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.
originally posted by: Informer1958
I find it very interesting that the word Truther means a negative.
So if one finds a lie in the OS of 911, what is he or she if they expose it?
originally posted by: THest
Most conspiracy theorists are dorks, sitting alone in their cellars.... never had any chicks.... let alone SEX.
A...M I .... RIGHT?
originally posted by: wayforward
All one has to do to know it was a conspiracy is believe what George Bush said he was doing as the first plane struck the first building.
Daniel Nigro: Chief of Department FDNY
Release date: September 23, 2007
Regarding WTC 7: The long-awaited US Government NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapse of WTC 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff).
The reasons are as follows:
1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.
For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.
Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.
Regards, Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY (retired)
To be candid, I'm in the construction management business and I know how to build but I have zero experience with controlled explosion demolition, but I see every day that buildings are over designed (primarily because Engineers of Record, as well as developers, do not want to be sued. WTC7 was completed in 1987 if I remember correctly. I promise you the building was structurally sound and a "typical office fire" would not bring it down. And if it was an atypical fire... a fire strong enough to collapse the building... I struggle to comprehend how it would come down so neatly. I would have expected perhaps portions to collapse and create a huge, very expensive mess rather than be self contained.
Boyle: "A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post.
Hayden:Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors.
It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.
Battalion Chief John Norman later recalls, "At the edge of the south face you could see that it is very heavily damaged." [Firehouse Magazine, 5/02]
Classic example of the internet - Silverstein got between $3-10 Billion in the insurance payment.
Can't be precise.
Silverstein Loses Battle Over 9/11 Payouts
A federal judge on Thursday rejected developer Larry Silverstein's bid to recover billions of dollars from two airlines whose planes were used in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a significant setback in his nearly decadelong fight for more money to rebuild the World Trade Center.
After a four-day bench trial in Lower Manhattan this week, U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled that an investment group led by Mr. Silverstein had already received all the compensation for which it is eligible: the $4.1 billion paid by property insurers in 2004.
originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: amazing
Just to let you know that your video is a joke. For an example, it mentions that the Pentagon was renovated to absorb a cruise missile strike. Nothng could be further from the truth. The Pentagon was reinforced for car bomb attacks, not cruise missile strikes. The fact that there is a huge hole on the west side of the Pentagon show how absurd that claim is.
In another segment of your video, it mentions a pod on United 175. There is no pod. I later found that truthers misidentified aerodynamic fairings and MLG doors as a pod, which are standard equipment on all B-767s, but it didn't end there. Another truther claimed that a pod could be seen beneath the forward fuselage of United 175, but a closer look revealed that what he perceived to be a pod, was nothing more than the paint scheme.
Question is, did you really think that United Airlines would have grounded its B-767 in order for it to be modify to carry a pod loaded with 1000 pounds of explosives when over 20,000 pounds of cargo could have been carried in the cargo holds without modifying anything?
It's blunders like those that have discredit the Truth Movement over the years. There was no way a pod could have been attached to the airframe of United 175 and not attract a lot of attention, which would have left a paper trail from Washington State to Washington D.C.
I know, because I have modified large and small aircraft including military helicopters over the decades and knew that the claim of an attached pod on United 175 was false.
As you can see, WTC7 suffered massive impact damage WTC1 on its south wall.
Answer: A Politically incorrect person. From what I have seen, that is the truth right there.