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!"

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.

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?

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]

---

---

---

---