It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by spooky24
HOLD THE DAMN PHONE!!!! we cant compare WTC to any other building that has ever been built but comparing it to an accident involving a tree and couple neighbors is fine............. seriously?????!!!!
Also you say there could have been dozens that did fall do to fire, but since we don't have video then it was not recorded? Again, seriously? How long have we as humanity been recording things on paper?
Find me a skyscrapper that was brought to a global collapse that falls at almost freefall speed form uncontrolled fires...
I don't need a video, find me a written account
There is proof that some one planted explosives, look at the collapse. No way a random chain of events causes a collapse with 2.3 seconds of free fall, eight floors were gone no resistance at all! How does fire achieve that?
Well I lied, towers 1 and 2 faced the same devastating chain reaction...
What mountains of evidence prove agains the CD? Please elaborate to us all
As far as NIST goes it was all brand new events that have never been seen before
Brand new phenomena
edit on thWed, 19 Mar 2014 13:29:38 -0500America/Chicago320143880 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)
How about instead YOU show ME ANY example of ANY building or buildings suffering the same damages and stresses to which those buildings were subjected on 9/11. Oh that's right...you can't. Feigning obtuseness is not a valid argument.
Even if the investigation were to be reopened i doubt the truth will ever be known for certian..tptb will never let it be..they control the evidence and chain of evidence.
a very interesting topic.
OtherSideOfTheCoin's thread presents data which I had not known before, especially on his excellent opening posts
Certainly in the history of the world there must be ONE video of a building falling down like that which is NOT due to controlled demolition.
If an ad is going to show the fall of building 7 it should show the fall of building 7, and not part of it
but a horrible series of events which took the building down
Common sense and physics has nothing to do with leftover components of actual "explosive demolition" as its being vaguely referenced.
Show me one piece of shock tube, blasting cap, wire, battery, etc.
I repeat, I do not know the details and data as well as you do, so I can't comment.
I realized that some of the collapse was missing,
No one in the mainstream cares what they think. If there was anything to this then the hundreds of periodicals, radio stations, TV outlets and citizens in general would support these adds-they don't. Also, just attacking Building 7 is proof to so many that they have no proof of anything-just conjecture.
Agreed, nothing has been changed. Why? I don't know.
there could have been dozens that fell from just fire
Besides how something falls is not evidence of why it fell.
My first Federal Grand jury term a defense lawyer(now a Federal judge) instructing the panel on evidence gave this example.
For those who haven't yet seen it, here's a link to the voluminous work done by Jeff Prager regarding the evidence (debunk it if you can) of mini-nukes being used to take down the towers. It's worth looking at just for the amazingly zoomable photos that are included which you won't easily have access to anywhere else.
Jeff Prager Nukes - 911
Funny that this information is so demonized and not discussed fairly, while Judy Wood's cockamamie theories are trotted out over and over again.
The truth appears to be that someone nuked NYC and whoever it is will feel free to do it again if they're not brought to justice. Is your city next in line for the 'no one could ever have imagined' false flag scenario?