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.

 

Pick Your 2 Most Glaring Points of Questions For 9/11?

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 01:51 AM
link   
The first thing would have to be the pa. crash. Just a smoldering hole and no signs of a plane to be seen. The owner of the land works for the government.

Second- Three buildings fall, 2 of them due to aircraft fuel and impact. In the history of aviation, a commercial jet-liner crashing into a high rise building has never made one fall.

examples.. www.history.com...

911research.wtc7.net...

I do have to make a point about the second link i posted. None of the major fires listed where caused by planes. But building 7 should not have fell in my opinion,

I also believe That there is no way the towers fell due to burning fuel. If only one building fell that day i wouldnt have thought much of it. But 3, That is highly suspect and shouldnt be ignored.

Two reasons are not enough. But the o.p asked for two so there you go.

Long live the truthers




posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iwinder
4 Planes down over land and lots of debris for sure including tires, a fully intact passport, lots of stuff now I must ask what became of the 8 data recorders that could not survive a building crash but a tire and a passport sailed right through?


Think for a moment... you are on top of tall building. You have 3 items: a piece of cardboard, a rubber tire, ad a box full of electronic circuitry. Let's call it a DVD player, but pretty much any electronic gadget will do. You then take those 3 items and throw them off that roof of that building to the sidewalk below. Which is least likely to survive that fall more or less intact - the piece of cardboard, the rubber tire, or the delicate electronics?



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Iwinder
4 Planes down over land and lots of debris for sure including tires, a fully intact passport, lots of stuff now I must ask what became of the 8 data recorders that could not survive a building crash but a tire and a passport sailed right through?


Think for a moment... you are on top of tall building. You have 3 items: a piece of cardboard, a rubber tire, ad a box full of electronic circuitry. Let's call it a DVD player, but pretty much any electronic gadget will do. You then take those 3 items and throw them off that roof of that building to the sidewalk below. Which is least likely to survive that fall more or less intact - the piece of cardboard, the rubber tire, or the delicate electronics?


the "black box" or data recorder has survived worse than 911 in other plane crashes throughout istory.... 0 out of 8 is a ticket to the minors and very suspicious odds for something designed to withstand severe conditions



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   
You seem to be pretty good at thinking neno.....



What do you think about my Big Plane question on the previous page???
edit on 15-11-2010 by benoni because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
I have a couple of questions.

1. Those airplanes could easily have been intercepted and shot down if necessary as they had a long way to fly and interceptors were available along the way. Was there an air defense drill in progress that morning? Was Cheney involved? What was his role exactly? Why no interceptors?

2. Is it true that the security director for the World Trade Center was a member of the Bush family? I'd like to know more about this.

3. The hole in the Pentagon is not Boeing 767 sized but it is cruise missile sized. Why?

4. Upon cleanup of the towers, why the extraordinary security for just ordinary rubble? Trucks were all numbered and convoyed and treated like they were carrying dangerous cargo. Wasn't it just rubble?

5. Why were objections to protocols in investigation ignored or brushed off ? No testing was allegedly done for explosives. Why not since they could conceivably have been a part of the plan and hidden in the airplanes.

6. What happened to the "black boxes" from the airplanes? Why were they not made available to the usual investigating agencies? They simply disappeared?

I could think of several more juicy questions. Those who throw dirt on we conspiracy buffs don't seem to mind that these issues are never addressed; that they are secret. The only real reason for secrecy in this is that someone has something to hide. What is it, why is it and who is it? These are reasonable questions that I want a truly independent panel to research and answer. Congress has the power to bring people before it. Why, in nine years, has this not been done?

Why are we such saps that we lack the balls to demand real answers?

Until I get answers I will remain convinced that Bush and Cheney and their pals did it. May they all rot in hell.
edit on 15-11-2010 by trailertrash because: typo

edit on 15-11-2010 by trailertrash because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I'll pick flight data record electronics since it's packed in a titanium case which can withstand thousands
of g's of impact and thousands of degrees of heat.

These specs have been employed since the early 90's

www.l-3ar.com...



Crash Impact Test -- It has been agreed that 3400gs for 6.5 ms would be required to meet most accident scenarios. This test is actually performed with a cannon. A Fairchild CVR has survived a crash that was estimated to be more than 6000 gs.



Fire Test -- The devices are subjected to 1100 degrees Centigrade for 60 minutes, then undergo 10 hours at 260 degrees Centigrade. Because of its outstanding fire survival record, the Fairchild Model A100CVR was used as the model to insure mandated standards could be obtained. The very latest FAA standards require the fire test to be expanded to 1 hour at 1100 degrees Centigrade. which all solid state models of L-3 Recorders meet or exceed.


Oops, did I mention the flight data recorder is solid state? That means there are no moving parts inside to
break like a DVD player.
edit on 15-11-2010 by turbofan because: fix quote tags



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Iwinder
4 Planes down over land and lots of debris for sure including tires, a fully intact passport, lots of stuff now I must ask what became of the 8 data recorders that could not survive a building crash but a tire and a passport sailed right through?


Think for a moment... you are on top of tall building. You have 3 items: a piece of cardboard, a rubber tire, ad a box full of electronic circuitry. Let's call it a DVD player, but pretty much any electronic gadget will do. You then take those 3 items and throw them off that roof of that building to the sidewalk below. Which is least likely to survive that fall more or less intact - the piece of cardboard, the rubber tire, or the delicate electronics?


A Flight Data Recorder isn't like a tape-recorder... it's built into a solid box that's made to withstand immense heat and thousands of pounds of pressure. Airplanes have crashed at vertical impact, 500+ MPH into the ground and the Data Recorder has survived, and will nearly always remain intact - it's BUILT to remain intact in that situation.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by fonenyc

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Iwinder
4 Planes down over land and lots of debris for sure including tires, a fully intact passport, lots of stuff now I must ask what became of the 8 data recorders that could not survive a building crash but a tire and a passport sailed right through?


Think for a moment... you are on top of tall building. You have 3 items: a piece of cardboard, a rubber tire, ad a box full of electronic circuitry. Let's call it a DVD player, but pretty much any electronic gadget will do. You then take those 3 items and throw them off that roof of that building to the sidewalk below. Which is least likely to survive that fall more or less intact - the piece of cardboard, the rubber tire, or the delicate electronics?


the "black box" or data recorder has survived worse than 911 in other plane crashes throughout istory.... 0 out of 8 is a ticket to the minors and very suspicious odds for something designed to withstand severe conditions


Actually, 4 black boxes were recovered from AA 77 and UA 93 but AA 77's cockpit voice recorder was too badly damaged to recover anything from.

The only black boxes not recovered were for AA 11 and UA 175 which crashed at high speed into the Towers and were then mixed up in the mincing machine of the collapses. What are the worse plane crashes that you have in mind where the black boxes survived ?



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


The ah, collapses? Please go back a page and review what I offered, thanks.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


It that was the case , then it was no Mystery but just a Urban Myth ? .........Hmm.........



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



That's not what he said....

Even in the video supposedly " Exposing the Truth " They obviously make it seem as if it's a conspiracy. He said he was standing outside waiting to go into the classroom when he saw the FIRST plane hit on TV [Just like Millions of other people] watching the TV news replay and he thought it was an accident then later after the SECOND plane hit [obviously not an accident] the SS guy comes in and informs him of the SECOND plane hitting.

Now Where is the conspiracy?


To stay on topic

1. building 7 being reported down while still standing.
2..to respond to the poster above..When the 2nd plane hit the building..gwb was told about it..and he continued to read his story...now i will never accuse this president of being too bright but it seems that at least his security would have tried to get him to an unknown location..as it was not just planes falling out of the sky but something that might and likely would be a direct threat to the president.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:08 AM
link   
1) Why were the air traffic control tapes which recorded conversations with the hijacked planes DESTROYED??
FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape

2) Why were intelligence agencies profiting from their foreknowledge of the 9/11 event instead of stopping it?
CIA and 9/11 insider trading



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:16 AM
link   
1. Many many things about the Pentagon - impact zone, lack of footage (having been confiscated) and eyewitness accounts contradicting the OS.

2. This one is a dilemma I stumbled across recently (cant remember the thread). Its allegedly an aerial map of the area of the flight 93 crash site, but in 1994. The 'wing gouges' appear to be there already, minus the central 'crater'. This combined with the second wreckage site of 93 being 6 miles away leads me to think it was indeed shot down. While a terrible thing to resort to, I would think it justifiable to shoot it down ("we will take lives in the air to save lives on the ground" - Col. Robert Marr when given the order from Bush through Cheney to shoot down flight 93). That being said, why the lie?



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by russ1969
In the history of aviation, a commercial jet-liner crashing into a high rise building has never made one fall.


Very wrong again, 2 high rise buildings have been hit by 2 jet liners, both buildings fell!



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:32 AM
link   
No.1 & No.2.. why no video footage of the Pentagon strike...don't worry about what did or didn't hit the Pentagon ..the FIRST question to be answered is WHY IS THERE NO VIDEO of a strike on the Pentagon by a civilian airliner..there is no issue of Natonal Security as the building is in plain sight every day of the week and the alleged airplane had been seen at hundreds of airports so there's no secrets to protect. Every inch of the Pentagon grounds was covered by cameras so WHY no video......why nearly 10 years later there is still NO VIDEO. The truly amazing part is why the citizens of the United States and the governments of the countries of the other victims are not DEMANDING that video evidence immediately and have passively accepted the official B.S.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:38 AM
link   
1) The tiny amount of actual plane wreckage, at any site.
2)The Pentagon, nothing fits.nothing,nothing,nothing.
And something else that made me think that things were
not as they should be was...And I know its strange but,
the ball caps the fire crews were wearing. from a distance, it sure
looked like FONY.......(FDNY) . It just struck me as surreal.

The BrainGarden.

spell check
edit on 15-11-2010 by BrainGarden because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by xavi1000
a) the fact that airplane hit penthagon ...most secured air space in the world
no #ing way




What should they have done to prevent it? Shoot the plane down?


Not give them VISAs in the first place.

Oh... my biggest two

1. WTC 1 being reduced to a rubble within a day after an airplane hit it
2. WTC 2 being reduced to a rubble within a day after an airplane hit it

Just didnt make any sense to me at the time and for sure
now I am 100% they were demolished.
Why didnt the sprinkler systems turn on?







edit on 15-11-2010 by FoosM because: added text



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
What are your two top points for suspicious of the event of 9/11?


As said also by others here, I have more than two, but these ones really did raise my eyebrows to its max.

1 Donald Rumsfeld announcement.
On September 10th, Donald Rumsfeld announced that more than $2 trillion in Pentagon funds had gone missing.
Doing such an in my opinion astonishing admission to the American public precisely one day before 911 still looks very, very suspicious to me.

2 The USAF Stand Down.
The fact that NORAD was conducting a week-long semiannual exercise called Vigilant Guardian looks also very, very suspicious to me.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Interesting thread, interesting questions, heres mine.

1. Why do my American brothers and sisters continue to debate and write about the genocide of 3,000 of their fellow Americans by their own government instead of taking your once great country back?

2. Why are Bush, Cheney etc not sitting on death row as I write?

respects



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 

They say that fire weakend the structure of the building, don't see much "fire damage" in that point of impact side, looks more like the wreckage damage you would expect to see after any local fires had blazed out on their own.
Thanks for that pic, that debunks a lot of the crap from the institutional side.




new topics




 
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join