Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

History Channel Special: "The 9/11 Conspiracies" August 12, 2007

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Hey CC! Sorry, I didn't know the link was considered a 'truther' thing. I was looking for something else, but couldn't find the reference I was looking for.
So, to play devils advocate,
Can you you suggest or have an original source to deem Both Fountain, and McNally as being frauds, not to mention Forbes? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but to dismiss information or 'witnesses' simply because they belong to a certain memory cluster that you have characterized as unreliable isn't enough reason, for me, to not trust them.
So, do you know of any information sources on these people? I didn't get very far with it, but didn't find anything suspicious.




posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ccaihc
Opinions from a engineer.

What do you do for a job?


More opinions from an engineer. I am a structural engineer that works for an architectural firm. You? Not to get into a pissing contest but you started it with calling us english majors.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Mechanical Engineer... UMAA....



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ccaihc
www.journalof911studies.com...
more specifically therewithin:

As we examined the WTC-debris sample, we found large chunks of concrete (irregular in shape and size, one was approximately 5cm X 3 cm X 3cm) as well as medium-sized pieces of wall-board (with the binding paper still attached). Thus, the pulverization was in fact NOT to fine dust, and it is a false premise to start with near-complete pulverization to fine powder (as might be expected from a mini-nuke or a “star-wars” beam destroying the Towers). Indeed, much of the mass of the MacKinlay sample was clearly in substantial pieces of concrete and wall-board rather than in fine-dust form...

It seems that the 9/11 truth community likewise “has been slow to understand” that the WTC dust particles in greatest abundance are the “supercoarse” variety rather than “fine” particles, and that significant chunks of concrete were also found in the WTC rubble.


Significant chunks? 5cm x 3cm x 3cm is significant? Do you know that there are 2.54 cm in an inch? That makes that significant piece of concrete 2 inch x 1 inch x 1inch. 2 cubic inches to be precise. That's about the size (smaller) than those pencil erasers given in elementary school. Significant my arse.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
^^^ LOL

"...we found large chunks of concrete (irregular in shape and size, one was approximately 5cm X 3 cm X 3cm"



Don't worry Griff... they found a chunk of the building the size of a few stuck together sugar cubes. Conspiracies DEBUNKED!

[edit on 7-8-2007 by Pootie]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by ccaihc

Sure, but it fell from the top down...


Did it really? I don't believe you are correct. I'm an engineer (a qualification you demanded yourself). I've spent just a little time looking at this. It is my educated and fact-based conclusion the core fell from the bottom.


Thank you. There are 3 engineers in here that I know of and one engineering student. As far as I know, we all agree the core fell first. NIST even agrees with us. I don't feel like plowing through the NIST report now, but it is in there. It could be FEMA that I'm thinking of.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   
aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh*runs in* possible for a minimum 1300lb bomb in the basement??*runs off*aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
I don't feel like plowing through the NIST report now, but it is in there. It could be FEMA that I'm thinking of.


I think it is FEMA, actually. They did an analysis that showed that WTC1's antenna sank first, but then NIST did a 180 and went out of their way just to try to debunk that particular point, using multiple angles and etc. They went all out on it if I'm remembering it right. HowardRoark used to try to hammer the antenna not falling first too, even though there was obviously a virtually simultaneous failure no matter how you try to slice it.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by bsbray11]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
no matter how you try to slice it.


Pun intended? Just joking. Thanks for clarifying for us BsBray. I thought I may have been thinking of FEMA.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ccaihc


This article alone should be enough to destroy the CD theory but I know how rabid you guys are... There is nothing I can do change your mind.


Yeah, but what you're missing here is that you are also talking to me - a non "CD theory" person. And you're not addressing my questions. Now, I don't feel all that "rabid" about anything...I just feel like you seem so committed to avoiding the possibility that explosions could have taken place else where in those buildings that you will blanket any one suggesting such with nasty labels and avoid the hard to answer questions. I'm not sure what you're scared of, but you do seem to be scared of something.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
Yeah, but what you're missing here is that you are also talking to me - a non "CD theory" person.


I believe Valhall and I have the same theory. At least for the collapse initiation. If not, Valhall, you can correct me on the differences.

As far as I believe. Operatives (either al queida or elsewhere) were able to penetrate the lower basement levels. Which would be all too easy. Just set up an office and then you have access to the building. Getting passes for construction is then a matter of just filling in paper work.

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

911review.org...

www.papillonsartpalace.com...

Those are a couple of links to get started.

Why is this so hard to fathom?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
Why is this so hard to fathom?

I'll bite


Now, first off, I'm NOT a debunker. I believe that elements of the administration, which would senior member of the Executive Branch, were aware that a massive attack was about to happen, but they didn't know exactly how or specifically where. I think that they allowed it to happen, so that they could further their particular agenda.

That having been said, I still believe that the controlled demolition theory is to hard to swallow. I am not laboring under the delusion that I am going to change your mind or the minds of anyone else on this board. In my experience, most everyone here has formed an opinion, dug in their heels, and refused to consider other reasonable options. Regardless, I sally forth....


A government, or a faction with a government, is hobbled by bureaucracy, red tape, and the public eye. They have active political and social enemies who are looking to identify any misstep and utilize it for their own political gain. Additionally, funds cannot be allocated without documentation. They must be included in budgets, there are requisition forms for equipment, transportation records, warehousing and storage records, and delivery reports. Not to mention all of the people involved in the packaging, shipping, storage, transportation, and delivery of the equipment. Dick Cheney can't walk into armory, pull out 20 tons of Semtex, and put it in his trunk. And once the "rebel faction" have the equipment, they have to go some where with it. Who transported it? Then they have to store it. That means guarding it. Who guarded it? Were they servicemen? Were they contractors? That means a payroll paper trail, plus more for supplies and expenses. Then they have to get it on property. Again, who move it into place? Did they have to pay off someone on property? Who did they have to pay off and why haven’t they talked? Where is the paper trail for that money? What if someone saw the preparations? What did they do with them? Kill them? There have to be records of that as well, people don't go missing without someone making a call.

Granted, small items, or small quantities of items, could be overlooked or “misplaced”, say a case of three FIM-92 Stinger missiles or a few boxes of M-16A4s. For a government group to manage to secret away tons of explosives and detonation devices to take out a building, that would be considerable harder. And if they did, there'd be a paper trail to follow.

Not to mention that the demolition needs to be planned and explosives need to be placed. By professionals. Rare professionals. You can't just hire a couple of hobos to place explosives....they're explosives. You do not want to jeopardize an operation of this magnitude by hiring streetwalkers and homeless men. Planning, setting, and demo'ing two 1,300 foot buildings at virtually the same time isn’t an everyday demolition. Only the best of the best could do it without massive collateral damage. How long would a list of professional demolition experts of that caliber be? Five? Ten maybe? It would be relatively easy to track down these people and determine where they were in the weeks leading up 9/11/2001. Beyond that, these professionals would have had to emplace the demolition charges in secret without any of about 20,000 people noticing. Then it would have to be carried out by these professionals without any of them telling their friends, wives, families, or getting ticked off and spilling their guts to CNN, or feeling guilty and confessing to his priest.

It is unreasonable to think that a notoriously incompetent establishment with a grand history of inefficiency and unreliability would be able to pull of something of this magnitude. It just doesn’t make any sense.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
Then they have to get it on property. Again, who move it into place? Did they have to pay off someone on property? Who did they have to pay off and why haven’t they talked? Where is the paper trail for that money? What if someone saw the preparations? What did they do with them? Kill them? There have to be records of that as well, people don't go missing without someone making a call.


I didn't quote the whole thing. You are going on the assumption that the government was involved? How about the trillions that went missing (announced on 9/10/01 by Rumsfield)? Where's the paper trail for that?

No where in my theory is the government involved except for maybe allowing it to happen (like they did in '93). Please check out the links I linked to. It would be all too easy for Al queida to set up a phony business in the towers and then they would have access to do things like "work on the sprinkler system".

I think the government just doesn't want to tell us that they can't fully protect us. That's why they won't tell us that there were bombs planted by the terrorists. Because if they did, we'd have a "war of the worlds" scenario again. All just MO.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   
The bomb in the Wtc Basement

the author of that thread is very handsome, if i do say so myself....

the possibility of seperate bombs in the building is super high...the one speaking most of this is the janitor rodrigez(sp)...griff gave me a link to a middle easterner who was arrested with a fake ID, and had an access badge to the WTC on sep. 6-7 of 01...there is also the fireman's report of a middle easterner being arrested in a janitors jump suit, by PA, as his group was running out of one of the towers....

p.s. i fixed the URL

[edit on 8-8-2007 by wenfieldsecret]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
there is also the fireman's report of a middle easterner being arrested in a janitors jump suit, by PA, as his group was running out of one of the towers....


I keep forgetting about this, thanks for keeping bringing it up. I used to tow the line of thermate. I now believe that if there was thermate, there were more explosives also. A combination punch.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Aughhhhh....this was never supposed to be a CD/non-CD/official story debate thread...you guys wanna talk about that, you should create another thread. It really has all been discussed before and is thus beating a dead horse, tho.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
It really has all been discussed before and is thus beating a dead horse, tho.


While I agree with you that we are being off topic, what would you like? The OP is about a show that hasn't run yet. My answer...good, maybe I'll watch it. Thread closed then.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
Dick Cheney can't walk into armory, pull out 20 tons of Semtex, and put it in his trunk.


Were they going to use Dick Cheney to pull off Operation Northwoods, too? I guess the Joint Chiefs should have re-thought that one before putting it on Kennedy's desk, huh?

Black ops exist, but politicians don't run them. That's the faulty chain in your logic. It has nothing to do with our politicians and their secretaries working desks. It has to do with our military industrial complex and intelligence agencies, as well as financial powers like big banking, big oil, or even big pharma, and then you have institutions like Israel's MOSSAD and their military, which has very close ties to the US military industrial complex for pretty obvious reasons: we built them up. And now they develop technology that we also use, as an example.

In fact, Israeli agents were arrested in NYC on 9/11 applauding the first tower impact. Al Qaeda again? Certainly not Dick Cheney running around doing all of the work with his secretaries.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Yeah, I going to guess... History Channel prob doesnt want to get taken off the air... so they will leave viewers (like my close minded dad) feeling as if is TRUTH seekers are averreacting and wrong... thats just my opinion though



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Sooo...what happened with this documentary after? Or was this the pre discussion thread? I didnt see it because i dont live in the US and have no access to digital channels.

Edit: I see obvious bias in the shows discription on the history channel site.


Examines the various conspiracy theories espoused on the Internet, in articles and in public forums that attempt to explain the 9/11 attacks. It includes theories that the World Trade Center was brought down by a controlled demolition; that a missile, not a commercial airliner, hit the Pentagon; and that members of the U.S. government orchestrated the attacks in hopes of creating a war in the Middle East. Each conspiracy argument is countered by a variety of experts in the fields of engineering, intelligence and the military. The program also delves into the anatomy of such conspiracies and how they grow on the Internet.

www.history.com...


"And how they grow on the Internet"? Oh yeah its tinfoil hattery so. Nothing to see here..move on. Good god i expected more after that BBC bashing. Has anyone seen it or got a link?

[edit on 13-8-2007 by Azriphale]





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join