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.

 

New Video: 9/11 Mysteries

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Well I came, I watched, I saw.

I think this was a good video and food for thought, but I am still skeptical about a conspiracy surrounding 9/11. There is no way our government or any other group within our own country could have been behind this. It would take a person that is so far detached from humanity and only concerned with the money they might make.

They would have to consider everyone else in this world a lower species. These people would think themselves to be so superior to the rest of us that what they do is justified. These would be psychopathic thoughts to put it mildly. It's just not possible.

But then again, I recall the words of Timothy McVeigh when referring to the children that were killed in the day care center of the Oklahoma City Bombing and called them “collateral damage”.

Hmm… Ok, I’ll get back to you.

[edit on 9/22/2006 by Hal9000]




posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Oklahoma was connected. Oklahoma was the PNAC's dress-rehearsal, as was WTC in 1993. McVeigh was the patsy. I don't even believe he knew exactly what he was doing nor what he was involved in.

And yes, they do regard themselves as superior. We regard Bush as a joke - heck, even the Illuminati probably regards Bush as a joke - Daddy Bush probably regards little sonny boy alcoholic as a joke, someone to deflect heat and distract attention from their evil doings.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:50 AM
link   
This is definitley the documentary we've needed!

I've shown it to a few people who have until now refused to keep watching other documentaries because theyre so "heavy conspiracy theory stuff", this one lets you think for yourself whilst getting the facts across!

Excellent, 10/10! (Although it could have done without some of the music..)



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I am a spiritual person and apart from my reading of the Bible as my foundation of what I have grown to believe, this video is by far the equal to that truth of what really happened that day in worldy affairs. In other words, I hold to what that video presents as solid as my spiritual truth. For me, that says a lot because it is based on logical facts of evidence that really happened. I have read a lot of conspiracy theories and none have been more persuasive to me than the evidence that the video presented. I think the US in on the verge of discovering more of these hidden secrets, because the power-hungry elitists are so arragant that they believe that they can do absolutely anything to meet their ends. I think if information such as this video starts to get out that people will increasingly wake up to reality of all the things that the upper echelons are doing in order to manipulate us into controlling our belief systems for their gain.

God help them, because they will need it when the masses wake up.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawa
this one lets you think for yourself whilst getting the facts across!


Oh, 100% agreement here. Whereas Loose Change perhaps left itself open for criticism by jumping to some (occasional) wild conclusions, the approach by this documentary to pose questions, to be objective via the power of suggestion (rather than shove it down your throat), works much better as a persuasive communication tool.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 03:48 AM
link   
More kudos here for this film.

Chalk up another upswing in the never-ending yo-yo game I feel internally as to whether or not 9/11 WTC was a CD (nevermind the WHO and the WHY ... I feel the WHAT is the most important and logical part to figure out first).

This is the first film I've seen that explains something I've mentioned in many of my posts here ... that the CD business is family-dominated and demoers learn through experience, not classroom training. That was always my basis to believing that a CD of WTC 1 & 2 was not possible (due to the methods they use and amount of pre-demo work needed). However this film brought up an interesting point I had never thought of.

What if it wasn't one of those family companies, but rather some sort of military contractor or ops team? If the military can cover up classified aircraft and UFOs, sneak into countries undetected, etc. (which many people on this site believe regardless of their position on 9/11) why can't they have classified demoing capablities? Couple that possibility with the testimony about machinery noises on vacant floors in the weeks prior to 9/11 as well as the full electronic shutdown the weekend of the 8th, and you have some pretty compelling evidence of the possibility of some sort of CD.

It's films like this (that don't shove ideas down your throat, but merely present possibilities in a well-thought out manner) that will spark intelligent debate to get to the bottom of 9/11.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 05:10 AM
link   
Ok, so we are very slowly approaching Schopenhauer's third stage of truth: the facts accepted as being self-evident.

The doctrine of pre-emptive war that was initiated from this false flag operation is in full swing with human beings being tortured and real extremists given a voice, a reason and a cause.

What can be done about it?



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Iam now watching it a 2nd time over, Brillant vid



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 09:29 AM
link   
I watched intently right up until they said the towers fell in 10 seconds and then showed the seismograph.



Just another notch in what appears to be an endless string of crap. It looks like if these people (and I use that word all encompassing for the myriad of groups and individuals who have done this same thing so far) are going to put in the time, money and effort to do something like this, they'd at least fully research before slapping together a mish-mash of videos and talking bullcrap over the picture.

*sigh*

BUT, I'll continue to give each one of them a try until some one gets it right.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
I watched intently right up until they said the towers fell in 10 seconds and then showed the seismograph.
Just another notch in what appears to be an endless string of crap.

I am completely missing the argument of your statement, would you reiterate please?

Misfit



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misfit

I am completely missing the argument of your statement, would you reiterate please?

Misfit


The video was obviously produced by some one who went out on the net and just collected the theories together - without taking the time to research whether the statements they were making in the video were correct or not.

For instance - the towers didn't fall in 10 seconds. That's a major blunder which leaves me with little desire to continue the video past that point since I've already watched a number of them and I'm not seeing anything new here - including the same errors.

[edit on 9-23-2006 by Valhall]



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
For instance - the towers didn't fall in 10 seconds.

Simply for clarification .........

[1] How long did the towers, then, take to fell?
[2] At what time frame is the "10 second" referrence made on the video?

Thanx

Misfit



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Somewhere between 14 to 18 seconds depending on which point you want to declare "it stopped". I have not ever seen the calculations that back the 14 seconds, but I've seen two different footages (and posted the calculations myself here) to show that WTC 1 took 16 seconds (at least).

Concerning your question about where the reference is to the 10 seconds...I didn't pay attention to what the timetag was when they started talking about that.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
One of the "new" visuals that I saw in the video was when they showed how the steel beams were found sliced on an angle like those that would be found in a controlled demolition. How would such a precise cut be made?

Plus the information about the curious loss of power, strangers in the building, mysterious "construction" on several floors. Although not backed up by facts - it still makes ya think!



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:24 AM
link   
To everyone who has said "where is the proof?" here it is. Federal Prosecution team, now is your time.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   
OpenMind,

Yeah, it definitely brings together all the asundry circumstantial evidence. But all of that is already known by most people discussing this issue. For instance, every bit of that has been discussed here time and again. There really is nothing new in this - in fact, there is "newer" material here than in this video because at least we've worked through the erroneous information.

[edit on 9-23-2006 by Valhall]



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
Somewhere between 14 to 18 seconds depending on which point you want to declare "it stopped". I have not ever seen the calculations that back the 14 seconds, but I've seen two different footages (and posted the calculations myself here) to show that WTC 1 took 16 seconds (at least).

Well, just basing on your stance of "this is bunk", I am going to assume you are an "official believer". With that, is this, the "official version" of fell time, from NIST:


wtc.nist.gov...

How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?

NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2


That, conjoined with:


wtc.nist.gov...

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse.


Perhaps this second calculation, that of the last "lone columns" giving way to gravity, is where you are recalling the longer time frame. As the video, with the 10 seconds, is quite relevant with the official story.


Valhall

Concerning your question about where the reference is to the 10 seconds...I didn't pay attention to what the timetag was when they started talking about that.


Being the video is innundated with time referrences, that makes it kinda hard for a discussion about the argument you bring to the thread, without every reader needing to view the video again, no?

Misfit



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Valhall,

I regard you as one of the most knowledgeable and level .ed people on ATS!! In the grand scheme of things does it really matter if the towers fell in 10, 14 or 18 seconds? Because my understanding and please correct me if I wrong but for the buildings to fall within anyone of those numbers some additional energy source was needed at the very least to bring down the cores.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I hope you watched the whole video.

Whether or not it was 10 seconds, or 14 or even 16 seconds, the towers fell at almost freefall speed encountering no resistance all the way down. I also think that the seismographs being at a distance from the towers and measuring the shockwave of the collapse travelling in the ground are not the best way to gage the timing of the collapse. You have to account for distance travelled and density of the "material" it travels through in a major metropolitann city (with all it's underground works, like sewers, subways etc.). Good luck with that.

I tend to believe what I see with my eyes and the interpretations I can bring to the whole picture with the knowledge and intuition I have. I also remember watching the coverage of that day in my company's boardroom filled with scientists. We knew that something was not quite right about how the first tower collapsed. We watched in what I would describe as total disbelief when the second tower collapsed in the exact same fashion. All of us were stunned and we knew right then and there that something was very wrong. Since that day 5 years ago I have believed - no! I've known - that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

If the inconsistencies you speak of in this production are so glaring and serve to dismiss the demolition story, then by all means, please indulge me and list them here. I don't have the time to wade through hundreds of ATS pages to find them.

I hope you are not falling into the trap that many scientists fall into, that of Reductionist Thinking.
.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
But all of that is already known by most people discussing this issue. For instance, every bit of that has been discussed here time and again.


True.

However, I think we can all agree that prior video productions have run the gamut from unprofessional productions screaming with credibility problems, to intense tin-foil conspiracy mongering. There are still significant numbers of people who either have never seen material such as this, or have quickly dismissed similar efforts because of the aforementioned problems. In many ways, this a is significantly improved production with increased credibility, script, timing, and planning. Something that may sway the previously unswayable.

In my case... this has pieced together important items in a slightly new way... and for me, I'm beginning to see a strong case for explosive charges that may have ensured a total collapse.

This is a conspiracy video for the masses... where Loose Change (for example) was for people who would tolerate conspiracy theories.

That's why it's new, different, and deserving of our attention.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join