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 spacevisitor
I did that, because if I am correct, blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer did not mention anything about what happened to those also quite important and pretty big parts in that particular statement, but if you think that I was wrong, that those parts did not changed into something that was closer to a liquid than a solid mass as blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer claimed as has happened with those wings, can you tell me then what has happened with those parts?
"It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
Originally posted by billybob
i was actually talking about myself and anyone else who lets a dig fly, not you specifically.
i mean, it's hard to discuss in a civil tone, when both sides are hurling insults, but that it is nearly impossible not to hurl insults.
yeah?
Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Brilliant work, fellow truther Pathos~ Although I don't think you have to be so sneaky to convince us, the facts speak for themselves.
Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Ok I get it now! This thread is a false flag attack by a truther! Make a dummy account (and I do mean a dummy account), make a complete ### out of oneself, hurl baseless insults around and generally come off as a complete baffoon...which makes all the reasonable truth seeking folk come off as geniuses by comparison and sways casual opinion away from the bunk OS!
Originally posted by Pathos
Not a chance. I have always thought the original story was true; thus, my opinion has not changed from the start. I disagree that there is a conspiracy behind 9/11. You guys are looking for the truth, but you are denying the truth. 9/11 was only a terrorist attack, and there was NO conspiracy.
Originally posted by 7redorbs
I am not searching for the truth. I know the truth based upon what the media, news clips, and administration had said. Anything else is foolishness.
Originally posted by Pathos
It is grotesque to think that many people would believe that a conspiracy occurred. Its unethical. I am not searching for the truth. I know the truth based upon what the media, news clips, and administration had said. Anything else is foolishness.
[edit on 7-9-2009 by Pathos]
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by MightyAl
Finally, IF there was a planned CD....dontcha thnk the ones doing it would have made the FIRST Tower to be hit fall first?? I mean, that would make more sense. The fact that they fell the way they did points AWAY from planned CD, doesn't it?
Very good observation!
The answer lies in the fact that the first plane HIT THE WRONG BUILDING! That is why the second plane had to come full circle around, exceeding the software limits, and nearly missed it's target.
If you study the time lines on 911 and reverse the impacts - ie first plane had hit the other building and vice/versa, the buildings would have collapsed in the proper sequence and stood for the same amount of time before collapsing.
Originally posted by Psychoses
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by MightyAl
Finally, IF there was a planned CD....dontcha thnk the ones doing it would have made the FIRST Tower to be hit fall first?? I mean, that would make more sense. The fact that they fell the way they did points AWAY from planned CD, doesn't it?
Very good observation!
The answer lies in the fact that the first plane HIT THE WRONG BUILDING! That is why the second plane had to come full circle around, exceeding the software limits, and nearly missed it's target.
If you study the time lines on 911 and reverse the impacts - ie first plane had hit the other building and vice/versa, the buildings would have collapsed in the proper sequence and stood for the same amount of time before collapsing.
This is an interesting theory, I've never heard this one before.
So for those who are in belief that conspiracy theorists regarding 911 are wrong, let this be a prime example of how "our" information is derived.
Anti-truthers, for a lack of a better word, receive their information only once. Maybe twice. MSM and perhaps a follow-up from Popular Mechanics periodically to keep the official story "fresh".
Truthers, read something about it from a networked source and subsequently it leads to something else and so on. It eventually becomes viral and the news is spread. Each time compounding the original tip or information into a noticeable growing web of deception.
Granted, not all of these probable theories are 100% accurate. For those who believe the official story, they leave it at that. No investigation, case closed in their minds. However, the investigation process done by truthers leave no stone unturned.
Let this be an example. I will begin to investigate about the software program on commercial 757 and 756 planes built by Boeing. If this is true, then it would have been impossible to exceed the 1.5 g permitted to reach the 5-7 as reported. Unless done remotely.
[edit on 7-9-2009 by FlySolo]