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.

 

WTC7, the smoking gun that just will not go away until the traitors are rounded up

page: 13
46
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4hero
Why are these so called debunkers here if they have everything all worked out and believe the OS? Why do they spend hours upon hours here if the OS stands up so well?

They obviously have a lot invested in 9/11 to keep doing what they do!

They think people are stupid! Their game was up a long time ago. US tax payers unknowingly paid for 9/11 with their taxes, and 11 years down the line their taxes are being spent on damage limitation!



Perhaps some of us don't like false information being thrown around. You have just been caught out lying about victim compensation for UA 93 passengers' families so maybe you should try to stick to the facts.




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 




But something tells me all three are full of hot air.

4.How can you seriously say the core survived? Because it dropped last? Nothing was still standing. That's why logical people conclude it was demo'd.


The core was not a freestanding structure. Something so thin and so tall would not survive alone without the surrounding brace of the floor trusses and exterior. The cores for both stood for another 15-20 seconds after initial collapse. However due to damage and just gravity, they too fell.




5.Fire ball elevators??. How do you know this?. Why would you say things that you have no clue about. Elevators do have brakes and chances are the elevators were either Otis or ThyCorp. I doubt any of those two companies would allow a Mechanical or Express elevator to not have brakes. Wow. So you say fire-proofing being blown off and now elevator-fireballs.



I guess all those burned people in the lobby, elevators, basements, and next to the elevators that were burned/incinerated/killed by fireballs must have been faking it and they imagined it....... Death by imagining fireballs, who knew?



My friend you are very sloppy and you use to be pretty good. Time to change jobs or go back to school.


I never met you before and it says you have just joined a few days ago. So how do you know anything about me?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


What's happening to the north side of this building?




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by GiodanoBruno
 




But something tells me all three are full of hot air.

4.How can you seriously say the core survived? Because it dropped last? Nothing was still standing. That's why logical people conclude it was demo'd.


The core was not a freestanding structure. Something so thin and so tall would not survive alone without the surrounding brace of the floor trusses and exterior. The cores for both stood for another 15-20 seconds after initial collapse. However due to damage and just gravity, they too fell.




5.Fire ball elevators??. How do you know this?. Why would you say things that you have no clue about. Elevators do have brakes and chances are the elevators were either Otis or ThyCorp. I doubt any of those two companies would allow a Mechanical or Express elevator to not have brakes. Wow. So you say fire-proofing being blown off and now elevator-fireballs.



I guess all those burned people in the lobby, elevators, basements, and next to the elevators that were burned/incinerated/killed by fireballs must have been faking it and they imagined it....... Death by imagining fireballs, who knew?



My friend you are very sloppy and you use to be pretty good. Time to change jobs or go back to school.


I never met you before and it says you have just joined a few days ago. So how do you know anything about me?


1. Never said it(core) was a free standing structure. But it could be a free standing structure. That's how strong the core was. anyways the video has the spire dropping down eventually ,meaning there must have been a hell of crater. How could there be a big enough crater for the whole core to eventually disappear into.? Would love to know your opinion.


2.So the burned people in both lobbies was do to elevators filled with fire that for some reason this stubborn fire continued to get hotter the faster it dropped(at high speed off course) some 70 floors ,,and oh,,don't forget it fell because it's brakes failed too?? Really ?? Really?

3.Believe me I do....



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 


That is the building collapsing and glass breaking. Your point?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   

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?


-Can you clearly prove the fire-proofing was blown off the steel beams,trusses and columns? (Please don't theorize)

-Can you prove fireball debris flying over hundreds of feet can ignite another other fire in another building?


-Can you explain how/why the core was also pulverized when the tree tipping/pancake theory doesn't really coincide with core being destroyed?


-Can you please clearly pin point how 392tons of aluminum and fuel can pulverize 1,200,000tons of mild steel and reinforced concrete?


Asking someone erroneous question on proving if and how steel columns were severed before the attack is ridiculous. You know dam well no one can prove that. But try to answer any of my questions. Thank you.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by maxella1
 



That is the building collapsing and glass breaking. Your point?






So? I guess we should now apply the tried and true Truther standard response: if it never happened before, it must not ever happen. Right? I wish everything was this simple.


So why is the glass shattering in only one location? Did the other window glass survive the collapse or did they simply decide to shatter much later on?

According to your logic, one should always expect black swans and things happening for the first time ever.

The problem with 9/11 is that the was too many 'first time events'.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by maxella1
 


That is the building collapsing and glass breaking. Your point?



Can you explain why the windows are braking on all floors at the same time, and only on the opposite side of where the penthouse collapsed 6 seconds a go? What would you say is the cause?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek

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?


You are right, they were cut for demolition: AFTER 9/11/01

Oh I am well aware of how they fell. For starters, if the column was cut at the base, then why did the collapse start at the top of the structure at the impact point? Also, why did people survive in the stairwells in the core? Third, why did the core remain standing after initial collapse if the core columns were cut at the base?

You have a lot of catching up to do. Arguments from personal incredulity are worthless here.


Keep shooting yourself in the foot. You're stretching buddy.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by 4hero
Why are these so called debunkers here if they have everything all worked out and believe the OS? Why do they spend hours upon hours here if the OS stands up so well?

They obviously have a lot invested in 9/11 to keep doing what they do!

They think people are stupid! Their game was up a long time ago. US tax payers unknowingly paid for 9/11 with their taxes, and 11 years down the line their taxes are being spent on damage limitation!



Perhaps some of us don't like false information being thrown around. You have just been caught out lying about victim compensation for UA 93 passengers' families so maybe you should try to stick to the facts.



You are a joker, right? You are going hold an anonymous atser to an alleged lie but you will swallow the 9/11 Official Story hook, line and sinker?




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   

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.


ConED??????That has nothing to do with your infamous voodoo fire that some how pulverized 1,200,000 tons of steel/concrete. Again you're stretching....



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno


1. Never said it(core) was a free standing structure. But it could be a free standing structure. That's how strong the core was. anyways the video has the spire dropping down eventually ,meaning there must have been a hell of crater. How could there be a big enough crater for the whole core to eventually disappear into.? Would love to know your opinion.


But it was not meant to stand alone. The core was strong enough to do its job, and we saw that it still managed to survive the initial collapse. However, damage and gravity brought it down. As to how it fell, this video shows how it is possible to make it appear that it fell "straight" down.



You can see how a kink formed towards the base and it got bent out, causing it fall, but the top remained up as it fell, appearing to fall "into a hole". how would you have reacted if you saw this tower fall if you didnt see the lower section bulge out like that? It is very possible that the same occurred with the "Spire". Also, how could the core fall into a crater if they pulled people from the core area? You still have not answered me that. Also, if there was a crater to have the core disappear into, then why during clean up we see a huge section of the base of the core standing right where it should be?






I do not see any craters for the core to fall into. Plus, why do I see a large chunk of the base of the core there?




2.So the burned people in both lobbies was do to elevators filled with fire that for some reason this stubborn fire continued to get hotter the faster it dropped(at high speed off course) some 70 floors ,,and oh,,don't forget it fell because it's brakes failed too?? Really ?? Really?


So I guess they all imagined the fireballs and in fact they were burned by the telekinetic abilities of the Reptillians in conjunction with Bush Jr. and the entire NWO/Illuminati?Reptillian alliance to take over the world right?


Some reading materials for you:
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...
sites.google.com...

There is a LOT of reading for you pal. Good luck.


3.Believe me I do....




Great, I smell socks.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno


ConED??????That has nothing to do with your infamous voodoo fire that some how pulverized 1,200,000 tons of steel/concrete. Again you're stretching....


You are really not making any sense! Its like you have no freaking idea about anything on 9/11.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   

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 as if it was pole axed like WTC 7.
edit on 25-5-2012 by MI5edtoDeath because: (no reason given)


Wait just a hot second. That building was behind WTC 7, so could not have been damaged by debris from WTC 1. It was damaged by the collapse of WTC 7.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Originally posted by GenRadek

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?


You are right, they were cut for demolition: AFTER 9/11/01

Oh I am well aware of how they fell. For starters, if the column was cut at the base, then why did the collapse start at the top of the structure at the impact point? Also, why did people survive in the stairwells in the core? Third, why did the core remain standing after initial collapse if the core columns were cut at the base?

You have a lot of catching up to do. Arguments from personal incredulity are worthless here.


Keep shooting yourself in the foot. You're stretching buddy.



Where exactly am I doing that? I have yet to see you post anything substantive.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


I have alot of catching up to do?

Dude when ever have you seen a building collapse at free fall speed?

If indeed the cores survived (which they didnt) it would cause friction, slowing down the collapse.

Same goes for the pancake theory, if the floors pancaked onto eachother they would slow down the collapse and not go at full speed.

No, what happened here, is that as one story was falling, the story below got demolished, exactly like they would do in a controlled demo, so that the building collapses onto itself and doesn't damage surrounding buildings (much).

Your avatar says you are a "critical thinker" though you think critically wrong.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by maxella1
 


That is the building collapsing and glass breaking. Your point?



Can you explain why the windows are braking on all floors at the same time, and only on the opposite side of where the penthouse collapsed 6 seconds a go? What would you say is the cause?


Uh, dude. When the building begins to fall, all the walls start deforming at the same time. What, do you think the think was just going to stay all perfect and straight all the way down? The windows literally COULDN'T have survived.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   



Building 7 was built in 1987. Are you suggesting that they were put in then?

Sounds like duff disinfo.

Building 7 had it primary superstructure in the core of the building. The outline of the core can be seen were the within perimeter of penthouse plant rooms and straight down.

Secondary superstructure elements consists of the cantilevered trusses reading from the core to the south elevation facade.

You can place charges in the cores and the floors above the trusses without anybody knowing.

Another reason why Barry Jennings saw corpses in the lobby could be because the cantilever trusses tied to the enormous north facing retaining structure were cut with charges.

All these explosive can be placed at any time during announced maintenance programmes. Most office users don't inspect lift shafts.


Well, THIS link to a fox news piece was posted a few pages back, where an eye witness saw Silverstein talking to his insurance company about the option of controlled demo.

First of all, WHAT THE #? I never saw that piece of info before...

Secondly, with that out of the way, the obvious questions now become:

When did the explosives get put in there? It certainly wasn't on 9-11 so...
Why were they put in there?
Were there explosives in Bldg 1 and 2?
If so, were they used to cause the collapses in order to "save lives"?
Are there explosives in OTHER buildings to this day?

Come on people, these are questions that need answered, the bickering and shill fights are creating a pretty low signal to noise ratio here.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Romekje
reply to post by GenRadek
 


I have alot of catching up to do?

Dude when ever have you seen a building collapse at free fall speed?

If indeed the cores survived (which they didnt) it would cause friction, slowing down the collapse.

Same goes for the pancake theory, if the floors pancaked onto eachother they would slow down the collapse and not go at full speed.

No, what happened here, is that as one story was falling, the story below got demolished, exactly like they would do in a controlled demo, so that the building collapses onto itself and doesn't damage surrounding buildings (much).

Your avatar says you are a "critical thinker" though you think critically wrong.


Since the trusses were the main thing failing, and the core was bypassed by the collapsing floors, I think it's safe to say that the core was not really offering the resistance. The floors were the only resistance, and they were being overcome by the weight and acceleration of the other floors.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by djmarcone
 


Wasn't the rest of that conversation about how the firefighters told him that it was far too dangerous to enter the building. They decided to wait it out, because they were expecting the building to collapse at any time.



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join