Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is there any real counter argument to the Conspiracy theorists of 9/11

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dinogur

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by Alfie1

Your guy was vastly unqualified to offer an opinion in comparison with Leslie Robertson and, even then, he only expressed it as his belief.

And it is not a belief that makes any sense. How many multiple plane strikes are the Towers supposed to absorb ? 10, 20, a thousand ?


Frank A. DeMartini, Manager of WTC Construction & Project Management sure knew what he was talking about, but his following statement does not fit the OS you are agressively defending, so you'll never accept his statement.


"The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners, because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door - this intense grid - and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."


Multiple would at least mean more than one, which is enough, becuase only one plane hit each tower. So it can be safe to say at the very least 2, the steel frames could support a 2000% load.

The man was a hero, and you are mocking him. How disgusting.


That is the quote i was looking for, by Frank A. DeMartini. This proved to me that the WTC Building 1 & 2 had no reason to fall with the collision of an aircraft


go to around 2.50, so what you are telling me is that this man Barry Jennings is a lier and didnt hear explosions go off in the WTC building 7...


Barry Jennings wasn't a liar. He was trapped in WTC 7 for a while as the result of the North Tower collapse at 10.28 which showered debris and started fires .

Stop pretending you are on some middle ground seeking information. You are a 100% deluded truther.




posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I've been a "truther" from the get-go. So many strange things about that day and the reporting that it's hard to not see manipulation via the media pertaining to the WTC and the agencies about the Pentagon.

I've argued OSers and no-planers and every possible sub-group who has an opinion on 9/11.

What I presume you're looking for is a "smoking gun", or series thereof with which to defend your beliefs. I'll say this: The ones already discussed will be "debunked" simply because either you're not an engineer, an architect, you weren't there, etc.

The BEST piece of evidence I've found so far that cannot be debunked pertains to Bush's nonchalance and inaction after he was supposedly notified that a 2nd plane hit the WTC.

His location was public, so if the nation is under attack, he's putting his life and the lives of every child, teacher, and reporter in that school at risk. His inaction PROVES one of two possible realities:

1. Bush simply didn't know what to do, so he tells Secret Service to stand by while he continues the photo op/appearance.

2. Bush KNEW he was not a target, and therefore didn't need to evacuate the building.


Now, these are not necessarily mutually exclusive either. Bush could have known he was not a target, but didn't know the timing of the Pentagon attack, so he wasn't sure whether to evacuate or stay.

Either way, it's pretty fishy that the POTUS wouldn't stop the event so as to protect himself and those at the school.

Public location, limited security, suicide hijack scenarios... sit and read book. It just doesn't add up.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by lambros56

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by lambros56
I wish people would stop calling it the " Official story ".
The governments story is a theory so it should be called the " official theory" as they have never given us any proof as to what happened and who did it.


So no proof would include the evidence submitted to the Mossaoui trial ??

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...



No.
That doesn't prove the official theory.


So people found to have links with Al Qaeda, visits to Afghanistan, under surveilance by German security in Hamburg, just happen to have been involved in flight training in the US and then never seen again after 9/11.

Perhaps they were on holiday ? Get real.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by crawdad1914
 


I have to wonder if you're joking, or if you really are this... dense?

Watch NIST's damn simulation again. See where the crumpling took place at the bottom? And I'm not talking about the simulation where they didn't factor in the damage to the building. I'm talking about the other one. See, like scientists, they ran multiple simulations.

Now, take a look at your magical videos. Notice something? No? They don't show the bottom HALF of the building! Guess where the crumpling happened? The bottom half! Good boy!

I've said all I need to say here. It's like talking to 3 year-olds.

Edit: I made a couple assumptions about the videos. After watching one, I see that one of the main mistakes they made is that they don't even know what was modeled in the simulation. They modeled the interior of the building. That means that the granite facade was not present in the simulation. The granite facade prevented the significant deformation in the upper portion of the building, except in the interior. The interior deformed greatly, as can be seen.
edit on 23-7-2012 by Varemia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Im struggeling to understand how any one could think that there is any conspiracy behind 9/11 nothing i have read or watched indercates that this was an inside job. ITS JUST NOT PLAUSABLE.. and do you really think the American government would kill hundreds of its own citizens. Think what would happen if it got out that they did!! They whould be over thrown ansd the country would decend in to chaos.


Any one who thinks that 9/11 was an inside job is wrong..

and i welcome any HARD evidance that says any differnt


PEACE!!!



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dinogur
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Well i know that:

1. Building 7 collapsed without impact of any airplane
2. First Responder - Firefighters heard a set of explosives go off during/right before the towers collapsed
3. There were pools of molten steel on the ground of Ground Zero, in no way could have an airplane impact caused that.
4. Many Engineers and Architects have said that the Towers could have with-stood many airplane collisions due to their steel-concrete reinforced skeleton

thats all i can think off of the top of m head

And off the top of my head.......
1. Fire damage (radiated heat) can weaken structures and then they collapse DUH!
2. And popping concrete structures as each floor collapses do so silently...DUH!
3. It's called heat from the FIRE not the impact .. DUH
4. Actually the towers DID withstand the collision, both of them did. What they didn't withstand was the susbsequent inferno inside the building as all combustable materials burned and weakened the internal structure. Ironically enough the external skeleton held them together as the internals collapsed. But let's not let that wee nugget spoil a good conspiracy shall we. Let's treat the towers as if they were concrete cooling towers that tend to collapse at a slight angle......DUH

The ONLY evidence for an internal conspiracy is interpretation of selected pictures and videos. Some of which could be used to prove ultimate proof of UFO's !! He says sarcastically....

Examine as many videos and pictures as you can don't disregard the ones that do not in with the conspiracy and hey presto you have a collection of information that shows no conspiracy. Now disregard some video and pictures (the clear ones DUH!) keep the out of focus, shakey, digitally zoomed etc etc and you can make Mickey Mouse the culprit.
edit on 23/7/2012 by yorkshirelad because: mised the word make



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Tim Osman



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


I can correlate a ton of # for you! Where to start though, let's see.

We had Israeli's on the George wasington bridge in a white van the day of 9-11 and the van was filled with explosives.:www.youtube.com...
Dancing Israeli's on 9-11
:911myths.com...
Planes hit each computer room on a certain level in each tower surprisingly.
:rense.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
squibs seen constantly blowing out certain windows or corridors of towers and building 7.
www.debunking911.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.youtube.com...
No way that pressure made it that far below before the building!
flashes seen in windows of trade towers.
:www.youtube.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com... hundreds of squibs seen in wtc towers.
thermite pouring from trade towers, it sure as hell isn't an electrical fire!
www.youtube.com...
other explosions heard from towers after collapse
www.youtube.com...
person blown out of trade center tower by an explosion! what exploded?
www.youtube.com...
whatreallyhappened.com...
Why hide pentagon video if you have nothing to hide from? This is what really pisses me off, they can bring everything to somewhat of a conclussion if they showed the tapes, but it has been too long and they are probably doctored up with photoshop by now!
:rense.com...
Funny how they can hide discerning evidence, which is an illegal action by them, to keep the truth hidden!
rense.com...
truthandshadows.wordpress.com...
video of pentagon missile.
www.veteranstoday.com...
not much wreckage, debris or bodies from flight 93!
:www.google.com... &ved=0CFMQsAQ
www.youtube.com...
to be continued...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATSGrunt

video of pentagon missile.
www.veteranstoday.com...


Wow... just wow.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 




His location was public, so if the nation is under attack, he's putting his life and the lives of every child, teacher, and reporter in that school at risk. His inaction PROVES one of two possible realities:

And do you think the hijackers had the ability to redirect the plane to the school?
I'm not a pilot but I doubt their GPSs has schools listed.

Think a couple of steps ahead. Pretend you were one of the bad guys. Trying to hit the pres with a plane is a bit much to ask.
But to hit the capitol building or the White House that's doable. And if the Pres is in the room at the time, bonus.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
continued...
the Enron files were in building 7 that somehow came toppling down to hide those rip off artists!
www.wtc7.net...
One thing I ask is how these terrorists new how to find all these buildings so perfectly without having any prior knowledge of finding these spots from the air!??
We had prior knowledge that was never divulged to most who worked in the towers and it cost them their lives for withholding this information from us American citizens. Maybe we should sue our system for withholding this information that took so many lives?
www.freewebs.com...
Most say that it is impossible for a 757 to be going 500 miles an hour so close to the ground due to it needing a suction under it wings to keep it up and flying!
www.democraticunderground.com...
15 of 19 terrorists that day were Saudi Arabian. Were they merely pawns stuck in a remote controlled plane set for the towers?
:whatreallyhappened.com...
strange pics of plane hitting towers shows uneven wings and strange underbelly line on a boeing 757!
612ua.0catch.com...
notice that when the second plane hits the second tower, you see a puff of smoke pour out of first tower as if something exploded in the first tower that was hidden when the second plane hit second tower! on 20 sec.
:www.youtube.com...
www.911truth.org...
story claim s that when the plane hit 90 floors up his friend in the basement was burned really bad somehow,read this story.
:www.illuminati-news.com...
isual examination determined the vans were separate and unique from trucks used by janitorial services, including different colors and devoid of markings. More curious, all the janitorial trucks had pulled out of the Towers by about 2:30 a.m—about half an hour before the second set of vans arrived.
:www.newsfocus.org...
Well here's just a few items, i'll go over what else i have missed and get back to you on this corrupt matter at hand that has been playing us all like fools!



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by KtruthD
Im struggeling to understand how any one could think that there is any conspiracy behind 9/11 nothing i have read or watched indercates that this was an inside job. ITS JUST NOT PLAUSABLE.. and do you really think the American government would kill hundreds of its own citizens. Think what would happen if it got out that they did!! They whould be over thrown ansd the country would decend in to chaos.


Any one who thinks that 9/11 was an inside job is wrong..

and i welcome any HARD evidance that says any differnt


PEACE!!!


please bring your evidences that some barbaric individuals even without any inside aid attacked the most important locations of USA. in the heart of USA ! so there are two facts: 1-USA is the weakest country in the world ! or 2-there was an inside aid.
who did kill Rachel Aliene Corrie ! who did the USS Liberty incident ! what is the role of AIPAC in USA ? why is USA full of freemasonary symbols ? the existing world order was completely on behalf of USA after the collapse of USSR but on behalf of who is the new world order ?
edit on 23-7-2012 by maes9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by maes9
please bring your evidences that some barbaric individuals even without any inside aid attacked the most important locations of USA. in the heart of USA ! so there are two facts: 1-USA is the weakest country in the world ! or 2-there was an inside aid.
who did kill Rachel Aliene Corrie ! who did the USS Liberty incident ! what is the role of AIPAC in USA ? why is USA full of freemasonary symbols ? the existing world order was completely on behalf of USA after the collapse of USSR but on behalf of who is the new world order ?
edit on 23-7-2012 by maes9 because: (no reason given)


You seem to be under the assumption that the USA can actually defend itself against this stuff. It doesn't make it the weakest country in the world. It is just reality. Get with it.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
First, I know there is more to the story than we've gotten with the OS. That being said, almost all aspects of the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 are complete hogwash. They mostly rely on the government (or some other super secret power) coming up with a plan so complex, that it could never have been pulled off successfully without raising questions. Switching planes, making missiles look like planes, or any number of other complex and unnecessary moving parts.

So why come up with such a plan? They didn't. There was no super secret plan. They could have easily planted the bombs in the buildings (since demolition is such a biggie theory), blamed the same people, and achieved the same result. Actually, that's what they would have done. No reason to go through all of the other ridiculous processes that led to the supposed implosion of the buildings.

Now if you want to talk about an epic failure in the intelligence gathering and reporting leading up to 9/11, I think you've got something there. I suspect quite a bit is being covered up regarding a complete failure of the government to identify and respond to a valid threat.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by usernameconspiracy
 



Now if you want to talk about an epic failure in the intelligence gathering and reporting leading up to 9/11, I think you've got something there. I suspect quite a bit is being covered up regarding a complete failure of the government to identify and respond to a valid threat.


An epic failure? I admit that the consequences of errors were epic, but that doesn't mean all the errors were "epic". There are pieces of info, when put together after 9/11 look very obvious, but I think a lot more of it is the benefit of hindsight always being perfect.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by usernameconspiracy
 



Now if you want to talk about an epic failure in the intelligence gathering and reporting leading up to 9/11, I think you've got something there. I suspect quite a bit is being covered up regarding a complete failure of the government to identify and respond to a valid threat.


An epic failure? I admit that the consequences of errors were epic, but that doesn't mean all the errors were "epic". There are pieces of info, when put together after 9/11 look very obvious, but I think a lot more of it is the benefit of hindsight always being perfect.


I even heard that a number of the hijackers were on watch lists, because it was considered suspicious to be foreign and be attending multiple flight schools. Intelligence simply didn't follow through on it.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by crawdad1914
 


I have to wonder if you're joking, or if you really are this... dense?

Watch NIST's damn simulation again. See where the crumpling took place at the bottom? And I'm not talking about the simulation where they didn't factor in the damage to the building. I'm talking about the other one. See, like scientists, they ran multiple simulations.

Now, take a look at your magical videos. Notice something? No? They don't show the bottom HALF of the building! Guess where the crumpling happened? The bottom half! Good boy!

I've said all I need to say here. It's like talking to 3 year-olds.

Edit: I made a couple assumptions about the videos. After watching one, I see that one of the main mistakes they made is that they don't even know what was modeled in the simulation. They modeled the interior of the building. That means that the granite facade was not present in the simulation. The granite facade prevented the significant deformation in the upper portion of the building, except in the interior. The interior deformed greatly, as can be seen.
edit on 23-7-2012 by Varemia because: (no reason given)


So the facade itself did not buckle at all in spite of the the interior framework ripping away from the facade itself.

And some say "truthers" will believe anything!


Edit: take a look at the NIST simulations again and notice the buckling taking place on the upper portion of the building. Again, somehow the facade itself amazingly falls without nary a buckling effect whatsoever.
edit on 23-7-2012 by crawdad1914 because: clarification of post



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 



I even heard that a number of the hijackers were on watch lists, because it was considered suspicious to be foreign and be attending multiple flight schools. Intelligence simply didn't follow through on it.

Or maybe they followed through - but in a different direction. Maybe they were watching for foreigners buying aircraft, not hijacking.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by lambros56

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by lambros56
I wish people would stop calling it the " Official story ".
The governments story is a theory so it should be called the " official theory" as they have never given us any proof as to what happened and who did it.


So no proof would include the evidence submitted to the Mossaoui trial ??

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...



No.
That doesn't prove the official theory.


So people found to have links with Al Qaeda, visits to Afghanistan, under surveilance by German security in Hamburg, just happen to have been involved in flight training in the US and then never seen again after 9/11.

Perhaps they were on holiday ? Get real.


Maybe to you, this makes the official theory true.
You`re too naive.

GET REAL !!!!!!



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by crawdad1914
So the facade itself did not buckle at all in spite of the the interior framework ripping away from the facade itself.

And some say "truthers" will believe anything!


Edit: take a look at the NIST simulations again and notice the buckling taking place on the upper portion of the building. Again, somehow the facade itself amazingly falls without nary a buckling effect whatsoever.
edit on 23-7-2012 by crawdad1914 because: clarification of post


Count the floors of windows in the video. I dare you.

The buckling happened way lower than the recorded picture shows.
edit on 23-7-2012 by Varemia because: clarity






top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join