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.

 

Pentagon Anti Aircraft and 911 truth video

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Right this video here is approx 90 minutes long but it is definitely worth watching a awful lot of eye opening things are mentioned in this. I was kinda on the fence with 911 until i saw this it kinda tells the story without cutting any corners.

Also just after about 20 mins into the vid it is confirmed that the pentagon had a array of anti aircraft batteries. These would recognise the identity of a USAF aircraft and do nothing however anything else would be shot at unless clearance was given by pentagon officials. So why no anti aircraft on 9/11?

This video also gives a lot of information regarding every little aspect of 9/11 its definitely worth watching

video.google.com...

[edit on 13-9-2006 by thesaint]




posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Thanks.

I have always said that the Pentagon was not "UNDEFENDED" as many here claim as that would be flat out retarded... The entire DoD should have been CANNED if they left our military HQ undefended.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Tell me about it. After serving in the UK Military i know for a fact that even some of the most seemingly mundane buildings in our country are defended and i could only imagine the US with its military might would be doing better than us



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   
I have seen many photos of the Pentagon rooftops, and never noticed any AA batteries.

If you go to google maps right now, you can zoom in on the Pentagon very closely. So closely you can see debris on the roof over the impact site. Yet, I see no AA guns anywhere.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   
did they have aa guns or people with portable/shoulder missiles launchers? i'm sure i've seen footage on uk tv of military personel on top of the whitehouse with shoulder launchers so would the pentagon be the same?



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Now we're just making stuff up.
I've never been inside the Pentagon, but I've been around it several times, pre-9/11. Have you?

I was there in 1999 and 2000, visiting an uncle of mine who lives in D.C. He took me around, showed me the Capitol, spent a lot of time checking stuff out. No AA systems, no AM systems. If they were anywhere, they were way outta sight. And AA guns aren't small, you can't hide 'em under a bush. AM systems are huge.

But let's roll with this, assume they were there (although there's no proof of this). What good do you think an AA gun would have done against an aircraft moving at 400+ mph? Damaged the plane irrepairably, killed everyone inside, yeah. But it's still a big hunk o'metal hurtling down at 400+ mph. Woulda made no difference.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Astygia are you saying then that you do not believe that the "nerve centre" of your countries armed-forces had any sort of protection from threats? I realise that you could also say that their was no direct threat at that time and who would have thought that they would fly an airliner into the building...but just because of the fact that building is so important to America they wouldnt take the risk of not having some kind-of defense on permanently.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astygia
Now we're just making stuff up.
I've never been inside the Pentagon, but I've been around it several times, pre-9/11. Have you?

I was there in 1999 and 2000, visiting an uncle of mine who lives in D.C. He took me around, showed me the Capitol, spent a lot of time checking stuff out. No AA systems, no AM systems. If they were anywhere, they were way outta sight. And AA guns aren't small, you can't hide 'em under a bush. AM systems are huge.

But let's roll with this, assume they were there (although there's no proof of this). What good do you think an AA gun would have done against an aircraft moving at 400+ mph? Damaged the plane irrepairably, killed everyone inside, yeah. But it's still a big hunk o'metal hurtling down at 400+ mph. Woulda made no difference.


I used to work in the Pentagon basement in 1987 for about 8 months. I do not recall any kind of AA guns or similar.

I have seen post-911 rooftop photos of the burning Pentagon and saw no guns.

Shoulder fired weapons would be useless in this kind of attack where a jet airliner appearrs suddenly from a random direction and is already within a few yards of the bldg before anyone can react, though they might be useful against a small Cessna.

I would be shocked to learn that the Pentagon routinely had defensive guns of any kind. But I again invite others to go to google maps right now and click the sattelite photos on the Pentagon and find such guns.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astygia
If they were anywhere, they were way outta sight. And AA guns aren't small, you can't hide 'em under a bush. AM systems are huge.


A small semi trailer or "box" such as the one on top of the white house after 9/11 is all you need.

Just because you did not see it certainly doe snot mean they do not exist... that is silly logic.

It wouls not be "AA Guns"... something like a PAC-3 is far more likely and fits on the back of a truck.


Originally posted by Astygia
But let's roll with this, assume they were there (although there's no proof of this). What good do you think an AA gun would have done against an aircraft moving at 400+ mph? Damaged the plane irrepairably, killed everyone inside, yeah. But it's still a big hunk o'metal hurtling down at 400+ mph. Woulda made no difference.


Again, AA guns would not have been use and a PAC-3 missile would have blown it into many pieces far less deadly than the whole mass slamming into the building.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lomillialor
I used to work in the Pentagon basement in 1987 for about 8 months. I do not recall any kind of AA guns or similar.


It would not be guns most likely a PAC-3 system in a "box" or tractor trailer.


Originally posted by Astygia
I have seen post-911 rooftop photos of the burning Pentagon and saw no guns.


Would not need to be on the roof.


Originally posted by Astygia
Shoulder fired weapons would be useless in this kind of attack where a jet airliner appearrs suddenly from a random direction and is already within a few yards of the bldg before anyone can react, though they might be useful against a small Cessna.


You are making an assumption... It is very possible that a shoulder fired AA missile would explode the fuel tanks in the wings when it detonated an engine.


Originally posted by Astygia
I would be shocked to learn that the Pentagon routinely had defensive guns of any kind. But I again invite others to go to google maps right now and click the sattelite photos on the Pentagon and find such guns.


This is America, they would be "hidden" we do not put "guns" out in the open.

Even after 9/11 when the White Hous had AA missiles on it, they were "in a box". and you would not have known what they were had we not been told.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

A small semi trailer or "box" such as the one on top of the white house after 9/11 is all you need.


Excuse me, but what semi trailer are you talking about?



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Excuse me, but what semi trailer are you talking about?


A simple example of how you can "camoflauge" an AA system that is in a public civilian area.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by deltaboy
Excuse me, but what semi trailer are you talking about?


A simple example of how you can "camoflauge" an AA system that is in a public civilian area.


Got a pic to show what this trailer you speak of on the top of the White House?



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Got a pic to show what this trailer you speak of on the top of the White House?


Read. I did not say there was a TRAILER on the white House, there was a "box" and YES I will find you a picture...



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:32 AM
link   
How the hell would anyone expect to see them they are not there for public display!!!!!!!!

In the UK Military we used to use the rapier system which has a electro optic sight system. There is no need for 2 men sat in a gun seat as with old aa guns in WW11. The weapon was programmed to lock on to aircraft itself and would traverse and follow. I know because once in the control room in the Falklands we were pissing about with the control panel moving this thing via a joystick to see its manouvrebility.

These things are not huge you can pull them on a trailer beind a simple land rover.

In fact here is a picture of one trailer based and look at the jerry can for reference to how small this whole system is



I dare say they (US) now has much more compact smaller systems than this



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   
No picture but two RELIABLE sources say it was there PRE 9/11:


There was an antiaircraft battery permanently stationed on top of the White House, but inexplicably it wasn’t used to shoot down Flight 77, which flew low over the White House before making a sharp turn and hitting the Pentagon. [Dallas Morning News, 9/16/01, Newsday, 9/23/01]


It looked like a white box... I will still try to find a pic.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
No picture but two RELIABLE sources say it was there PRE 9/11:


It looked like a white box... I will still try to find a pic.





Is this what you were talking about?



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Is this what you were talking about?


Hard to say as the photos were from the front but I believe on the right of the peak... Anyway, I provided two mainstream news sources saying it was there... If you want to argue the point, call them.

Dallas Morning Day
and
NewsDay



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
No picture but two RELIABLE sources say it was there PRE 9/11:


It looked like a white box... I will still try to find a pic.





Is this what you were talking about?


Thats actually a good picture. As with camoflauge when out in the field we would camo up vehicles, weapons etc. Now obviously the first rule of camo is to adopt to the surroundings so my conclusion would be that on top of the white house a white box like pictured would not really look out of place infact it would seem to be a elevator service room or something whereas artic camo netting would stand out like a sore thumb.

Obviously this box is not there to be a covert OP as there are so many men on the roof so i could only imagine this box conceals something such as a AA weapon



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by thesaint
Obviously this box is not there to be a covert OP as there are so many men on the roof so i could only imagine this box conceals something such as a AA weapon


careful, you are falling into his "trap".... You can see through that like it is a lokout "tower". Probably not AA.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join