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.

 

Ground Witness not important

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   
Why do people believe, that what we as a minority individuals believes or think, are important to the massmurderes of 9/11?

That to me sounds like you think that they care, sorry but they don’t care about us.

People often say “ but what about the witness that saw the plane (missile, explosion) or those who didn’t see the plane (missile, explosion)” as if the massmurderes would care about what they saw, sorry they don’t.

That is important to "you" what the witnesses saw and heard, not to them, they don’t care, it’s not important to them.

It doesn’t matter if 300 people on the ground had seen Rudy Guiliani riding ontop of a missile, jumped off before it hit the towers, and sailed to the ground in a parachute.

The 300 would have been labeled terrorists and the terrorist cell had spread all the way to USA, and we all had been happy that the government saved us from those 300 terrorists, because we were in shock.

Today anyone who don’t bye the government story of anything, could be labeled a terrorist.

What people saw on the ground was not important.

I say it again “I bet if you check their 9/11 “to do” list of 100 things, they probably #ed up on 65 and that doesn’t worry them because they can improvise and get things done.”

There were two things that had high priority.

1. Blow up the World trade center and Pentagon.

2. Make 99% of the sheeps believe the terrorist hijackers did it, by showing it on TV.

The other 1-% they are able to handle and take care of.

Its when we are 25%-35% they will have problems handle or take care of us, but that is another show we can get into later.


I don’t think that it was on their “to do list” to have people on the ground see airplanes, because if they did, they did not have to use faked witnesses. If a big 767/757 were used we would have seen all the networks the first hours interviewing real witnesses what they saw, but we did not get that.

So at this point I don’t think they used a Big 767/757 and I am not 100% sure they even used missiles because of the possibility to screw up.

I think fly by planes might have been used, but then you have to figure out why.
I don’t think the reason was to have people on the ground see planes, that might have been a bonus for them.

I will change my mind if you give me a good reason to do so.

Best
D.Duck




posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by D.Duck

I will change my mind if you give me a good reason to do so.

Best
D.Duck


Well, first, you are assuming as true that which you have to prove: that there was a government conspiracy.

Second, you are eliminating from consideration that which allows one to determine whether something happened or did not happen.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
Well, first, you are assuming as true that which you have to prove: that there was a government conspiracy.

Most of us know it as true. All of the professional research organizations of the 9/11 truth movement have proven well beyond any reasonable doubt that there was a conspiracy.

And I'm sorry there there are some like jthomas that can't grasp the science or physics, or yet others that would defend the official account no matter how wrong they are.

9/11 was an inside job. That's the sad reality.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by jthomas
Well, first, you are assuming as true that which you have to prove: that there was a government conspiracy.

Most of us know it as true. All of the professional research organizations of the 9/11 truth movement have proven well beyond any reasonable doubt that there was a conspiracy.


No, you don't "know" it. You claim it. As we know, your claims have never amounted to anything.


And I'm sorry there there are some like jthomas that can't grasp the science or physics, or yet others that would defend the official account no matter how wrong they are.


Unfortunately for your political movement, the forensic and scientific evidence of what happened on 9/11 has never been refuted. That's what happens when you believe politics trumps evidence, science, structural engineering to achieve your political goals.


9/11 was an inside job. That's the sad reality.


Until there is one iota of evidence for 9/11 being an "inside job" - none has ever been presented in seven whole years - we'll continue to inform people that the 9/11 Truth Movement's fiction is not a substitute for objective reality, and not to fall for the TM's propaganda.



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
Until there is one iota of evidence for 9/11 being an "inside job" - none has ever been presented in seven whole years - we'll continue to inform people that the 9/11 Truth Movement's fiction is not a substitute for objective reality, and not to fall for the TM's propaganda.

I seem to recall a recent letter from FBI's Michael J. Heimbach, Assistant Director, Counterterrorism Division to AE911T complimenting Richard Gage on the "thorough research and analysis". If there was no evidence, why would the FBI waste time even responding? Debunk that.

And please never tell me what I do and do not know. You have no clue.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by _BoneZ_]



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by jthomas
Until there is one iota of evidence for 9/11 being an "inside job" - none has ever been presented in seven whole years - we'll continue to inform people that the 9/11 Truth Movement's fiction is not a substitute for objective reality, and not to fall for the TM's propaganda.

I seem to recall a recent letter from FBI's Michael J. Heimbach, Assistant Director, Counterterrorism Division to AE911T complimenting Richard Gage on the "thorough research and analysis". If there was no evidence, why would the FBI waste time even responding? Debunk that.


You can ask the FBI agent yourself. Apparently, the crux of your argument that 9/11 was an "inside job" rests on what an FBI agent stated about an incompetent architect. Thankfully, there are no real structural engineers who would ever take Gage as anything but incompetent. Do you not agree?


And please never tell me what I do and do not know. You have no clue.


If you claim to "know" something as "true", then I can point out that what you think is true has no basis in reality, and for good reason. You have to have hard, factual evidence to "know" something definitively is "true." Next time, state your position properly, such as "I believe 9/11 was an inside job."

Agreed?



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
the crux of your argument that 9/11 was an "inside job" rests on what an FBI agent stated about an incompetent architect

I don't think Richard Gage would still be employed, let alone continue to be a member of the AIA if he was incompetent. Please make it clear that this is your opinion that he's incompetent as the facts would say otherwise.

It also amazes me how architects, engineers, firefighters, scientists and physicists are all competent until that one single moment in their lives that they look at the evidence and say that "9/11 was an inside job". Then they instantly become incompetent. All their years of experience, training, education, all down the toilet because of their beliefs, according to jthomas.

Thank goodness that in the real world, most people don't call others incompetent just because of their beliefs.


Originally posted by jthomas
Thankfully, there are no real structural engineers who would ever take Gage as anything but incompetent.

So the 610 architects and engineers that really do take AE911T and Richard Gage seriously, including Mr. Gage's employer and the AIA, all become instantly not real because of their beliefs? Everyone is competent and a real person until you declare that 9/11 was an inside job. Then you instantly become incompetent and you're not a real person, all according to jthomas.

That's excellent logic there. No wonders you can't fully comprehend what happened on 9/11.


Originally posted by jthomas
You have to have hard, factual evidence to "know" something definitively is "true."

Um, there is hard, factual evidence. Just because you deny it doesn't make it any less factual.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by jthomas
the crux of your argument that 9/11 was an "inside job" rests on what an FBI agent stated about an incompetent architect

I don't think Richard Gage would still be employed, let alone continue to be a member of the AIA if he was incompetent. Please make it clear that this is your opinion that he's incompetent as the facts would say otherwise.


Gage is neither trained in large skyscraper design and engineering nor is he competent in that field.


It also amazes me how architects, engineers, firefighters, scientists and physicists are all competent until that one single moment in their lives that they look at the evidence and say that "9/11 was an inside job". Then they instantly become incompetent. All their years of experience, training, education, all down the toilet because of their beliefs, according to jthomas.


I never said any such thing. In fact, who knew of Richard Gage until he started claiming things for which he has no competence?


Thank goodness that in the real world, most people don't call others incompetent just because of their beliefs.


No one did. Thank goodness I can remind you of that fact.


Originally posted by jthomas
Thankfully, there are no real structural engineers who would ever take Gage as anything but incompetent.


So the 610 architects and engineers that really do take AE911T and Richard Gage seriously, including Mr. Gage's employer and the AIA, all become instantly not real because of their beliefs? Everyone is competent and a real person until you declare that 9/11 was an inside job. Then you instantly become incompetent and you're not a real person, all according to jthomas.

That's excellent logic there. No wonders you can't fully comprehend what happened on 9/11.


Too bad your logic falls flat on its face. Gage and his group have convinced no one outside of the 9/11 Truth Movement of any competency in the discussion of structural engineering when it comes to the WTC 1, 2, and 7. That Gage should instantly become competent because of his beliefs is what characterizes the irrational thinking infusing your 9/11 Denial Movement. No wonder you must deny what really happened on 9/11.

Simply put, the 9/11 Truth Movement has spent seven years going around in circles and producing not one iota of evidence to convince the vast majority of the world including, especially, the world's structural engineers, architects, physicists, chemists, and forensic scientists. The only way Gage's and his group will ever succeed is not by preaching to the choir, but successfully publishing in peer-reviewed journals compelling evidence to convince others in the relevant fields that he has a case.

He won't get anywhere with continued buffoonery just as your 9/11 Denial Movement has totally failed in seven years to convince anybody of anything outside of its movement. Denial is denial is denial.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
your 9/11 Denial Movement has totally failed in seven years to convince anybody of anything outside of its movement. Denial is denial is denial.

Oh, jthomas. How you show with every word you type, that you have no idea what you're talking about. How do you think the 9/11 truth movement grows by the day? How do you think more architects and engineers sign on to AE911T by the day?

BY CONVINCING PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THE MOVEMENT! They're not part of the movement unless they look at the evidence and become convinced and involved. Wow, where some people get their logic.....


[edit on 25-2-2009 by _BoneZ_]



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Well jthomas, at this point (2009) the burden of proof is on you to show it wasn't a Government conspiracy.

D.Duck



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
9/11 was an inside job. That's the sad reality.


! You bet it was !

THAT is what convinced me:
www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...
Treatement for one (WTC7) ~ treatment for the others, right ?

The people that did the 9/11 murders, also are :
The like people that created the **Iraq incubators** lies ! ! !

The like people that created the **Weapons of Mass Destruction** lies ! ! !

! Remember those !

Blue skies.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   



No debate.

Your own ignorance fails to see that that is a 45 degree angle cut in the metal column, which is done by line thermite(a incinerating compound to weaken the structure of a building and cause it to collapse, at a free fall rate. commonly used in demolition of buildings)


Therefore, you being ignorant to the ground witnesses, ranging from police, to fireman, to fearful citizens, you receive a level 99 epic fail reward.




posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
There were ground witnesses who say Flight 77 hit the Pentagon and I don't believe it did. I guess it's possible the same happened in NYC.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Revolution-2012
 


I think the columns were cut in the cleanup operation..i dont think thermite was used anyway imo.Probably more complex than that.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
I think the columns were cut in the cleanup operation..i dont think thermite was used anyway imo...


Hi. inquisitive persons.

When we cut steel, we do it via the shortest "route" !

NOBODY is stupid enough to cut columns at 45*
with an acetylene/oxygen torch/burner or tungsten blade !
It will lengthen the cut by a factor of 1.4 times LONGER !
[ 1.4142) for nitpickers ].

I did cut steel, in my working life, in a steel plant, Mittal,
and I NEVER did cut it at 45*, ALWAYS at 90* !

Blue skies.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
I think the columns were cut in the cleanup operation..i dont think thermite was used anyway imo.Probably more complex than that.

Maybe you could explain the reasoning behind cutting those columns at 45-degree angles for the purpose of cleanup? We know for a fact that in demolitions that the cutter charges are placed at 45-degree angles. Add on top of that every other aspect of the collapses is consistent with demolitions.

You have to be in denial to look at all the available evidence and still say the WTC was not brought down with explosives. I'm currently working on a project that will hopefully kill all doubt.

As far as the thermite/thermate goes, nobody knows how much was used or in how many different locations in the towers it was used, but the most likely places were the impact areas.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Apologies.Im sure i read it was from the clean up operation.As for explosives yes i agree the towers were brought down with explosives..im just not sure it was solely thermite.I either think it was in conjunction with another type of explosives or not used at all.Just my opinion.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


The debunkers say it's from cleanup as part of their denial process, even though there are 9/11 documentaries that specifically interviewed demolitions experts and we were shown how the explosive charges are placed on steel columns at 45-degree angles to help the building slide down (if that makes sense).

I don't believe either that the buildings were brought down with just thermite/thermate. There were some conventional aspects of the demolition, particularly in the squibs that are seen in videos, and heard by many.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Uhhhhhhhhhh

That's a fail, because 45 degree cuts are used directly for the controlled collapse of a building, cleanup, they can simply use a 5 degree angel cut and it'll come down just fine.


Please do your research about demolition before you blurt comments that have no substance.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Revolution-2012
 


Question - why do you insist on repeating the "columns cut by thermite"
lie?

Maybe should look at these pictures - in background can see workers
with torches cutting the columns for removal by the grappler cranes.

Workers using thermal lance aka "burner bar" to cut columns





Series of pictures showing debris removal including workers using torches

home.hiwaay.net...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join