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.
Originally posted by esdad71
Hey Slaps, PNAC is not a 'government organization' per say. Yes, alot of the members are goverment officials, and i am sure in some way the conversations that occur in there somehow refer to the White House, but that is what it is for. I do not feel it is any type of shadow government.
Originally posted by esdad71
Have you read the PNAC statement or anything about it rather than referencing a few quotes you may have read on line?
Originally posted by esdad71
It was designed I would believe because of the eroding military under Clinton.
Originally posted by esdad71
They want democracy across the globe, which, in it's basic form is not a bad thing.
Originally posted by esdad71
However, for democracy, there must be some type of conflict.
Originally posted by esdad71
PNAC did not plan 9/11, it was in the works prior to them creating it. Plans for 9/11 were forged the day in 93 that the towers did not collapse in the bombings.
Originally posted by esdad71
As far as the NYPD helicopters, yes, they can show that the official story is true. Take some time and look it up, they saw the damage and the buckling, and the shifting minutes before they fell.
Originally posted by esdad71
WTC 7 is another arguement all together. It however was not a controlled demo either. It took close to 30 seconds for the tower to fall from the first indication of failure. You can see the 'penthouse' elevators as they were called, sinking into the building.
Originally posted by Esdad71
As far as the NYPD helicopters, yes, they can show that the official story is true. Take some time and look it up, they saw the damage and the buckling, and the shifting minutes before they fell.
Originally posted by esdad71
WTC 7 is another arguement all together. It however was not a controlled demo either.
Originally posted by esdad71
You have an opinion, but no facts which makes it difficult to try to absorb your ideas. However, since I decide that the 'official' story is correct, I have to defend my views.
Originally posted by esdad71
As far as "pull it", if this was really the case, do you really think the insurance company would have paid him 4.7 million? NFW they would. Pull it was referring to the fact that there would be now way to save the building and they needed to stop the effort from the NYPD, FDNY and PA workers. Pull it. like pull the plug maybe? Oh, but it couldn't be explained away that easily, could it. That would be too easy even though it makes sense. Silverstien did not want loss of life.
Originally posted by LAES YVAN
Originally posted by esdad71
WTC 7 is another arguement all together. It however was not a controlled demo either.
esdad.... please comment on this video of Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC's, saying they "pulled" WTC 7.
Click here to watch...
You wanted proof? There is your proof, Larry Silverstein himsellf saying WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.
If you didn't already know, the term "pull it" is commonly used with ALL controlled demolition crews. Tell me, why does it take only 1 short day to perfectly demolish the WTC 7 building, but it takes up to 2 to 3 weeks of planning to destroy every other building professionaly? Also, tell me why on this Earth would a fire department have the correct high explosives, and the correct amount of explosives, and the correct knowledge of C.D. to bring down the WTC 7 building?
If I had to guess, the WTC 7 buildings were pre-wired with explosives. Which means 9-11 was predicted, or planned, and we had edvanced knowledge of the "attacks". If WTC 7 was pre-wired, you could only imagine that WTC 1 and 2 had explosives as well.
On top of that, Larry Silverstein was awarded 4.7 BILLION dollars from his insurance to rebuild.
Maybe Flight 93 was supposed to hit WTC 7, but something went wrong and they pulled WTC 7 anyway.
[edit on 22-8-2006 by LAES YVAN]
Originally posted by esdad71
There was no evidence found by NIST of any type of demo or explosive in WTC 7.
We were there, I don't know, maybe 10, 15
minutes and then I just remember there was just an
explosion. It seemed like on television when they blow
up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the
way around like a belt, all these explosions.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
LEAS: Can you link me to the NIST report with the whitewashed picture in it? I have not seen that photo in any of the "NCSTAR" series.
Good find. What a STEAMING PILE OF BULL PUCKEY. They turned the brightness up in Photoshop to hide the squibs... What a bunch of tools.
I would like to add this dis-info to this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by svenglezz
Still to date..........not one "structural" engineer has come forward to
say otherwise (and i have asked many to date).
So unless you have REAL info to show TNT was used ....then I would read other posts in the other threads....to see that the PLANES took the buildings down.