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.

 

NYC World Premiere. Firefighters, Architects & Engineers: Expose the Myths of 9/11

page: 27
114
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

The CIA never supported Tim Osman sorry I meant Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda along with the Mujahadin in Afghanistan against the Russians?

Are you serious? LMAO

FFS! Your credibility has gone right out the window mate!

Yikes!

How about the Al-Qaeda / ISIS support?

Oh yeah!



I can see why you believe the official LOL story!






posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Nova937



The CIA never supported Tim Osman sorry I meant Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda along with the Mujahadin in Afghanistan against the Russians?


Now, a history lesson for you because Osama bin Laden was a member of the Afghan Arabs, a group of foreigners which did not receive aid from the CIA, but from Pakistan. The CIA supported only the Afghan Mujahideen.



Afghan Arabs: Not Supported by the CIA

Afghan Arabs (also known as Arab-Afghans) were Arab and other Muslim Islamist mujahideen who came to Afghanistan during and following the Soviet-Afghan War to help fellow Muslims fight Soviets and pro-Soviet Afghans. Observers and journalists covering the war have cast doubt on their significance as a fighting force, but within the Muslim Arab world they achieved near hero-status for their association with the defeat of the militant atheist, anti-religious Communist superpower that was the Soviet Union.

One supporter of the Afghan Arabs, General Hameed Gul, the former head of the Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence, explained the recruitment of Muslims to fight in Afghanistan this way: `We are fighting a jihad and this is the first Islamic international brigade in the modern era. The Communists have their international brigades, the West has NATO, why can't the Muslims unite and form a common front?`

While there was generous financial aid to Afghan guerillas throughout the 1980s, most foreign Muslim jihad volunteers did not arrive in Afghanistan until the mid-1980s.

Osama bin Laden used the thousands of fighters he recruited in 1988 to fight against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan. After the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan bin Laden expanded his "jihad" or holy war. The goals of al-Qaida's jihad are to establish the rule of God on Earth, to cleanse Islam of depravity and to become martyrs to the cause. In 1998 al Qaida issued a statement claiming it was the duty of all Muslims to kill U.S. citizens including civilians.

en.wikipedia.org...


Afghan Mujahideen: Supported by the CIA

The Islamic Unity of Afghanistan Mujahideen (also known as the Seven Party Mujahideen Alliance or Peshawar Seven) was an Afghan organization formed in May 1985 by the seven Afghanmujahideen parties fighting against the Soviet and Democratic Republic of Afghanistan forces in the Soviet-Afghan War. The alliance sought to function as a united diplomatic front towards the world opinion, and sought representation in the United Nations and Organisation of the Islamic Conference

www.airpower.au.af.mil...


In other words, you were unaware that the Afghan Arabs, which were foreigners that included Osama bin Laden and his group, received aid from Pakistan and other sources that had nothing to do with the CIA.

You were also unaware that the CIA supported the Afghan Mujahideen, not the hostile group of foreigners known as the Afghan Arabs.

Don't you think it is about time for you to do some real homework for a change?!

edit on 23-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)


(post by Nova937 removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Nova937



Is that the best they can come up with to stop what you idiots call 'TRUTHERS' trying to learn the truth?


I find that far-fetched considering that truthers have been bombarding the Internet with hoaxed videos and photos and taking comments out of context and spewing disinformation.


For one thing Al-Qaeda is a database of Mercenaries and not a group.


Another name for foreigners who were hostile toward the United States who did not receive aid from the CIA.



If you do YOUR homework you will find out that 'Tim Osman' was OBL's CIA codename and has been since the 1970's and that the CIA funded all his operations.


Even Osama bin Laden would not believe you.



Osama bin Laden

Bin Laden himself once said "the collapse of the Soviet Union ... goes to God and the mujahideen in Afghanistan ... the US had no mentionable role," but "collapse made the US more haughty and arrogant."


Let's take a look at the rest of the story.



* With a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land

* With several hundred million dollars a year in funding from non-American, Muslim sources, Arab Afghans themselves would have no need for American funds

* Americans could not train mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of U.S. agents to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan;

* The Afghan Arabs were militant Islamists, reflexively hostile to Westerners, and prone to threaten or attack Westerners even though they knew the Westerners were helping the (Afghan) mujahideen.

* The US government greatly feared arming or training Arabs would lead to attacks on Israel with those arms or training.

According to CNN journalist Peter Bergen, known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997, The story about bin Laden and the CIA — that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden — is simply a folk myth.

There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently.

The real story here is the CIA did not understand who Osama was until 1996, when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.

www.cnn.com...


Bergen quotes Pakistani Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, who ran the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Afghan operation between 1983 and 1987:
It was always galling to the Americans, and I can understand their point of view, that although they paid the piper they could not call the tune. The CIA supported the (Afghan) mujahideen by spending the taxpayers' money, billions of dollars of it over the years, on buying arms, ammunition, and equipment. It was their secret arms procurement branch that was kept busy.

It was, however, a cardinal rule of Pakistan's policy that no Americans ever become involved with the distribution of funds or arms once they arrived in the country.

edit on 23-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409
As to the sound and seismic activity. That all Depends on the type of demo charge they used.. If it was a set up, I highly doubt they would be ignorant enough to use typical demo charges. What if they found evidence of thermite dust? Would that raise your eyebrows? And you have to admit, (aside from planes being involved) the way them buildings fell looked professionally done. Especially wtc7

I won't even comment on the Pentagon/plane/bull# , that can all be proved by the video, that's all I'll debate about. The evidence that they won't release. If it's a plane, fine ,we've already mourned over it. Just show us. Simple.
edit on 23-9-2015 by Redheadhog because: I missed part of my sentence. And if not corrected, i could be taken wrong.



posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Did they hide the footage of air Florida? Or any crash in recent history in that area?

Why hide the footage? Why not just show us one original video? I mean it would help their story. So why not.?



posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Redheadhog



As to the sound and seismic activity. That all Depends on the type of demo charge they used..


If explosives are firmly attached to steel columns they will send signal through the steel column and into the ground where it can be detected. Look at it as someone who is taping on one end of a steel beam as you listen on the other end.



If it was a set up, I highly doubt they would be ignorant enough to use typical demo charges.[/qluote]

It doesn't matter what type of explosives is used because explosives make a lot of noise that can be heard for miles.


What if they found evidence of thermite dust?


The basic ingredients of thermite was already present at ground zero in the presence of other materials. Thermite is not practical for demolishing steel frame buildings.

[qote]Would that raise your eyebrows? And you have to admit, (aside from planes being involved) the way them buildings fell looked professionally done. Especially wtc7


WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 had suffered from massive impact damage whereas, structural loads were redistributed, and all it took was for fire to finish the job on the remaining steel columns that were carrying the redistributed loads.


I won't even comment on the Pentagon/plane/bull# , that can all be proved by the video, that's all I'll debate about.


My Wing Commander was at the Pentagon when it was struck by American 77. He later briefed us on the details of what happened during his going-away dinner party.


The evidence that they won't release.


The evidence has been released. First of all, American Airlines announced the loss of American 77 at the Pentagon, where remains of passengers and crew were recovered. Secondly, I have identified B-757 wreckage inside and outside the Pentagon.

In addition, American Airlines and the Boeing Aircraft Co. released conversion formulas that pertained only to the airframe of American 77, and not other aircraft. If anyone wanted frurther confirmation other than eyewitnesses accounts, they can ask the engine manufacture, Rolls-Royce, what happened to American 77. After all, Rolls-Royce built the enginers and each engine have their own unique maintenance histories that can be easily tracked.



posted on Sep, 23 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   


y Wing Commander was at the Pentagon when it was struck by American 77. He later briefed us on the details of what happened during his going-away dinner party.


I think it's time you pony that up..give a name so we can investigate...



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Why? Considering all of the evidence points to the aircraft as that American 77, there is nothing more to investigate. I will give you a hnit though, he was the commanding officer of the 349th AMW, Travis AFB, CA.

If you really want to investigate, ask American Airlines what happened to American 77. You can also contact Rolls-Royce, whose engines powered American 77. After all, even the engines of American 77 have their own unique maintenance histories that can be tracked right to the Pentagon.

We can also go here.



Eyewitness Accounts: Large Jetliner

Eyewitness Accounts Describe Jetliner Approaching and Striking Pentagon

Of the more than 100 eyewitness accounts in Eric Bart's compilation, most refer to a jet aircraft approaching the Pentagon in the moments before the explosion.

Of the accounts that indicate the type of aircraft observed, the majority describe a large twin-engine jetliner, consistent with a Boeing 757, which Flight 77 was, or a Boeing 737. Far fewer witnesses recalled a small aircraft approaching the Pentagon. Following are accounts organized into two categories.

Alan Wallace -- firefighter with safety crew at Pentagon's heliport
We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus.

Albert Hemphill -- from inside the Naval Annex
Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex

James S. Robbins -- Robbins, a national-security analyst and 'nationalreviewonline' contributor, watched from his 6th story office window in Arlington
The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, ...

Tim Timmerman --
... said it had been an American Airways 757.

Tim Timmerman -- from 16th floor apartment near National Airport
It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.

Mike Dobbs -- observed from upper level of outer ring of Pentagon
... looking out the window when he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building.

Terry Morin -- watched from 5th wing of BMDO offices at the old Navy Annex
The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn't be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities.

Jim Sutherland -- from his car
... saw ... a white 737 twin-engine plane with multicolored trim fly 50 feet over I-395 in a straight line, striking the side of the Pentagon.

Noel Sepulveda --
... saw a commercial airliner coming from the direction of Henderson Hall the Marine Corps headquarters.

Madelyn Zakhem --
... she heard what she thought was a jet fighter directly overhead. It wasn't. It was an airliner coming straight up Columbia Pike at tree-top level. It was huge! It was silver. It was low -- unbelievable! I could see the cockpit.

Joel Sucherman --
Do you know how many engines? - I did not see the engines, I saw the body and the tail; it was a silver jet with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet, it was not a commercial, excuse me, a business jet, it was not a Lear jet, ... it was a bigger plane than that.

Dave Winslow -- Winslow is an AP reporter
I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon


To sum it up, no one saw a missile strike the Pentagon and FDR data proved that American 77 was not flown under remote control.
edit on 24-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

I never said anything about a missile hitting the Pentagon. . my question about that, was simply, why withhold the evidence?? Why not show us the videos? We have all kinds of videos of the planes hitting the towers.. Why not the Pentagon? As I said, if it was a plane, then show us!!

All you keep saying is, "my commander told me this, so I believe it" . if that makes you a 100% believer, then good for you. But for me, I like to see all the evidence on the table before I decide.. That includes all the videos from the Pentagon strike. Or at least one authentic clear video.

Another thing that strikes me as shady (among other things), is sending all the evidence from the wtc buildings wreckage by the boat load over to china, India, etc. To sell for scrap, before it could be investigated thoroughly.

I try to keep an open mind. That being said, it's easy to see that a lot of things don't smell right in the OS.



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Redheadhog

There is no footage of the Air Florida crash.

And, they have released EVERY video from the area that showed anything.



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Redheadhog
And you have to admit, (aside from planes being involved) the way them buildings fell looked professionally done. Especially wtc7

.


How many 110 storey tube in tube constructed steel framed buildings have you seen professionally done BEFORE or AFTER 911


As for WTC7, a 20 storey grove cut in the building, damage done on one corner several storeys high and fires left to burn for hours. Also if you look at the rubble pile for WTC 7 it DIDN'T fall straight down



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Yeah, I'm no professional in demolition, I admit that. But even if It was my profession, it seems like it would be one heck of a task to bring them two 110 story buildings down without extensive damage to buildings around it. Two planes hitting it would make my job even harder. I would be worried that they would fall over. Imagine the damage they would have done then? Smh, scary.

Again, I'm no professional. But after watching and reading all the information from both sides. I still feel like they should have taken more time, more evidence collection, everything they could do to make sure they knew everything about that day.

So all questions could be answered. Withhold no evidence. We all went threw this together. We all deserve honest answers if we ask them. Or family was attacked as a whole.

This goes for both sides (OS, n truther)

When my family goes threw the death of a family member (especially if their murdered), we don't hold back any information from each other. We don't criticize each other for asking questions. We all know the whole family is hurt. So we help n comfort each other. I wish could see that.



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Redheadhog



..my question about that, was simply, why withhold the evidence?? Why not show us the videos?


If you talking about the Pentagon surveillance videos, why would they when there was more than enough evidence?


We have all kinds of videos of the planes hitting the towers..


And despite videos of aircraft striking WTC1 and WTC2, there are still people claiming that no aircraft hit those buildings.


... Why not the Pentagon?


Having something to do with the military, it would not be prudent for the Pentagon to advertise its surveillance capabilities to everyone.


As I said, if it was a plane, then show us!!


You don't need videos when there are many photos of B-757 wreckage, some in the colors of American Airlines, inside and outside the Pentagon and there were witnesses in the air and on the ground who saw American 77 strike the Pentagon,

You have American 77 FDR data that pertained only to the airframe of American 77 and no other aircraft, and there is radar data as well, but most of all, you have the announcement from American Airlines confirming the loss of American 77 at the Pentagon.
edit on 24-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

You gotta admit that it didn't look good that the 9/11 commission complained about being under funded, not having enough time, and not being able to share a lot of the info they had.

The government held them back. You can see the frustration in their face and hear it in their voice during interviews. That is enough to raise a lot of suspicion. They should of been able to go threw all the wreckage before it was sold as scrap to china n India. Jus sayin.



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Redheadhog



You gotta admit that it didn't look good that the 9/11 commission complained about being under funded, not having enough time, and not being able to share a lot of the info they had.

The government held them back. You can see the frustration in their face and hear it in their voice during interviews. That is enough to raise a lot of suspicion. They should of been able to go threw all the wreckage before it was sold as scrap to china n India. Jus sayin.


The government had a lot of explaining to do,. For an example, why were the warnings ignored? Prior to 9/11 countries around the world had issued warnings to the United States that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda were in the process of carrying out their terrorist attack on the United States and use hijacked airliners to kill thousands.



They Tried to Warn Us: Foreign Intelligence Warnings Before 9/11

The Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9-11 is now finished, but the findings that have been released fail to mention any warnings from foreign governments. The US mainstream media also has paid little attention to warnings from foreign governments.

Yet there were so many warnings—from both our friends and enemies alike—often specifically suggesting the targets or method of attack. In at least one case, the warnings actually mentioned hijackers by name.

www.historycommons.org...


Even the Philippines issued warnings to the United States as far back as 1995 when a plot was uncovered to bomb many American airliners out of the sky and use another aircraft to slam into CIA Headquarters.



The Bojinka Plot

The explosions were to be timed by the operatives before they disembarked from the plane. The aircraft would have exploded over the Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea almost simultaneously. If this plan worked, several thousand passengers would have perished, and air travel would likely have been shut down worldwide. The U.S. government estimated the prospective death toll to be about 4,000 if the plot had been executed. (For comparison, about 3,000 were killed during the September 11 attacks in the United States.)

Phase III: CIA plane crash plot

Phase three would have involved Murad either renting, buying, or hijacking a small airplane, preferably a Cessna. The airplane would be filled with explosives. He would then crash it into the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in the Langley area in Fairfax County, Virginia. Murad had been trained as a pilot in North Carolina, and was slated to be a suicide pilot.

There were alternate plans to hijack a 12th commercial airliner and use that instead of the small aircraft, probably due to the Manila cell's growing frustration with explosives. Testing explosives in a house or apartment is dangerous, and it can easily give away a terrorist plot. Khalid Sheik Mohammed probably made the alternate plan.

en.wikipedia.org...


One of the terrorist of that plot was Ramzi Yousef, the terrorist who bombed WTC1 in 1993 and nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11. Even the Taliban issued the warning to the United Statess.



Taliban 'warned US of huge attack

An aide to the former Taleban foreign minister, Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil, has revealed that he was sent to warn American diplomats and the United Nations that Osama bin Laden was due to launch a huge attack on American soil.

news.bbc.co.uk...


Our intelligence services and even the FAA had dropped the ball prior to 9/11. I also blame Condoleezza Rice for ignoring the warnings.

Government leaders ignoring intelligence warnings is nothing knew, and in fact, Hitler continued to ignore the advice of his own military commander as was the case with Japanese leader, Hideki Tojo.

I am surprised that no one has concocted a conspiracy theory over the ignorance of Hitler and Tojo, because after World War II ended, the United States emerged as the world's only nuclear superpower.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Redheadhog

There are lots of things to consider with this event I will give you a few examples it was claimed that the Towers were around 500,000 tons each based on what was supposed to be the mass of the steel & the amount of concrete used.

The bulk of the concrete went into what's called the bathtub, we have the number of floors we know the floor slab thickness and we have a mass for the type of concrete used for the floor slab.

The most accurate figure I have seen for the steel was 92,000 tons for each tower, the Empire State building has 60,000 tons so that looks about right the floors work out at around 120,000 tons for each tower.

When people don't think the OS is correct they will post things like this, fire alone has never brought down a steel structure, well it wasn't just fire they seem to foget about the aircraft and the damage they caused.

Then it's all the fuel burned off in the blast so is the assumption nothing else would be on fire after that.

Then the fire could not melt steel didn't need to office fires, can reach a 1000c there is documented proof of that at at 600c steel is around 50% of it's strength.

Or they will show other building fires which they don't know were of a different design or mainly concrete and even on those the steelwork actually failed.

Then the dust with claims that steel was turned to dust
no materials that could produce dust caused the dust the list is long sheetrock, vermiculite insulation the sprayed on fire protection, concrete on the floor slab, paint , ceiling tiles even the glass etc.

Then the lack of undestanding of structures and the loadings they seen to think floor slabs of around 900-1000 tons falling are not a problem.

One of the biggest issues what about the people killed they were from all around the world the US Government could never risk doing what's claimed imagine the backlash if they were found out.


edit on 25-9-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Redheadhog




Another thing that strikes me as shady (among other things), is sending all the evidence from the wtc buildings wreckage by the boat load over to china, India, etc. To sell for scrap, before it could be investigated thoroughly.

Have you forgotten that all the debris was taken to the fresh kills landfill where people went through it by hand ?
Beams were inspected by experts and held aside for detailed analysis.

Conspiracy sites don't mention those little details do they?



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Redheadhog




Another thing that strikes me as shady (among other things), is sending all the evidence from the wtc buildings wreckage by the boat load over to china, India, etc. To sell for scrap, before it could be investigated thoroughly.

Have you forgotten that all the debris was taken to the fresh kills landfill where people went through it by hand ?
Beams were inspected by experts and held aside for detailed analysis.

Conspiracy sites don't mention those little details do they?


That's probably because - unlike you - they realise that those details are irrelevant to the issue of whether 9/11 was an inside job. What you call the "experts" were scientists and engineers appointed by the US government. They would have been under HUGE pressure to confirm to the official story and not to report anomalies that were inconsistent with the offical narrative. Their careers would be over in a second if they did not stick to it.

And some naive people wonder why such irrelevant details were never covered by 9/11 truthers? "Forgive them, Lord, for they understand not what they say."



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: micpsi




They would have been under HUGE pressure to confirm to the official story and not to report anomalies that were inconsistent with the offical narrative. Their careers would be over in a second if they did not stick to it.

And no one has talked.
No one has retired.
No one has changed their career.

Lets not forget we have since had the crash of 08'.
Even Richard Gage lost his career.

After 14 years not one person has had a change of heart.
After 14 years not one widow has had a change of heart.

For this conspiracy to have taken place:
You need more than one person to concoct the deed.
You need more than a few people to do the deed.
You need more than a few dozen to cover up the deed.

All of these people would be on the hook for conspiring to commit first degree murder.
A death penalty offence in New York at the time.
Even if one person opted out of his part he would still be charged for failing to inform the authorities.

After 14 years there is zero evidence that any individual other than the 19 Saudis were directly involved.
And no one talked.




top topics



 
114
<< 24  25  26    28 >>

log in

join