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 Investigation

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




No demolitions job in history has ever demolished buildings from the inside out, like how WTC 7 had collapsed and as your own video link showed.


I have made my case. There are plenty of statements by demolition experts out on the internet if you have remaining questions. I recommend www.ae911truth.org... as a good starting point if you are unsure who to trust. There are many good and bad sources out on the internet.



Here in the US we had a guy back during the revolution named Paul Revere, and when British soldiers were on the march he rode through towns warning that the Redcoats were coming. He did NOT say that something dreadful was coming and he'll only tell them what it was for $19.95.


I am not getting paid for this and neither are plenty of other people working on it.



Why are they contributing to the war in Afghanistan if this is all one big US orchestrated conspiracy? Are Australia and Denmark all bumbling idiots and utterly servile to the US, or are they actively involved in the coverup and the conspiracy too?


I am in Australia and we are bumbling idiots and utterly servile to the US. Wikileaks has demonstrated this by kicking out Prime Minister Kevin Rudd when he went against US homogeneity. The reputation of the CIA to manipulate governments around the world is first class. I consider the CIA is the prime suspect behind the removal of another Prime Minister Gough Whitlam over Pine Gap and also in the death and cover up of your president JFK. When you do lift up the covers of deception the tentacles do spread deep and wide.



Here's the problem I have with the conspiracy scenarios- rather than attempting to answer any questions, all they do is generate more questions


Yes. It can make your head spin and unsure who to trust. Either it was Al Qaeda or it was not. From the evidence I have seen my conclusion was that it was not Al Qaeda. They still might have had a part to play, but there is a lot more going on than has been addressed with the official story. A lot of people are have trouble with this, they know something is wrong, but what is it exactly? This is why we need another investigation.




posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 




Besides, its been years now and not one detailed paper about the NIST report and yet all the 'truthseekers" are scrambling for a new one and haven't even looked at the old one.


For the most recent documents. I had already posted this one earlier: The NIST Analyses: A Close Look at WTC 7, Mar 2010 www2.ae911truth.org...

More recent technical articles can be found at www.ae911truth.org...

There have been ongoing debates over the years and many articles written. There is a lot to this case and the issues are addressed one at a time.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 




Did you not see the first two stills? They show a VERY clear lean. Take of the "truther" blinders.


I can see the lean in the photo. But I am unsure how that lines up with the other video evidence that is available from many different angles. Also why are only a couple of frames shown and not the complete sequence of video that it originated from? I does make it more difficult to keep things in context and see the path of the collapse.



7WTC fell down while twisting. That is what caused it. It's called gravity.


A big steel girder weighing so many tons twists it way across the street and embeds its self deep within a building due to gravity? Any you think "9/11 blueprint for truth" is crap




Explosives would do those things. Thermite cannot.


Uncompressed thermite cannot. Similar to how uncompressed just petrol burns. Compress it and bang. www.freepatentsonline.com...



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev

The current 1,419 have been verified as architects and engineers.


So, you would trust a "Landscape Engineer" to build your house? I guess you would be ok with a plumber doing cardio-vascular surgery too? I certainly wouldn't.

Electrical Engineer? Laughable. Road engineer? Again, I wouldn't trust those people to build me a doghouse, let alone anything else.

Appeal to authority noted, and dismissed.



Originally posted by kwakakev

There is also 11,084 other supporters. www.ae911truth.org... . I acknowledge that they may not all agree with what exactly did happen, but they are concerned enough that something is wrong with the official story and have collaborated a lot of information over the years to aid in uncovering the actual events.

I have looked into it along with many others. There are many resources around so to help get to the point try
nistreview.org...



Wonderful. Appeal to popularity.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by FDNY343
 




Explosives would do those things. Thermite cannot.


Uncompressed thermite cannot. Similar to how uncompressed just petrol burns. Compress it and bang. www.freepatentsonline.com...


The patent you referenced was a thermite cable cutter, no bang involved. It described a reservoir with a metal diaphragm delay device and an apparatus for holding the molten thermite around the cable so it can work. The delay is to get a goodly amount of liquid metal suddenly surrounding the cable which, under some tension, would fail. This would be handy for suspension bridges, transmission towers, cable railways, etc. Cables are difficult to cut and usually the anchors have to be blown or some solid linkage must be attacked.
Even when thermite acts as an explosive, not well developed in 2001, there is an explosion. The only reason people were claiming thermite was that there were no typical CD demolitions heard.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 




The patent you referenced was a thermite cable cutter, no bang involved.


I know. But it does demonstrate how thermite has the capability to quickly cut through steel and can bring down a building if employed correctly. Nano thermite has a much greater surface area than thermite and therefore oxidises quicker. I am not certain of the exact method used, but it has been found at the crime scene. It also helps explain the building pulverisation and the high temperatures within the rubble. Of all the theories presented it does make the strongest case and lines up with the available video evidence. FEMA, NIST and the other government studies failed to even consider an explosive compound and have only considered the fires as a reason for collapse.

Kevin R. Ryan, 7-02-08, The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites, www.journalof911studies.com...



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 


If want to dismiss all the available evidence because it is so blatant that a Landscape Engineer or general member of public can recognise the deception going on that is your prerogative.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 05:52 AM
link   
The lean you see in those photos are the outer walls falling inwards due to implosion demolition that resulted in this...



The walls sitting on top of the debris pile.

This picture does not show the whole building leaning...



It is obviously late in the collapse, after the penthouse kink and the collapse of the buildings inner structures.


Sometimes, though, a building is surrounded by structures that must be preserved. In this case, the blasters proceed with a true implosion, demolishing the building so that it collapses straight down into its own footprint (the total area at the base of the building). This feat requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it.

Blasters approach each project a little differently, but the basic idea is to think of the building as a collection of separate towers. The blasters set the explosives so that each "tower" falls toward the center of the building, in roughly the same way that they would set the explosives to topple a single structure to the side. When the explosives are detonated in the right order, the toppling towers crash against each other, and all of the rubble collects at the center of the building. Another option is to detonate the columns at the center of the building before the other columns so that the building's sides fall inward.

science.howstuffworks.com...



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
I know. But it does demonstrate how thermite has the capability to quickly cut through steel and can bring down a building if employed correctly.


Not quite. But, hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.


Originally posted by kwakakev

Nano thermite has a much greater surface area than thermite and therefore oxidises quicker. I am not certain of the exact method used, but it has been found at the crime scene.


No, it wasn't. Not at all. The stuff Jones found, produced MORE heat energy than ANY flavor of thermite is capable of.



Originally posted by kwakakev
It also helps explain the building pulverisation and the high temperatures within the rubble.


Say what? Thermite explains the broken concrete? How's that work? Thermite is an INCENDIARY!!!! NOT an explosive. It has very little air displacement.

Also, the high temperatures in the rubble are explained by fire. Fire creates heat. The fires in the rubble pile (if thermite was the cause) would have been WELL over 2500 deg. F. This didn't happen.



Originally posted by kwakakev
Of all the theories presented it does make the strongest case and lines up with the available video evidence. FEMA, NIST and the other government studies failed to even consider an explosive compound and have only considered the fires as a reason for collapse.


So, you have evidence of thermite going off all over the place? You realize that the TT's would have lit up like the 4th of July, right?



Originally posted by kwakakev

Kevin R. Ryan, 7-02-08, The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites, www.journalof911studies.com...


Kevin Ryan?!?! LOL!! I cannot think of a WORSE example of a terrible source.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by FDNY343
 


If want to dismiss all the available evidence because it is so blatant that a Landscape Engineer or general member of public can recognise the deception going on that is your prerogative.


I think I will trust the ACTUAL structural engineers like Bazant, Zou, and the engineers at NIST over a landscape engineer any day.

You go ahead and call that plumber for your heat surgery. I'll call a cardiologist.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
The lean you see in those photos are the outer walls falling inwards due to implosion demolition that resulted in this...



The walls sitting on top of the debris pile.

This picture does not show the whole building leaning...



It is obviously late in the collapse, after the penthouse kink and the collapse of the buildings inner structures.


Sometimes, though, a building is surrounded by structures that must be preserved. In this case, the blasters proceed with a true implosion, demolishing the building so that it collapses straight down into its own footprint (the total area at the base of the building). This feat requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it.

Blasters approach each project a little differently, but the basic idea is to think of the building as a collection of separate towers. The blasters set the explosives so that each "tower" falls toward the center of the building, in roughly the same way that they would set the explosives to topple a single structure to the side. When the explosives are detonated in the right order, the toppling towers crash against each other, and all of the rubble collects at the center of the building. Another option is to detonate the columns at the center of the building before the other columns so that the building's sides fall inward.

science.howstuffworks.com...


So, the walls fall IN, and that is how the roof fo Fitterman Hall was hit?

How amazing! Did someone relocate Fitterman into the INTERIOR of 7WTC then move it back out?



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


first,


George Bush and Cheney would be required to testify, under oath in front of cameras and being listened to by fair, unbiased judges.. and courtsroom people.

second

The Pentagon would be subpoenaed to release ALL security camera and CCTV footage it captured on the day, on the days leading up to 911, and the days after.

third

ALL foreign oil industries, all domestic oil industries, all large global and corporately governed domestic industries would need to release all meeting notes it has had with members of the Bush Presidency, specifically including Dick Cheney

fourth

tests would be conducted on large airliner craft smashing into reinforced concrete via remote control. With the craft being flown at the 'officially stated specifics' of the plane on 911, and the reinforced concrete building being of the same construction as the Pentagon.

fifth

All evidence and intelligence on Osama Bin Laden and Saudi Arabia links would be fully released and investigated by an unbiased third party.

sixth

the original team put together to investigate 911 in the years after will be investigated and individually interrogated on all contacts, links, bank accounts and communications between Bush officials and themselves in the months leading up to and after 911.

seventh

All communication between the Chinese steel furnace and the American government in the months before and after 911 will be released and investigated by a unbiased third party official

eighth

Samples of dust and tissue from victims of the tower collapse will be thoroughly investigated by Swiss Scientists and their findings released


then and only then would I be satisfied,

Personally, I see no reason for any of this information to be kept secret, if they had nothing to hide.




posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Please describe a "new investigation".

Who, what, where, how long, how funded, how much power would be invested in the investigators. Maybe even some clue as to the agenda. Would they be invested with subpeona power? Who would provide oversight? Accountability? What circumstances, situations or history would preclude one from being empanelled?


Who. All persons reasonably suspected to have prior knowledge, involvement and hampered investigations.
What. The events leading up to 9/11 and cover up of the investigation.
How. An international crime commission would provide the most independent inquiry.
Funded. United Nations and donations from other nations.
Power. Full subpoena. Reputable independent forensics. Depends on resources for depth of investigation.
Agenda. To investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of 9/11.
Oversight. International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice.
Accountability. United Nations body.
Empanelled. Direct involvement with military, oil and finance industry does preclude being empanelled. Independence and an unbiased opinion is most important with a history in war crime trials and strong reputation helping to be be empanelled.


reply to post by FDNY343
 


FDNY343, this thread is about the structure a new investigation should take. There are plenty of other threads available if you wish to debate exactly what happened.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I have made my case. There are plenty of statements by demolition experts out on the internet if you have remaining questions. I recommend www.ae911truth.org... as a good starting point if you are unsure who to trust. There are many good and bad sources out on the internet.


This statement is intellectually bankrupt. Claiming "there are a lot of demolition experts out on the Internet if I have remaining questions" is a not too well veiled attempt at saying you haven't a clue what you're talking about so I need to argue this with someone else. If you don't have a sufficient background in controlled demolitions then it's disingenuous to say that something should or should not be a controlled demolition. Tell me, just how many controlled demolitions are you a witness to? The only ones I'm a witness to are the ones posted by actual controlled demolitions companies I.E. CDI and their projects don'r even remotely resemble the way WTC 7 came down.

You most certainly have not made your case. all you've done is repeat the material those damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing out to make a quick buck off the conspiracy crowd. How many, "investigate 9/11" T-shirts can you ever humanly need?


I am in Australia and we are bumbling idiots and utterly servile to the US. Wikileaks has demonstrated this by kicking out Prime Minister Kevin Rudd when he went against US homogeneity. The reputation of the CIA to manipulate governments around the world is first class. I consider the CIA is the prime suspect behind the removal of another Prime Minister Gough Whitlam over Pine Gap and also in the death and cover up of your president JFK. When you do lift up the covers of deception the tentacles do spread deep and wide.


That abject paranoia would have been believable if it wasn't for the fact that France and Germany send troops to Afghanistan, but they did NOT send troops to Iraq. This shows right there that they found the evidence linking the 9/11 attack to Al Qaida to be credible, but they did NOT find the evidence showing Saddam Hussein was building WMD to be credible.

I am surprised that you even mentioned Wikileaks, since Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has been quoted as saying your 9/11 conspiracies are a complete waste of everyone's time becuase there are so many real ones out there that we need to be more concerned about. You're cherry picking your evidence as it suits your purpose here.


Yes. It can make your head spin and unsure who to trust. Either it was Al Qaeda or it was not. From the evidence I have seen my conclusion was that it was not Al Qaeda.


...and just what gave you the conclusion that it couldn't be a attack from islamic fundamentalists? When I hear about the entire muslim world going ballistic and rioting over cartoons of Mohammed in Danish newspapers, and the Christians in Indonesia being murdered for daring to use "allah" to describe the Christian God...not to mention, Salmon Rushdie STILL has a contract put out on him by the ayatollahs in Iran...the question I ask is how can it NOT be the work of a bunch of religious zealots? It was the the Muslim terrorists who invented the idea of hijacking passenger planes to begin with.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by hooper
 

then and only then would I be satisfied,

Personally, I see no reason for any of this information to be kept secret, if they had nothing to hide.


Yeah, but that doesn't even remotely answer the question on whether the towers were destroyed by lasers from outer space or whether the 500 videos showing the plane striking the south tower was really a plane or a hologram.

...or are you saying the calls for investigations from the proponents of these claims should be ignored?
edit on 21-1-2011 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 



Personally, I see no reason for any of this information to be kept secret, if they had nothing to hide.


Fine. Who does the investigation? How is it paid for?

What happens when foreign oil industries and Chinese Furnaces tell us to go pound sand?

For the interrogation of Ameircan officials do we suspend constitutional protections?

Do we need to actually crash a perfectly good airplane? Isn't that what we have computers and engineers for?



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Dave, I have presented the information I have found to be most credible to this case. It is up to a new investigation to determine the facts from the fiction and take it in the direction it sees fit. There are other threads if you want to debate these events. This thread is about the structure of a new investigation.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343
The biggest problem I see with a "new investigation" is that there are so many different fractions of the "Truth" movement. From no planers to CD, to thermite/explosives to plain old thermate to nano-thermite, to DEW and shape-shifing reptiles etc......

They all claim that they are correct. So, are we going to have one investigation? Or 6 different ones? They cannot all be right.

here we go again with more truster out right lies
NOBODY in the truth movement supports theories such as no planes! they are simply saying the os stinks and theres no proof to support it and we need a new investigation

because there are so many wholes in the os your gunna get a bunch of theories just because every truther doesnt have the same opinion doesnt automatically mean that the os is true as you ppl always love to point out

we dont claim they are all right

wtc complex was a crime scene why was all the forensic evidence from a crime scene so quicky cleaned up with out testing? why was the metal shipped off so quick with out conducting tests in order for a better understanding for future buildings?



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343
The biggest problem I see with a "new investigation" is that there are so many different fractions of the "Truth" movement. From no planers to CD, to thermite/explosives to plain old thermate to nano-thermite, to DEW and shape-shifing reptiles etc......


Where do you get this from?

You've been here less than a month, and I have yet to see ANYONE in the threads you are involved in talk about any of that stuff.

You really did come here with a closed mind and an agenda, as it's obvious your mind was made up before you even joined.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by kaya82
 


You say that " NOBODY in the truth movement supports theories such as no planes ." but you are kidding right ?

There are 4 or 5 threads just on page 1 about that ; e.g It is scientificaly impossible that a plane hit the Pentagon, Where did aircraft wreckage come from, Evidence no plane crashed at Shanksville, No plane at the WTC.

It is no good pretending that there is some sort of logical combined truther front because it is obvious that there isn't.




top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join