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.
from Howard
Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Theory' is a Conspiracy Fact
Snip~
The Port Authority was already trying to line up the thousands of tenants it would need to fill the acres of office space in the towers. Such a frightful vision could not be left unchallenged. Robertson says that he never saw the ad and was ignorant of the political battle behind it. Still, he recalls that he addressed the question of an airplane collision, if only to satisfy his engineer's curiosity. For whatever reason, Robertson took the time to calculate how well his towers would handle the impact from a Boeing 707, the largest jetliner in service at the time. He says that his calculations assumed a plane lost in a fog while searching for an airport at relatively low speed, like the B-25 bomber. He concluded that the towers would remain standing despite the force of the impact and the hole it would punch out. The new technologies he had installed after the motion experiments and wind-tunnel work had created a structure more than strong enough to withstand such a blow. Exactly how Robertson performed these calculations is apparently lost -- he says he cannot find a copy of the report. Several engineers who worked with him at the time, including the director of his computer department, say they have no recollection of ever seeing the study. But the Port Authority, eager to mount a counterattack against Wien, seized on the results -- and may in fact have exaggerated them. One architect working for the Port Authority issued a statement to the press, covered in a prominent article in The Times, explaining that Robertson's study proved that the towers could withstand the impact of a jetliner moving at 600 miles an hour. That was perhaps three times the speed that Robertson had considered. If Robertson saw the article in the paper, he never spoke up about the discrepancy. No one else issued a correction, and the question was answered in many people's minds: the towers were as safe as could be expected, even in the most cataclysmic of circumstances. There were only two problems. The first, of course, was that no study of the impact of a 600-mile-an-hour plane ever existed. ''That's got nothing to do with the reality of what we did,'' Robertson snapped when shown the Port Authority architect's statement more than three decades later. The second problem was that no one thought to take into account the fires that would inevitably break out when the jetliner's fuel exploded, exactly as the B-25's had.
The ad with its eerily prophetic message:
[edit on 9-6-2005 by HowardRoark]
Originally posted by Sauron
I marked the good bits in bold are you saying that the Port Authority lied to the public to.?
Or at lest twist information to there own benefit?
Originally posted by Sauron
I marked the good bits in bold are you saying that the Port Authority lied to the public.?
Or the Port Authority has at lest twist information to there own benefit or needs? it looks that way to me, if they lied about this what else have they lied about?
Originally posted by TxSecret
Howard, do you not go back and read your own posts? And you still have not answered my question about the seismic data concerning the fall of 1 and 2. At least post a link to the thread where your alleged "debunking" took place. (You know where I'm talking about) I don't think you really debunked anything but I want everyone else here to make up their own minds.
DOJ Emergency Response to Terrorism Manual Depicts WTC
Towers as Targets on Cover Before Attacks
Source: Internet September 2001
The Department of Justice has been training civic officials
and law enforcement officers terrorism response techniques
with a manual depicting twin towers as targets. These manuals
were in use prior to the September 11 attacks on the WTC.
Source: www.september11news.com...
as posted by billybob
i couldn't see it EXPLODING down the elevator shafts, and blowing out elevator doors and lobby windows, decimating the machine shop on sublevel c, while also pooling up above, compromising steel strength, and also creating the HUUUUGE fireball, OUTSIDE the building........
The report estimated that even if just 1% of a jetliner's fuel ignited after impact, it would create an explosion equivalent to 1,000 pounds of dynamite....
Originally posted by Seekerof
Apparently your not familiar with jet fuel, billybob?
Ask some Navy people, who work on carriers, etc., in reallife about the qualities and properties of JP5, etc.
You must think that they put typical gas fuel into commercial jetliners, with no regards for the octane requirements or levels, huh?
seekerof
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Originally posted by slank
.
WTC had sky lobbies.
The local elevators only went like a third of the way up and down up and down,
Express elevators went like to the 44th and 77th sky lobby floors.
That would have made it neccessary for any fuel to have transfered elevators between sky lobby floors to get to the basement.
These have to be independent explosions.
I guess it really is true,
911 was a government involved event.
.
You are forgetting about the freight elevator. Read the whole article that I linked to above. The elevator operator was burned in the fuel explosion.
Besides that, elevators aren't the only shafts in the core area, there were pipe shafts the run the height of the building as well.
Keep up the good work Howard, some of us are still behind you.
Syntaxer and others must think they are the smartest people around. Yup, out smarted the best in the government and exposed their lies. Even smarter than all the structural engineers from around the world.
Syntaxer is so smart he even knows what was on each floor and NOTHING would help that jet fuel from burning hotter.
How come 100,000's of structural engineers aren't backing up Syntaxer? I guess Syntaxer also knew the hardening level of the steel used in the building. I guess Syntaxer also assumed this steel wouldn't be softened after being exposed to small amounts of heat for a couple of hours.
I guess Syntaxer and others never thought about electrical mains being severed and acting as arc welders. There were 100's of radio and TV transmitters on top of the tower requiring a few megawatts. Quite an arc welder. And what else was in the building that act as fuel to make the fire hotter and weaken the steel more???
Originally posted by Seekerof
Here is just one documented example and MORE can be found and provided, be assured of that.
The report estimated that even if just 1% of a jetliner's fuel ignited after impact, it would create an explosion equivalent to 1,000 pounds of dynamite....
Vulnerability of US Power Plants to Terrorist Attack and Internal Sabotage
Now, this native of Puerto Rico and remarkable American hero is taking his 9-11 activism to an even higher level. He has commenced, as Plaintiff, a federal court lawsuit against George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld and others alleging that they and others were complicit in the 9-11 attacks, and either planned the attacks, or had foreknowledge of the attacks and permitted them to succeed, in order to exploit a "New Pearl Harbor" to launch wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. (The phrase "New Pearl Harbor" comes from a declaration of principles by the neo-conservative "Project for the New American Century," in which it is proposed as an event needed to steel American public opinion to support the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and U.S. military domination of the Middle East.)
Attorney Berg acknowledges that Rodriguez's action will shock and offend many Americans. But he urges critics to read the detailed complaint, posted on the internet at www.911forthetruth.com, before forming conclusions. "The 'Official Story' of what actually took place on 9-11 is a lie," Berg flatly maintains. "We do not pretend to have put together a full and definitive account of how, and by whom, the attacks were carried out. But information reported in mainstream media, and viewed in the light of common sense and the laws of physics, demonstrate that the 'Official Story,' examined closely, is not credible. The 'Official Story' contains an alarming number of inconsistencies and implausibilities. The major media have reported many of the raw facts, but have studiously avoided analysis, because doing so would reveal that the government is lying to us. The 9-11 Commission, a suspect collection of government and intelligence insiders, restated without question or examination all essential elements of the 'Official Story' of the actual events of 9-11. It failed almost completely to refute, or even to mention, the great body of evidence that suggests the 'Official Story' cannot be true, and it failed completely to hold anyone accountable. From the foregoing facts, it ought to be obvious that a cover-up, or a "limited hang-out" admitting only bureaucratic mistakes for which no one is to be held accountable, has taken place and is continuing."
COUNTS…………………………………………………………………………….P. 149
1. MISPRISION OF A FELONY (18 U.S.C. Section 4)…………………………...P. 149
2. MISPRISION OF TREASON (18 U.S.C. Section 2382)………………………...P. 151
3. PATTERN OF RACKETEERING ACTIVITY (18 U.S.C. Section 1962c)…….P. 152
4. RACKETEERING ACTIVITY (18 U.S.C. Section 1961(1))……………………P. 154
5. CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT RICO VIOLATIONS\
(18 U.S.C. Section 1962 (b, c))……………………………………………….….P. 155
6. INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (18 U.S.C. Section 1964c)…...P. 156
7. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (18 U.S.C. Section 1964c)……………………………...P. 157
8. COMMON LAW INJUNCTIVE RELIEF……………………………………. ...P. 159
9. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT (28 U.S.C. Section 2201 et seq.)……………...P. 159
10. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF……………………………………………………….…P. 161
11. RELIEF UNDER ANTI-TERRORISM ACT (18 U.S.C. Section 2333)…….….P. 162
12. RELIEF FOR AND FROM CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY………………..P.163
13. RELIEF UNDER WAR CRIMES ACT (18 U.S.C. Section 2441)……………..P. 172
Sorry, turbonium, but I've already addressed that falacy once before
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The affect of an aircraft impact was considered long after the design of the towers was finalized.
The fact is, structurally, the towers did withstand the impacts. They were not able to withstand the damage to the fireproofing.
What a totally secondhand, hearsay, logically and gramatically incorrect statement.
Originally posted by turbonium
WTC 7 WAS NOT hit by anything, and lost NO fireproofing, and had MINIMAL fires. Yet it too collapsed in free fall time. Totally different strucure, totally identical collapse time!! Geez, what are the odds? Must be VERY high!! I guess we can thus conclude that they had best stop contructing steel framed buildings, as they completely collapse with the smallest of fires!!