It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Vushta
Originally posted by truthseeka
Taurus feces, Howard.
Gravity is a REALLY weak force, compared to the other forces. So, your explanation to Rasobasi was pretty lame. But, don't stop with your spiel...
Reallynobody, what are you doing? You present some of the most booty conspiracy theories, then lump the valid ones along with them and dismiss them all. Now, I haven't read this whole thread, but from what I have read, that's precisely what you're doing.
Does it bother you that the hijackers were govt agents or that our govt KNEW not only that the attack was coming, but the nature of the attack?
That makes no sense of any kind.
[edit on 29-6-2006 by Vushta]
Originally posted by reallynobody
I see everyone that believes in 9/11 conspiracies has yet to answer the big question:
1) IF it was the shadies/gov that hijacked those planes instead of arabs
2) AND the plane crashes where faked
3) AND the real planes disposed of in another way
Why didn't the shadies just crash the real planes? They already had them under their control! They where already willing to kill people! I just don't get peoples reasoning. What on earth lead them to fake plane crashes when it would be easier to cause the real deal?
I have yet to receive an answer on this question and that is annoying. If people hadn't made the 9/11 conspiracies so outlandish I might actually think them more likely.
Which brings me to my next question:
MAny people call me, and everyone that disagrees with their own personal pet theory, a government agent. Why?
If I was the government, I would not send debunkers. I would send theorists with crazy ass theories so that people are more and more led astray from the truth and no serious researcher would want to look into it anymore. (sort of what is happening now ) Debunking just makes people believe it more, but more and more wilder theories is better then any cover up ever was. Remember Roswell?
Think you can still find out what really happened there with all the fake and altered stuff mixed in with real info? In a few years the truth behind the 9/11 incident, whatever it's nature, will be equally unrecoverable if things continue like this.
I would think it likely that the gov would use peoples paranoia against themselves. 100% skepticism is as damaging as 100% lack thereof, afterall.
Originally posted by new coterie rotary
come on. how can anyone with a brain honestly support dylan avery.
the guy's a lunatic- he says bush was after 160 billion in gold bars and that the planes never crash landed, they actually came down safely in a field.
but hey if you want to support the theory that bush is a money crazed leprachaun that's cool. and while you're at it how about we start denying that the halocaust ever happened.
Originally posted by kissinger
I'll humor the doubters over WTC 1 and 2 and the Pentagon for a short while - Let them have that virtual victory.
Come on you doubters, let's talk about the hard core issue you avoided in your opening thesis!
Go dig your heels into the saved video of the WTC7 collapse at www.wtc7.net... for an hour or so.... Then come back and please share with us why you think the main stream media hesitates cover the WTC7 collapse in the same fashion that the un-Kean commission did.
Originally posted by fulcanelli
The crucial deciding factor in this discussion in my opinion is building 7.
Not to flog a dead horse but I point out that this building was NOT hit by a plane and spontaneously imploded neatly into its own footprint with several characteristics of its collapse strongly indicating controlled demolition (to say nothing of Larry Silverstein's "confession" on PBS). This collapse, we are told by those in authority and proponents of the official line, was due to some moderate fires.
Originally posted by fulcanelliThis is to say nothing of the problem of the hundreds of tonnes of concrete and other materials that made up the remainder of the support structure of the building...
Originally posted by fulcanelliJust from watching the collapse in the masses of video footage taken on the day, it is clear that the SPONTANEOUS collapse, even if caused by the thermal weakening of the steel, would ALSO have required the SPONTANEOUS removal of the supportive characteristics of these other structural materials materials (ie. one moment ALL the concrete supporting the building along with the steel must have been sound in terms of its support characteristics, the next it provided LITTLE OR NO RESISTANCE to gravity).
Originally posted by fulcanelliIn closing I'd just like to say that if a few fires burning for several hours on a few seemingly randomly distributed floors of an overengineered, modern 40+ storey skyscraper are enough to bring it down so neatly, how have all these controlled demolition companies since 9/11 managed to prevent themselves going out of business? If that's all it takes to bring a building down that perfectly, all a person would have to do would be to set some fires, stand back and then call in the dump trucks while the dust settles!
Originally posted by kissinger
Building 7 (WTC7) and it's vertical collapse in onto it's own foot print the afternoon of 9-11!!!!!
It was not hit by any aircraft, (building 6 protected it from damage) and only had two small fires that fire fighters called "modest".
A little north of Vesey I said, we'll go down, let's see what's going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what's going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good.
But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.
So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.
Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Well that's crap. Even if one corner of the building was blown out, unless every other corner was blown out at the same time, that building wouldn't have fallen that evenly. Building 7 is what blows the whole thing out of the water. Theres even recording of the owner saying pull it before it goes down.
Asking anyone to believe this bs is like asking someone to believe that everything in Iraq is hunky-dory, and that Gtmo is a humane facility, and that Iran is developing nukular energy to power their homes.
Originally posted by kissinger
How can you be so conclusive on that. Could not others such as the public, media, etc. on the ground, in the air, up in other building possibly have caught a shot of that HUGE hole, in the most photographed event to ever happen in America?