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 cashlink
reply to post by wmd_2008
You are right! My opinion is the WTC were bought down by uses of explosive. However, the Government story (lies) fails to stand up to real science. I know what I see in all the video and what I see is a Hughes EXPLOSIONS! My eyes do not lie to me, only man lies to me. The only way “you” are going to change my mind of what brought the WTC down, is you show me the science that supports the Government story, because I have not found any so far. In addition, do “not” tell me about NIST report because I have read it.
Furthermore, there have been complaints filed against NIST, and I know for a fact a spokes person for NIST said they did not look in to doing any study on demolition bring down the WTC, because there where no eye witness, moreover the whole world knows that is a lie.
Therefore, if you have a way to prove to me with creditable science that the WTC fell down, other than explosions I am all ears.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
Can you PROVE that the STRUCTURE could resist A 40,500+ ton impact dropping 10-12 ft? at least as seen on the video.
CAN you prove someone MANAGED to plant explosives without anyone ever seeing it done or evidence it has been done?
Funny thing as well WHEN people LIKE myself post REAL science YOU guys seem to ignore what is stated.
Freefall speed of collapsing floors YET video evidence shows objects
falling faster than the floors thats impossible is it NOT?
Graph shown tempreture of steel against strength thats REAL!
On the net people with YOUR belief have the following theories!
Holographic planes BECAUSE they cant understand how plane could punch through the wall!
MISSILE PODS! LASER SPOTS! THE SECRET EXPLOSIVES
One site even claims they were planted during construction
posted by wmd_2008
Funny thing as well WHEN people LIKE myself post REAL science YOU guys seem to ignore what is stated.
Freefall speed of collapsing floors YET video evidence shows objects
falling faster than the floors thats impossible is it NOT?
posted by wmd_2008
Look at this video at about the 1.59 mark watch the South Tower above the impact area DROP
posted by wmd_2008
Then this picture look at upper part of building still intact but leaning over!
That happened because the impacted area of the building had steelwork damaged by the impact and then weakend by the fires like I have stated many times
posted by Griff
reply to post by wmd_2008
I knew I shouldn't have responded to someone who has managed to accumulate -1993 points in the whole 14 days they have been here. That's an average of -142 points a day.
I am not a points whore, but, to me, this shows a lot about a person's presence here. If you can't keep a positive point score, then it is obvious that you are either a troll or can't follow the forum rules or both. Hence, this will be the last time I speak with you until you show something more than regurgitation. Good day to you.
posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by SPreston
Ah you mean the melted plastic or anything else that could have melted in the flames why assume its metal ? because it suits your agenda
I did not SAY it fell to the SOUTH did I?
posted by wmd_2008
Have you seen the pictures of how the floor structure was supported on the outside walls of the build. How this for an explanation you may have seen the pictues of long lines of columns posted by someone earlier WHAT YOU assume is a explosive shock wave could just as easily be internal structures giving way under the massive dynamic load pushing from above.
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
In fact, in the months leading up to the attacks those working in the towers stated that there were allsorts of strangers wandering about the place who are unaccounted for.
A photo ID pass for Sept. 5 found on one of the men charged with fraudulently obtaining a Tennessee driver's license from a Memphis woman gave him access to the six underground levels of the One World Center building.
But which tenant hired Sakher 'Rocky' Hammad, 24, to work on its sprinklers is lost, said Port Authority of New York and New Jersey spokesman Alan Hicks on Friday.
Hammad told federal authorities that he was working on the sprinklers six days before the twin towers were brought down by terrorists, court testimony revealed this week.
But Hicks said the Port Authority, which owned the building, did its own sprinkler work, and that any other work involving sprinklers would have been arranged by an individual tenant.
"We don't know (which one) because all our records were destroyed in the World Trade Center, as were some of the people who know that," Hicks said.
posted by nh_ee
But to add to the list,
The unusually high number of PUT Options
posted by CameronFox
Clearly explained here:
Put Options
The story...
There was very high trading in "put options" on American Airline and United Airlines, immediately before 9/11. These were effectively gambles that their share prices would fall, which of course is what happened once the attacks took place. This shows the traders must have had advance knowledge of 9/11.
Our take...
This is a complex story, but the claims don’t always match the reality.
Although there were high volumes traded on these days, for instance, they weren’t as exceptionally high as some sites like to claim. Here’s one analysis.
There were very good reasons to sell American Airlines shares, too, as they’d just announced a string of bad news. Read more here.
United Airlines stocks were falling in price, too. If investors anticipated they were about to release bad results then their put options would also be worth buying (although keep in mind that the UAL put volumes weren’t the highest in the year anyway). Here’s our thoughts.
Some point to stories like the “unclaimed millions” from UAL puts as having a sinister explanation, but we disagree. Here’s why.
There was plenty of talk about potential insider dealings in other stocks, too. We haven’t researched these in any depth, but it’s worth pointing out that some people believe the claims were overblown.
What about most of the options being put through a CIA-linked bank? We weren’t convinced.
posted by wmd_2008
3) To the security expert you calcluate how much explosive would
have been required to cause the destruction seen then post back
how that much could have been planted.
THINK ABOUT IT!
posted by Griff
The problem with the whole "it must have been an individual tennant" excuse is that there weren't any individual tennants in the 6 sub-basements where "Rocky's" pass gave him access.
A photo ID pass for Sept. 5 found on one of the men charged with fraudulently obtaining a Tennessee driver's license from a Memphis woman gave him access to the six underground levels of the One World Center building.
But which tenant hired Sakher 'Rocky' Hammad, 24, to work on its sprinklers is lost, said Port Authority of New York and New Jersey spokesman Alan Hicks on Friday.
Hammad told federal authorities that he was working on the sprinklers six days before the twin towers were brought down by terrorists, court testimony revealed this week.
But Hicks said the Port Authority, which owned the building, did its own sprinkler work, and that any other work involving sprinklers would have been arranged by an individual tenant.
"We don't know (which one) because all our records were destroyed in the World Trade Center, as were some of the people who know that," Hicks said.
whatreallyhappened.com...