4 ms·

>Security cameras don't tend to be aimed at the sky True, but this is the HQ of the most expensive, most technologically advanced military ever to exist. >Wha

>Security cameras don't tend to be aimed at the sky True, but this is the HQ of the most expensive, most technologically advanced military ever to exist. >What other cameras do you expect to have recorded video? Cameras every couple feet along the exterior of the pentagon. Cameras on every light pole in the lawn. Cameras on the fences. On buildings facing the pentagon. ... There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area.

mikeash 10y ago
What would be the purpose of putting up so many cameras? Why would Congress vote to spend so much money on it? The place has guards with eyes, why would you need a ton of cameras too? In any case, you can get pretty close to the place without any special permission. Various public roads go right past it, and there's a busy Metro station and bus terminal right outside the front door. I've been past there a lot and don't recall ever seeing this hypothetical mass of cameras on it. The idea that the Pentagon is super-important and therefore must have had a ton of high-quality cameras surrounding it is common, but appears to be based on no real-world evidence. If they were real, surely somebody would have posted a diagram and said, "this security camera, circled in red, should have captured video of AA77." > There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area. This is absurd speculation. The US doesn't have live satellite coverage of the entire planet today, and certainly didn't in 2001. They wouldn't waste scarce resources surveilling the middle of a large American city. As for surveillance planes, people notice those when they're around, and as far as I know nobody has ever said they saw one on the morning of 9/11. Nobody anticipated this kind of attack. You will find massive surveillance systems geared toward detecting attacks they did expect. There are gigantic radar installations and fleets of satellites whose sole purpose is to detect incoming nuclear missiles, for example. But nobody thought of watching for a rogue airliner.

mikeash 10y ago

What would be the purpose of putting up so many cameras? Why would Congress vote to spend so much money on it? The place has guards with eyes, why would you need a ton of cameras too? In any case, you can get pretty close to the place without any special permission. Various public roads go right past it, and there's a busy Metro station and bus terminal right outside the front door. I've been past there a lot and don't recall ever seeing this hypothetical mass of cameras on it. The idea that the Pentagon is super-important and therefore must have had a ton of high-quality cameras surrounding it is common, but appears to be based on no real-world evidence. If they were real, surely somebody would have posted a diagram and said, "this security camera, circled in red, should have captured video of AA77." > There may even be a live satellite video of the event. Or surveillance planes monitoring the area. This is absurd speculation. The US doesn't have live satellite coverage of the entire planet today, and certainly didn't in 2001. They wouldn't waste scarce resources surveilling the middle of a large American city. As for surveillance planes, people notice those when they're around, and as far as I know nobody has ever said they saw one on the morning of 9/11. Nobody anticipated this kind of attack. You will find massive surveillance systems geared toward detecting attacks they did expect. There are gigantic radar installations and fleets of satellites whose sole purpose is to detect incoming nuclear missiles, for example. But nobody thought of watching for a rogue airliner.