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.

 

Here it is! The final ad for the 9/11 global campaign!

page: 6
238
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Am, I missing something . The Towers showed the wings of the Jet Liners made of 2024 T6 aluminum , maybe some 7075 T6 aluminum and other light metals penetrate all of those huge thick structural Steel Box columns all the way out to the tips . When you look at the Pentagon you see a hole supposedly from the fuselage . What am I not seeing ?


I said non passenger planes. They were military planes with remote controlled pods attached to the fuselage. I posted the video and picture in the other thread and don't have time to post it again. Here are those posts:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As for the pentagon it was probably a cruise missle launced from a predator drone. I am not sure about this though. I haven't studied the pentagon in great detail.




posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I said non passenger planes. They were military planes with remote controlled pods attached to the fuselage.


No, they were passenger planes - how do you explain the windows on them? The "remote control pods" were just part of the aircraft.
www.popularmechanics.com...
911review.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrMaybeNot

Originally posted by FirstCasualty

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 

I predict great things for this campaign and for this thread!

The thread title alone got me excited let alone the campaign.

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are more than just patriots, theyre heroes.

One of those 2,000 engineers is a good friend of mine with a Masters in chemical engineering.



edit on 3-6-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)
h
As painfully obvious that it is that 9/11 had help from the inside
this could never come to life or its the end of America.

Nobody would ever trust the US. and no american would ever trust the
white house.

Keeping the truth about 9/11 secret IS a matter of national security.


I think keeping the truth about 9/11 secret IS a matter of life security for the perpetrators.


If someone kills 3 people they get hanged or a lethal injection. You mean to tell people that killing 3000 in one day and starting two wars on total bs should be tolerated? I hope not. They don't deserve to live 1 hour let alone a normal life.

Not to mention the longer this horse manure remains as "truth" the greater the chance for WW3 with russia because we are giving weapons to REAL muslim terrorists trying TO OVERTHROW legitimate governments in the middle east and stealing their trading partners.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by nOraKat
 


the most damning evidence pointing to a controlled demolition is the overwhelming copious amount of white *micro-ash* that blanketed all of downtown Manhattan in a thick layer.

The only evidence of "controlled demo" is leftover firing train components. They should be littering the site (in "overwhelming copious amounts").

Mmm hmm?

Spent shock tube...




posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I said non passenger planes. They were military planes with remote controlled pods attached to the fuselage.


No, they were passenger planes - how do you explain the windows on them? The "remote control pods" were just part of the aircraft.
www.popularmechanics.com...
911review.com...


Yeah I saw a 3-window section of the fuselage. Both cargo and military planes have a few/several.



Eyewitness accounts are hard to debunk. The plane was going fast but not that fast to fail to see any windows and that strange blue logo at the front of the plane.

As for that bulge at the middle of the planes belly that DOES NOT look similar to the pictures posted on that pseudo-debunking site. Trust me I looked at them and its irrellevant.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Am, I missing something . The Towers showed the wings of the Jet Liners made of 2024 T6 aluminum , maybe some 7075 T6 aluminum and other light metals penetrate all of those huge thick structural Steel Box columns all the way out to the tips . When you look at the Pentagon you see a hole supposedly from the fuselage . What am I not seeing ?


I said non passenger planes. They were military planes with remote controlled pods attached to the fuselage. I posted the video and picture in the other thread and don't have time to post it again. Here are those posts:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As for the pentagon it was probably a cruise missle launced from a predator drone. I am not sure about this though. I haven't studied the pentagon in great detail.

I saw that post.






People do plenty of research so why don't you acknowledg it


Are you working for the rogue government?

That van was a hoax. And the pic of the plane proves what? That "bulge" is on both sides, but the plane is angled so it appears to be "lopsided".



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I said non passenger planes. They were military planes


So what happened to the passengers and crew on American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175?

Where are the 157 people that were onboard those planes?



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Indeed the lack of pentagon video footage is another smoking gun. Not that really pathetic 5fps clip of something exploding and being hazey as hell either. It is impossible to determine what if anything struck the pentagon.

Then they confiscated the surveillance videos from nearby business so that one can only assume the governments account of a passenger plane impacting the pentagon. The same none passenger planes that struck the twin towers and brought down 3 buildings in the complex. Please are people retarded or what??

The pentagon wasn't destroyed like the twin towers. And its military .quarters for the entire US War Machine. Does it really surprise anyone they don't want to show how it was done? Maybe to give others ideas, why not?



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


Compare the bulge on that picture with the pictures on that pseudo-debunking site and you will see there is no credible resemblance whatsoever. Its day and night different. Maybe my eyesight is a little better than yours?

If you haven't looked yet then please do.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


If you haven't looked yet then please do.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Indeed the lack of pentagon video footage is another smoking gun. Not that really pathetic 5fps clip of something exploding and being hazey as hell either. It is impossible to determine what if anything struck the pentagon.

Then they confiscated the surveillance videos from nearby business so that one can only assume the governments account of a passenger plane impacting the pentagon. The same none passenger planes that struck the twin towers and brought down 3 buildings in the complex. Please are people retarded or what??

The pentagon wasn't destroyed like the twin towers. And its military .quarters for the entire US War Machine. Does it really surprise anyone they don't want to show how it was done? Maybe to give others ideas, why not?


What do you mean how it was done?

There was copious amounts of convincing through out the mainstream media on how it was done. don't you remember the pilot lined that big arsed jet a few feet off the ground and ran that biatch right into the side of the pentagon.

It was a pretty clean story, a few snaps of the scene wouldn't have added more to the story if that WAS the story. ...Right?
edit on 4-6-2013 by FirstCasualty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Indeed the lack of pentagon video footage is another smoking gun. Not that really pathetic 5fps clip of something exploding and being hazey as hell either. It is impossible to determine what if anything struck the pentagon.

Then they confiscated the surveillance videos from nearby business so that one can only assume the governments account of a passenger plane impacting the pentagon. The same none passenger planes that struck the twin towers and brought down 3 buildings in the complex. Please are people retarded or what??

The pentagon wasn't destroyed like the twin towers. And its military .quarters for the entire US War Machine. Does it really surprise anyone they don't want to show how it was done? Maybe to give others ideas, why not?


Of course it suprises me that government wants people to trust it without providing any credible evidence, so that we are forced to go to war on such treacherous lies. 3000 PEOPLE DIED JUST IN ONE DAY!!!!!

The most secure building can't provide any credible evidence? And then on top of all this BS the feds go around the block confiscating private surveillance videos for what reason? Are you nuts or what?



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by FirstCasualty
 


It was a pretty clean story, a few snaps of the scene wouldn't have added more to the story if that WAS the story. ...Right?

Yah, we all saw the "simulations". And thats exactly why they don't want to show a good bit of video of how the plane hit. Thy might be a little paranoid about thousands of planes flying nearby everyday?

You and I both know the footage is there, a ton of it. How does that change what happened?

Now tell me they are covering it up and I'll agree. Just not for the same reason as you.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Are you nuts or what?

You want to converse fine, I'm not replying to insults.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by DeeKlassified
 


Excuse me, you said there was no gash to WTC7. I presented evidence that there was. Did I say that was the cause of the collapse? No. Reading comprehension 101. Might want to brush up on that.

Why is that important? The impact is what set off fires for over 5 hours, knocked off any fire-proofing in the area of impact, and as it ALSO stated in the NIST FAQ:

21. Did debris from the collapse of WTC 1 cause damage to WTC 7's structure in a way that contributed to the building's collapse?
The debris from WTC 1 caused structural damage to the southwest region of WTC 7—severing seven exterior columns—but this structural damage did not initiate the collapse. The fires initiated by the debris, rather than the structural damage that resulted from the impacts, initiated the building's collapse after the fires grew and spread to the northeast region after several hours. The debris impact caused no damage to the spray-applied fire-resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams except in the immediate vicinity of the severed columns. The debris impact damage did play a secondary role in the last stages of the collapse sequence, where the exterior façade buckled at the lower floors where the impact damage was located. A separate analysis showed that even without the structural damage due to debris impact, WTC 7 would have collapsed in fires similar to those that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001. None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings.

www.nist.gov...

As for Craig Bartmer?


For someone to be that close to the base of WTC7, to only look at the WTC7 collapsing AFTER someone yells its coming down, run for your life, and MISS the massive blasts before collapse?


"I saw, you know, there was definately fire in the building, you know, but ... um, I didn't hear any, and you know maybe this is movie crap, i didn't hear any creaking or i didn't hear any indication that it was going to come down, and all of a sudden the radios exploded and everybody started screaming, "Get away. Get away. Get away from it." and I was like a dear in the .lights. And I look up. It was that moment, you know, "Get away", and I looked up... and... it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. And all the things started peeling in on itself and... I mean, there was an umbrella of crap seven feet over my . that I just stared at. Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running and the [explitive]'s hitting the ground behind me and the whole time your hearing "thoom. thoom. thoom. thoom. thoom." So. I think I know an explosion when I hear it."


Yeah, nothing that gives away it is going to collapse. No sounds. Nothing. Then all of a sudden his radio "explodes" and people scream "Get away get away!!" and THEN he looks up and sees the building caving in over him? Yeah, wow, and thn after that, he hears the booms of "expletive deleted' hitting the ground behind him. This must be the first time a building started to collapse well before the explosives went off. After all, how could someone like him, at the very base of WTC7 miss something like this:


or miss this:


So the only thing that got his attention was not the above sound of demo charges, but people and radios screaming to run. No bangs,no booms, no thooms. Remember this one fact, for ever and ever, as long as you live: buildings do not silently collapse before the explosives explode. Explosives do not explode silently. They go boom, then the building comes down. Not the other way around. For someone that was allegedly right next to it, to completely miss those blasts (and admit it unintentionally to boot
) it hurts your argument even more so. Explosives go boom loudly. He didnt hear a darn thing until it actually started to have an umbrella of crap over him.
edit on 6/5/2013 by GenRadek because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by DeeKlassified
 


Excuse me, you said there was no gash to WTC7. I presented evidence that there was. Did I say that was the cause of the collapse? No. Reading comprehension 101. Might want to brush up on that.

Why is that important? The impact is what set off fires for over 5 hours, knocked off any fire-proofing in the area of impact, and as it ALSO stated in the NIST FAQ:

21. Did debris from the collapse of WTC 1 cause damage to WTC 7's structure in a way that contributed to the building's collapse?
The debris from WTC 1 caused structural damage to the southwest region of WTC 7—severing seven exterior columns—but this structural damage did not initiate the collapse. The fires initiated by the debris, rather than the structural damage that resulted from the impacts, initiated the building's collapse after the fires grew and spread to the northeast region after several hours. The debris impact caused no damage to the spray-applied fire-resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams except in the immediate vicinity of the severed columns. The debris impact damage did play a secondary role in the last stages of the collapse sequence, where the exterior façade buckled at the lower floors where the impact damage was located. A separate analysis showed that even without the structural damage due to debris impact, WTC 7 would have collapsed in fires similar to those that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001. None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings.

www.nist.gov...

As for Craig Bartmer?


For someone to be that close to the base of WTC7, to only look at the WTC7 collapsing AFTER someone yells its coming down, run for your life, and MISS the massive blasts before collapse?


"I saw, you know, there was definately fire in the building, you know, but ... um, I didn't hear any, and you know maybe this is movie crap, i didn't hear any creaking or i didn't hear any indication that it was going to come down, and all of a sudden the radios exploded and everybody started screaming, "Get away. Get away. Get away from it." and I was like a dear in the .lights. And I look up. It was that moment, you know, "Get away", and I looked up... and... it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. And all the things started peeling in on itself and... I mean, there was an umbrella of crap seven feet over my . that I just stared at. Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running and the [explitive]'s hitting the ground behind me and the whole time your hearing "thoom. thoom. thoom. thoom. thoom." So. I think I know an explosion when I hear it."


Yeah, nothing that gives away it is going to collapse. No sounds. Nothing. Then all of a sudden his radio "explodes" and people scream "Get away get away!!" and THEN he looks up and sees the building caving in over him? Yeah, wow, and thn after that, he hears the booms of "expletive deleted' hitting the ground behind him. This must be the first time a building started to collapse well before the explosives went off. After all, how could someone like him, at the very base of WTC7 miss something like this:


or miss this:


So the only thing that got his attention was not the above sound of demo charges, but people and radios screaming to run. No bangs,no booms, no thooms. Remember this one fact, for ever and ever, as long as you live: buildings do not silently collapse before the explosives explode. Explosives do not explode silently. They go boom, then the building comes down. Not the other way around. For someone that was allegedly right next to it, to completely miss those blasts (and admit it unintentionally to boot
) it hurts your argument even more so. Explosives go boom loudly. He didnt hear a darn thing until it actually started to have an umbrella of crap over him.
edit on 6/5/2013 by GenRadek because: (no reason given)


It should be noted though that the level of ambient noise on the most chaotic day in NYC history was probably high.

The noise of a demo explosion is not near as loud as the noise from a typical bomb, At least i don't believe so, I admit I have seen neither in person and am only going off TV effects.

The charges were likely buried well into the concrete covered by drywall and insulation in some areas. That would be necessary obviously to not be detected.

The building not being stripped as a regular demo would be, like party walls and core and stair walls. Sound would carry a lot better i suppose in a regular demo compared to 9/11.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Indeed the cacophony of noise from actual explosive demolition is hard to miss. That hypersonic "crack a crak ack". Since charges are designed to defeat the hardest (concrete and steel) elements that support the whole structure, they must have the most brisance, be relatively small and a lot of them.

Spread out around the columns and wired together from a central location in order to fire all at once. That way you get symmetrical collapse. Most people don't have the first clue how that looks just before they are detonated.

Heres a look. Notice the star of shock tube radiating from a central point. Each yellow lead is to a charge and set so that it will fire all the charges on that floor at once. That way the building is less likely to fall on its side. The intent is to kick out all the columns on that floor at the same time.




posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Actually I'm all on your side, I think the truth should be known by everyone, as the US participated in the attacks. All I was trying to say is the only people with anything to lose from such truth revealed would be the ones responsible for it.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Indeed the lack of pentagon video footage is another smoking gun. Not that really pathetic 5fps clip of something exploding and being hazey as hell either. It is impossible to determine what if anything struck the pentagon.

Then they confiscated the surveillance videos from nearby business so that one can only assume the governments account of a passenger plane impacting the pentagon. The same none passenger planes that struck the twin towers and brought down 3 buildings in the complex. Please are people retarded or what??

The pentagon wasn't destroyed like the twin towers. And its military .quarters for the entire US War Machine. Does it really surprise anyone they don't want to show how it was done? Maybe to give others ideas, why not?


Show how what was done, a plane crashing into a building like at the Towers which was shown, over a million times on the nightly news ?

You do not believe what happened at the Pentagon ? What exactly do you believe for this, then.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by nOraKat
 


the most damning evidence pointing to a controlled demolition is the overwhelming copious amount of white *micro-ash* that blanketed all of downtown Manhattan in a thick layer.

The only evidence of "controlled demo" is leftover firing train components. They should be littering the site (in "overwhelming copious amounts").

Mmm hmm?

Spent shock tube...



Oh, of course.

For sure that no other means of "professionally" demolishing buildings exist other than what the usual companies do to maintain a certain budget..

No chance that any other technology has been developed, hundreds of advances in technology and explosives could not possibly have been involved, only pure chance and BETTER than CONTROLLED DEMOLITION INC. Themselves could have done...

It surely is incredible that those airplanes produced a more perfectly controlled building implosion, and complete annihilation than the conventional explosives used regularly in most takedowns.

And in the so called "debunkers minds" gravity and jet fuel are somehow far more destructive than carefully placed, timed explosives...

I would say the time for your useless pandering to boring archaic belief systems is run its course...better switch teams fast.





top topics



 
238
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join