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.
But the thing that most makes me doubtful of the conspiracy theories is how much is focused solely on the collapse of the WTC buildings. My first questions is: exactly what is supposed to happen when buildings are hit by planes and massive raging fires ensue?
When it boils down to the belief the buildings didn't fall the way they should so therefore there were explosives planted, one has to wonder.
As it becomes clearer with time and distance, the nature of those collapses is used now as a rallying point for a movement wishing to blame the government for 9/11 rather than the foreign agents that planned and executd it.
Kinda easier to accept that the US was attacked rather than attacking itself.
Particulalry when there is endless amounts of intelligence and forensic evidence saying the same thing.
But there are loads of armchair radicals who like to think they've caught the government is some massive deception. And they find their support in the analysis of how buildings should or shouldn't fall.
Marvin Bush was reelected to the Stratesec board of directors annually from 1993 through 1999. His last reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000.
As for the goofy assertion that Wirt Walker is related to the Bush family, I will let you do your own websearch....use Wirt Walker and Maggie Burns. Maggie Burns seems to be the source of the lie that Wirt was a member of the family, and even she cannot make up her mind. The first time she wrote about it, she called him a cousin, a later article calls him a distant relation and an even later article says, "Well a friend of mine told me he was related...."
Originally posted by impressme
Furthermore do not give me NIST garbage, I have read it.
Did you read what the designers of the WTC wrote after the demolition of the Towers, did you know when the WTC were being built the designers took in consideration that airplanes could hit the WTC because of all the airport in NY. The designers designed the Trade Centers to survive hurricanes the towers were designed to sway. They were also designed to withstand fires even at high temperatures.
Infact, if the entire WTC burnt from the ground up and burnt all day and all night it would not have falling, it was design to stay standing.
However, sciences as proved there are ingredients found at ground zero that should not be there. These ingredients that have been discovered scientifically are known ingredients used in making high grade military weapons. In fact, we know it as military science, not some third world science.
I guess you have never research false flags operations try reading about
( Operation Northwood ) then one knows our government is capable of anything including murdering it own citizen for what every reason they need to.
I have read a mountain of reports, however, a lot of it lacks sources and is hearsay, and as for your forensic evidence, I have not seen any that supports the OS.
The Titanic was designed not to sink,
the Hindenberg not to blow up, and endless other examples of things not supposed to happen.
You cannot say the building would have remained standing. No one knows that.
Truther science claims that.
No proof other than the demonstrably fraudulent claims of Jones, et al.
I guess you haven't researched anything and accepted the usual Truther disinformation bunk.
Northwood was a draft proposal rejected by the military in the early 60s.
Is the hunt so desperate to show American perfidy they have to search trough waste baskets?
This is my description of the Truther Story, and that of the other 99% of worldwide independent engineers, demolition experts, physicist, chemists, forensic experts, architects, etc.
Originally posted by impressme
I can say that because the designers of the WTC made that claim repeatedly.
You cannot compare the Titanic and Hindenburg with the WTC event and the reason you cannot is the Titanic and Hindenburg where “accidents”, unlike, 911 and the WTC were acts of terror something very different. Your analogy is not very good
If you think, Professor Steven Jones science is fraudulent, I would like to see you demonstrate that it is, and please show your sources. Are you debating me, or are you just giving your opinions without any facts to support them.
I think it is time to put you on “ignore”.
" Northwood was a draft proposal rejected by the military in the early 60s."
That is a lie! Do you care to prove this ridiculous assertion?
Originally posted by notreallyalive
[Also a special invitation to GoodOlDave and mmiichael to please read the facts on this post and verify them yourselves at the given website before responding]
As your own eyes witness — WTC Building #7 (a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane) exhibits all the characteristics of a classic controlled demolition with explosives: (and some non-standard characteristics)
Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse
Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall acceleration
Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed mostly in its own footprint
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses
Chemical signature of Thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples by physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.
FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional
Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY
(By the way, Big Unit, I have noticed Mr. gage and many of those guys do not seem to behave like paid actors...)
Originally posted by StellarX
Operation northwoods, Prescott bush and some American industrialist fines for trading with Germany in wartime, gulf of Tonkin, secret bombing of Loas and Cambodia during Vietnam war ( hidden from US senate& thousands of personal involved) and such incidents should set the stage for just what the American government has done in the past.
Once you set the stage in that way 9-11 will not seem such a significant conspiracy by comparison
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
a) You clearly never read the actual Operation Northwoods report. It was a plan to stage falsified Cuban hostilites to give ther US justification to invade, so the plan was to *not* kill any innocent American people becuase they wanted live witnesses to Cuban hostilities.
Besides, the gov't itself saw the plan was pretty stupid and they threw it away.
b) Bringing up Prescott Bush is nothing but a five degres of separation "Kevin Bacon" game put out by these conspiracy websites.
His total sum of "collaborating with the Nazis" was that he worked for a bank, that was owned by a Dutch corporation, that was owned by a German corporation, that was owned by a German industrialist that once gave money to the Nazis before they decided to throw him in a concentration camp, too.
I don't need to tell you that the five degrees of separation links YOU to the Nazis, too, once you find the right five people.
c) The USS Maddox really did exist, it really was in the Gulf of Tonkin, there really were N.
Vietnamese torpedo boats, and they really did shoot at each other. The debate is over who fired first, and whether or not a second reported engagement actually happened.
d) The US bombed Laos and Cambodia becuase the North Vietnamese were violating their neutrality by setting up military staging areas there, whcih they themselves admitted to doing after the war.
The US military bombed these areas secretly because they were in areas protected by international neutrality laws, which was the whole reason the bases were hidden there to begin with.
Intellectually dishonest logic.
he very fact that all those other supposedly "secret" conspiracies" couldn't be concealed from you...whcih you admit to yourself becuase you obviously know about them... necessarily means any such 9/11 conspiracy coulnd't be concealed from you either.
Originally posted by StellarX
Please do not tell me what sort of documents, or how much of them, i should read before i am 'allowed' to arrive at the logical conclusion that when the JCS chairman signs and passes on something to the secretary of defense it is something we can consider with some suspicion.
But they staged the bay of pig's invasion and somehow managed to be fooled into thinking the Cuban's would rally to support the invasion? Please don't tell me how 'smart' they were when we are all aware of the dismal foreign policy 'failures' ( or maybe the conspiracy is that they were trying to destroy the United States of America?) of that era.
oooooooh! The 'conspiracy websites'! That MUST disqualify this evidence.....
The connection was much closer than that and he well understood who he was cooperating ( not calling him a nazi; just a pure capitalist) with. The fact that the US government at the time fined him for STILL doing so in 1942 should give you some idea of how much he loved money.
So you managed to turn me into a Nazi for saying something about the Bush family/ Nazi connection?
Why was it in the Gulf of Tonkin within torpedo boat range in the first place? Why are we surprised that US boats get into skirmishes off unfriendly shores?
I know and apparently you do too. Again the sources are there for anyone to see and it's pretty clear that the second engagement never happened. But hey, there was a first skirmish but they had to make up a second one just to find some additional cause for escalation.
Yup, it's pretty clear that the resistance to the US occupation of South Vietnam came from all sides and that there was staging bases in these countries. That's not what i am trying to point out.
And what is most interesting is how the managed to drop more tonnage of bombs on those two countries than they did on Germany during the second world war; all without the knowledge ( at least express) of the US senate. Basically a entire air campaign against two countries were done in secret. Perhaps that doesn't strike you as noteworthy but it does me.
I make my mistakes but your argument holds even less water when you pretend that there were no serious conspiracies or that they were any better understood in the first years after they were commited.
Well the crimes of 9-11 hasn't been concealed from me and very many others but considering the disagreements in the 'truther' community ( and i don't wish to be associated with them) i can understand your anger.
What i do not understand is why you believe that our lack of solid knowledge ( Much of which could still be employed to flesh out the details of the above noted historic cases) on 9-11 in any ways 'proves' the official story line. I mean how where the previous conspiracies and crimes exposed if not trough the actions of the same people that are leaking info about 9-11?
Apple face: because there are crazys in every field.
because you ( all conspiracy nutjobs) writeoff the 911 commision report and the nist report as corrupt.
because you CANT provide a citation that isnt 911truth.# or
911lies.jewsdidit or any real scholarly report at all.
"I dont know how else TO explain it.
it actually seems pretty clear cut to me.
but..... why would they be told to report it when they would clearly find out about it eventually and obviously report it anyways?"