Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Sept 11th...

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 15 2003 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite



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




Attack on NK or Iran will produce a US defeat..

Attack on China and especially Russia will result in exterminaton of your "great" nation and people..


You should.. or better yet Mr.Bush should check his objectives, and focus on real world and stop the daydreaming.. South-America is good place to start the crusade.. with all those dictators and military juntas.. One funny thing.. only legimate govs. in S-America.. the Nigaracua and Cuba.. the US is in "war" with..




posted on Aug, 15 2003 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Astrocreep: "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"

It really depends on the circumstance. I would think that if you slammed a plane into one side of the building, it would especially weaken that specific area. And when it fell, that gaping hole would cause the building to topple that way, kind of like felling a tree.

Buildings topple sideways all the time. The only time I've ever seen a building implode like the WTC towers did is when it is a controlled demolition. That's what it looked like to me.



posted on Aug, 15 2003 @ 09:32 AM
link   


Attack on China and especially Russia will result in exterminaton of your "great" nation and people..


If US went to war with Russia it would result in great loss, but i wouldn't go as far as a "exterminaton" of their nation and people, this abit extreme



posted on Aug, 15 2003 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Because of the tragedy of 9/11....this country has in place, the ability to declare Marshall Law. This would also effect Canada and Mexico. If another 'big' terrorist attack/incident occurs again in the US.....be assurd that the possibility of Marshall Law being declared is a significant possibility and not one that anyone should be looking forward to.
If one looks into the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, FEME, etc., and then looks at their connections to the Bilderberg Group, Illuminati, Freemasons, Bohemian Grove Club, etc., one will see that a greater agenda is involved: the bringing of a New World Order. You apply this to PNAC, The Project for the New American Century, and read what the doctrines of PNAC actually say, added to 'comments' made by those of power in this nation in relation to their affiliations to the "elitist few" (ie: Illuminati, Freemasons, Bilderberg, etc.), one will see that it was required to have an event on the level and magnitude of "Pearl Harbor" for such laws, etc. to be put into place (ie: laws, etc., allowing for a Marshall Law to be applied). Then take this and apply it to the original goals of the "elitist groups" and one see's that this is nothing more than the preamble to the New World Order.....

3000 lives and many more allowed to die for the sack of the "elitist few" in their goal for NWO. Many more thousands of lives have died before and have died after this 9/11 tragedy....all for the same agenda.....and I believe that many thousands more shall do so again....
They consider us the "ignorant many"....like lambs lead to slaughter....

regards
seekerof



posted on Aug, 15 2003 @ 10:04 AM
link   
i believe US is in dangerous times, I think they are waiting to call marshal law. I thought they would call it due to the black out.

[Edited on 15-8-2003 by infinite]



posted on Aug, 24 2003 @ 08:38 PM
link   
i suggest that you all get ready! garb your helmets and rifels CAUSE WAR'S A BREWING! its not a matter of if, its a matter of when. heck the US might be invaded.



posted on Sep, 1 2003 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep

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.



finally a smart person



posted on Sep, 1 2003 @ 10:25 PM
link   
If marshall law is going to be inacted it will be soon. So that the effects of sept 11 will still be fresh.



posted on Sep, 1 2003 @ 11:41 PM
link   
I was passing by to look for talent interested in the new 9/11 topic proposed on the Research Forum.

Have a look see, and determine what other issues might be of interest to be researched.

IMHO the focus ought to be on new material, stuff that has not surfaced before. That can build on all the material already discussed at ATS and the wealth of websites, all of which take a different slant, that have devoted themselves to constructing timelines and alternative conspiracy theories that fly in the face of the "official government conspiracy".

Speculation without factual basis probably ought not surface there.

Things that are still puzzling me are:

* Did Mohammed Atta and some of his "team" REALLY spend the night before, nightclubbing and buying lapdances in Miami?

* Who were the nine (yes, now nine) people who stole the identities of supposed hijackers known to be alive?

* Why has there been no action taken against officers of government, and security companies in charge of passengers at airports on the morning of 9/11?

* why EXACTLY did George W Bush elect to spend time reading to children about goats, instead of responsing to a national emergency?

These and other technical, structural, engineering, political, media, propaganda questions ought to be of interest to a small team of researchers (6-7 per team is what's anticipated).

Have a look at the Research Forum thread!



posted on Sep, 2 2003 @ 12:31 AM
link   


Are you trying to tell me that this can't take down a tower!



posted on Sep, 2 2003 @ 12:51 AM
link   
I know this should go in the research forum but I'll post it here since it isn't up yet.

Lets take a deeper look at this and not take into account the specifics and technicalities.

There are forces that keep a building up and forces that want to bring it down. The weight of the building at any point will have to be supported by the structure immediately under it or a chain reaction of a massive structure gaining momentum will occur.

This tower had a huge hole in the side of it. It looks like it was about the size of covering 1.5 of the sides at the widest point. Now, the towers outer shell is the main thing keeping it up, it was designed that way. If you have no structural support on 3/8 of the tower and you also have a raging inferno heating the supports on the all the other sides. This will greatly reduce the amount of weight the whole structure can support. It is reasonable to say that the weight above the underlying structure overwhelmed the amount of resistance the underlying structure could handle.

Someone argue my point by pointing out that " is it the possible that the situation got better over time. The fuel supply was used up, the oxygen was used up and the fire died down." My viewpoint on the matter would be biased, I think, because of my above remarks.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join