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: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   
And, about how, when, and who could've planted the explosives:


The government has plans for EVERYTHING.

Most government buildings are pre-wired with explosives in the event that sensitive material could be exposed.

We all know that many secret things were hidden in the WTC Towers 1 and 2. There was a secret mint and vault that no one knew about. What else could have been there? Not just in the Twin Towers, but in all buildings in the WTC complex. The government would rather destroy its secrets then let prying eyes see it. The government knew that firefighters or good semaritans would have searched the building for anyone hurt or trapped, and, because no one was guarding the building, could have stumbled upon anything in the building. They would rather destroy anythin (or anyone) than have their secrets come into light.

[edit on 11/25/2006 by TheRanchMan]




posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
Ranchman-

www.911myths.com...

You tell me that WTC7 did not get enough damage? .. please look at this picture.

Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle: ...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.

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.
www.firehouse.com...

As for Building 7 and the evidence for Controlled Demolition, let's review the evidence...

What we do have for sure.

1) Fireman saying there was "a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors." "I would say it was probably about a third of it".

2) A laymen officer the fireman was standing next to said, "that building doesn’t look straight." He then says "It didn’t look right".

3) They put a transit on it and afterward were "pretty sure she was going to collapse."

4) They "saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13".

5) Photographic evidence of a fire directly under the penthouse which collapsed first.

6) The penthouse fell first, followed by the rest of the building shortly after.

7) The collapse happened from the bottom.

8) Photographic evidence of large smoke plumes against the back of B7. Plumes of smoke so large you can't see the entire rear of the 47 story office building.

Lets also look into the fact... WHO,WHEN and WHERE were all the explosives planted?Just like those that think WTC1 &2 were a controlled demolition.




You need to check out this new report by "Winston Smith" who has done an excellent job via photographic analysis of the damage area to the south-face of WTC7.

It shows that NIST is erroneous in its estimates of the damage to WTC7:
www.studyof911.com...

That quote by the head of NIST investigating WTC7 looms even larger now (excerpt from this report):

Small wonder then that the head of the WTC project for NIST, Dr Shyam Sunder, stated in a March 2006 New York Magazine interview, "But truthfully, I don’t really know. We’ve had trouble getting a handle on building No. 7". Unless NIST can provide some photographic evidence that we haven't yet seen, it would appear that the institute's interpretations of the damage to the south face of WTC7 are at best grossly inaccurate, and at worst, deliberately biased in favor of their hypothesis for the collapse of the building.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   
My understanding is that wtc7 is still under investigation by NIST. Guys, seeing that the building was not as much a key focus as WTC 1 & 2..there wasnt as much photographic and video evidence as WTC 1&2 . We saw the planes hit the towers... we didnt see the debris from WTC1 hit the WTC7....BUt we ehave SEVERAL eyewitness reports that say they saw a 20 story GASH in WTC7. What is difficult about the building is the way it was designed over the electrical substation.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRanchMan
And, about how, when, and who could've planted the explosives:


The government has plans for EVERYTHING.

Most government buildings are pre-wired with explosives in the event that sensitive material could be exposed.

We all know that many secret things were hidden in the WTC Towers 1 and 2. There was a secret mint and vault that no one knew about. What else could have been there? Not just in the Twin Towers, but in all buildings in the WTC complex. The government would rather destroy its secrets then let prying eyes see it. The government knew that firefighters or good semaritans would have searched the building for anyone hurt or trapped, and, because no one was guarding the building, could have stumbled upon anything in the building. They would rather destroy anythin (or anyone) than have their secrets come into light.

[edit on 11/25/2006 by TheRanchMan]



Exactly, RanchMan.

And this is why we need a new, truly independent, criminal investigation of 9/11, this time a real one. This is not a request anymore.

It is a demand.

Can anyone here offer a reason not to have a new one?
(Careful out there...if you say "no" to this, you'll really look like a troll.)



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Quick -

Im ALL for a NEW investigation... the 911 OMMISSION was a JOKE. Thats where the TRUE conspiracy is.... what did Bush know...WHAT did he cover up.

I just think REACHING at things like... "The building was wired with explosives.... JUST IN CASE!"

I find it hard to believe that EVERY building in the country that may have sensative materials is wired with explosives.... where are the charges? Who has the controls.
WTC ...1,2,and 7 were all PRE WIRED? WHEN? back in the 1960's and 70's and 80's when they were built?? Was the WTC built by government officals? Do we add the Local Iron Workers Union to the ever growing list of peole that helped in this cover up? They would have had to have been present when these so called explosives were added to the columns. AND we have to add the asbestos company in there too... they would have to have seen all the charges prior to applying this to the steel.

Geesh



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   

It was a B-25 .. not a B-52


A typo. B-25G NA-96.

In any case, anybody who still believes that steel can melt from jet fuel, need to read a book Lab Director Kevin R. Ryan contributed to.

He was fired from Underwriters Laboratories for questioning the asinine BS idea that jet fuel melts steel.

To the guys that buy into that utter nonsense, how about if you get together, buy a bunch of kerosene (aka jet fuel), and try melting some steel with it.

Video tape the whole thing and post it on YouTube, and then all of your assertions will be substantiated.

Give it a try, but make sure to bring a truck load of coffee, because you'll be sitting there until you run out of kerosene.

What's more embarrassing, having a funny accent, or being a part of a society in which most people happen to believe that steel can be melted with kerosene.

No wonder that the rest of the civilized world looks at us like we're all mental patients.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
My understanding is that wtc7 is still under investigation by NIST. Guys, seeing that the building was not as much a key focus as WTC 1 & 2..there wasnt as much photographic and video evidence as WTC 1&2 . We saw the planes hit the towers... we didnt see the debris from WTC1 hit the WTC7....BUt we ehave SEVERAL eyewitness reports that say they saw a 20 story GASH in WTC7. What is difficult about the building is the way it was designed over the electrical substation.




CF,

Understood, but please read the report (you couldn't possibly have done this so quickly...it takes some time but is well-worth the effort). It addresses the 20-story gash, the eyewitnesses, and more.

Yes, being built over the substation is why they had to incorporate trusses into the structure, which is important to NIST's considerations--and this is directly addressed in the report.

Thanks.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
Quick -

Im ALL for a NEW investigation... the 911 OMMISSION was a JOKE. Thats where the TRUE conspiracy is.... what did Bush know...WHAT did he cover up.

I just think REACHING at things like... "The building was wired with explosives.... JUST IN CASE!"

I find it hard to believe that EVERY building in the country that may have sensative materials is wired with explosives.... where are the charges? Who has the controls.
WTC ...1,2,and 7 were all PRE WIRED? WHEN? back in the 1960's and 70's and 80's when they were built?? Was the WTC built by government officals? Do we add the Local Iron Workers Union to the ever growing list of peole that helped in this cover up? They would have had to have been present when these so called explosives were added to the columns. AND we have to add the asbestos company in there too... they would have to have seen all the charges prior to applying this to the steel.

Geesh


That's great you want a new investigation.

All that is required is for the murderers/conspirators to be identified, apprehended, and brought to justice. This is a crime investigation and only facts are allowed. Forget theories, which are OK if they lead to the facts, but there must be indisputable facts and nothing less.

Good statement about the "reaching out" part. Another reason for a new investigation.

However, the name of this thread, "Let's End The Controlled Demolition Theory!", is untenable. Far too many explosions happened that day.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRanchMan
And, about how, when, and who could've planted the explosives:


The government has plans for EVERYTHING.

Most government buildings are pre-wired with explosives in the event that sensitive material could be exposed.

We all know that many secret things were hidden in the WTC Towers 1 and 2. There was a secret mint and vault that no one knew about. What else could have been there? Not just in the Twin Towers, but in all buildings in the WTC complex. The government would rather destroy its secrets then let prying eyes see it. The government knew that firefighters or good semaritans would have searched the building for anyone hurt or trapped, and, because no one was guarding the building, could have stumbled upon anything in the building. They would rather destroy anythin (or anyone) than have their secrets come into light.

[edit on 11/25/2006 by TheRanchMan]


totally agree with most of this, yes you are right it was like a complete and 100% guarentteed eradication of the buildings so absolutely nothing was left!

However the WTC buildings were not pre-wired, more like wireless remotes and a very small amount of extremely powerful explosives that were very easily deployed in the time window of the power downs a few weeks before. Mini tactical 'nuclear demolition' munitions (hydrogen based) of less than a kiloton that were the size of a suitcase, back pack or possibly as small as a softball were easily planted and hidden away where no one would notice or find them.

Conventional demo charges such as TNT and C4 are too unrealistic for the WTC scenario since they do not create molecular dissociation of the buildings materials unless virtually every square foot of concrete had its own large payload distributed evenly through out the building, and would of taken many months if not years to rig and that is with a large group of people involved.

It wasn't even really even much of a controlled demolition, more like guarentteed building annihilation with the controlled aspect coming second. If this were controlled by someone like CD inc they would of been careful to not even smash a window on adjacent buildings. In some ways, i feel it was almost desperate and slightly rushed and was not without marginal error...

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Insolubrious]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by iskander

It was a B-25 .. not a B-52


A typo. B-25G NA-96.

In any case, anybody who still believes that steel can melt from jet fuel, need to read a book Lab Director Kevin R. Ryan contributed to.

He was fired from Underwriters Laboratories for questioning the asinine BS idea that jet fuel melts steel.

To the guys that buy into that utter nonsense, how about if you get together, buy a bunch of kerosene (aka jet fuel), and try melting some steel with it.

Video tape the whole thing and post it on YouTube, and then all of your assertions will be substantiated.

Give it a try, but make sure to bring a truck load of coffee, because you'll be sitting there until you run out of kerosene.

What's more embarrassing, having a funny accent, or being a part of a society in which most people happen to believe that steel can be melted with kerosene.

No wonder that the rest of the civilized world looks at us like we're all mental patients.


No one has EVER claimed that the steel was MELTED.
The STEEL at the WTC was not UL inspected.

No one EVER said it was JUST the jet fuel that casued the WEAKENING of the steel



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Congrats. One post with five brief talking points and suddenly everything makes sense. Thanks.




It makes a lot more sense than most of the stuff you and others come up with.

As for the delay in the seismic reading, I think we went through this some time ago.

There were several seismic stations at difference distances that recorded what happened that day. The farther away the seismic station the more delay there will be in the seismic signature of the crash of the planes.

Unless you or someone else now wants to claim that such a delay is "also a conspiracy"....

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRanchMan
..............
Most government buildings are pre-wired with explosives in the event that sensitive material could be exposed.
...........


Right....
and you know this how exactly?...

Some of the things some people come up with....



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by iskander
...........
In any case, anybody who still believes that steel can melt from jet fuel, need to read a book Lab Director Kevin R. Ryan contributed to.
...........


Well, some people here, and I won't mention who it was to avoid him some embarrasment as he has had more than enough embarrasment to go through, claimed that the main company that helped remove the debris from WTC saw such "melted steel" yet in his website, which has the information on what was done to remove the debris from ground zero mentions nothing at all about finding melted pools of steel, and btw the claim was that the steel was still "molten" which is more BS....

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious
.............
However the WTC buildings were not pre-wired, more like wireless remotes and a very small amount of extremely powerful explosives that were very easily deployed in the time window of the power downs a few weeks before. Mini tactical 'nuclear demolition' munitions (hydrogen based) of less than a kiloton that were the size of a suitcase, back pack or possibly as small as a softball were easily planted and hidden away where no one would notice or find them.
..............


What the heck?....

Do people even understand some of the claims they make?....

Any "nuke" will leave radiation behind....which means all of NY would almost literally be glowing green at night.... Most people would be suffering the side effects of radiation from nuclear material.... But i guess that's a conspiracy too...somehow "the government found a way to take away all that radiation"....


Anyways, i got to get to work, I'll expand a little bit more on radiation when I get back.

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:04 PM
link   

No one has EVER claimed that the steel was MELTED.


Oh, OK, and weakening of the steel makes it fold nicely on it self, sure.


The STEEL at the WTC was not UL inspected.


Kevin R. Ryan says it was. I don't suppose you work for UL to know for sure, because you know, credibility wise, I'll go with the guy that actually worked there.


No one EVER said it was JUST the jet fuel that caused the WEAKENING of the steel.



I blame our failed educational system.

CameronFox, have you ever worked with metal? I have, and I know what it takes to "weaken" steel to the point of its structural collapse, and 600 degrees just don't do it, period.

Try this, if you have a propane Bar-B-Q, run it full blast for a few HOURS, and then see if the grill gets "weak", then come back and share the results with all of us.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
My understanding is that wtc7 is still under investigation by NIST. Guys, seeing that the building was not as much a key focus as WTC 1 & 2..there wasnt as much photographic and video evidence as WTC 1&2 . We saw the planes hit the towers... we didnt see the debris from WTC1 hit the WTC7....BUt we ehave SEVERAL eyewitness reports that say they saw a 20 story GASH in WTC7. What is difficult about the building is the way it was designed over the electrical substation.



Dear CameronFox

the 20 story gash really is completely irrelevant.

Listen, why do we have controlled demolition companies that take many months of careful and precise planning to correctly demolish a building when we can simply throw some random debris at a building or create a large 20 story gash in just a few minutes, start some fires and let the building take care of itself and it wall fall neatly and symetrically down into its own footprint, completely unaided and within a few hours?

Surely, we don't need controlled demolitions! They are conning us all and wasting months of our time! Why bother with controlled demolitions that takes months of planning, and sufficient weakening to the structures main supports by up to 99% when we could simply fly a large plane into the side of it and it will take care of itself about an hour later? What a waste of time controlled demolitions are! They should be out of a job by now.


[edit on 25-11-2006 by Insolubrious]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by Insolubrious
.............
However the WTC buildings were not pre-wired, more like wireless remotes and a very small amount of extremely powerful explosives that were very easily deployed in the time window of the power downs a few weeks before. Mini tactical 'nuclear demolition' munitions (hydrogen based) of less than a kiloton that were the size of a suitcase, back pack or possibly as small as a softball were easily planted and hidden away where no one would notice or find them.
..............


What the heck?....

Do people even understand some of the claims they make?....

Any "nuke" will leave radiation behind....which means all of NY would almost literally be glowing green at night.... Most people would be suffering the side effects of radiation from nuclear material.... But i guess that's a conspiracy too...somehow "the government found a way to take away all that radiation"....


Anyways, i got to get to work, I'll expand a little bit more on radiation when I get back.

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Muaddib]


You obviously have little understanding of modern nuclear devices. Hydrogen bombs leave very little detectable radiation, much different to a typical atomic bomb. Anyway, radiation was detected and h-bomb rad is easily washed away by high pressure water spraying, which is what happened day and night for the next 100 days after the event. Another important factor to bear in mind is that a typical gieger counter will not detect this type of bombs fallout.



An atomic bomb is built based on very heavy elements, plutonium or uranium.
An atomic bomb also is very polluting, and it has a critical mass type explosion mechanism
which does not allow very small bombs or also necessary directed energy effects. The
energy distribution of an atomic bomb is also less suitable for the purposes used in the WTC.
An atomic bomb emits 50% of it's energy in blast force, 35% in thermal radiation and the
remaining 15% in various radioactive forms (initial radiation 5%, residual radiation 10%).
The use of covert atomic bombs in the WTC towers is an utterly hopeless idea, which is
why this evil young man misrepresents my theory so eagerly offering those A-bombs.

The hydrogen bomb is very different. It uses the lightest of the elements, like various
forms of hydrogen and lithium. It has very small minimum size, the cherry-size pellets
are typical in fusion energy designs. It can be made into directed-energy device much
like conventional military explosives. And the energy distribution is more useful, some
80% is in neutron and thermal radiation (and in this case, neutrons also use most of their
energy in warming steels and other hard targets). Some 15% goes to blast effects and
the remaining 5% into various radiations. In covert operations like the WTC the residual
effects of the hydrogen bomb are neatly disappearing into the winds and this process
can be speeded up with continuous spraying of water (which also is what happened).
Some of the tritium binds with oxygen forming tritiated water (which is less harmful than
the free tritium remains) and spraying will also get these lighter-than-air molecules moving,
out into the skies.


I have already been here a few times and i am not prepared to repeat myself much longer as next you will probably tell me about critical mass, EMP and fusion/fission triggers. Well search and ye will find.. Check out the hydrogen bomb hypothesis brought down the WTC thread as it is all there already.



[edit on 25-11-2006 by Insolubrious]

[edit on 25-11-2006 by Insolubrious]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
As for the delay in the seismic reading, I think we went through this some time ago.

There were several seismic stations at difference distances that recorded what happened that day. The farther away the seismic station the more delay there will be in the seismic signature of the crash of the planes.

Unless you or someone else now wants to claim that such a delay is "also a conspiracy"....
[edit on 25-11-2006 by Muaddib]


You are mistaken about seismic networks. They must all be networked to UTC to work properly, and they are able to determine to a certain error rate, the times of seismic events.

In the case of WTC1, the seismic event was 8:46:29, error rate ± 1 second.

Regarding this seismic time, NIST contracted with LDEO to reanalyze the times from 2001. This effort ended with NIST accepting the revised times, as found in their section entitled: "ABSOLUTE TIME ACCURACY". The time for WTC1 plane "impact" was 8:46:29 (this was not the plane’s impact).
Regarding the NIST “ABSOLUTE TIME ACCURACY”, read 3.5 and 3.6 from Chapter 3. Here is the link (be patient; it is a huge file):
wtc.nist.gov...

There is no question, all times were synchronized to UTC.

The cold, hard truth for all who believe in the official government theory [OCT] is that the facts of this paper contain accurate data put out by the government (where neither it's right hand nor left hand knew what the other was doing),...AND...it is not up to the authors to prove the data is true.

IT IS UP TO CRITICS TO SHOW THE DATA IS FALSE.

You have not done this, Muaddib.

What factual evidence can you substantiate that either of these times are false?
(Anything else just wastes time.)




“Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II)”
Link: www.studyof911.com...
By Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross, Scholars for 9/11 Truth: www.st911.org...

The official times for plane "impact" [precise to the second] as declared by the US Government, from both the 9/11 Commission and from NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), are different and yet both are true and accurate times. What can this factual contradiction mean? Looking exclusively at WTC1, there is found an indisputable causal link:

One World Trade, September 11, 2001
American Airlines Flight 11 “impact” time:
8:46:30 UTC, per LDEO seismic data (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2005)
8:46:40 UTC, per FAA last primary radar contact (9/11 Commission Final Report, 2004)

Q- What caused the 8:46:30 seismic event that occurred 10 seconds before the actual air crash?
A- The only possibility is huge explosions, as corroborated by many eyewitnesses at the time.
Q- Who caused these explosions before the plane hit?

This precision data has yet to be refuted. It is from the two highest governmental entities charged with looking into what happened on 9/11. Both declared these times as accurate, and in doing so corroborate William Rodriguez and the many eyewitnesses the morning of 9/11 who testified of explosions in the sub-basements of WTC1 before American Airlines Flight 11 struck the building. This is indicting evidence of governmental coverup, and thus implication of complicity.

Demand a new, truly independent, criminal investigation of 9/11, this time a real one.
Justice waits...[and there is no statute of time limitation on murder]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Dear Friends : There are Many Republicon's that for whatever the reason just can't get there little minds around the notion that The WTC was OVER DESIGNED and well able to handle more than one fully loaded Boeing 707 that was at the time the largest aircraft ... And these very same Sick Crazy's are the exact Same SOBs that RE-elected the WORST CRIMINALS OUR LAND has ever known ! They flat out refuse to allow the Idea that they are to blame for where WE ARE TODAY Or Lest they commit Suicide By the Droves .... It was they that for whatever the reason felt the need to have such Lacky's installed in the Business of Country running when the record books clearly show Bush Couldn't Run the Toilet let alone a Country ... I only pray that some day I'm allowed to Have the Chance to get one of thse SOBs in My Crosshairs .. Oh and Big Boy Jet Fuel Flashes off at 550 never mind the fact it's ONLY KEROSENE .... IDIOTS



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Wow... After I bring up some valid points. We get the following:

1- The Squibs actually WERE squibs... (YET no one has told me WHY they increased as the collapse got CLOSER OR... WHY wasnt their ANY failure of the areas were the squibs were located. )(until the global collapse)

2- The buildings were PRE-WIRED when the towers were built. ( wow )

3- MINI NUKES (that dont have radiation!!!)

4- Nanothermite... (That has NEVER been used in a demolition)

5- Secret CIA companies that set all these charges in the buildings.

6- "too many explosions that day" for it NOT to be a controlled demolition.

7- there were not too many fires, they were not hot enough...etc.

8- The "scholars" have proven it all !!! (doctors in English Literature and Dermatologists!)

9- ONLY the Jet fuel was burning.. ( people forget about the offices up there)
Geeshhh

[edit on 25-11-2006 by CameronFox]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join