What to expect if the 9/11 truth bomb does drop

a reply to: Jesushere

Example

In a confidential meeting, file the notes claim a video exists of a hijacker seated in the cockpit seat. Again does not elaborate

Example;
What note by what documents?
Who claims?
How would there be a video?

Again does not elaborate

As in could not confirm your innuendo some unnamed document claims some unnamed person had a video with no context with no mention how the video exists.

Or

and video of Muslim men prior to 9/11 showing badges to security at Dulles airport.

I guess you don’t link “Muslim men” can hold a job at an airport? Much less one that requires a badge?

Innuendo is strong with this one with no actual quotes and provides no context.

The bigger truth bomb is the possibility that it was all a cover up for the accident a there pentagon. See I done believe the Pentagon is a building. It's a super stargate now thay mother had a explosion and caused the side to blow, then get sucked bskf in. Notice how there is no plane?

a reply to: HorsemanJim

You

Notice how there is no plane?

Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate
By John D. Wyndham | Oct 7, 2016

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

Conclusion
Despite the clear evidence and its analysis using the scientific method of large plane impact, a substantial portion of the 9/11 truth movement, including accepted leaders and those involved in major organizations, continues to publicly endorse, adhere to, or promulgate talks, writings and films on false Pentagon hypotheses. Some simply offer criticisms and reject or ignore evidence that would bring closure to the argument. There is clear evidence by way of disintegrating truth groups that these endorsements and communications are injurious to the movement.

People that deny a large jet hit the pentagon in the face of witnesses, wreckage, and damage that is specific to a large jet impact working from outside to inside the pentagon helped kill the truth movement. Sorry.

a reply to: neutronflux

And with all these witnesses and evidence, why have they not shown any of the live footage on the day from all the cameras they confiscated, they have only released one tiny little video that you absolutely can't see a plane, just a motion blur, could be anything.

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: neutronflux

Watch the THREE buildings fall. I can tell with my own eyes it was fake. Wake up.

I bet you can tell which white lines in the sky are chemtrails as well?

I am so glad we have superhumans on this board

a reply to: iplay1up2

Uh, nothing may have happened when that came out, However MOST Americans were not affected by the Vietnam War, they watched footage from the comforts of their homes.

How many died on 9/11 due to the attacks?

How many died that never came back home from Vietnam?

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: neutronflux

and if you still dont believe me listen to the alarm going off in wtc7 pre detonation and see the liason officer.
this guy later got charged for stealing secret service cars that were due to be destroyed in the event kind of proving his foreknowledge of the event.
www.youtube.com...

Oh well I guess that proves Nibiru already hit us and cause the towers to collapse and the government covered it up because they were actually behind the steering wheel of Nibiru when it made its pass in 2012 and cause 9/11/2001.

a reply to: neutronflux

While the real and serious questions are, What ties did the terrorists have. Who helped them financially, get in the country, and help them stay in the country. Why was the gross negligence of protecting this country whitewashed with little consequence for those in charge. Why were the towers built to minimize cost by minimizing concrete usage. Why did the WTC have deficient fire insulation.

They are boring.

Nukes and UFOs and the Illuminati cause it, its more interesting and makes a better movie.

They could get the Rock to play Dick. that came out weird.

a reply to: Thejaybird

There are too many anomalies in the official narrative to subscribe to it in blind faith (which amounts to what you have, based on your posts).

To which the poster you are replying too points out and has so in this very thread.

But those questions get ignored

and its nukes, demolition, missiles and space weapons that get debated, over and over.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


Your motives, apparently, are to sustain the deception and cover-up that are the official narrative. At least those are your goals.

Exactly what motivates you is another matter.

Its funny how the questions asked in this very thread that do point to something sinister are ignored especially by you

a person pushing nukes

originally posted by: myss427
a reply to: neutronflux

And with all these witnesses and evidence, why have they not shown any of the live footage on the day from all the cameras they confiscated, they have only released one tiny little video that you absolutely can't see a plane, just a motion blur, could be anything.

Well let's think about this logically:
Security cameras are set up with security in mind.
This would be unauthorised access to the building or the grounds.
Unauthorised access would be via doors and windows or by road and pedestrian entrances and exits by people on foot or in road vehicles.
To be any use for this purpose the cameras would have to be set up to monitor access via these routes by pedestrians or road vehicles.

What they are NOT set up for is to monitor the air for incoming passenger jets flyng at hundreds of miles an hour
What they are NOT set up for is to pander to the whim of a handful of conspiracy theorists

Just because YOU believe that there should be some video showing the aircraft does not mean that there should logically be some video showing the aircraft. Just because YOU believe the video should exist does not mean the lack of one is somehow suspicious

a reply to: InhaleExhale


I'm "pushing nukes" and at the same time ignoring sinister factors? What are you even talking about?

Those who accept the official conspiracy theory are essentially practicing what some call "naïve realism". They manifest the Dunning-Kruger effect, unable to realize how wrong they are.

a reply to: Salander

Those who accept the official conspiracy theory are essentially practicing what some call "naïve realism". They manifest the Dunning-Kruger effect, unable to realize how wrong they are.

If anyone is displaying the D-K effect it seems to be some of those of the truther persuasion on here.

People who do not share your rather "woo-woo" beliefs are not all people of "low ability" and for you to label them as such does you no credit at all. Get off that high horse of yours.

a reply to: Salander

I'm "pushing nukes" and at the same time ignoring sinister factors? What are you even talking about?

Try reading what you are replying too.

Ignoring questions that point to something sinister is what I said, its funny you can misinterpret such a short sentence.

Those who accept the official conspiracy theory are essentially practicing what some call "naïve realism". They manifest the Dunning-Kruger effect, unable to realize how wrong they are.

Is there is even one poster on ATS that accepts the "official story" in its full?

Its why I said you ignore question posed by certain posters because you cannot logically believe they are shills like you do if you address the questions asked.

Only an idiot or someone with ulterior motives would think and say such

stop exposing yourself with every reply to me, just ignore me and keep on with whatever agenda you have.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Salander

Those who accept the official conspiracy theory are essentially practicing what some call "naïve realism". They manifest the Dunning-Kruger effect, unable to realize how wrong they are.

If anyone is displaying the D-K effect it seems to be some of those of the truther persuasion on here.

People who do not share your rather "woo-woo" beliefs are not all people of "low ability" and for you to label them as such does you no credit at all. Get off that high horse of yours.

Sorry if I offended you. From the aviation perspective, it's just really humorous when so many self-described experts proclaim the Hani Maneuver to be just another day at the office for a 350 hour pilot who couldn't fly a Cessna 172.

To laugh or to cry, that's always the question. The D-K effect is quite useful in describing people who believe fantastic stories told by known liars.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Salander

I'm "pushing nukes" and at the same time ignoring sinister factors? What are you even talking about?

Try reading what you are replying too.

Ignoring questions that point to something sinister is what I said, its funny you can misinterpret such a short sentence.

Those who accept the official conspiracy theory are essentially practicing what some call "naïve realism". They manifest the Dunning-Kruger effect, unable to realize how wrong they are.

Is there is even one poster on ATS that accepts the "official story" in its full?

Its why I said you ignore question posed by certain posters because you cannot logically believe they are shills like you do if you address the questions asked.

Only an idiot or someone with ulterior motives would think and say such

stop exposing yourself with every reply to me, just ignore me and keep on with whatever agenda you have.

Sure there is one poster at ATS who accepts and defends the official story--Neutronflux. Have you not followed his 'reasoning'?


By the rules of logic, if a claim (a story) with several elements is made (told), if even one element of that claim is false, that renders the entire claim (story) false.

Are you selective in which parts of the story you believe or disbelieve? May I ask which parts you believe and which parts you accept?

a reply to: Salander

No worries.

There is a distinction to be drawn between gullible people and those suffering from D-K but then sometimes I have believed 6 impossible things before breakfast.

a reply to: oldcarpy


An excellent point you make.

Frankly, I'm skeptical of many "psychological conditions" as being accurate. That said, it is a fact that a significant segment of the population manifests what some call cognitive dissonance. Maybe that would be a better label or description than D-K, at least for the general population.

a reply to: Salander

Yes - there is an awful lot of both conditions on here.

As a Brit I am not really that well up on the various 9/11 theories but one thing I never really understood was why the 3rd building collapsed?

I was at home on the day waiting for the guy to sweep our chimney. When he arrived he said to switch on the TV cos "They are having some trouble in America". Understatement! We did and saw the 2nd plane hit - we thought we were watching a film until it sank in that it was real.

I suppose some smartarse will now chime in and say it was a film or something.....