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.

 

The strangest Coincidence regarding the Pentagon attack on 9/11

page: 63
293
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2017 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: MrBig2430

Yes it's all elementary physics and the puzzling part is why do some people have such a difficult time understanding the principles involved.

If the kinetic energy of the projectile applied over the area of contact exceeds the UTS of the stationary target then it's going to penetrate regardless of the actual materials involved.




posted on May, 7 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

Come on....

Should know better than to quote physics and logic to deluded conspiracy types

After all they know that an aluminum airplane cant penetrate a masonry wall - no matter how many
pictures of hole in Empire State building left the B25 or the Pentagon after American 77 hit it

According to them plane should have crumpled up like a piece of tinfoil.....



posted on May, 7 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

According to some if there is no video evidence of a B25 hitting the empire state building, it did not happen.



posted on May, 7 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


According to some if there is no video evidence of a B25 hitting the empire state building, it did not happen.


That is untrue.

Comparing an incident that happened many decades ago to when technology of camera surveillance that did not exist, to the Pentagon attacks, when camera surveillance was everywhere, and at many business surrounding the Pentagon.

Very Jevanal if you ask me, for one to make such a comment and a comparison of two completely different events that happened many decades apart.




edit on 7-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2017 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958


Very Jevanal if you ask me, for one to make such a comment and a comparison of two completely different events that happened many decades apart.
Nobody asked you hahaa.

Maguire declaration...
Link

Now ever going to show some evidence that there is any reason to believe that any other video exists except what has been released?

Surely someone must have went around to the businesses in the area and looked to see if they had cameras with line of sight that might have captured the impact?



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 03:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Yet in the Empire crash one engine made it through and out the other side even though speed was slower and the building wasn't open plane. It also caused a fire were it landed similar to events in the towers.It also caused s lift to drop as well does that sound familiar. Actual facts not claims like steel resistance to temperature but we won't go there eh



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: firerescue

According to some if there is no video evidence of a B25 hitting the empire state building, it did not happen.


That is a grossly inaccurate statement. So grand and inaccurate, it suggests desperation on the part of the poster, a sort of "grasping at straws".



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Nothing JUVENILE about it. It is quite valid since you continue to cling to your faulty beliefs about the cameras around the Pentagon.



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander


Its like this. Certain posters continue to cling to the idea that the exterior of the Pentagon was covered by state of the art video cameras and that every business around the Pentagon had state of the art video cameras that they pointed at the Pentagon.....they cling to that idea no matter how many times they are shown that it was not the case. And because they have that belief, they refuse to accept the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon..because there is no video of it. ( its called, he is using the "logic" used by so many of the "truth" movement to show how absurd they are)



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: firerescue

According to some if there is no video evidence of a B25 hitting the empire state building, it did not happen.


That is a grossly inaccurate statement. So grand and inaccurate, it suggests desperation on the part of the poster, a sort of "grasping at straws".


So what evidence WOULD you accept for a B25 hitting the Empire State?



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596


Nothing JUVENILE about it. It is quite valid since you continue to cling to your faulty beliefs about the cameras around the Pentagon.


Are you suggesting there were no cameras around the Pentagon? Let's see this valid evidence there were no camera on, or around the Pentagon?



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958


Was there not a link to the individuals that worked on and set up security cameras at the pentagon? They gave an account of what cameras were working and why on 9/11 at the pentagon. Did you provide a rebuttal other than your ambiguous "they were not under oath."?

Or a rebuttal to the freedom of information requests that worked through the court system to release the flight 77 footage.

Or a rebuttal, or an account, of the legal work and freedom of information requests filed by groups like AE 9/11 Truth?



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

No, I said you cling to your faulty beliefs about the cameras, primarily your beliefs that the Pentagon had a high tech system covering every inch of the exterior and that all the businesses in the area bought similarly high tech systems to point, not at their OWN property, but at the Pentagon.

But, I do thank you for once again illustrating the poor comprehension shown by many members of the "truth" movement....

My statement was:

"Nothing JUVENILE about it. It is quite valid since you continue to cling to your faulty beliefs about the cameras around the Pentagon."

Your statement which involves, once again, hopping on a Harley and barreling up a ramp...and hitting the face of the opposing ramp rather than the landing area....

"Are you suggesting there were no cameras around the Pentagon? Let's see this valid evidence there were no camera on, or around the Pentagon?"

Nowhere did I say there were not any cameras around the Pentagon. I said that you cling to faulty beliefs about the cameras that are there.



posted on May, 8 2017 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: cardinalfan0596


Nothing JUVENILE about it. It is quite valid since you continue to cling to your faulty beliefs about the cameras around the Pentagon.


Are you suggesting there were no cameras around the Pentagon? Let's see this valid evidence there were no camera on, or around the Pentagon?


Comments on this?

Pretty sure You've seen it before, maybe it's just slipped your mind, like a lot of other evidence that you keep asking for, repeatedly, over and over, ad naseum, without supplying any evidence of your own.

I don't know it thats Juvenile or not, but it is lazy.

Link



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Salander


Its like this. Certain posters continue to cling to the idea that the exterior of the Pentagon was covered by state of the art video cameras and that every business around the Pentagon had state of the art video cameras that they pointed at the Pentagon.....they cling to that idea no matter how many times they are shown that it was not the case. And because they have that belief, they refuse to accept the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon..because there is no video of it. ( its called, he is using the "logic" used by so many of the "truth" movement to show how absurd they are)



So you want me to believe that the parking lot video was the best video system there was at HQ DoD? Sorry Charlie, no can do. LMAO I might have been born at night, but it wasn't last night.

Because the feds seized numerous surveillance videos from nearby civilians clearly demonstrates the feds were cognizant of the video record, and desired to have it kept away from public view. For years. It was an inside job, surely, and that's why there was never anything but a parking lot video provided by the government. If they have nothing to hide and such a solid story, why are they hiding everything?



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: mrthumpy

It's history. I accept it as part of the historical record of the times I live in, it happened.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Example two of someone clinging to faulty beliefs about the cameras around the Pentagon. The FBI gathered the videos from the 29 working cameras in the area from in/around the Pentagon in the hopes that one or more of them might have shown in more detail what happened.

Then, there is your faulty belief that the government only provided the parking lot video...when every other video was released long ago



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Then there's the faulty beliefs of supporting the OS narratives.

There's also the faulty beliefs that my government cannot commit a crime, because my government is not smart enough.

Then there is the faulty beliefs there were no cameras surrounding the Pentagon, or from other business who had cameras aimed towards the Pentagon.

Then there is the issue of "controlling" the OS narratives by very few.

Then there the faulty beliefs that I am smarter than all of you.

edit on 10-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   
"Or from other businesses who had cameras aimed towards the Pentagon"

Another example of a faulty belief. Businesses do not invest in security cameras just to point them at someone else's property. They point them at THEIR property.

And, no, its not a faulty belief that I am smarter than you. Its reality. And I am quite humble about it too.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 01:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy

It's history. I accept it as part of the historical record of the times I live in, it happened.


That's hilarious. Thanks!



new topics

top topics



 
293
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join