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.
Originally posted by Alfie1
Would you let us know which WTC building they were found in please ?
The label in the case above says: "Gun Encased in Concrete and Gun-Casing Remains The U.S. Customs House stored a large arsenal of firearms at its Six World Trade Center office. During recovery efforts, several handguns were found at Ground Zero, including these two cylindrical gun-casing remains and a revolver embedded in concrete. Fire temperatures were so intense that concrete melted like lava around anything in its path."
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Originally posted by Alfie1
Would you let us know which WTC building they were found in please ?
If only someone had told us where this exhibit was located so that you could have looked into this for yourself.
The label in the case above says: "Gun Encased in Concrete and Gun-Casing Remains The U.S. Customs House stored a large arsenal of firearms at its Six World Trade Center office. During recovery efforts, several handguns were found at Ground Zero, including these two cylindrical gun-casing remains and a revolver embedded in concrete. Fire temperatures were so intense that concrete melted like lava around anything in its path."
That took 48 seconds. Free of charge just for you.
edit to bold which building in case reading an entire paragraph to find it proves too much for anyone.
[edit on 7-3-2010 by K J Gunderson]
Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by Alfie1
I saw no point in confusing the issue, or you. Obviously, your point was to confuse the issue.
The guns were found at ground zero, encased in melted concrete.
How did that happen?
Thank you for trying not to confuse me by being coy about where the exhibits were found, but it wasn't really necessary.
Anyway, we are all now agreed it was WTC 6 so it doesn't help at all with any issues over WTC 1,2 & 7.
As I said I doubt the weapons are actually encased in molten concrete because the guns have a considerably lower melting point than the concrete. I would guess hard-baked concrete dust and gypsum but I am quite ready to accept expert analysis.
That might be something practical that truthers could actually seek. Need to make your mind up as to whether WTC 6 was rigged with thermite though. I haven't seen that alleged so far. Another caution, if the exhibits are a literal "smoking gun" why are the wicked perps leaving them on display in a museum when they are allegedly knocking people off in plane and train crashes elsewhere in case they let anything slip ?
Leslie Robertson replied quickly by e-mail to that site, (not my source) and in it he says he has no RECOLLECTION of making that [2001] statement and would not be qualified to say that, so what did he originally say... nothing? a man with a Bsc degree, with surely some knowledge in metallurgy, and who was a chief engineer on the WTC project. As to the NIST are you referencing John Gross?
Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by smurfy
Thanks for that smurfy but NIST was not convinced about any molten steel at the WTC and I am not convinced otherwise.
For example, Leslie Robertson, who you refer to, has specifically denied referring to molten steel there. That is mentioned in this article which covers some other things as well :-
www.911myths.com...
Originally posted by smurfy
... and in it he says he has no RECOLLECTION of making that [2001] statement and would not be qualified to say that...
Originally posted by Beancounter72
reply to post by GoodOlDave
The steel was NOT melted? So the pictures taken of molten metal dripping from the scene of the impact before the towers fell and the molten metal that was dripping from the rubble as it was being (illegally) cleaned up must then be hoaxes.
The towers did NOT fall into their basements? Okay so where did the towers fall? On their sides? (NO).
The components of the aircraft that hit the pentagon did NOT evaporate? Then if that's true then those components ie. the titanium engine parts, the steel wings, must still be there, right? Oops that right, they're not there and have never been found so either they weren't there to begin with or they 'evaporated'.
If there's any disinfo here it's from you. What cell of the Mossad do you belong to?
Originally posted by Alfie1
Exactly, WTC 6, I felt dogdish was trying to be evasive.
So, nothing to do with the towers or WTC 7. Is it being alleged now that WTC 6 was attacked with thermite ?
Interesting exhibits though but as steel melts at 500 degrees f less than concrete one would have expected the guns to have melted. More likely concrete and gypsum dust baked on but I would be interested to hear any expert analysis.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
What proof do you have that this was actually steel, vs aluminum, copper, or whatever that would be in every skyscraper in the world?
Photographs of the aircraft wreckage I.E. landing gear, engine parts, fuselage components, etc have already been posted here many times already and I know you've seen them, not to mention the black box was recovered as well,
What proof do you have that it is not steel?
There is no proof where or what plane these said parts came from. The black box was not matched to the plane by serial or part numbers.
Originally posted by hooper
Are you familiar with the logical problems involved in proving a negative?
No proof? If the DNA of the last known passengers of the plane are found at the crash site, that is pretty much infallible proof where the plane parts came from. In fact that is better than any serial number matching.
Such a sad, old excuse for people that cannot post evidnece.
Too bad NIST had to come up with new DNA testing for 9/11. Testing that was not ready untill 2002. Plus the problem with proper chain of custody and if the bodies from the plane were actually in the building.
Originally posted by hooper
Not relative to Flight 93 were there was a definitive passenger list and next of kin could be identified.
And what is the problem with the proper chain of custody? I say the chain of custody was properly adhered, prove that's not right. And don't tell me you can't prove a negative because that is just a sad old excuse.
So your stating ther was no crash or fire?
Originally posted by hooper
At Shanksville all the human remains were limited to a very finite and knowable set of persons with the caveat (however unlikely in the remote location) that no one on the ground was killed.
Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by hooper
At Shanksville all the human remains were limited to a very finite and knowable set of persons with the caveat (however unlikely in the remote location) that no one on the ground was killed.
If the fire was hot enough to destroy the rest of the plane it would have been hot enough to destroy DNA evidence, same as with the Pentagon.