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.

 

Jury Trial !!! NO PLANES *ever* hitting *any* WTC & directed energy weapons used in WTC distruction.

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
I was wrong. Tom Bedlam was correct. It was not a nuclear weapon. Now I unequivically think it was a Directed Energy Weapon.

My thoughts and suspicions are good up to midnight Pacific time. If they are not changed or modified they are good for another day unless changed or modified herein.


I guess you gave up on the nukes and now you have moved on to even sillier ideas? This post from a NASA scientist on the JREF forum:

JREF poster R. Mackey:

forums.randi.org...



Today we're going to design our own WTC Killing Beam Weapon of Doom to see just what one would look like. While the beam emitter itself could plausibly be a "black" project, something the Governmint doesn't want us to see, it would be dependent on much more mundane technologies -- launch vehicles, power systems, that kind of thing -- and still restrained by the laws of physics. While we may not know anything about the weapon itself, we can figure out the rest.

So suppose an unsmiling man in a grey suit delivers a magical beam weapon to us, and insists we make it functional. All we know are its requirements. Some of these we can divine from what we saw on Sept. 11th.

1. Orbit

The beam weapon must fire from almost directly above its target, and must do so unseen. If it fired at an angle, the beam -- allegedly capable of destroying the WTC towers -- would have cut through at an angle, leaving a quite interesting damage path, one that was not seen on TV. Likewise, TV cameras did not capture any blimps or dirigibles or large aircraft hovering high above the Towers. Thus, we assume the beam system was orbital.



so no matter what secret technology you think the US gov't might have, it fails instantly because your weapons still need to obey they same physical laws as everything else.

Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link

Mod Edit: to apply external quote code, please review this link


[edit on 15-9-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Far too risky. Do you have any idea how difficult is is to hit a building at 500 mph. You might miss the first time and all these explosions would be going off while you are circling back for another try. And why waste a good airplane? Those things are expensive!!!



Do you not think that creating an incredibly large scale, believable hologram to do the same mission would carry the same type of risks as above, if not more? I can only imagine the cost of a couple airplanes is probably chump-change for the agencies that pulled off 9/11.

Any estimates on how expensive the hologram show would cost?



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by u2r2h
 


I find people like this offensive, as I saw a plane. No gov paid me to say this, as if I had millions from the gov to say this, I wouldn't be here saying it, I would be back stabbing the gov, taking the million, and running to Mexico!



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 03:06 AM
link   
More from jref re: Morgan Reynold's lawsuit.




Except your theory isn't plausible at all. If a thermobaric weapon were used on the WTC it would not have looked at all like what it did. Besides, you don't even know what "the government's theory" is, as you have obviously not read the NIST report. Therefore your opinion of its plausibility has about as much worth as my dog's.

Which will go nowhere, I assure you. Don't be pissed, or surprised, when it's tossed out of court as frivolous. The rest is just argumentum ad ignorantium. Here's a thought: why don't you go study the physics relating to the weapons system you're describing, or better yet (since you're obviously not a scientific type) why don't you ask a scientist from the relevant field if the scenario you're speculating about is feasible? Where do you think secret weapons programs come from?

The jet fuel did not clearly all burn up outside the building. A great deal of it spread throughout the impacted floors causing widespread fires. NIST estimates that most of the fuel burnt up within 10 minutes, but the mass of office contents continued to burn for almost two hours in the North Tower and almost an hour in the South Tower. Office fires are known to reach very high temperatures: up to 1800 degrees Fahrenheit, more than hot enough to significantly weaken the damaged steel core columns and the remaining perimeter columns that had not already been severed from the aircraft impacts, as well as the floor trusses connecting the floors to the perimeter and core columns. As a result the floor trusses of several floors were deformed, eventually pulling the perimeter columns inward towards the core. (This bowing of the perimeter columns can be seen in close-up pictures and videos of the towers focused near the impact zones minutes before the collapses.) Once buckled, the perimeter columns could no longer hold the loads they were bearing and redistributed them to the already weakened core columns. Thus the whole upper portion of the tower above the impact zone was being held up by a few core columns, far more than they were designed to hold, and global structural failure inevitably ensued. This initiated a more or less symmetrical collapse in the form of the "pancaking" effect: floor after floor being sequentially stacked onto the ever increasing falling mass of the upper portion of the building.

If the US government was in posession of a power source that is 30 million times more powerful that the biggest generator that could fit onto a semi-trailer truck yet could fit into the space shuttles cargo bay, or atop a Delta IV rocket, then the age of oil would be OVER!

Lets just say, for the sake of argument, that there is a satellite in orbit capable of doing the things you believe to have happened. The power requirements for such a device would result in a satellite the size of Rhode Island. The logistics of such a thing are nearly beyond comprehension.

Lets not forget that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to hide such an orbital construction. Something that size would be visible to the naked eye and resolvable with good detail using a decent pair of binoculars, let alone a telescope. Thousands of amateur astronomers all over the world would have seen and reported it long before 9/11.





[edit on 033030p://upSunday by QuasiShaman]



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 04:03 AM
link   
Is it not possible that this is just a staged event by the government?
I dont just mean the prosecution,
I mean the judge, jury and lawyers.
I don't think anyone will be able to be taken seriously after this.
Frankly, I'm disgusted at the government if they have in fact staged this.



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Anyone know when the court date is?
I looked but couldn't find it.



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 04:29 AM
link   
well guys, what do we really have in our hands?

just imagine, that these f***ers used a black triangúlar UFO
(Lockhead, of course
, in stealth mode) right above, a DEW mounted underneath.
now, they laugh at us once more.


XL5

posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 06:16 AM
link   
I personally have a high power Nd:YAG and Ruby laser, when the beam hits anything that absorbs the beam (including razor blades), you can see the light on that object. You will also see the dot it makes on carbon paper.

The dot of light made by an Nd:YAG on a target can be seen, even though the laser emits infra-red, the rapid heating of the object will throw off its own light. Focused on carbon paper, any/all pulse lasers will make a shaft of super heated carbon vapour rise up and will be bright white with an orange flame above it. On iron targets, it will make an orange/white vapour plume and orange sparks will fly off it at an angle. When the beam would hit the target it would ALSO make a loud snapping sound at the target, its the carbon/iron vapour expanding at a very fast rate.

Pulse lasers do not heat things up as a whole unless theres more then 2 pulses and engulfs the whole object. Continuous (CW) laser heat things up like a blowtorch and if they have the power, untill they become vapour.

If the WTC was hit with a beam powerfull enough to turn concrete to dust, all the camera's in the news choppers would have burnt out CCD's and the people in the plane's/choppers would be blind. The people on the ground would be blind too as that much energy would be bounced back down by moisture in the air.

If the laser used was CW (UV-visable-IR-FAR IR and microwave) and there was no black smoke, there would be white glowing and cracking/popping sounds coming from the top of the WTC. It would be like holding a blowtorch to a brick. If there was black smoke in the beams path, it would make a VERY bright dot on the carbon in the smoke and every one would have seen it.

If the laser was a pulsed laser (UV-visable-IR-FAR IR and microwave), no smoke. There would be one giant sharp bang at the top of the WTC and a white flash. If you could slow time down ALOT, you would see the top part of the WTC radially explode and it would travel down the building exploding floor after floor like that. There would be a shower of white and orange sparks from the metal as well and would look like a giant sparkler. Every one would be blind for the rest of thier lives. If you had black smoke in the air, there would be a huge shaft/ball of carbon vapour and maybe some caron fusion power. Very little power would get to the top of the WTC and again, every one who sees it would be blind.

In all cases, the destruction would go from the very top of the WTC to the bottom, not from where the planes hit and down.



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Remember when the top of one of the Towers started to tilt and then dropped straight down? THAT is when the beam weapons were turned on; the top section, which SHOULD have toppled over into the street, simply STOPPED its rotation, and disappeared into the dust from the explosions at the level of the ' strike '. The entire upeer section did NOT appear as a huge chuck on top of a pile of rubble; Oh no!! It simply turned into DUST before it even reached a part of the way down!! Amazing, eh?

WHAT could take a section of building, perhaps 30 floors worth, and stop it from falling over, and then turn it to sudt? ONLY beam weapons, nothing else. No other cause has the energy needed.The FACT that that huge section did not topple over meant this: The point at which the section was standing, the reamining place where the edge of the section was touching , simply fell apart under that point!!If something is leaning and falling, it will continue to do so UNLESS affected by a force that would account for the change in motion.

PHYSICS rules out the official story, totally. SOMETHING caused the building, at the point of contant with the section, to drop away and allow the leaning and falling section to CHANGE DIRECTION and drop down straight. The FACT that the section did not remain intact and end up as a huge section sitting on top of a pile of debris is evidence of tremendous energy, far above anything generated by fire and or gravity.

Notice when each Tower starts its ' dustification ' the floors at a level near where the ' planes ; struck shows massive explosions and huge dust coulds BEFORE the upper sections simply turn to dust also. There should have been huge sections still intact if the official story was true, but instead we see the TOTAL dustification of both Towers. It is plainly and clearly an example of great energy being applied at specific points, and that can ONLY come from a directed energy weapon. NO OTHER FORM OF ENERGY could acount for what is seen.

There is NO factor that can account for the dustification of the concrete other than the one that proposes high energy directed beam weapons. None. If regular explosives had been used to turn the buildings to dust, there would have been continuous and massive explosions, the kind that could NOT be ignored or played off as something else.

People, this nation has been TAKEN in a coup, and it is as plain as the nose on your face. All of the evidence is there, all that is needed to prove guilt, but since the American people are asleep and trusting and uneducated about the event due to media complicity and fear, we see the same old nonsense asserting that somehow the buildings were inherently faulty and other silliness. Those buildings were OVER built and could withstand anything, except a high energy weapon.

The far right wing freaks have actually accomplished their goals, stripping our rights away under the guise of ' protecting us ' from some vague and nebulous enemy, the ' terrorists ' who it turns out are basically all elements of various intelligence services to be used to destabilize other nations and to get political gains in spite of the illegality and cost. We are suckers and fools if we believe the official story, considering all of the massive amounts of hard evidence that the media will never discuss.

It will be TOO LATE to save this nation if we do not act now. It is almost gone totally. The evildoers that brought this about are laughing at us, they know we are stupid and lazy and easily fooled by the TV shows and the idiots who scream about ' conspiracy theories ' while they ignore the massive evidence all around them. Dick Cheney is arguably the most dangerous and twisted man alive; he exudes lies and treachery and money grabbing treason in every pore of his diseased body. The fact that his black heart has continued to beat is a testimony to how science is used to chaet the world of a much deserved respite from the machinations of the truly despicable men that are at the helm of this ship to hell.

When the truth is finally accepted, it will be too late to do anything about it, the control will be total, and the Bush/cheney gang will be far beyond the reach of any court; they already have legally paved the way for dictatorship and without a whimper from the public or the press!! It is too late, I fear, for us. But perhaps someday when the great WW3 that the Neocons lust after has killed billions and the earth is laid waste by the contaminants of total war, a new society will look back and correct the mistakes that we maed: trusting those in power, allowing stolen elections, ignoring vast evidence of corruption, voting for politicians who never get anything done except for the most mundane and worthless projects, usually costing billions more than necessary due to graft and corruption and payoffs at the highest levels.

This nation is sick, terminally ill, and only a miracle will save it from certain doom; after all, the patient is not complaining and the doctors are all playing golf and a nice memorial will be read when we are all gone..thats a great way for this nation to end up..as a state of people being terrorized by their leaders and stripped of their rights and ignored while the country goes to hell in an ever increasing rush to oblivion. We can thank ourselves for not taking it seriously.



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Well, this sounds hard but true.
now is the time for action. these years after 911 and the next step are very unsafe, but also it is yet possible.
what will the situation be in 15 years,when a (perhaps) nuclear assault will be ´arranged´ to rape this country again?
..they wont wait to grab for power, thats sure. they wont.


XL5

posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Beam weapons can not stop motion when fired at right angles to the motion. They can only make the target become smaller pieces and blow them appart, there should still be a net motion in the direction it was going before the beam hit.

If it was a DEW with that much power, there would be blinding light. Any laser beam over 1000Watts will be brighter then the sun on concrete OR it will explode the concrete.

Suppose a 10LB table has 4 metal legs and each can hold 25LBs and you attach a 90LB weight to the center of the table with screws. Then you cut one leg off and heat the others up so thier LB capacity is now 20LBs. The table will level its self and loose about 90+10LBs of potential energy into the table below it. The table and legs below it has been heated, that table has another 90LB's on it (like the table above it) and although it has all its legs intact, they are now at 20LB capacity. The corner leg of the table below the upper table still fails but does so SLOWER then the fall of the FIRST tables corner/leg. Now the lower table has a capacity of 80LBs and must support 90+10(its weight) and 25LB shocks of potential weight put on it. the lower table fails but remains more LEVEL then the upper table.

As long as the center of mass is not over the edge or anwhere near it, it will not tip.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I see John lear hasn't returned to this thread.

it does not matter how advanced the technology is, due to the fact that ALL technology still obeys the same physical laws, your fairy tale is not possible. The level of energy that you are talking about, delivered from space, is so enormous that it would create a flash detectable to the naked eye, among a countless number of other problems with your theory that NASA scientist R. Mackey points out.

forums.randi.org...

The fact that these weapons only exist in your imaginations is the LEAST of your worries. R. Mackey mainly points out the placement, orbit, and implementation is where your plot fails, hilariously



[edit on 18-9-2007 by Patrick Bateman]



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Unless such a device is powered by 'dark matter' then there would be plenty of it in space.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by anti72
 




Why would Greg Jenkins do a hit piece "ambush interview" on Dr Wood and nobody else? And why would Steven Jones recruit Jenkins to do multiple hit jobs on Dr Wood? See here: drjudywood.com...


Let's not forget Jenkins' ties to the NSA and Jones' ties to Los Alamos, where directed energy weapons are researched. And let's all remember how Jones discourages people from looking at the DEW evidence with such statements as:

"The current "pet theory" that I have challenged is one now supported by you and (not surprisingly) Wood and Reynolds - the idea that "space beams" or "energy beams" were directed at the Towers to bring them down."

See here for source and more quotes:
www.911researchers.com...



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
This is the government allowing disinformation, to brand the whole truth movement as lunatics.



Precisely!

None of the legitimate cases "even exist": "What controversy? New investiagation, what are you talking about? Oh, wait, fake planes and directed beam weapons form outer space? Now that's a case!"



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 



In an interview with Kevin Barrett,
trial attorney Jerry Leaphart has said:


"What I can tell you and the listeners, Kevin, is this. There is more admissible evidence associated with the theory that the World Trade Center was destroyed by directed energy weapons than there is admissible evidence for any single other theory out there that has been promulgated."

MP3 Clip: drjudywood.com...

Full Show: drjudywood.com...



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Isn't she the one claiming that beams fried the cars down in the WFC parking lot? I hope she isn't trying to use that as evidence because I've destroyed any claims about the cars malting by beams of nukes. And I especially can't get over how she using CRUSHED cars as examples.
Then the cars on FDR have been confirmed by a site worker to have been dumped there.

Here's my thread on cars. Be sure to go thru it before dismissing it. The first page only contains a portion of my analysis:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
That research was too bad actually, they kept forcing me to further my point, and in the meantime I realized that the infamous “phone booth” explosions was most likely the cars and gas lines exploding. I was actually going to do a wtc7 focus video with that as a prime piece.


Let's see what else about Dr. Woods...

First claim:

There was no significant damage to the bathtub on 9/11.
www.drjudywood.com...


That's false. They show how the tub wall was caving inwards at an alarming rate requiring emergency repair procedures that were quite dangerous, in at least one of the PBS doc's about the WTC cleanup operation. It was from the extensive damage to the basements levels. Or did they fabricate that entire ordeal, wher ethey actually showed the repair effort. GO look at her image and look for the stubby things sticking out of the wall.

Next:

WTC Station Platform after the event; this PATH train wasn't crushed.
www.drjudywood.com...


Um, what? Tiny cropped photo where we can't evne see what's actually going on near the damage? Even if it didn't fall thru to the train it doesn't mean a thing. In all of that chaos it's foolish to assume EVERYTHING would cave in.

This lady kills me.

Another piece of "evidence" from her 1st page:


That solves it. Call in the firing squad.


Page 2:
Seismographs.
Not even worth the time. I've seen all sides of the debate "prove" this happened or didn't happen.


Page 3:
"Dustification"

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Yawn.


Page 4:
"Holes"

I must add that the WTC6 hole is some fascinating stuff. I found a rescue worker report where (i think it was a she) claimed to tried to flee the first collapse running into there and there were federal uniforms ushering her back out the door and she seen explosions coming from the ceiling above the lobby. Who knows. My closing argument should wrap this point up...

Page 5:
Cars:
See above.
But furthermore, if the beams are so inaccurate that they wasted cars all over Manhattan, then how could they have done their job effectively? Why weren't people burned and fried as well? People were all over down there.

Page 6:
etc.

"Figure 72" is interesting, but the point is there could be explainations from ANY of the main thesis out there. It doesn't PROVE anything whatsoever. She could use it to add probablity perhaps, but not as prime evidence of her thesis.

And then she seems to promote the squibs argument as if that props up her theory?


Traditional CD doesn't do this.


But a space beam weapon does?????

No rubble pile? You can see it to the lower left in Figure 88a.

She going to have to do better than that.




None of this would hold up in court, and even if 20% of it "could", there's a major problem in PROVING a court case:
Directed energy weapons are classified. We don't know that they even have functioning and effective space based platforms. Even if we did, they won't tell us what they can actually do. PERIOD. The air and land based weapons that we know of are good for melting holes into artillery shells and missiles, NOT the entire sides of buildings. One more time: "WE" dont know if space weapons exist, they wont tell us, and even if they admit they have something they wont admit to anything with an effective beam for what she talking about. IT CANNOT BE PROVEN IN COURT, not even the mere part of them having them. Then, you still wont PROVE they actually used them. It’s like trying to PROVE IN COURT that US built UFO’s assassinated JFK Jr.

The news won't even cite the PNAC document, you actually think the establishment will allow a real 9/11 case to be accepted? I can't believe people buy this stuff. It seriously makes me question if they're establishment disinfo agents.


[edit on 20-9-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss




None of this would hold up in court, and even if 20% of it "could", there's a major problem in PROVING a court case:


Thanks for the posts IIB, your input is greatly appreciated. I would like to point out that your speculation that "even if 20% of it 'could' (hold up in court) there's a major problem in PROVING a court case", is unfounded, without foundation, sheer speculation and that you are not an attorney or you would not be making such statement.

In fact, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States District Courts, Signing of Pleadings, Motions, and other papers; Representations to Court, Sanctions, specifically states in (a)(3)” The allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery”.

I point this out because the Court, under Rule 11 (c) Sanctions, can “If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that subdivision (b) has been violated, the court may, subject to the conditions stated below, impose an appropriate sanction upon the attorneys, law firms, or parties that have violated subdivision (b) or are responsible for the violation.

These sanction include (Rule 11 (1)(A) (excerpt) “If warranted, the court may award to the party prevailing on the motion the reasonable expenses and attorney’s fees incurred in presenting or opposing the motion. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly responsible for violations committed by its partners, associates, and employees”.

What this means, of course, is that if Morgan Reynolds and his attorney Jerry V. Leaphart & Associates., P.P. can’t prove their allegations against:

Science Applications International Corp.
Applied Research Associates, Inc. Boeing; NuStates; Computer Aided engineering Associates, Inc.
Datasource, Inc.; Geostats, Inc.;
Gilsanz Murray Steficek LLP;
Hughes Associates, Inc.; Ajmal Abbasi;
Eduardo Kausel; David Parks;
David Sharp; Daniel Venezana;
Josef Van Dyck; Kaspar William;
Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc.
Rosenwasser/Grossman Consulting Engineers, P.C.;
Simpson Gumpertz & :Heger, Inc.;
S.K.Ghosh Associates, Inc.;
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, LLP.
Teng & Associates, Inc.;
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.;
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.;
American Airlines; Silverstein Properties;
And United Airlines,

they are going to owe the above defendants a substantial amount of money in addition to which the Court may impose (Rule 11, (2) (excerpt) “directives of a non monetary nature, an order to pay a penalty into court, or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order directing payment to the movant of some or all the reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses incurred as a direct result of the violation.

So, IgnoranceIsntBliss I would respectfully suggest that if you have any information that would help the Court decide the truthfulness of the allegations, specifically your statement (if not mere speculation) “none of this would hold up in court” I would strongly recommend that you contact the Court and also post a copy of your information in this thread.

their address is:

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007-1312

Thanks for the post, it is greatly appreciated.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Brooklyn:
And let's all remember how Jones discourages people from looking at the DEW evidence with such statements as:

"The current "pet theory" that I have challenged is one now supported by you and (not surprisingly) Wood and Reynolds - the idea that "space beams" or "energy beams" were directed at the Towers to bring them down."

you think Jones is a doin false flag ?



well, it would be a good thing to see more videos of the dustification of steel, I hope there are more. its by far the most interesting points of a possible theory..
(Perhaps they have for the court, but just dont release on the web)
this suit will be a struggle between evidence and falsehood.


[edit on 20-9-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 20-9-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 20-9-2007 by anti72]



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by anti72
 



see this blog for info on Jones: www.911researchers.com...



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join