One million New Yorkers to see Building 7 fall (AE911truth), page 4


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6    7  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 41 times


reply posted on 12-8-2010 @ 06:13 PM by Alfie1
reply to post by impressme



How did WTC 7 fall " faster than a natural freefall " please ?

Downward pointing rockets on the roof perhaps ?


reply posted on 12-8-2010 @ 07:03 PM by Whyhi
reply to post by impressme



faster than a natural freefall, the fact is...science says it is not possible.




[edit on 12-8-2010 by Whyhi]



reply posted on 12-8-2010 @ 08:07 PM by getreadyalready
reply to post by weedwhacker



Bursting into flames is very different than "exploding." Yes kerosene burns, but it does not send a shockwave that would move vehicles or sound like a bomb as witnesses described at the Pentagon.

As for the WTD towers, there were very inefficient yellow fire balls billowing out with the smoke. This is typical of a damped fire. The raw fuel does not have enough oxygen to ignite, so it vaporizes with the smoke and it ignites when it gets into an oxygen rich environment.

That is still more proof that the flames inside the building were inefficient and therefore not hot enough to melt steel.


reply posted on 12-8-2010 @ 08:52 PM by Son of Will
Meh, I think the debate is just depressing now. There is SO MUCH information out there - some of it legitimate, some of it bunk, some of it unsubstantiated, some of it somewhere in between...

I don't care where you stand in the spectrum of 9/11 theories - from "the government is basically truthful" to "government is completely complicit" - if you are arguing about 9/11, you're most likely cherrypicking the data that supports your view and either ignoring or forgetting the data that conflicts with it.

Disinformation is the most powerful and most common tool, and 9/11 is full of it from every angle. I don't care what the motive is - selfish money schemes, or controlled misinformation - it exists and it's everywhere.

But I thought I'd post this little tidbit about Mohammed Atta that I bet at least some of you didn't know.

"Top Ten Things You Never Knew About Mohamed Atta."

NUMBER 10: Intimidated Witness: Atta's American girlfriend.

Mohamed Atta had an American girlfriend with whom he lived for two months in Venice, FL., a lingerie model named Amanda Keller. You haven't heard her story because she was intimidated into silence by the FBI.

In the aftermath of the attack she spoke only a dozen words to the press: "I can't really discuss anything. I'm afraid I'll get in trouble."

NUMBER 9: Mohamed Atta, Beastie Boys fan.

Atta often listened to them non-stop.

"One time I got mad cause he broke one of my knick-knacks, so I snapped his CD's in half," said Amanda Keller, his erstwhile American girlfriend. "I broke all of his CD's, cause they drove me crazy, he played the 'Beastie Boys' nonstop."

In the aftermath of the argument, Atta told her why he was such a big fan. "He told me about this girl he'd dated in France, that had his son," said Keller. "He didn't tell anyone else about that, for some reason he felt he could spill his guts to me. His son was like nine, he said. He said his son was the reason he liked the Beastie Boys so much, cause they were his son's favorite band."

NUMBER 8. Mohamed Atta, Islamic Party Animal

"Atta and his crew were always flush with lots and lots of money," said Stephanie Frederickson, a 50-year old housewife and foster mother who with her husband lived right next door to Atta's apartment. "Those guys were all really party animals."

During their brief time together, Amanda and Atta went out almost every night, she said, and were part of a social scene at clubs like Margarita Maggie's in Sarasota. "When we went out we would meet pilots from Africa, Germany, and there were always lots of Arabs."

In fact, Atta was a heavy drinker, snorted coke, was a stylish dresser and wore enough expensive gold jewelry that a waitress in Venice thought he might be in the Mob.

NUMBER 7. Mohamed Atta liked pork chops.

"Islamic fundamentalist" Mohamed Atta loved pork chops, according to former girlfriend Amanda Keller. In fact, she said this was 'fanatical Islamo-fascist' Atta's one endearing trait.

Devout Muslims don't eat pork, do they?

NUMBER 6. Mohamed Atta didn't come to the U.S. to learn to fly.

Atta was already a licensed pilot when he arrived in the US., with pilot's licenses from half a dozen countries, and while at Huffman Aviation was not treated like a 'newbie' pilot, but accorded the privileges of a flight instructor.

And instead of attending just one flight school, Huffman Aviation, as the FBI states, his path took him through at least three Florida flight programs, not including his visit to a flight school in Oklahoma and a stint at the first flight school he attended in the U.S., whose name, oddly enough, remains unknown.

If Atta's real reason for being in Florida wasn't to go to flight school... "why then was he here?"

That facts this basic remain unknown illustrates the extent of the official blackout on information about 9/11.


There's more of course, I didn't want to quote too much - it's not mind-blowing stuff, but tidbits that are probably true which add color to an otherwise black-and-white portrayal of the man.

www.informationliberation.com...

I personally think he was an asset of our Intelligence community, many signs seem to point to that.


Google Video Link



reply posted on 12-8-2010 @ 11:26 PM by truthwillneverberevealed
reply to post by GoodOlDave



This whole site is for open minded discussion and debate. This site is not intended to be used for sweeping generalizations and inflammatory rhetoric towards people with opposing views. There is plenty of evidence to 9/11 being an inside job. Just because there is a certain theory about 9/11 doesn't mean everyone who believes it was an inside job has those same views.

From your thought process you might put stephen hawking in a, "crazy alien lunatic psychopath" box for believing there is a large probability of extraterrestrial life in space.

Maybe instead of having such a one sided narrow minded view of things you should look at both sides of a topic. Not everything is black and white.


reply posted on 13-8-2010 @ 02:59 AM by DaMod
reply to post by GoodOlDave



If your going to insult something why don't you insult the dozens of engineers that say the way the buildings fell was impossible. And then I want you to watch the video of the world trade centers falling and I want you to look at the detonation charges going off on the way down. Then you can stfu. Yes planes hit the buildings, but they aren't what brought them down. Why is it so hard to believe the George Bush who wasn't even surprised when it happened and stood to make a fortune could fabricate this whole thing especially since at that time he was debatably the most powerful man on earth.


reply posted on 13-8-2010 @ 07:16 AM by hooper
reply to post by bjsmi2



So many unanswered questions...


I think this is one of my favorite lines - unanswered questions. The "questions" have been answered - over and over and over and over again. I think the statement should really be "so many ignored answers".


reply posted on 13-8-2010 @ 07:23 AM by network dude
reply to post by GoodOlDave



I have a question for you, Hooper, and Dereks. Do you believe the official story given by the 9-11 commission 100%?

And for the record, not everyone who questions some of the facts presented fall into the no plane category. Building 7 is an excellent starting point to question what happened and how. It's amazing to find out how many people don't know about it.


reply posted on 13-8-2010 @ 07:26 AM by getreadyalready
Originally posted by dereks
Originally posted by getreadyalready
That is still more proof that the flames inside the building were inefficient and therefore not hot enough to melt steel.


Once again we have someone twisting the facts to avoid the truth, who said that the steel was melted by the fire?


?????

That is the official story. What do you mean, who said that? The official story is that heat from the fire plasticized the steel beams and compromised their integrity enough to allow the weight from the upper floors to come crashing down and create a pancake collapse.

That official stance is impossible, because all the hundreds of beams were at varying distances from the fire and would have been in varying degrees of plasticicity. They could not have all collapsed at once.

It is also impossible because, according to NYC fire code for similar high rises in Manhatten, it would have taken at least 12 hours of intense chemical fire to get them to the temperatures required for collapse. This is why the Firemen ran in, they knew it could not collapse from fire.

It is also impossible, because even if it had plasticized the steel, It would have only been a few beams in the most intensely heated areas, and those areas would have buckled first, the building would have shifted and torqued as some beams provided resistance and others did not. There would be tons of video evidence before, during, and after the collapse showing how the beams started to giveway one at a time. Instead we get the nice uniform pancake collapse that is only possible if all the beams were compromised at exactly equal amounts at exactly the same moment in time.


reply posted on 13-8-2010 @ 07:35 AM by NorEaster
Originally posted by camaro68ss
I really dont know what to belive anymore. your making me question things. i guess thats a good thing. I really really need a solid motive for all this to make myself start questioning what really happened that day.


Trillions in new defense and security intelligence spending. The old Cold War was over, and the 90's didn't spend much at all on defense. That needed to be addressed, and on Sept 11th, it was.

This was a corporate hit job. Hell, the date of the attack alone - 9/11 (emergency!!!!) has enough corporate marketing "personality" attached to it to make the whole thing obvious. Islamic fundamentalists would have chosen a significant date (for their own cultural sense of being aligned with their god during the mission) and it would not have been a date that so clearly corresponds to an American number pattern that would instantly make the attack date a marketing logo.

That's not how Islamic fundamentalists think. That's how corporate marketers think. I know. I was a Marketing Director for two medium size software companies. The 9/11 date is an immediate tip-off. It works off the 9-1-1 emergency number, and because it's so obvious, it smacks of that "make sure they get it" mentality of business advertising. It's a knee-jerk reaction, and I can just picture the staff meeting where this date was proposed. Personally, I would've been scared to death of being that obvious, but then these high level corporate people live in a protective bubble for their entire lives. Upper class childhood - on to prep school - then university - and then to the big money firms at the C-level. The whole world feels like their front yard to them.

It reminds me of the specific ritual that a serial killer performs during or just after a kill. They can't help it. Long time corporate marketers are the same way, and I bet that if you were to examine the marketing literature of all the major defense contracting firms of the late 90's and early 2000's, you find the primary culprit firm eventually. The marketing approach would expose it.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6    7  >>    ^^TOP^^



Why the Pentagon?
  Posted 3 days ago with 12 member flags
NEVER FORGET 9-11….Maybe we SHOULD forget.
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
Personal Theory on The Twin Towers Plane Pilots
  Posted 0 days ago with 8 member flags
The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered
  Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Note from trapped workers surfaces 10 years after 9/11
  Posted 1 days ago with 6 member flags
Where were you when the world stopped turning...
  Posted 2 days ago with 4 member flags