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: 8
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander
There was not a Congressional audit going on. Good grief. And yes, he hit the one section that had the least amount of obstacles. I will post, so you can mention the 2.3 trillion.




posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Imagewerx

Few remains of unknown plane... great. Look at the hole in the Pentagon. Look at it. Do You really believe that 100 000kg plane with ~500 km/h hits that building and left only a small hole? Look at the holes in WTC.


That plane could destroy hole district..
edit on Sat, 03 Jan 2015 06:42:58 -0600America/Chicago584203America/Chicago1312015f by residentofearth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: residentofearth

undicisettembre.blogspot.com...


Here is a composite photo of the impact zone at the Pentagon. Look at it and then talk to us about a "small hole"



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

You are wrong on that. There was a congressional audit going on, and Office Of Naval Investigations was somehow assisting in that effort. ONI was conducting its own investigation into other matters involving suspected financial crimes and irregularities. Yama#a's Gold and Project Hammer were somehow involved.

In fact, Rumsfeld was deposed on 10 September in Congress. I saw his deposition on CSPAN. Maybe you did not?

He was a most reluctant witness to Ms. McKinney who was conducting the investigation by way of her House Committee. $2.3 Trillion was indeed the number.



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

CSpan? Maybe. Deposition before Congress? Nope.

Rumsfeld, gave a speech on September 10, 2001 entitled this "DOD Acquisition and Logistics Excellence Week Kickoff—Bureaucracy to Battlefield "

During his speech he said this...

"According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions"

People like you, have taken that quote and blown it into a huge conspiracy saying that Rumsfeld stole the money and then arranged to blow up the Pentagon the next day to hide the crime. There is one problem, its bull#. Here is the FULL paragraph.

"The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible."

In other words, Rumsfeld, was talking about an OLD problem at the Pentagon.

Here is the link to his speech that day....and it was not a "deposition" in front of Congress. Hell, the Congress does not have the Constitutional authority to "depose" a Cabinet official.

www.defense.gov...

You did not see his "deposition" on CSpan.




edit on 3-1-2015 by cardinalfan0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Your desperation is showing. I did indeed see his deposition on CSPAN. It was comical really. He is a skilled witness and in this case a most reluctant witness, and he completely frustrated the investigation. He and a lady that was his assistant.



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

It isn't desperation, its reality. You should try it. Better yet, you should have NO problems finding records of this investigation. So, post them.



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander



$2.3 Trillion was indeed the number.

Look you can't destroy all evidence of the 2.3 trillion by blowing up the Pentagon.
Contractors have copies of invoices and dates paid.
Banks have copies and printouts of checks paid.

Conspiracy believers think if you burn down your house with your records and check book inside, your financial record goes up in smoke.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: samkent

Apparently there was much more to it than the $2.3 trillion. That was being investigated by a House committee, but ONI was onto other items. Yama#a's Gold, Operation Hammer and other suspicious activities.

Did you know that for the first time ever in the history of the SEC, rule 12(k) was invoked, and on 12 September about $240 billion of covert government securities were cleared without the normal regulatory controls regarding identification of ownership?

Eastman, Flocco, Durham and Schwarz investigated all that.

www.doeda.com...



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   


Still Think There should be Pentagon Video ?




Yes I do, out of 80+ cameras at or on the Pentagon and CCTV at local businesses. All Joe public got to see was 5 frames, sounds legit to me.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: hillbilly4rent

Your 'facts' are inaccurate. But I do have a question, why would a business invest in cameras to watch someone else's property?



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

A property holding company was investigating the Pentagon? Okay.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596
Who said they invested them to watch someone else's property. They invested them to watch thier own property ie parking lots, gas pumps or any other area that needed to have surveillance. A camera lens doesn't stop at the curb. So anything that is in the line of sight or field of view of the camera will get recorded.

OK now answer a question for me. Why did the FBI confiscate private security camera footage from private business around the area of the Pentagon and not return or make any other footage available other than the 5 frames?



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: hillbilly4rent

All the video from the surrounding area cameras has been public domain for years now. No surrounding business had a camera that gave the required view of the Pentagon. The 80+ number does not refer to Pentagon cameras, it refers to the number of videos that the FBI has from that day, encompassing NYC, Shanksville and the Arlington area.


edit on 8-1-2015 by cardinalfan0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: residentofearth
a reply to: Imagewerx

Few remains of unknown plane... great. Look at the hole in the Pentagon. Look at it. Do You really believe that 100 000kg plane with ~500 km/h hits that building and left only a small hole? Look at the holes in WTC.


That plane could destroy hole district..


Lots of remains of a plane that can and have been identified as being from an American Airlines Boeing 757.Both engines and all the undercarriage legs were recovered and easily identifiable as such.The rest of it (the hollow aluminium tube part and it's human occupants) was torn to shreds after it hit a very solid brick,concrete and steel framed building at 500 MPH.
Oh and a SMALL hole,it was over 100 feet across? In fact it was so close to the right shape and size,it was almost as if a Boeing 757 had been forced through it.Oh wait a minute,might this be just a bit too obvious?



The world trade centre was a completely different type of building,using the cheapest possible building materials and methods.Finally unless a 757 crashed into a district where everything is made from wood,there is no way one could ever take out a whole district.
edit on 8-1-2015 by Imagewerx because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Salander

A property holding company was investigating the Pentagon? Okay.



That is your statement sir, not mine.



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander


That was the site you linked to. So, that is you.
edit on 18-1-2015 by cardinalfan0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I'll throw in my usual comment

Every time you go through ANY intersection in ANY town
with over 1000 people, there are at least 4 live action clear
cameras recording you going through. just for little ol you.
now..
The Pentagon can't come up with a single image of a PASSENGER JET ?
None from any camera within view of the crash?
nope...oh wait we do have this one rickety 1987 Radio Shack time lapse shot that shows no plane.
will that work ?

This isn't directed to the OP but I wish people would stop
defending these terrible terrible people, just because it's unthinkable to them.
It's done and it has happened.

Until we right this wrong;
This country will always be ill.

All this mess to line some pockets with oil lithium and reconstruction contracts.
Something has to be destroyed before KBR can do a rebuild so shoddy,
you can be electrocuted while taking a shower.



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak
I'll throw in my usual comment

Every time you go through ANY intersection in ANY town
with over 1000 people, there are at least 4 live action clear
cameras recording you going through. just for little ol you.
now..






I live in a metro area with around 500,000 others. Very few intersections have cameras. Your point is invalid.....especially concerning the Pentagon. Public sector almost always has better security systems.



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak



Every time you go through ANY intersection in ANY town
with over 1000 people, there are at least 4 live action clear
cameras recording you going through. just for little ol you.
now..

According to you theory every crime in America is now caught on camera.
Not.
Lets not forget that back in 2001 most people still used film cameras.
Some rich cars had VCRs inside.
Just look at some of the cell phones from 2001.
Cell Phone History




top topics



 
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join