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 7/11 investagation Ats members please help We are on to something

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 05:59 PM
link   
as previous stated in my other thread if explosives where used then somebody knew hence the companies on the floors that where hit.

You should find these pages useful as they have a diagram showing the tenants and the damaged areas:

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

thats the floors and companies that owned them and it shows where the planes hit (thank AgentSmith for this info)

if explosives where used then somebody knows something.

wtc 1 all the floors that were hit are owned by marsh www.marsh.com...
they are a risk managmment company

wtc 2 all the floors that were hit are either financial or attorneys

78 First Commercial Bank Banks/Financial www.firstcommercialbank.com...
79-82 Fuji Bank Banks/Financial website unknown
84 Euro Brokers Financial www.ebi.com...
85 Harris Beach and Wilcox Attorneys www.harrisbeach.com...

these companies would or should know of something starnge or unusaal going on days or months or even years before 9/11 all the info is like vanished off the interennt about pre 9/11 but we need to dig deep guys and check these companies out. If Marsh compnay is a risk managment compnay known worldwide then why put your headquaters at risk especially if you knew the attacks could and most likley would happen?

please help out guys

also my 7/11 investagtion will be starting soon

[edit on 10-3-2006 by snobird]

[edit on 10-3-2006 by snobird]




posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   
marsh is owned by www.mmc.com... mmc compnay

www.mmc.com.../index.php

MMC Capital forms AXIS, a global insurance and reinsurance company, in response to the market dislocation following the World Trade Center attacks. AXIS is capitalized with more than $1.6 billion.

so after 9/11 they got a $1.6 billion dollar insurance check for the marsh comapny they were in world trade center 1 floors 93-100

but the same company owns guy company which is located in buliding 2 maybe some body could help me find out how much they got for that



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 06:40 PM
link   
the guys flying the planes wouldnt know which floors were what when they hit, or who was on them, i doubt.

The real mystery is with the guy who leased the WTC, Andrew Silverstein, who took out a huge insurance policy on the WTC for a few billion 7 weeks before the event. Ithyink its safe to say he probably knew something.



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
the guys flying the planes wouldnt know which floors were what when they hit, or who was on them, i doubt.


They wouldn't have to if the planes were precision guided.

www.vialls.com...
www.vialls.com...



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
the guys flying the planes wouldnt know which floors were what when they hit, or who was on them, i doubt.



what guys? the hijackers that are still alive?
fatty bin laden?...see, 'fatty' bin laden
saddam, maybe?


Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
The real mystery is with the guy who leased the WTC, Andrew Silverstein, who took out a huge insurance policy on the WTC for a few billion 7 weeks before the event. Ithyink its safe to say he probably knew something.


mob assisted insurance fraud



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 12:59 AM
link   
well the thing is some body put explosives in the bulidng we need to know who but thats the hard part even if the planes were precison guided then how did the other exposins happen



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

They wouldn't have to if the planes were precision guided.

www.vialls.com...
www.vialls.com...


Which I do not believe they were. I havent found any convincing evidence of remote control.





what guys? the hijackers that are still alive?


No, obviously not, since it has been proven at least 7 of the hijackers listed by the FBI are alive and well and victims of ID theft. The true IDs of whoever flew the planes is still unknown.

What do Bin Laden or Saddam have to do with this anyway? Everyone knows the Bin Laden tape found in Afghanistan is a fake. Doesn't mean the real Bin laden wasn't involved, even if indirectly. And Saddam had nothing to do with anything. next?




well the thing is some body put explosives in the bulidng we need to know who but thats the hard part even if the planes were precison guided then how did the other explosions happen


Well, theres the kicker. Did explosives bring the twin towers down? Probably. Most evidence points to that, in my opinion, as I have looked at the arguements from both sides, and with some personal experience with jet fuel. Thus, the answer to the question of how the explosives got into the building in the first place is much easier to answer than if it was demolished at all.

A public place of commerce as big and high profile as the WTC ahs thousands of people in it every day. Not just workers and tourists, but service people. Electricians, security systems people, air conditioning service people, cleaning staff, caterers, maintainence, ect. With explosives as devices as high tech as they are today, it is nothing to disguise an explosive device in an alarm pannel, electrical fuse box, or hide in an airconditioning duct, even in an elevator shaft.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I havent found any convincing evidence of remote control.


Well where is your evidence that Arabs piloted the planes into the buildings themselves? Btw, did you read either of those Vialls articles?

The tech for remote control has been around for decades. I would keep both possibilities in mind here.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11


Well where is your evidence that Arabs piloted the planes into the buildings themselves? Btw, did you read either of those Vialls articles?

The tech for remote control has been around for decades. I would keep both possibilities in mind here.


Did I say Arabs piloted the planes? No. Read again.

Just because I don't believe the planes were not remote piloted does not mean I believe the 19 accused hijackers were the ones flying them.

I know far more about remote piloting than you realize. I worked with several people in the Army and airforce who worked with such things.

I simply stated there is no compelling evidence remote piloting was used to fly those planes. Just because the technology exists does not mean it must have been used.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
There has been some commentary on the web about this already. Here is an outline of some possible scenarios:

1. People were evacuated and agents run in to make sure everything is a 'GO'
2. Company's were complicit in the plan and somehow were rewarded by globalists - followup to see if this is true
3. Company's were not complicit in the plan but are still aligned with the globalists.
4. During reno's in offices (which can occur on regular basis), explosives were planted for later useage.
5. During change of tenents, explosives were planted for later usage.
6. The explosions were a result of unknown technology.
7. Some degree of complicity between property owners and managers in all above cases is likely.

These are some starting points but I have to say that this is a good line of investigation here to follow.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Did I say Arabs piloted the planes? No. Read again.

Just because I don't believe the planes were not remote piloted does not mean I believe the 19 accused hijackers were the ones flying them.

I know far more about remote piloting than you realize. I worked with several people in the Army and airforce who worked with such things.

I simply stated there is no compelling evidence remote piloting was used to fly those planes. Just because the technology exists does not mean it must have been used.


Well take the Arab part out then.

How do you think those planes hit those towers, and what evidence do you have for it?



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11


Well take the Arab part out then.

How do you think those planes hit those towers, and what evidence do you have for it?


They hit those towers because they were flown into them. Its not that hard. The evidence is, well, everyone saw them hit the towers. Pretty damn self evident.

Now, I bet youre trying to say is who was flying those planes into the towers? Thats the mystery. The real identities of the hijackers involved is known only to a few. There really wasn't much skill involved in flying them into the buildings. You dont need remote control for that. the twin towers, once sighted, would have been easy for anyone with some flying experience to hit.

The real curiosity is in the performance of flight 77, which did indeed perform maneuvers that some supposed flight school drop-out would NOT have been able to pull off.

So then, who do I think MIGHT have actually hijacked the planes and flew them? Real Al-Qaeda recruits with some CIA or Mossad plants seeded in, possibly. obviously, they had to have been people who had some serious flying training, more than likely, military. Not a real brain teaser.

I honestly don't think that the identities of whoever hijacked the planes has any real bearing on the validity of the whole 9/11 conspiracy. far more damning is the odd behavior of certain government officals, the near abscence of the Air Force, NORADs peculiar responses, and the aftermath right after that attacks, like abandon vans of Korans and Arab flight manuals, indestructible passports at the scene of the crime, ect ect ect to be far more damning evidence of a conspiracy than the assumption for some strange reason that remote control was needed to pilot those planes.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 06:20 PM
link   
www.reopen911.org...
tells you just about everything you need to know, its also offering a million dollar reward for anyone who can prove that 9/11 wasnt a controlled demolition



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Lets assume for a moment that the towers were brought down by explosives rather than aircraft impact and fire.

1) The explosives would not have been placed on the floors that were hit.

2) In large sky-scrapers, it is perfectly possible to do maintenance work without the occupants being aware of it. In fact, most mainenance is done this way.

3) ask yourself on which floor the main charges need to have been. Ask yourself who would have had access to the spaces where they would have been placed.

4) In controlled demolitions, the inside of the building is gutted and bracing wires are installed to control the direction of the collapse. Ask yourself what alternative method would have been used to control the collapse.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Now, I bet youre trying to say is who was flying those planes into the towers? Thats the mystery. The real identities of the hijackers involved is known only to a few. There really wasn't much skill involved in flying them into the buildings. You dont need remote control for that. the twin towers, once sighted, would have been easy for anyone with some flying experience to hit.


That's what Vialls is contesting. He got video of a plane's long-range approach to a tower and argues that the approach is pushing a 767 to its limits. Unless a weird coincidence (which, on 9/11, I hardly believe in), the angles at which the 767s hit the Twin Towers were almost identical, too.


I honestly don't think that the identities of whoever hijacked the planes has any real bearing on the validity of the whole 9/11 conspiracy.


Me neither. I was just pointing out that there is no real evidence for any scenario of how the planes were flown into the towers. Ruling anything out for a lack of evidence, in this case, isn't very productive imo. It would lead to the conclusion that no planes must have hit the towers, or flew themselves.



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11


That's what Vialls is contesting. He got video of a plane's long-range approach to a tower and argues that the approach is pushing a 767 to its limits. Unless a weird coincidence (which, on 9/11, I hardly believe in), the angles at which the 767s hit the Twin Towers were almost identical, too.



I know. Over the past few years, Ive seen so many 9/11 conspiracy sites my eyes blur. But I dont see how he comes to the conclusion the 767 is being pushed to its limits. The approach, other than the fact its heading into a dense urban area of skyscrapers, does not show a plane performing any feats I have not seen them perform before. Nor considering that the plane is seconds away from impact, is anything amiss from what Ive seen.

There was nothing identical about how the planes hit the tein towers. The first plane hit at a higher level on the towers, and the angle of impact was alot flatter. The second plane that hit, which we all saw, hit at a much sharper angle. It tilted like one second before impact, not totally impossible to do if on a death mission. The angle was like 45 degreees.

This is the first time Ive heard anyone claim that the new York flights were pushing their limits. Ive heard that about flight 77, which unfortunately (and VERY suspicously, given Washing DC is always packed with newsmen and tourists with rolling video camera) was not caught on film, was indeed pulling off maneuvers worthy of the Blue Angels.

I have not completely discarded the remote control theory. I simply believe it is the least likely and least solid theory, and until good evidence from more solid sources comes along, its at the bottom of my 9/11 possibilities list.

The only theories on 9/11 I have discarded:

1. A missle hit the pentagon. Utter B.S. A red herring thrown in by intel goons, I think. Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
2. The government was caught totally off guard. Utter B.S. The big people in high places knew
3. The offical story is the truth. Right. And the easter Bunny and Elvis are comming to my house for Rammadan.
4. Saddam and Iraq were behind 9/11. Right. And disgruntled fairies from Jupiter shot JFK.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 01:39 AM
link   
all pre 9/11 info has pretty much gone off the internet trying to find out who and what for explosives will be hard like i before stated marsh compnay is a risk assement comapny who laid off tons of workers orior to 9/11 laid off all workers expect those at the towers also they paid 20 million of the 1.6 billion back to familes so they made a pretty penny we need to investagate marsh comapny and other companies to see just what really happend cause whoever planted the explosives woulda apperead odd to the workers but since it is a huge bulidng they woulndt of thought twice about it i wish we had the manitence records but i cant find them anywhere hopefully somebody can shed some lioght on this




top topics



 
0

log in

join