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 - No camera footage = No plane. A reasonable assumption.

page: 15
136
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Helghast1
if it was a global hawk dont you think ATLEAST 1 person in the area got some kind of footage of it or even announced that they saw a black airplane flying in to the pentagon? I have a hard time believing this was a global hawk.


If it was not expected, then no-one would have the time needed to react to capture a photograph of it. How fast does a Global Hawk travel? If 600 miles per hour, then it is traveling 880 feet per second. In the minimum of 10 seconds you would need to have before you could overcome your startle reaction, gain a vague awarenes of what's making the noise, and orient yourself visually, it would already be 1 2/3 miles past you.
edit on 12/27/2010 by dubiousone because: Clarification




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


My point? If you haven't figured it by now there is no hope in me trying to let you know again. Believe what you will, I respect that and see no need to argue with anyone as I have laid out my opinion. If you do not agree then no worrys here. Have a good night.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood


web.archive.org...


Your link;
info what?
Geo tool; You'll have to type-in the captcha...
web.archive.org?
Who is;
Here Fishy fishy



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Interfacer
Its incredible we can get 100s of thousands of men to fight and die for LIES by government officials but we cannot get just 1 patriot in the know to put his life on the line and bring damning evidence of 911 to fore.


People who blow the whistle risk their livelihoods due to retaliation? Look at Assange!



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by loveguy
 


So true especially in today's police state.

Its one thing for a government with an endless budget to pay people who desire a good wage, education & benefits to do what it wants them to do. Its quite another for that same individual to risk it all to speak the truth when he or she knows how our society today has turned it's back on those that have in the past.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 





While your diagram is impressive, it fails in one key aspect. The plane did not fly in perpendicular with the building. (According to the OS)


Correct the plane struck at an angle.






Furthermore, if the plane was in tact when the rear wings (tail) hit, as your diagram suggests, and they didnt break the barrier of the building to enter inside, there should be some form of wreckage left on the exterior for all to see.


Not sure what you are asking here. A lot of if's.

"if the plane was in tact when the rear wings (tail) hit" It wasn't. Everything in front of the tail had already been thoroughly demolished at something like 400 miles an hour (or whatever the speed was).

"and (if) they didn't break the barrier of the building to enter inside" The front of the plane had already broken the barrier of the building, the tail didn't find much resistance to entering.

"there should be some form of wreckage left on the exterior for all to see." There is plenty of wreckage all over the outside of the building. Mostly stuff from the nonstructural parts of the wing tips and the tip of the vertical stabilizer (the tall part of the tail).

Any airplane debris outside of the building would have to be stuff that bounced off the building, right? And anything hitting that fast and bouncing off, would bounce a goodly way wouldn't it? It didn't just hit, stop dead and fall to the ground. There is debris scattered all over the place. Remember the plane came in at an angle, so the debris bounce off at an angle equal but opposite from the angle of incidence. The debris covered the heliport and the field beyond to the left of the attack point. The heliport pad is over 100 yards from the wall of the building.
edit on 27/12/2010 by rnaa because: fix markup



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Below, no 90ft hole here.



Below, no debris here.



Below, heliport looks clean & squared away from here.




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 

I've heard of quote-mining, but I think that's the first time I've seen image-mining


Any particular reason you strayed away from images such as this:





As for the entry hole, you may find this interesting:
undicisettembre.blogspot.com...



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by roboe
 


Ah, a game player. Typical rhetoric to confuse. Shame on ya.

The first photo you posted does not show the close up of the engine part real well as the one I used. That photo, both versions is widely available on the internet for all to see. No slight of hand needed, as you suggest.

Your other photos show debris probably planted by the two shown below....



Which bring sup another point. Why were the debris in the pics you posted (heavily used by the OS & it's supporters) not scooped up and roped off but all other debris as in the pic above is being quickly gathered? I know why. Perhaps one day when you get that wool from around your head, you'll understand. Good night.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 

I see you missed the entry hole composite image, no snide remark for that one?

And I don't know how you can proclaim that debris was being planted, based on a still image of someone who looks like he's picking it up. I guess that is the wonder of a conspiracy theory, you can just make random stuff up.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:35 AM
link   
I've always wondered why right after a crime was committed were MIB (lol) running around picking up (supposedly) pieces of evidence? Why would there be a need to hurry?

Or were they really in a hurry because they needed to get their job done before anyone got there? Ooops they almost gave the game away...



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by roboe
 


Oh I'm getting to that. Don't worry. But I'm at work and that comes first!!



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by roboe
 


Below is the photo you reference as "proof" that it left a Road Runner like impression. Only problem is that photo is known to have been over manipulated to death and widened until the desired effect was obtained.

Statement on the photo's website:


The picture, says Mr Murru, was "obtained by blending 17 high-resolution photographs compensating for perspective distortion where needed."


Only problem with that is if the original photos did not show an entry point as is clearly the case in all known photos that were taken by both FEMA, DoD personnel and others on scene in regards to the original image then the individual must have a camera that can magically see thru smoke then.

Another issue is with the level of which this hole is at. There are no marks on the lawn leading up to the manipulated entry point in that photo, as seen in other photos that are wider showing the lawn before the building. In the photo below, the "entry point" is right at ground level, meaning there should be a vast amount of damage leading up to the building. There simply is none to be found, not in any FEMA or other government photos. And the photo is cut/cropped at ground level further proving this photo is manipulated for an intended purpose.

In addition, some of columns are bent the wrong way or not at all. Further disproving any airliner entered the building as the photo suggests.

And one last thing, the wire spools would have been knocked clear into the building if this photo was genuine not to mention that there is a large amount of debris right at the front lower right of the photo. Again had an airliner actually entered the building as this image is trying to suggest, that debris wouldn't be there. Oh and, airplanes aren't square either. The hole is symmetrical, another fault in the photo.

Good night.


edit on 12/27/2010 by mikelee because: Text
source
edit on 12/27/2010 by mikelee because: source photo and spelling



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
I've always wondered why right after a crime was committed were MIB (lol) running around picking up (supposedly) pieces of evidence? Why would there be a need to hurry?

Or were they really in a hurry because they needed to get their job done before anyone got there? Ooops they almost gave the game away...


To get the sharp pieces of metal out of the way for the emergency crews. Please remember it was not a "crime scene" it was a rescue scene. Taking care of the victims comes before forensic duties.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 



To get the sharp pieces of metal out of the way for the emergency crews. Please remember it was not a "crime scene" it was a rescue scene. Taking care of the victims comes before forensic duties.


So how many victims were there out on the lawn.??
I thought they were all inside...



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:37 AM
link   
9/11 no planers arn't interested in the truth. If they were they would be studying the flight manifest and tracking down all the people to see if they were real. But they know if they did that they would find grieving families & friends who knew they were on the flight. Then they would have to make up some loonball theory to explain it.

Its too hard for them. so they avoid any real investigation.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by roboe
reply to post by mikelee
 

I've heard of quote-mining, but I think that's the first time I've seen image-mining


Any particular reason you strayed away from images such as this:




Greetings.

If I may take a jab at the photo I left remaining in your quote?

That debris pile is clearly staged on top of the gigantic tarpaulin...used during clean-up.

If it was there during the fire, wouldn't we see big melted and curling in the material, or is that a new one that got placed after the fire?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
9/11 no planers arn't interested in the truth. If they were they would be studying the flight manifest and tracking down all the people to see if they were real. But they know if they did that they would find grieving families & friends who knew they were on the flight. Then they would have to make up some loonball theory to explain it.

Its too hard for them. so they avoid any real investigation.


From what I read there weren't many passengers on the planes which is actually odd in itself..
M7y only no plane event is that a boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon..
May have flown over it, but it didn.\'t hit..



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
9/11 no planers arn't interested in the truth. If they were they would be studying the flight manifest and tracking down all the people to see if they were real. But they know if they did that they would find grieving families & friends who knew they were on the flight. Then they would have to make up some loonball theory to explain it.

Its too hard for them. so they avoid any real investigation.


Here's a hypothesis I haven't brought to the boards yet...

Clearly eye witnesses claimed seeing a plane. Would it have been possible to notice if that plane had some unknown armament it had under its belly as it raced toward the Pentagon? Did anyone happen to catch the numbers on its tail?

Better yet, is it possible to modify a 757 to carry armament under it's belly?

Can the 757 deliver said armament and disappear behind the cloud of smoke and debris?

I'm asking for some discernment on your part...

I wonder if there are any videos out there to disprove this as being what I can conceive- possible, and very much likely the true scenario. IMHO. Ofcourse I wouldn't rule-out that it was a much smaller airplane (DC-10/737) model used to deceive the masses, given the "impossible" flight-path and it's rate of travel according to the B- I mean OS.

Who is avoiding a real investigation BTW? And what is it you are advocating?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


so why dont you do some investigation and prove it? you could be the new woodward & bernstein Get the passenger names who supposedly died and go interview their relatives & friends, All you need to find is 1 passenger that deosnt exist and you have evidence of foul play.

But lets face it you & i both know you will find greiving relatives & friends who would all confirm they were on the plane. Thats why no planers wont investigate. It would falsify their theory and they couldnt handle being wrong.
edit on 27-12-2010 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
136
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join