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.

 

Should we just focus on Building 7?

page: 7
71
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: daftpink


What's your thoughts on it? Do you disagree with the possibility that it was a planned attack? (to some extent at least with reference to building 7).



So yah, 911 was planned and promoted as an attack on America to further the goals of world conquest.






The September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States were a Zionist “coup d'etat” to seize power in the country and launch a permanent war on Islam on behalf of Israel, an American scholar and journalist in Wisconsin says.


presstv.com...

This is a very good possibility, and even if you disagree, the simple fact is people deserve to know the truth of what REALLY happened on 9/11.
edit on -216002015-02-17T12:56:08-06:00u0828201508022015Tue, 17 Feb 2015 12:56:08 -0600 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I didn't say that was the reason - 'to further the goals of world conquest'.

But I'm sensing that's what you think I believe? I still don't know your opinion.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: daftpink


What's your thoughts on it? Do you disagree with the possibility that it was a planned attack? (to some extent at least with reference to building 7).



So yah, 911 was planned and promoted as an attack on America to further the goals of world conquest.



By whom?



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Jchristopher5

So instead of replying to posts refuting your theory about 'obvious controlled demolition' regarding your OP and building 7, we are off after a missile at the pentagon now?




Should we just focus on Building 7?


I take it you answered your own question in the OP then?

Round and round we go. You are not after truth.


edit on 2 17 2015 by stosh64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: Jchristopher5

So instead of replying to posts refuting your theory about 'obvious controlled demolition' regarding your OP and building 7, we are off after a missile at the pentagon now?

Round and round we go. You are not after truth.


You are funny. You accuse this post of having nothing original, and yet you postulate the same ridiculous arguments, in response after response. Pot.. kettle.

I am definitely after the truth, and I have seen absolutely nothing from you to indicate you are anywhere near it. You expound on the same OS that it's authors said was "politically motivated", a "cover-up", "underfunded", and full of lies.

So, enjoy your story. I would prefer to read Mother Goose than the crap you offer.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Jchristopher5


A missile.

Just 'a missile'? What kind, if you would?

A plane was used as 'a missile' if you ask me.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: daftpink
a reply to: intrptr

I didn't say that was the reason - 'to further the goals of world conquest'.

But I'm sensing that's what you think I believe? I still don't know your opinion.

That is my opinion.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

ok thanks I just thought you were being sarcastic.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jchristopher5

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: daftpink


What's your thoughts on it? Do you disagree with the possibility that it was a planned attack? (to some extent at least with reference to building 7).



So yah, 911 was planned and promoted as an attack on America to further the goals of world conquest.



By whom?

Bush and Cheneys sealed testimony before the 911 commission in the whitehouse would go a long way to answering that.

Gotta go…



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Jchristopher5

I'm still waiting on the explanation of how was it wired..

if your going to call me an Os stooge please show me where I said the Os was 100% right.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Jchristopher5

If you even watched the videos, what caused all the widows below the penthouse collapse to deform as that structure fell through the building? Explosives? Only on the left side of the building?

Not very 'planned' for a demolition.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Jchristopher5


A missile.

Just 'a missile'? What kind, if you would?

A plane was used as 'a missile' if you ask me.



I really could only pass someone else's opinion on what type, sorry. I don't know.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Jchristopher5

I'm still waiting on the explanation of how was it wired..

if your going to call me an Os stooge please show me where I said the Os was 100% right.


I don't have to understand aerodynamics and flight theory to understand that planes to, in fact, fly. Nor, do I have to understand how a building is wired to believe it was demolished.

Did I ever call you and "OS stooge"? If so, show me where I used those words.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: whatsup86




Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Like it's common for fully loaded 757's to be directly flown at full speed into buildings.


Why is it necessary for OS'ers to always say things like, Fully Loaded, Fully Fueled, like that is somehow different than every other plane out there ???

Smacks of sensationalism in trying to make these planes out to be more than just everyday normal jetliners, that actually turn to ribbons when they hit things.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: whatsup86




Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Like it's common for fully loaded 757's to be directly flown at full speed into buildings.


Why is it necessary for OS'ers to always say things like, Fully Loaded, Fully Fueled, like that is somehow different than every other plane out there ???

Smacks of sensationalism in trying to make these planes out to be more than just everyday normal jetliners, that actually turn to ribbons when they hit things.


Your right, and it's ironic that sensationalism is what they accuse "truthers" of doing.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I know it's meant to be offensive, but I wear "Truther" as a badge of honor. The truth is just right after all.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: whatsup86




Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Like it's common for fully loaded 757's to be directly flown at full speed into buildings.


Why is it necessary for OS'ers to always say things like, Fully Loaded, Fully Fueled, like that is somehow different than every other plane out there ???

Smacks of sensationalism in trying to make these planes out to be more than just everyday normal jetliners, that actually turn to ribbons when they hit things.


Right. What difference does 11,500 gallons of jet fuel, at this point, matter?



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: whatsup86




Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Like it's common for fully loaded 757's to be directly flown at full speed into buildings.


Why is it necessary for OS'ers to always say things like, Fully Loaded, Fully Fueled, like that is somehow different than every other plane out there ???

Smacks of sensationalism in trying to make these planes out to be more than just everyday normal jetliners, that actually turn to ribbons when they hit things.


Right. What difference does 11,500 gallons of jet fuel, at this point, matter?


You're absolutely right!

Especially considering it is impossible for jet fuel (1600 degrees) to melt steel (about 2600 degrees) although melted steel is exactly what several witnesses reported, yet was such testimony was left out of the highly-flawed OS.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Jchristopher5

You are good at cherry picking what you answer.

Just like you are at cherry picking the facts that fit your agenda.

I am still waiting for your response about what I showed you regarding the collapse of building 7..........



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Put the above information together with what Susan Lindauer said about Iraq, 911 and the background information she gave and things become quite obvious. Not that these types of false flags haven't happened before in history. Just search the web for "extreme prejudice" and "Susan Lindauer" and you will find lots of interesting information. The rabbit hole goes much deeper in other areas.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jchristopher5

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: whatsup86




Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Like it's common for fully loaded 757's to be directly flown at full speed into buildings.


Why is it necessary for OS'ers to always say things like, Fully Loaded, Fully Fueled, like that is somehow different than every other plane out there ???

Smacks of sensationalism in trying to make these planes out to be more than just everyday normal jetliners, that actually turn to ribbons when they hit things.


Right. What difference does 11,500 gallons of jet fuel, at this point, matter?


You're absolutely right!

Especially considering it is impossible for jet fuel (1600 degrees) to melt steel (about 2600 degrees) although melted steel is exactly what several witnesses reported, yet was such testimony was left out of the highly-flawed OS.


For like the one hundred millionth time...IT DOES NOT HAVE TO MELT IT TO WEAKEN IT TO THE POINT OF FAILURE!!!! For crying out loud. Steel loses over EIGHTY PERCENT of its strength at temperatures that even you Truthers admit were present that day. Are you actually going to say that you do not understand that the loss of EIGHTY PERCENT of the material's strength in a building that size would kind of sort of be a problem? Jeebus, the willful ignorance of the Truther movement is mind blowing!




top topics



 
71
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join