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.

 

All of you 'No-Planers' need to see This :

page: 5
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   
NPT notwithstanding, the questions about 9/11 arose swiftly after that day due to incidents related to the tragedy:

NORAD standing down
Change in protocol about command of NORAD that day (Cheney...why?)
The stiff and unbending refusal to even hold an inquiry by Bush for so long
The hand-picked men assigned to the inquiry
The overwhelming case of amnesia which stonewalled the inquiry
The reluctance of the investigators to ask pertinent questions
The white glove treatment by all who testified
The increasing rage and impotence of the families of the 9/11 victims who were unheard
The quick and unprecedented removal of the building materials from the scene of the crime to out of the country before an investigation could ensue...
The linking of the Bush family (brother Marvin and cousin) to the WTC security company
The building 7 demolition which destroyed SEC files on Enron and other miscreants and
was missing Gold from the bank vaults in the basement of building 7
The highly unusual 'put' options on the participating airlines...some of the options put by
alleged governmental (CIA) sources
Willie Brown and others being warned not to fly on 9/11 by someone in Washington DC
The obvious explosions occurring in the buildings....stuff being strewn out all over the
city and the pulverization of the concrete to tiny dust....
The reports of explosions by people in the twin towers BEFORE the planes hit
The change in testimony of journalists, and the death of witnesses who spoke out about anomalous events....
How Bush disappeared for 8 hours after the event (sent to various bases in AF1?)
How Rumsfeld said a 'missile' had hit the Pentagon (looks like one...long and low)
How Bush mentioned 'explosives to be set off'...
Larry Silverstein leasing the trade center just before the incident and insuring it
double indemnity for terrorist assaults (it HAD been bombed before)...but why
lease such a white elephant full of asbestos and not full of tenants??? He
apparently won around 4 billion dollars in the law settlement and without
spending a cent to clean up asbestos which scattered all over the city in the
lungs of the responders....

More events discussed in The 9/11 Timeline and Crossing the Rubicon...as well as many other observers. Many europeans spoke out loudly about it being an inside job.

Lots of questions,
it needs to be cleared up. If there were extenuating circumstances such as
a dirty bomb, we can take it. This incident, followed so rudely and roughly
by the Iraqi holocaust by Bush II, has destroyed so much faith and trust by
the people in the government that only a good 'housecleaning' will begin to
bring it back. It has also caused the world to view us as psychopathic war
mongers, and it is stirring up Americans who are becoming afraid that their
government would not hesitate to sacrifice them like the victims of 9/11,
WACO and the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing...people are so suspicious
of any and all terrorist activities. This is entirely unhealthy but a real
consequence of the lies, smoke and mirrors and deceit we have met so far.

No, we won't forget Pearl Harbor ... the government knew beforehand that
the kamakazi were on their way to bomb the ships. Thats why some of the
more valuable ships left port that day and all of those men were sacrificed so
that we would get into the war. It's called "Collatoral Damage".




posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


The fire twisted the steal structer. They even did tests and let jet fuel burn outside under a steal beam and the beam twisted and started to melt...and that was in an outside area....the fire from the planes was inside, thus more heat. This is the main evidence 9/11 "truthers" ignore.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by LaMadameDuval
 


Every single evidence you posted, you have no proof of, you heard and read this from someone else. Lets see every single source, and documents proving all that you stated.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaMadameDuval
NPT notwithstanding, the questions about 9/11 arose swiftly after that day due to incidents related to the tragedy:

NORAD standing down
Change in protocol about command of NORAD that day (Cheney...why?)
The stiff and unbending refusal to even hold an inquiry by Bush for so long
The hand-picked men assigned to the inquiry
The overwhelming case of amnesia which stonewalled the inquiry
The reluctance of the investigators to ask pertinent questions
The white glove treatment by all who testified
The increasing rage and impotence of the families of the 9/11 victims who were unheard
The quick and unprecedented removal of the building materials from the scene of the crime to out of the country before an investigation could ensue...
The linking of the Bush family (brother Marvin and cousin) to the WTC security company
The building 7 demolition which destroyed SEC files on Enron and other miscreants and
was missing Gold from the bank vaults in the basement of building 7
The highly unusual 'put' options on the participating airlines...some of the options put by
alleged governmental (CIA) sources
Willie Brown and others being warned not to fly on 9/11 by someone in Washington DC
The obvious explosions occurring in the buildings....stuff being strewn out all over the
city and the pulverization of the concrete to tiny dust....
The reports of explosions by people in the twin towers BEFORE the planes hit
The change in testimony of journalists, and the death of witnesses who spoke out about anomalous events....
How Bush disappeared for 8 hours after the event (sent to various bases in AF1?)
How Rumsfeld said a 'missile' had hit the Pentagon (looks like one...long and low)
How Bush mentioned 'explosives to be set off'...
Larry Silverstein leasing the trade center just before the incident and insuring it
double indemnity for terrorist assaults (it HAD been bombed before)




Where is your proof? You heard and read this from someone else.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by people=oooo
reply to post by mikelee
 


The fire twisted the steal structer. They even did tests and let jet fuel burn outside under a steal beam and the beam twisted and started to melt...and that was in an outside area....the fire from the planes was inside, thus more heat. This is the main evidence 9/11 "truthers" ignore.



Show us when and where this steel twisted, who did tests under a steel beam ? what you seem to ignore even if any of that is true is the fact that steel twisting could not cause massive destruction.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 01:35 AM
link   
I am not a "no planer" because I know people that died on Flight 93, and I have not seen them since or heard from them on the other side or wherever they are.

But I am a bit suspicious because trying to link to the site in the original post I get "bandwidth limit exceeded".

Also I think the poster above me [people000?] is quite demanding. Is that how discussions are progressed here. I wonder if the member knows any primary sources of anything useful to add, or just makes demands.

Anyway that is just a matter of personal preference, class and style.

Off topic. When I type a reply I cannot see previous posts, I don't want to quote anything but I am used to seeing the page I am on when I reply at other forums. I don't suppose there is any way around that?



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 05:55 AM
link   
you wont know the truth about 911 less you walk in the right circles.
ya feel me?



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


john lear , for one - and the claim has been repeated by others on ATS



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaMadameDuval

No, we won't forget Pearl Harbor ... the government knew beforehand that
the kamakazi were on their way to bomb the ships.


There weren't any kamikazes at Pearl Harbour.

You obviously know as much about the war in the Pacific as you do about 9/11.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


Seeing that the pics are not available on the link in the OP , here is another link with some of the same pics :


911review.org...



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


Why are the 'no-plane' theorists choosing not to discuss the fusalage found ON TOP of the building ?

Are there ANY witnesses who have claimed to have seen trucks rolling into the crash zone with tarps covering their loads ?

Anyone out there that saw people walking around carrying aircraft parts into the zone ?

Anyone see any cranes hoisting aircraft parts off of trucks and onto tops of buildings ?



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by vanhippi
 


How Do You Know It Was A Plane ?, Were You Standing In The Streets Of NYC? Or Did You Just Watch The Video On TV ?, Like Millions Of Us Did.
I Have Worked Construction & Maintence On Large Buildings, There Are A
Plethra Of Ways To Get Explosives Into An Occupied Buildings. Just Because No One Saw Boxes Marked EXPLOSIVES, Does Not mean They Did'nt Get In
There Covertly !!



[edit on 17-4-2010 by DalMil54]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by LaMadameDuval
 


Sounds To Me Like you Have A Handle on It !!! There Is to Much Info On this
Subject Pointing To An Inside Job, Planes Or No Planes, The Towers fell !!



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
Bonez, were sort of on the same side

Actually, we're not. Anyone who believes that no planes hit the towers or nuclear devices were used on the towers, are not on the side of truth.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
We Dont Know What Happend On 911.

No, we don't know exactly what happened. But what is indisputable is that jetliners hit both towers. That is evidenced by 44+ videos, numerous still-images, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of witnesses, the physical damage to the towers themselves, and the plane parts scattered all over Manhattan.



Originally posted by Anti-Evil
well, the French camera crew, more than likely was planted

Ah yes, yet another claim with no evidence to back it up.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by people=oooo
The fire twisted the steal structer. They even did tests and let jet fuel burn outside under a steal beam and the beam twisted and started to melt

We all know that is not true. Do you know what jet fuel even is? It's kerosene. You can buy a kerosene heater at Walmart. They don't melt, or twist. Or become deformed in any way.

If you think kerosene can do that kind of damage to steel, go get you a large, thick steel rod from a hardware store. Then go get you some kerosene from your local gas station. Then go into your back yard, set the kerosene on fire and stick the rod into the kerosene. Nothing will happen except the steel rod wil get hot. It will not twist, it will not melt.

Before spewing such blatantly false information, you should try these simple tests at home first before taking someone's word for it with zero proof.



Originally posted by people=oooo
the fire from the planes was inside, thus more heat

That is also a falsity. You have to have a continuous fuel source for an enclosed fire to maintain it's heat. Most of the jet fuel burned up in the first few minutes. The furniture in the towers was fire-resistant as furniture is supposed to be in any Class-A building.

Suffice it to say, look at images of the fires burning in the towers. You'll see mostly reds and oranges. Which those are the coolest fires where the temps are the lowest.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by nal War
Off topic. When I type a reply I cannot see previous posts, I don't want to quote anything but I am used to seeing the page I am on when I reply at other forums. I don't suppose there is any way around that?

What I do is right-click on the quote button, which opens up the quote in a new window. Then you can see the thread you're replying to in one window, and the quote in another.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by DalMil54
How Do You Know It Was A Plane ?

That would be called 44+ videos of both plane impacts. Then there's the still-images of the planes. Then there's all the witnesses that were outside watching the first tower burning. Then there's all the plane parts scattered all over Manhattan.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
yeah, there were planes...

yes, people died.

Yes, its still an inside job.‘‘


I agree, I believe planes were used but that doesn't prove it was done by 'Terrorists of Mass Destruction' (Great scary title for them... wooo)


Where is the proof of planes hitting the pentagon?
-One of the most secure building on the planet but all those cameras can miss a Boeing 757 flying straight at it

What was the deal with the hole in a field where another aircraft allegedly came down?
-The impact allegedy disintegrated (or atomised) the whole plane, engines and all; yet the men in the hole were walking around with plastic crates and things which are 'impervious to damage'!!
--It later turned out that the hole in the field had already been there previously and had been photographed or scanned a long time ago
(sorry I dont have the link or anything but im sure that you guys already know this stuff)

Airease



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Ok, so my previous post wasn't the best contribution when it comes to people believing no planes crashed into the buildings. I'll better my words:

When you're on the ground and you see planes hit the buildings, I'm pretty sure that means planes actually hit the buildings.

Sorry, but this conspiracy theory is insulting and offensive to those who died.



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Big disinformation right there. It's only a discrepancy to those who have no knowledge of powered flight.

Yes, it's true that a jetliner cannot exceed 350mph at sea level because it's engines aren't powerful enough. But a jetliner can reach and exceed 500mph without using it's engines while coming down from altitude. It's called "gravity". The second jet that hit the south tower came down from altitude and only leveled out in the 2-3 seconds before impact.

You can simulate that in any cheap flight simulator right on your computer.


Ouch, you just shot yourself in the foot! I challenge you to try the simulation with ten of your best buddies. Let me know if anybody can hit the tower on the first try ...

The maneuver you just described is extremely difficult to perform. I used to work for Swiss Air when it was still in business and have talked to many pilots. (I'm not a pilot!) The maneuver requires an expert pilot, advanced three dimensional thinking and a familiarity with the craft that the hijackers simply did not posses. All pilots I talked to confirmed that they could not have performed that maneuver.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join