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.

 

9/11 Comprehensive Concise Evidence---please contribute

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar

Once you've collected all of the evidence, are you going to then come up with a narrative of what you believed happened? Or, are you going to continue with "just asking questions"?


No narrative, just a list. A short list, easily understood and verified,
of the most damning evidence against the OS to date.

The 9/11 Truth Movement historically has been on its heels. For every
(one) relevant, cogent argument you will find on a web-site, or in a
documentary film, you will find (two) that are poorly constructed and
easily debunked. The hyperbole in these sites and films is there to turn
a profit and they do a disservice to the Movement. Mainly, I don't want
this issue to die, I want a fresh list with the latest info to sway anyone
who will lend an ear...

[edit on 10-7-2010 by rival]




posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 

Thanks for the "heads up", but what exactly can we trust? How about eyewitness testimony to explosions? Is that good enough?



Firemen testifying that explosions brought down the towers.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by richierich
Notice: Not ONE official story cultist has dared to try and respond to my last post: VAPORIZATION OF STEEL CANNOT, REPEAT CANNOT BE CAUSED BY FUEL BASED FIRES.

They can ignore this proof, this total evidence, but they cannot hide from it.


Would you mind terribly posting your source for where you heard that steel was ever vaporized during the collapse?



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
Why the NIST report on WTC7 is flawed, and the people responsible should have their professional licenses pulled.

www.journalof911studies.com...


First, Frank Legge isnt' addressing the NIST report here, he's addressing the FEMA report becuase when this thing was published (Mar 2008) the NIST report wasn't released yet (Nov 2008). Second, Legge is a chemist, not a structural engineer, not a materials engineer, not a fire expert, and not even an explosives expert. He didn't even analyze any of the samples of WTC 7 steel to come up with this; the guy openly admits this report is to prove explosives entirely through "appearance of the collapse of WTC 7". He has zero professional background relevent to the NIST report's analysis and did zero physical exminations so that makes this an opinion, not a professional estimate, and is no more or no less noteworthy than your own.

It by no means overrides all the structural engineers, materials engineers, and fire experts at NIST. For one thing, the people at NIST actually has samples of the WTC 7 steel to go by so they didn't need to make guesses like Legge is doing. Instead of you simply blindly quoting other people (who, in this care, didn't even read it), what say you tell me in your own words why the NIST report is flawed?



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   
OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF 9/11 FLIGHT CONTRADICTED BY GOVERNMENT'S OWN DATA
pilotsfor911truth.org...

UNITED 93 DATA PROVIDED BY US GOVERNMENT DOES NOT SUPPORT OBSERVED EVENTS
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
pilotsfor911truth.org...

NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room"
pilotsfor911truth.org...

9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
pilotsfor911truth.org...

United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Physical Damage To Pentagon Impossible Based on Witness Statements/Observations
pilotsfor911truth.org...
www.citizeninvestigationteam.com...

F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Identify 9/11 Plane Wreckage
pilotsfor911truth.org...

The Lack of Foundation Damage at the Pentagon is Irreconcilable with the Official Reports and Data
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Arlington Topography, Obstacles Make American 77 Final Leg Impossible
pilotsfor911truth.org...



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   
I'm getting tired of repeating myself with the past thread, but I feel educating people on the matter is more important. I can boldy say that if you STILL believe in the story that we were told, then you honestly haven't educated yourself on the truth.

Here are some IMPORTANT quotes that can NOT be debunked, PERIOD:

-Referring to Bush's efforts to obstruct the 9/11 Commission's access to critical documents, "disgusting . . . a scam. Americans are being scammed." Senator Max Cleland (D-Georgia, 1997-2003), 9/11 Commissioner (originally appointed, dropped off the Commission in the Fall of 2004)

- "I know enough physics to know that it is strictly impossible for those buildings to collapse in their own footprint, at free-fall speed except under controlled demolition. Those buildings did not come down the way the 9-11 report says. It is strictly impossible, in fact, it's a total, the account in the 911 report is a total contradiction to the laws of physics." Paul Craig Roberts Former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury

- "Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned. They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations." Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions.

- "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft." Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority.

- "After 4+ years of research since retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government. It is now time to take our country back." Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS Aeronautical Science, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Retired U.S. Air Force command fighter pilot. Former instructor; U.S. Air Force Fighter Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program.

- "I knew from September 18, 2001, that the official story about 9/11 was false. ... [A]nomalies poured in rapidly: the hijackers' names appearing in none of the published flight passenger lists, BBC reports of stolen identities of the alleged hijackers or the alleged hijackers being found alive, the obvious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 [each 1300+ feet tall, 110 stories], and WTC 7, the lack of identifiable Boeing 757 wreckage at the Pentagon ... Link to full statement [Editor's note: WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11, seven hours after the collapses of the Twin Towers. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, PhD, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer

- "After five years of talking to many individuals in the intelligence community, in the military, foreign intelligence agencies, and a whole host of other people, people from the air traffic control community, the FAA, I came to the conclusion that after five years what we saw happen on that morning of September 11, 2001, was the result of a highly-compartmentalized covert operation to bring about a fascist coup in this country." Wayne Madsen – Former U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer, specialist in electronic surveillance and security. Formerly assigned to the National Security Agency and the State Department.

- "Of course Bush knew about the impending attacks on America. He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism." Lt. Col. Stephen L. Butler, EdD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at the Defense Language Institute

- "Recent research proves that explosives were used at the World Trade Center. Flight paths and maneuvers of the aircraft involved at the Pentagon and Shanksville do not match NTSB released flight data recordings. Shouldn't there be a criminal investigation before more lives and trillions of dollars are wasted?" Major Jon I. Fox, U.S. Marine Corps – Former Marine Corps fighter pilot, including interceptor pilot. Retired commercial airline pilot, Continental Airlines. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, McDonnell Douglas DC-10, LearJet. 35-year commercial aviation career.

- "The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]."Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng – Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center.

www.patriotsquestion911.com...

GUYS!!! these are creditable people with extensive backgrounds in the fields that they talk about. DEBUNK THIS!!! DEBUNK IT!!!!! NOW!!! YOU CAN'T!!!! These people aren't weirdos making videos in their basements!! This people are in the CIA/NSA/FBI/NASA/All branches of the military!!!!!!



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by monkeySEEmonkeyDO
 



Excellent offering, thank you.
Lots of useful information, and many quotes I had not seen.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by monkeySEEmonkeyDO
Here are some IMPORTANT quotes that can NOT be debunked, PERIOD:

-Referring to Bush's efforts to obstruct the 9/11 Commission's access to critical documents, "disgusting . . . a scam. Americans are being scammed." Senator Max Cleland (D-Georgia, 1997-2003), 9/11 Commissioner (originally appointed, dropped off the Commission in the Fall of 2004)


Actually, we're being scammed TWICE...

-First, the Bush administration was so flipping incompetent that it couldn't even hand out bottles of water to hurricane survivors in New Orleans without slipping on babana peels, and couldn't even out a CIA agent without hordes of journalists tracing it back to him. I absolutely positively know there's more incompetence involved that direlyly impacted the 9/11 attack. The reason why Bush was withholding information is obvious- if it turns out he had a warning of an imminent terror attack lying forgotten underneath a pizza box in the corner of his office, the entire countrly would want to lynch him.

-Second, all the antiestablishment paranoids seeing gov't secrecy and instictively thinking CONSPIRACY are going to see this and naturally think somethign sinister is afoot in knee jerk reflex. The whole reason there are so many crackpot claims of controlled demolitions, cruise missiles, lasers from outer space, or whatever, is specifically becuase of this secrecy. Well, that, and an exorbitant amount of excessively bad information the conspiracy movement is being fed by these damned fool web sites. Case in point-

- "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft." Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority.

The black boxes were recovered from the Pentagon crash site as well as the Shanksville crash site, which irrefutably showed the planes were flight 77 and flight 93. Nelson isn't basing his statement on his own investigation. He's basing it upon the rubbish being spoon fed to him by the conspiracy theorists.

To the OP: you say you want people to contribute "comprehensive, concise evidence" but you'll need to define just what that is first, 'cause people posting nonsense they scraped off some conspiracy web site certain ain't it.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I did give examples...

Molten steel at ground zero
Traces of thermite
Building 7 (free-fall -due to fire)(ignored by 9/11 Commission)
Seismic data from gov. sites of anomalous fluctuations before impact
Evidence of sub-basement explosions with witness and injury

Looks like I have a short list, so far. Wish there were more
responses...



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by rival
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I did give examples...

Molten steel at ground zero
Traces of thermite
Building 7 (free-fall -due to fire)(ignored by 9/11 Commission)
Seismic data from gov. sites of anomalous fluctuations before impact
Evidence of sub-basement explosions with witness and injury

Looks like I have a short list, so far. Wish there were more
responses...


Here's two more to add to your list of falsehoods- no wreckage identifying the planes and the hijackers being poor pilots. Both are addressed when they found the black box at the Pentagon crash site- the flight recorder identified the craft as AA77, and the hijackers flew to Washington by inputting Reagan into the autopilot and then turning it on so they didn't need to have expert flying skills.

You asked for comprehensive, concise evidence? Here you go.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


Well gee sphinx, this video was the first video I saw and it had no explosions, or anything, and was seen on tv in the documentary in this format. So no, you cannot go an cast doubt like this, because I can turn this right around on the entire TM and cast doubt on every single video the TM tries to use as "proof" of bombs, explosions, no planes etc. When will ANYONE in the TM ever put as much scrutiny on their own sources as they do to the "debunkers"? I have yet to see you, or anyone supporting the TM's nonsense ever scrutinize the videos they use as "proof" of "inside job".

So sphinx, will I be seeing you scrutinizing videos like the alleged explosion at the WTC7, or the accounts of "bombs" going off, etc, or will you just attack anything that does not fit your preconceived notions, including this video, which obviously has been altered by someone in the TM support camp to create the obvious FAKE sound effects and pass it off as authentic and "evidence" of demo charges?

And if you think that its so easy to get suckered in by a video on yt, well then gee, the entire TM is one GIANT sucker. In that case I suggest that you as well question EVERY SINGLE VIDEO that the TM uses to bolster its opinions/ideas of "demolition" and do not even bother supporting them until you have confirmation its unmolested, un-edited, un-twisted. I want to see you question EVERY video ANYBODY that uses as "proof" or "show" evidence of demolition. If not, well, then you do know what a hypocrite is? Remember, whats good for the goose, is good for the gander.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
1 No Trusters have been able to come up with just one example of a steel frame building globally collapsing as the three buildings 1, 2 and 7. Without explosive demolition. Never in the history of mankind before or since 911.

I laugh in their faces.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 03:07 AM
link   
Yes I also find it amazing that three structures fell in one day, and there is no
historical precedent for such structural failure due to fire.

To be fair though, WTC 1 and 2 were struck by airliners and their
central cores would have sustained damage above and beyond that of
fire alone.

However, building 7 sustained NO inner structural damage. The damage
building 7 sustained was clearly facial on the outside of the structure. And
so for historical precedent, I will only include building 7 as being the first
steel frame core building to ever collapse due to fire.

I wish I had more information on the reported cause of the fire in building 7.
It remains suspicious that this building caught fire to such a degree that
a decision was made to actually stop fire fighting efforts. I can see no
plausible explanation for this...diesel fuel cells situated near the central
core of the structure--supplying fuel to nearby emergency generators?
I just cannot fathom how they came to be involved with the facial
damage of the structure. Perhaps an electrical fire that spread?
I dunno....



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Doctor Smith
 


Well if you can come up with another time when a loaded 767 impacted a building at very high speeds, causing fires to erupt across multiple floors without any firefighting effort, we'll be all ears. Oh also make sure that the building is also a 110 floor tube in tube design. And remember, no water was poured on the buildings.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doctor Smith
1 No Trusters have been able to come up with just one example of a steel frame building globally collapsing as the three buildings 1, 2 and 7. Without explosive demolition. Never in the history of mankind before or since 911.

I laugh in their faces.


...and we laugh right back. No conspiracy monger has ever been able to come up with just one prior example where an occupied building could have controlled demolitions secretly planted in it without any of the occupants noticing. Never in the history of mankind before or since.

Every time I point this double standard out, you conspiracy people universally run away the same way vampires run away from sunlight. May I ask why?



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


GoodOlDave, do you honestly still trust NIST and the OS after watching this whole video?

If there is nothing to hide about WTC 7 &* other elements of the OS, why make some of their data classified and unavailable to the public?









[edit on 23-7-2010 by Skyline74]

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Skyline74]

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Skyline74]

(Edits for typo and adding links)

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Skyline74]



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyline74
 



If there is nothing to hide about WTC 7 &* other elements of the OS, why make their findings classified and unavailable to the public?


Wow, talk about semantical creep!


Now the findings are classified? I guess you have some basis for that declaration, right? Also, am I in big trouble because I do not have a security clearance and I did read the findings. I guess I better watch out, huh? And since the findings are classified I think it was really a bad idea for them to publish them on the internet.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Sorry, I shouldn't have used the word "findings", just a typo. I am referring to this:





posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyline74
 

That link doesn't work. On your prior post, the first didn't work, but the second did.
Anyway, keep in mind that there are those here that you will not convince of anything. It does not matter the quality of your argument, they will simply say it is garbage if it differs from the O.S.
The OS has been totally discredited, any open minded person that pays any attention at all can see that. We just have to get more people to pay attention.
Just be aware of the roadblocks. Some will follow this post, no doubt.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 






To be fair though, WTC 1 and 2 were struck by airliners and their central cores would have sustained damage above and beyond that of fire alone.


That's true they were hit by aircraft. One of the buildings almost toppled over at the point of impact, but suspiciously disintegrated before it could fall.That's the most that could have happened. Topple over at the point of impact. Not fall straight through the strongest point of resistance.

You can use a wrecking ball or an earthquake whatever. The steel frame buildings just don't fall like that.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join