You all seem to have theories on HOW it was done, but what about WHO and WHY???

reply to post by impressme


Lordy lordy, you didnt even read the 9/11 Commision Report either, have you?

You dont even know what its about! The 9/11 Commision Report is about the intelligence failures up to 9/11, piecing together the massive amounts of data and intel on the terrorist cell, and who dropped the ball in the intel world. Why the idiots at the agencies witheld info, or set up so much red tape, that its impossible to share anything between the two. Of course people are going to try to cover their @$$ and not be held responsible for idiotic inter-agency fighting and competition. Everyone knew there was friction between the two. It was not about the structural behavior of the WTCs at all!

That is what the NIST report was about. THEY were responsible for investigating the technical, engineering, metallurgical, aspects of the impacts and resultant collapses. NOT about the terrorists, or where they came from, who were they, who funded them, who failed to inform the proper agencies as the activity, etc. That was up to the 9/11 Commision!

Truthers didnt find anything critical, or any evidence, or anything for that matter that would be "dangerous" to the actual events as reported by EVERYONE else.

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


and if you were to look deeper into the human mind, and history, you will find out that ALL HUMANS are capable of deception, mass murder, cruelty, brutality, etc. So does that mean that you are now not going to trust anyone? Not even yourself? thats what it is boiling down to.

People on all levels on the totem-pole can be evil or good.

double post!
sorry! Deleted!

[edit on 2/19/2010 by GenRadek]

reply to post by GenRadek

Lordy lordy, you didnt even read the 9/11 Commision Report either, have you?

You dont even know what its about!

Really, I would expect something more mature from you, but to stoop this low just shows me how desperate you are in winning your silly argument and making your big ego feel good.

The 9/11 Commision Report is about the intelligence failures up to 9/11, piecing together the massive amounts of data and intel on the terrorist cell, and who dropped the ball in the intel world. Why the idiots at the agencies witheld info, or set up so much red tape, that its impossible to share anything between the two. Of course people are going to try to cover their @$$ and not be held responsible for idiotic inter-agency fighting and competition. Everyone knew there was friction between the two. It was not about the structural behavior of the WTCs at all!

Wow, I am glad you informed us what the 911 commission report was, because no one knew until you just told us.

Here is my understanding of the 911-commission report:

It was a white wash! Chuck full of proven lies.

That is what the NIST report was about. THEY were responsible for investigating the technical, engineering, metallurgical, aspects of the impacts and resultant collapses. NOT about the terrorists, or where they came from, who were they, who funded them, who failed to inform the proper agencies as the activity, etc. That was up to the 9/11 Commision!

And thank G-d for the Truthers that proved the NIST report was a one big fat lie.
The NIST report was constructed by using “pseudo sciences,” obviously you need to go back to school, if you support their proven lies.

The 911 commissioners have admitted their phony report is a lie, so why do you defend a proven lie?

Truthers didnt find anything critical, or any evidence, or anything for that matter that would be "dangerous" to the actual events as reported by EVERYONE else.

This is your opinion, or do you have a credible source for this claim? (I didn’t think so.)

reply to post by impressme




impressme, you are a laugh riot!

NIST was proven to be lies? Where? By who? Truthers? I have yet to see anything they said that would disprove the NIST or prove it was a lie. Or for that matter, say anything correct.

Innuendo, incredulity, lies, assumptions: those are not things to combat facts in the NIST report. I have not seen much in terms of facts from the Truthers on the NIST report. Only garbage being passed off as truth.

Pseudo-science were used in the NIST report? impressme, you are really making me laugh.
Allow me to refresh your memory of the "truthers" actually used "sciences":
Silent explosives, special explosives, explosives that explode silently and then cause collapse 6 hours later, special fire/impact-proof explosives, energy beams, space lasers, holograms, thermite, thermate, nano-thermite, super-thermite, special rigged detonators for thermite/ate/super/nano, ninja-style rigging of the buildings, mini-nukes, no planes, some planes, holographic planes, UAVs, missiles, missile pods, pods, thermite-packed planes, DU-armor piercing nosecone planes, TV fakery, buildings packed to the ceilings and walls with explosives to have the floors be vaporized, debris fell inside its footprint, debris fell outside its footprint, no such thing as thermal expansion of steel in fires, steel is stronger than fire always, airplanes should have behaved like an accordian on impact with the Towers and never entered them, bunker-buster bombs, radio-contrlled airplanes, radio-controlled explosives, and these are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. I know there are many many more I forgot.

reply to post by GenRadek

and if you were to look deeper into the human mind, and history, you will find out that ALL HUMANS are capable of deception, mass murder, cruelty, brutality, etc. So does that mean that you are now not going to trust anyone? Not even yourself? thats what it is boiling down to.

People on all levels on the totem-pole can be evil or good.

no captain point misser thats not what this is boiling down to. you basically have reiterated what I have already said earlier in this thread...

I think the "government" is probably comprised of a lot of different people. some are corrupt, some are pretty cool, some are better friends then others, some are privy to more info then others, its not hard to imagine. What if some are in employed by but not listed as government. I think america is one of histories greatest examples of how ingenious, cooperative, combative, influential, competitive, creative, and capable a nation can be. It's not hard to imagine some of the stuff that is talked about on this site.

the point isn't that good or bad could be found all up and down the totem pole, its simply that people in high levels are capable of entertaining and even carrying out false flag type scenarios. Thats a scary fact.
I maintain a different level of trust for different people in my life, if i truly didn't trust anyone I wouldn't even be able to leave the house, on the other hand I wouldn't walk up to a stranger hand them my debit card and pin # and say...hey could I trust you to keep this in a safe place for me?

To say that all humans are capable of blah blah blah is a really safe statement on yer part, but in being such doesn't really make much of a point. I mean are certain societies, demographics, religions etc more prone to immoral behavior?
Here's a thread on how power corrupts those who have it...whether they like it or not.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

so while all that bad behavior may be found all up and down the totem pole, it seems to be more concentrated at certain spots more than others...

Hey General....


Did you have a straight face when you typed that last post??

I'm pretty sure you must have been laughing your "never question the OS" head off!!

Thanks also for your list of alleged twoofer beliefs....but next time try bullet points....makes for easier reading and you may find it assists in the presentation...

Its always about the presentation when the substance is starkly lacking.......

reply to post by benoni


"Alleged"?

wow! I'm surprised! I mean are you joking or what? Cause that just blew my mind. Do I have to direct you to the websites myself?
For starters:

Rense
Infowars
LC
A&E4T
P4T
9/11 Truth

I can also bring up Richard Gage's hilareous "box" presentation too! Or Jones' terribly flawed "paper". These are seen as superior to the thousands of people involved in NIST or FEMA's reports?

reply to post by GenRadek

impressme, you are a laugh riot!

NIST was proven to be lies? Where? By who? Truthers?

I have yet to see anything they said that would disprove the NIST or prove it was a lie. Or for that matter, say anything correct.

Your “ignorance” precedes you.

If you disagree with someone, then why don’t you show evidences that disproves the individual topic instead of behaving infantile and ridiculing someone else opinion.

Innuendo, incredulity, lies, assumptions: those are not things to combat facts in the NIST report. I have not seen much in terms of facts from the Truthers on the NIST report. Only garbage being passed off as truth.

Then please do entertain us by showing proof that all of these scientific arguments are garbage.
I am sure you have plenty of credible scientists that have come forth, and put their reputation as Architectures and Engineers on the line, and have proven that all of the Architectures and Engineers for 911 Truth are all lairs.
Besides ”your opinions” you have nothing.


Here are just some of the proof to your question of where? by who?
That proved NIST lied.

The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and
Nano-Thermites

www.journalof911studies.com...

Scientists, Scholars, Architects & Engineers respond to NIST



We have found many areas that need to be revised and re-examined by NIST personnel before they release a final report on this matter. We have provided our names and affiliations at the end of this document, in accordance with the guidelines for submittal of comments promulgated by NIST at (wtc.nist.gov...).

Your response to our request was dismissive, based primarily on your belief that a six-week comment period on the 10,000 page report NIST issued for the Twin Towers was reasonable. You also saw no problem with NIST’s failure to provide any references in its Questions and Answers page to the 1000 page Report itself, apparently satisfied with NIST committing the logical fallacy of appeal to authority. As things stand right now, your position in this matter can be seen as nothing less than a deliberate attempt to hamstring the public’s ability to review and comment on NIST’s work in this extremely important area of research.

Based on our comments below, it is readily apparent that the NIST collapse explanation relies solely on extremely suspect computer models. Furthermore, at each juncture where NIST was given the opportunity to input data into each subsequent model, NIST has chosen to use those inputs which would cause the highest temperatures and the most amount of structural damage. Therefore, the submitters of these comments hereby call on NIST to publicly release its models and modeling data so that members of the scientific community can test whether other, more reasonable, assumptions will also result in global collapse of the structure. After all, a scientific hypothesis cannot be widely accepted unless it is repeatable by others.

In the August 2008 NIST draft Report on WTC 7 there is no mention of testing of any recovered steel from the collapsed remains of the building. In sections where the properties of the steel need to be discussed reference is curiously made to WTC steel samples, not specifically those of WTC 7. This can be understood if one is aware that in an earlier draft of the WTC 7 report NIST made the stark admission that “No metallography could be carried out because no steel was recovered from WTC 7. Other physical properties are the same as those estimated in Chapter 8 for the WTC steels”.
Since the NIST report on the collapse of WTC 7 suffers from a lack of physical evidence to support its findings, it should go into some level of detail on: why normal investigatory protocol was not followed, why none of the steel was recovered, and whether any laws were violated in not doing so. If there are questions as to the legality of the removal and lack of recovery for investigatory purposes, NIST should recommend that an investigation be commenced to determine who was involved with the decision to remove the steel and why NIST did not receive any of it for its investigation.
There are also several seemingly contradictory issues between the FEMA Building Performance Study Appendix C and the NIST WTC 7 Report, for which no explanations have been provided, and they are:

• NIST states "No steel was recovered from WTC 7" while FEMA section C.2 shows that at least one piece of WTC 7 steel was tested, with the results being alarming, considering the highly unusual formation of a liquid eutectic, intergranular melting, and erosion. Features not seen before, by the experienced investigators, in steel subject to common office fires.
• FEMA section C.3 Summary for Sample 1 states that the steel was heated to around 1,000° C. (1,800° F.), which is much hotter than the steel temperatures NIST is claiming to have caused the collapse, and seemingly far outside the ability of office fires to heat the steel. Additionally, this section states that steel liquefied at these temperatures, due to the formation of the eutectic, which would dramatically lower the usual 2750° F melting point temperature of the steel.
• FEMA Section C.6 Suggestions for Future Research states "It is also possible that the intergranular melting, eutectic formation, and erosion phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure."

www.911blogger.com...

The Missing Jolt:
A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis

www.journalof911studies.com...

Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC 1

www.journalof911studies.com...

Direct Evidence for Explosions: Flying Projectiles and
Widespread Impact Damage

www.journalof911studies.com...

Propping Up the War on Terror
Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories

www.911review.com...

If you disagree then show “credible sources” that all these people are wrong?








[edit on 19-2-2010 by impressme]

If the OS is true then why have they had to revise it for almost 10 years now? FEMA admitted they really had no idea how those building fell and when they clearly had no real answers to support the official storyline the government turned to NIST and they did no better we have heard how their computer simulations were modified to fit the OS even their head of fire investigations has said they did not answer his questions at all.

reply to post by impressme


I posted the best example of A&E4T! Richard Gage! Mr. Box man himself! The one who started the group! This man is better than the ACTUAL engineers who studied and investigated intensively the WTCs?

What exactly did A&E4T do to counter? Just have a bunch of wild accusations based purely on speculation and assumptions, with nothing to back it up? Where are their calculations? Where are their computer models? Where are their thousands of man hours doing research? Their "research" consisted of the same nonsense LC did. By staring at videos and then coming with some real beauties of nonsense. Once again, Richard "Mr. Box" Gage. I'm suppose to take the word of a "professional" (who never designed anything taller than a few story building) that uses cardboard boxes to "prove" how the WTCs should not have collapsed the way they did? No thanks. And HE is the founder of A&E4T??

By the way, I have read the "refutations" of NIST in those "journal of 9/11 studies". I have not seen so many holes in their claims, as I have here. Assuming the top section of the WTC just turned to dust when it collapsed and therefore should not have been able to collapse the rest of the tower? Based on a PICTURE?? Lordy lordy. Squibs? Oh they mean those explosives that when they explode, they increase in velocity as time goes forward, rather than in reality, losing their velocity after detonation. These people dont even know how explosives work. I've seen this junk debunked so many times, and yet here you are reposting it as if it is the magic bullet that is more correct than NIST. These are nothing more than rehashes of the original Loose Change boys' talking points. And to hang your hat on "research" done by two frat boys in their mom's basement, looking at grainy footage, and backed up by other armchair basement investigators, well, more power to you.

and again, I very much doubt you ever did read the NIST report or the FEMA reports. Am I correct in my assumption? If you did read them, then show me where exactly are they wrong, or "lying"? I'm most interested. Cause as far as I can tell, what they have said is true. And please, if you are going to redirect me back to those previous "rebuttles", dont bother. I want to know what YOU see as lies, and on which pages NIST and FEMA are wrong.

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


So what is the alternative? Anarchy? Have no one in charge?

Yes power can corrupt. I know it, you know it, its happened many times. People can go bad and do go bad in positions of power. But to use this as direct evidence or proof that they can be capable of such deception (on 9/11) or even suggest that because of those facts, they ARE responsible for 9/11, that is one heck of a stretch.

good point, man. The theories themselves are ludicrous, especially the fantasy re controlled demolition. This is impossible. How could they know the exact area/floors of the Towers that the hijackers flying the planes would strike? What if the plane smashes into X number of floors packed with explosives - how could this not set the rest of the explosives off, then the Tower falls instantly, and even the most convoluted science in the world wouldn't be able to explain an immediate complete collapse of the buildings.

Plus, there is no need to bring the towers down. What's the point? Why take these outrageous risks, thus 1. vastly increasing the risks of exposure, and 2. obviously increasing the manpower, more people in the loop, and again more chance of the plot getting out. If you want to attack Iraq, forward the New American Century, advance American imperialism, or whatever the motives might be, why this pointless orgy of controlled demolition ?

9/11 conspiracy theorists want us to believe that a group of conspirators (we don't know who) wanted to attack the USA and the best plan they could come up with was a fantastically complex, difficult, ludicrous scheme that even in the planning stages they must have known that the whole world would discover.

Someone says on this page that the real target was building 7, which is surely an incredible assertion. All this horrific death & destruction just so you can collapse building 7 in such a manner that the layperson instantly thinks - that's a controlled demolition. This is insanity. If you want to destroy 7, then why not have some of your operatives start fires throughout the whole building, footage will be captured of these raging flames, then after x time, the building might even collapse on it's own, so you won't need to bring it down. If it doesn't collapse, and you still need to bring it down, you do so in a fashion that isn't so obvious.

You answer your own question of the who & the why, - Al Quaeda, and its perverted distortion of Islam. Any other theory, or at least the ones I have read so far, involve the most egregious leaps in logic, unnecessary idiotic & almost suicidal decisions made by the hypothetical conspirators, and most important of all, - there is no evidence to support them!!

Here's a NOVEL thought boys and girls.

The actual perps are now still alive and among us.

Not speaking of the Kingpins of this crime,but some of the grunts and leutenants.

They followed orders thinking it was an,"excercise" but it went FUBAR and they kept following orders...

Now,these years later,nothing to do but...hope...you continue getting away with the crime of the Republic.You wake up in a cold sweat and turn on the computer,check the up to the minute news...Then log on to ATS...and lurk.YA?That's WHO,to answer the OP.
As to why,they were following orders never really thinking they would be doing such a'' screw up'',at the time,charitably surmising.

If the nano thermate was a combination over kill thing which included,a paint,applied by an innocent contractor,just given special paint.Or sprayed on foam,same thing.
The layers of the destruction charges which were to prevent toppling would have been laid in secret,wich the people involved could rationalize in terms of numbers.And after,could tell each other it was accidental. It's only when you get to the top are there people truly knowingly involved in dastardly deeds.

WHY?Dehumanization of untermenschen,useless eaters,that's what the kids are calling it?We know brutal force and merciless taking of life will cow the sheeple.Then their need for power and wealth runs it's course.They are now evil and know it,can't go back.All they can do is prevent it from ever seeing the light of day.It would be an obsession.They could never give an inch nor cede a point.What would you do?Get a job or go online?You made money by the palletload if you were smart.

Originally posted by trueforger


If the nano thermate was a combination over kill thing which included,a paint,applied by an innocent contractor,just given special paint.Or sprayed on foam,same thing.
The layers of the destruction charges which were to prevent toppling would have been laid in secret,wich the people involved could rationalize in terms of numbers.And after,could tell each other it was accidental. It's only when you get to the top are there people truly knowingly involved in dastardly deeds.

But you would still need someone to wire it all up, keep it all maintained, and undiscovered by a parade of engineers, maintenance workers, inspectors, etc that would go through certain areas on inspections, or routine maintanence. That would be a lot harder to hide.

reply to post by GenRadek


whats so bad about anarchy?
join the anarchy thread....
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't know what you think I think, but my thoughts on 9-11 have been posted already in this thread, if you don't wanna read em, then you probably shouldn't reply to me.

I have NOT pointed the finger at anyone for the events of 9 11. But my whole point, regarding north woods, which you seem to have missed, is that some people in charge are maniacs. It's absolutely NOT a stretch to think that they could commit heinous acts. If you can't even see that, then you must be incredibly naive.

Originally posted by vicen
How could they know the exact area/floors of the Towers that the hijackers flying the planes would strike? What if the plane smashes into X number of floors packed with explosives - how could this not set the rest of the explosives off, then the Tower falls instantly

As you may know, there are explosives that do not simply detonate in the event of a jet fuel fire or a violent impact.
Delayed and controlled detonation is perfectly plausible even more so if the hijacked planes were also remotely controlled (just what the company of a major PNAC signatory was developing on ... Boeings).
Obviously such explosives and technology are not for everyone.

Originally posted by vicen
Why take these outrageous risks, thus 1. vastly increasing the risks of exposure, and 2. obviously increasing the manpower, more people in the loop, and again more chance of the plot getting out.

What risks? You mean if someone speaks out?
Those who work for the most classified sections of CIA or Mossad (political assassinations, coups, arms dealing with bloody dictators etc) are not your ordinary citizens inspired by virtues of compassion or human rights.
They're cold-blooded and wired to follow orders and oftentimes work only on target assignments that they themselves cannot connect with a wider plot.
This would apply for the teams responsible for cabling and preparing the electronic, remote controlled demolition.

I'm not accusing the government - but only rogue elements within it.
And to those who protest that the Army could not have been involved, please do not bring the regular servicemen into the discussion. We're talking about the high echelons, and the trillion-dollar weapons and oil industry that have been relishing the consequences of 9/11.

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
reply to post by GenRadek

 

whats so bad about anarchy?
join the anarchy thread....
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't know what you think I think, but my thoughts on 9-11 have been posted already in this thread, if you don't wanna read em, then you probably shouldn't reply to me.

I have NOT pointed the finger at anyone for the events of 9 11. But my whole point, regarding north woods, which you seem to have missed, is that some people in charge are maniacs. It's absolutely NOT a stretch to think that they could commit heinous acts. If you can't even see that, then you must be incredibly naive.

I'm not too sure about anarchy around here. We have plenty of that in our city with gangbangers and such. lol no thanks!

I do understand and know that some people are insane that are the top. No doubt! Of course its not a stretch to think they could be responsible for some bad things, (case in point, the murder of the Hamas leader in Dubai this past week. Someone in the Isreali Mossad allowed to have the identities of British civilians stolen in order to carry out a hit. Now that is very heinous). Are there bad apples in our govt? Yes. But to be able to pull off anything of the scale as 9/11, that would have required the co-op of hundreds, if not thousands of people. THAT is a number I find to be the weak point of the whole "inside job".

I never intended to have you appear as someone pointing the finger at someone. I apoligze if I did so.

reply to post by vicen


Vicen, you just added another dimension of doubt to the OS for me. Here is a new member [Registered: 19-2-2010] that just HAPPENED to join and support the OS. It's almost as if you were called in to help out the beleaguered OS believers.

We have seen this happen many times; drive by posters to support the OS. Then never post again.

Welcome to ATS vicen!


Perhaps I'm just paranoid.






[edit on 20-2-2010 by whaaa]

thanks for the welcome, - I have to say I'm fascinated by conspiracy, esp JFK & 9/11. I joined this site simply because I became exasparated by the amount of pro-conspiracy, "inside job" material online.

I don't think it's constructive to be rude or insult people who believe alternative theories to 9/11, and i'd like to think those who disagree with what I believe would share the same view.

(but hold on, - maybe I have links to the CIA, or Mossad - TRUST NO-ONE)