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.

 

IS AE911 On The Ropes ???

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

While stating credible arguments to supersede inward bowing and buckling at the WTC, the damaged at the pentagon was created by a large passenger jet, and the buried jet wreckage and spreading of human remains at shanksville was because of a high speed jet impact?




posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
I don’t understand why AE 9/11 Truth didn’t start the WTC 7 project sooner?

Sorry, but AE 9/11 Truth needs to produce a clear threorey with actual evidence to supersede fire leading to WTC 7 collapse to be effective.


Tony Szamboti has been having a tough time at metabunk....



By benthamitemetric

Thread: buckling-led-to-free-fall-acceleration-for-part-of-wtc7s-collapse.t8270/page-3

www.metabunk.org...


So now that we've established that Tony clearly misunderstood the video evidence he cited in support of his claims, is there anything else left to his claims? Not from what I can see.



I think tony has taken his ball and gone home



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
9/11 conspiracies are kind of dying out I think.

They have either been debunked or it’s just that people don’t care anymore.

It will wind up like the JFK assassination conspiracies, every now and then there will be something someone wants to discuss but I think they days of explosive new ideas and truth movemen groups is almost gone.


I agree, the media only talks about it anymore on the anniversary.

As for ordinary people on the street that I encounter, in my experience many folks understand and will admit the story is likely false, and they would rather not talk about it. Those willing to actually engage in an adult conversation know full well the gubmint story is bogus.


Did you know you're considered a disinformation agent?


Yes I did. You and I and a few others are in the same boat that way, as far as perceptions go.

There are many posters who post in accordance with Goebbels Guidelines: Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred. You are not the first to call me a disinformation agent. It's funny, but so it goes in the propaganda business.

"The truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Though intended as an insult, I am happy to be called a truther.

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." Thank you Edward Bernays.

"Not every item of news should be published. Rather must those who control news policies endeavor to make every item of news serve a certain purpose." Censorship is important.

Way back after the release of the 911 Commission Report, about 85% of respondents thought that the report did not tell the whole truth. If anything, that number is higher today.

The use of the term "conspiracy theorist" did not enter the American lexicon until after the CIA realized that a very large part of the US electorate did not buy into the report of the Warren Commission.

You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but sometimes the masses realize their government deceives, frequently.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

How is you pet theory that nukes brought down the WTC working out for you? Cause there is zero evidence a nuclear device was detonated or used at the WTC. The nuclear device used at the WTC theory is all fabrication. No supporting evidence. None.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Can you state a clear theory on what caused the damage at the pentagon to supersede large jet impact. You have to have an actual theory to be labeled disinformant. Your not even relevant.



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 02:51 PM
link   
LOL, I guess my irrelevance is what makes you respond to a post not directed at you, eh NF?



posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Like to post something of proof and credibility? Or just fill up threads with more empty rants?

How are those quotes coming concerning Wallace Miller you cannot produce.

Want to make any more claims thorium is proof at a nuclear detonation?

Just a little reminder your post are full inconsistencies and pseudoscience.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 01:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
9/11 conspiracies are kind of dying out I think.

They have either been debunked or it’s just that people don’t care anymore.

It will wind up like the JFK assassination conspiracies, every now and then there will be something someone wants to discuss but I think they days of explosive new ideas and truth movemen groups is almost gone.


I agree, the media only talks about it anymore on the anniversary.

As for ordinary people on the street that I encounter, in my experience many folks understand and will admit the story is likely false, and they would rather not talk about it. Those willing to actually engage in an adult conversation know full well the gubmint story is bogus.


Did you know you're considered a disinformation agent?


Yes I did. You and I and a few others are in the same boat that way, as far as perceptions go.

There are many posters who post in accordance with Goebbels Guidelines: Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred. You are not the first to call me a disinformation agent. It's funny, but so it goes in the propaganda business.




Wasn't me who called you a disinformation agent. Do try and pay attention

(BTW the term conspiracy theorist was in use long before the CIA was founded)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin


I think that what you say about outlandish claims is a big part its kind of died off a bit.



That's how disinfo works.


What are you doing spreading propaganda? Shame on you!



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: mrthumpy

Heh, you would not be interested in providing an example of CT being used in the media before 1947 would you?




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy

Heh, you would not be interested in providing an example of CT being used in the media before 1947 would you?



Et tu, Brute?

Iliad

Odysseus

King Author



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   
The arthurian legend is probably one of the first examples of the fictionalization of history to push media sales. Just what the truth movement is guilty of.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   
If you think about, mainstream media, Jones (Thermite guy), Gage, Wood, cost to cost radio, info wars have much in common. The dramatization and fictionalization of events to push a consumer product.
edit on 9-11-2017 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy

Heh, you would not be interested in providing an example of CT being used in the media before 1947 would you?



I'll try again when I'm on a pc
edit on 10-11-2017 by mrthumpy because: Forum is a bit rubbish



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 03:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy

Heh, you would not be interested in providing an example of CT being used in the media before 1947 would you?



Right, try that again. 1899

https: //books.google.co.uk/books?id=cHdNAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22conspiracy+theory%22&pg=PA227&redir_esc=y&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22conspiracy%20theory%22&f=false



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: mrthumpy


The link didn't work. I do understand that the word "conspiracy" and the word "theory" existed before, but as demonstrated in Lance deHaven-Smith's book "Conspiracy Theory in America", the term never came into the lexicon until around 1967 when it was coined to describe the significant number of americans who did not buy into the Warren Commission report.

He makes a much more persuasive case, complete with documentation, than you do.



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy


The link didn't work. I do understand that the word "conspiracy" and the word "theory" existed before, but as demonstrated in Lance deHaven-Smith's book "Conspiracy Theory in America", the term never came into the lexicon until around 1967 when it was coined to describe the significant number of americans who did not buy into the Warren Commission report.

He makes a much more persuasive case, complete with documentation, than you do.


You just need to take the space out between the https: and the //

There's plenty more examples of "conspiracy theory" being used before 1967 too



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: mrthumpy


Considering George Bush's speech to the UN in November 2001 invoking the term, and your extremely weak case, deHaven-Smith and Sharyl Attisson make a far better case than you do.

I'm not a big Alex Jones fan, but he is quite right in stating that "there is a war on for your mind." It appears they have yours, but not mine.



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy


Considering George Bush's speech to the UN in November 2001 invoking the term, and your extremely weak case, deHaven-Smith and Sharyl Attisson make a far better case than you do.

I'm not a big Alex Jones fan, but he is quite right in stating that "there is a war on for your mind." It appears they have yours, but not mine.


The term "conspiracy theory" being used before 1967 is an extremely weak case for the term "conspiracy theory" being used before 1967?


What went wrong with you?



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: mrthumpy

I also guess there is nowhere in recorded history that a king had a political rival, or group, executed based on false allegations?

Or no group ever conspired to out a king to put a puppet on the throne?

I guess conspiracy is a new thing. Sarcasm....

I guess some people cannot think outside the box because of their blind and dogmatic devotion to the false narratives of 9/11 conspiracies. Enabling those that exploit 9/11.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join