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.
Do you have a link for proof of that statement?
I haven´t heard that before, but I'm open for the truth.
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by RationalDespair
Do you have a link for proof of that statement?
I haven´t heard that before, but I'm open for the truth.
Hows that?
I think most of us know it was.
Originally posted by foodstamp
No they don't. They outright deny it completely!
www.bbc.co.uk...
There's the BBC statements written by BBC right there at that link.
It is certainly true that on 9/11 the BBC broadcast that WTC7 had collapsed when it was still standing. Then the satellite transmission seemed to cut out mysteriously when the correspondent was still talking. Then Richard Porter admitted in his blog last year that the BBC had lost those key tapes of BBC World News output from the day.
So is that proof that we at the BBC are part of a huge sinister conspiracy or is there a simpler explanation?
The mystery of the missing tapes didn't last that long. One very experienced film librarian kindly agreed to have another look for us one night. There are more than a quarter of a million tapes just in the Fast Store basement at Television Centre. The next morning I got a call to say the tapes had been found. They'd just been put back on the wrong shelf - 2002 rather than 2001. Not so sinister after all.
What about the incorrect reporting of the collapse of Tower 7? Having talked to key eyewitnesses who were actually at Ground Zero that day it is clear that, as early as midday, the fire service feared that Tower 7 might collapse. This information then reached reporters on the scene and was eventually picked up by the international media.
Originally posted by kurthall
I have believed 911 was an inside job for years. I think most of us know it was. Some people just have blinders on, and that is just what the government wants.
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by kurthall
I think most of us know it was.
If your only proof exists in cyberspace is that wise?
Suppose you were on trial for something. And the only proof came from YT and other websites. How long do you thing it would take your lawyer to get the case dismissed?
Indefinite detainment without trial - without telling you what the charges against you are - without the right to even see a lawyer let alone have one defend your interests.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by kurthall
I have believed 911 was an inside job for years. I think most of us know it was. Some people just have blinders on, and that is just what the government wants.
You have to know you're admitting this is faith based logic. You want to believe something is true. Therefore, it must be true.
How is this any different from any of the other faith based logic being thrown at us? Someone believes guns are at the root of crime, ergo, it must be true that passing gun restrictions against law abiding citizens will make criminals spontaneously behave themselves. Someone believes that some fourth dimension invisible guy is living up in the clouds, ergo, it must be true that humans were created by magic out of a clump of dirt. And so on and so forth.
So who is it that's really wearing the blinders, here?
Originally posted by FlySolo
Originally posted by Pilot
I wonder where that footage came from, why was a camera pointed at that building at that time? Wow!! I guess people can attempt to come up with a rationalization for why that building came down that fits in with the OS, but I can't! Good find!edit on 6-12-2012 by Pilot because: (no reason given)
Good question. And there is only one comment in the YT site. Bizarre. I guess this clip is too hard to dispute.
The speed of sound is the distance travelled during a unit of time by a sound wave propagating through an elastic medium. In dry air at 20 °C (68 °F), the speed of sound is 343.2 metres per second (1,126 ft/s). This is 1,236 kilometres per hour (768 mph), or about one kilometer in three seconds or approximately one mile in five seconds.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by exponent
There is no 'official story' of this, the BBC isn't even American. They repeated a Reuters report without sufficiently fact checking it. That's all there is to it.
.
No steel framed building had ever collapsed from fire before 911, so who could ever predict something that had never happened before? Steel framed building do not normally collapse from fire, so there was no precedence for such a claim.
edit on 12/6/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)
The McCormick Place fire "is significant because it illustrates the fact that steel-frame buildings can collapse as a result of exposure to fire. This is true for all types of construction materials, not only steel." wrote Robert Berhinig, associate manager of UL's Fire Protection Division and a registered professional engineer. He also discusses UL's steel fire certification much more knowledgably than Kevin Ryan. He is an example of one more highly qualified engineer who supports the collapse theory.
Part of a floor of an unprotected steel frame building collapsed in Brackenridge, Pennsylvania on, December 20, 1991, Killing 4 volunteer firemen
Part of the roof of a steel framed school in Virginia collapsed about 20 minutes after fire broke out
Originally posted by Another_Nut
Did wtc 7 collapse due to fire?
Where there is smoke there is fire. Where there is no smoke.....
the speed of sound is 343.2 meters per second (1,126 ft/s).
.
The McCormick Place fire "is significant because it illustrates the fact that steel-frame buildings can collapse as a result of exposure to fire.
Part of a floor of an unprotected steel frame building collapsed in Brackenridge, Pennsylvania on, December 20, 1991
Originally posted by FlySolo
reply to post by NavyDoc
I already know it was faked and I acknowledged it a few pages ago. However...
the speed of sound is 343.2 meters per second (1,126 ft/s).
only proves the video was taken 343 meters away because 1 sec was the length of time before the initial flash. (for the sake of argument)
.
The McCormick Place fire "is significant because it illustrates the fact that steel-frame buildings can collapse as a result of exposure to fire.
Part of a floor of an unprotected steel frame building collapsed in Brackenridge, Pennsylvania on, December 20, 1991
Part of a floor is not the same as a whole steel-frame building. I don't believe structural integrity can be used as an excuse either w/fires because those buildings were designed to take damage similar to a pencil poking through a mesh screen. wtc1 & 2 specifically. Can't say the same for wtc7. But still.
Originally posted by FlySolo
Part of a floor is not the same as a whole steel-frame building. I don't believe structural integrity can be used as an excuse either w/fires because those buildings were designed to take damage similar to a pencil poking through a mesh screen. wtc1 & 2 specifically. Can't say the same for wtc7. But still.