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.

 

The Twin Towers: The Proofs Of Demolition

page: 15
10
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
And thats why the PA lost some K-9s that day...they werent there anymore........True, they did have extra dogs there for a bit at one point, but on 9/11/01 the dogs that were stationed there...WERE there.


There was one dog that died that day.


Sirius was the only police dog killed by the terrorists on September 11th and, perhaps, the only American police dog ever killed by international terrorists.


www.portauthoritypolicememorial.org...

On that note. Does anyone know how many bomb sniffing dogs there were total? Just curious.


Wow one K-9 died during the events of 9/11. So we have one possible bomb sniffing dog to account for the whole of the WTC Complex.

Should there have been more bomb sniffing dogs? Absolutely. Why wasn't there? Thats another question to add to the many that have already been asked and no answers have been received.

Maybe it has something to do with Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport which Marvin Bush, the presidents brother, sat on the board of directors.

BeZerK




posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by earth2
I think im jumping track for now on the squib thing. I have seen demolition and they have a lot more squibs in critical locations. There are only a half a dozen or less on this gigantic tower, just doesnt make sense. And they are scattered in weird random areas, kinda like were doors could be open.
I really used to think it was demo but I have changed my mind, if it was demo there would be no question.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by earth2]

in those cases did they also have a plane flown into them?

if they did not i would say re-evaluate your conclusion.



posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 01:20 AM
link   
A controlled demolition does not start near the top, then work downward, but they detonate the supporting of the structure at the bottom, then let the weight of the building do the rest. The energy contained in the building reduces the amount of explosives necessary to do the job, and certainly, those tiny little "squibb like" puffs emanating from below the falling portion, are totally insufficient to produce a demolition effect. No one would put such "lady-finger firecrackers" in the building to bring it down.

Also, how could anyone install such an enormous amount of explosives in a building overnight, or at any time prior?

And why is it that with every building that has been hit by terrorists, have to follow with a conspipracy theory that includes "planned" demolition? It's far too absurd.

The planes did it.



posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by addvantage666
A controlled demolition does not start near the top, then work downward, but they detonate the supporting of the structure at the bottom, then let the weight of the building do the rest.


Is this always and absolutely necessarily the case?

(No, there are examples of exceptions, and physics permits many other configurations and techniques.)


The energy contained in the building reduces the amount of explosives necessary to do the job,


Which only means we need less explosives in there, right?



The planes did it.


Yeah, the planes and what else?



posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by earth2
 


Its a real pic. Its just been altered. Google pictures of the 911 towers and look for the same pic. None of the others have the building exploding on the right side. It was probably photoshopped.



new topics

top topics
 
10
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join