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.
posted by hooper
reply to post by SPreston
Exactly what do the words "vicinity of" mean to you?
-- Police and the FBI completed a grid search of area streets near the site of the World Trade Center looking for clues, said Barry Mawn, director of New York's FBI office.
The searchers found several clues, he said, but would not elaborate. Last week, a passport belonging to one of the hijackers was found in the vicinity of Vesey Street, near the World Trade Center. "It was a significant piece of evidence for us," Mawn said.
CNN Source
posted by hooper
Or it means that when a piece of paper is dropped from an elevation of 850 feet it doesn't fall to the ground like a cannon ball. It may, just may, have been effected by the atmoshpere.
Originally posted by HennyPen
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
I believe that Satam al-Suqami passport official storyline is toast (pun intended) figuratively speaking. With the FBI shooting themselves in the foot again and again on 911 issues, I believe it has been sufficiently proven that the passport was planted.
But why would the FBI and government officials think they need to fake evidence if 911 happened as claimed? Wouldn't the simple facts which naturally occur during an event be sufficient?
So what other evidence did they decide needed to be faked and planted covertly? Other passports claimed to be recovered from alleged 911 crash sites? Drivers licenses? Fuselage pieces? DNA? Single steel aircraft wheels with nine missing and single aircraft tires? Engine rotors? Jet fuel? Downed light poles? Eyewitnesses who cannot be tracked down publicly or who changed their original testimonies? Passengers still strapped into aircraft seats?
If they will lie about one event; why wouldn't they lie about other events?
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by SPreston
Sorry, the denial is all on your guys side, not over here. The passport was found, it was handed over to the NYPD and then to the FBI. You want to pretend that there is some exact predetermined trajectory for passports falling 1000 feet out of the sky (I forgot it was the 97th floor) that this particular piece of paper is in violation of, go right ahead.
I think the most hilarious thing is hearing the passport being likened to a book of stone when it suits the trajectory argument and then the same passport is a single sheet of kerosene soaked rice paper when arguing that it would never survive the impact. It did, and it was found and it is in evidence.
Originally posted by HennyPen
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by SPreston
Sorry, the denial is all on your guys side, not over here. The passport was found, it was handed over to the NYPD and then to the FBI. You want to pretend that there is some exact predetermined trajectory for passports falling 1000 feet out of the sky (I forgot it was the 97th floor) that this particular piece of paper is in violation of, go right ahead.
I think the most hilarious thing is hearing the passport being likened to a book of stone when it suits the trajectory argument and then the same passport is a single sheet of kerosene soaked rice paper when arguing that it would never survive the impact. It did, and it was found and it is in evidence.
How do you explain the passport heading north against the wind when the rest of the aircraft headed south? Oh did I forget; after surviving a fireball supposedly trapped inside the fuselage as the fuselage rammed into the 97th floor concrete floor slab at an alleged 466 mph and with the alleged passport officially soaked in kerosene inside the fireball inside the North Tower?
But oh no; you accept on faith that your government would never fake the evidence even though the entire Satam al Suqami passport fable stinks to high heaven.
Originally posted by hooper
to prevailing winds, etc. Think about that a little bit in the context of the twin towers - think about why the towers, in their design, were not in line.
Originally posted by Nutter
Originally posted by hooper
to prevailing winds, etc. Think about that a little bit in the context of the twin towers - think about why the towers, in their design, were not in line.
So you believe that a southerly wind will create a northerly vortex around WTC 1? Can you show in a wind tunnel test how that is even remotely possible?
posted by Nutter
So you believe that a southerly wind will create a northerly vortex around WTC 1? Can you show in a wind tunnel test how that is even remotely possible?
posted by hooper
Yes, let me get out my wind tunnel and I'll show you. The point is that air movement in the vicinity of the WTC and lower Manhattan is as simple as it is on an open plain. Something as small and with decent sail area could end up going in any direction.
posted by hooper
As to prevailing winds, etc. Think about that a little bit in the context of the twin towers - think about why the towers, in their design, were not in line.
posted by hooper
Really, to sit there and try to argue that a passport falling from 1000 feet (or maybe much more) can only go in one direction must sound absurd even to those trying to argue it.
Originally posted by Lillydale
reply to post by hooper
I am just a little curious as to where in your studies you learned that anything with a decent sail area will travel against the wind especially for a rather lengthy period of time?
Originally posted by hooper
Rather than "investigate 911" maybe you should try and investigate science and the physical world around you. Maybe find a high bridge or structure around you and simply drop a sheet of paper. But before you let go, try to predict where it is going to land to withing a foot or two. If your predictions don't hold true then the piece of paper was obviously "planted" right?
Originally posted by Nutter
Originally posted by hooper
Rather than "investigate 911" maybe you should try and investigate science and the physical world around you. Maybe find a high bridge or structure around you and simply drop a sheet of paper. But before you let go, try to predict where it is going to land to withing a foot or two. If your predictions don't hold true then the piece of paper was obviously "planted" right?
I can, without a doubt, know that the piece of paper WILL NOT fall in the direction of the prevailing wind. Talk about investigating the real science and physical world around you all you want, but until you do it and understand it, we can see your desperation.