Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

10 Questions for 9/11 Truthers

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   
A couple of days prior to 911 the rabbi? in charge of the Pentagon declared losing almost 3 trillion dollars. The so called plane that hit the Pentagon. Hit the treasury dept and destroyed any paper trail. Which was very fortunate for the rabbi in charge. A mr Dov zackman. Israeli prints are all over the place. No wonder those mossad agents were dancing. dancing all the way to the bank. With 3 trillion dollars? Israeli art students in the towers the week before? Mossad agents in the van stopped which had traces of explosives.
edit on 8-4-2011 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by xavi1000
I will answer only first question ...it's called Compartmentalization en.wikipedia.org...(information_security)

en.wikipedia.org...

For example Manhattan Project employed more than 130,000 people but only few know it final product ..atom bomb .. and that was secret project and no one knows until first test
edit on 8-4-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-4-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-4-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)


Not so. Soviet Intelligence was well aware of the Manhattan Project and received important information throughout :-

en.wikipedia.org...

The Project started in 1942 and the first weapons were detonated in 1945. This compares with the nearly 10 years for the 9/11 supposed conspiracy and still not a squeak from anyone.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by xavi1000
I will answer only first question ...it's called Compartmentalization
For example Manhattan Project employed more than 130,000 people but only few know it final product ..atom bomb .. and that was secret project and no one knows until first test

There's your weak point "until the first test". Keeps people out of the loop until the loop is closed.

So you're back to square 1.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by xavi1000
I will answer only first question ...it's called Compartmentalization
For example Manhattan Project employed more than 130,000 people but only few know it final product ..atom bomb .. and that was secret project and no one knows until first test

There's your weak point "until the first test". Keeps people out of the loop until the loop is closed.

So you're back to square 1.


What a BS comparison..
And if they didn't use it on Japan how long would the secret be kept??

Fact is, the Government kept it a secret till THEY wanted it known...

Does the Government want the truth of 9/11 known??
I doubt it..



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Adressing one. Deniers argue a coverup of an operation of this magnitude is not possible and therefore it did not happen. We know now that the coverup failed and that it DID happen.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by xavi1000
I will answer only first question ...it's called Compartmentalization
For example Manhattan Project employed more than 130,000 people but only few know it final product ..atom bomb .. and that was secret project and no one knows until first test

There's your weak point "until the first test". Keeps people out of the loop until the loop is closed.

So you're back to square 1.


What a BS comparison..
And if they didn't use it on Japan how long would the secret be kept??

Fact is, the Government kept it a secret till THEY wanted it known...

Does the Government want the truth of 9/11 known??
I doubt it..


Simply not true. Klaus Fuchs was passing Manhattan Project secrets to the Soviets during the war :-

www.suite101.com...



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev

2/






Yeah, so, the one that you have, is Photoshopped. It's not pained that way. But, I do laugh when people post that fraud image.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
A couple of days prior to 911 the rabbi? in charge of the Pentagon declared losing almost 3 trillion dollars. The so called plane that hit the Pentagon. Hit the treasury dept and destroyed any paper trail. Which was very fortunate for the rabbi in charge. A mr Dov zackman. Israeli prints are all over the place. No wonder those mossad agents were dancing. dancing all the way to the bank. With 3 trillion dollars? Israeli art students in the towers the week before? Mossad agents in the van stopped which had traces of explosives.
edit on 8-4-2011 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)


I’m sorry to burst your Jew hating rant but in your racism blinded you to one simple fact.

You can’t hind 3 trillion dollars.

You can’t deposit in a bank.

You can’t hide it in the basement.

Try expanding your knowledge of the real world instead of the cyberconspiratorial websites.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
One major problem with the theory of a missile at the Pentagon is the amount of fuel that vaporized and ignited. The fireball seen in the video was from thousands of gallons of hydrocarbon Jet-A and not the explosion of a missile warhead containing HE.
If logic were to be applied to the issue, not a common event with the truthers, a commercial airliner full of fuel is far more damaging than any puny, non-nuclear cruise missile.
Things to consider:
1. If this were a conspiracy, what is the least complicated way it could be carried out with minimal chance of discovery? It would seem that using planes for all attacks would be most damaging and much easier than some half-baked plan using painted missiles that are so much smaller than airliners that it would be apparent to witnesses.
2. Why use planes on the towers and a little missile at the Pentagon? What if someone were filming something else, much like the first WTC hit, and got it on tape? No conspirators would risk that.
3. The entire concept of killing passengers at secret locations and then using a missile is really idiotic. From the conspiratorial view it greatly complicates matters and and would provide far more work and chance of discovery.
4. Why would any secret group of conspirators so powerful as to pull off this great conspiracy allow all those youtube videos if the videos could actually prove a conspiracy?

It is apparent that aircraft did all the damage because aircraft were all that were needed. Given the damage to the towers, their collapse changed nothing with respect to the world events that followed in that the wars would have happened anyway. The Pentagon strike was of the same ilk. Hitting the Pentagon anywhere would have accomplished the job; even a near miss would have been hailed a victory. Had the Whitehouse been more visible from the air, it may have been hit. The Shanksville plane was likely headed for the Capitol which is also highly visible and collapsing that would have been a real plum.
If you really want a conspiracy, I suggest that you come up with one where incompetence and infighting at the highest levels of the Bush administration allowed the events to occur and the coverup is about those who were in charge avoiding blame.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
All that matters is #6

6) Bizarrely, despite the fact that the WTC was hit by planes, many Truthers claim the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions. How in the world could that be done without people in the buildings noticing it? Why in the world would they wire the buildings with explosives and THEN fly planes into the buildings? It’s not as if terrorists hadn’t ever tried to bring down a building with bombs before.


Each WTC tower was more than 200 TIMES the mass of the airliner. The fact that the majority of people in the nation that put men on the Moon can't figure out the OBVIOUS physics questions to ask about such an event is certainly telling about the educational system of the last 40 years.

It would be really terrible if a larger percentage of Americans would not have believed the official story for a minute in 1969.

Skyscrapers must hold themselves up. How many tons of steel were on every level of th WTC? How many tons of concrete were on every level. That is only 232 numbers but the NIST could not put then into their 10,000 page report that took 3 years and cost $20,000,000.

The Physics is IMPOSSIBLE. How many tons of steel had to weaken int 102 minutes?

The south tower only deflected 15 inches when the plane impacted.

psik



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


its not jew baiting its the truth. Israel premier says jump and the yanks say how high. All over this fiasco is their finger prints. From security to art students, as well as moving companys with traces of explosives in their vans. To mossad agents actually getting caught cheering and dancing. And they were released without charge by another dual citizen. jerkoff. Low and behold the guy in charge of the treasury another dual citizen/rabbi declares losing trillions. Sure they didnt grab it in a wheel barrow and take it away. How about silverstein? just pull it? lol Surprised you never mentioned anti semite which is the usual knee jerk reaction, when any one mentions the israeli connection to all this. We dont know were the money went, as the paper trail was wiped out on 911. By some cave men who took a couple of lessons in small aeroplanes then went on to do some incredible flying. In passenger planes. For some reason the air defense system was turned off and pilots sent in the oposite directions. No matter what you say. Israelis were involved one way or the other. The dancing crew said they were sent to record it. So they knew before hand.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
All that matters is #6

6) Bizarrely, despite the fact that the WTC was hit by planes, many Truthers claim the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions. How in the world could that be done without people in the buildings noticing it? Why in the world would they wire the buildings with explosives and THEN fly planes into the buildings? It’s not as if terrorists hadn’t ever tried to bring down a building with bombs before.


Each WTC tower was more than 200 TIMES the mass of the airliner.
Skyscrapers must hold themselves up. How many tons of steel were on every level of th WTC? How many tons of concrete were on every level. That is only 232 numbers but the NIST could not put then into their 10,000 page report that took 3 years and cost $20,000,000.

The Physics is IMPOSSIBLE. How many tons of steel had to weaken int 102 minutes?

The south tower only deflected 15 inches when the plane impacted.

psik


The plane only had to shear the steel it came in contact with. A .22 bullet weighs 40 grains, about 0.000038 times as much as a 150 pound human. Your version of impossible physics says that if you are shot with a .22, it should have no effect on you because you are 26,250 times as massive as a .22 bullet.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 




If logic were to be applied to the issue, not a common event with the truthers, a commercial airliner full of fuel is far more damaging than any puny, non-nuclear cruise missile.
The hole in the Pentagon after the "plane" hit was only like 1/3 of the size of a Boeing 747, how do you explain that? "If logic were to be applied to the issue", you're commercial airliner full of fuel that you claim is more damaging would have been....more damaging.



4. Why would any secret group of conspirators so powerful as to pull off this great conspiracy allow all those youtube videos if the videos could actually prove a conspiracy?
I think if YouTube videos of the planes hitting and the towers collapsing were all removed from YouTube, that would be a pretty good indication that the government was responsible and doesn't want us to see what really happened.



2. Why use planes on the towers and a little missile at the Pentagon? What if someone were filming something else, much like the first WTC hit, and got it on tape? No conspirators would risk that.
Well since the only footage we have of the plane hitting the Pentagon is one of the poorest quality cameras known to man, I'd say they did a good job of covering up whatever happened there. Maybe people with high-quality footage did post it to YouTube, but it got removed like you said in the previous question. Maybe they turned in their footage to the local authorities or some higher-ups, and it got destroyed. Maybe they just got lucky and nobody happened to be filming, who knows?



3. The entire concept of killing passengers at secret locations and then using a missile is really idiotic. From the conspiratorial view it greatly complicates matters and and would provide far more work and chance of discovery.
I disagree, for all we know the pilot could have told the passengers that there were some delays or some other planes had been hi-jacked and they needed to land at a nearby airport for safety reasons or because it's standard procedure. There they could have killed all the passengers, I don't think that's too complicated. As for the missile? I agree that complicates matters, but the fact that the hole in the Pentagon was nowhere near the size of a Boeing 747 complicates the official story pretty drastically.

But I do agree that the people responsible for 9/11 need to be held accountable for their actions, but in reality I doubt that will ever happen.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 




The plane only had to shear the steel it came in contact with. A .22 bullet weighs 40 grains, about 0.000038 times as much as a 150 pound human. Your version of impossible physics says that if you are shot with a .22, it should have no effect on you because you are 26,250 times as massive as a .22 bullet.
That is a terrible analogy, when you get shot your body does not collapse into itself at free-fall speed. Sure, you may fall on your back and bleed to death, but if humans were structurally built like a skyscraper, I don't think it would have such a profound effect on us. And the official stories version of impossible physics says that a mild fire can make a building (Tower 7) collapse at free-fall speed, which is only possible by the use of a controlled demolition.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Each WTC tower was more than 200 TIMES the mass of the airliner. The fact that the majority of people in the nation that put men on the Moon can't figure out the OBVIOUS physics questions to ask about such an event is certainly telling about the educational system of the last 40 years.


Lets see - a bullet weighs 1/3 ounze. Explain how something so small can hurt you?

Maybe when accelerated to 750 fps it is capable of inflicting considerable damage

750 fps is the speed the aircraft were traveling when struck WTC

Energy created is function of velocity - take something and accelerate to high speed and the energy created
is considerable

Formula is 1/2 M*V Squared

Notice velocity is squared (multiplied by itself) - double the velocity and energy goes up by factor of four

Looks like your version of physics is incorrect - along with all the rest of your "theories"



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
The plane only had to shear the steel it came in contact with. A .22 bullet weighs 40 grains, about 0.000038 times as much as a 150 pound human. Your version of impossible physics says that if you are shot with a .22, it should have no effect on you because you are 26,250 times as massive as a .22 bullet.


Structurally, it really wouldn't have much effect on the body.

Next you'll be arguing that the Twin Towers were living organisms, that felt pain and experienced muscle contractions.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by pteridine
The plane only had to shear the steel it came in contact with. A .22 bullet weighs 40 grains, about 0.000038 times as much as a 150 pound human. Your version of impossible physics says that if you are shot with a .22, it should have no effect on you because you are 26,250 times as massive as a .22 bullet.


Structurally, it really wouldn't have much effect on the body.

Next you'll be arguing that the Twin Towers were living organisms, that felt pain and experienced muscle contractions.


I agree that if it struck you in the head, it wouldn't have much effect, but severing a spine might do it for you. The point was that because of plastic deformation of metal, the total mass of the building has nothing to do with it and the material at the point(s) of impact is the discriminating factor, much like a small projectile striking a human body. A better analogy would be a kamikaze attack where a light airplane penetrated the hull of a ship far more massive than the plane, but that has been used many times before on these threads.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
I agree that if it struck you in the head, it wouldn't have much effect, but severing a spine might do it for you.


Comparing a building to the human body was an asinine comparison in the first place. This, coming from someone who doesn't even like comparing skyscrapers with concrete around columns to other skyscrapers with no concrete around columns. Of course if I tell you that you're exhibiting a double standard, you'll start up some petty semantic bickering contest, so I'll save the effort.

The point remains that comparing a plane impacting a building, to a bullet impacting a human being, is stupid. Maybe if the Twin Towers were made of skin and bones and its core structure was its spine. I'll leave all that crap to you.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
This, coming from someone who doesn't even like comparing skyscrapers with concrete around columns to other skyscrapers with no concrete around columns.

The point remains that comparing a plane impacting a building, to a bullet impacting a human being, is stupid.


I don't remember a comparison about concrete covered columns. It may have been someone else.

The point remains that the overall mass of a building or the ratio of its mass to the mass of the projectile is not important; only the part of the structure that is directly impacted is important. See the oft used analogy about suicide planes penetrating ships in my previous post.



posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
The point remains that the overall mass of a building or the ratio of its mass to the mass of the projectile is not important


Well that was the point you were trying to justify by comparing the Twin Towers to the human body, but the problem is, your comparison was baseless, so you have really made no point at all.

The most I can say is that the relation between the overall mass of a building, and the mass of a projectile into it, as far as destroying the building, there is no scientific link between the two whatsoever to speak of. There are too many variables to reduce to such a simple analysis. That neither confirms or denies what you're trying to argue, and same for whoever made the original argument you were responding to.
edit on 8-4-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join