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.

 

I also have Questions!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pepe Lapiu
The Great Conspiracy
video.google.com...

9/11 Mysteries
video.google.com...


I haven't seen the first one yet. Will look in to it.

9/11 Mysteries is a good video. There are 2 things off the top of my head that are wrong about the video though.

1. The buildings did NOT fall in 10 seconds. This is an error that the maker got from the NIST and 9/11 commission reports. Since the error was due to the government agencies, we really can't hold it against the maker of the video.

2. There was more fire than the video tries to make it out to be. I don't know why they do this.

Other than that, it is a pretty good video.




posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pepe Lapiu
I think you saw Loose Change, I would seriously advise against that movie and any analysis based on that movie. It is extremely inaccurate and it lends itself to too many speculations, extrapolations and exaggerations. Dylan Avery might be popular right now, but he does not represent the truth movement in any way, he is nothing but an erected straw man.


I clicked on a link and noticed they were about an hour long. I will look at them tonight.

Loose Change or not, does not tell me why the HOLE in the pentagon is so small, compared to such a large plane with a very long wingspan.
Seriously, why were remains found so far away from the Flight 93 crash site? I guess stuff just bounced miles away?
www.cooperativeresearch.org...



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Pepe,

Wow! What a super video! I recommend this to all that want some answers to the WTC's and the use of thermite.

A quote from Jack LeCreaux, of Controlled Demolition Inc......The Art Of Controlled Demolitions - "to take a building and break it up into millions of pieces and put it in its basement".

If anyone has 1.5 hours to spare, watch this video


9/11 Mysteries
video.google.com...



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Dear texaspike:

I don’t know if I’d call it an “art” to blow buildings up — even if it does give some people a wood (this is not directed toward you texaspike, I'm talking about the demo boys and girls). Somehow destroying things just doesn’t seem like something one would want to be overly proud of. But perhaps that’s only me who feels that way. Now constructing an edifice — that might qualify as an art form.

In other parts of the world there are structures still standing thousands of years old. We pay top dollar to travel to see these sites. Yet in the U.S. even some of our proudest architecture is often viewed obsolete after a measly thirty years and gets torn down — no questions asked. What’s up with that? Where does this frame of mind come from, why do we build so half-ass?

But hey, one cannot argue with success. And demolition companies are the hottest thing going right now. “Cooler” than a cat’s meow. Still, the WTC’s were NOT “put in their basements”. They were placed into the “clouds”. And that’s not quite the same.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by texaspike
Pepe,

Wow! What a super video! I recommend this to all that want some answers to the WTC's and the use of thermite.

A quote from Jack LeCreaux, of Controlled Demolition Inc......The Art Of Controlled Demolitions - "to take a building and break it up into millions of pieces and put it in its basement".

If anyone has 1.5 hours to spare, watch this video


9/11 Mysteries
video.google.com...

Cheers to that.
Actually, I am thinking of making a documentary myself and I have been in touch with the lady who made 9/11 Mysteries and I have to say, she is a really smart cooky that one, and a very nice person to talk with too.
I was going to make copies of the video and hand it out to friends, family, co-workers and even my boss. But I decided I would rather buy a hundred copies from her and give them out. After all, she should be compensated a little for her efforts. Most people don't really realize the expenses involved in such a documentary.



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by Pepe Lapiu
The Great Conspiracy
video.google.com...

9/11 Mysteries
video.google.com...


I haven't seen the first one yet. Will look in to it.

9/11 Mysteries is a good video. There are 2 things off the top of my head that are wrong about the video though.

1. The buildings did NOT fall in 10 seconds. This is an error that the maker got from the NIST and 9/11 commission reports. Since the error was due to the government agencies, we really can't hold it against the maker of the video.

2. There was more fire than the video tries to make it out to be. I don't know why they do this.

Other than that, it is a pretty good video.

I do agree that the building falling in 10 seconds is a fallacy.
However, as for the force and strength of the fires: have you seen that picture of the hole with the lady standing there looking down? How can she stand there in the middle of all that supposedly intense heat? Also, have you listened to the firemen tapes when the guy said it was "Two isolated pockets of fire" which can be easily contained and killed of with only two hoses? Twice he explained that, then 10 minutes after, he died in the collapse. That's why they imploded that tower first, because they didn't want too many firemen stating there are no considerable fires up there, so they blew it up right away before an other 20 firemen get up there and say "Duh! No fires here!"



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pepe Lapiu have you seen that picture of the hole with the lady standing there looking down? How can she stand there in the middle of all that supposedly intense heat? Also, have you listened to the firemen tapes when the guy said it was "Two isolated pockets of fire" which can be easily contained and killed of with only two hoses?


The woman seen in the impact hole was taken before the fires engulfed whole floors.


www.911review.com...



This image is from Chapter 2 of FEMA's WTC Building Performance Study. It shows a person standing in the North Tower's impact hole was apparently taken rather early in the interval of time between jet impact and collapse.


At least try to do a little basic research before using these things as "evidence".

The fireman was talking about the very lower levels of fire, it is ridiculous to think that he was in the middle of this;



And believed that it could be taken out by two hoses.

Remember, the floors in WTC were huge, with acres of square footage, there is no way that one area that could be put out with two hoses in any way represents the whole fire.



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Remember, the floors in WTC were huge, with acres of square footage, there is no way that one area that could be put out with two hoses in any way represents the whole fire.



I have to agree with LeftBehind on this one. There is no reason to misrepresent the fires IMO.



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Thanks Griff, regardless of what we disagree on, we can all agree that the more things we can all agree on as being correct, the better. One of the best ways to find the truth is to find and discard the lies.

That being said, one of the biggest problems with the 9-11 mysteries video is it's reference to the fires as "90 minutes of smoke", which IMO is a lame attempt to downplay the reality of the fires.

The reality is, as my picture above shows, that acres of floorspace were burning and in no way can it be characterized as "smoldering" or "90 minutes of smoke" as 911 mysteries would have us believe.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Do you happen to have a time stamp on that picture? I'm just curious as to how long before failure it was. Thanks.

Edit: As far as 9/11 mysteries, I don't know why they downplayed the fires. The rest of the video did a pretty decent job on its own without having to downplay the fires IMO.

[edit on 11/22/2006 by Griff]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 12:40 AM
link   
There are a few things that are hard to get around on this video:

1. The Squib Blasts - They were captured on film all the way down, seemingly beating the rubble on its way down.

2. Molten Liquid - Most likely caused by thermite. (my opinion, please don't give me the extremelly hot jet feul stuff)

3. White Thermite Smoke - Located at the bottom of the buildings, as charges were going off (felt by everyone at the bottom of the damn building), before the building began to topple.

4. Core Cuts - The were cut with precision with "shape charges". There is no way around that one. They weren't bent or snapped, they were blown thru with a perfect cut, from bombs.

The documentary was very good in detailing that even if the floors (acres big) were to be ablaze and toppled down, the core/middle framing would still stay in place. Well, unless it was bombed in the parking garage below first.


Gotta love the interview with the MSNBC guy and Steven Jones, where Jones is trying very hard at the very end to get one more thing in and is abruptly cut off. Governments got the medias balls also!



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by texaspike
There are a few things that are hard to get around on this video:

1. The Squib Blasts - They were captured on film all the way down, seemingly beating the rubble on its way down.


Wecomeinpeace went through great depth to debate this issue (not compressed air):
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



2. Molten Liquid - Most likely caused by thermite. (my opinion, please don't give me the extremelly hot jet feul stuff)


No clue what that is.. as we've found Aluminum in all relative aspects to not glow THAT BRIGHT in broad daylight. (Luminousity in broad daylight being the key here.)


4. Core Cuts - The were cut with precision with "shape charges". There is no way around that one. They weren't bent or snapped, they were blown thru with a perfect cut, from bombs.


I found that interesting, note this popular photo:





The documentary was very good in detailing that even if the floors (acres big) were to be ablaze and toppled down, the core/middle framing would still stay in place.


Awww but I thought the WTC fires were raging 1800+F fires unlimitedly supported by jet fuel that within the 1-2 hours of "constant" exposure steel-heat, managed to effectively sag all the trusses on a general area/floor, by which at the same time, causing the exterior columns to "LAWL-buckle" (as I'll come to call this ridiculous theory) in which a pancake collapse occurs, that the NIST is now beginning to take back.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masisoar
Awww but I thought the WTC fires were raging 1800+F fires unlimitedly supported by jet fuel that within the 1-2 hours of "constant" exposure steel-heat, managed to effectively sag all the trusses on a general area/floor, by which at the same time, causing the exterior columns to "LAWL-buckle" (as I'll come to call this ridiculous theory) in which a pancake collapse occurs, that the NIST is now beginning to take back.

Yes, the NIST will most likely take it back and push an other "conspiracy theory" about how it all collapsed. The whole idea is to send a bunch of different ideas and let the propagandized public try to juggle with it all. Eventually, you pick the one you believe the most and when someone comes to explain how ridiculous it is, you just switch to an other. You just end up running after your tail endlessly.

They did the same with the Iraq attack, they feed us about 20 different reasons (all of which were B.S. of course) and we got all so dizzy trying to pick which reasons to use that we just shrugged it off and walked away.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join