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.

 

BBC tries to debunk top 5 "conspiracy theories" in relation to the 911 events.

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


And another example of how incredibly uninformed many people are.

I dont care what you believe, because you are flat out wrong. I know its a hard pill for some to swallow, but its called reality. The meat cleaver that was taken to the military after the Cold War left us ill prepared for an attack on our own soil. You can ask any Air Force pilot who was assigned to air defense here in the US in the late 90s....oh wait, I work with a bunch of them....and they will tell you that an attack like we saw on 9/11 was never seriously considered. Sure, it was included in some exercises...but no one ever really considered it valid.

Even today, we rarely load live weapons on our fighter jets, unless we are heading for the range.




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


And another example of how incredibly uninformed many people are.

I dont care what you believe, because you are flat out wrong. I know its a hard pill for some to swallow, but its called reality. The meat cleaver that was taken to the military after the Cold War left us ill prepared for an attack on our own soil. You can ask any Air Force pilot who was assigned to air defense here in the US in the late 90s....oh wait, I work with a bunch of them....and they will tell you that an attack like we saw on 9/11 was never seriously considered. Sure, it was included in some exercises...but no one ever really considered it valid.

Even today, we rarely load live weapons on our fighter jets, unless we are heading for the range.


the air force pilots are nothing more than utensils to the powers that be, do you really think that they would have an idea of what their commander's commanders think? they aren't in the know, they are told to do something and they hop to it, simple as that.......



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by patternfinder
 


You truly are clueless when it comes to the subject. There is just no other way to put it. It is amazing how many people think that the military is a bunch of wind up robots.

Besides, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that 1. There arent as many aircraft on the alert ramp and 2. The rest of the jets dont have weapons loaded.
edit on 1-9-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Romanian
 


the same bbc who accidentally "lost" those jane stanley (iirc) tapes?
oh, ok. by the way, don't forget 9/11 conspiracy roadtrip on bbc3 on
8th. that should be interesting too.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   
I saw this on tv and it's exactly the same conclusions that the History Channel and National Geographic channels came up with, just with different talking heads and slightly differing evidence.

I found it impossible to disagree with the findings personally.

Now I do believe the towers were both brought down after the attack by explosives and my own mother who also saw the BBC documentary also thought that without prompt but personally, I believe the controlled demolition was to prevent the buildings toppling to one side and destroying other buildings in the vicinity and causing even more casualties.

In other words, I believe the Official Story but also believe the controlled demolition of the towers was a safety measure pre-installed in the towers as a "just in case" years before to allow them to collapse straight down so as to prevent even more loss of life and damage to other buildings.



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by curious7
Now I do believe the towers were both brought down after the attack by explosives and my own mother who also saw the BBC documentary also thought that without prompt but personally, I believe the controlled demolition was to prevent the buildings toppling to one side and destroying other buildings in the vicinity and causing even more casualties.


If the demolitions was designed and installed years before it would not have been designed to hurl 4 ton girders 600 feet.

People talk about the time involved to design a NORMAL controlled demolition. The normal objective is to minimize collateral damage. But if excessive explosives are used then the design does not need to be that precise or take that long. More explosives less precision.

psik



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Romanian
 


Here's an article written by one of the participants after she watched herself last night.

A fascinating insider's view of the edit room floor.

911truthnews.com...



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
Hi Romanian,

I don't mean to derail or hijack your thread but would like to point out that I posted several links in This other 911 conspiracy road trip thread which includes audio interviews with 3 of the participants in the show.

Peace



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join