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.

 

For those who buy into the OS of 9/11

page: 9
23
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: scottyirnbru




I went back and read the 5 pages that make up that thread. It's a whole load of dystopian hokey that you made up. There is not a single fact in that whole entire thread. It's beginners Sci fi. It's all in your mind. I'm willing to admit that may change but right now it's nothing.


I never made any claim I could prove my answer to your question
factual. So you can put your little toy away now? My answer was
only meant to present you with the possibility that 911 may not only
be a pretext for invasion or war. As the context of your question implies
in writing, when a simple lie would have sufficed?
Well in the light of other possibilities, however you choose to refer to
them with your head in the sand? There is absolute plausibility for more
then just some simple lie if they are working towards an agenda such as I
exampled. Which BTW fits better than any other notion I've entertained.

Thanks for reading


edit on Rpm81315v10201500000001 by randyvs because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: scottyirnbru




I went back and read the 5 pages that make up that thread. It's a whole load of dystopian hokey that you made up. There is not a single fact in that whole entire thread. It's beginners Sci fi. It's all in your mind. I'm willing to admit that may change but right now it's nothing.


I never made any claim I could prove my answer to your question
factual. So you can put your little toy away now? My answer was
only meant to present you with the possibility that 911 may not only
be a pretext for invasion or war. As the context of your question implies
in writing, when a simple lie would have sufficed?
Well in the light of other possibilities, however you choose to refer to
them with your head in the sand? There is absolute plausibility for more
then just some simple lie if they are working towards an agenda such as I
exampled. Which BTW fits better than any other notion I've entertained.

Thanks for reading



It doesn't fit better than any notion. It fits worse. It fits worse because Iraq in 2004 shows you that governments don't even need a reason, just a want.

Also I'm not sure you understand what absolute plausibility means. Absolute meaning completely, plausible meaning reasonable or probable. Just because you believe something doesn't make that thing so. I read your thread where people stated vets are implanting animals with chips to purposely give them cancer because the have seen how much human doctors make. No. I'm not convinced you've a solid grasp on the reality of situations. I believe it is absolutely plausible that you are deluded.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

What you've outlined there in terms of how historical conspiracies have played out is the only conspiracy angle I can buy on the 9/11 subject.

The rest of it - no matter how many times people repeat things - is abject speculation at best, and junk science at worse without any proof whatsoever.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: scottyirnbru

Deluded - your belief that I was ever trying to convince you of anything



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: roncoallstar

So anyone who disagrees with your premise is a disinfo agent?

I wouldn't suggest that anyone were an agent simply for taking a different point of view but the amount of time and energy some of these guys put in to, not just 'debunking', but fervently disparaging OS-skeptics does make me wonder. I remember this one guy years ago on YouTube called 'PoetryHound' and if you've ever encountered this guy you'll understand why some people think there might be agents out there. This guy was on another level to everyone else. Google 'PoetryHound 9/11 YouTube'.
edit on 13-8-2015 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr



As we now know, Iraq had little to do with 911. The people were sold reengaging Iraq by 911. Couldn't have planned it better myself.


Please provide details on how you could have planned such an operation.



Unlike Vietnam, we "won" one for a change...


Were you aware that the communist in Vietnam were within two days of surrendering to the United States when Nixon halted the Line Backer II bombing over North Vietnam? Check it out.



General Võ Nguyên Giáp

The following quote is from his memoirs currently found in the Vietnam War memorial in Hanoi:

* "What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes.

* If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it.

But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. We were ready to surrender. You had won!"

www.mnvva.org...


I am a military history buff and I like people to know the rest of the story.


Although I wasn't fooled by WMD in the desert or little vials of yellow powder in the UN. Were you?


It wasn't the United States that lied about WMD in Iraq, it was an Iraqi, code named; " "Curve Ball" who bragged about convincing the United States that WMD was still in Iraq. However, U.S. troops eventually found and recovered WMD in Iraq. 550 tons of "yellowcake" was also shipped out to a Canadian port.



Perhaps you were sold the "first" gulf war by "Iraqi soldiers unplugging babies incubators in Kuwait"?


Question is: What were Iraqi troops doing in Kuwait in the first place? Were they warned to leave Kuwait? Yes. Did Iraq comply? No. How many countries were involved in ejecting Iraqi troops out of Kuwait?

War cost lots a money and lives, and I don't buy into the idea that 9/11 was a False Flag operation to invade Afghanistan, when in fact, the Taliban in Afghanistan had warned the United States just prior to the 9/11 attack that OBL and al-Qaeda would carry out an attack on the United States.

After the 9/11 attack, the United States warned the Taliban to turn over OBL or else. The Taliban refused and the rest is history.

And, you know the rest of the story about "Curve Ball" and Iraq's WMD, and we can look here as well.

The WikiLeaks vindication of George W. Bush

The WikiLeaks de facto declassification of privileged material makes it case closed: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction – and intended to restart his program once the heat was off.

www.wnd.com...

The two wars' Afghanistan and Iraq, practically bankrupt the U.S. military and will cost the United States trillions of dollars over the next three decades, not to mention the loss of thousands of American lives and thousands more who were wounded and in need of care, many who will need constant care for the rest of their lives.

The facts above are not good reasons to fashion a 9/11 False Flag operation in order to go to war.


edit on 13-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



3 trillion


Can you be more specific about the 3 trillion?



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr



War is about conquest. The 'first' gulf war left everyone wondering why we stopped short of conquering the whole country, remember?


* Did the United States pull combat troops out of Afghanistan? Yes.

* Did the United States pull combat troops out of Iraq? Yes.

* Did the United States go to war when terrorist bombed the USS Cole? No.

* Did the United States go to war when terrorist bombed our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania? No

* Did the United States go to war when North Korea shot down our EC-121. No.

* Did the United States go to war when North Korea hijacked the USS Pueblo? No.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

No thanks, you've proven yourself quite hopeless.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



No thanks, you've proven yourself quite hopeless.


You did the right thing by not confronting me on the $2.3 trillion because I would have made you aware that most of the $2.3 trillion has been accounted for.

At that time, our computers could not handle that much money and somehow, another unfounded conspiracy theory was hatched. It is beyond me why anyone would think that flying an aircraft into the Pentagon is going to affect our financial situation or somehow destroy certain evidence.

Apparently, my paycheck wasn't affected because the Pentagon doesn't keep all of its eggs in the same basket, so it was silly to think that flying an airliner into the Pentagon was going to destroy certain evidence that didn't exist because the CT folks were too lazy to do any homework to ascertain the rest of the story regarding the $2.3 trillion that wasn't missing in the first place and as a result of their ignorance of the facts, they concocted another unfounded conspiracy theory. Is it any mystery then, as to why the Truth Movement has made itself look clownish over the years? Now, they have added nuclear weapons as a replacement for thermite for taking out the WTC buildings. What's next?!

Simply amazing!!
edit on 14-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

How could refusing further discussion, with someone who hears
and sees, only what they themselves say and write, be wrong?
Of course I was right again.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: scottyirnbru

Deluded - your belief that I was ever trying to convince you of anything


You write like a bad emo band.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: skyeagle409

How could refusing further discussion, with someone who hears
and sees, only what they themselves say and write, be wrong?
Of course I was right again.


And again.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 02:32 AM
link   
a reply to: randyvs



ow could refusing further discussion, with someone who hears
and sees, only what they themselves say and write, be wrong?
Of course I was right again.


Let's just say that I know how the system works because my paycheck came from the system, and additionally, I use the system in support of my government job to know when the CT folks are trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

To sum it up, there was never a reason to concoct another unfounded conspiracy theory over that $2.3 trillion. Had the CT folks done their homework, they would have found why our computers could not handle that much money and they would have found that much of that money has since been accounted for.
edit on 14-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

I guess you missed this.



I never made any claim I could prove my answer to your question
factual.





I use the system in support of my government job


Wait, was that honesty? Or did I just get hit by a semi
passing thru my man cave?

How can I get a job like that?

Scotty



You write like a bad emo band.


I wasn't breast fed?


Good day gentlemen
edit on Ram81415v03201500000056 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: intrptr




The will of Allah, revealed by elders (mullahs) who earn that regard and status over a life time is their method, their "state".

Won't they be pissed when ET lands next to their mosque and tells them there isn't a god.

They laugh at our ideas of evolution and no life elsewhere "without proof". The notion of angels and demons "from somewhere else" is alien….to us in the West, not them.

ETA: "ET" is the angels, misinterpreted by us in our dogma, not theirs. Although, in the end I agree, all religions are man made, having twisted the meaning/origin of life all around, spun this huge fabrication out of the truth of it.
edit on 14-8-2015 by intrptr because: ETA:



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: intrptr



War is about conquest. The 'first' gulf war left everyone wondering why we stopped short of conquering the whole country, remember?



* Did the United States pull combat troops out of Afghanistan? Yes.

We're still there, occupying their country, their government a US puppet regime.


* Did the United States pull combat troops out of Iraq? Yes.

See above


* Did the United States go to war when terrorist bombed the USS Cole? No.

* Did the United States go to war when terrorist bombed our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania? No

* Did the United States go to war when North Korea shot down our EC-121. No.

* Did the United States go to war when North Korea hijacked the USS Pueblo? No.

None of those countries have oil and or minerals. North Koreas strategic location is obvious from a military standpoint. A toehold on the Asiian underbelly (like Vietnam was also supposed to be).

What do you suppose the blowback will be for all the countries the US has invaded to date? Even Korea peninsula is still occupied by the US military after all these decades.

This incidents you cite are picnics compared too the destruction US is raining down on foreign lands… do give me a break with all the butthurt over nothing.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: jimmyx

1. A Congressionally chartered investigation that is allowed to subpoena and swear under oath the head of another branch of our Government? A quick study of the US Constitution and the checks and balances set up in it SHOULD answer that for you.

2. Did not consider a truck bomb........... You confuse the 9/11 Commission with the NIST reports. One, was supposed to look at the events of the day, and those events leading up to it and develop a timeline. The OTHER, was supposed to figure out how/why the building collapse. Truck bomb.....just because you did not read about it, does not mean that at some point they examined that idea and said, nope, was still those two big airplanes that slammed into the buildings.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SlowNail Since neither of those two things happened, I do have to ask, what was the point of your post? NORAD, was not nullified, if anything that day was an illustration of just how badly we had cut down our defense for the continent. The Bin Laden family, was gathered AFTER the events of the day, the FBI interviewed several members and then when commercial air travel resumed, they were flown home.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Were you aware that the communist in Vietnam were within two days of surrendering to the United States when Nixon halted the Line Backer II bombing over North Vietnam? Check it out.

I get the official story was always, we are winning, almost winning, could be winning if we just have a little more time, more money, troops, bombs…

You can't possibly be thinking someone who saw all that propaganda can ever be fooled by it ever or all over again ever again?

I bet you think we are wining the 'war on terror', too… if only we had more money, boots on ground or bombs?

Geez louise, you're trying to convince the wrong old person of that dogma, one more time.

ETA: Consider yourself a history buff? Then you know the truth of it too, and are only spouting the propaganda that they did then about it, or only have the history written by the victors at hand. Don't leave out the Gulf of Tonkin… 'incident'.
edit on 14-8-2015 by intrptr because: ETA:



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join