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.

 

9/11 Bombshell: Methodical Deception -- Rebekah Roth

page: 35
135
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   
We can debate this till the cows come home, but at the end of the day none of us are true experts and what some highly qualified people are asking for is basically a thorough and proper investigation. Not only are the experts asking for this but also some families of victims. Shouldn't they be given what they have asked for in such an event? If they have major doubts as to the veracity of the OS it is their right to ask for an impartial investigation and to get it, after all it is this one event that created the Patriot Act The War on Terror and 2 wars! Surely the basis for such important acts which have had a huge impact on the American way of life and have had a knock on effect around the world, should be unquestionably and completely founded in fact, not deceit fiction maybes or coincidences

If this event were as clear cut as alleged, the alleged conspiracy theories would not have arisen in the first place. There ARE questions, there ARE anomalies, there ARE too many coincidences for people to swallow and accept and there ARE too many inconcistencies all across the board. People can try and debunk them all from websites specifically set up to do just that, with obsfucation, plays on words and maybe's but it will never go away until definitive answers are found

The NIST report is almost worthless, the Commission themselves feel they were underfunded and set up to fail, no criminal investigation was conducted, there was no "crime scene", all evidence was removed asap and people present at ground zero are dying. Good grief! Even the FBI said they didn't have enough concrete evidence to name Osama as the perp for 9/11 and on his Wanted poster details 9/11 isn't mentioned!

The only way this will ever get put to rest is to do as the people have asked and conduct a thorough independant investigation for everyone's sake so people involved can move on with their lives




posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Well, it has been 14 years and still no evidence that explosives and thermite brought down the WTC buildings.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Well, it has been 14 years and still no evidence that explosives and thermite brought down the WTC buildings.


And still no evidence that the Official Story is true!

OS Truthers can squawk all the want. There is not a shred of evidence to prove the OS is the real story!



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Nova937



And still no evidence that the Official Story is true!


Of course its true, which is why after 14 years, the OS remains standing to this very day.
edit on 18-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Nova937

Let's take a look here.



Bogus claims: "No Planes" hoaxes

Traps to distract and discredit the 9/11 truth movement

Due to the success of the "no plane at Pentagon" claim, several successor stories were created to deny the other crashes but none were as popular as the original hoax. The first of these was the idea that a plane did not really hit the North Tower, but was really a missile camouflaged by a King Kong sized hologram of a plane.

This bizarre creation came from a website called "the webfairy," and took advantage of the fact that there is only one, low quality video publicly available of the North Tower attack. This hoax is easily disproved by the most obvious "physical evidence" - the hole in the side of the North tower was the size of a 767.

The "no plane at the towers" campaign didn't fly, partially because the idea for the missile masked by a King Kong sized hologram of a plane at the North Tower is ridiculous and was of limited utility in discrediting the 9/11 truth movement. It is probable that this wasn't intended to attract supporters, but merely make 9/11 skeptics look silly.

www.oilempire.us...

edit on 18-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Nova937



To say that we don't understand physics when 3 buildings came down exactly the same way at Freefall speed due to fires is just preposterous!


You think the WTC buildings fell at free fall speed, but this photo says that you are incorrect. You will notice that debris, which are falling at free fall speed, are outpacing the collapse of the WTC Tower.

WTC Tower Not Falling at Free Fall Speed

It seems that you missed this video as well.



Verdict: The WTC buildings did not fall at free fall speed.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 11:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Well, it has been 14 years and still no evidence that explosives and thermite brought down the WTC buildings.


I would beg to differ and present something like this but we both know that's not going to change your opinion.
edit on 18-9-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Nova937



To say that we don't understand physics when 3 buildings came down exactly the same way at Freefall speed due to fires is just preposterous!


You think the WTC buildings fell at free fall speed, but this photo says that you are incorrect. You will notice that debris, which are falling at free fall speed, are outpacing the collapse of the WTC Tower.

WTC Tower Not Falling at Free Fall Speed

It seems that you missed this video as well.


Verdict: The WTC buildings did not fall at free fall speed.


Can you show me in this thread where you defended the building's actual rate of collapse? Can you explain it's oddly fast and totally destructive nature? Or do you shut down all possibility of open mindedness on your part because he didn't just say "fell real fast..."?



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: humanityrising



I would beg to differ and present something like this but we both know that's not going to change your opinion.


I have challenged truthers to post scientific evidence that explosives or even thermite was used.

I might add that they have failed because not one WTC video depicts demo explosions, which explains why seismic monitors in the area did not detect demo explosions, which goes even further to explain why no evidence of demo explosives was ever found.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Wizayne



Can you show me in this thread where you defended the building's actual rate of collapse?


We can take a look here where debris falling at free fall speed are outpacing the collapse of the WTC Tower.

Photo: Debris Falling at Free Fall Speed Outpacing WTC Tower Collapse

That photo is proof, that the WTC Tower was not falling at free fall speed because the debris was striking the ground while the collapse was still in progress many stories about the ground.



Can you explain it's oddly fast and totally destructive nature?


The collapse of each of the WTC buildings was such that there was nothing that could have stopped the collapse.



Or do you shut down all possibility of open mindedness on your part because he didn't just say "fell real fast..."?


None of the WTC buildings fell at free fall speed. I think you missed this video, so I will post it once again.




edit on 19-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: humanityrising



I would beg to differ and present something like this but we both know that's not going to change your opinion.


I have challenged truthers to post scientific evidence that explosives or even thermite was used.



Here's a link to the actual study. The 'debunking' that you will most assuredly and impulsively respond with only addresses the iron microspheres, NOT the presence of aluminum and actual chunks of unignited, "highly energetic" thermitic material. This is what we call cold, hard evidence. To deny it means you're either lying to yourself or lying to us.

The sad part is that this completely legitimate and altogether damning evidence won't cause even one second of reflection inside your head because your crusade is not driven by facts, but by ideology. I would copy and paste an excerpt but it's PDF so I can't. Happy reading!

ETA: This might be something you want to view in tandem with the study and whatever debunking articles you google.


edit on 19-9-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-9-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 01:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: humanityrising
The 'debunking' that you will most assuredly and impulsively respond with only addresses the iron microspheres, NOT the presence of aluminum and actual chunks of unignited, "highly energetic" thermitic material.


Wrong again, annarborscienceskeptic.com... thoroughly debunks that paper.... which was NOT peer reviewed!

This is what we call cold, hard evidence. To deny it means you're either lying to yourself or lying to us.

It is also debunked here www.abovetopsecret.com...
and here
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 19-9-2015 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:04 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Read the other link I posted



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 03:48 AM
link   
a reply to: humanityrising

The microspheres are not evidence that thermite was planted. I might add that Steven Jones and Richard Gage were both caught lying about thermite. Ask his former colleagues at BYU what they think about Steven Jones and his paper.



Letter to the Editor
Refuting 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

April 09, 2006
Dear Editor,

After reading in the Daily Herald the presentations made by Professor Steven E. Jones (BYU Physics) to students at UVSC and BYU, I feel obligated to reply to his "Conspiracy Theory" relating to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center (9/11/01).

I have studied the summary of the report by FEMA, The American Society of Civil Engineers and several other professional engineering organizations. These experts have given in detail the effects on the Towers by the impact of the commercial aircraft. I have also read Professor Jones' (referred to) 42 page unpublished report. In my understanding of structural design and the properties of structural steel I find Professor Jones' thesis that planted explosives (rather than fire from the planes) caused the collapse of the Towers, very unreliable.

The structural design of the towers was unique in that the supporting steel structure consisted of closely spaced columns in the walls of all four sides. The resulting structure was similar to a tube. When the aircraft impacted the towers at speeds of about 500 plus mph, many steel columns were immediately severed and others rendered weak by the following fires. The fires critically damaged the floors systems. Structural steel will begin to lose strength when heated to temperatures above 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. Steel bridge girders are bent to conform to the curved roadway by spot heating flanges between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. It is easy to comprehend the loss of carrying capacity of all the structural steel due to the raging fires fed by the jet's fuel as well as aircraft and building contents.

Before one (especially students) supports such a conspiracy theory, they should investigate all details of the theory. To me a practicing structural engineer of 57 continuous years (1941-1998), Professor Jones' presentations are very disturbing.

D. Allan Firmage

Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, BYU


Brigham Young University doesn't want anything to do with the paper

The BYU physics department has also issued a statement: "The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones' hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty members. Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."

The College of Engineering and Technology department has also added, "The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."

www.debunking911.com...


Now, let's go here.

RJ Lee Group: Microspheres

www.metabunk.org...
edit on 19-9-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: humanityrising

The microspheres are not evidence that thermite was planted. I might add that Steven Jones and Richard Gage were both caught lying about thermite. Ask the former colleagues at BYU what they think about Steven Jones and his paper.

Now, let's go here.

RJ Lee Group: Microspheres


Lol I don't think you are reading my posts. I anticipated you having this exact(microspheres) response so I specifically addressed it earlier. With regards to the rest, I'm sorry but character assassination is not going to cut it.

It's obvious that we're going to have to agree to disagree. Do I really think I'm going to change your mind? No. Are you going to change my mind? Helle no. There is sufficient data for both points of view to be explored, though that is obviously a matter of opinion. I just am tired of hearing that there is no substance whatsoever to the inside job theory and that we're all a bunch of nut cases. That is preposterous. The fact that your side thinks our side actually believes every crazy theory pertaining to 9/11 found on the internet shows me that you really have no idea who truthers are and that you've never really delved into the subject with an open mind to learn where they're coming from. We're just lumped together without regard to any nuances or specifics and seems like most OS believers just thoroughly enjoy the act of belittling truthers and calling them crazy while simultaneously reinforcing their own 'rightness' and ego. To say that there is absolutely not one single thing that is questionable about the official story is pure insanity.
edit on 19-9-2015 by humanityrising because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 05:05 AM
link   
That's the thing I have noticed here.

I'm going to call 'OS Truthers' 'OS Activists' because they are not searching for the truth. They are trying to debunk anything anyone else says that is contrary to the Official Story. We 'Truthers' as the like to call us do NOT accept the Official Story as it is full of holes, deception and anomalies. That being the case we are looking at anything that would explain these holes, deception and anomalies.

OS Activists will NOT accept any evidence presented to them that contradicts the Official Story. They want to debunk anything we say!

They try to demolish it in an instant (Excuse the pun)
edit on 19-9-2015 by Nova937 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 05:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nova937
do NOT accept the Official Story as it is full of holes, deception and anomalies.


yet these alleged " holes, deception and anomalies" are simply due to truthers poor understanding of physics and believing the crap truther websites post!


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

posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Impartial investigation? By who? The FBI, NSA, CIA, NIST, NTSB, NYPD, FDNY, PAPD, FEMA and a dozen or so other US Agencies and a dozen or so foreign agencies investigated various parts of the events of that day. Who are the "impartial" individuals you want to investigate? The Theology professor? Richard Gage (caught lying more times than I can remember? Stephen Jones (again, caught doctoring photos and lying)? Thierrey Meyssan (caught lying)? Kevin Ryan the UL water lab employee (caught lying)? WHO is it you want to investigate?

The problem is, many of the people saying we need another investigation are people who are believing lies that have been told over the years.

People say there was no airplane at the Pentagon...despite the 757 wreckage found, the passenger/crew remains found, the witnesses to it, the radar tracks to it, the ATC employees at Reagan National's control tower who watched it, the reporters who reported the wreckage they observed....and yet, people think there was no plane there.

People say that there is no way that steel can fail from an office fire no matter how many times you can show them that steel fails at a much lower temperature than it will melt at....its why they spray fireproofing on structural steel, to try and give enough time for firefighters to put the fires out.

People claim that the FBI never thought OBL was a suspect because they never added 9/11 to his most wanted poster, despite the fact that the State Department specifically listed 9/11 as a reason they offered a reward for him AND that in the trials that we HAVE had about 9/11, OBL is ALWAYS listed as a conspirator in the court indictments.

The NIST report....is an educated guess. ANY investigation of the building collapses will be an educated guess. There was NOTHING inside of the buildings to record the precise sequence of events. You look at the videos, you look at the photos, you talk to the witnesses and you theorize the events. No one will ever know exactly which column failed where. To do that, you would have needed a camera...sensor..human being on a phone that says Column 79 is buckling on the 22nd floor. It sucks, but it is reality. And anyone who tells you that another investigation will allow them to pinpoint the cause...is lying to you.

The evidence.....took over 8 months to completely remove from Ground Zero and it all went to four landfills where people went through it, looking for clues.

There are ALWAYS anomalies in every event. HOW in the world did earthworms and ants survive the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster when seven human beings did not? How did videos and notebooks survive a fiery reentry that day? You can find anomalies.

Just as you can always find conspiracies, when you fail to examine all the evidence and rely on things you read on the internet.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596




HOW in the world did earthworms and ants survive the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster when seven human beings did not? How did videos and notebooks survive a fiery reentry that day? You can find anomalies.

The earthworms and note books were planted there.
There never were any humans on board.
They were removed and shipped to Cleveland where we dispose of all in flight witnesses.
See! Simple! New conspiracy.




top topics



 
135
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join