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.

 

A few deep questions about 9/11

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 





You may also want to look into the roof top doors to both buildings being locked and there being no emergency evacuation procedures from the roof. I also believe there were many stairwell doors which where locked as well which may have trapped many victims.

Anyway you look at it, the emergency evacuation procedures failed miserably on that day, causing many deaths. How this was allowed to happen at buildings which had already been the target of a terrorist attack eight years previously is mind boggling.


Access door to roof were locked for specific reason that nobody (except
Port Authority personnel) were supposed to be there! Going to roof
in hope someone came land helicopter there is a Hollywood fantasy
(re DIE HARD) Roof of buildings were full of obstructions from antenna
and machinery for HVAC and elevators. Capacity of most helicopters
in area would be 6 (at most 10 passengers). Now do the math ( I assume
you can) for how many helicopter trips it would take to get several
hundred people, much less thousands of people down.

The whole thing was rendered moot when NYPD declined to risk it based
on amount of heat and smoke from the fires made helicopter landings
too risky. Things are bad enough without crashing a helicopter on building or street.


You state the evacuation procedures failed

Explain why and how if a failure ALMOST everyone below the impact floors
were able to escape - an estimated 14,000 got out of the WTC that
day. Those killed had stayed in the building either by dint of
physical impairment and were waiting to be evacuated or remained to
assist others in getting out.

Refer to John O'Neil, Rick Rescorla, Wells Crowther




posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Thet locked the roof hatches so no one could be rescued from the roof.


How many tall buildings do you know with unlocked roof access? Obviously you have never worked in one, or even looked! They are all locked....



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 



Thet locked the roof hatches so no one could be rescued from the roof.

How many tall buildings do you know with unlocked roof access? Obviously you have never worked in one, or even looked! They are all locked....


Are you sure about that, where is your source to back your claim?



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by PersonalChoice
You got your so called Truthers ... Normally do NOT get offended or abusive if you do not agree with their view.

Then you've got your so called Debunkers...Normally they DO get highly offensive and abusive if you do not agree with their view.

Complete bunk, truthers came to ATS, and got VERY offensive FIRST! Guys like Killtown, and a few others, harassed those of us who were simply stating facts on the topic, but disagreed with their theories. In my opinion, any skeptic who stands up to anyone in the movement at this point does so out of self defense after years of harassment, and dealing with frustrating insults. A lot of those original truth movement folks were very abusive because they were the first round of folks selling stuff (books, dvd’s etc), and making a profit off the tragedy. They immediately and hostilely attacked anyone who had the potential to hurt their business profits. Killtown went so far as to pursue people outside ATS, track them down, and harass them in real life.

And remarks like this just annoy the heck out of me…

Originally posted by impressme
, because your fairytales are falling apart everyday, so now you have resorted to telling lies because you will not face the Truth.

…Because they are generalized lies, even if not a direct attack.
I have not heard a single thing from the truth movement that has made me even so much as second guess at my opinion on the topic. Most of the stuff they speak of simply makes me shake my head in amusement. I have professional, first hand experience working on 757’s and 767’s but some of these guys will try and convince me of stuff that I know for a fact to be untrue, then call me a debunker when I call them on it.


Originally posted by impressme The WTC were demolished with Nano Thermite & supper Nano Thermate with other explosives devices.



The jet exploded into the 93rd through 98th floors of the World Trade Center's north tower with a force equal to 480,000 pounds of TNT.


480,000lbs of TNT, That’s the equivalent of a half a megaton nuke being detonated! You do realize that the majority of those weapons are only in the Kiloton range? They save the Megaton ones for BIG important targets, like entire cities. Just the impact generated enough energy to show up as a .9 magnitude earthquake. How can you honestly believe that was not enough force to bring down a single building without some additional aid?

All I can say is.

Originally posted by impressme
Look at the proven lies and venom you spew… ridiculous nonsense… it is really disgusting



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
Watch the video and read the creditable eyewitness account from the website that I just provided in the above post that proves it.
Watch the video and watch and listen to the eyewitness account of explosions going off before the plane hit the WTC.

Watch the video…
Watch the video…
Watch the video…
Is that all you guys ever say?
The entire movement would fall apart in a day if they took down Youtube.
I would love nothing more then to see a truther post that was based on sound science, facts, and research by the poster. Instead they all rely on Youtube videos made by their cronies as proof of a conspiracy.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
Are you sure about that, where is your source to back your claim?


Yeah…
They do it for liability reasons. It keeps people from committing suicide by jumping off the roof, as well as from screwing around up there and accidentally falling off. It prevents people from trying to base jump off the building. It protects people from hazards that are on the roof, such as electrical, AC, and elevator equipment. It protects the pedestrians on the ground from folks either falling on them, or dropping stuff on them.

I work in a small three story building and they even keep our roof access locked to all but maintenance.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Nuclear subs were Hollywood fantasy and so were cell phones.
Stop the nonsense. There was a helicopter pad on the south tower.
Do you think that a door alarm would stop you from breaking the seal in those conditions.
The math is---- if you can save one life you do it. No one even freekin tried.
Shame on you for backing those criminals up.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
There was a helicopter pad on the south tower.

It’s very difficult and dangerous to land a helicopter on the roof of a building that is on fire, and its not always possible. There are naturally updrafts/downdrafts on a building like that, when you add heated air raising off a fire it becomes a nightmare. Then you add smoke and soot to the situation, which not only impairs visibility, but can also seize up an aircraft engine.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


I would love nothing more then to see a truther post that was based on sound science, facts, and research by the poster.



Your whole OS movement of protecting the OS lies is falling apart everyday; no one cares about the OS anymore. Everyone knows it is a fairytale, whom are you trying to fool?

You have seen the sciences, it has been posted repeatedly, yet you continue to ignore every bit of it. Yet, you will not even discuss it or debate it, because you will lose. Your opinions, and OS does not hold water to true science.

The only little weapon you have is insults and ridicule, because your truth does not stand up to creditable science, NIST sciences has been exposed as a political pseudo fraud.
Most science academic do not accept the NIST sciences, and that was the only sciences the OS had.

You do not see the Truthers in here “constantly” insulting OS posters, it is because we do not have to, we have the Truth.

You can insult it.
You and ridicule it.
You can ignore it.
You can dismiss it.
You can hand wave it.
However, the Truth will never go away.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Are you sure about that, where is your source to back your claim?


Yeah…
They do it for liability reasons. It keeps people from committing suicide by jumping off the roof, as well as from screwing around up there and accidentally falling off. It prevents people from trying to base jump off the building. It protects people from hazards that are on the roof, such as electrical, AC, and elevator equipment. It protects the pedestrians on the ground from folks either falling on them, or dropping stuff on them.




Please show NYC ordinance or other reliable documents that states all roof top doors must stay locked?
Opinions, do not count as facts. Please show with creditable internet sources.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
Your whole OS movement of protecting the OS lies is falling apart everyday; no one cares about the OS anymore. Everyone knows it is a fairytale, whom are you trying to fool?


While the OS might have some errors in it, it is not a fairytale overall, it simply has some errors. The general facts as to what happened that day remains quite intact.


Originally posted by impressme
You have seen the sciences, it has been posted repeatedly, yet you continue to ignore every bit of it.

Yes, I have worked on these aircraft, and I refuse to accept tripe like that an aircraft, which hits something solid, at that speed, would remain in large chunks, or that inertia should leave parts of that aircraft forward of the point of impact. Too many of the truth movements ideas on how aircraft react to crashes is based on pure fantasy, and brain rotting TV, Movies, and Youtube Videos.


Originally posted by impressme
The only little weapon you have is insults and ridicule, because your truth does not stand up to creditable science, NIST sciences has been exposed as a political pseudo fraud.

I have seen, and even quoted in this thread, you slinging insults at those of us who do not prescribe to your theories. I have seen truthers harass people in public. I have seen them wolfpack attack posters on the web for having the audacity to challenge any of their silly theories.


Originally posted by impressme
Most science academic do not accept the NIST sciences, and that was the only sciences the OS had.

Quite the contrary, if you get your head out of the conspiracy sites that you posted above as “Research sites”
, You would find that there is no question in the real world that the events of that day were not a government conspiracy, and that the majority of folks believe in no government involvement outside of complacency.


Originally posted by impressme
You do not see the Truthers in here “constantly” insulting OS posters, it is because we do not have to, we have the Truth.

Truth movement tactic 102… Do something then act innocent of having done it yourself...
I have already quoted some of YOUR INSULTS in this thread once so far!!

As a matter of fact, your fellow truther pulled such outrageous tactics he got an entry in the urban dictionary:

Killtowning
To evade argument or discussion on an internet forum when you are unable to defend your position, by accusing the person you are debating with of trolling, shilling, hating etc and other handwaving distraction tactics.
Named after the forum posting style of killtown (an extremely annoying 9/11 "researcher").

killtown: *makes unsubstantiated claim*

other poster: *proves him wrong*

killtown: you're a troll and this forum is full of haters, shills and trolls! why does the admin continue to allow the trolls to keep posting here!?

other poster: stop killtowning you clueless dufus!


Otherwise known as TROLLING…
As a matter of fact 75% of the truth movement posters on ATS fall under trolling posts IMHO, and if the admin here ever wants peace on the topic of 911, they need to realize that trolling is truth movement handbook 101.


Originally posted by impressme
Please show NYC ordinance or other reliable documents that states all roof top doors must stay locked?
Opinions, do not count as facts. Please show with creditable internet sources.

Truth movement tactic 103… “Misquote and twist the posters comments around to fit your agenda”
I never said it was an ordinance, I said it done for liability reasons…

I know this from tall buildings I have worked in, its done for safety, security, and liability reasons. Also in a fire they don’t want you heading to the roof, as 99.999% of the time rescues are preformed from the ground, and by heading to the roof your stand a higher chance of getting trapped or overcome by smoke as it climbs out of the building.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
There was a helicopter pad on the south tower.

It’s very difficult and dangerous to land a helicopter on the roof of a building that is on fire, and its not always possible. There are naturally updrafts/downdrafts on a building like that, when you add heated air raising off a fire it becomes a nightmare. Then you add smoke and soot to the situation, which not only impairs visibility, but can also seize up an aircraft engine.


This is why you put highly trained pilots in those rescue choppers that stayed home that day?
Why did they spend all that money on the pad?
Pure utter nonsense. Up drafts sure that's why you stay upwind.
They didn't even freekin try!!!
Did you see the LA fireman risk his life and the helicopter to rescue a Doberman that bit the crap out of him?
A DOG!! A DOG!! The folks in those towers were not treated with the same respect as a DOG!!



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GenRadek
 




There is no proof of explosions before the impacts.


What is so funny? Three thousand people were murdered and you think this is a laughing matter!

Your information is “wrong” and I disagree with you entirely on everything you just posted, but you know that already don’t you?
I will not waste my time on someone who continually pushes “disinformation” against the truth , which you have a long history of doing, for two years now.


Eyewitness Accounts
Eyewitnesses Recalled Explosions, No Alarms or Sprinklers


911research.wtc7.net...

This alone, blows your laughing matter down the drain.




[edit on 22-1-2010 by impressme]


yes 3,000 people were murdered BY Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who were willing to commit suicide in order to strike a blow agianst the "Great Evil" that is the United States. They have a nasty record, those militant fundamentalist jihadists. It was no secret they hated us and were planning to strike us.

And yet, here you are trying to pass along the myth of bombs and super magic thermites and thermates and nanu-nanu thermite that brought down the WTCs. And you post quotes from people which are all taken out of context, or are being twisted to mean something else, or can be explained by something as innocuous as understanding how some people would explain something that they have never before in their lives experienced.
Now I am going to laugh again because what you posted has nothing to do with any "explosions" being felt or heard before any impacts.
What I posted to you is correct. You have obviously NO clue to how an explosive works and what it means when a bomb goes off. Instead of saying I'm wrong, and then posting something which has nothing to do with what I was talking about, how about explain HOW I am wrong. Please, am I wrong in saying high power explosives used to cut steel beams in the basement dont create massive fireballs that come DOWN elevator shafts and burn people standing inside them or just outside them? Am I wrong in saying that people in the lobby were burned by a massive fireball that was related to the fuel from the jet fuel, which had such force to knock elevators out and shatter windows? Did you even read the accounts of the people that said the fireballs traveled DOWN the elevator shafts and then ended up burning and killing people standing too close to them, and even getting blown out of the WTC? Since when do cutter charges leave behind a strong smell of jetfuel and leave behind soot everywhere? You purposly ignore all of these relevant question because you have no idea to the facts, and instead repeat the same garbage from the CT sites that are just hilareously wrong on so many levels.

I'm spreading disinfo? Take a good look in the mirror. Instead of saying my information is wrong, how about you take a second and correct me and my "wrong" information. Explain how everything I stated above is wrong. I and a few others here would love to see it.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 





This is why you put highly trained pilots in those rescue choppers that stayed home that day?


Pilots are highly trained yes, but are not stupid. Trying to land on building
roof in pitch black smoke qualifies. What about the obstructions - roofs
of building covered with antenna and machinery - the helipad occupied
a small corner of the building. Thermal updrafts created by the fires
plays havoc with lift from rotor blades and makes control almost impossible.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
This is why you put highly trained pilots in those rescue choppers that stayed home that day?

First off, there were helicopters there that day who were asking to land, but there was no one visible on the rooftop so they were told not to risk going in.


Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Why did they spend all that money on the pad?

I assume for corporate use.


Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Pure utter nonsense. Up drafts sure that's why you stay upwind.

WTF?!? What does being upwind have to do with an updraft? Do you have any clue what you are talking about? A microburst can happen anywhere air is raising or descending rapidly. I just happen to be on the phone with a friend who used to be a military ATC person and she is laughing so hard at that statement I had to move the phone from my ear.


Originally posted by Donny 4 million
They didn't even freekin try!!!

Yes they did:

Of the two choppers that arrived within five minutes of the plane crash, one was a Bell 412 equipped with a 250-foot hoist and capable of carrying as many as 10 survivors at a time. The three-man crew was specially trained for rooftop rescues.
As the police pilots swooped in and peered through a smoke-free area on top of the north tower, however, they saw no one to save. People were still alive on the top floors, according to the New York Fire Department. But Greg Semendinger, the first chopper pilot on the scene, says, "There was nobody on the roof."
But Mr. Semendinger says the wind that morning did leave a corner of the tower relatively clear of smoke, almost until the building collapsed. Using a hoist with folding seats, rescuers could have saved as many as a few dozen people, he estimates.
NYPD Deputy Commissioner Thomas Antenen, a spokesman for the department, confirms that the police helicopters were on the scene. But he says whether they could have rescued anyone "is a moot issue."
Helicopters couldn't have saved anyone from the top of the south tower, NYPD pilots say. That building's roof was completely obscured by a 100-foot layer of dense smoke blown from the north tower by wind from the northwest.

At most they could have gotten down a couple of dozen people out of 1300 or so trapped in the North tower.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
The folks in those towers were not treated with the same respect as a DOG!!

No the people got caught in the middle of a battle between rescue departments:



But rather than reinforce the life-saving potential of rooftop rescues, the police department's daring helicopter operation in 1993 had the opposite effect. After the garage bombing, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owned the World Trade Center, and the fire department made a deliberate decision not to plan for future helicopter rescues, officials with the two agencies say. The agencies rejected recommendations from police pilots that an area of the north tower's roof be kept clear for helicopter landings. The antennas were put back up. And mostly for security reasons, the Port Authority kept the two sets of heavy metal doors leading to the building's only roof exit tightly locked -- as they would be on the morning of Sept. 11.
Part of the explanation for this decision in the wake of the 1993 blast was an intense feud then raging between the city's fire and police departments over who had control at emergencies. The fire department, which has no helicopters of its own, dismissed the 1993 rooftop rescue as grandstanding. Fire commanders said the mission was dangerous and unnecessary. And they said any future evacuations should be carried out by fire personnel from the ground.
Mr. Gribbon says the fire department did the right thing by following its general policy of getting occupants of tall buildings to move quickly down stairways. He notes that an estimated 25,000 people from the two towers got out and lived.
The FDNY's aversion to helicopter rescues is the mainstream approach around the country. Fire experts concluded long ago that if fires erupt in tall buildings, and evacuation is necessary, it is always best to send people down the stairs, not to the roof. Smoke and flames tend to rise, and people can get trapped at the top if weather or smoke conditions make a helicopter approach impossible.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Thanks for pointing out the excuses and incopetence of those paid to save and protect us.
As for the person on the phone-- Let's just say --I am glad she is a used to be.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Donny, do you even know what an updraft is and how it can wreck havoc with an aircraft, especially a helicopter over a massive fire? Do you know what happens when a strong updraft can interfere with any aircraft and the resulting downdrafts? If not, I would save your incredulity for some other time.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Damn right I do.
If I were flying a chopper I would avoid flying over the hot air you type.
No one was there when the fire stabalized.
The updraft and wind were moderate at worst case.
Need some links?



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Perhaps, it has been presented before, but I always found Aaron Russo's explanation to make the most sense. Granted, I can't say I have ever heard many of these theories but they all merely seem to be the little details that all point to the bigger picture, which, quite simply, is that something is not right, certain things just don't add up. It's like a giant puzzle or mystery, however, while there is normally an investigation, almost immediately, we were told it was terrorists and that investigation was short lived.

How do we make such an assumption with such immediacy? How are we sure that what we are told it was, is exactly the case? More important, why has there been no other terrorist attacks on such a scale as this one? OK, we are daily told of a new "attack" that was foiled, but how does 9/11 slip through the cracks, while all these others are caught in time? I am not doubting terrorism but I am also not 100% sold on the idea either.

The fact is, unless it is specifically told to us, we reserve judgment, but how many people are going to come out and say that 9-11 might have been an inside job? How many people, thus far, have and have been largely ignored? I remember how much controversy sprung from Charlie Sheen and he was just asking a simple question.

Sometimes fiction is stranger than truth, but we believe both hoping one of them is right.

It was Aaron Russo that got me thinking about about 9-11, and while I reserve judgment one way or the other, I find his take very interesting

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by phil0s
 


I don't know who Ruuso is but he made a good point. If an unarmed person or people can board a plane on Sept. 11 2001, hijack it, then fly it wherever they want, why hasn't it happened again? You can't read potential passengers' minds to stop them if they have something bad in mind. Security agents at airports who make what? 9, 10 dollars per hour are going to be more motivated to stop terrorists then the terrorists themselves who are more than likely bankrolled by the C.I.A.? I don't think so.

It was an inside job perpetrated by the bushs , bin ladens, and other elitists for the purposes of more contol and more money. That's just my gut instinct.

If you have the time, and resources, follow the money. At the end of that shades of grey rainbow you will find the truth. I can all but guarentee it.

Peace



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join