Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Sept 11th...

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 04:37 PM
link   
There's been loads of thread on this but mine is different. Im not posting theories. I just want to know why? why lie to the people and why kill thousands(if the gov as involed)?

After seeing those events happen, it made me feel sick. I couldn't believe someone would do this. Seeings people jumping out of the WTC and the building collasping on 100s of people was painful to watch.

All i want to say to the US gov is what happen and (if its there plan) why kill your own people??

Im not American, but i would want to know why thousands if poor Americans died on that day.

(may the victims on that tragic day rest in peace)

-Dan-

[Edited on 13-8-2003 by infinite]




posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 04:42 PM
link   
It was disgusting.....

But I'd say, whoever did cause it, Government or not, whatever their goal is, they don't care for civilians lives..........power is everything, everything else is nothing. Sick individuals......



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 04:44 PM
link   
9/11 was an intro to shock and awe. It certainly shocked and awed everyone. It was the building block to get the Patriot Act into the system and to get wars brewing, with the public behind it - we were going to have war with Afganistan even if the terrorist attacks never happened. What else is planned? NK? Iran? China? Russia?



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 04:47 PM
link   


What else is planned? NK? Iran? China? Russia?


well i believe it will be all the countries you have just said. WWIII will probably be next on their cards



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Why? Infinte, you make the very same mistake too many others do in assuming that those who planned and executed these attacks, our govornment for a start, are groups comprised of human beings. They are NOT human beings. They may look human, they may appear and act like humans, yet the soul, spirit, whatever that true human posses, they lack. They are like souless, claculating animals, like serial killers. They are clever, ruthless, and do not care, because only humans care, only humans feel guilt, remorse, and sorrow, and these people feel none. They view the rest of us the same way say a slaughterhouse views a herd of cattle: meat to be killed, sold, skinned, whatever.

It is a mistake to think our govornments and leaders are a bunch of fellow human beings. They are twisted, empty, cold blooded and ambitious creatures who lost thier humanity long ago.

Thus, once the human soul/conscience/heart is removed, you are capable of anything, including the horrifying slaughter of thousands, even millions if you so wish. Nothing is beneath you.

These are the people with thier fingers on the buttons. These are the people who could kill the rest of us without a thought. They havent yet simply because its not in thier interest to do so. Yet theres always that possibility. I often wonder, do these goons ever consider a world devoid of any sentient life but thier own? the answer is even scarier: they probably never considered it, or simply dont care.



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 05:08 PM
link   
If it is the US gov, how can they sleep knowing they have murdered thousands of people?? their own people for christ sake, its insane.
I just hope the truth comes out one day so the people who died on that tragic day can rest in peace.



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 05:12 PM
link   

we were going to have war with Afganistan even if the terrorist attacks never happened.


Have you read about the whole pipeline incident? Below we see plans to build a 2 billion dollar oil pipeline through Afghanistan, post 9/11.


UPDATE, 5/13/02: the BBC announced that: `Afghanistan hopes to strike a deal later this month to build a $2bn pipeline through the country to take gas from energy-rich Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India. Afghan interim ruler Hamid Karzai is to hold talks with his Pakistani and Turkmenistan counterparts later this month on Afghanistan's biggest foreign investment project, said Mohammad Alim Razim, minister for Mines and Industries told Reuters.'

`Mr Razim said US energy company Unocal was the "lead company" among those that would build the pipeline, which would bring 30bn cubic meters of Turkmen gas to market annually. Unocal - which led a consortium of companies from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Japan and South Korea - has maintained the project is both economically and technically feasible once Afghan stability was secured. "Unocal is not involved in any projects (including pipelines) in Afghanistan, nor do we have any plans to become involved, nor are we discussing any such projects," a spokesman told BBC News Online.'


ist-socrates.berkeley.edu...

But the plot of the pipeline issue thickens when we examine pre-9/11:


But Caspian oil, landlocked between Russia, Iran and former Soviet republics, presents formidable transport challenges. Afghanistan is strategically located near the Caspian Sea. In 1994, the U.S. State Department and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency sought to install a stable regime in Afghanistan to enhance the prospects for Western oil pipelines. They financed, armed and trained the Taliban in its civil war against the Northern Alliance.

In 1995, California-based UNOCAL proposed the construction of an oil pipeline from Turkmenistan, south through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Arabian Sea. Yasushi Akashi, U.N. Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, was critical of "outside interference in Afghanistan" in 1997, which, he said, "is now all related to the battle for oil and gas pipelines. The fear is that these companies and regional powers are just renting the Taliban for their own purposes."


www.commondreams.org...

Also I wonder if the Opium economy has anything to do with it..


Afghanistan's Opium Economy Needs to be 'Broken', says Top UN Official
Jenny Badner
United Nations
17 Jun 2003, 20:37 UTC


The Director of the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, predicts that Afghanistan will remain the world's top opium producer in the coming years and is calling for international cooperation to curb Afghanistan's illicit drug trade.


www.globalsecurity.org...

These are all important questions to be addressed, however they should not take away the memories of the people who tragically died on 9/11. If anything, the families of the victims deserve to know the truth.

Despite the motivations of those sinister people involved in 9/11, these individuals in power are profiting financially from it.



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 05:12 PM
link   
On the topic of those carrying out the attacks not having that special something other humans have, I present here a link :

www.cassiopaea.org...

Makes ya wonder. Makes me paranoid...am I one? I hope not!



posted on Aug, 13 2003 @ 05:18 PM
link   
They sleep very well, Infinite, because 3000 dead people means nothing to them. Only people who have souls would even be haunted by those ghosts.

Soldiers come back from wars haunted by the ghosts of those they have killed and those that they cared about were killed. because they are still human. Thier leaders, however, are not haunted, because they do not value any human life but thier own. They are not human. Asking if they feel guilt is like asking the lion if he feels bad for killing an antelope. We are simply the herd, they the hunters.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 12:23 PM
link   
What I always think about is how the scrap metal from the WTC was shipped off overseas within DAYS of the attack. No crime scene investigation, no investigation into how jet fuel (mostly kerosene) managed to melt steel. (try it at home, it's not possible)

And two words come to mind : PAYNE STEWART.

Do you remember when PGA golfer Payne Stewart's plane crashed? Initially, it was on autopilot and went off course and lost communication. Interceptors were there to check out the rogue aircraft within about TEN MINUTES of him having taken off. ? This was in Florida, not in hugehubs like New York and Boston.

And on Sept 16th, when Dick Cheney was interviewed on NBC's Meet the Press, he claimed that the military needed authorization from the president before scrambling fighter jets to intercept American Airlines Flight 77. That's a bald-faced lie, and it's coming to you from the Vice-President who really should know that it's false.

I doubt the US government planned it (since it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to keep a secret like that), but I do believe that they knew about the plans and did nothing to stop it. They realized that this was an opportunity to outrage Americans and use the attack to push through their plan for a New World Order.

Jakomo



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Paybe Stewart! Yes! Im glad someone mentioned that, to prove, that scrambling jets not only can be done by the FAA alone, but has been done many times!

I tend to agree, i dont think they planned, but knew, and aided the attacks via third parties, or plants and moles within the org. The CIA and all these supposed experts say and maybe some believe they cant be infiltrated, but thats untrue. No such thing as an impregnable fortress.

I think our gov found out about it, and indirectly made sure these terrorist bastards had every single aid and assistance they needed to carry them out, and just made sure the important and right people were no where near.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I can conceed most of these arguments except the assertation that extreme heat does not fatique metal. It most certainly does affect the a structure's composition and ability to bear and transfer extreme loads to the ground.


Metals are forged in blast furnaces and when you crash that much high octane jet fuel into a climate control building filled with dehumidified cooled air at such velocity, you in get something very comparable to a blast furnace. No, you cannot melt steel by holding it over your kerosen heater but place it in a blast furnace for 10 minutes and have a metalurgist tell you why it won't hold up weight until its cooled..and why it is now less capable of tensile and compressive strength than it was before it was re-heated.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 12:53 PM
link   
What truly makes you think is that the people that have made these attacks against the US were those that had been originally funded by the Americans. Now, perhaps its just me but you don't 'kill' the hand that feeds you, do you not'. The Taliban and Al Qa'ida were both equipped and funded during the first Afghanistan Conflict to drive the Russians out.

What causes someone to turn against their Benefactor? Now, my knowledge of what happened between the Afghanistan Conflict and the first WTC attack is limited, could someone give me a reasonable response as to why they would turn on the States?

I was thinking that perhaps the US gov. may have paid Usama and his cronies to make a coouple of videotapes and to accept responsibility and they get a small island somewhere.

Also, I don't understand why any government would want the blood of 3000 of its own citizens on its hands. It was a an atrocious event, that I hope will never have to be repeated, but I believe it is inevitable.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Theres powers in this world we have no idea about. They don't care about human lives.
Sept 11th was a tragic day and i pray it will never happen again.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 01:23 PM
link   
It will happen again and again and again. I fear. As long as THEY hold power. It will be horrible. Whose next? maybe America, again. Maybe another country will pay. Who knows. All I know si more unassuming innocents are gonna die in a massive number again. No telling who or where, but the perps will be the same.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I don't America will be attacked again. My fears are that it will be a european city, probably London. I fear for Europe because a major terrorist act will be against europe i believe



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Britain is such are hard country for an attack to happen. It is a small country, we have some of the best intelligence in the world. The SAS are the top of their league, we have tight Immigration control. All criminals and supposed-terrorists are kept under surveillance. All security has gotten tighter post 9/11

I believe that the only real threat would come from Irish Terrorist cell members supplying people with weapons. Although there was that near incident with Heathrow a couple of months, when they had to get the Army in, because of 'supposed' Al Qa'ida members had gotten hands of a Surface to Air missile.

Presently America is the still the number 1 target and it always will be, aslong as the government try to flex its power.



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 01:56 PM
link   

I just want to know why? why lie to the people and why kill thousands(if the gov as involed)?


Why? It is a valid question. However, I'll add mine to what's already been said. To start stripping away freedoms, thus gain more control of the populace...you must convince them that there is a threat great enough to warrant losing personal liberties in order to ensure security... This is the prime supposed reason behind the theory of the government being responsible for it....

However, this same goal could have been achieved far easier and with less cost, and without crippling the economy and airline industry, and without massive loss of life. How? Simple, they could have taken out a symbol such as the Statue of Liberty, Mount Rushmore, etc. without massive loss of life, or disrupting the airlines (a foundation of modern business). Thus, the goal would have been achieved (crying for blood, etc. and willing to allow extreme measures to cath the evil-doers). The fact that it was an economical blow as well, is the main reason I don't believe the government planned it....



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Astrocreep: How long do you think it would take for jet fuel to melt a support strut? Not just one but all of them. It takes about 3000 degrees of constant, consistent heat to melt steel (like an acetylene torch), and kerosene only burns at around 1300. Plus, being a liquid, it burns away fairly quickly.

Your blast furnace analogy isn't particularly apt because it's consistent heat in a blast furnace.. A fuel-burning fire in a building isn't consistent, the oxygen supply is not uniform throughout the entire semi-demolished structure.

Metal Melting Points (Deg F)
mild steel 2730
wrought iron 2700-2900
stainless steel 2600
hard steel 2555
cast iron 2060-2200
copper 1985
red brass 1832
silver 1763
yellow brass 1706
aluminum alloy 865-1240
magnesium alloy 660-1200
lead 621
babbit 480

Jet fuel burns at a max of about 1300, like I said.

Even if it was hot enough to melt steel, it would have melted SOME struts, causing the WTC to TOPPLE, not to implode like a controlled demoliton. Check it on on google for yourself. There have been studies done that question the collapse of the WTC towers due to jet fuel burning. Like I said, it's all out there on the Net.

MrEisenhower: The US is famous for being a fairweather friend. Back in the 80's, Saddam Hussein was the Pentagon's golden boy. They funded him in his war with Iran (who was the lesser of two evils as they saw it).

Check out the "School of the Americas" in the US. It has singlehandedly trained hundreds of South and Central American despots and terrorists, all on the US mainland. You reap what you sew.

It's just a tragedy that so many innocents had to die to fulfill a few men's agendas. The same can be said for the thousands of innocent Iraqi and Afghani civilians who have died because of a few neo-cons in the Bush Administration who were rabid to unleash their Shock & Awe campaign of massive bombing on a Third World Country.

[Edited on 14-8-2003 by Jakomo]



posted on Aug, 14 2003 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Astrocreep: How long do you think it would take for jet fuel to melt a support strut? Not just one but all of them. It takes about 3000 degrees of constant, consistent heat to melt steel (like an acetylene torch), and kerosene only burns at around 1300. Plus, being a liquid, it burns away fairly quickly.

Your blast furnace analogy isn't particularly apt because it's consistent heat in a blast furnace.. A fuel-burning fire in a building isn't consistent, the oxygen supply is not uniform throughout the entire semi-demolished structure.

Metal Melting Points (Deg F)
mild steel 2730
wrought iron 2700-2900
stainless steel 2600
hard steel 2555
cast iron 2060-2200
copper 1985
red brass 1832
silver 1763
yellow brass 1706
aluminum alloy 865-1240
magnesium alloy 660-1200
lead 621
babbit 480

Jet fuel burns at a max of about 1300, like I said.

Even if it was hot enough to melt steel, it would have melted SOME struts, causing the WTC to TOPPLE, not to implode like a controlled demoliton. Check it on on google for yourself. There have been studies done that question the collapse of the WTC towers due to jet fuel burning. Like I said, it's all out there on the Net.

MrEisenhower: The US is famous for being a fairweather friend. Back in the 80's, Saddam Hussein was the Pentagon's golden boy. They funded him in his war with Iran (who was the lesser of two evils as they saw it).

Check out the "School of the Americas" in the US. It has singlehandedly trained hundreds of South and Central American despots and terrorists, all on the US mainland. You reap what you sew.

It's just a tragedy that so many innocents had to die to fulfill a few men's agendas. The same can be said for the thousands of innocent Iraqi and Afghani civilians who have died because of a few neo-cons in the Bush Administration who were rabid to unleash their Shock & Awe campaign of massive bombing on a Third World Country.

[Edited on 14-8-2003 by Jakomo]


I made no reference to melting..only to extreme metal fatique combined with the MASSIVE structural damage done from impact. No one suggest metal melts in a structure fire but every state building code in the state requires any structure subjected to fire condemned until proper inspecting and then most recommend demolition unless its a historical building and then special requirements for additional support of the old structure must be put in place. The WTC is not the first non-wooden structure to weaken and collapse due to such damage. Even masony structures are rated for fire such as walls constructed to endure fire for an hour or more. heat alone was not the reason for the collapse, it was a combination of the heat and the weakend structure on the floors affect which caused their collapse onto the floors below. Gravity increased the downward force beyond the external frame's capability to transfer such load to the piles and to the rockline they are driven too. This external frame which was the loadbearing structure according to the architect, was responsible for the downward collapse. Much like a radio tower when it fails, it fails straight downward (although a radio tower tends to spiral) due to gravities pull on the massive weight of the structure. No building topples sideways...that would violate the laws of physics as one side would have to raise up in the air in tact and would not. The building we have all seen fall starting with one side and progressing to another are the work of professional demolition teams which time such blast to release the pressure which caused the cloud of debris we saw from WTC.

I guess because I work in the field and actually have a degree in Construction technologies, its easier for me to understand the mechanics of materials and their performance. Like I stated in one thread..I wasn't shocked when they failed..just that they continue to stand for so long.

Now, i can't atribute any arguments as to whether the government played in roll in the events that led up to it, I can just say from professional experience..no additional explosions were needed to bring those buildins down. I was suprise by building 7 going down until I delved a little deeper into the footing layouts and realized just what a massive blow it had to be and the extreme force applied not only to the buildings but to the reinforcement , the piling, as well as the supporting rock itself. Everything is subject to change when pressure is upon it. Much of the "ROCK" in NY isn't rock but highly consolidated glacial till that,until a collapse of a bridge in the late 80s due to rock scour, had gone largely ignored by engineers. No way to know without some testing how this material reacts to such impact..whether it would react its liquifaction frequency from this is unknown...but I dare say not for long.






top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join