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.

 

What hit the pentagon on 9/11/01?

page: 27
20
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by A Fortiori

Why is this so important to you to prove they had bad cameras? I think I missed something.


I'm not saying that at all.

I'm explaining to Lilly that record rate does not mean that they had crappy cams. We don't know WHAT quality the cams were. They might have been first rate, and if they were watched, then it would have shown the detail needed to prevent car bombings, etc. The record rate was ~1/sec. So what we see is what we see. Nothing more can be read into that.

Also, I'm trying to explain to her just why a crappy record rate doesn't matter, when the goal of ext security at the Pentagon would be to get some armed Marines out on the grounds if they saw someone trying to run down the fence with their truck to get closer to the building, etc.


Yes, but truck bombs were not all that they were worried about. Getting Marines out in the parking lot was not their only concern.

I don't know why, perhaps it is a sense of "going native" while working for the military, but I kind of resent people treating the military like short term, one dimensional thinkers. Their weapons systems don't show that. Their strategic defense planning does not show that. They have war-gamed a defense of the Pentagon, the Capital, etc.

Now, I believe their weapons were "stand down" because of some reason--maybe the drills that morning, but they do have strategic defense weaponry. This isn't 1950. This isn't even 1990. This was in 2001. They were prepared for terrorists who had missiles, shoulder arms, truck bombs, etc.

Our military is mismanaged by politicians, but they are, in fact, the best frickin' standing military in the world. Bar none. Someone made a decision and here we are, but having been around Congressmen and the military, my bet is on a politician screwing this up, not the US Armed Forces. They are organized, they are long term strategic thinkers, they are planners, they are innovators!

And now that I am "hot"...to my my friends at Quantico..."Oooorah!"




posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


Swampfox, did you post the link to the DNA results yet and I missed it?



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


For another thing, there isnt "A" autopsy report. There would be multiple reports. I do not know if they even issue an actual autopsy report (as they are conventionally understood) for DNA reports on remains found.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by A Fortiori
 


I posted a link to one of the AFIP reports on the subject earlier. When I have a chance I will try to dig up some of the other reports that are out there.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by A Fortiori
but quite simply, the security cameras perched on top of buildings are not to catch criminals stealing data tapes or manila folders on their way out of the Pentagon. They are there to see the approach of an erratically driving vehicle and eliminate it before damage is done.

Yep, that's exactly the point I was gonna make with Lillydale.
Cameras are there just to see activity so that it can be acted upon by Marines with guns.

Casual readers to the thread, read the above and see how Joey has destroyed his own arguments.

A Fortiori has stated that cameras on top of buildings are there to survey the grounds for approaching vehicles. Joey agreed with this.

Allegedly, the official government story has the alleged Flight AA77 approaching the Pentagon on a low, flat path... in other words, it's an approaching vehicle.

Therefore, according to Joey, the roof mounted cameras should have seen this activity.

Why do some official government story believers state that the roof mounted cameras didn't see anything, when Joey (an official government story believer) has just stated that the cameras would see approaching vehicles?

I wish that the official government story believers would make consistent claims, without contradicting each other.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by A Fortiori
 


I posted a link to one of the AFIP reports on the subject earlier. When I have a chance I will try to dig up some of the other reports that are out there.


Thanks, Swampfox. I think if everyone chipped in their expertise we would have good discussions. I may not always agree with WW he brings so much value.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Lillydale
 


For another thing, there isnt "A" autopsy report. There would be multiple reports. I do not know if they even issue an actual autopsy report (as they are conventionally understood) for DNA reports on remains found.


Hmmmm....you might want to tell that to the office that has released the results of the autopsies then. Yes, there would be an autopsy for each and every set of remains but the report of the autopsy findings from the supposed plane crash at the Pentagon are all in one report. A simple FOIA request will get you your very own copy.

You claimed to be so sure about the results before? You told me that I was wrong about the terrorist DNA. Now you claim you have not even actually seen what the results of the 'autopsies' were? Interesting how you can be so certain of things and then when pressed for info, have a nice reason why you do not have said info.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Body parts from the passengers and crew of Flight 77 were found from the entrance hole...to the exit hole, from the mess of the first floor to the mess of the upper floors..

In other words, they were not just found in two places. They were found all over the place, and it wasn't just the "FBI" that found them. It was the military workers, the civilian rescue workers, the federal agents, the construction crews. No one or two or even three people were ever by themselves to "plant" body parts.


Can you back any of this up? Can you post something other than some personal website that actually goes over this? You seem to keep making claims that actually contradict the story being put out by the officials in charge that day. Do you have info they did not have access to? Did they just make things up because you would not share your secrets?



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 





You claimed to be so sure about the results before? You told me that I was wrong about the terrorist DNA. Now you claim you have not even actually seen what the results of the 'autopsies' were? Interesting how you can be so certain of things and then when pressed for info, have a nice reason why you do not have said info


Which part of "conventionally understood" did you not understand? Conventional autopsy reports consist of assessments of the organs, height, weight, toxicology tests...all things you are not going to get from an arm or a charred torso etc...



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Which part of "conventionally understood" did you not understand? Conventional autopsy reports consist of assessments of the organs, height, weight, toxicology tests...all things you are not going to get from an arm or a charred torso etc...


What?????????????

What the hell are you even trying to say here? You are right, I do not understand you. An autopsy is an autopsy. They do not have categories. Are you trying to claim there are two separate sets of autopsy results? What are you saying?

Why are you trying to twist and dodge? You said you do not know if they have autopsy results for things like this. I have told you a few times now that yes there are autopsy results for every name on the passenger list. I know it blows a big hole in your story but it is true.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by Lillydale]



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Thanks for answering my questions!



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Lillydale
 


No, but it sure shoots holes in your rant about the autopsy report identified everyone now doesn't it? Personally, I wish you would take one position and stick with it. You keep shifting.


1. What holes did it shoot? It proved nothing, demonstrated nothing, and was evidence of nothing. How does that shoot any holes in anything. Please explain,

2. What have I ever shifted on? You are going to have to provide an example or stand as a bald faced liar. You pick.



posted on Oct, 30 2009 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Lillydale
 


No, but it sure shoots holes in your rant about the autopsy report identified everyone now doesn't it? Personally, I wish you would take one position and stick with it. You keep shifting.


Hey pssssssssssssst, swampy - please explain what it is that I am shifting on. My opinions have never once changed unless undeniable evidence is presented causing me to to gumble myself and admit I was wrong. You have yet to either do that or present my ever changing positions you speak of. Please explain your personal attacks.



[edit on 10/30/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Oct, 30 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
My opinions have never once changed unless undeniable evidence is presented causing me to to gumble myself and admit I was wrong.


I have given you many opportunities to admit you are wrong. Now you are FORCED to admit you are wrong.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Lillydale
My opinions have never once changed unless undeniable evidence is presented causing me to to gumble myself and admit I was wrong.


I have given you many opportunities to admit you are wrong. Now you are FORCED to admit you are wrong.


What????????????

What planet are you on??????

What is it you proved that I am wrong about??????

Why are you polluting this thread with all this random nonsense. You just say things to invoke emotion in the respondents but you have nothing of value to offer so you just toss out things you hope will stick.

What did you prove me wrong about????



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Pentagon Worker April Gallup said there was no plane debris at Pentagon

Why did the FBI collect all those closed circuit surveillance tapes surrounding the pentagon immediately after the explosion at the pentagon? Why do the only two tapes shown to the public not show a huge 747 plane in them? Why do the frames in the tape closest to the pentagon show a possible missile hitting the pentagon?

Maybe that is because there was no plane!

On the day when the pentagon was attacked April Gallup was just arriving to work. She had just returned from maternity leave. In her arms she was carrying her baby, and her main concern was to get him to the daycare.

Prior to her taking her son to the daycare she had to do some things in her computer for her coworkers. She turned on the computer and just as she turned on the computer, she heard a large explosion. The pentagon was attacked but by what?

As she tried to make herself a way out of the debris of the explosion her main concern was to get her child to safety, but she could not immediately find him. So her next concern was to help her coworkers get out from under the rubble.

After she helped her coworkers and they ran for their lives out of the office, she luckily found her child from under a small patch of debris. With the love of a mother she pulled him out toward safety.

As she made her way out of the Pentagon with the rest of her coworkers, she could not find any plane debris where the explosion was located at.

This is a first hand report from an eyewitness on the subject, should not her testimony be taken as worthy of an investigation.

The FBI needs to release the tapes of the Pentagon to the public and let the people know the real truth instead of hiding it.

To see an interview with April Gallup click the following link
www.youtube.com...

Check out my blog at [SNIP]

Mod Edit:

4) No Endorsement of User Content.
...
19) Advertising: You will not advertise or promote other discussion boards, chat systems, online communities or other websites on the Websites within posts, private messages, avatars and/or signatures without prior written permission from TAN.

Terms and Conditions
edit on 6-10-2010 by Gemwolf because: Snipped link to personal blog



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by simpletruths10
 


I am amazed that anyone is still prepared to put forward April Gallup as a credible witness. This is the woman who sued American Airlines on the basis that her hurt and suffering was caused by their plane and then later decided that there wasn't a plane in the first place.

No wonder the judge, in dismissing her second lawsuit, referred to her allegations as frivolous and based on fantasy and delusion.



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


No wonder the judge, in dismissing her second lawsuit, referred to her allegations as frivolous and based on fantasy and delusion.


Looks to me, the judge was the crackpot, he wasn’t at the Pentagon on 911, April Gallup was. As far as I am concern, the judge was probably paid to ridicule and insult April Gallup, and dismiss her case. Nothing new here, probably just anther paid off judge, who must defend his career by supporting Bush politics.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join