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.

 

Let's End The Controlled Demolition Theory!

page: 22
0
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 05:40 PM
link   
The design of the WTC buildings restricts the ways in which they can colapse to, essentially, straight down. The central shaft; which houses the elevators, stairwells, etc; bears 60% of the weight and is somewhat of a mesh structure, which means that when the structure does fall, most of it will be in the same direction. Add to that the supporting outer mesh, which bears 40% of the weight, and you have a nice tube that can colapse only in one direction - ESPECIALLY if the center colapses first, which is what we see in WTC 1 and 2.

In WTC 7 , a corner and part of the side of the mesh support gave, which subsequently put vertical stress on horizontal support beams and began to pull the rest of the structure down with it (which is why we see one side colapse a tenth of a second or so prior to the rest of the building following).

And I refuse to beleive that hundreds of explosive charges could be set up without many of the employees at the WTC taking some notice, and then, later, going "Hey.... these guys came in and started packing the place with explosives." Plus - successful demolitions pre-cut the metal to ensure that the wedge is ejected in the propper direction and that the structure falls in a certain way. Structures go through weeks of pre-demolition preparation - a building such as the WTC could NOT be set up for demolition in secret.

It takes more than a commando and a c-4 pack to blow up a building...... shocking, I know....




posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
It takes more than a commando and a c-4 pack to blow up a building...... shocking, I know....


Quite right.

It takes a conspiracy and TH3.

Wouldn´t it be nice if one of the insiders risks it all and comes forward?

Moving along---



posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I am a member of the United States Navy, with a rate of Avionics Technician. I was previously assigned to a project that was classified Top Secret to design a carrier operable UCAV version of the Aurora for increased reconaisance capabilities of the Navy.

Prove me wrong.

I AM in the Navy. I AM an avionics technician. However, I have not worked on such a program, and have not even started "I strand" of my schooling. Three years from now - there'd be no way to prove one way or another, only my testimony and the possible testimony of someone else involved with such a project. And if I were - I wouldn't tell you (I like my job).

To pull off such a conspiracy, thousands of people from more than several dozen agencies would have been involved. More than a few people would stand up and claim it was a conspiracy. Your refference is just some employee who was pissed off that they didn't get as long of a Christmas vaccation as they wanted to - or they don't particularly like President Bush.

And I don't think you could pay people enough money or compensation to get them to wire the WTC for demolition. I also highly doubt you could do it without drawing a whole lot of attention to the process. Cutting torches and high velocity explosives are not standard maintenance equipment.

But if you want me to, I'll crack out the 3d program and model the structure and colapse of the WTC for you.



posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Well actually it would not take a lot of people, ask G. Gordon Liddy or Oliver North and those guys who do black ops. They pull off things using only small groups of people. All it takes is the right people in the right places.

[edit on 13-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 13-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 14-12-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
I am a member of the United States Navy, with a rate of Avionics Technician. I was previously assigned to a project that was classified Top Secret to design a carrier operable UCAV version of the Aurora for increased reconaisance capabilities of the Navy.

Prove me wrong.

I AM in the Navy. I AM an avionics technician. However, I have not worked on such a program, and have not even started "I strand" of my schooling. Three years from now - there'd be no way to prove one way or another, only my testimony and the possible testimony of someone else involved with such a project. And if I were - I wouldn't tell you (I like my job).

To pull off such a conspiracy, thousands of people from more than several dozen agencies would have been involved. More than a few people would stand up and claim it was a conspiracy. Your refference is just some employee who was pissed off that they didn't get as long of a Christmas vaccation as they wanted to - or they don't particularly like President Bush.

And I don't think you could pay people enough money or compensation to get them to wire the WTC for demolition. I also highly doubt you could do it without drawing a whole lot of attention to the process. Cutting torches and high velocity explosives are not standard maintenance equipment.

But if you want me to, I'll crack out the 3d program and model the structure and colapse of the WTC for you.


Yes, please crack our your 3-D program and model the structure and collapse of the WTC. If you can disprove scholars who have done other tests regarding the buildings coming down, please do.


Thanks, and God Bless our Troops!



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
It takes more than a commando and a c-4 pack to blow up a building...... shocking, I know....


But some plane damage and fires can? Go figure.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
But if you want me to, I'll crack out the 3d program and model the structure and colapse of the WTC for you.


Yes, please do. Please also specify all perameters so that we can review and verify your findings. Thanks.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C

And I refuse to beleive that hundreds of explosive charges could be set up without many of the employees at the WTC taking some notice, and then, later, going "Hey.... these guys came in and started packing the place with explosives." Plus - successful demolitions pre-cut the metal to ensure that the wedge is ejected in the propper direction and that the structure falls in a certain way. Structures go through weeks of pre-demolition preparation - a building such as the WTC could NOT be set up for demolition in secret.

It takes more than a commando and a c-4 pack to blow up a building...... shocking, I know....


Workers from the South Tower have said that the bldg was shut down with no electricity for a long weekend the week prior to 9/11 ostensibly to update the internet cabling. Another witness said he heard movement of heavy equipment on the floor above him during the week prior to 9/11. That foor above him was supposed to be vacant.

Also, what in H caused all the concrete to turn to dust if it was a vertical collapse?



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
To pull off such a conspiracy, thousands of people from more than several dozen agencies would have been involved. More than a few people would stand up and claim it was a conspiracy.


Yeah, it would take thousands if it involved the US govt. Sure. But it only took a couple dozen Saudis with box cutters. That's the amazing qualitative difference between the terrorists and our own.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by seattlelaw
Workers from the South Tower have said that the bldg was shut down with no electricity for a long weekend the week prior to 9/11 ostensibly to update the internet cabling. Another witness said he heard movement of heavy equipment on the floor above him during the week prior to 9/11. That foor above him was supposed to be vacant.

Also, what in H caused all the concrete to turn to dust if it was a vertical collapse?


Workers? I heard of one worker. Scott Forbes that claimed that there was a power down for some type of an upgrade. We have discussed this several times.

So, there was a power down? In ONE building. Not all three. Now, for poops and giggles let s say that there WAS one...so what? What could be accomplished in those 36 hours? The building had a back up system emergency generator and UPS Battery back up on all critical equipment.

The power down argument is a moot point.


Originally posted by seattlelawYeah, it would take thousands if it involved the US govt. Sure. But it only took a couple dozen Saudis with box cutters. That's the amazing qualitative difference between the terrorists and our own.


Seattle law... are you suggesting that Terrorist cant take over a flight with only box cutters?




[edit on 14-12-2006 by CameronFox]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

The power down argument is a moot point.


All your arguments are mute also, as far as I'm concerned, unless you can answer the question that I keep asking and you keep ignoring, and where's that video you said you had??

I think you remember your post in this thread right?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 14/12/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 05:42 PM
link   
don't you find it a bit odd that larry silverstein said we decided to PULL IT.

and put one of the bush family members in charge of security of the buildings who's contract ended surprisingly on sept 11?

building 7 was controlled demo. look at who was housed in that building? weird isn't it.

also bomb sniffing dogs weren't allowed in WTC while all the upgrades where going on.

buildings around WTC 1 nd 2 had way more damage then WTC 7 and yet they didn't collapse.

gotta love popular mechanics saying they found DNA evidence of the hijackers that flu the plains. that's how they know who did it.

if they had DNA evidence how in H did they get the original samples to mach it from in such a short period of time..

this whole situation stinks.

and the argument it wouldn't be able to be kept secret is a bad point.
if something is compartmentalized and people doing someone only know what they are doing then it wouldn't take 1000's of people.
tuskegee,manhattan project and many other were kept secret for a long time.

911 was allowed to happen/ US took advantage of the situation at hand. those building had to come down sooner rather then later because of espestice.

[edit on 14-12-2006 by thedangler]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

The power down argument is a moot point.


If you say so, sahib.


CameronFox

Seattle law... are you suggesting that Terrorist cant take over a flight with only box cutters?


Let's hope not. But I am saying that terrorists cannot destroy three buildings with box cutters and jet fuel.

Also, you failed to identify which force involved in the collapse/implosions caused the tons of concrete to turn to dust? Not even one chunk left. How in God's name is that possible?

[edit on 14-12-2006 by seattlelaw]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK


All your arguments are mute also, as far as I'm concerned, unless you can answer the question that I keep asking and you keep ignoring, and where's that video you said you had??

[edit on 14/12/2006 by ANOK]


I recall answering you Anok.... IF you dont like my posts...dont read them. I am far from qualified to explain WHY the building fell in that manner. Just becasue an average man...with ZERO experience in Building Demolition or Structure... etc... cant answer ONE question...you will dismiss EVERYTHING i say?.... well... then with that logic..I should ignore about 80% of the posts in here.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Hey Dangler,

You asked:

don't you find it a bit odd that larry silverstein said we decided to PULL IT.
Its only odd if you don't know that he was talking about the minimal fire operations that was going on at WTC7

and put one of the bush family members in charge of security of the buildings who's contract ended surprisingly on sept 11?
Marvin Bush was a director of the Sterling, Virginia company Securacom, also known as Stratesec, from 1993 until fiscal year 2000.Marvin Bush was no longer listed as a shareholder by the end of 2000. However, His cousin Wirt Walker was chairman of the board...but im not too sure what that would have to do with anything.


building 7 was controlled demo. look at who was housed in that building? weird isn't it.
please support this with proof, witnesses to the building being wired for demolition.

also bomb sniffing dogs weren't allowed in WTC while all the upgrades where going on.
yet another lie. There was extra security on weeks prior to 911. 5 days prior to 911 the EXTRA Security was removed. There were FULL time Bomb sniffing dogs at the WTC since the 1993 attack.

buildings around WTC 1 nd 2 had way more damage then WTC 7 and yet they didn't collapse.
please back that up with some evidence. And make sure you compare how each building was built.

gotta love popular mechanics saying they found DNA evidence of the hijackers that flu the plains. that's how they know who did it.
Well, who do YOU think flew the planes? There is also video footage of the terrorist of flight 11 on security cameras prior to boarding.

if they had DNA evidence how in H did they get the original samples to mach it from in such a short period of time..
I'm not sure to be honest...how short of a time was it?

this whole situation stinks.
I agree, the 911 investigation (911 Commision Report) Was a joke.

and the argument it wouldn't be able to be kept secret is a bad point.
if something is compartmentalized and people doing someone only know what they are doing then it wouldn't take 1000's of people.
tuskegee,manhattan project and many other were kept secret for a long time.
Do the Math...and remember Clinton couldnt get a blow job...Nixon with watergate...this was just too big to be kept secret (IMO)

911 was allowed to happen/ US took advantage of the situation at hand. those building had to come down sooner rather then later because of espestice.
Allowed...i was almost going to disagree with you, but seeing Bush FAILED to act on the mulitple warning that was given to him and his advisors...yeah he allowed it.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 06:44 PM
link   
OOOOOPS hit the wrong button

[edit on 14-12-2006 by CameronFox]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by seattlelaw

Originally posted by CameronFox

The power down argument is a moot point.


If you say so, sahib.


CameronFox

Seattle law... are you suggesting that Terrorist cant take over a flight with only box cutters?


Let's hope not. But I am saying that terrorists cannot destroy three buildings with box cutters and jet fuel.

Also, you failed to identify which force involved in the collapse/implosions caused the tons of concrete to turn to dust? Not even one chunk left. How in God's name is that possible?

[edit on 14-12-2006 by seattlelaw]


So my name is Sahib? Are you saying I am of Middle Eastern dissent? Thats pretty brilliant.

Once again, you failed to remember...that jet fuel...was being carried by planes... two of them... pretty big ones too!

Not one chunk was left huh? Interesting. In your spare time, go find out what Gypsum is.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

I recall answering you Anok.... IF you dont like my posts...dont read them.


No you didn't answer me, you gave a link to a video clip that had nothing to do with the question you said there was an answer for.

And it's not that I don't like what you post, it's that you're dodging this question that you obviously can't find an answer for. I just want you to provide what you claimed to have.

Why is this so important? Well, by itself the fact that the top portion of the south tower started to tilt to one side, until the rest of the undamaged building fell away from underneath it. This one fact alone proves there was some mechanism other than fires and plane impacts acting on the building.

It's also important to know that not ONE official story apologists has even touched this issue, they just ignore it like the plague, or pretend it's a none issue. Why is that? Because there is no answer, better to ignore something that blows your theory sky high than be honest and face the truth.

So Mr.Fox this makes all your other arguments mute, a waste of time, lies, denial and cover up. Unless you can prove me wrong, you've had plenty of time.

[edit on 14/12/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Terrorists have a very powerful advantage over us. They can plan and coordinate from anywhere in the world and are nearly undetectable until they initiate their plan. There are thousands of 'sleepers' planted nationwide. Some of them have no connection with the middle-east - with families that have been here since the Mayflower - they may not even be aware they are linked to a large terrorist network.

So, while it appears that only 12 terrorists were involved, it was really hundreds - from the people embedded in agencies who helped create their IDs (or let them slip through certain checkpoints), maintain communication, obtain flight schedules - everything required in recon of a target.

This is all based on a cell structure - where one cell is blindly following orders and unaware of another cell's existance or how their actions are going to be used. This also means that compromising one cell does not lead to the compromising of another cell; making counter-intelligence and interception/neutralization a royal pain in the ass.

So, can I beleive what happened? Sure. You just choose to beleive something else for reasons yet unknown to me.

I'll have to spend some time modeling the structure. I should have some time this weekend.

I can't plug in values - only demonstrate the process. Why can't I plug in values? Because we don't know all of the values and will end up arguing until the thirty-first of February over what the values are and how changing them will affect the colapse.

Both towers can be explained with one model, and building seven can be explained with another. It's really quite simple if you think of chicken wire and how it behaves. It's the same governing principle - the towers used a steel mesh structure.

I also suggest you at least watch a Discovery/History program over the demolition of buildings - you don't just waltz in and place explosives.

As for what turned the concrete to powder - the concrete encased steel supports, when these supports snapped under the pressure of the building colapse, a wave of energy was released through them, and resonated through the steel and, shattered the concrete. Very similar to taking a metal pole and beating it against another solid object (and squeezing it very tightly) - notice how it hurts all the way up your forearm.

I'm also sure that massive slabs of concrete slamming into other massive slabs of concrete would powderize some of the concrete. I know that's going out on a limb.... and disagrees with all known physics and personal experiences....... but....

The fact of the matter is that a building of that scale has never been demolished before - and many prior demolitions are useless to refference because they simply didn't have A) the magnitude and B) the structure (WTC was a one of a kind construction method).

And I'll talk more when I have a 3d model made and we can have our 'story time' complete with illustrations.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 09:12 PM
link   
your not serious right?
did you watch 911 mysteries?
prove that little documentary wrong.
can you apply your model to the buildings around the WTC that didn't collapse but had way more damage then that of WTC 7?

if so id love to see it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join