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.

 

So Where Were The Families And Friends Of The Alleged Passengers And Crew Of The 9-11 Aircraft?

page: 7
20
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I haven't heard too much on the news about the family of the victims either? Maybe it had been hushed up for some reason.




posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999



but there were terrorism experts on tv that said it was CD as the towers came down.


If I wanted their opinion on terrorists or terrorist tactics, I would listen to the terrorism experts.

The collapse of the towers is an engineering question....I'll stick with the engineers. Asking a terrorism expert about a collapsing building is like asking Tom Clancy what its like to fly an F-14. He could offer his opinion, but he has no real clue.


Hmm, so you don't want the opinion of someones job it is to recognize CD? Why would you not trust the opinion of someone who has been trained to do a CD? Because they don't have "engineer" in their name? What about engineers who never did a cd? do you trust their opinion?



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


A terrorism expert isnt trained to recognize a CD. Engineers and demolition experts are...and even then, can only make a determination after examining the evidence...or in the case of the WTC, the utter lack of evidence of a CD.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999



Of course when these hundreds of workers start dying off; they will get the same help and medical assistance from the government as the WTC 1st responders received. Nothing. Zilch. Zero. No funds available. Sent off to the war effort. Screw you people. Just shut up and die


I can always count on you to be a day late and a dollar short. I have already addressed that and posted the links to the legislation that is appropriating a few billion dollars to help the workers with the illnesses they are suffering from. The thread is still on the page....


Eight years later and still counting Swampfox? And if it gets passed, Obama just like Dubya, will steal the funds to dump into the next no-win war of naked aggression over in the Middle East.

The sick and dying 1st responders and the Fresh Kills victims still won't get any help, and the corrupt government will get their wish for the victims to just shut up and die. Will that make you rub your hands together with glee Swampfox? One man's pain is another man's satisfaction?



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I'm sorry but I trust the experts more than you. Many experts say it looked like CD and untill they are disproven by other experts I will continue to look into it. The fact that other experts came to the conclusion that there was no CD without investigating it tells me the level of competence I sould come to expect, and quite frankly I want and deserve a little more.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


No explosive residues, no primer cords, no detonator remains, no RF receivers...absolutely NO evidence of any kind that the buildings were imploded.....and you still think it was a CD......hmmm......



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by jprophet420
 


No explosive residues, no primer cords, no detonator remains, no RF receivers...absolutely NO evidence of any kind that the buildings were imploded.....and you still think it was a CD......hmmm......


No plane engines found in the debris, 1700 bodies never accounted for, no office furniture, no plane remains whatsoever found in the debris.

Why?.

No pyrotechnic testing done, nor forensic tests for explosive residues.

Why?.

Terrorists at work managing to tie the most advanced military power and security forces in the world up their own asses, by hijacking 4 planes and hitting 3 targets, and no one thought to check (what surely would have been a walk in the park for these bad boys) for explosive based collapse devices.

Why?.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


I know I will regret replying to your post, but.....

Parts of the plane engines were found. Tests were conducted on the steel....

You really should do some honest research, rather than rely on what you read on conspiracy sites. When you make mistake laden posts like your previous.......

[edit on 13-8-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Seventh
 


I know I will regret replying to your post, but.....

Parts of the plane engines were found. Tests were conducted on the steel....

You really should do some honest research, rather than rely on what you read on conspiracy sites. When you make mistake laden posts like your previous.......


Federal scientists ruled out controlled demolitions of three World Trade Center towers but declined to perform routine tests on soil and debris for traces of explosives or incendiaries, a review of National Institute of Standards and Technology publications shows.

The agency, which spent $16 million on its inquiry into the Sept. 11, 2001, collapses, said such tests weren't needed because computer simulations and other considerations had shown that controlled demolitions were improbable.A Znewz1 special report Federal scientists ruled out controlled demolitions of three World Trade Center towers but declined to perform routine tests on soil and debris for traces of explosives or incendiaries, a review of National Institute of Standards and Technology publications shows. The agency, which spent $16 million on its inquiry into the Sept. 11, 2001, collapses, said such tests weren't needed because computer simulations and other considerations had shown that controlled demolitions were improbable. In an August 2006 fact sheet, the agency frankly admits that it did not test trade center steel for the residue of explosives or the incendiaries thermite and thermate. The agency's decision to omit routine tests contrasts with its assertion that "some 200 technical experts -- including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia -- reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse." Concerning the probe of the collapse of the two main towers, the fact sheet says, "Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors..." The agency, which failed to note that the FBI was in control of the trade center crime scene and which sent a bomb squad to the site, says nothing about the FBI or other federal investigative unit confirming that no explosives or incendiary residues were found, nor does it cite specific local police reports to that effect. NO FORENSICS REPORTS In fact, in its numerous public pronouncements between 2004 and 2008, NIST cites no forensic evidence gathered by criminal investigators, even though Congress had granted the agency subpoena power. For example, the final report on the collapse of the 47-story Building 7 includes the New York City fire and police departments among "cooperating organizations" that assisted its inquiry but says nothing of the FBI or other federal investigative agency. A computer search of FBI and Justice Department documents and press releases failed to turn up any record of the FBI's findings concerning tests for explosives at Ground Zero. The FBI and another Justice Department unit, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, routinely do forensic testing of crime scenes where explosives or incendiaries are a possibility. In an Aug. 26, 2008, technical briefing concerning the fall of Building 7, S. Shyam Sunder, who led NIST's investigation of the collapses, did not answer directly a question about residue tests, but said that a scientist, Jonathan Barnett, who had found a peculiar residue on steel shards recovered from Tower 1 and Building 7, had told the BBC that his team's findings showed nothing sinister.The agency's decision to omit routine tests contrasts with its assertion that "some 200 technical experts -- including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia -- reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse."

Concerning the probe of the collapse of the two main towers, the fact sheet says, "Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors..." The agency, which failed to note that the FBI was in control of the trade center crime scene and which sent a bomb squad to the site, says nothing about the FBI or other federal investigative unit confirming that no explosives or incendiary residues were found, nor does it cite specific local police reports to that effect.

NO FORENSICS REPORTS

In fact, in its numerous public pronouncements between 2004 and 2008, NIST cites no forensic evidence gathered by criminal investigators, even though Congress had granted the agency subpoena power. For example, the final report on the collapse of the 47-story Building 7 includes the New York City fire and police departments among "cooperating organizations" that assisted its inquiry but says nothing of the FBI or other federal investigative agency.

A computer search of FBI and Justice Department documents and press releases failed to turn up any record of the FBI's findings concerning tests for explosives at Ground Zero. The FBI and another Justice Department unit, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, routinely do forensic testing of crime scenes where explosives or incendiaries are a possibility.

In an Aug. 26, 2008, technical briefing concerning the fall of Building 7, S. Shyam Sunder, who led NIST's investigation of the collapses, did not answer directly a question about residue tests, but said that a scientist, Jonathan Barnett, who had found a peculiar residue on steel shards recovered from Tower 1 and Building 7, had told the BBC that his team's findings showed nothing sinister.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Seventh
 



I know I will regret replying to your post, but.....

Parts of the plane engines were found. Tests were conducted on the steel....

You really should do some honest research, rather than rely on what you read on conspiracy sites. When you make mistake laden posts like your previous.......

[edit on 13-8-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]


Nope I can`t find any proof of plane parts found in rubble, so I could be wrong on 1 count, but not that important, unlike overlooking tests that would have proved so much, unexplainable.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
How is it that not one single duhbunker or pseudoskeptic has challenged the claim that these alleged final statements of the alleged 9-11 hijackers on high quality videos released in 2008, even though they supposedly died in 2001, are all frauds?

That is right. They are no more authentic that the poor quality and sloppy alleged Usama bin Laden confession videos, produced before and after he died in December 2001.

Why is it that you duhbunkers and pseudoskeptics approve of our government deliberately fabricating false videos and evidence covering up its crimes?


posted by SPreston
Allegedly this is a 2008 video of 9/11 hijacker Ahmed al-Ghamdi (Flight 175) reciting his last will and testament before he died on 9-11-2001.



Here is my question. Since only cruddy alleged Al Qaeda videos were produced back in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 and later, how did they produce this really clear video of Ahmed al-Ghamdi if he died way back in 2001?

Is it because the 9-11 Truth movement has been expanding so fast and knocking a hundred more holes in the rickety 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY? Has the CIA panicked and set a task for its As Sahab production house to produce as many videos of the alleged 19 hijackers as possible? Give Al CIA da credit; the quality of their videos has really improved.

Here is a splendid video of a Flight 77 hijacker giving his testimony way back before 9-11-2001. Just look at that splendid quality. Why he even shows a cutout of the damage to the Pentagon. How did he do that before the event?



And here is a splendid Al Qaeda video of alleged Flight 93 hijacker Ziad Jarrah a year before he died. Both of his uncles are admitted MOSSAD agents. Maybe that is a clue? Why didn't Usama bin Laden get high quality videos like these? He was supposed to be the bossman and he was worth billions.



Here is another video by As Sahab showing the will of alleged hijacker Waleed al-Shehri aboard Flight 11.

Waleed al-Shehri

Perhaps they will produce a high quality video of Hani Hanjour grinning madly as he knocks down the 5 light poles.



Since 9/11, videos have been shown that depict Osama bin Laden meeting with some of the hijackers, or the last will and testament of some of the hijackers. In the past Al Qaeda has used couriers to deliver videos to media outlets, such as Al Jazeera. Now, Al Qaeda has the capability to produce high quality videos, through As Sahab, its production house, and deliver videos directly over the internet.

September 2008
On September 19, 2008, As Sahab released a new video which includes approximately ten minutes of footage showing 9/11 hijacker Ahmed al-Ghamdi reciting his last will and testament. Ghamdi was one of the muscle hijackers aboard United Airlines Flight 175.

In all, this video is nearly 1 1/2 hours. There is substantial footage of Ayman al-Zawahiri, Bin Laden's deputy. There also are a few clips of Bin Laden speaking about Palestine, which he says is a "great opportunity for mujahadeen who have been fighting in Iraq," speaking as though Al Qaeda has been doing well in Iraq lately (that is actually not the case, with foreign mujahadeen leaving in large numbers). The video also includes some old clips of Abdullah Azzam, who along with Bin Laden, established the Maktab al-Khidamat (Services Office) in 1984 for supporting the mujahadeen during the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

The video was released several days late, after technical problems with online forums and sites that Al Qaeda uses. This may mean that the organization Al Qaeda had previously with creating and disseminating videos and other material has been disrupted in some way. Adam Gadahn, a U.S. born Al Qaeda operative, has played a key role in the organizations media operations. There are unconfirmed reports that he was killed in a missile strike in North Waziristan, located in Pakistan along the Afghanistan border.

source





posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Lying to the public is all right, says Washington's chief lawyer

By Mark Helm, in Washington
Sydney Morning Herald, AU
March 20, 2002

The United States Government's top lawyer has said that officials have the right to lie to American citizens, telling the US Supreme Court that misleading statements are sometimes needed to protect foreign policy interests.

"It's easy to imagine an infinite number of situations where the government might legitimately give out false information," the Solicitor-General, Theodore Olson, told the court on Monday.

"It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests."

source


Bush Regime Solicitor General Ted Olson practicing what he preaches.

Ted Olson lied about talking on the phones to Barbara Olson allegedly aboard Flight 77, and Ted Olson lied about Barbara Olson reporting the pilots and crew and passengers were moved to the back of the aircraft, and Ted Olson lied about Barbara Olson reporting that the alleged hijackers were armed with boxcutters.

Ted Olson believes it is good and legal to lie to the American people about 9-11, and apparently the duhbunkers and pseudoskeptics agree with him.

. . "misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests."

vital interests? What vital interests? Keeping their necks out of a noose?


posted by thedman
reply to post by SPreston
 

People on AA77 were distributed like this - hijackers up front in cockpit (5)
passengers crowded in rear of cabin (59)


posted by SPreston

Well I guess that information is just about useless isn't it? The FBI and American Airlines and the Pentagon historians all established that Bush Regime Solicitor General Ted Olson LIED about the phone calls from Barbara Olson, and we have no evidence that anybody moved to the back of the alleged aircraft; isn't that true thedman? Do you want to count the phony Hollywood movies as evidence thedman? Or perhaps you had a vision? So the crew and all the passengers in this fantasy tale could have been all jammed in the baggage compartment for all we know. All it comprises is a prepared script to con the American people anyway.

Beside, Ted Olson kept jumping back and forth from cell phone to air phone and collect calls, proving that he could not keep his script straight, and that he was lying. Isn't that correct thedman?




posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


SP

I don't know much about Todd Beamer? A guy made a hero after (supposedly,because I don't know) making a call to an operator and tell things about the flight shot down over PA.
It is reminiscent of your previous post. Are these two stories similar?
I will dig up the info if you need it. Thanks
donny



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join