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: 20
13
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

Why not though? There were no defenses around the Pentagon to stop the plane. The Alert force around the country had been gutted to levels not seen ever. Military radar systems used FAA radar around the country for most of their data.

Why shouldn't it have happened?




posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

They did, to both. There was a fire department on site, and they did save lives. So did the people working in the building that pulled people out, and went back in to pull more out.

They just didn't have a firefighting force the size that you think they should have.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iwinder
It should not have been possible at all.


Why not? Just how do you think it could have been stopped?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




There were no defenses around the Pentagon to stop the plane. The Alert force around the country had been gutted to levels not seen ever. Military radar systems used FAA radar around the country for most of their data.


And why did this happen? I am asking about your above quote. After 911 the money sure was there then eh? Grease my palm and you shall have all the tanks and jets you need sir.

It's all there hiding in plane site.....Pun intended.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

And prior to 9/11, while there had been spending cuts, they were still spending more than every other country out there. They had the F-22 under development and in testing, the F-35 was about to be awarded, and various other major projects.

As for the Pentagon defenses, and the radar, it was always like that. The most likely weapon to target the Pentagon was an ICBM directed at Washington DC. And those are damn hard to stop, even today. Any aircraft were thought to be outside bombers, having to fight their way through layers of aircraft defenses.

The radar only makes sense. The FAA had to put in a large network for ATC systems, so why would the military pay for a completely separate system of radars, to cover the same area, when they could piggyback on the FAA ATC radars?
edit on 4/1/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete

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."


What i still would like to know is why was that specific post deleted?



edit on 1-4-2015 by everyone because: typo



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: everyone

Because I changed my mind about something I said. I have never said anything about working at the Pentagon and I never have.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: everyone

Because I changed my mind about something I said. I have never said anything about working at the Pentagon and I never have.


Then Peacefullpete is right, it is very convenient.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: everyone

And he's wrong. I have NEVER said that I worked at the Pentagon. Not once. I've been discussing 9/11 on here for years, and have never once said I worked at the Pentagon. Just because he didn't understand that, doesn't make anything "very convenient".



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 07:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Iwinder
It should not have been possible at all.


Why not? Just how do you think it could have been stopped?

If you think about it that Germanwings pilot could ave taken out the new WTC if he had the Atlantic crossing.
What would have stopped him?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Iwinder
It should not have been possible at all.


Why not? Just how do you think it could have been stopped?

If you think about it that Germanwings pilot could ave taken out the new WTC if he had the Atlantic crossing.
What would have stopped him?


The invisible pop up air defences around every building in the USA?



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: everyone

And he's wrong. I have NEVER said that I worked at the Pentagon. Not once. I've been discussing 9/11 on here for years, and have never once said I worked at the Pentagon. Just because he didn't understand that, doesn't make anything "very convenient".


I have been following the 911 threads since I joined and never once has Zaph ever mention being employed or working for the Pentagon......Never.
Put it to bed I say and do some research before you start accusing posters of things they did or did not state.
You are derailing this thread just as I am posting this.
Let it go and do some research or at least debate something please.
Regards, Iwinder
edit on 2-4-2015 by Iwinder because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
13
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join