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.

 

Secret Service Does Not Use Its Stinger Missiles to Protect New York

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Think about the hassle if the truck transporting Stingers to New York City was in an accident and the press caught wind of what it was carrying.


Well, right after 9/11 I got stuck on 270 going back to Pittsburgh. We were diverted onto 40 the whole way through Maryland and part of Pennsylvania. It took me 10 hours for a 4 hour trip. The reason? A transport that was transporting a missile of some sort overturned.

So, I counter your annectdote with one of my own.

I can't find a link to the story at the moment, but I saw it with my own eyes.

[edit on 7/25/2007 by Griff]




posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Thier are too many things that went on that day that do not make a lot of sense. Thier is no way a hijacked airliner should have gotten into restricted airspace over the Capital and white house and get to the Pentagon. Thats why i believe the officail story is just missing or left out too much imformation.

[edit on 25-7-2007 by ULTIMA1]


I'm not finding evidence that any of the hijacked aircraft entered restricted airspace over the Capital or the White House. Where did you find this information?



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I do not bother to read the other posts, so if I repeat...

The Secret Service is not allowed to have Stinger weaponry, the Secret Service protects high ranking political members and is controled by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Let me repeat that: The Secret Service is not allowed to use Stinger weaponry, it is against policy. The Secret Service's mission is to protect what I just stated, close-quarters. Stingers are long-range (further than rifle's range), so they are not allowed to use them.

I must repeat myself because some people just do not understand. The information you quote is a lie; it is false; and I suggest you do not trust any more information from that source unless you check it through multiple other sources.

In addition: The government did not give clearance to shoot down the aircraft; also, aircraft should not be shot down over a major city, civilian deaths would be too high. That was the policy before 9/11, it is now changed. I will not post my resources, if you want to check them, do it yourself.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by nobody
I will not post my resources, if you want to check them, do it yourself.


You might want to change your stance here. Being new, you probably don't know that we consider this site top notch. In so being, we really like to see the sources of imformation. If not, you're are going to be called on it. Just some friendly advice.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Let me ask the members here, do you have pictures of the Secret Service armed with Stinger missiles on the White House as of right now?



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Let me ask the members here, do you have pictures of the Secret Service armed with Stinger missiles on the White House as of right now?


Do they not have missiles at the White House? If not, why? SS or not.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Do they not have missiles at the White House? If not, why? SS or not.


If they did, they sure didn't help back in 94 when that plane crash into the White House.

Even on 9/11 they told everybody to get the hell out of there, and took the VP to the bunker, didn't see any personnel armed with Stingers. I guess thats their policy if the White House was about to be attacked by an airplane. Not to mention having an airport nearby, pretty much makes any Secret Service from attempting to pull the trigger and shoot down a passerger airline into a neighborhood or perhaps a school.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
There a few of these around Camp David, I saw one in DC during the 1 year anniversary of 911, anyone else seen them around?

Q There are Avenger anti-missile -- now in place in Washington. Do we expect another terrorist attack from the air, and are the President and the Congress in danger from such attacks?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, again, the alert has been raised to high as a result of numerous concerns we have about the ability of our enemies to try to strike us in ways that are not knowable with absolute precision here, on our own shores. So a variety of actions have been taken to provide the greatest protections to the American people. And as I indicated earlier, I'm not going to be able to describe each and every one of these steps that are taken, but you can be assured that when the alert goes to high, the government does enhance its abilities to protect the American people.

www.whitehouse.gov...

The Avenger weapon system is a lightweight, day or night, limited adverse weather fire unit employed to counter enemy reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition (RSTA) efforts and low-level aerial threats.

The Avenger fire unit has eight ready-to-fire Stinger missiles in two turret-mounted standard vehicle missile launchers (SVML), an M3P .50-caliber machine gun, a sensor package with forward-looking infrared receiver (FLIR), laser range finder (LRF) and IFF. It has an optical sight and digital fire control system.

The Avenger firing sequence is entirely automated after the firing trigger is pulled. The gunner, after receiving an unknown IFF response and having visually identified the target as hostile, will activate a missile, uncage the seeker, and, if the target is within range, fire a missile. Immediately upon firing the missile, the next missile is already spinning up its gyro and cooling down. This is done without the gunner activating the next missile.

www.inetres.com...




posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 05:59 PM
link   


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Thier are too many things that went on that day that do not make a lot of sense. Thier is no way a hijacked airliner should have gotten into restricted airspace over the Capital and white house and get to the Pentagon. Thats why i believe the officail story is just missing or left out too much imformation.



You apparently think that restricted airspace has some sort of
unpenetratable barrier in the sky which no one can cross. It is an area
marked on aircraft charts which pilots unless authorized are not to enter.
If found violating restricted airspace will find being meet on ground by
FAA and FBI giving you 3rd degree - also likely to have pilots license
revoked. It does not mean a free fire zone which if violated means being
shot down. Before Sept 11 pilots did not have clearance to fire - since
9/11 Rules of Engagement been loosened a little - authority to fire moved
down command chain, but still unlikely to shoot. Since 9/11 restricted
airspace around Wash DC has been violated several times by inept pilots
who have been questioned.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
If they did, they sure didn't help back in 94 when that plane crash into the White House.


Good point. But, this then goes back to the "no one could fathom airplanes being used as missiles" comment from Condiliar Rice. But, her ineptitude paid off because she is secretary of state now.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   
they may have not found it a serious threat...

prop1.org...

On Sunday, September 11, 1994, after spending an evening with his brother consuming alcohol and smoking crack coc aine,



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Document ID: EUP20010916000213
Version Number: 01

Region: Near East/South Asia, West Europe, The Americas
Sub-Region: Near East, West Europe, North America
Country: Israel, United Kingdom, United States
Topic: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL, MILITARY, TERRORISM, URGENT
Source-Date: 09/16/2001

UK Paper: Israeli Security Warned CIA of Large-Scale Terror Attacks

As shaken White House staff began a frantic evacuation, the aircraft banked, performed a 270 degree turn and sailed past lines of aghast drivers on expressways to crash explosively into the west side of the Pentagon.

If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president's home.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   
was there to be a link?....i dont understand the post

and like many warnings it's vague...isreal warns of "large scale" attacks against the US



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
was there to be a link?....i dont understand the post

and like many warnings it's vague...isreal warns of "large scale" attacks against the US


No link. Its just a quote taken from a government open source document.

Well we had many warnings with the addition of the warning that planes could be used.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Link

Pretty much what this says. Don't look like a govt. document.


As shaken White House staff began a frantic evacuation, the aircraft banked, performed a 270 degree turn and sailed past lines of aghast drivers on expressways to crash explosively into the west side of the Pentagon.

If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president's home.

The Pentagon is not similarly defended. "We are an open society," said a military official. "We don't have soldiers positioned on the White House lawn and we don't have the Pentagon ringed with bunkers and tanks."


Fix link.



[edit on 26-7-2007 by deltaboy]

[edit on 26-7-2007 by deltaboy]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Evidence that the Secret Service had Stinger missiles at builidng 7. No reports on if they used them. Why didn't the Secret Service try to stop the planes if they had the resources? Specially Flight 77 in restricted airspace?

www.cooperativeresearch.org...

In New York, the Secret Service has a Stinger missile secretly stored in the World Trade Center, to be used to protect the president if the city were attacked when he visits it. Presumably it keeps this is in WTC Building 7, where its field office is. [Tech TV, 7/23/2002; Weiss, 2003, pp. 379] Stinger missiles provide short-range air defense against low-altitude airborne targets, such as fix-winged aircraft, helicopters, and cruise missiles. They have a range of between one and eight kilometers. [Federation of American Scientists, 8/9/2000; GlobalSecurity (.org), 4/27/2005] Whether the Secret Service makes any attempt at defending New York from the two attacking planes with its Stinger missile is unknown. The agency is also known to have air surveillance capabilities. These include a system called Tigerwall, which provides “early warning of airborne threats” and “a geographic display of aircraft activity” (see (September 2000 and after)). And according to Barbara Riggs, who is in the Secret Service’s Washington, DC headquarters on this day, the agency is “able to receive real time information about other hijacked aircraft,” through “monitoring radar and activating an open line with the FAA.” [US Department of the Navy, 9/2000, pp. 28 ; PCCW Newsletter, 3/2006; Star-Gazette (Elmira), 6/5/2006] These capabilities would presumably be of use if the Secret Service wanted to defend the World Trade Center. Furthermore, according to the British defense publication Jane’s Land-Based Air Defence, “the American president’s residences in Washington and elsewhere are protected by specialist Stinger teams in case of an aerial attack by terrorist organizations.” [Jane's Land-Based Air Defence, 10/13/2000]


[edit on 22-7-2007 by ULTIMA1]


I don't see how this is "Evidence that the Secret Service had Stinger missiles at builidng 7". Just because there is a website saying it, does not make it true. I have seen many websites that say the Earth is hollow, or that the Moon landing was a hoax, or that Jesus actually existed. That doesn't make any of it true.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Pretty much what this says. Don't look like a govt. document.



My source was a government open source document version as per the documnet number and title. No link.

Document ID: EUP20010916000213
Version Number: 01

Region: Near East/South Asia, West Europe, The Americas
Sub-Region: Near East, West Europe, North America
Country: Israel, United Kingdom, United States
Topic: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL, MILITARY, TERRORISM, URGENT
Source-Date: 09/16/2001

UK Paper: Israeli Security Warned CIA of Large-Scale Terror Attacks
EUP20010916000213 London The Sunday Telegraph (Internet Version-WWW) in English 16 Sep 01

[edit on 27-7-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
My source was a government open source document version as per the documnet number and title. No link.

Document ID: EUP20010916000213
Version Number: 01

Region: Near East/South Asia, West Europe, The Americas
Sub-Region: Near East, West Europe, North America
Country: Israel, United Kingdom, United States
Topic: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL, MILITARY, TERRORISM, URGENT
Source-Date: 09/16/2001

UK Paper: Israeli Security Warned CIA of Large-Scale Terror Attacks
EUP20010916000213 London The Sunday Telegraph (Internet Version-WWW) in English 16 Sep 01


Your source is just a copy of a news article of The Sunday Telegraph that reported it.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Source-Date: 09/16/2001

UK Paper: Israeli Security Warned CIA of Large-Scale Terror Attacks
EUP20010916000213 London The Sunday Telegraph (Internet Version-WWW) in English 16 Sep 01

[edit on 27-7-2007 by ULTIMA1]


and once again...a vague threat....

i myself have come to not believing in reacting to vague threats.....if we responded by securing some place....then:
1. it pulls critical manning from necessary places...
2. shows the terrorists what we think is most valuable

have you ever watched the news after a vague threat?..they bring on experts that say..."if i were a terrorist...right now i'd attack here...."
i seriously think that terrorists issue vague threats...turn on fox or cnn and start writing down ideas



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
have you ever watched the news after a vague threat?..they bring on experts that say..."if i were a terrorist...right now i'd attack here...."
i seriously think that terrorists issue vague threats...turn on fox or cnn and start writing down ideas


I use government and professional research site to get my information from.

How many warnings does it take ? Thier was more then enough that should have put the FAA and NORD on higher alert.

www.ctstudies.com...

Bush team tried to suppress pre-9/11 report into al-Qa'ida
Federal officials were repeatedly warned in the months before the 11 September 2001 terror attacks that Osama bin Laden and al-Qa'ida were planning aircraft hijackings and suicide attacks, according to a new report that the Bush administration has been suppressing….(Belfast Telegraph, 11 Feb 05)

Early '01 Memo Warned of Al Qaeda Threat
….The memo, from former counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke to then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, had been described during the hearings, but its full contents had not been disclosed…..(Reuters, 12 Feb 05)

Terror warnings to FAA detailed
The Federal Aviation Administration received repeated warnings in the months prior to Sept. 11, 2001….(AP, 11 Feb 05)

Memo warned Bush of al Qaeda threat
A newly released memo warned the White House at the start of the Bush
administration that al Qaeda represented a threat throughout the Islamic world, a warning that critics said went unheeded by President George W. Bush until the September 11, 2001, attacks….(Reuters, 11 Feb 05)

FAA ignored pre-9/11 terror alerts
In the months before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and al- Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according to a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission…..(New York Times, 10 Feb 05)

9/11 Commission: FAA Was Alerted to Potential Attacks
Federal Aviation Administration officials received 52 warnings ….(AP, 10 Feb 05)

9/11 Report Cites Warnings About Hijackings
U.S. aviation officials failed to respond to dozens of warnings….(Reuters, 10 Feb 05)






[edit on 27-7-2007 by ULTIMA1]




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join