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.

 

Evidence of demolition company at 9/11

page: 4
46
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:06 AM
link   
The 25 Story building is on fire!! and it never fell www.iafrica.tv...



Approximately with 10,000 liters of water, were mobilized to the disaster, but that the raging inferno was more than trucks could handle. The eyewitness told to The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) that the Federal Fire Service was quick to respond to the distress call of traders and more than five fire engines were lined up to battle the blaze. There was nobody in the building because the fire started before resumption of work. NAN also reports that as at 11:00 a.m., the firemen were able to contain the fire and also prevented it from spreading to other floors and shopping plazas around the skyscraper.


40 story building in flames
still standing




posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: Answer


Problem is, there IS no contradictory evidence towards the TRUTHERS.

It is so far beyond laughable the efforts the pathetic scientists made trying to fit this into the marred paradigm of the world they were programmed with, it blows the mind.

How do you figure any of the conclusions the MEDIA came up with have anything to do with the truth, and how do you reconcile the fact that no real scientific investigation was ever done on this, but bottled up into segments filled with people who were ready to change REALITY to fit the absolute destruction seen here.

Some serious revelations are coming to those whom are so easily fooled.



Again, you're applying your own bias to the situation. A thorough investigation was done and the causes of the collapses were documented. You just don't want to believe the evidence presented. You're EXACTLY like a creationist who denies the evidence of evolution because "the scientists are just trying to make the evidence fit what they already believe!" The parallels are interesting and I think it paints a clear picture of denial.

Not one single piece of evidence has been presented by the truthers that holds up to the slightest degree of scrutiny. In the 13 years since the attack, the truther movement hasn't come up with anything solid. They keep presenting the same bogus opinions of a small handful of "experts" with questionable or non-existent qualifications. It makes as much sense as moon-landing deniers who say it didn't happen because "I just don't think it's possible." An individual's uneducated and uninformed opinion does not a reality make.
All the evidence was packed up and sent to China. I bet they retained some for use at a later date.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: Bilk22


Don't forget there is also a video around with fire fighters telling people in advance building 7 is coming down and they need to clear the area.

I try finding it:

This is not the one, but also they know it in advance:



Another:



Firefighters were reporting over the radio that the structure was starting to fail. They saw parts of the building starting to bulge and crumple. After the towers collapsed, they obviously weren't taking any chances.

EDIT: I see this was already addressed earlier in the thread and the typical truther responses have already been posted. Predictable.


I didn't hear anything in those reports that said the fire fighters reported seeing bulging. Not in the 2 videos you quoted.


What are you talking about? I was responding to the claims made in the post. I was not commenting on those particular videos.

Do some basic research on the WTC 7 collapse... even Wiki talks about the radio traffic from police and firefighters saying parts of the building were collapsing and the entire structure seemed compromised. That's why they stopped fighting the fire and moved everyone away from the building.


I must be blind. I looked as hard as I could but didn't find anything. could you post it for us since you sound like you know where to look.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Answer
Anyone who disagrees with the explosive demolition story is just "buying the official story." The irony is that the truthers buy the conspiracy story without any evidence. It's true because they want it to be.


It is funny you should say that because you have been selling a story that had no real investigation done. The evidence was quickly disposed of. Almost the entire narrative was given on september 12 2001 and you just ate it up before there was even a look-see. You WANTED to be attacked by terrorists apparently because you never gave it a second thought.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 05:30 AM
link   
This is the sound of a controlled demolition with explosive.




There is absolutely no sound of any explosives going off when building 7 collapse though you can hear the sound of the building collapse.



There is absolutely NO PROOF of a controlled demolition of building 7, though a lot of armchair experts in here always try to claim so, even with no evidence at all.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

If nano thermite was used, there wouldn't be any sounds of explosives.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ugmold


The next time you see a steel frame building on fire, or smoldering like 7, you better run. Actually, don't worry it will never happen again.

Smoldering, lol.

It burned unchecked for hours. it will never happen again? If those same circumstances occur, it will.

Lets see, unchecked fire, hi rise collapse times two, hundreds of rescue workers dead, debris and fire blocking access, no power or water, workers exhausted, yah, it will happen again.

All we need is some suicide pilots armed with the biggest napalm bomb, cruise missiles ever… and a city.


Yes it smoldered, on one side of the building. Never has a high rise steel structure building collapsed because of fire. The circumstances you mention are suspicious, especially when Larry Silverestein said
, and No, he wasn't eluding to the Firemen who were in the building because they had long since exited, I believe around noon.

Now watch any video of the building coming down and point out a single flame. It will never happen again, unless like you said their are similar circumstances, controlled demolition.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold
especially when Larry Silverestein said
, and No, he wasn't eluding to the Firemen who were in the building because they had long since exited, I believe around noon.


Any evidence for that claim? So you think the NYFD blow up buildings....

Ps - your video does not work....



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:37 AM
link   


Oh so a fire can cause a steel framed building to collapse... Of course, the full extent of the damage/collapse depends on the individual design and construction of the building.
This one only started with an electrical fault in a coffee machine as well, it wasn't due to aircraft impacts and jet fuel, or even 'just' having large sections of WTC1/2 falling onto it..



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: ugmold




Yes it smoldered, on one side of the building.


O RLY.





This one is the wind side, the wind pushing the flames and smoke into the building, it's also the side used by people who claim there were only small or non fires going on because the smoke and flames came out on the other side facing WTC 1, WTC 2.

The smoke from the building show that it's burning.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

Your video just proved our point even more. That building did not collapse. Just the part that was damaged. The non damaged parts stood standing.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Emerys

I'm wondering if you actually read my short post, allow me to repeat:


Of course, the full extent of the damage/collapse depends on the individual design and construction of the building.
This one only started with an electrical fault in a coffee machine as well, it wasn't due to aircraft impacts and jet fuel, or even 'just' having large sections of WTC1/2 falling onto it..


The overall construction of the building was different and the damage was different, I was merely illustrating that a collapse of a steel framed building could start from just a fire - as some people insist it cannot.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: ugmold
especially when Larry Silverestein said
, and No, he wasn't eluding to the Firemen who were in the building because they had long since exited, I believe around noon.


Any evidence for that claim? So you think the NYFD blow up buildings....

Ps - your video does not work....


Isn't that funny how many youtube videos regarding the Truth about 911, go bad. Well just search "Larry Silverstien Pull it" The video is still up and has the same number. Larry Baby

There is evidence that all Fireman were out of the building, none you would consider legit, you could probably ask FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti, 34 year veteran who made the announcement that the building was coming down.

For more I would you, and every American pick up a copy of 9/11 The Simple Facts, around 100 pages.Handy Reference



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye
Confirmed, smoldered.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22

They destroyed all the evidence by sending it to China so it could then be sold back to us in trinkets. Pretty evil, if you ask me. May they all rot in hell.


Ummm no.

There's STILL plenty of evidence around. I believe FEMA selected out ~236 pieces of steel of interest and had it set aside for further study at the landfill. It is at the Kennedy airport. Even Jessie Ventura agrees on this point cuz he filmed there and shot through a window and saw it there.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
gotta look them other buildings being demo'd, must of their guts had been ripped out building 7 didn't so the explosion would be muffled maybe.

what gets me is the other buildings around building 7 why aren't they on fire?



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: Emerys

originally posted by: Bilk22
What's interesting is the cop knew that Building 7 was going down. How and what time was it when this video footage was taken? So who told this cop in advance it was going to collapse? Who would know the extent of damage, since the building was supposed to be engulfed in flames and evacuated? No steel structure of it's kind ever collapsed because of fire, so I find it difficult to believe someone could make that assessment. That is a smoking gun right there.


I don't know the timeline. But it appears not too long before WTC7 collapses. Maybe 30-40 mins prior? I also find it interesting how the police and federal agencies are blocking off just those areas of the WTC. You would think if they had no clue of which buildings were going to collapse, all buildings would be deemed unsafe. Hmm.
Well he didn't even say it was unsafe. He said it was coming down. I find that to be one of the most damning pieces of evidence for a designed demolition there is regarding this travesty. He knew well before 30 - 40 minutes in advance. He and everyone in uniform there knew it.


Right. And he cared enough to get people away from it but not enough to stop it or to speak out afterwards. Because, logic.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: amraks
gotta look them other buildings being demo'd, must of their guts had been ripped out building 7 didn't so the explosion would be muffled maybe.

what gets me is the other buildings around building 7 why aren't they on fire?


"Um maybe, possibly, herpa derp I'm just gonna keep grasping at straws to maintain my version of the story."

The other buildings did have small fires that were extinguished by fire fighters. Some of the buildings did not end up with flaming debris inside of them. This isn't rocket science.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: Bilk22


Don't forget there is also a video around with fire fighters telling people in advance building 7 is coming down and they need to clear the area.

I try finding it:

This is not the one, but also they know it in advance:



Another:



Firefighters were reporting over the radio that the structure was starting to fail. They saw parts of the building starting to bulge and crumple. After the towers collapsed, they obviously weren't taking any chances.

EDIT: I see this was already addressed earlier in the thread and the typical truther responses have already been posted. Predictable.


I didn't hear anything in those reports that said the fire fighters reported seeing bulging. Not in the 2 videos you quoted.


What are you talking about? I was responding to the claims made in the post. I was not commenting on those particular videos.

Do some basic research on the WTC 7 collapse... even Wiki talks about the radio traffic from police and firefighters saying parts of the building were collapsing and the entire structure seemed compromised. That's why they stopped fighting the fire and moved everyone away from the building.


I must be blind. I looked as hard as I could but didn't find anything. could you post it for us since you sound like you know where to look.


I believe in my post I said Wikipedia talks about it. You obviously didn't look very hard because it's the second response on Google when you type in "WTC 7 Collapse."


It is funny you should say that because you have been selling a story that had no real investigation done. The evidence was quickly disposed of. Almost the entire narrative was given on september 12 2001 and you just ate it up before there was even a look-see. You WANTED to be attacked by terrorists apparently because you never gave it a second thought.


Yes, I wanted to be attacked by terrorists because I accept the story presented by people who know what they're talking about, who didn't have a conspiracy agenda, and who could see and postulate clearly what happened to the buildings that day. The only people who doubt how the buildings came down are WANTING to find a conspiracy. An unbiased look, with an understanding of structures and physics, will yield the same explanation that was presented in the official story.

There was a thorough investigation done by NIST. You may want to read up on it so you'll stop incorrectly stating that no investigation was done. You want your version of the story to be true so badly that you manipulate and fabricate information to make an illogical story seem possible. Do you honestly think, with all the brilliant minds in our nation, that someone legitimate would not have stepped forward by now and presented clear evidence that the buildings must have been brought down intentionally? All the truther movement can find are crackpots with questionable credentials pulling their own opinion out of thin air.
edit on 9/22/2014 by Answer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Emerys
a reply to: Mianeye

If nano thermite was used, there wouldn't be any sounds of explosives.


And if they used unicorn turds, the building would have collapsed into a pile of yummy gum drops.



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join