It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
What is the US Hiding about 9/11
Originally posted by EmVeeFF
That microwave weapons that derive from Nicolai Tesla's research were used to bring down the towers...
Originally posted by geobro
do the maths 50 million tonns in each tower = 100 million a hollow aluminunm tube hits only 12 million tonns hit the ground metal turns to dust. car engines 3 blocks away burst into flames ground had to be taken to the site thats a bit odd the first time they were insured the towers was months before .so many clues cost of demolition in 1980s 9 billion + ASBESTOS claims the towers were due for demo ?by 2011 WHO had most to gain by this G W BUSH ? CO the first 200 pages in david ickes TALES FROM THE TIME LOOP . WHAT TIME DID YOU HEAR ABOUT 9/11 ? COULD START A THREAD ON THAT ONE . its my fav game when i meet american tourists love the look on their faces . nanu fxxxxxg nanu
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by NorEaster
It's a shame there is not one peice of evidence to support your theory.
But it would make a nice movie. Who should we get to play the roll of the button pusher?
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by drifter1109
The key point here, I think, is so what are you gonna do about it? There is more than enough evidence to support arresting those involved.
Name one person that was directly involved.
Show the evidence that would support an indictment in a court of law.
Originally posted by filosophia
Anyone who has done black smith work knows you need an incredibly hot fire just to get steel to turn red. And even then it cools almost immediately. The amount of smoke billowing out of the towers meant the fire was mostly out, as a raging inferno produces less smoke than one that is almost quenched. The black smoke indicates painted objects like ceilings, floors, office equipment was burning. The argument that office equipment, which is mostly plastic, somehow burned hot enough to melt steel is ridiculous. Plastic melts about as quickly as paper, and when it burns up, that's it, there's nothing left to weaken the steel. Since the towers stood for about an hour after the initial plane impact, obviously the plane did not cause the tower to collapse. So from the time the plane impacted to when it collapsed, something had to have burned hot enough to not just weaken the steel but pulverize it. Plastic can't do this, and the aviation fuel was visibly seen to have evaporated almost immediately upon impact, which is natural for combustible fluids to do. That fire ball most likely was what caused the office fire to catch fire, but the fire was mostly out shortly after that as can be seen by the black smoke.
And even if you say somehow after all this the tower just collapsed, how could it be that the exact same thing would happen to both towers when the planes hit different areas on both towers?
And even if you think this still somehow happened, how did building 7 which was not hit by an airplane also come down when buildings near it were worse off yet remained standing?
edit on 30-8-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)