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.

 

9/11 Intercepted

page: 7
10
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Yeah, even people that worked for the government don't have faith in the 9/11 commision report!







posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatcoat
 


You mean the insurance policies he was forced to take out by the bankers that were going to finance his leasing of the WTC complex? Had he been able to do what he wanted, he would have had a lot LESS insurance money.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ThePostExaminer
 


How hard is it for you to understand that the ONLY jet we had a realistic chance of stopping was Flight 93? That is the only one. It was not until Flight 175 hit the South Tower that we knew we under attack. By then, both towers were hit, and Flight 77 was barreling towards DC.

And the only reason why we even had a chance at Flight 93, was that it was delayed so long on the ground and screwed up the terrorists time table. Had that not happened, the passengers would have never known what was going on and never tried to take the plane.......and we would have had another burning building.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer


Yes, I saw your bluff and bluster post that answered none of my questions.

The 25.3 second discrepancy was pointed out by the NTSB themselves.


I never did respond to this one. Yes they did. Problem is, at 1335 (9:35 am), it is NOT 25.3 seconds, it is 25.1 seconds. The time stamp error is a step function, not a static quantity, which increases at a very regular interval at a very predictable quantity. Pointed out and defined are too different things. But then again, you go to P4T for your answers, not the data itself.

I should also add, it is not just one time offset, it is multiple (at least 4) time offsets. A very interesting phenomena to say the least.
edit on 20-7-2012 by 911files because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
911files MO

The RS3 Software is not easy to learn. It would take a few days... this is why he "wants" people to download it then "check for themselves". Most readers will be so confused when opening the software of where to even begin... which is his intention.


Man, you sure sound like Cpt'n Bob. Darn, I learned the software pretty much the day it came in the box. I must be one smart cookie. Yes please, just watch P4T's cartoon, so much easier for you dumb folks to understand. I credit people with having enough intelligence to find their own answers, P4T and you think they need cartoons to understand 9/11. Sad really.


Again.


911files MO

The RS3 Software is not easy to learn. It would take a few days... this is why he "wants" people to download it then "check for themselves". Most readers will be so confused when opening the software of where to even begin... which is his intention.

If Rob really altered something, all 911files would need to do is make a screenshot of the alleged alteration, and then take a screenshot from his RS3 showing the difference/alteration.

And if this were true, why has he never brought it up before? Readers here know that these guys would be all over it like a rash. A chance to fully discredit Rob Balsamo and he wants to be "enigmatic" about it?

Right


Busted. Again.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ThePostExaminer
 


Sigh, you post the same post and expect it to what? I want people to learn for themselves. Quit depending on the false prophets of P4T. Get the data, run it for yourself. The 84 RADES software is actually pretty straightforward. The FAA data on the other hand not-so-much. That is a lot of fun and takes a learning curve to put into a graphical format. But, even that can be done by anyone who is math literate and functional with Excel or other spreadsheet application.

So, to sum it all up, ThePostExaminer and P4T thinks you guys are too stupid to use the RS3 software and need cartoons. Twice they have made the point. So are you guys that stupid? I don't think so.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:01 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePostExaminer
 


So I read the 7 pages of comments and I may have learned what the video is suggesting.

The highjacked plane/s on 911 were still on radar after the official time of their crash.

A couple of questions for the OP.

1. How long after the supposed crashes were these planes still on radar? (according to this video)-(please list flights and times after crashes)

2. What is your opinion of the videos' conclusion/s?

3. Why do you have this opinion?



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I was there too and saw the second "explosion". I agree it was a terrorist attack. Who the terrorists were is still in doubt.

CJ



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


What is stupid is believing sagging trusses can pull in columns. Do you believe they can? That is the hypothesis of the NIST report.

IF, big IF, they could don't you think the connections, 1" and 5/8" bolts, would have failed first? Or were the connections stronger than the columns? If they were then why did they break so easily during the rest of the collapse?

(Obviously the columns were much stronger than the bolts holding the trusses, as OS supporters have correctly claimed many times in the past.)



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 

They have this thing called HEAT! It has a tendency to...at certain temps...to make even the strongest of Tempered Steel or Heavy Iron...do some crazy things such as MELT...OR BEND...OR ESPECIALLY IN A BOLTS CASE...SNAP OFF DUE TO DEGRADING OF SHEAR STRENGTH.

What happened did not happen independent of one beam or one bolt or concrete re-enforcement. One of the HARD TO CLASSIFY LEVELS OF STUPID as far as people seeing windows of levels blow out below a collapsing number of floors as this is PROCLAIMED....LOOK! LOOK! EVIDENCE THAT CHARGES WERE BEING DETONATED!

THIS WAS DUE TO AIR PRESSURE! When air in a building that is in a state of collapse floor by floor downward...This air has no where to go in the time given so it EXPLODES OUTWARD THROUGH THE GLASS!
Split Infinity



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join