It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Can anyone tell me otherwise, when i explain it like this? Please! There is logic in chaos?

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 12:10 PM
reply to post by hooper

cause it was the only way to save ny from nuke in basement

posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by Chesster

I am so glad ore people see it this way.

God bless America, I really don't think it's a conspiracy anymore yey!

It sounds like you are convinced all three NY collapses were controlled demolitions but are not ready to accept the implications of that.

If a decision was made to bring down the towers with hundreds of people still inside it was never morally justifiable.

Shooting down passenger plane: Net result = lives saved which would otherwise be lost.
Bringing down tower before people have a chance to get out: Net result = lives lost which would otherwise have survived.

You can also not claim it was in the name of protecting secrets.

posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:49 PM
reply to post by Chesster

...just to play devil's advocate (i really think this is a silly theory) if there was a nuke in the basement or something that threatened to knock the building over. Odds are it would happen before the decision to bring the building down could be made. Besides, those buildings didn't look like they posed any risk of "falling over" or whatever before they came down. So by your theory there was no reason to pull it.

Also, don't you think it is likely if a bomb went off or a plane went through, it would sever the cables that connect the explosives and allow them to go off in a row? If you think about it a little more, you will see that it is just really not reasonable. That pretty much debunks it.
edit on 19-9-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:55 PM
reply to post by DrinkYourDrug

They dropped the buildings to cave in the secondary attack which was nukes in the basement, thats why the rubble stayed hot.

They saved lives. I mean i'm looking at it from logic, makes sense, plus they did it in stargate, you can collapse a mountain to seal in radiation and control it. Or maybe collapse the buildings cause the nuke ties were about to go off.

NSA rocks for ffiguring it out. Let's give the secret intelligence some credit here for saving a downtown city.

posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:59 PM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

No, listen think like a terrorist doing a two stage attack, listen, I know it's silly, but terrorists are silly.

You draw in everyone rescuers, and civilians and a ton of gov officials to rescue people from the plane hits, but the real attack is the nuke hidden in the basement as a trap. The second attack would be more devastating since logic would indicate we would all run to help and see, and gov officials would also.

That's why the theory is more plausible than anything anyone else can come up with. And I think it's why the secretive bs is in place, they are scarred to admit the terrorist had a nuke or two.

Or maybe someone called up the pentagon and said HEY MY brother an extremist said this was plan! and they panicked, could of just been a super quick trigger pull.

Plus remember last time Al Quaeda warned of a nuke, we rushed in and grabbed bin laden and whacked him. Seems like they take those threats serious.

I for one think this theory is A+

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 12:07 AM
reply to post by Chesster

That doesn't make sense either. Yeah it would bring in a few rescuers, but the majority of the people are running as far away as possible. That is not a baited trap like you are thinking. It would be more sensible obviously to hit something bigger where lots of people will be like evening commute home or sport event.. Not make everyone run away and then do something.

No the theory isn't A plus, it's actually getting weaker and weaker as we go. Nukes? That was just thrown in there when the theory was falling apart and makes absolutely no sense. If that was the case, why did they wait and not trigger? Why would demo be planted in anticipation of such a specific incident? No it's just incredibly nonsensical.
edit on 20-9-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 12:16 AM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

Dude take a deep breath, and relax.

If its a trap why would the nuke be set off moment after the plane hit, when people are running.

Think like a terrorist for a second. If its planned and executed proper it could be more devastating, just think of the flood of media.

Actually the theory is getting stronger, it is just some people fail to think outside their box.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:46 AM

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Chesster

No the theory isn't A plus, it's actually getting weaker and weaker as we go. Nukes? That was just thrown in there when the theory was falling apart and makes absolutely no sense.

I second that.

Originally posted by Chesster
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

Actually the theory is getting stronger, it is just some people fail to think outside their box.

Theories only get stronger on supporting evidence, not because they make your world-view more comfortable.

nukes in the basement, thats why the rubble stayed hot.

Pretty sure it's quite noticeable when a nuke is detonated.

Or maybe someone called up the pentagon and said HEY MY brother an extremist said this was plan! and they panicked, could of just been a super quick trigger pull.

That's why the theory is more plausible than anything anyone else can come up with.


May I ask if you are out of high school yet?

Also, if terrorists can get a nuke into Manhattan, why not just skip the planes and go straight to destroying Manhattan and everyone near it. I like where your "outside the box" reasoning is taking this thread.


edit on 20-9-2011 by DrinkYourDrug because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 04:30 AM
reply to post by Chesster

No man, sorry it doesn't. I am thinking outside the box. You stepped out of the box and apparently got trapped in a plastic bag (no oxygen getting to your brain). If terrorists intended to let off a nuke, like actually let it off, they would do it the second they got it in place in a city. Also it's unlikely they would put it in a place like a basement that would prohibit the blast some. They would not get their hands on one of the most horrifying and devastating weapons in the world, then essentially bury it in the ground, and come up with an insane and complicated scheme to crash into the buildings to kill what would likely be about the same amount of people (we are talking about a nuke!) the whole time risking that the bomb be discovered or destroyed by the damage to the building.

If you damage a nuke it doesn't just go off, it is destroyed, so why would the risk destroying their own weapon, or having it be discovered by the rescue teams?

Think of the media? The media that isn't there because the area is cordoned off? Actually no one is there except rescue workers so everyone else is prohibited from being close. Actually they would probably barely kill anyone as the nuke would probably be very, very low yield and it would be buried under tons of concrete and steel in the parking garage (what I think you believe is the basement) and people would be kept several blocks away. Small yield nukes would probably only destroy several city blocks, but the underground status coupled with the roped off area would lower the death toll considerably.

Are you starting to get why it makes no sense?
edit on 20-9-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 06:24 AM
Nukes, holograms, pods, tv fakery has been proven to have been started by debunkers, disinformationalists, official story pushers to discredit the movement.

When official story pushers/ debunkers look like fools ( which is daily ) these nuke, hologram junk theories get injected to smear the thread. Nothing new here.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:24 AM
Sorry if this post is a little late.

I think we can disregard the pre-rigged explosives theory in the event of another terrorist attack.

Most explosives have a shelf life and become increasingly unstable with time.

Considering such a theory, how would you explain the explosions in the basements of the towers BEFORE the planes" hit?

Why would "poor President Bush" initiate the demolition of the towers with these explosions BEFORE the event had started?

How would you explain the destruction of WTC6 before the towers fell?

The possibility of a nuke in the basement planted by terrorists is plausible but not likely. A nuke air-burst high up in the towers would have been much more devastating and one heck of a dirty bomb.

Any nuke in the basement would probably be part of the inside job plan....

...and is not without merit. This would explain why truckloads of fresh soil were repeatedly brought in to ground zero after the rubble had been cleared, spread over the area, left for several days, then trucked out again.
See "Trucking Dirt" section here:-

There is also a theory of subterranean nukes:-

A nuclear detonation directed at the core of the towers, either basement or subterranean, would send a pulverising wave of destruction up the towers.
"On its way up the waves of fire pressure partially penetrating about 100 floors of concrete and steel. Over ten million degrees of heat caused by a hydrogen bomb would sublimise all water within the concrete in a moment.
Water exploding extremely quickly into 1000-fold volume and totally pulverizing the concrete.
Even people and computers that were in the buildings disappearing turning into heat and light. That is why almost nothing of them was found in the ruins."

Why was the destroyed WTC site called "Ground Zero".

ground zero - "the surface directly above or below the point at which a nuclear explosion takes place".

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:37 AM
reply to post by Shadow Herder

I didn't inject it into the story? He did, the guy whose theory you are backing.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:41 AM
reply to post by Alpha20mega

Don't you think people would have detected radiation there? Also, people would have felt a nuke for great distances and it wouldn't have just traveled up the building it would have caused more noticeable and different damage and there would be fallout.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

Umm did you read the reports... there was radiation..

I' not saying these guy used a super nuke... im sure it was a mini nuke.

Think like terrorists.
My theory is way more plausible than a gov cospiracy involving thousands of people....

Think about it just step back and think of it like a movie terrorist... sure its not the best idea, but humans rarely go with best idea. If you wanted to make a statement thi would be the best way.

And it makes sense to collapse a building on a nuke to seal it in, wether detonated or not...

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 11:05 AM
reply to post by Alpha20mega

Thank you for websites, I am redin all the info now. I'm not saying my idea is flawles it's just after years of thinking about it, I came to this conclusion. Bear in mind I voted for Bush twice, and believed the official story, then believed the conspiracy people. But I think they are both wrong now. I believe that this was a bad moment of history for humans and that all these events coincided t create the conspiracy of bad choices by both terrorist and politicians.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 11:29 AM
reply to post by Chesster

Think like terrorists.

OK, say you're a terrorist and after years and years of trying you finally get your hands on a nuke. Why would you then hide said nuke in the basement of a building that you were planning on crashing planes into and then HIDE the fact that you had nukes??? If I am terrorist organization I want the WHOLE WORLD to know that I have nukes!

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 12:00 PM
reply to post by hooper

The world trade tower is like the oscars to terrorists. It would cause more global impact than just hitting a city blindly, plus if they are terrorists they are passionate against hating a certain type of person or politician, granted they do civilian attacks, i would assume those capable of plotting this style attack would be the intellectual superiors of common terrorists, and therfor the more intellectual can become very obsessed and passionate about getting his Oscar, or trophy, or making their statement a certain way.

Why assume all evil scumbag terrorists are scumbags, some might actually be driven by a search for justice, granted I would go about it a different way, but who knows all speculation on peoples thoughts.

I'm just thinking like a terrorists to see if I can find a more simple suitable psychology for the event. I just can't see 100' -1000's of people being involved in an event to make it a conspiracy, when by it's very nature a conspiracy like that would fail.

But I can see 12 idiots hijacking a plane, and maybe a rich saudi prince sympathizer being able to buy a rogue nuke. Planting it as a mouse trap so when the running mice come to see, and the media and all that the mouse trap would go off, and I could see the politicians being stupid enough to think this was the best option to either deal with a nuke, or disable it. Remember i'm not saying the nuke the terrorists planted went off, for all i know it could have been a chem weapon or biological, and the gov flew or lasered some type of beam from space to deal with that threat, which is to collapse the building.

A biologicl attack or chem could also explain the trucking of dirt, or the need for high heat.

Perhaps the reason for secrecy on it, is high tech satellite used, or the fact the buildings were rigged just in case of terrorist attack to fall a certain way.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:20 PM
reply to post by hooper

Terrorists know they must keep any information on a nuke, if they have one, in the deepest level of compartmentation. No, I won't discuss how that works, I WANT US TO FIND the bastards BEFORE, not have to pick up a lot of dead bodies, try as we might to deal with the f****** horrible carnage after the fact, the wounded, those (a whole lot) in physical agony, not to mention dreadful emotional trauma. The inevitable result of this kind of holocaust. As for more on "we took out the towers, etc" I won't bother to address that non-sense. Already did what I could just to spell out certain basics of chemistry&physics, and human social historical reactions. Do I miss stuff? Sure I do, but also check out what anyone can by asking this question of anyone in power: "What is the Maximum benefit and maximum risk" of anything? Then do the math. Hey, TPTB have the control NOW, the last thing is what all governments from the beginning of time fear more then anything; loss of faith "TBTB" can protect us, thats governments first duty, or they don't last.

For the gentleman who voted for Bush twice, Thats your right. And people vote for who ever they think will protect them. All else is secondary, and just human nature. Nothing; things, power, or anything else of value is totally free, starting w/freedom. But we do have liberties, if we stay vigilant. And keep asking questions.

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 02:36 PM
reply to post by arbiture

Settle down mate.

Listen TPTB are just a reflection of the people. You think they care about invading places and conspiracies? Look how fast watergate came out.

My theory is way more plausible in todays age of media ratings, since a scandal like this would brea the moment it happened.

sit back and think about what I am putting out. It really is the most plausible theory given the evidence and secrecy, plus would explain why politicians are silent about it. Politicians want to save face and not admit they let terrorists get the nukes or wmd chem or bio, maybe thats why we pressed iraq, trying to figure out where they got it from.

It all makes more sense this way. I even convinced and reporter here when debating him.

And also think about it, your theory doesn't hold water to the evidence of history, since the basement of the towers was attacked in 94, and 911... obviously they cared about the towers since to them it was a beacon of american supremacy and orpession.

By your logic a mall would make a better target, and we can see they aren't hitting malls.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 07:31 AM
reply to post by Chesster

Umm did you read the reports... there was radiation

They detrected tiny amounts of TRITIUM, a slightly radioactive isotope of hydrogen

Tritium is used to make luminous signs and gunsites, both were very common at WTC (several police agencies
ATF, Secret Sevice, Port Authorithy had large srsenals in the complwx)

No radiation was detected by haz mat teams which swept the area repeatedly

The NY Department of Health was on the scene within minutes checking for radiation

Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department’s office of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way to work when the first tower was hit.

“While I was walking down Church Street, with all my instruments, I came within 1000 feet of the South Tower, and unfortunately the building came down,” says Borri, sounding every bit the unruffled scientist. “It’s a good thing I walked slowly.”

How does one continue on one’s mission without getting distracted by such details as a 110-story building comes down in front of you? “You concentrate on what you need to do,” says Borri, who simply walked amid the vehicles and victims covered with layers and layers of soot, “taking samples off the people coming out of the building.”

Borri checked the World Trade Center site for signs of radiation before and after the collapse of the buildings. Radiation could have originated in industrial radiology sources, such as the installing beams of the huge office buildings, which may have contained some radioactive elements from x-rays taken, and from depleted uranium used in ballasts in aircraft wing tips (such counterweights in airplane wing tips give the most weight for least volume, says Borri). It might also be left from any medical or dental offices.

The far more serious threat, of course, was the chance that one of the hijackers might have carried a suitcase of radioactive materials or a dirty bomb, a conventional bomb spiked with radioactive material. Such a bomb has been compared to TNT, strapped to a container of plutonium or plutonium-contaminated waste. This kind of a device would not produce a nuclear explosion, but it could spread deadly radioactive matter across a swath of city.

According to Borri, the fear with a dirty bomb is that hundreds, maybe thousands, could die from radiation poisoning and cancer, and the area could be poisoned for years. (Plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years, says Borri.)

That was fortunately not the case, Borri found, using a portable liquid scintillation counter, which measures radioactivity like a Geiger counter. The high-tech portable gadget he carried, one of the few available in the United States, is far more precise than its century-old cousin, the Geiger, counter with a much more refined ability to detect any kind of radioactivity.

“If you’re creative you can get what you need to without getting in another agency’s way pulling samples,” says Borri, who was dodging fire trucks and police vehicles and hordes of people streaming out of the building. “It’s not a good idea to walk into the center of the action. Some of the people weren’t walking as slowly as I was.”

Although Borri didn’t turn up any problematic radioactive readings by the end of the day, his work would be supplemented by the federal Department of Energy, whose technicians remained on site and continued to sample. [Only during the last days of the Ground Zero cleanup would radioactive testers find any evidence of radioactive emissions, from a pharmacy laboratory located within one of the buildings.]

The city’s Health Department also sent several other trouble-shooters to the scene immediately, says McKinney. Unlike inspectors with particular specialties, trained to adhere to a set of detailed protocols in specific situations (sanitary inspections of restaurant, for instance, or safety inspections at swimming pools) and unlike Borri, a radiation specialist, these seasoned trouble-shooters were trained to identify and analyze unknown hazards in virtually any setting. “Their primary direction was to be the Department's eyes on the scene, and to communicate to us detailed descriptions of emerging health hazards,” says McKinney.


The FD HazMat team checked the rubble - again nothing

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in