Video & Evidence There Was No Controlled Demo

I am none of the people you mention. This is the type of derailment and clear insults that you are basing on the premise , that i support parts of the official story?, or that i served my country?
With the type of hatred you post, i hope you do get banned, you have derailed every 9/11 thread i have seen.
And how the hell do you compare " No Plane" mentalness, to direct video footage from the day that supports that part of the official story.
Can you stop with the insults, as you are way out of line and plain wrong..
My study of 9/11 became frentic and intense after losing a close family member on that day, and you have the audacity to talk to me like that..
No wonder you support Killtown, your unfound speculation suits his style.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Originally posted by ANOK
Why do people spend so much energy trying to make the official story stick if it stands up on its own?

Hmm, Why isn't the Truth Movement taking all this solid evidence to court to put Bush behind bars?

Come on, you have all this "solid proof" that our govt did it. The truth movement spends its energy prancing around on the street spreading the word instead of taking real action. I'm sure they could do better than that if they really had a case.

My question is to anyone who believes the CD theory, how should have the towers collapsed if there was really an inferno in the impact sites that severely weakened the steel? Please tell me what it should look like.

Because Doom, the best way to keep a perpetual paranoia is by demanding an independent investigation which is an oxymoron because the funding would have to come from the government which would then be used to argue that it's not independent and thus it's really impossible. Therefore there's always a crime and always an injustice, etc.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

My main question is why are the 3 WTC buidlings that collapsed that day the only steel buildings in history to collapse from fire, specially when you have other steel buidlings that have had worse fires and worse structural damage and did not collapse ?

Which steel buildings in history have had structural damage and then caught on fire? Or while on fire suffer structural damage such as wtc7 did.

What I gather from what you said is that the fire caused partial collapses in these other steel buildings. The fire was initiated in a structurally sound building. On 9-11 the fires were not in structurally sound buildings. The towers were hit by planes and WTC 7 was hit by North Tower collapse.

To me the pure massiveness of the WTC towers constuction just can't be visualized as a partial collapse. WTC7 I'm still wondering about because it really does look awkward how all four corners just about simultaneously begin to drop. However, I'll wait and see what the report on that will say.

Originally posted by selfless
There are so many unanswered questions and inconsistencies with the laws of physics and lies and contradictions that can't be explained through the official story.

If the official story would have been consistent with the events that took place surrounding 911, there would be no need for people to research for the truth.

Since there are millions of people who sees how flimsy the official story is,
it dictates the manifestation of people who seeks the answers to these unanswered questions.

And the CT's are consistent? Haha comedy. There are more holes in the CT's than the official story. If you think no planes is more believeable than hi-jackers than .... hehe I won't go there

This video definately shows that the building has lost structural integrity. Those who keep relying on the orange liquid that pours out of the one corner in other captured video CANNOT and SHOULD NOT instantly assume it is thermite as there was a fire in the building and stuff can burn and quite possibly resemble that orange liquid. To go straight and assume it is thermite is ludicrous.

Be a fence sitter, don't just go and think it's one thing and one thing only. That's why I like reading this forum because I myself think there is more to the official story but the so called "proof" that is shown on this forum has not yet convinced me and I come back to see if anything new has been thought of.

Originally posted by DoomX
Hmm, Why isn't the Truth Movement taking all this solid evidence to court to put Bush behind bars?

Because a gallon of milk is nearly four dollars, a gallon of gas is three or more dollars. I can't afford an attorney's time in Federal Court to bring a civil suit, even if I could on what premise? They scared me? They used it to pass fear based legislations which were an affront to my rights? The one group of people who could bring a realistic civil suit were the families of the victims, most of them were paid, and if I'm not mistaken, some of them did actually bring a suit but the evidence is supressed in the interests of national secuirty. Unless you seriously think Norad is going to release internal documents at your behest to bring a civil suit which would probably eventually come around at some point to their negligence, or the CIA is going to let your case review their god knows what, etc. the evidence isn't going to be there for you.
As to actual criminal charges, who's going to bring that against the POTUS and Co.? The Justice Dept.? FBI? I think we know better than that. Even if they did, National Security simply wouldn't allow it to happen.

Has a Plane ever flown in to a 100 story building at 500mph before and then tested your theory? no! , we have nothing to equate it too..
As fgor WTC7 this is where i do get my conspiratory head on.. I have been lead to believe that this was an opportunist event, after the chaos of the day and that it was on fire, certain people considered it to be advantageous for WTC7 to come down too.. they tried to make it look like it was the same thing that happened to the other two, and made sure even its exisetence has almost faded in to history.
Yes WTC7 was pulled imo, but i dont believe the Twin Towers were, i believe it to be an opportunity too good to miss, so to speak.

even if the top portion had been cut off by phaser fire, it doesn't matter, the lower portions should have remained intact, the cores of both towers DID in fact remain standing longer than the rest of the building, please

Fowl Play

explain am viable mechanism of separation. if you don't know what i'm talking about, check the first post on p3.

we do have a point, people just don't think it matters, the majority knows what happened, but they think it's OK. that's why the entire effort can only be aimed at people who are not yet aware. most peeps around here would beg to differ, though.

Originally posted by Long Lance
even if the top portion had been cut off by phaser fire, it doesn't matter, the lower portions should have remained intact, the cores of both towers DID in fact remain standing longer than the rest of the building, please

Fowl Play

explain am viable mechanism of separation. if you don't know what i'm talking about, check the first post on p3.

we do have a point, people just don't think it matters, the majority knows what happened, but they think it's OK. that's why the entire effort can only be aimed at people who are not yet aware. most peeps around here would beg to differ, though.

The lower portions could not have remained in tact. If I handed you a 40lb weight you would have no trouble holding it right? Now if I dropped that 40lb weight from 12 feet above, would you have any trouble catching it? This notion that it would have just stopped is unfounded. If that had happened, then you'd definitely have a smoking gun.

I've spoken alot here at ATS about 9-11, but I think if I had to put it in one simple concept it would be this...

Reach deep into your logical cortexes and put aside your preconceptions just for a second and tell me that this honestly looks like a fire related collapse to you.

This video proves absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing.

Its funny, how there were eyewitness's who reported explosions in the basements of the towers, all three of them, twin towers and WTC7.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.prisonplanet.com...

www.infowars.com...

In one of the videos you can even hear the explosions.

And, most people would never know this, but there was actually 4 buildings destroyed on 911. WTC 1 2 7...and 6. WTC6 was destroyed as well. It collapsed the same way the others did, and I remember distinctly the day of 911, Peter Jennings on ABC reported 4 buildings collapsing, all the same way, within hours of each other.

But the media, backed by government spin, said that WTC 6 collapsed because of "debris that fell on it from the twin towers". This is ridiculous and defies logic.

But, in the rubble of WTC 6, you can see a huge hole at the basement, indicating that there was an explosion in the basement, which was probably what caused it to collapse.

www.serendipity.li...

So this video, to some people, may provide some proof that the towers werent taking down by explosives.

But, there is just too much proof to support otherwise, to any clear thinking person.

I suggest you look at Twitchys post, look at the image, and tell us whether that is a fire related collapse, I dare you.


[edit on 14-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

The reality Twitch is we just dont know, we have nothing to compare to. The Video posted does show twisting on the impact area and when it gave way it looks possible to me that the weight and pressure on such points could cause that, the Police felt it was going to collapse minutes before, they had seen the building bowing to what caused the twisting in Video.

9/11 cops saw collapse coming
New York Daily News - June 19th, 2004

The World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground, scientists probing the Sept. 11, 2001, disaster said yesterday.

In the case of the north tower, police chopper pilots reported seeing the warning signs - an inward bowing of the building facade - at least eight minutes before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m.
link
www.skyscrapersafety.org...

Obviously, the way an actual controlled explosion happens is the explosives all go off in a matter of seconds. There simply would not be warning signs that the buildings were about to be demolished by explosives, it would of course just suddenly happen. But that is not what happened, the buildings did not suddenly collapse without any indications that they would. Instead, the fires were compromising the structural integrity of the buildings and the buildings' support structures failed. Exterior columns buckled because the fires weakened the floor trusses and the floors sagged. The sagging floors pulled on intact column connections so as the floors sagged down, they pulled the exterior columns inward. This inward bowing of the exterior columns was evident to observers such as the police helicopters circling the towers.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Originally posted by LightWorker13
This video proves absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing.

Its funny, how there were eyewitness's who reported explosions in the basements of the towers, all three of them, twin towers and WTC7.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.prisonplanet.com...

www.infowars.com...

In one of the videos you can even hear the explosions.

And, most people would never know this, but there was actually 4 buildings destroyed on 911. WTC 1 2 7...and 6. WTC6 was destroyed as well. It collapsed the same way the others did, and I remember distinctly the day of 911, Peter Jennings on ABC reported 4 buildings collapsing, all the same way, within hours of each other.

But the media, backed by government spin, said that WTC 6 collapsed because of "debris that fell on it from the twin towers". This is ridiculous and defies logic.

But, in the rubble of WTC 6, you can see a huge hole at the basement, indicating that there was an explosion in the basement, which was probably what caused it to collapse.

www.serendipity.li...

So this video, to some people, may provide some proof that the towers werent taking down by explosives.

But, there is just too much proof to support otherwise, to any clear thinking person.

I suggest you look at Twitchys post, look at the image, and tell us whether that is a fire related collapse, I dare you.


[edit on 14-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

Less of the i dare you BS, and i never new building 6 collapsed??
You sort your knowledge out first before you point fingers and refute my decently presented argument, you are the one with it all to prove, i dont need to prove or disprove a CT.. in my opinion, No Planes are definitely debunked and CD's are going that way too.
Can you also stay on topic please, there has been enough derailment.. and now we are back on topic.
Regards

Originally posted by twitchy
I've spoken alot here at ATS about 9-11, but I think if I had to put it in one simple concept it would be this...

Reach deep into your logical cortexes and put aside your preconceptions just for a second and tell me that this honestly looks like a fire related collapse to you.

So you're saying that what constitutes truth is throwing out all the scientific findings and relying on opinion of us uneducated people who have no expertise on what a building collapse should or shouldn't look like? Perhaps you could show us an example of what a proper collapse should look like of a 110 story building that was hit by a commercial airliner?

This is the biggest problem. People want to just go by what they see and want to believe. If one were to put away their preconception then they would make NO determinations from such a photo and go purely by what experts have to say because they would know they don't know enough about these things to simply look at a picture and know. And even the experts can't simply look at a picture and know.

So what is it you expect?

We expect reason and logic, backed by fact and testimony, backed by intuition and that "deep down" feeling everybody has, and ALL of it points to an inside job, you know it deep down, so get your facts straight and learn the Truth.

My dare is still on, by the way.


[edit on 14-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

Originally posted by DoomX
Which steel buildings in history have had structural damage and then caught on fire? Or while on fire suffer structural damage such as wtc7 did.

Well lets start with buildings 5 and 6, and the other buidlings. They were closer to the towers had more structural damage then building 7 and had fires but did not collapse.

i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...


Here is a list of buidlings that had fires burning for several hours longer then the WTC buildings, suffered great structural damage but did not collapse.

www.pleasanthillsfire.org...

1. The One Meridian Plaza Fire
One Meridian Plaza is a 38-floor skyscraper in Philadelphia that suffered a severe fire on February 23, 1991. The fire starting on the 22nd floor, and raged for 18 hours, gutting eight floors and causing an estimated $100 million in direct property loss It was later described by Philadelphia officials as "the most significant fire in this century".

The fire caused window breakage, cracking of granite, and failures of spandrel panel connections. Despite the severity and duration of the fire, as evidenced by the damage the building sustained, no part of the building collapsed.

2. The First Interstate Bank Fire
The First Interstate Bank Building is a 62-story skyscraper in Los Angeles that suffered the worst high-rise fire in the city's history. From the late evening of May 4, 1988 through the early morning of the next day, 64 fire companies battled the blaze, which lasted for 3 1/2 hours. The fire caused extensive window breakage, which complicated firefighting efforts. Large flames jutted out of the building during the blaze. Firefighting efforts resulted in massive water damage to floors below the fire, and the fire gutted offices from the 12th to the 16th floor, and caused extensive smoke damage to floors above. The fire caused an estimated $200 million in direct property loss.

A report by Iklim Ltd. describes the structural damage from the fire:

In spite of a total burnout of four and a half floors, there was no damage to the main structural members and only minor damage to one secondary beam and a small number of floor pans.

3. The 1 New York Plaza Fire
1 New York Plaza is a 50-story office tower less than a mile from the World Trade Center site. It suffered a severe fire and explosion on August 5, 1970. The fire started around 6 PM, and burned for more than 6 hours.

4. Caracas Tower Fire
The tallest skyscraper in Caracas, Venezuela experienced a severe fire on October 17, 2004. The blaze began on the 34th floor and spread to over 26 floors, and burned for more than 17 hours. Heat from the fires prevented firefighters from reaching the upper floors, and smoke injured 40 firefighters.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by LightWorker13
We expect reason and logic, backed by fact and testimony, backed by intuition and that "deep down" feeling everybody has, and ALL of it points to an inside job, you know it deep down, so get your facts straight and learn the Truth.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

Where is your evidence backed by facts and testimony? i see nothing? where does it point to an inside job? who is the insiders? where are the facts or testimony that back this wild accusation up?
You fall very short pal, i have studied this since day 1, as well as other conspiracies on the old ATS and prior since 1988, if you are going to appeal for facts and testimony (which i have provided throughout the thread using video and official statements) you must show that you are using them yourself, stay on subject and show me the facts it was a CD? i can debunk all of them... because i believed CD myself, until i managed to debunk..
on topic please


[edit on 14-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Hmm well lets see...

Project for the New American Century, document "Rebuilding Americas defenses" page 51, paragraph 1..."The process of transformation (of global power to America) would likely be a long one, absent some catalyzing and catastrophic event like a NEW PEARL HARBOUR."

www.newamericancentury.org...

This was written by the very people in power now, and this was written 1 year BEFORE 911. And my, what a coincidence, 7 months after these crooks got in power via the Bush regime, it happens!

You think they wouldnt plan it, theyve done it before.

Operation Northwoods

That is just two things, I can go on and on and on, and I will if it means you will see the Truth.

This including reports by police and fireman, trained observers, of explosions in all the towers that fell?? There is no debate, at least there shouldnt be, and Id love to hear anyone debunk the explosions clearly heard on the video tape, if you bothered to watch it.


[edit on 14-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

Originally posted by LightWorker13
And, most people would never know this, but there was actually 4 buildings destroyed on 911. WTC 1 2 7...and 6. WTC6 was destroyed as well. It collapsed the same way the others did, and I remember distinctly the day of 911, Peter Jennings on ABC reported 4 buildings collapsing, all the same way, within hours of each other.

Building 6 did not collapse on 911. It was Pulled down days later.

911research.wtc7.net...

WTC 6 was demolished as part of the clean-up of Ground Zero. FEMA, the agency charged with investigating the disaster, did not collect any data on this building.

Originally posted by LightWorker13
Hmm well lets see...

Project for the New American Century, document "Rebuilding Americas defenses" page 51, paragraph 1..."The process of transformation (of global power to America) would likely be a long one, absent some catalyzing and catastrophic event like a NEW PEARL HARBOUR."

www.newamericancentury.org...

This was written by the very people in power now, and this was written 1 year BEFORE 911. And my, what a coincidence, 7 months after these crooks got in power via the Bush regime, it happens!

You think they wouldnt plan it, theyve dont it before.

Operation Northwoods

That is just two things, I can go on and on and on, and I will if it means you will see the Truth.

what has this got to do with the thread?
gimme your facts, not specualtive CT's..
You have given nothing to this thread, now im wondering if you have anything to give?
I dare you?