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.

 

(new theory) Squibs Explained - Controlled Demolition

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Hmmm..no one wants to answer my post.

Oh well...


Because it is totally off topic (against the rules) ,been addressed many times here and you are derailing this thread.




posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Derailing the thread? Did you even bother to read it? My points were addressed on page 2 by Griff.

The thread was and still is on topic.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Derailing the thread? Did you even bother to read it? My points were addressed on page 2 by Griff.

The thread was and still is on topic.


You are asking about the dogs in a thread about squibs... you then admit you have no idea what they are trained to smell, you then continue to ask questions about some survivor statements that are not in the form of a question and un-sourced then, you demand answers as if you are being purposefully avoided because you have struck debunking gold...

Pretty common MO here... I see this behavior in most of your postings.

[edit on 10-7-2007 by Pootie]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 09:57 AM
link   
To have explosive squibs, you need explosives. The point i was making was not de-railing. I was asking a legit question as to how that many explosives got by full time bomb sniffing dogs. The thread continues with other posters (danx) stating that the dogs were removed. I simply corrected him by stating the extra dogs were removed. Perhaps I could have listed a couple more sites. I assumed that by seeing that there were in FACT dogs there on 911, you would be able to put 2+2 together.

This is not derailing...this is adding substance and debate to the posiblilty of multiple charges going off that caused the so called squibs.

If you read the OP's additional posts, he claims that WTC7 was ( In his opinion) supposed to be hit by flight 93. I stated my opinion on that as well. I wasn't derailing, I was making valid points that goes against what he was stating.

1111 didn't seem to have a problem with my points, not sure why you do.

If you would like some sources as to the witnesses to the wind during the collapse, I will be more than happy to.

ETA: as far as not know what the dogs were trained to sniff out... The thread would have went right to the "can the dogs smell nukes?" "thermate?"...etc... So..I was honest in saying I'm not sure.

Funny how you didn't comment on the other poster that was going on about Missing Gold... THAT my friend is de-railment.... But oh...its part of a CT so that doesnt matter!







[edit on 10-7-2007 by CaptainObvious]

[edit on 10-7-2007 by CaptainObvious]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
To have explosive squibs, you need explosives. The point i was making was not de-railing. I was asking a legit question as to how that many explosives got by full time bomb sniffing dogs.


It should be OBVIOUS to "Captian Obvious" that the topic of squibs was being brought up as a discreet event.

As usual, you want to go back to totally different argument to take the thread off topic...

The OP explained how he where he thought the explosives would be placed in order to produce the squibs... all you can do is cling to...

"well, well, well what about the dogs..."

It is TOTALLY off topic, there are many threads here about Securacom, Marvin Bush, Power Downs, Bomb Dogs, etc.

I personally am sick of watching you play this game in every thread. I feel many of your posts are detrimental to any sort of reasonable debate on a specific subject. But that is just my opinion.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
The dogs were PART of why his theory didn't hold water with me. I actually raised points on a few things.

Still not sure where you get that I am derailing. Derailing is changing the topic...taking it in another direction. All of my posts dealt with the possibilities of explosives being secretly smuggled into the WTC.

If pointing out facts about a topic/thread is derailing.. then... guilty as charged.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
The dogs were PART of why his theory didn't hold water with me. I actually raised points on a few things.

Still not sure where you get that I am derailing. Derailing is changing the topic...taking it in another direction. All of my posts dealt with the possibilities of explosives being secretly smuggled into the WTC.

If pointing out facts about a topic/thread is derailing.. then... guilty as charged.


The dogs don't matter. They are controlled by humans and their responses or lack thereof need to be interpreted by humans.

You cannot show that whatever dog was on duty at that time was trained to smell even a FRACTION of the munitions available to the US government or foreign intelligence apparatuses. It may have been someones pet for all you know...

You cannot show that the handler or the dog ever went searching through the building and unless you are a bomb dog trainer or have EVIDENCE to show that:

1. Bomb dogs were present that day and on all previous days,
2. They were actively moving throughout the buildings. Not just standing in the lobby.
3. They were trained or could pick up on whatever explosive/incindary that could be employed.
4. The dogs was even trained.
5. the handler was legit.
etc. etc. etc.

You do not have this evidence and are just posting "things" to throw up road blocks.

I am CERTAIN that if this was an inside job finding a way around the dog would take about 10 seconds for the planners.

1. Use something they are not trained to smell.
2. Mask/seal the smell.
3. Send in a plant/fake team of handler /dog.
4. etc.

People get LARGE DRUG SHIPMENTS right past drug dogs ALL OF THE TIME... I can even tell you how so your little dog theory is nothing more than a distraction.

The topic IS NOT about smuggling the explosives in... it is about squibs and placement.

YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT ABOUT SMUGGLING THEM IN... that is CLASSIC DERAILMENT.


[edit on 10-7-2007 by Pootie]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Would you two please knock it off with this personal battle? I see a whole page here about your duel...

Shake hands and lets go back to the squibs

Now the OP has shown placement... what I want to know is has ANYONE ever done a study to find out just how many of the uprights would have to be taken out... and on how many floors to allow the result we saw?

I am sure its not all of them, but I AM sure gravity wouldn't do it. The number of squibs is not that many. I like the OP's idea that only some would show outside. This makes the most sense so far.

But as with anything I am sure that there are key points that would cause the result. A demo team would need to know this info to get in quickly and hit only key points.

If a LOT of uprights need to be taken out, then it would be logical that he explosives were set a LONG TIME before the event



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Now here is the final answer to all this...

After watching the video presented on this thread what is left to say?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join