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.
originally posted by: neutronflux
" "Looking at this closely, I don't find this credible." "
"Oh, well, that settles it then...
Seriously?"
Did you cite proof otherwise?
originally posted by: Extorris
originally posted by: tanstaafl
originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: LookingAtMars
Looking at this closely, I don't find this credible.
Oh, well, that settles it then...
Seriously?
Yes. Seriously.
There is a large amount of evidence and facts concerning this claim and 99% of it clearly debunks it. The fact that the OP chose to pretend contrary facts and evidence do not exist at all, only furthers the conclusion this is BS.
originally posted by: tanstaafl
originally posted by: neutronflux
" "Looking at this closely, I don't find this credible." "
"Oh, well, that settles it then...
Seriously?"
Did you cite proof otherwise?
I cited just as much proof as Extorris did...
Do you always butt into thread responses to someone 'not you' as if it 'was you'?
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: firerescue
If the truth were made public, it would be that indeed, MOSSAD had a very large role in the events of the day.
originally posted by: InhaleExhale
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: firerescue
If the truth were made public, it would be that indeed, MOSSAD had a very large role in the events of the day.
Did they supply the nukes?
What about the missile that hit Pentagon was that US weapon or did the Israelis also supply that?
originally posted by: neutronflux
"Do you always butt into thread responses to someone 'not you' as if it 'was you'?"
It’s a public forum. Try using a private message next time.
originally posted by: tanstaafl
originally posted by: neutronflux
"Do you always butt into thread responses to someone 'not you' as if it 'was you'?"
It’s a public forum. Try using a private message next time.
Never mind, I took a look at your posting history, a much better solution is to just set you to Junk/Ignore...
Done...
originally posted by: InhaleExhale
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: firerescue
If the truth were made public, it would be that indeed, MOSSAD had a very large role in the events of the day.
You would have to ask somebody involved about that. All I know is that no airliner was at the pentagon.
Did they supply the nukes?
What about the missile that hit Pentagon was that US weapon or did the Israelis also supply that?
All I know is there was no airliner at the pentagon.
originally posted by: Irishhaf
Mossad still does spying the old fashioned way, I have no doubt they knew what was going to happen, I have no doubt that some members of the Israeli govt were happy it happened.
But speaking purely from standpoint of the people spying... do you warn an ally even though it would compromise your asset when allowing the attack to continue could benefit your nation, and keep the asset secure.
Bad choices all around if I was israeli I would chose to keep the secret and hope the asset could warn us of an impending attack in Israel rather than warn the Americans and hope it doesnt get the asset killed.
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: facedye
No, there was a van stopped that a K9 hit on for POSSIBLE explosives. They searched the van, did not find ANY explosives and called it in that it was negative shortly after. Conspiracy theorists ALWAYS neglect to do proper research.
The first report......
"Three arrested with van full of explosives
4:27:11 AM
Reports from New York are saying three people have been arrested with a van of explosives.
The van was stopped along the New Jersey turn-pike near the George Washington Bridge.
It was not clear why police stopped the van but when they did they found it was laden down with tonnes of explosives.
archives.tcm.ie..."
The second report...7 minutes later....
"Police confirm arrests but deny explosives find
4:34:43 AM
NYPD officers have confirmed the arrest of three men on the New Jersey turn-pike.
However officials denied any explosives were found in the van.
Officials declined to say why exactly the men had been arrested.
archives.tcm.ie..."
Did Larry Silverstein buy terrorism insurance just before ...
Feb 23, 2019 · The answer is “Yes”, but it is neither as simple nor as sinister as the question implies. Silverstein had only become the leaseholder of the World Trade Center Complex less than 2 months prior to 9/11, on July 24th, 2001.
The WTC did not have insurance coverage for terrorism. Silverstein took out the policy for terrorism with a double indemnity clause. The ink was not dry on the contract when the towers fell.
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander
All I know is there was no airliner at the pentagon.
So you cannot explain what caused the damage to the pentagon. Or how the passengers and crew of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon. And you cannot provide a more credible explanation for what happened at the pentagon, and why the passengers and crew of flight 77 didn’t return to their families.
So? You have no argument with no reason to find your assertions credible? What’s the point of your post again?