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.

 

Why Wait an Hour to Blow the Buildings ?

page: 15
7
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




The Port Authority are criminals, it was them in my opinion who ordered the crime scene cleaned up as fast as possibly to cover up what they really knew about the substandard steel. They did not want any outside agencies getting their hands on that steel to do any testing. This make sense to me now.


Think about this, the Port Authority of then was not the same as in 2001, to many years went by, new people, would they have even known ?

Still does not explain the complete collapse to ground level..




posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
You either believe in magic or the events on 911 are clearly a false flag

And I don’t mean this next statement as a joke

If this wasn’t a false flag then aliens did this



Well there was that saucer caught on video flying by at the time....lol just keeping it lite folks..



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

From your link



To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C te]


I might add that the temperature of the fire that resulted in the shape of this steel beam was nowhere near 1100 degrees C..

Photo: Steel Beam Bent Due to Fire



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
On Key Public Projects, Who Monitors the Monitors?


Who monitors the monitors?

In the 21st century New York City is now dominated by huge multinational construction conglomerates and integrity monitors who act act as a bulwark against the sector slipping back into the bad old days of fraud and corruption. But as the record has shown their presence doesn’t mean things still can’t go terribly wrong with catastrophic consequences.


citylimits.org...

For all of you interested here is a credible source of some of the corruption with construction conglomerates.

This is an excellent read to understand the how's and why's.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell



Even if the steel did melt, and its proven it didn’t, the building would never have fallen down so uniformly, that is a physical impossibility the way the buildings fell


There was no need for the steel to melt in order to facilitate the collapse of the WTC buildings. After all, the steel structures of 3 buildings in Thailand had collapsed within 2 hours due to fire, and their steel structures did not melt.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell



If this wasn’t a false flag then aliens did this


We can definitely rule out 9/11 as an inside job. After all, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda took responsibility for 9/11.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb


Think about this, the Port Authority of then was not the same as in 2001, to many years went by, new people, would they have even known ?

Still does not explain the complete collapse to ground level..


Yes, I believe they knew, and some of them high up, had powerful political friends in Washington that was no secrete.

I agree there are many questions, that are still unanswered and we probably will never get them.

In the light of all this new information I am still trying to digest it, and it is overwhelming to say the lease.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:44 PM
link   


After all, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda took responsibility for 9/11.


Weather they did or did not is a moot point, it still does not explain a complete collapse to ground level..



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Well your doing a great job of digging up some good info, and I don't rule any of it out, in fact I am sure it is true, but.. it still does not explain things.

I will however look forward to looking at anything more you find.. My mind is not changed but it is still open.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



Weather they did or did not is a moot point, it still does not explain a complete collapse to ground level..


The WTC buildings collapsed as would be expected under those circumstances and they did not collapse at free fall speed nor within their footprints, which is not indicative of demolition implosions.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Evidence please!



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb


Well your doing a great job of digging up some good info, and I don't rule any of it out, in fact I am sure it is true, but.. it still does not explain things.

I will however look forward to looking at anything more you find.. My mind is not changed but it is still open.


That is the way I am, I always keep an opened mind and read all sides of a story before coming to a conclusion.

Being someone who is always searching for truth, has to be able to change his or hers mind when compelling evidence supports one's findings.

There still is a lot of unanswered questions concerning the demise of the WTC. At this time I am sitting on the fence. There is compelling evidence on both sides of the isle of the WTC demise.

I have to stand back and digest what I have learned and research if the substandard steel was the cause of the WTC collapse or did the substandard steel help play a big role in a demolition. Either way, I am now convinced the two WTC had to be demolished and not just on the substandard steel, there were other materials used in the buildings that were hazard to humans. The more I dig the dirty it gets.
edit on 4-1-2016 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




Either way, I am now convinced the two WTC had to be demolished and not just on the substandard steel, there were other materials used in the buildings that were hazard to humans. The more I dig the dirty it gets.


There was great incentive to take the buildings down, not so great doing it to the letter of the law thou. as in 5 billion worth.. 911 very big story.

When I started to do my own research into 911 it was to prove the CT'ers wrong, its a long story, but after about a year I found myself agreeing with them, thats no joke and it was very hard to accept, and I still to this day question myself, could I be wrong, so far no one has provided me with any info to make me change my mind..



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

[QUOTE]
Either way, I am now convinced the two WTC had to be demolished and not just on the substandard steel, there were other materials used in the buildings that were hazard to humans.
[/QUOTE]

It is clear that the WTC buildngs were not demolish by explosives. No sound of explosions and no seismic data to support the use of explosives.

In any case, let's take a look at those who were responsible.


edit on 4-1-2016 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-1-2016 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



There was great incentive to take the buildings down,


Apparently, nations around the world were pointing their fingers at Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, not the Bush Adminstration. After all, there were very good reasons why the 9/11 hijackers took flying lessons..



Al-Qaeda released martyr videos for most of the 9/11 hijackers

The Al Jazeera satellite network shows an hour-long video about al-Qaeda containing footage given to it from al-Qaeda of some of the 9/11 hijackers, including a martyr video from hijacker Abdulaziz Alomari (see September 9, 2002 and September 9, 2002).

A martyr video from hijacker Ahmed Alhaznawi was shown in April 2002. But this new hour-long video contains images of each of the hijacker teams that hijacked Flights 11, 77, 93 and 175 on September 11. These images show pictures of each hijacker in the team floating over a background.


al-Qaeda Reveals 9/11 Hijackers



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
I still ask myself this:
If you were planning this conspiracy why wait about an hour before you blow the buildings?
That gave the news media time to set up cameras and catch the explosions.
That gave rescue crews time to stumble across prewired explosives.
That gave time for people to escape.
Those escaped victims may have seen something by accident.

The smart plan would be to wait 4-5 seconds after the impact then hit the button.
Who's going to question the collapse ?
Who's going to be alive to tell what they saw?
Greater loss of life.


Interesting points you make...

But by 'blow' you only mean by explosives right? And as far as we can tell no rescue crews or escaping victims came across or mentioned any explosives or wiring or anything unusual like that.

To blow them 4-5 seconds after impact does seem like a no brainer move though, but it wasn't done etc.

And no one claimed stumbling upon any strange wiring or explosives. So it looks like they couldn't have blown the towers immediately after impact even if they wanted to, which is curious, no they had to wait, it seems.

They were waiting for something. Had to be. But what?

The conditions were not quite right 4-5 seconds after impact but they were right a bit later for both towers and building 7. For why not 'blow' building 7 when tower 1 was 'collapsing? Same sort of missed opportunity less people would question.

They waited to destroy building 7 too, nearly all the live long day it seems.

You'd think if they could indeed 'blow' it they would not have waited.

So the fact that they waited must be significant.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



There was great incentive to take the buildings down,...


Apparently, Larry Silverstein lost a lot of money because of 9/11.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   


Apparently, nations around the world were pointing their fingers at Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, not the Bush Adminstration. After all, there were very good reasons why the 9/11 hijackers took flying lessons..


All irrelevant to my post..the hijackers did not bring the buildings down..



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

I think it was carried out by Saudi's but the many in the US administration knew it was going to happen. The order must of been given by people higher up, outside of governments.

I don't know if it counts as an inside job but...
Just in case people forgot, a secret planning of people wanting to do any act of violence or other negative actions is technically a conspiracy. To say there was no conspiracy on 911 is not knowing the definition of the word conspiracy.



posted on Jan, 4 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   


Apparently, Larry Silverstein lost a lot of money because of 9/11.


He sure did..



new topics




 
7
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join