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.
Originally posted by 4hero
The 9/11 shills describe their own behaviour everytime they make a reply against a 9/11 researcher!
WTC7, was controlled demolition and no shill lies will ever change that fact.
Originally posted by Alfie1
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
You have a coherency problem dude. My response was in relation to the video you gave to 4hero. You subsequently commented to me with a link to a photo which I did not address. You also called me a "truther".
If you cannot keep up, I will no longer respond to you. Sorryedit on 25-5-2012 by MI5edtoDeath because: (no reason given)
I think I am likely to die of old age before I get a coherent reaction from you. I am not thedman. I gave you a link to this article in relation to cut steel at the WTC site. Any comment ?
www.sharpprintinginc.com...
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by 4hero
The 9/11 shills describe their own behaviour everytime they make a reply against a 9/11 researcher!
WTC7, was controlled demolition and no shill lies will ever change that fact.
This is just Orwellan double speak. You're saying it's okay for you to insult and derail because you alone know the truth. And that by calling you out for ad hominems and half-truths the "shills" are acting dishonestly.
Only a zealot could think this way. It's deeply millenarian and absolutely anti-logic.
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
Originally posted by Alfie1
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
You have a coherency problem dude. My response was in relation to the video you gave to 4hero. You subsequently commented to me with a link to a photo which I did not address. You also called me a "truther".
If you cannot keep up, I will no longer respond to you. Sorryedit on 25-5-2012 by MI5edtoDeath because: (no reason given)
I think I am likely to die of old age before I get a coherent reaction from you. I am not thedman. I gave you a link to this article in relation to cut steel at the WTC site. Any comment ?
www.sharpprintinginc.com...
Sorry. I was rude.
Basically what I am saying is that site clearances crews may have cut the steel members. I would expect them to during the removal of very heavy objects.
This, however, does not negate the possibility of some columns and tying members being dismembered by cutting charges used by the criminals that destroyed the WTC building.edit on 25-5-2012 by MI5edtoDeath because: (no reason given)
This, however, does not negate the possibility of some columns and tying members being dismembered by cutting charges used by the criminals that destroyed the WTC building.
But do you have any evidence of cut steel pre-clean-up ? And why do the cuts show typical characteristics of cutting by thermic lance ?
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by MI5edtoDeath
This, however, does not negate the possibility of some columns and tying members being dismembered by cutting charges used by the criminals that destroyed the WTC building.
But can you prove even one was cut before the attack?
Just one?
Originally posted by GenRadek
Originally posted by Romekje
It's called controlled demolition, just like the 2 main towers, anyone with more then 2 working brain cells can see that.
I mean, steel beams always break at neat 45 degree angles and thermite fires keep raging in the debris when a building collapses onto itself, right?
Im actually amazed there are still people who believe the official story.
Oh wow. You are still stuck on those photos of the clean up with 45 degree angles? Fun fact: During clean up at Ground Zero, workers cut the beams on 45 degree angles.
Geeze are Truthers reversing back five six years?
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
reply to post by Alfie1
But do you have any evidence of cut steel pre-clean-up ? And why do the cuts show typical characteristics of cutting by thermic lance ?
Considering that you broached the subject and I merely raised a point of logic, do you believe there is no evidence that cutting charges were used?
Originally posted by Romekje
Bending the truth to fit the OS is easy.
The beams were cut in exactly the same way as they would have been with a controlled demolition.
LOOK at how the buildings come down, are you blind or just plain ignorant?
IF it wouldve even been possible for the towers to come down with the relatively miner damage they recieved, they would've topled over, not crumble into it's own footprint.
But can't have damage to the surrounding buildings now, can we?
Originally posted by Alfie1
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
reply to post by Alfie1
But do you have any evidence of cut steel pre-clean-up ? And why do the cuts show typical characteristics of cutting by thermic lance ?
Considering that you broached the subject and I merely raised a point of logic, do you believe there is no evidence that cutting charges were used?
There is absolutely no evidence of any of the following :-
a) acquisition of explosives.
b) transportation to WTC site.
c) installation at WTC evading security, sniffer dogs etc.
d) detonations at point of collapse.
e) remnants of det cord, caps, detonators etc
Can we please ban every english word.....
Originally posted by CoolStoryMan
Can we please ban the term "smoking gun" on this website? it is way overused!
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
Check this out;
An enormous chunk of WTC 1 landed on Fiterman Hall and it did not collapse like it was pole axed like WTC 7.
Originally posted by GenRadek
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
Check this out;
An enormous chunk of WTC 1 landed on Fiterman Hall and it did not collapse like it was pole axed like WTC 7.
Friterman Hall was not built like 7 with a ConEd substation underneath it and fires burning over 6 hours.
Originally posted by Alfie1
There is absolutely no evidence of any of the following :-
a) acquisition of explosives.
b) transportation to WTC site.
c) installation at WTC evading security, sniffer dogs etc.
d) detonations at point of collapse.
e) remnants of det cord, caps, detonators etc
Originally posted by GiodanoBruno
reply to post by GenRadek
1. That's right Gdeck , 5 hours of an uncontrolled fire cannot do squat to steel. In fact , even aluminum has a hard time weakening with uncontrolled fires. So imagine "mild steel". I am starting to think you have never work on an actual Tower before???
2. Flaming debris? You have any physical evidence of that?- I mean flaming while being projected in the sky. You keep shooting yourself in the foot with 1000 ft and 300 ft distance stuff. Understand fire can't survive flying in thin air. And the plane impact is not and will not be an issue when asking a simple question: how many times (the supposed expert) has anyone seen flaming flying debris ignite another of these voodoo fires that will pulverize steel and concrete.
3.How do you know it was "sub-standard"? Someone else's theory or yours alone? It doesn't matter you really have no clue and you choose to use this term constantly. Did you even read what I said about the core? For your "Fire-proofing failure/Tree tipping/Pancake theory(FTP)" to work the Responsible Party(not the 19 arabs) must use an additional arsenal to pulverize the core. Which is what we both see in your video. The FTP theory alone would leave the core mostly intact(much,much more than the video displays) . Why ? Well what would have pulverized it exactly? Can't be the fuel or the jet liner or weight alone.
If planes can do this much damage then the Japanese should have won the Pacific in WWII. And if jet liners were this destructive to massive facilities ,then why we haven't sent one of are many "old fleet" 767's to destroy or pulverize those Iranian Nuclear facilities with one quick swoop. Our military spends trillions and trillions and the answer to all wars is are special Boeing 767's and we don't use them.. Honestly, after witnessing 911 why would we ever use a Tomahawk or a Bunkerbuster bomb to do our dirty work again. Two planes weighing 392tons, And that amount pulverized 1,200,000tons of a much harder material. I say cut our military by half and start using these 767's... That's if NIST/FEMA and Gdeck are correct.
Originally posted by MI5edtoDeath
WTC7 was not built like WTCs 1 and 2 and no airplane hit it but it went down like them.