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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Was Building 7 Supposed to be Hit by a Plane?

page: 3
34
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 02:49 AM
link   
It probably was suposed to be hit by a plane. I don'y talk in the 9/11 forum, normally. But I read it. The full conclusion I come to I do not want to type.




posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 02:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Fire fighters and police, but non of them say they heard the distinctive sound of demolition explosives when building 7 collapsed.

Not to mention, you don't need to be close to the building to hear the explosives, in a city the sound will reverberate through the streets and of buildings, and would be heard miles away.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
You guys are forgetting one thing - the Pentagon.

The more elaborate the ruse, the more cracks it has.

This one in particular is full of more cracks than substance - anyone who disagrees is either uneducated on the matter or willfully ignorant and I really don't care for those terms.

To quote Bush, "you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists." It won't be long until this comes to fruition. TPTB ensured that any opposition to their "official story," would be immediately dismissed by a myriad of different (draconian) strategies.

PR and in specific advertisement is really, really simple - it's all about emotion. You don't sell a product, you sell a feeling that product gives you. For some reason, people eat this up.

When it comes to 9/11, there was (and imo still is) an effort to discredit (especially through ridicule and logical fallacies) anyone who may have any disagreement or opposition to what we were essentially told by authoritarian figures and talking heads.

Building 7 certainly may be a "smoking gun," but that doesn't mean there aren't multiple other fires that sprang up and were quickly extenguished as well.

Most Americans aren't even bothered with examining or understand what happened, how it happened, prior knowledge to its happening, "coincidental," wartime experiences (to quote Bush again, "never anticipated using commercial airliners to ram into skyscrapers," which is a lie given the wartime exercises), the epic failure of BBC reporting a collapse before it happened, inaccurate government reporting (NIST), closed door with no press and specific rules set by those who were to "testify," and I could go on, and on, and on, and on.

This rabbit hole runs deep - and THIS is a conspiracy that should still be on the front of Americans minds. Why are in the M.E. again? Wasn't it to stop the big bad evil terrorists that were going to kill us all?

How come then there is only now an even larger group of super secret evil terroist boogeyman who hide in the shadows and hate America?

Should we re-invade the M.E.? That seemed to work out well the first time, no? No? Oh, that's right - we're STILL there.

But I digress - for the "Hillary is actually dead, she has body doubles, she has clones, she coughs up Reptilian eggs, she died in a plane wreck in 2012, she is severely ill," take much more precedent than actual material.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Crashed?

Wasn't that the one Donald Rumsfeld said was shot down.. I know I know slip of the tongue,

But back in the day I had much more information on this.
I just tried some old links I saved and they are all dead haha, it was in 2005 I heard about this 9/11 conspiracy, and in 2005 I decided to stop investigating because I got scared..

Anyway whatever happened that plane did not make that goofy hole..


AS far as building 7.. We follow the line of a controlled demolition, that tower was filled with bombs right? So no matter what happened they had to pull it before anyone found out.



your diagram shows flight 93 flying towards Washington more than New York...


none of the flight paths, go towards where they are going.. Just look at them.. No telling when they'd make the turn or if they would..

Here:






posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 02:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
It probably was suposed to be hit by a plane. I don'y talk in the 9/11 forum, normally. But I read it. The full conclusion I come to I do not want to type.


Nor do i...

this is my first... er second? Thread on this topic besides the one that asked for a reason for this subforum 10 years after the fact...

But this subject also was my intro to conspiracy...




posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 02:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: Akragon

Fire fighters and police, but non of them say they heard the distinctive sound of demolition explosives when building 7 collapsed.

Not to mention, you don't need to be close to the building to hear the explosives, in a city the sound will reverberate through the streets and of buildings, and would be heard miles away.


It was like 15 years ago brother... all the videos are public knowledge...

There were people inside the buildings... not 7, but the towers...

the Tube is your friend... well kinda




posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Reverbs

Neither of the first 2 videos actually says the plane over PA was shot down. The wording of the 2nd is weird, but not proof.

I believe it was, but that is not proof.
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: Akragon

Fire fighters and police, but non of them say they heard the distinctive sound of demolition explosives when building 7 collapsed.

Not to mention, you don't need to be close to the building to hear the explosives, in a city the sound will reverberate through the streets and of buildings, and would be heard miles away.


what??

Sometimes you guys baffle me




posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Reverbs

I certainly heard.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Reverbs

Neither of the first 2 videos actually says the plane over PA was shot down. The wording of the 2nd is weird, but not proof.

I believe it was, but that is not proof.


I didn't say it was proof reldra.
I said this:

But back in the day I had much more information on this.
I just tried some old links I saved and they are all dead haha



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Reverbs

I don;t understand why you posted them, then. They have prob been posted in this forum before.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Reverbs

I don;t understand why you posted them, then. They have prob been posted in this forum before.


What do you mean.. ?

the first one is them saying they thought the plane was going towards DC but it wasn't SEE what I quoted above it ?.. And there was an order to shoot it down.

the second one says they shot it down..

It's not proof reldra after all this time there won't be proof.

It's called most likely based on evidence.

Everything has been posted before.

You are so combative all hte time for no reason.


edit on 22-9-2016 by Reverbs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:10 AM
link   
Yes, this thread makes sense. Building 7 was supposed to have been hit by a plane.

The next thing we need to figure out is who's plane?

The one that ended up in PA? One sent by...you know who.
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)


Or the PA plane went off course, no matter who sent it.
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)


Or there was yet another plane that went off course and we don;t know...

Or do we?

T hat day I remember at least 2 more planes being reported as being off course.
It was covered up as a mistake later.
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)


I remember talking about the other 2 planes with Bruce beach That is the phone call I made when I got home.
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)


OK, call me a geeky survivalist person. but I called and his wife answered and brought him the phone. I was surprised he talked to me (fan girl).
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
Building 7 was nothing but collateral damage, it wasn't part of any plan IMO...


Lol I am assuming that this is sarcasm!

Well done Mianeye, I am with you man, it is laughable to believe that Building #7 was not a demolition!

Suspiciously enough the owner Larry Silverstein, who made 4 billion dollars off the insurance of the WTC buildings was on television and declared that they had made the decision to "pull it" an obvious demolition term!



He conveniently purchased the buildings 6 weeks before the attacks and made out like a bandit!

Nothing to see here right Mianeye!

lol! collateral damage, what a knee-slapper!

On topic with thread... I think it is quite obvious that flight 93 was supposed to hit building #7 and the fact that it did not is unraveling the entire lie that is the official story!
edit on America/ChicagoThursdayAmerica/Chicago09America/Chicago930amThursday3 by elementalgrove because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:22 AM
link   
a reply to: elementalgrove

It was not only that people that owned it made money, it was documents held inside it. This has al been gone over. I am surprised anyone on ATS would question that part.
edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: elementalgrove

It was not only that people that owned it made money, it was documents held inside it.


Not to mention a never ending "war" on terror, which amounts to our military industrial complex having carte blanche to drop bombs across the middle east.

Murica!



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Reverbs

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Reverbs



You are so combative all hte time for no reason.


*qote from me*
I am sorry if you read me wrong. I am not combative all the time, at all.




edit on 22-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Reverbs

That guy would fit well in here, but you got me, he says he heard an explosion and the building came down.

Just weird that only one guy come forward, where is all his colleague...



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:27 AM
link   
what guy?



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Can we focus on the problem not the protester?





top topics



 
34
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join