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.

 

so much 'debunking' but what about...

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   
so many things get 'debunked' but i've never seen this one talked about. i am new to ATS though so maybe i just missed it. we all saw planes hit the towers repeatedly all day...and for weeks after on television. so clearly theres no threat to national security to see planes hitting the buildings. why is it a threat to national security for us to see the videos of the the plane hitting the pentagon? doesn't make any sense.




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by SGTSECRET
 


Because a plane did not hit the Pentagon. They have no video of it, hence we can't see it.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SGTSECRET
 


There is a video from a gas station security camera that clearly shows a nice blur that was released to the public YEARS after we were all demanding it. I'm still on the fence about the whole no plane hit the pentagon thing, but that video sure as hell doesn't provide anything to the argument.

Edit to add: Building 7 really is the smoking gun. You need look nowhere else to find enough reason to question the official story. I think all of these other questions that we are constantly asking merely muddle the intent of those of us who want truth. It would fare so much more for us if we were to demand that there be an independent investigation of how Building 7 collapsed and take it from there instead of pulling out all kinds of wild ideas and adding them to this giant conglomerate of conflicting conspiracy theories. That won't get us anywhere.


edit on 1-1-2012 by Q:1984A:1776 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


im completely aware of this, but how can those that think a plane DID hit explain this? they cant because its not something you can go back and forth about all day like wtc7 or thermite in the towers. theres nothing about the pentagon videos to debunk, the fact is cameras were pointed where the 'plane' hit and every other inch of the pentagon, but we cant see the footage for 'national security' reasons.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Q:1984A:1776
 


there are PROBABLY many more angles of footage to see that would clearly show a plane hitting, the gas station camera was pointed in a way that i think even it all frames were released the 'plane' would have been going so fast it would have been a blur anyway. so the gas station video is definately not the best choice, but it is the one we were given



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Q:1984A:1776
reply to post by SGTSECRET
 


There is a video from a gas station security camera that clearly shows a nice blur that was released to the public YEARS after we were all demanding it. I'm still on the fence about the whole no plane hit the pentagon thing, but that video sure as hell doesn't provide anything to the argument.

Edit to add: Building 7 really is the smoking gun. You need look nowhere else to find enough reason to question the official story. I think all of these other questions that we are constantly asking merely muddle the intent of those of us who want truth. It would fare so much more for us if we were to demand that there be an independent investigation of how Building 7 collapsed and take it from there instead of pulling out all kinds of wild ideas and adding them to this giant conglomerate of conflicting conspiracy theories. That won't get us anywhere.


edit on 1-1-2012 by Q:1984A:1776 because: (no reason given)


building 7 is talked about all the time and also gets people who want the truth nowhere. 'facts' about how any of the buildings came down can be thrown back and forth constantly and have been for ten years. the idea that there is clear footage out there somewhere of this supposed plane hitting the pentagon is definately something to focus on. theres no argument from a commission report believer because theres nothing they can say about the subject. we still to this day see the planes hitting the towers, in theory that all would have been taken down or banned from media also if it had something to do with security, which is supposedly why we cant see clear pentagon footage. im with you on the level that a real investigation needs to be done though.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
reply to post by DIDtm
 


im completely aware of this, but how can those that think a plane DID hit explain this? they cant because its not something you can go back and forth about all day like wtc7 or thermite in the towers. theres nothing about the pentagon videos to debunk, the fact is cameras were pointed where the 'plane' hit and every other inch of the pentagon, but we cant see the footage for 'national security' reasons.


Yeah..but people that believe a plane hit the Pentagon are the same people that believe that Lee Harvey Oswald fired a 'magic bullet' that should change the laws of physics.
They believe what MSM tells them, they have no logical or critical thinking skills, and the believe our government has their best interests at heart - 100% of the time.

OR...............

Theyre getting paid to continue the lie.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


maybe thats why he was also assasinated..because he could defy the laws of physics - dont want that technology getting out.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SGTSECRET
 


Don't get me wrong, I agree with you completely that the discussion can't really continue unless we had some kind of evidence to discuss. I'd like to see some transparency in the issue as well, and I wasn't trying to derail your thread. My only point was that if we were to collectively demand that there be an investigation into WTC7 by an independent board, we'd get a lot farther than we are now, because the whole 9/11 truth movement has become a convoluted mess of wild theories that most people simply can't take seriously. While a plane hitting or not hitting the pentagon takes all kinds of explanations of physics that go WAY over most people's heads, WTC7 is basic as hell and was never even mentioned in the 9/11 commission report.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
so many things get 'debunked' but i've never seen this one talked about. i am new to ATS though so maybe i just missed it. we all saw planes hit the towers repeatedly all day...and for weeks after on television. so clearly theres no threat to national security to see planes hitting the buildings. why is it a threat to national security for us to see the videos of the the plane hitting the pentagon? doesn't make any sense.


Ok, I will bite. I don't know about you but I have noticed that there are cameras EVERYWHERE! So, let's just consider this, if nothing else, one of the most secure places in the entire world was hit by a "plane" and there is no (zero) footage outside a crappy gas station. Duh! I am sure that I don't understand the point of your post. But I am also sure that sometimes the absence of something does speak louder than its presence. So, I guess the question is, why are you bringing this up now? You may get some that say xyz and others pdq. What do you think?



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Q:1984A:1776
 


trying to 'explain' what happend at the pentagon with physics and such would be a difficult way to get people to understand. explaining that its shady that we saw all the other events that day but are still sheltered from the hundreds of cams pointed at pentagon is much easier.
no physics to explain, just a little common sense of 'oh yeah...you're right never really thought about it like that' see...no physics just a little brain power, but as someone already mentioned here MSM has the whole brain power thing under its thumb.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Chemley
 


"why are you bringing this up now? You may get some that say xyz and others pdq. What do you think? "

ok im bringing this up because im not going to just forget about it like some people would hope. i saw people die over lies, so of course im not letting it go. as for what i think, there was no plane, if one did hit the pentagon there would have been no problems releasing a video of the event - and we wouldn't be stuck with a b.s. release years later that shows nothing



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
I thought the pictures of the pentagon before the roof collapsed showed no plane hit there or not the plane they said it was.



edit on 1-1-2012 by ZeussusZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
reply to post by Chemley
 


"why are you bringing this up now? You may get some that say xyz and others pdq. What do you think? "

ok im bringing this up because im not going to just forget about it like some people would hope. i saw people die over lies, so of course im not letting it go. as for what i think, there was no plane, if one did hit the pentagon there would have been no problems releasing a video of the event - and we wouldn't be stuck with a b.s. release years later that shows nothing


Honorable enough. Maybe we will get one more to understand "pdq" as it were. That day was a horrific day for all Americans and many others in the world. That destruction seems to have only led to microcosms of 9/11 with our troops overseas trying to do the "right" thing. I guess I am hoping that we can all start to look at the bigger picture(s) from the 9/11 tragedy, one of which, is certainly how it affects our troops and their families.
edit on 1-1-2012 by Chemley because: grammer error



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeussusZ
I thought the pictures of the pentagon before the roof collapsed showed no plane hit there or not the plane they said it was.


you are right but sadly people still dont understand. they see the pictures of the tiny pieces being carried away and hear the tv tell them a plane hit the building. in my opinion there is not enough evidence there to show that a commercial airline hit the building, but as with many other 9/11 subjects this is an ongoing debate and has been for years. the only thing that would bring the truth forward about the pentagon event is the hundreds(ish) cameras pointed at the pentagon all day every day, after that is acknowledged there is no more debate. bringing to light the unwillingness to release video evidence that we all know exists(or existed) should instantly /end any attempt of debunking the plane/pentagon story.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET

Originally posted by ZeussusZ
I thought the pictures of the pentagon before the roof collapsed showed no plane hit there or not the plane they said it was.


you are right but sadly people still dont understand. they see the pictures of the tiny pieces being carried away and hear the tv tell them a plane hit the building. in my opinion there is not enough evidence there to show that a commercial airline hit the building, but as with many other 9/11 subjects this is an ongoing debate and has been for years. the only thing that would bring the truth forward about the pentagon event is the hundreds(ish) cameras pointed at the pentagon all day every day, after that is acknowledged there is no more debate. bringing to light the unwillingness to release video evidence that we all know exists(or existed) should instantly /end any attempt of debunking the plane/pentagon story.


I think that this would be a good time to remind everyone of just what section of the pentagon was hit and whom worked there. As I remember it, it was the accounting department that was struck and they had recently (the day or week before) let congress know that 1 trillion $$$ was missing that had been funded to the defense department. As memory serves, it was literally September 10th. There were going to be great inquiries into this. Conveniently, that was never to be. Why? Why were no top officials harmed? Why were there only "rank and file" accountants present? Why were we shown pictures of an empty hole and 1 or 2 plane seats? Come on...



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
reply to post by Q:1984A:1776
 


trying to 'explain' what happend at the pentagon with physics and such would be a difficult way to get people to understand. explaining that its shady that we saw all the other events that day but are still sheltered from the hundreds of cams pointed at pentagon is much easier.
no physics to explain, just a little common sense of 'oh yeah...you're right never really thought about it like that' see...no physics just a little brain power, but as someone already mentioned here MSM has the whole brain power thing under its thumb.


I think for a start that you need to substantiate your allegation that there were "hundreds of cams pointed at the Pentagon".

The FBI doesn't agree with you and made a Declaration to the US District Court, District of Columbia describing all the tapes examined by them which might have been relevant to the attack. Details in this link under "The Maguire Declaration" :-

www.911myths.com...



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


really? wow..ok im sure its common knowledge that a government facility such as the pentagon would have video security, and definately businesses in the area had cameras also. whether it was hundreds or not the fact still remains, what happened was caught on camera somewhere which is why all the tapes were seized. are you going to substantiate your claim of the pentagon NOT having video security..or that no other cameras in the area have a view of the facility?



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


i checked your 911myths source:

The FBI are talking about 85 videos, but this is just the result of an initial search that includes (for example) all videos obtained by the Washington Field Office. If we move on from that then the numbers begin to fall dramatically.
56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."
Of the remaining 29 videotapes, 16 "DID NOT SHOW THE PENTAGON CRASH SITE and did not show the IMPACT of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."
Of the 13 remaining tapes, 12 "only showed the Pentagon AFTER THE IMPACT of Flight 77."
Only one tape showed the Pentagon impact: the Pentagon's own security camera footage, that would later be released.

so you are trying to tell me that cameras pointed at the pentagon didnt see the COMMERCIAL AIRLINE at all? im not talking impact anymore im saying it came from somewhere right? whether it was filming the impact site or not, the plane didnt originate there. like i said before, if the plane is real its on footage somewhere.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
reply to post by Alfie1
 


really? wow..ok im sure its common knowledge that a government facility such as the pentagon would have video security, and definately businesses in the area had cameras also. whether it was hundreds or not the fact still remains, what happened was caught on camera somewhere which is why all the tapes were seized. are you going to substantiate your claim of the pentagon NOT having video security..or that no other cameras in the area have a view of the facility?


Where did I claim there was no video security ? I gave you a link to what the FBI say about the available tapes. If you want to claim that there is more then you really need to back that up.

Btw, are you ignoring the security gate cameras vid ?




top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join