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.

 

New 9/11(NY) footage, taken by Steve Vigilante, released last month(Warning Graphic Language)

page: 15
68
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 05:05 AM
link   
www.youtube.com...

Sorry...not real good at adding things to a post....




posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by benoni
Mossad agents admitted on camera to being in NY on 9/11 to "document the event"


They were not Mossad agents - where did you get that from?

Where did they admit that they were there to document the event?


Does this make me a "jew hater" dereks


By posting lies like this - obviously yes!



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by benoni
Section31,
Could you please post a link where you say you read that the WTC complex was designed to collapse during an earthquake?????????

You will not get this type of information online. If you people ever want to learn about this subject (or any other subject), go to your local library or head to your local college's library. What I can do for you is look through my 'Design History' notes, and provide for you a few titles as a starting point.

When dealing with this type of information, you will never-ever find anything reliable online. 95% off all human knowledge can only be found in a library. If you want 'real' results, go to a college or state library.

See, this is why I know the 9/11 conspiracy theories are illogical. No one does any offline research into engineering, physics, etc... Everyone hands over the keys of trust to some hobbyist, blogger, or activist.

*facepalm*


edit on 16-9-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
History of the World Trade Center::
Key Historical Notes for Offline Research

Keywords to look up in the library:
~ Twin Towers
~ Architect: Minoru Yamasaki/Emery Roth & Sons
~ Structural Engineer: Leslie E. Robertson Associates
~ David Rockefeller

The rest is up to you.



edit on 16-9-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   
hahah @ 7:47 (lol) the side says "ANAL ST" lol



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ashyr
hahah @ 7:47 (lol) the side says "ANAL ST" lol


A new video and 15 pages of discussion and that's the best contribution you can make to the thread?




Grow up.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by PersonalChoice
 


OK ANYONE NOTICE @1:55 the smoke coming out of the building shifts from left to the right, a second later the plan hits =, the smoke also seems to change in volume coming out of the building like a pressure change. Was it shock-wave? Just odd that is right BEFORE the hit and not after. I understand sound and shockwaves travel but it seems more like something went off right before the hit.

SOMEONE ELSE VERIFY THIS FOR ME. THANKS

It really looks and sounds like: Explosion then Plane

Love'n yall and happy Friday BTW



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


Uhm yeah they were agents and they stated they were sent on Israels TV interview after they returned home but i cannot find a video back up BUT... I got ya this


Two of the "Five Dancing Israelies"
According to ABCNEWS sources, Israeli and U.S. government officials worked out a deal — and after 71 days, the five Israelis were taken out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home. While the former detainees refused to answer ABCNEWS' questions about their detention and what they were doing on Sept. 11, several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home.
Said one of the men, "Our purpose was to document the event."
HOW DID THEY KNOW THERE WOULD BE AN EVENT TO DOCUMENT?

The Five Dancing Israelis
Arrested On 9-11
www.todayscatholicworld.com...

Israeli Spies

Five Men Including Mossad Agents Documented the WTC Attack
911research.wtc7.net...

Five Dancing Israelis Arrested On 9/11
www.youtube.com...

FIVE DANCING ISRAELIS (1)
www.youtube.com...

Dancing Israelis Arrested on 9/11, Interviewed by Ch. 4
www.youtube.com...

Mossad Truck Bombs on Sept 11
www.youtube.com...

MI5 Agent Annie Machon knows that Israeli Mossad was behind 9-11
www.youtube.com...

The Five Dancing Israelis
Arrested On 9-11
whatreallyhappened.com...


It goes on... and on... and on... and on....

Hope it helps.




edit on 17-9-2010 by Loki Lyesmyth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ashyr
hahah @ 7:47 (lol) the side says "ANAL ST" lol


I LOLed.


Originally posted by Section31
See, this is why I know the 9/11 conspiracy theories are illogical. No one does any offline research into engineering, physics, etc... Everyone hands over the keys of trust to some hobbyist, blogger, or activist.


Some of us get our offline degree in engineering or physics then use that knowledge to critique the information that is available online. You won't find much relevant smoking gun information in a library.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31

Originally posted by benoni
Section31,
Could you please post a link where you say you read that the WTC complex was designed to collapse during an earthquake?????????

You will not get this type of information online. If you people ever want to learn about this subject (or any other subject), go to your local library or head to your local college's library. What I can do for you is look through my 'Design History' notes, and provide for you a few titles as a starting point.

When dealing with this type of information, you will never-ever find anything reliable online. 95% off all human knowledge can only be found in a library. If you want 'real' results, go to a college or state library.

See, this is why I know the 9/11 conspiracy theories are illogical. No one does any offline research into engineering, physics, etc... Everyone hands over the keys of trust to some hobbyist, blogger, or activist.

*facepalm*


edit on 16-9-2010 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



Lol and were supposed to believe you do? Of course online sources are terrible. But your calling the kettle black. You make claims you can't support, and rag on people for asking for you to support your claims? Go to a library and have this debate then. Duh!

Common sense tells us they wouldn't design a building to fall in an earthquake. Don't need a source to realize what a horrible claim that is. Anyone would want evidence of that. Why don't you go and get that book and scan it while your at the library, then post it for us. Or tell me what book and I will do it. Since your so educated you know what book right?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 


Actually, it does kind of make sense to create a building with the intent to allow it to be demolished safely in the case of a disaster. Or does it make more sense to design a building that, upon failing, topples over and kills tens to hundreds of thousands more?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Ciphor
 


Actually, it does kind of make sense to create a building with the intent to allow it to be demolished safely in the case of a disaster. Or does it make more sense to design a building that, upon failing, topples over and kills tens to hundreds of thousands more?


....
....
....
It's probably safer to make a building that doesn't fall at all in the event of an earthquake. Like.. All buildings ever built in history... yaaaa.... Would you work in a building that was meant to fall in the event of an earthquake? Lol seriously... would you? Sounds "safe" for sure bro. I can't really believe some of you are serious.

"Naw I don't work in that building, I have a wife and kids and that building is meant to withstand an earthquake. I work in that one over there, its meant to collapse if an earthquake happens, it's safer that way."




edit on 18-9-2010 by Ciphor because: @#$#@$#@$



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 


No... you sound extremely condescending in your post. The building is meant to take a lot of damage, BUT! If it sustains so much damage that the building would collapse, it could be designed to collapse safely in that highly unlikely event. It would be stupid to design a building that would destroy multiple city blocks upon catastrophic failure.

Now please, remain civil in this debate.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


I'm civil, cool your jets buckaroo. Don't be so hypersensitive. Sorry if I found the idea of buildings built to collapse in earthquakes amusing and worth a few jokes.


Let's be serious then.

1) Can you support this claim with evidence.
2) Can you show me buildings that weren't meant to fall in a earthquake that caused blocks of damage? (probably can, japan gets rocked, but hey, I'm rolling the dice).



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I think one of the most significant aspects of this video, other than the expelling of smoke from WTC1 before the impact, is the status of both structures.

[Frank A. Demartini:] � The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it . That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.� Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by oggie168
 


Interesting date that interview took place in. I'd love to see it, any chance when you get the spare time you could PM me the link? I would be eternally grateful.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Section31
 

Interesting speculation, as it now is to be considered, regarding the twin towers being built to self destruct during an earthquake. I too would be interested in seeing some proof of this statement. I do believe standard procedure around here is to provide information to others in support of their side of the debate. Therefore, I too would appreciate some scanned copies or other forms of information of what you suggest. In support of my questionability of such a statement I include the following information.

As I think most know, earthquakes on the east coast of the US aren't common but also aren't unheard of. For example, the Ottowa Quake in June of this year was felt in NYC whose epicenter was about 300 miles away. The NYC OEM even has a page titled NYC Hazards: Earthquakes and also lists Tsunami hazards on this page.


More than 400 earthquakes of magnitude 2.0 or greater occurred in the state between 1760 and 1986. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) ranks New York State among the states at a “moderate risk” of earthquake, compared to a state like Alaska, which is ranked a “very high” risk.
New York State is no stranger to earthquakes, so should consumers consider buying earthquake coverage?



Here's the list that corresponds to the above map of the 18 largest earthquakes originating near NYC for the last 300 years. Largest was a magnitude 5.2-5.8, depending on source, which wouldn't have caused significant damage.


V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
USGS magnitude intensity comparison


I don't deny that earthquakes can happen in NYC and there's even recent speculation that a major earthquake is overdue.


The study's authors, who work at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Observatory, acknowledge that the biggest earthquakes — in the 6 or 7 magnitude range — are rare in the New York City region. They say a quake of magnitude 7 probably comes about every 3,400 years.

But they note that no one knows when the last one hit, and because of the population density and the concentration of buildings and financial assets, many lives and hundreds of billions of dollars are at risk.
Study finds new earthquake dangers for NYC

I do however think its odd that during the design phase of the twin towers in the 60's, when some of this information wasn't even available, that such a forethought was even considered to the designers, despite the fact that I've never heard of a building being designed to fall during an earthquake. I've only ever heard of buildings designed to withstand earthquakes. I've even heard of building designs being rejected because of earthquake concerns. I've never heard of a building being designed to fall during an earthquake. If this unsubstantiated earthquake information is true, where was the earthquake that caused the twin towers to fall as they were allegedly designed to do? Since that seems to be the premise of your side of the debate, this question is especially important to answer.

Although minor quakes, here's more information to suggest that earthquakes weren't even considered during the design or construction of the twin towers.

In 2001, two minor but historic quakes were recorded in New York City. Although these quakes measured only 2.4 and 2.6 on the Richter scale, their epicenters were within the boundaries of Manhattan – the first ever since modern record keeping began.
New York City on brink of earthquake?


And here's information regarding the relatively new seismic considerations to the building code. Granted, a building can be built better than code but I believe I've already covered that possibility.


A draft of seismic design provisions for the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code was completed in January 1993. They are based, to a large extent, on seismic provisions for New York City which have been subsequently signed into law. Since this is the first time earthquake-resistant design has been considered in the State, many technical and practical issues had to be resolved.
Seismic Zoning Map for New York State Seismic Building Code

Looking forward to some documentation concerning this.



edit on 9/18/2010 by Three_moons because: because of an edit



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 


www.youtube.com...

I can't PM yet.

Be Well-



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   
There is a pretty significant anomaly near the beginning of this video that no one seems to have caught. Look at the north tower from the period of 0:55 to 1:05…apart from the obvious, nothing unusual about the footage, right? Now look at the same portion of the video, but focus your attention to the shadow of the smoke on the south tower.

At 0:59, there is a very subtle jump in the movement of the shadow across the face of the building, as if a frame has been removed. At 1:01 or so, there is a second, more noticeable jump. I have done a significant amount of video editing, and know a ‘jump cut’ when I see one. What is bothersome, is that the jumps that can be plainly seen on the south tower, do not correspond to what is seen when watching the north tower i.e. the image of the smoke rising from the north tower is fluid throughout the period – no jump. This leads me to believe the video has been altered. The south tower shadow and the north tower smoke are out of sync during this portion of the video.

The video claims ‘original audio’ but it is impossible for frames to be removed on video without changing the audio, as they are recorded simultaneously. It is also impossible for one portion of a frame to jump, while another portion remains fluid, unless there are multiple layers of video, or superimposition – one showing the north, and one showing the south. I have no doubt the video has been changed, but whether the audio was laid in after the fact, or whether the video was doctored to conceal something that occurred visually in real time, is in question.

It is notable to mention that at the precise time of the jump cuts, there is a rather aggressive plume of black smoke rising from the roof of the north tower, at the base of the antennae. Moments later, the camera, which was on a tripod and locked off, shakes noticeably.



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join