The Battle of Los Angeles 1942 : New Light on the Original Picture?

I would like to thank the majority for adding to what was intended as a very basic post with interesting information and debate. But it seems this thread has slipped rapidly from the tracks now.

So I will make everyone aware of the T&Cs on this site when posting on ATS.

15f.) Relevant Content: You will not Post messages that are clearly outside of the stated topic of any forums or disrupt a forum by deliberately posting repeated irrelevant messages or copies of identical messages (also known as "flooding").


...

15h.) Spamming: You will not Post identical content, or snippets of identical content, to multiple threads in the discussion forums. ....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just so we all know where we stand.

If anyone wishes to add anything about the Battle of LA and not let the thread drift with irrelevant messages please feel free to do so.

a reply to: mirageman

If anyone wishes to add anything about the Battle of LA and not let the thread drift with irrelevant messages please feel free to do so.

It is very clear that gunners were shooting at an object embedded within the searchlights. Later, the object returned as it headed in the opposite direction whereas it disappeared back over the ocean from where it was first detected by multiple radar systems, which should have told people that the object was not a balloon.

To further add, it wasn't only time that UFOs were fired upon by military forces, which was revealed at the U.S. Air Force Academy.

Van Tasseel predicted it, and then it happened.
Those are two facts.
So, pics not so important. It happened so did The Battle of LA.
Weather balloons. The US military seems to be REALLY incompetent when it comes to firing heavy artillery at weather balloons. Always miss somehow.
BTW my cousin is a Marine and my whole family is Air Force, so, yea, sarcasm.

Bookmarking for later reading!! My father was born at the exact moment of the sirens there in LA. I have a story to tell....