It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Questions I have regarding Sept. 11th

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:49 AM
Well, here goes my first post…

In considering both sides of the argument concerning the 9-11 attacks (we can call them attacks, because a lot of people lost their lives on that day, regardless of who were behind them), it is my belief that there ARE certain questions that should be looked into further.

If, in fact, the truss failure theory would create the visual evidence of squibs due to increased air pressure in floors underneath the collapsing floors, then the squibs should be disregarded because both explosives and “pancaking” could arguably create the blowing out of debris as witnessed in video footage.

But if truss/steel weakening was the cause of collapse, it must be considered that the building still fell at “near free fall speed.” If one floor pancakes onto another, causing debris to be expelled from the windows below, wouldn’t it make sense that there would be some slowing of the speed of collapse each time a failed floor met a less structurally compromised floor?

If we are to believe the failed truss theory, did WTC 7 have the same basic design as the towers, and did truss failure due to heat from fires also bring WTC 7 down?

The structural design of the WTC towers kept the entire weight of the buildings suspended since their completions. I think what we need is for an expert to calculate the difference between the static weight (which the building could CLEARLY handle) and the weight/added force of the kinetic energy caused by the collapse of each floor. And if those numbers tell the story of how the buildings fell as quickly as they did, due to an exponential increase of forces caused by the pancaking floors.

There are some who argue that Thermite/Thermate was used to vaporize steel in the structural columns of the towers. This is speculation due to the fact that steel from the incident is hard to acquire. I’ve read reports that the steel from ground zero was cleared and sent overseas for melting, as quickly as possible. My question would be why wasn’t the steel extensively studied by NIST, FEMA, etc., and if those organizations did perform tests on the steel, where are their conclusions?

Here’s the heart of it: Ultimately, when catastrophe occurs in America, we the people want to know exactly what transpired. This is why we’ve all seen the careful gathering of airline wreckage, space shuttle debris, etc. when there’s an accident (TWA Flight 800 for example). The pieces, regardless of size, are each important in their own right because each piece could possibly contain clues as to what caused the catastrophe. And I suppose that one could argue that we all saw what happened, so why go through the trouble of painstakingly sorting and reconstructing airliners and buildings? And I would answer, “Because that’s how it’s done.”

The September 11 attacks were unprecedented due to the scale of destruction, loss of innocent lives, and the impact it had on the American Psyche as a whole. So why not put unprecedented effort into detective work that had been Standard Operating Procedure until the Sept. 11th events?

I’ve paid attention to coverage of building collapses due to terrorist acts before. The Oklahoma City one and the barracks oversees, as two examples. What you get is PARTIAL collapse. The whole building doesn’t fail and fall into itself, turning into dust.

I really want to believe that the attacks were made by enemies of the state. Because I love the U.S. (I served in the U.S. Army in the early 90’s) and because I’m raising three boys, it would hurt deeply if the truth was something other than a terrorist plot. But I have questions that remain unanswered.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:54 AM
I would think that NIST, FEMA, NSA, and the government as a whole would answer any questions a citizen might have regarding the attacks. I would hope that they would act as though they are elements of the government of and for the people. I would think that their conclusions would be more readily accepted if they were more forthcoming with the evidence and processes they used to produce their results. And the fact that the NIST report only covers the timeframe from impact to collapse initiation, when the process of actual collapse is what many argue about here on ATS, simply is not enough information to end the rumors and put this thing in the history books.

In closing, I’d like to propose that the different factions and schools of thought on the many issues and questions concerning the whole scope of what transpired on that fateful day come together as American citizens, and work it out once and for all. HowardRoark & Vushta; Slapnuts & BSBray11, you guys must be getting tired by now. Lets put our efforts into solving problems rather than to waste energy arguing unsubstantiated claims.

I think we should ask the Myth Busters to rebuild one of the towers, fly an airplane into it, and see if it collapses.

Thanks for your time and I hope I’ve made sense.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 02:58 PM
I just gotta laugh! Fema ,nist, and all the others that studied this nitmare, have done their jobs. Their job isn't to debate with the fringe. As for them being accepted, they are, except by the denial crowd( see fringe). Recreating the towers etc... is impossible. To do it exact is only gonna cost someone about 5 billion $. Doubt Myth Busters budget can help ya there. You could never be one 100% sure of colums destroyed, flow of fuel etc,etc...... I like your spirit, though! Maybe you could take all that and , I dunno.....mow the lawn!

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 03:15 PM
I just gotta laugh, too! Your opinion of my spirit means a lot!

The Myth Busters thing was sarcastic, trying to convey the fact that we can all go back and forth forever and not get anywhere, because your side operates from information presented by the goverment agencies, and your so-called "fringe" has questions remaining that weren't addressed in the reports.

Do you have responses beside "Mow the lawn", for whether NIST studied the chemical aspects of the steel? If NIST didn't cover certain issues, that means that NIST decided that there were no issues with the materials the building was contructed of, right? You might want to consider pulling some weeds.

I understand that the those who studied this "nitmare" 9-11 commision, NIST, "did their jobs." The question is did they do their jobs as well as they could have? If they addressed everything, then the CT guys wouldn't have any ammunition. See what I mean? Duhh.

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 03:22 PM
Oh, Duhh, one more thing.

In stating that "you could never be one 100% sure of colums destroyed, flow of fuel etc,etc" you're basically saying that the collapse of the buildings isn't due to fire and aircraft impact alone. I concur...what are the chances of getting all the variables right to cause two very similar collapses.

Rethink your beliefs while you're gardening.

posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 02:17 PM
I have one thing to say... I work for the Government (USAF) and I think that they did it. not the Air Force per-say, but the government in general.

either way, plane or bomb, I think they did it. they've done it before.

posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 02:19 PM

Originally posted by Methuselah
I have one thing to say... I work for the Government (USAF) and I think that they did it. not the Air Force per-say, but the government in general.

either way, plane or bomb, I think they did it. they've done it before.

I find your comments very interesting,Would you care to add any more infomation????

Not your name of course but maybe the branch of the USAF you are connected with.

posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 02:59 PM
You ever hear about TWA flight 800?
or people who so happened to leave the building right before Oklahoma city bombing?
or even the cure/prevention for cancer that has been claimed an illegal substance by the FDA due to the positive effect?

I dont care who thinks what about me after this post. I know in my head that this world is messed up beyond return. too many people dont care... there are too many people with power that want nothing less than more power and will do anything to hang on to it. same thing with people with money. and many people think that the earth is overpopulated and its not (there have been many surveys done to prove that one).

im not saying I have a good reason to believe that 9/11 was done by our own government or that they had some part of it. I do think however that something similiar to what happened at Pearl Harbor did indeed take place. I think that they at least knew that something was going to happen and didnt do anything about it. and if thats not the case its probably worse. but I have no reason to believe that it was just a terrorist group that caught us off guard.

if it was our own government, I would not be the least bit suprised. lets just put it that way.

posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 03:12 PM

Originally posted by cryingindian
Thanks for your time and I hope I’ve made sense.

Nice post cryingindian

I have often thought along the same lines

The attacks of September 11 were part of the biggest crime in recent US history. You would have thought that would warrant one of the largest, no expenses spared, criminal investigations mankind has ever seen

Instead we get Bush stalling for an enquiry, and finally the 9/11 Commission Whitewash and the NIST report - both attempts to bolster and reinforce the official rush to judgement conclusions (shades of JFK and the Warren Commission there) and both (by their own remit) not likely to cover all aspects of a proper thorough investigation

The commission concluded in part that a series of failings allowed the hijackers to carry out there plans and yet no one was fired or reprimanded, no resignations - no one in the Bush Admin, the White House staff, CIA, FBI, NATO, NORAD, Pentagon staff - no one!

If I were a US citizen I would want to know exactly who the hijackers were, where they were, where they came from and who did what (within reason) and an official timeline of events that isn’t contradictory.

I would love to see any existing CCTV footage of the hijackers checking in, boarding the planes - anything in fact to show that these men existed and did what we are told they did.

I don’t know of a shred of evidence of this calibre that has been realised to the media. Hell - even the famous Pentagon footage doesn’t even show a plane for definite!

The only sure thing you can say for sure is on that terrible day two planes hit two towers and the towers fell down and a helluva lot of people died in a large scale tragedy.

The rest of the official story is just that – A STORY. It may be true, but if it is I reckon that there would be a lot more proof available.

I think a few years back I saw a black and white CCTV photo of one of the hijackers in an airport car park. That's it! I imagine you will have seen more stuff on TV over there, but I haven’t heard of it.

Say the official story is true - why did Bush block an investigation? What was he trying to hide? Mere business ties with Bin Laden? Prior knowledge of the attacks? Or something much more sinister?

Less money spent on 9/11 than the Challenger disaster investigation? Fishy. Very fishy.

One thing just struck me - perhaps the official story is 100% true but the only solid evidence and footage is from covert surveillance by one or more intelligence agencies of the hijackers and that is why we have not been presented with it – because that would prove PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THE ATTACKS

posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 08:43 AM
In trying to consider things that haven't been brought up here before, I wonder if it would be ridiculous to think that, since alot of the government reps here wonder "How were explosive planted without anyone seeing?", could the plane impacts have been ample to create diversions of attention, allowing the quick placement of whatever might have been used to cut the structural steel in the towers?

There was a full hour from the time the first plane hit to it's collapse, right? And a little over 1/2 an hour for the second...

I recently read a report from NIST about the metallurgical tests that were done on some of the "recovered" steel...

(it's an executive summary so those of you who share W's reading skills can get through it...)

...and it states that there was NO STEEL RECOVERED FROM WTC 7. They used documentation from the construction, apparently, to form their conclusions regarding the evening collapse. Talk about adding fuel to the CTs' fire!

If NIST is that lacking in EVIDENCE in regards to the WTC 7 report, how can we trust their assesments in other reports authored by their agency?

I will say this: NIST's function is more a mission to provide info on buildings in general, the safety of their construction, and to come up with standards for prevention of fires, etc.; and less to provide info that will disprove CTs' thoughts.

I know I'm jumping around a lot here, but I want to get as many of my thoughts out in as little time as possible...

(thanks for the kind words, alienanderson)

new topics

top topics


log in