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.

 

Botched Building Demolition Reinforces WTC 7 Lie...

page: 7
38
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 


Thermobaratic and nano thermite are terms thrown around by the
conspiracy loons - anybody with knowledge of explosives and incendiary
know better




posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter
reply to post by thedman
 


Did these bomb squad guys have extensive knowledge of all the military's arsenal? (I highly doubt it as thermobarics and nano-thermate weren't even known to the public sector back then.)

Or where they looking for "conventional" explosives only?


Thermobaric explosives and nanothermitic materials would still have ignitors, bursting charges, wires, blasting machines/batteries, caps, etc., so a complete knowledge of what went off wouldn't be necessary to say that something went off. These folks know what physical evidence to look for.
This would be analogous to saying that an arson was committed without knowing exactly what materials were used to start the fire.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman





*SNIP* irrelevant crap.


Your astuteness never ceases to amaze me, quoting my post regarding someone missing the point, by completely missing the point, well done.



As this thread regards tower seven, here`s an interesting fact, it`s facts like these that feed we loons




BBC News 'Predicted' 9/11 WTC #7 Collapse; Corporation Denies Conspiracy Claims


Video footage of 9/11 news coverage by the BBC where the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 was announced over 20 minutes before it actually fell has conspiracy theorists buzzing and the BBC issuing a statement that its tapes are lost.

The video, posted on various websites, shows news reporter Jane Standley announcing the building's collapse while it is still intact and in clear view behind her left shoulder. The BBC claims it was a simple reporting error.

BBC editor Richard Porter, responding to the conspiracy claims, says that they 'no longer have' the original tapes of the news corporations 9/11 coverage, fueling speculation that the Tower 7 collapse was an 'inside job.'


This and the `Pull it` fiasco is the bread and butter of CT`s yummy, a mind boggling prediction, then the B.B.C. lost the tapes, now there`s something you don`t see every day, unlike x3 towers all collapsing in their own foot prints, a plane that buried itself, and another that managed to enter a building with it`s wings entering the exact same hole as the cockpit, Bush stating he saw on T.V. the 1st WTC plane impact a day before the only footage was released, John Gross denying evidence of almost everything, 503 first responders with 19000 plus pages of evidence completely overlooked and ignored.

Terrorists alive and well then dead then alive, a passport found in prime condition, and a video tape showing Bin Ladens stunt double pretending to be him, then someone completely different stands up and is to blame, so wtf was all the original video about lmfao?.

Put options and John McCain`s wife eeeep.

www.tomflocco.com...

You do know who John McCain is don`t you?, a released video not showing anything hitting the Pentagon - gotta love the F.B.I on this one, editing a video but forgetting to add something important like a plane, but leaving a 9/12 time stamp on it, priceless, explosions 14 and 17 seconds pre - impacts reported on seismographs, a survivor speaking from the 84th floor on a live feed who when starts to quote how things actually happened, the news anchors cut him off for the much more important traffic news update.

F.B.I.`s 9/11 most wanted - WTF no O.B.L. just as well nothing bad happened as a result of this, well apart from declaring war on Afghanistan. moving all the Bin Laden family to safe houses just prior to 9/11, high ranking dignitaries told not to fly.

Norad doing identical things in their war games scenarios, all the steel quickly removed, 1700 bodies never accounted for, cell phone calls made in excess of 9000 feet (impossible at the time), and who was the perp who accidentally stated missile instead of plane?, roof top rescues were a viable option but doors remained locked... why?.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Quality rant - top work.

please also add in the recent evidence the the CIA knew and was tracking ALL of the terrorists inside the US - their passports were issued to them by the CIA front office which was an embassy in Saudi despite objection from the Ambassador which were overruled - again - they were all known terrorists, which were given passports by a CIA front office over ruling objections and were tracked the entire time INSIDE the USA - FACT.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by audas
reply to post by Seventh
 


Quality rant - top work.

please also add in the recent evidence the the CIA knew and was tracking ALL of the terrorists inside the US - their passports were issued to them by the CIA front office which was an embassy in Saudi despite objection from the Ambassador which were overruled - again - they were all known terrorists, which were given passports by a CIA front office over ruling objections and were tracked the entire time INSIDE the USA - FACT.


I capped characters half way through it
.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Oh yes the infamous BBC report WTC 7 had collapsed - so must be in on the conpiracy

A favorite of the mentally defective set....

Its called confusion or chaos - BBC was quoting from Reuters report that WTC 7 had collapsed

The fact the WTC 7 was in danger of collapse had been reported all
afternoon. I live about 12 miles from NYC - was in my firehouse
listening to radio transmissions from scene. Heard the orders to
clear collapse zone around WTC 7 being passed down so had knowledge of operations at WTC

Unfortunately being 3000 miles away and several time zones BBC had to rely on information passed by others. Because of all the chaos at
the time somebody in the chain screwed up and gave out bad information

Here is lnk to BBC documentary on WTC 7

video.google.com...

Goes into detail about the BBC screwup that day

Oh they found the tape, someone had misfiled it on wrong shelf

Watch the video - might learn something



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
Haha, the funniest part is that debunkers never bother to show up for threads such as these.


Why should I? You all "debunk" yourselves with the absurdity of your claims. There's no need to do anything but sit back and laugh at you as you compare a couple of 110 story towers and a 47-story unique-designed structure with a bunch of much smaller buildings, many of them reinforced concrete. It isn't just comparing apples and oranges, it is comparing beach balls and loaves of bread - "Oh look! The beach ball rolls, and the loaf of bread doesn't roll! Proof!!!".

Go on....whoop it up and congratulate yourselves that you posted something that "debunkers" don't care about or don't need to "debunk". Knock yourself out.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Thermite is not an explosive.


Really?

I believe more research is due on your part.


The thermite reaction can take place accidentally in industrial locations where abrasive grinding and cutting wheels are used with ferrous metals. Using aluminium in this situation produces an a mixture of oxides which is capable of a violent explosive reaction.[8]


en.wikipedia.org...

Please quit spreading disinfo.


And that's just regular thermite. Not nano sized.

[edit on 11-8-2009 by Nutter]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Thermobaratic and nano thermite are terms thrown around by the
conspiracy loons - anybody with knowledge of explosives and incendiary
know better


Again. Really?

They know better than what?

That those two exist and are extrememly explosive?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by mmiichael
Thermite is not an explosive.


Really?

I believe more research is due on your part.


The thermite reaction can take place accidentally in industrial locations where abrasive grinding and cutting wheels are used with ferrous metals. Using aluminium in this situation produces an a mixture of oxides which is capable of a violent explosive reaction.[8]


en.wikipedia.org...

Please quit spreading disinfo. :up;

And that's just regular thermite. Not nano sized.



Wow. A message about DISINFORMATION from someone who can't read their own links. The opening sentence of your Wikipedia Thermite entry linked says:

"Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small area for a short period of time."

You really can't blow up much with a thermitic reaction. It works like those sparklers, violent chemical reaction for a few seconds but little yield. A thin layer would do almost nothing. Even self-promoting sleazy scientist Jones concedes you couldn't blow up a building with thermite.

Do you actually know what nano-sized means? If so explain how the microscopicity of the particles would make a difference in energy potential.

Do you actually know anything about chemistry?

Do you know there are hundreds of websites making childish unscientific conspiracy claims aimed at the semi-literate?

Do you actually consider finding out of context bits of data from websites "Research?"

No response required.


M





[edit on 11-8-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Originally posted by thedman

Oh yes the infamous BBC report WTC 7 had collapsed - so must be in on the conpiracy

A favorite of the mentally defective set....

Its called confusion or chaos - BBC was quoting from Reuters report that WTC 7 had collapsed

The fact the WTC 7 was in danger of collapse had been reported all
afternoon. I live about 12 miles from NYC - was in my firehouse
listening to radio transmissions from scene. Heard the orders to
clear collapse zone around WTC 7 being passed down so had knowledge of operations at WTC

Unfortunately being 3000 miles away and several time zones BBC had to rely on information passed by others. Because of all the chaos at
the time somebody in the chain screwed up and gave out bad information

Here is lnk to BBC documentary on WTC 7

video.google.com...

Goes into detail about the BBC screwup that day

Oh they found the tape, someone had misfiled it on wrong shelf




Watch the video - might learn something



Okay hotshot, here we go, short and sweet, you are a live on the spot news anchor, you are about to broadcast a live feed you-do-know-what-live-means hot shot don`t you? huge clue here... See the female news anchor?, guess where she is, another clue - NEW-YORK, got it yet?.

Anyway back to the plot, her live broadcast can be one of two things... auto cue or ad libing, auto cue would need to be scripted right where she is, or ad libing is purely her own account.

So the $64,000 dollar question is.................... Where the F*** did she get that story from?, obviously if she would have only turned around lmfao.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


Talk about ad-hom wrapped in rhetorical questions batman.

Yes, I know what nano means.

The smaller the size, the greater the surface area, the larger and more explosive the reaction becomes.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 



Anyway back to the plot, her live broadcast can be one of two things... auto cue or ad libing, auto cue would need to be scripted right where she is, or ad libing is purely her own account.


By "auto cue" to you mean "teleprompter"?

Let's see if I have the timeline correct, just guessing off the top of my head.

In the USA we use what's called "Daylight Savings Time" (DST) from about late Spring to sometime in the Fall.

In the UK they do something similar, but they refer to it as "Summer Time".

Now, is it approximately true that the WTC7 building collapsed at about 1720 EDT?

AT five PM, East coast time, it would have been ten PM ( 2200 ) local "Summer Time" in the UK.

Is it at least possible that the BBC was preparing for their ten PM nightly broadcast, and got a premature report, and incorrectly ascertained that WTC 7 had alreaady collapsed?? Someone said it had been incorrectly reported on Reuters already, did the news copy folks just hastily slap together a report, type it into the teleprompter, to be ready on air?? Maybe hoping for a "scoop"??

There sure are a lot of buildings, in NYC. Do you suppose the on-site reporter, doing the live feed, even knew by sight, even if she had looked out the window, WHICH building was number seven???


edit here, to add:***
I'm American, and never knew! (edit-in)*** To me, the "World Trade Center" was just the two Towers. I just thought of them as "North" and "South" Tower....didn't know they were numbered. WHO DID???

I think you'd have to have been a native New Yorker, intimately familiar with Lower Manhattan, to be able to know such a thing. ***(edit-out)

Golly, News Organizations screw up all of the time, especially in haste to beat their competitors to a story. It's not pretty, they surely don't want it to happen, due to the embarrassment, but it still happens.

Pretty flimsy to hang a segment of a "conspiracy theory" on, isn't it??
_____________________________________________________________




[edit on 11 August 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter
reply to post by mmiichael
 


Talk about ad-hom wrapped in rhetorical questions batman.

Yes, I know what nano means.

The smaller the size, the greater the surface area, the larger and more explosive the reaction becomes.



At least you have a sense of humour.

I'm not any great expert on this aspect of the chemistry, but there is so much 'out to lunch' stuff put out by sleazy Jones and dumb Truther sites it's not hard to counter.

If you know what nano means you would understand if anything tinier particles would lessen any explosive potential not increase it.

Millimeter thin layer masses are involved. Jones likes to claim those red oxide primer paint chips are thermitic.

Thermite's highly reactive chemically - but doesn't really do much. You'd need tons and tons of it for any kind of power. Used for small precision work mostly.

Plastic explosives are 100 times more effective.


Mike

[edit on 11-8-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Referencing the BBC video - said report came from local news report,
who promptly retracted it. Too late - Reuters had already put it out

As for the building - WTC 7 was commonly known as the Salomon Building
after the Wall St brokers Salomon Brothers - I know several people who
worked there on Sept 11, fortunately all got out safe.

Since when would some BBC type know where WTC 7 was !

I live just west of NYC, had to gone by old WTC 7 dozens of times without
giving it second thought - In fact could see WTC 7 from where I live!
To me it was just some building peeking up in front of the WTC towers


By the way - Silverstein rebuilt WTC 7. So much for your insurance
fraud rants....



The new 7 World Trade Center has 52 stories and is 741 ft (226 m) tall.[61][62] The building has 42 floors of leasable space, starting at the 11th floor, and a total of 1,700,000 sq ft (158,000 m²) of office space.[63] The first ten floors house an electrical substation, which provides power to much of Lower Manhattan. The office tower has a narrower footprint at ground level than its predecessor so the course of Greenwich Street could be restored in an effort to reunite TriBeCa and the Financial District.[64]


New WTC 7




posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Jeez WW, don`t stoop to their level, dear oh dear.

Forget where the newscasters country of origin is, let`s for now pretend she`s a more than competent female news broadcaster on a huge, in your face, live scoop, she`s in the close proximity of the biggest act of terrorism the world has ever seen, hell she`s been taking it in all day, she`s roughly a mile away from WTC7, it`s been a long day, poor lass has witnessed two towers - collapsing-traumatic-but she`s a hardened travelled news lass, a mile from the complex - live, hold on a second, I have something here, WTC7 the tower that just fell, was it wearing a huge rubber overcoat that absorbed all the dust and noise?.

Seriously, jeeez, think what you just wrote, the woman is no more than a mile away from somewhere where a 40+ storey tower just collapsed, but she didn`t even notice that she had not heard a thing, nor spotted yet another horrendous dust cloud, or am I horribly mistaken and forgot some sort of reality jet lag time zone warp thing only affecting the English?.

Remarkable.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I was going to waste 30 seconds of my life then, i`ll donate 10 for free.

Mad Then is an anagram, you know that don`t you?.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
And again I am reminded of how Dumb the population are.

It has been clear since that very day that these buildings were brought down by the use of explosives. Who was responsible for that is the question, not whether they were or were not.

Even on that day reporters were stating that they heard explosions and then the towers came down in the style of a controlled demolition. Intelligent people knew exactly what was happening as it was happening.

I guess when it's something you don't want to accept, when the truth is far scarier than the lie, people will gladly swallow the lie instead.

I'd rather believe that people have just been persuaded to believe the lie, than accept that the majority are just so completely thick they don't know their ass from their elbow!

Actually, I take that back, I'd rather live in a world full of complete idiots than a world where persuasion and the repeating of a lie often enough makes people believe completely, to the point of rewriting the laws of physics.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Hey, don't shoot the messenger!

I asked, you didn't answer specifics, as to: The woman, on the live feed, how well did she know NYC?? Could she have looked out the window, the window behind her, and instantly intuitvely known which building was which??

Was she somewhere, off camera, getting ready (makeup???) off-set, reviewing the opening story???

YOU make a lot of allusions, as if you KNOW she should have contemplated dust, assessed the situation instantly, or any number of things. I DON'T KNOW who the reporter is, do you?? IF SO, please enlighten us, it would be ever so helpful!

Look....I threw out some ideas that just about any reasonable, intellectually honest person would consider plausible, UNLESS that individual had SPECIFIC, pertinent information about the reporter in question, her activities that day, where she was at every moment, and all the other "behind the scenes" details. I was asking, not dictating.

Just sayin'.....



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 



Mad Then is an anagram, you know that don`t you?.


Well, "thedman" could also be an anagram for Ned Math.

SO, what's your point??


I COULD also look at "thedman" as "The D Man"....so what????

Please elaborate.....

AND, WHY is this pertinent????

(don't get me started on "seventh"...




top topics



 
38
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join