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.

 

We Are NEVER Gonna Find Osama.....Know Why????

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 01:46 PM
link   


posted by BANGINCOLOR

Don't be afraid to question authority or even what your own eyes see. Your whole argument is that, "We all saw it happen that day so it must be true." We are all trained to think when a building collapses, it ALWAYS collapses onto itself because, that's all we see. Buildings DON'T naturally fall onto themselves and on 9/11, two of them did because of relatively small fires both in less than an hour. [Edited by Don W]



Well, how many tall, fairly new, buildings not intentionally demolished have you seen fall or collapse?

A. _____ .




posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
draw a conclusion that contradicts reality is not valid. Not believable.


Contradicts reality? Not believable?

Do you know what contradicts reality? The government's story.



For a large over-ventilated jet-fuel pool fire, the heat release rate per unit
area is reported to be approximately 2 MW/m2 [13]. As one limiting scenario, we consider that the plane dumped its whole fuel load over only one floor (smashing all material on that floor, including both combustible and non-combustible matter). Then the fuel would cover this floor to an average depth of nearly 0.8 cm, and the fuel load per unit area would be approximately 6.2 kg/m2. In this case, we consider the fuel to be instantaneously ignited and begin burning with a heat release rate of approximately 2 MW/m2, yielding a total heat release rate in this scenario of several GW. At this burning rate, the jet fuel would be consumed in only a few minutes, assuming an adequate air supply, and even in less time if
the fuel were spread over a greater area. These estimates are consistent with those given in the FEMA/ASCE study [7] and are important because they demonstrate that the jet fuel would be consumed quickly relative to the duration of the tower fires.


NIST Report



We have assumed that the entire quantity of jet fuel from the aircraft was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction.

We have found that it is impossible the jet fuel, by itself, raised the temperature of this floor beyond 280° C (536° F).

Now this temperature is nowhere near high enough to even begin explaining the World Trade Center Tower collapse.

It is not even close to the first critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F) where steel loses about half its strength and it is nowhere near the quotes of 1500° C that we constantly read about in our lying media.

"In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C (1,500-1,700° F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments."


Jet Fuel Examination



Seldom mentioned in the literature about the September 11th attack is the fact that the North Tower experienced a serious fire in 1975, when it was only sparsely occupied. On February 13, 1975, a fire, set by a custodian turned arsonist, started on the 11th floor and spread to limited portions of six other floors, burning for three hours. Several fire suppression systems that were later installed in the towers were not present at the time, including sprinklers, elevator shaft dampers, and electrical system fireproofing.


North Tower Fire 1975


The North Tower was hit at 8:46 AM and collapsed at 10:28 AM. That's 1 hour and 42 minutes. Considerably less than the 3 hour fire in 1975.

The South Tower was hit at 9:02 and collapsed at 9:59. That's 57 minutes. Considerably less than the 3 hour fire in 1975.


-continues-

[edit on 12/6/2006 by TheyAreWatching]



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Now, I'm sure it's true that the jet fuel burned hotter than the arson fire in 1975. However, NIST themselves stated that the jet fuel was most likely completely ignited within minutes of impact. The black smoke pouring out of the towers minutes after impact backs up this claim because black smoke means soot is being formed. Soot means dying fires or oxygen deprived fires.

As stated in the report of the British Steel and the Building Research Establishment, the steel in their experiment reached temperatures of 1500-1700 degrees Farenheight, which is well above the 1100 degrees Farenheight temperature in which steel loses half it's strength. So, the steel in their experiment lost half it's strength and more, yet, no collapse. The fire in the Twin Towers, at it's most severe point, which only lasted a few minutes at the most, was strong enough to maybe weaken the steel to half it's strength, yet, it collapses.

I don't want to hear anything about contradicting reality when this pile of lies submitted by our own government has been accepted widely by people who have chosen to not do their own research and use their common sense. Let's forget the odds of a fireball shooting down the elevator shaft in both towers, let's forget the odds of both towers collapsing in the same fashion, let's forget the odds of 19 terrorists armed with box cutters being able to pull off such an attack against the most powerful country in the world without interuption, let's forget those witnesses that heard and saw explosions at the World Trade Center and label them as conspiracy theorists or say that witness testimony isn't accurate or credible while we contradict ourselves and accept the witnesses that claim they saw an airplane strike the Pentagon, let's forget that the fires burning in the Twin Towers for only a few minutes were not hot enough to melt the steel to the point of a collapse, and certainly not to the point of a collapse with little or no resistence, let's forget that not near enough energy was formed by the fires and impact alone to completely pulverize the steel and concrete in the towers and could have only resulted from another force such as explosives, and let's completely forget who benefited most from this, the United States Government. We're forgetting all of this, we're contradicting reality, all because of what? Because they told you so? Because CNN said so? Because you watched it live even though watching it live doesn't provide temperature censors to measure the fires and doesn't show you what exactly is going on inside the towers? Yeah, that story is real credible. I respect the right that all of you have to your own opinions and views of a situation or topic, but don't ignore physics and common sense, cover your ears and eyes and scream LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, just because your story is getting smacked down at every turn and you're getting overwhelmed by facts and evidence that you have absolutely no response to. And why don't you have a response? Because the very people you rely on for your information won't give it to you. Why won't they give it to you? Because just like you, they have no response. Why don't they have a response? Because they are full aware of the lies they've fed you. End of story.



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I think Osama Bin Laden is in the Southeastern Frontier Province of Iran that borders Afghanistan and is remarkably close to, if not bordering in 1 spot, part of western Pakistan.

That frontier province.. south baluchistan i think, or khorastan? anyways.. its home to SUNNI separtists and is just as rugged as the Pakistani frontier. Iran has been fighting those Sunnis for quite some time in that province. You can read all about it, goto Wikipedia and search for baluchistan and do some more searches after that.

We could never go into Iran to pluck him unnoticed, and theyd see anything like that as an attack or invasion and they'd start launching missiles full of biological weapons at our troops in Iraq and attack our ships in the Gulf.

So I think they may have some knowledge that he's there, but they don't act on it because it's in their own interest to keep him alive and plotting (Iran). Yes I know Shia and Sunni feud but they DO put it aside.. look at Syria and Iran, strategic allies, one Sunni, one Shia.

I think if he was truly in that 200 square mile area of frontier in Pakistan we would've been killed or captured him. I'm sure we would even violate the rules and sneak into Pakistan to capture/kill him if we really had a good idea of where he was. Ever since they started saying he was there after the fall of the Taliban in the media, I knew it was BS. How could the world's most wanted terrorist get past all our top secret CIA crap like unmanned drones and satellite spying and even agents working in the area for us, America. How could he just stay in a tiny, tiny area and not be caught/killed? Even Zarqawi had to constantly move around before he got bombed, and Iraq has way more places to hide.

He's somewhere we CANT go without starting a regional conflict or a new world war, that has to be it, and Iran is the likely candidate. Either that or he is dead .. or hell, maybe you conspiracists are right and hes in cahoots with dubya. I dont think so.

[edit on 12/10/2006 by runetang]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite



posted by BANGINCOLOR

Don't be afraid to question authority or even what your own eyes see. Your whole argument is that, "We all saw it happen that day so it must be true." We are all trained to think when a building collapses, it ALWAYS collapses onto itself because, that's all we see. Buildings DON'T naturally fall onto themselves and on 9/11, two of them did because of relatively small fires both in less than an hour. [Edited by Don W]



Well, how many tall, fairly new, buildings not intentionally demolished have you seen fall or collapse?

A. _____ .


B. Thank you for making my point for me.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 08:29 AM
link   



posted by BANGINCOLOR

"How many tall, new buildings not intentionally demolished have you seen fall or collapse?

A. _____ ."

B. Thank you for making my point for me. [Edited by Don W]



To BANGINCOLOR, tch! tch! BiC. That’s akin to proving a negative, reputed to be very hard to do.

What you offer us is not evidence. It is conjecture. Hypothetical. You are the advocate. The burden of proof lies with you and not with me.

You should not overlook the fact the clearing of the rubble that had been the WTC towers was the most thorough, most expansive, ever in the history of man. Somewhere between $10 b. and $20 b. but nobody will tell the taxpayers just how much.

We know from the Hoffa investigation that the Mafia owns the NJ landfills. That's where whoever was in charge of the cleanup - Mayor Gulianni? - sent the debris. Wouldn’t you like to know how much per ton they charged the taxpayers? Or who was “counting” the endless stream of truck loads of debris? I'd bet there were a lot of new millionaires made on the WTC. The Maria must have thought it a God-send! I wrote my Congressperson 2 X but got back only the “Thank you for wring but don’t bother me" letters.

Now there's a real conspiracy for you to tackle.


[edit on 12/11/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   


posted by runetang

I think Osama Bin Laden is in the southeastern frontier province of Iran that borders Afghanistan and is remarkably close to part of western Pakistan. That frontier province . . south Baluchistan I think [Sistan va Baluchestan per CIA Factbook] or khorastan? . . is home to SUNNI separatist and is just as rugged as the Pakistani frontier. Iran has been fighting those Sunni for quite some time in that province. [Edited by Don W]



Are you a CIA operative Mr Runetang? Your suggestion is the best one I’ve heard since Dumbya invaded Iraq. Ever since as Zarqawi changed the name of his smallish group of devils to “al Qaeda in Iraq” us poor Americans have been completely bumfuzzled. Truth is, there are no operatives in Iraq who are subservient to OBL, regardless of the group’s name.

It is my contention, by the bye, that al Zarqawi was murdered after his capture, On orders from the Oval Office, because the US could not afford another trial like Saddam’s. Saddam even in the dock, is kicking the crap out of us! And we can’t decide whether to kill him or let him live, as in Napoleon. If we kill hiim, we loose the Sunni for good. I we let him live, we lose the Shiar for good. Thank you Dumbya! One more muck-up for you! Once our designated Prime Minister, Mr Maliki promised to execute Saddam by the end of December, but now I hear nothing about that. I Only hear more about the 2nd trial. Q. Is there anything left in Iraq that Dumbya has not Mucked Up?

Time Out - More Later


[edit on 12/11/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 10:23 AM
link   
See My Prior Post



posted by runetang

We could never go into Iran to pluck him unnoticed, and they’d see anything like that as an attack or invasion and they'd start launching missiles full of biological weapons at our troops in Iraq and attack our ships in the Gulf.

I think they [Iran] have knowledge that he's there, but they don't act on it because it's in their interest to keep him alive and plotting [against the US]. Yes, I know Shia and Sunni feud but they DO put it aside . . look at Syria and Iran, [for now] strategic allies, one Sunni, one Shia. [Edited by Don W]



Who said “The friend of my enemy is my enemy, the enemy of my enemy is my friend?”



I think if he [had been] in that 200 square mile area of frontier in Pakistan [with Afghanistan] we would've killed or captured him. I'm sure we would even violate the rules and sneak into Pakistan to capture or kill him if we really had good [evidence] where he was. Ever since they started saying in the media after the fall of the Taliban that he was there, I knew it was BS. How could the world's most wanted terrorist get past all our top secret CIA crap like unmanned drones and satellite spying and even agents working in the area for us? How could he just stay in a tiny, tiny area and not be caught or killed? Even Zarqawi had to constantly move around before he got bombed, and Iraq has more places to hide. He's somewhere we CANT go without starting a regional conflict . . that has to be it, and Iran is the [most] likely candidate. Either that or he is dead .. or hell, maybe you conspiracy buffs are right and he is in cahoots with Dumbya. I don’t think so. [Edited by Don W]




Foot Note One: Of the 30 listed provinces, it seems names beginning with the letter “K” is the most popular. 1) Kermanshah, 2) Khorasan-e Janubi, 3) Khorasan-e Razavi, 4) Khorasan-e Shemali, 5) Khuzestan, 6) Kohgiluyeh va Buyer Ahmad, and 7) Kordestan. You suggested “Khorastan.” Probably my Number 7. I don’t know where there is a map with the provinces labeled. Note also the province you mentioned, Sistan va Baluchestan. It shows up in my Nat Geo World Atlass as the area in the south-east corner of Iran abutting Pakistan, as you have suggested.

Foot Note Two: There are nine of the so-called “-stans." From the defunct USSR we get 5 of the -stans: Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Two -stans are from Great Britain’s 18-19th century empire building exploits around the Indian sub continent and its adjoining regions, Afghanistan and Pakistan. For an American take, see a favorite movie, "Gunga-Din." Finally, there are two more of the -stans that never made it down the birth canal. Kurdistan, still beholden to Turkey and Baluchestan, still under the thumb of Iran or old Persia. I don’t know where those people came from, I don’t know how they have managed to survive into the 21st century. I don’t know much about them at all.

Foot Note Three: Despite Dumbya's continuing disdain for Iran, the CIA has improved Iran’s tier rating: Tier 3 - Iran is downgraded to Tier 3 after persistent, credible reports of Iranian authorities punishing victims of trafficking with beatings, imprisonment, and execution. From CIA World Factbook.


[edit on 12/11/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Thx Don, and no im not a CIA member. I actually live kinda close to CIA HQ though, I do not know exactly where it is nor do I want to, but it's within my state, and within a 100 mile radius of my city. It scares me because sometimes I think they use the local population unknowingly as the guinea pigs for new eavesdropping technology, and new spying technology.


Sistan va Baluchistan is the province I was talking about. You got it right on, I think the other word I was looking for was "Khorasan" but I dont know where I got that from. If you've read books or seen documentaries on the ouster of the Taliban from Afghanistan, you may read or hear that the terrorist leadership had two options, the frontier of Iran or the frontier of Pakistan. I checked a map and that frontier province, Sistan va Baluchistna, borders Afghanistan and Pakistan!! and it borders Pakistan in the southwest of Pakistan, 'the heartland' of islamic fundamentalism there.

Anyone who looks at a map and sees it could see the strategic significance here, how unchecked, one could zip around from Pakistan's frontier to Iran's frontier, then back into Pakistan, then they can cross the Afghani border into the mountain region that Nato is deployed in. Its alot like the Ho Chi Minh trail in a sense, but different. They can recieve foreign recruits and aid from the Eastern border of Saudi Arabia and from Sistan va Baluchistan because they both sit on the Persian Gulf. If the terrorists and smugglers stayed close enough to the shorelines, they could theoreticly bypass any U.S. or Nato warships in the area. I'll admit this idea here is a bit of a stretch due to the U.S. Gulf presence. But 80-90% of all the Heroin in Europe and Russia is cultivated and processed in Aghanistan, then smuggled through various routes which I do not know. They always manage to get the drugs on the street? So how could anyone tell anyone that it wouldn't be equally as easy for the terrorists to smuggle something else like a terrorist bomb or foreign fighters, or anything else that keeps them operating?

[edit on 12/11/2006 by runetang]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by BANGINCOLOR
Just watched another 9/11 video over at Google Video and came to the conclusion the US government does NOT want to find Osama EVER. Know why?

Because then HE will tell everyone what we knew all along, that it was the US government planned 9/11.

No way does a fire, even one from an airplane impact, gonna drop a building in LESS than one hour, no way. We were all in a state of shock when this sh*t went down so, it was easy to put this bulllsh*t past us but now that I see everything, it's quite easy to understand.

110 story building collapses in less than 10 seconds? That's like total freefall speed, no way that could happen because each floor would slow down the floors coming down. The collapse should have progressively gotten SLOWER not faster!!!

[edit on 5-12-2006 by BANGINCOLOR]


You know, I see and hear this stuff way too much.

Explain to me exactly how you know so much about fire, and building construction? Tell me for instance, why the buildings could not have fallen as fast as they did. Try using math. Or why fireproofing is used on beams and columns during construction processes.

It is as if you refuse to accept the fact that a couple crazy people could impact life as you know it so much. Come to grips with reality. ALL OF YOU. Why intentionally block out reason for fantasy? Are you afraid of the realities in your life???



[edit on 11-12-2006 by Sight2reality]



posted on Dec, 12 2006 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sight2reality

Originally posted by BANGINCOLOR
Just watched another 9/11 video over at Google Video and came to the conclusion the US government does NOT want to find Osama EVER. Know why?

Because then HE will tell everyone what we knew all along, that it was the US government planned 9/11.

No way does a fire, even one from an airplane impact, gonna drop a building in LESS than one hour, no way. We were all in a state of shock when this sh*t went down so, it was easy to put this bulllsh*t past us but now that I see everything, it's quite easy to understand.

110 story building collapses in less than 10 seconds? That's like total freefall speed, no way that could happen because each floor would slow down the floors coming down. The collapse should have progressively gotten SLOWER not faster!!!

[edit on 5-12-2006 by BANGINCOLOR]


You know, I see and hear this stuff way too much.

Explain to me exactly how you know so much about fire, and building construction? Tell me for instance, why the buildings could not have fallen as fast as they did. Try using math. Or why fireproofing is used on beams and columns during construction processes.

It is as if you refuse to accept the fact that a couple crazy people could impact life as you know it so much. Come to grips with reality. ALL OF YOU. Why intentionally block out reason for fantasy? Are you afraid of the realities in your life???



[edit on 11-12-2006 by Sight2reality]


Sorry if you can't understand BASIC physics.

Those buildings fell at the same speed as an object thrown off the roof of one of the towers. The difference between a freefall and the buildings collapsing is.........the first floors to collapse ran into the other floors of the buildings below which should have caused resistance and SLOWED the fall of the building down, not speed it up.

An object falls from the roof, it takes about 10 seconds to hit the ground. Gravity, acceleration all comes into play. Why didn't the bottom floors of the buildings that WEREN'T hit by any planes and had NO fires raging in them, why didn't they cause any resistance to the above collapsing floors?????

You don't think it's weird that the top floors of a large building collapsed and hit the ground at the exact same speed as an object thrown from atop the same building that had NO resistance????

I don't think anyone needs a college course to figure there is something wrong with this.



posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Osama is simply a tool for the nwo at this point. Is he a bad guy? Few could argue that he isn't. The thing is that Clinton, Bush, etc have done an amazing job of ingraining in the minds of the gullible that Osama is the devil on earth with the sole goal of terrorizing the people into submission. The reality is that the true terrorists are the ones that work feverishly to perpetuate this fallacy to the point that it becomes a reality in the minds of the majority of people. As long as people accept is as fact, the nwo will continue their war and terror to the point that the average indivual becomes completely and utterly helpless. That being said, in their minds there is no reason to find Osama.



posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by BANGINCOLOR

Originally posted by Sight2reality

Originally posted by BANGINCOLOR
Just watched another 9/11 video over at Google Video and came to the conclusion the US government does NOT want to find Osama EVER. Know why?

Because then HE will tell everyone what we knew all along, that it was the US government planned 9/11.

No way does a fire, even one from an airplane impact, gonna drop a building in LESS than one hour, no way. We were all in a state of shock when this sh*t went down so, it was easy to put this bulllsh*t past us but now that I see everything, it's quite easy to understand.

110 story building collapses in less than 10 seconds? That's like total freefall speed, no way that could happen because each floor would slow down the floors coming down. The collapse should have progressively gotten SLOWER not faster!!!

[edit on 5-12-2006 by BANGINCOLOR]


You know, I see and hear this stuff way too much.

Explain to me exactly how you know so much about fire, and building construction? Tell me for instance, why the buildings could not have fallen as fast as they did. Try using math. Or why fireproofing is used on beams and columns during construction processes.

It is as if you refuse to accept the fact that a couple crazy people could impact life as you know it so much. Come to grips with reality. ALL OF YOU. Why intentionally block out reason for fantasy? Are you afraid of the realities in your life???



[edit on 11-12-2006 by Sight2reality]


Sorry if you can't understand BASIC physics.

Those buildings fell at the same speed as an object thrown off the roof of one of the towers. The difference between a freefall and the buildings collapsing is.........the first floors to collapse ran into the other floors of the buildings below which should have caused resistance and SLOWED the fall of the building down, not speed it up.

An object falls from the roof, it takes about 10 seconds to hit the ground. Gravity, acceleration all comes into play. Why didn't the bottom floors of the buildings that WEREN'T hit by any planes and had NO fires raging in them, why didn't they cause any resistance to the above collapsing floors?????

You don't think it's weird that the top floors of a large building collapsed and hit the ground at the exact same speed as an object thrown from atop the same building that had NO resistance????

I don't think anyone needs a college course to figure there is something wrong with this.
Yeah,that would mean all those bolts in all those steel columns would all have to fail at the exact same time for them to have "fallen due to fire" as the government states it happened.Imagine that.Millions of bolts that held all that steel shearing off from the weight above AT THE SAME TIME to have the collapse that was on 9/11.I just don't know about that.



posted on Dec, 16 2006 @ 07:22 AM
link   
"Yeah,that would mean all those bolts in all those steel columns would all have to fail at the exact same time for them to have "fallen due to fire" as the government states it happened.Imagine that.Millions of bolts that held all that steel shearing off from the weight above AT THE SAME TIME to have the collapse that was on 9/11.I just don't know about that."

Thank you, that's what I mean. Just doesn't make BASIC sense. Those lower, unaffected floors should have SLOWED the collapse down, definitely not speed the collapse up and in such short time too. The one tower fell in LESS than one hour.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join