It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
reply to post by lifestudent
Been a while since I watched it, but saying there was no plane debris on the Pentagon lawn is false. There was debris. Saying the Towers collapsed in 8-10 seconds is false. It was 18-20 seconds. Just different stuff like that. I can't remember everything point after point, I'd have to watch it again.
Originally posted by monst3rtruck
Note to the trigger happy moderators:
I'm sure some moderators will be all too quick to ban this account and perhaps delete this post before anybody gets the chance to read it, so I'll give you a little advice, don't bother. The more you censor me the more you fuel the fire, and there's only so much you can delete before people start questioning your intentions. Have no worries though, there are plenty of chumps who will blindly dismiss me as a troll and return to worshiping the ground you walk on.
...Both towers were perfectly capable of collapsing (without assistance) as a direct result of the impact and resulting damage and events. Such a collapse does not violate any laws of physics or any established well accepted science. There is no need for a conspiracy so there is no reason to suspect one without reason. The government would gain minimal if any benefit at all from carrying out such a conspiracy and any such benefit would be overshadowed by the cost and effort involved in pulling off such a conspiracy and keeping it hidden. Any government capable of pulling off such a conspiracy would be quite proficient at what they do yet the current US government have blundered many proportionally simpler tasks. Any government with the audacity, will, and capability of pulling off such a conspiracy would be perfectly capable and willing to plant WMDs in Iraq, and yet there were no WMDs found in Iraq, which was a rather large egg on the current US government's face in the minds of the public. Don't you think that any government who would conspire to effect the events of 9/11 in such a cruel and heartless way, would also plant WMDs to be found in Iraq to save face?
Originally posted by bovarcher
...Both towers were perfectly capable of collapsing (without assistance) as a direct result of the impact and resulting damage and events. Such a collapse does not violate any laws of physics or any established well accepted science.
Excellent post, and very thought provoking.
What do others think?
Originally posted by gen.disaray
WELL , i got in about 3 minutes before i got sick of it ..
why is it that truthers say fire did it ? in fact , it was PLANES !!!!!!
Originally posted by alinost
9/11 was not an inside job. That video used circular and circumstantial evidence
Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Why can't a 9/11 debate be civil in the least bit?
Listen, debunkers, this is how it is, and the sooner both of us realize it, the sooner we can end the drama. So here's how it is:
You'll never believe us
We'll never believe you
Sucks, but it's the truth.
But a lot of us don't buy all the other crap the "truther" camp throws at us. And on the other hand, we beat our heads against the wall when we see the proverbial "debunker" that won't view any evidence"
2) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, hateful and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.
1) Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.
If you believe the official version these top sections smashed down onto the floors below causing the 'pancake' collapse.
NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.
One may think that 'some' possess a symptomatic attention disorder which renders the modern mind incapable of sitting through and concentrating on a fairly lengthy (yet reasonable) presentation of information….
…a symptom which can then be counted upon by 'some-other' to justify activity, made confident by change and deferment of the initial reasoning rendered.
"That video didn't (in my mind) didn't have a absolutely rock solid case... therefore 9/11 wasn't an inside job."