Forget the Pentagon videos; how could a plane have reached the building?

reply to post by talisman


Guess you seem to not apply terrorist attacks like guerrilla warfare. Think of the U.S.S. Cole when it was unexpectedly attacked by a small boat with hundreds of pounds of explosives. Guess the military planners forgot about such threats. They tend to think conventional. Look at the Iraq war and you know why.

We're moving away from the thrust of the OP, which did not ask in general terms how the US was attacked, but asked how the Pentagon was attacked - the implication here being it damn well shouldn't have been given it is what it is, that it happened some 40 minutes after it became clear the country was under attack and that FL77 was being tracked from more than 50 miles out with standing orders (apparently) to shoot it down.

reply to post by deltaboy



But this involved the "AIR" and there was security detail that knew of such attacks.

Consider Genoa in JULY 2001

World Leaders meet, guess what is put there>?
archives.cnn.com...

The Italian authorities' security measures also include the positioning of surface-to-air missiles at Genoa's Christopher Columbus airport. Dubbed the SPADA, the land-based system consists of missiles capable of a range of 15 kilometres (9.3 miles).

Surface to air missiles in this case are to shoot down Planes.

The other leaders of the world's most industrialised nations -- the U.S., Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, plus Russia -- are also staying offshore on a luxury cruise liner, the "European Vision, " chartered by the Italian government at a reported cost of $2.89 million.

They didn't stay in Tall Buildings. Remember there was a PDB memo in August warning that Bin Laden was determined to attack in the United States. That came a month after, the July meeting and a month before 9/11.

So now, we see that in Italy they prepared for this sort of attack with surface to air missiles. Its not like no-one has thought of this.

I can't fathom anyone who can conclude such ineptness on the part of the United States air defense, would be able to handle either China or Russia that day.

To say they weren't prepared is a little bit much.






[edit on 5-3-2008 by talisman]

reply to post by talisman


Dude its just like the attack on the White House back in the 90s. You can be prepared and still be attack. Fine the placing of the SAMs at the meeting overseas. Guess what? The White House is not the G8 meeting everyday. On the day of the attack, the Secret Service had to get VP Cheney to underground bunker and told reporters and other White House staff to get the hell out of the White House grounds. This sends a message that 1. It does not have a SAM defense against air attacks. 2. They have no confidence of such system if it exist.

It does not conclude that they don't have confidence in such a system if it exists. Even if the defense system exists, you would still want to get people out of harm's way just in case.

And because of the white house incident, you'd think that would make some people realize there's a danger...

reply to post by ajmusicmedia


The principle for decades behind US air defense was that threats would
materialize from OUTSIDE the borders of the US. Attacking aircraft
would be attempting to break in. This has sometimes been called the
"donut theory" - everything would be looking outward, leaving a hole
in the middle. The collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990's
seemed to have eliminated most if not all threats to the US. Many
fighter bases were closed and aircraft reassigned to other duties.
On 9/11 there were only 14 fighters on alert at 7 bases watching the
skies. So fixated on external threats that when the 2nd hijacking went
down the fighters launched from Langley VA headed out east over
the Atlantic as per protocol.

On 9/11 were no missiles at or near the Pentagon - in 1950/60's
most majot cities wwere ringed with Nike SAM missile emplaced about
20-25 miles outside of the citiy. Missiles were removed in 1970's
as ICBM increasingly replaced manned bombers. Pentagon is about
mile from Reagon airport in Washington. Question is how to discriminate
hijacked aircraft from normal air traffic considering at any time
are 4000 commercial aircraft in air. Military aircraft have IFF transponder
which when hit by radar signal responds with coded signal identifying
it to air defenses. Also firing missiles at random would cause more
damage than the terrorists could - burned out rocket stages, dud missile
and if actually hit target burning aircraft debris coming back to earth
would cause significant casulties/damage.

reply to post by deltaboy


www.fas.org...

If you think this was done by a man in a boat with open undirected explosives... Well theres no hope for you.

reply to post by ajmusicmedia


Very interesting indeed, and a question I've asked myself often. I somehow find it hard to believe that one of the biggest command centers in our country would easily have its air space invaded by a mere jet plane. Even if you are to believe the skeptics that there are no surface to air missiles on the site, I still would imagine a small force of army f-16's would be deployed almost instantly.

reply to post by deltaboy



The attack on the White House? Last I looked that was one plane, did another one penetrate or was there a higher level of alert after? How does that correlate with interception, since passenger jets are supposed to be tracked if they go off course without response?

I mean, they had the PDB memo, they knew Bin Laden was determined to attack, they just did a meeting that year (JULY-2001-ITALY) expecting something with planes (or possibly),

Then viola, the NORTH TOWER gets struck! Standard procedure would dictate extreme measures, they knew there was a plane some miles out of the Pentagon.

Either the military and the air defense would be completely clueless as to what is in their skies, or easily confused, or they are just fine and dandy.

I find it hard to fathom that the United States air defense would be that confused. Again, if they were then it doesn't stretch anyone's imagination to think through what may have happened had China or Russia sneaked a surprise.


Also, judging by the lengths they went to keep the leaders safe in ITALY with surface to air missiles,

(hypothetically) IF the South Tower had a meeting that day with the same world leaders,

Do you honestly think that they would have been told to go back to their meeting after the NORTH TOWER was struck???

I believe the answer to that is obvious.

So why on earth, with such confusion or supposed confusion are the ordinary citizens "CANNON FODDER" while World Leaders aren't?


[edit on 5-3-2008 by talisman]

[edit on 5-3-2008 by talisman]

Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti−aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building.

This was said by Barbara Honegger, MS. You can read the whole thing at patriotsquestion911.com...

There are other interesting quotes on that site from military personnel who were at the Pentagon when it happened and who saw no plane wreckage.

Originally posted by ajmusicmedia
I was just reading through threads about Pentagon videos, whether they're real or not, but there's one thing people seem to miss.

The Pentagon is the command center of the most powerful armed forces in the world. That makes it the #1 target of any enemy of the US.

If you were in charge of the Pentagon, wouldn't you defend it? Wouldn't you be ready for a plane or missile hit? There are probably enough surface to air missilles at the Pentagon to take out (at least) a small country's entire aviation. There must be guns and cannons for planes flying low. And I would expect that these defenses would not be limited to the immediate surroundings of the building. They probably have planes and/or helicopters permanently circling the building. And who knows what else? It would be interesting to hear from someone who has actually worked on defense for the Pentagon about full defensive capabilities.

Anyway, how could a plane possibly fly through all those defenses and hit the building? The only way anything will hit the building is if the US armed forces (or at least certain key personnel) would let it hit.

The Pentagon never had such protecton against domestic aerial attack pre-9/11. They never had helos or planes circling overhead, as they are close to constant air-traffic emanating from DCA. They do now have aerial defense systems on constant alert, but pre-9/11 I never once saw anything that would indicate an active system.

The White House is a very sensitive site, as is the Capital, yet you don't see constant plane/helo patrols over them do you? They typically depend on the USAF and USANG to keep the skies clear over restricted airspace, and they do a great job. What stumped everyone on 9/11 was the unanticipated internal attack, and the fact that the Pentagon flight used the same FLT path flown by inbound DCA Flights.