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.

 

Regardless of your opinions of 9/11 , you need to read this.

page: 34
33
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by tpg65
9/11 2001 , a date that will go down in history for a multiple of reasons .

In my short time as a member of ATS I have read countless threads on the subject of 9/11 , some with very valid and well researched points and others that were not so well researched , but who still managed to make people stop and think about the subject.
Many people died on that terrible day . Fathers , mothers , sisters , brothers , friends and lovers, all perished at the hands of an unseen enemy. Wether that enemy came from without or within has sadly come down to a point of view of the individual and that my friends is a great dis-service to memory of all who died .
To coin a phrase ..." The truth is out there " . Don't we owe it to the ones who perished , to finally uncover the truth and in doing so , play a part in bringing the perpetrators to justice ?

We are so lucky to have a forum filled with such great enquiring minds . Why can't we put aside our personal loyalties and mistrusts and in doing so , work side by side to finally put together the pieces of what happened on that terrible day ?
We owe it to the memories of all who perished , those who will never be able to share another single moment with their loved ones , to work together to uncover the truth .

In searching for the truth , sometimes we uncover things that go against our beliefs , such is the nature of the beast .
If we here at ATS can work together , put aside our petty differences of opinions and look at the evidence objectively , then maybe one day we can truly honour the dead .

I'm telling you now , any trolling or off topic remarks will be reported immediately .
Let's keep this objective and stick to the facts .



edit on 29/05/2011 by tpg65 because: (no reason given)

edit on 29/05/2011 by tpg65 because: (no reason given)


wonderful sentiment, good luck. there's so many information resources on this, so I won't be redundant and repost them. what bothers me most about the official bull# story is the lack of interception by fighters, and the buildings falling into their own footprint at freefall speed. not possible with an exterior strike. being a new yorker, and having been in those buildings multiple times in my life, I knew the officiall bull# story was a bull# story soon as the shock wore off. anyways, hope the thread goes well




posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by DragonriderGal

Originally posted by pteridine

Given the amount of explosives needed to clear 6-7 floors a second, windows would have been blown out in a wide radius and the sounds would have been obvious over the noise of collapse.

Why do you think the buildings should have collapsed sideways? I keep seeing this claim but no one who makes it can explain why the buildings should fall like a tree or do something other than what they did.

None of those buildings were hit by aircraft and were constructed like the WTC. Steel framed buildings have collapsed by fire alone; this has been referenced in many threads.

I see more personal attacks from you than those directed toward you. I don't try to make people doubt you, it is you who do that with your posts.


Really?? You can't figure out why something should fall in the direction it was pushed??? Wow. How many times have YOU tripped and then fell straight down in a vertical heap instead of continuing forward in the direction you were heading when you tripped??

IF indeed the airplanes were such a contributing factor to the fall of these buildings as you party liners like to insist, then there is NO way to say that said airplanes, ramming thru the sides of the buildings at high speed, would not also contribute significantly to the direction they fall! That is just simple logic.. oh.. sorry. Didn't mean to make your head hurt.

And actually no. Steel framed buildings haven't collapsed by fire alone. Steel and concrete buildings have sort of collapsed because of the concrete's tiny propensity to have a bit of moisture trapped in them. There actually haven't be ANY steel framed buildings collapse except for during reallllly violent earthquakes and planned demolitions, and the earthquakes don't make the buildings fall straight down. Only planned demolitions do. Like I said, must be the water in NY that made these three buildings behave in such an unbelievable way. Or magic. Because surely, oh surely the PTB would NEVER lie or try to manipulate us for their own profit-driven money-grubbing, power-grabbing reasons.

And once the towers started coming down, I doubt anyone was really paying attention to noise. I'm sure they were all running for their lives. Plus Thermite explosions work not only with blast but with corrosion too, so it wouldn't be as noisy. Or the other likely possibility would be using thermobaric charges which requires a LOT less material than the more traditional explosives, and if used with hydrogen don't have visible blasts in daylight. All you'll see is dust clouds and water vapor.

And oh... yah, people doubt my posts. Perhaps you ought to clarify that the party liners 'doubt' my posts and sorry but they do plenty of personal attacking all on their own. My take is that it is mostly because they can't get me to agree with them.


The buildings were not monolithic. They do not behave like trees; that simplistic concept is why the theorists claim demolition in the first place. It is merely ignorance that drives the concept of buildings falling like trees and until people educate themselves about this they will continue to claim that the buildings should have tipped over. In fact, the top of the WTC did tip and initiate the collapse at the hinge point made by the impact. If you cut the top off of a tree, why would the tree fall over?

There are not many examples of steel framed building collapses due to uncontrolled fire but they do exist and have been posted in many ATS threads. The claim about “never happened before” is not true but is oft repeated as a mantra by those desperate for any hint of a conspiracy.

Maybe no one at ground zero was paying attention but the collapses were filmed. There was no visible or physical evidence of demolition of any kind. Thermite, per se, does not explode, it melts the target material. . It could have started the collapse but it can’t work fast enough to do what you and others suggest. As the particles get smaller, the reaction naturally gets faster but still not fast enough to clear a floor in 150 milliseconds. Thermobaric explosives are designed to produce blast and are not used in cutter charges. Had any thermobarics or HE been used, it would have been painfully obvious. The use of hydrogen as an explosive additive adds yet another level of complication to an already contrived scenario. One would have to contain the hydrogen with an oxidant and one would need enormous amounts of hydrogen. Producing or releasing that amount while still containing it in the time frame allowed would require serious infrastructure. If you could calculate the volume of hydrogen needed you would realize how foolish that claim is. While the hydrogen emits mostly in the infrared, explosives, including thermobarics, radiate in the visible and the hydrogen won’t mask them. If you have a reference to this “invisibility” claim, please provide it. I would like to educate the claimant.

I don’t doubt that you truly believe your posts and are not trolling. You are using resource material that is misleading, biased, and just plain wrong in many cases.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Yankee451
 


Curious, other than yet another aimless post...what was your point? Video games were pretty much still Atari 2600 when I started my career.


My point was military men and women are some of the most indoctrinated people on the planet.

You are trained to be functioning psychopaths who kill on demand. I thought Kissinger's quote was appropriate too.

And the video reinforces my premise that we are programmed from birth.

The media are the CIA. Video games and war movies are US.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by mike dangerously
"The president ought to be ashamed"


By Eric Boehlert


Nov 21, 2003 | During his six years as a United States senator from the conservative state of Georgia, Max Cleland was known as a moderate Democrat. He drew the wrath of liberals in 2001 when he broke ranks with Democrats and voted for President Bush's tax cuts, and last year he backed the resolution authorizing Bush to wage war with Iraq (though on that vote, at least, he was joined by some liberals).

Today, though, Cleland has emerged as one of the president's harshest critics, especially about the war he voted to authorize. Today, he says, it's a move he deeply regrets, as he scans the headlines from Baghdad. "I feel like I have been duped, I don't mind telling you," Cleland admits. "Everybody in the administration was selling this used car. The problem is all the wheels have fallen off the car and we've got a lemon."................

Source

edit on 013131p://0626 by mike dangerously because: (no reason given)


Cleland resigned prior to the release of the Commission's final report stating he didn't want to be part of a whitewash. Except for the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations and Watergate, someone please point to a major governmental investigation where the outcome was not entirely predictable and in complete compliance with the needs and interests of those in power. God, how many of these charades do people have to witness before they wise up?

If you want a real laugh, read J. Allen Hynek's critique of Project Blue Book. Governments do not go out of their way to undermine their own authority. Quite the opposite.
edit on 27-8-2011 by Elbereth because: typo/add



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Yankee451
 


ClaimIng a circular argument means you do not understand or are not intelligent to follow..it is a cop out.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
I don't doubt that planes hit the pentagon, twin towers and Stonycreek. Not because I think some "Hijackers" did it, but more so because I don't doubt the fact that the government would order planes to be flown into said buildings regardless, like they'd care a plane flew into the pentagon which is after all just a building they can re-build if they get to invade the middle east as a "rebuttle" to the attacks. If they're going to pretend terrorists attacked America, why not make it seem as real as possible?

The only poor thing is the way the buildings fell. The head structural engineer of the twin towers stated that they were built to withstand collisions and the aftermath fires from a jetliner.

"John Skilling

John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. In a 1993 interview, Skilling stated that the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner such as Boeing 707 or Douglas DC-8.

Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there. 3
A white paper released on February 3, 1964 states that the Towers could have withstood impacts of jetliners travelling 600 mph -- a speed greater than the impact speed of either jetliner used on 9/11/01.

The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact." found here 911research.wtc7.net...

and the fall of WT7 and people have posted the same "evidence" as I would post, not hit by a plane and collapsed in on itself like a demo controlled collapse.

Why would a building so big fall from one single plane pretty much at the top of the tower? It's common knowledge to see that is a giant fault right there.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Yankee451
 


You mean like Hassan?



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 





You mean like Hassan?


I don't know what you mean, please explain.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by CA18DEST
 


Lightweight aluminum wings cannot slice structural steel like a hot knife through butter.

Whoever claims they can, whether they be a believer in the official story or not, is either a fool or a liar.

What we were shown on TV was impossible in the real world.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Yankee451
 


ClaimIng a circular argument means you do not understand or are not intelligent to follow..it is a cop out.


The CIA has run the media since the 40s.

The Internet is part of the media.

Therefore the "Truth Movement" and "conspiracy" sites like this one should be suspect as being controlled by the CIA.

What is the one thing this site, and posters like you refuse to discuss?

The role of the media in 911.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Yankee451
 


ClaimIng a circular argument means you do not understand or are not intelligent to follow..it is a cop out.


The CIA has run the media since the 40s.

The Internet is part of the media.

Therefore the "Truth Movement" and "conspiracy" sites like this one should be suspect as being controlled by the CIA.

What is the one thing this site, and posters like you refuse to discuss?

The role of the media in 911.
What is the one thing this site, and posters like you refuse to discuss? The role of the media in 911.



every aspect of 9/11, including the media's role in 9/11, any and every aspect of that, has been thoroughly discussed on ATS and many other places.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by CA18DEST
 


Skilling was rendering an opinion - this is what they thought the result would be

Unfortunately there was no way to test the theory prior to 9/11 where was shown to be faulty

Skilling and others failed to account for the fire proofing on the steel to be blown off by the impacts

Also failed to understand how the lightweight web trusses which supported the floors would react to the fire

This is not the first nor the last time an engineer's opinion was shown to be wrong by real world....



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Veilwalker

Originally posted by Yankee451

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Yankee451
 


ClaimIng a circular argument means you do not understand or are not intelligent to follow..it is a cop out.


The CIA has run the media since the 40s.

The Internet is part of the media.

Therefore the "Truth Movement" and "conspiracy" sites like this one should be suspect as being controlled by the CIA.

What is the one thing this site, and posters like you refuse to discuss?

The role of the media in 911.
What is the one thing this site, and posters like you refuse to discuss? The role of the media in 911.



every aspect of 9/11, including the media's role in 9/11, any and every aspect of that, has been thoroughly discussed on ATS and many other places.


Hardly.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451


Lightweight aluminum wings cannot slice structural steel like a hot knife through butter.

Whoever claims they can, whether they be a believer in the official story or not, is either a fool or a liar.

What we were shown on TV was impossible in the real world.




Take a look at this vid. In it you are going to see a 1.4 mm strip of aluminium weighing less than 3 grms slice through a piece of 6 mm structural steel like a hot knife through butter.

Make no mistake about it, it is the aluminium that's cutting the steel not the explosives. You do know how shape charges work don't you ?

How do you explain that Witch Hunter ?





posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by CA18DEST
 


Lightweight aluminum wings cannot slice structural steel like a hot knife through butter.

Whoever claims they can, whether they be a believer in the official story or not, is either a fool or a liar.

What we were shown on TV was impossible in the real world.


It is quite possible. You just don't understand it so you reject the possibility out of hand. Your experience just doesn't cover this aspect of materials engineering. In one of our earlier discussions I suggested that you came to this conclusion while throwing empty beer cans at an anvil. Watch a few videos of USN railguns and you will see what an aluminum projectile can do to steel.

Consider modifying your sentence to read: "Whoever claims they can, whether they be a believer in the official story or not, is either an engineer or a materials scientist."



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Sorry all.. got life to go live.. see you Monday, if I see any reason at all to keep wasting my time with the so obvious swill of the party liners (humm-- that does kinda sound like panty liners, eh? *lol*).

If I don't return, then you party liners have a great time debunking the obvious that anyone with glasses and a brain can see, and browbeating those who won't allow you to force them into believing as TPTB want you to believe.


And good luck to those who are wise enough to see thru it all, but (like me) may not be wise enough to stop beating a dead horse! hahahha!



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonriderGal
 


Not often you see a truther admit they aren't wise.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by DragonriderGal
 


Not often you see a truther admit they aren't wise.


Not often you see a truther admit they were beating a dead horse.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by CA18DEST
 


Lightweight aluminum wings cannot slice structural steel like a hot knife through butter.

Whoever claims they can, whether they be a believer in the official story or not, is either a fool or a liar.

What we were shown on TV was impossible in the real world.


It is quite possible. You just don't understand it so you reject the possibility out of hand. Your experience just doesn't cover this aspect of materials engineering. In one of our earlier discussions I suggested that you came to this conclusion while throwing empty beer cans at an anvil. Watch a few videos of USN railguns and you will see what an aluminum projectile can do to steel.

Consider modifying your sentence to read: "Whoever claims they can, whether they be a believer in the official story or not, is either an engineer or a materials scientist."



Remember the last time we went down this path? You were trying to use the MIT paper as some sort of proof.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by tpg65
 


About 100 eyewitnesses to the jet hitting the Pentagon were recorded in the official records. I personally know of one person who saw the jet go by a government building on the way to the Pentagon. In spite of comments that the videos of the jet hitting the Pentagon were being withheld as part of a conspiracy, I have seen videos of exactly that. You can't say the evidence does not exist, you can only say that you haven't seen it.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join