Too bad footage from all the security camera's in the area will never see the light of day after getting confiscated by the feds. All we have is this.




Over and out! -dan
edit on Tue Mar 24 2015 by Jbird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: danleonida I am going to say the same thing I said the last time you posted this. Your horribly faked video shows THE WRONG SIDE OF THE PENTAGON GETTING HIT.



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Since I posted the BLACKMARKETEER QUOTE with the video in it, I searched the Internet and found it in many, many places. It was leaked in Dec 2012 by someone. Frankly, I DON'T care!

What I do care about is the Pentagon's indifference to its existence and the lack of their 'official version' of it. I saw a documentary that claimed that a video in it was 'officially released by the Pentagon'. That was even funnier than the one above and nowhere to be found on the Internet. Where the hell is it? I could describe but there no doubt in my mind that anyone on this forum would even try to assist to find it!

Why aren't they releasing ON THE INTERNET (defense.gov) their version of a video? Any video! BECAUSE THERE IS NONE!!!

I don't buy the gibberish about posters not being 'professionals'!

I'm a fifteen-year veteran of the intelligence field and what I have to say about it ain't flattering! Believe you me!

-dan



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: danleonida. So you dont care that the video is a horrible fake. Now I WOULD believe you were a 15 year intelligence agency employee



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: danleonida
Frankly, I DON'T care!
What I do care about is the Pentagon's indifference to its existence and the lack of their 'official version' of it.


Why should there be a official version of a faked video? You seem confused.


I saw a documentary that claimed that a video in it was 'officially released by the Pentagon'.


What was the name of the documentary?


nowhere to be found on the Internet. Where the hell is it? I could describe but there no doubt in my mind that anyone on this forum would even try to assist to find it!


So you claim to have seen a video, and want us to tell you where it is, but you do not describe it, so we have no clue at all what you are on about


Why aren't they releasing ON THE INTERNET (defense.gov) their version of a video? Any video!


lmgtfy.com...



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: danleonida. So you dont care that the video is a horrible fake. Now I WOULD believe you were a 15 year intelligence agency employee


Pesky wabbit reporting for duty! 15 year veteran pesky wabbit, that is!!!! Got it Pontiac??!! ;o))

If the Pentagon WERE hit by a missile and YOU were The Pentagon, what would you do??!!

That's what I would do in similar circumstances:

1. Confiscate ALL evidence of the attack.

2. Fabricate and dessiminate easy to discredit evidence of a missile attack.

3. At the appropiate time discredit MY OWN evidence and HOPE to sell to the public the absence of evidence as being evidence of absence! Q.E.D.

Only a US assette would require such a simple scheme to be SPOON-FED to him!

THE VERY FACT THAT FAKE PENTAGON MISSILE ATTACKS ARE SO WIDELY AVAILABLE AND AND SO OBVIOUSLY FAKE, PROVES TO ME THAT THE MISSILE VERSION IS TRUE!

About the video on this forum page...

There are no cameras these days as bad as the one which took the gif (not video). The out-of-focus apparence makes one think it was deliberate for the purpose of hiding the video doctoring. Therefore ALL Pentagon missile attack must be doctored in the plebean's mind. How convenient.


-dan


edit on 23-3-2015 by danleonida because: add paragraph

edit on 23-3-2015 by danleonida because: fix

edit on 23-3-2015 by danleonida because: (no reason given)

edit on Tue Mar 24 2015 by Jbird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: peacefulpete

Even if they couldn't prevent an attack that way, they could maybe FILM an attack for evidence of what exactly happened!




"So here is a film of a plane attacking us."

" Wow, we never knew what happened until we saw that video"



As opposed to a plane attacking, eyewitnesses seeing the plane attack, all the physical evidence of the plane after it attacked and all the DNA etc evidence to show who died, and what plane it was.... but remember, according to some people "unless there is a video it did not happen"!


"IF" a plane crash produced heat high enough to "vaporize" the titanium as well as the aluminium structure, how is there enough human tissue of the passengers left to get accurate DNA samples.
Even with the samples, which family members do they use to confirm a positive ID?
If you don't know who has hijacked the plane where do you find their family for comparisons?



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

isnt there video what shows cameras all along the side of the pentagon that got hit?
they did have cameras they just decided not to release it, as i understand they were forced to release the footage that was released through a foi request but notice the date stamp 10th september and the words "impact" and "plane" also on the footage, if they did only have those cameras would the pentagon really have the wrong date stamp? if so can someone not press charges of negligence for the fact that the pentagon couldnt be bothered to have the correct date stamp also if this is the date stamp of 10th september why dosent someone ask for the video for the day after? "hide in plain sight" afterall



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: anonymous1legion

Here's an image showing those cameras:




posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: anonymous1legion

Here's an image showing those cameras:



thank you, so is this thread obsolete as we KNOW there were cameras?



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
so could we ask the pentagon for an foi request and link their video of "10th september" and request the video from the day after? or at least the video which is dated the 11th?



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: teamcommander

There is very little titanium in an aircraft engine. The fan blades and portions of the combustion chamber. The fan blades are extremely fragile because of how thin they are. I've had aircraft sitting on the ramp with a fan blade change because a chunk of ice went through it.

The combustion chamber was recovered.
edit on 3/23/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

you seem to have lived up to your thread killing reputation lol



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
The only one view that I would be interested in is the one the FBI confiscated from the gas station across the street from the point of impact. But of course you only get a look at that one being the Smoking Man. The Truth is Out There!



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join