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.

 

You must think I'm a fool...

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
You mention Bush several time truth so I'm left assuming that you think Bush was behind this. So....
How can one of the biggest idiots in the world carry out one of the most successful terrorists attacks in history?


Amazing question... very true ..everyone mocks Bush has beeing one of the biggest idiots in the world, yet he manages to CONTROL the ALL world with the tip of his fingers... and noone is samrter than he is, even tho he is the "dumbest" person on the Planet... right...


Will there be a time... any time that ppl will take their heads of the conspiracy bucket, and look at the world the way it is ... ? I think not... Conspiracy must be the security blanket.

Is life really easier when you believe that Bush controls the world, and the muslems fanaticals really dont exists ?




posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
... Thank Bush for the Web... maybe i can pin this on him as well.


No, that's Gore remember. Sorry, just had to.

I never knew we had agreements with the Taliban? Thanks for the info. Got anymore about our affiliates with the Taliban? I'm just curious...i.e. I believe you.



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
Amazing question... very true ..everyone mocks Bush has beeing one of the biggest idiots in the world, yet he manages to CONTROL the ALL world with the tip of his fingers... and noone is samrter than he is, even tho he is the "dumbest" person on the Planet... right...



Why would a person, who at the very most will be in office 8 years, even be in the know? Just because some claim government, it doesn't neccessarily mean Bush.



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   
What I want to know, as with the NORAD question, if there were no pre-planted explosives in the buildings why were firefighters pulled out because there were explosives in the building? Then you have firefighters and civilians explaining how they heard multiple explosions before the building went down.

Something else that has bothered me is, how can buildings all over the world completely burn, I mean completely burn for days on end and not collapse, while WTC collapsed from an isolated fire in its mid sections? What kind of since does that make?

I dont think Bush was fully behind it, but definatly a part of it. He took the role of war president with the most minimal prompting that its asurd to think that he wasnt prepared for it. After 9/11 the great war president goes after the country that has the least ties to 9/11.

There's just so much stuff that doesnt add up its rediculous to fully beleive the official events.

Did anyone see the articles on the head of building 7 saying that the building was pulled? Pulled being a demolition term. I think it was 7, could be wrong there.



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
I never knew we had agreements with the Taliban? Thanks for the info. Got anymore about our affiliates with the Taliban? I'm just curious...i.e. I believe you.

I know I had a lot of stuff on this before, I'll see if I can find anything else, but for now...

The Taliban

After we stoped the millennium plot
www.cooperativeresearch.org...

The plan, approved by President Clinton, focuses on harassing and disrupting al-Qaeda members throughout the world. The FBI is put on heightened alert, counterterrorism teams are dispatched overseas, a formal ultimatum is given to the Taliban to keep al-Qaeda under control, and friendly intelligence agencies are asked to help.


A big part of the reason why we (I don't want to say support because we really didn't..) didn't do too much about the Taliban is because we really wanted that oil pipeline, and (the US also thought) the Taliban was a more stable force than what was there before.
dir.salon.com...

www.cooperativeresearch.org...



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 01:41 PM
link   
That'sJustWeird, please, spare me.

I NEVER said Bush was behind it. What I DID say was that Bush has more ties to Tim Osmond than any other American, he holds hands with the Royal Saudis, he wants unlimited power (otherwise known as a dictator), he goes to Bohemian Grove, he and Cheney were given the power to scramble fighters, and I'll add that he planned on being a war president before he was president. Oh, yeah, and he signed W199I (yes, Clinton signed it first, he's a globalist too, so spare me your left-right BS. He is literally a Bush family member now, and he was dirty too. Have a look at my sig...), taking the Feds off Bin Laden's tail.

I guess your Bush-loving eyes made you see me put Bush as the mastermind.
I DO think he knew about it, though. Why else would a yellow-bellied blueblood like him not hide behind the Secret Service while the nation is under attack? Nerves of steel, baby...



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Delirious
What I want to know, as with the NORAD question, if there were no pre-planted explosives in the buildings why were firefighters pulled out because there were explosives in the building? Then you have firefighters and civilians explaining how they heard multiple explosions before the building went down.


Where did you hear firefighters were pulled out because of explosives?
How would they even know there's explosives?

The "explosions" people heard was the building collapsing. You think buildings collapse quietly?
Trees falling or snapping are loud so you can imagine what a building would have sounded like.


Something else that has bothered me is, how can buildings all over the world completely burn, I mean completely burn for days on end and not collapse, while WTC collapsed from an isolated fire in its mid sections? What kind of since does that make?

lol
This was no ordinary fire.
This was a fire as a result of an explosion.
The explosions were a result of planes crashing into the buildings.
If you can show me a case where that has happened before I'd love to see it.


I dont think Bush was fully behind it, but definatly a part of it. He took the role of war president with the most minimal prompting that its asurd to think that he wasnt prepared for it.

What are you talking about?
What did he do that any president wouldn't have done?


After 9/11 the great war president goes after the country that has the least ties to 9/11.

We went after Al Q and the Taliban in Afghanistan after 9/11.
Again, what are you talking about?



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
I guess your Bush-loving eyes made you see me put Bush as the mastermind.

lol
So because I think terrorists are real and are willing to carry out attacks like 9/11, I'm a "Bush lover"
Are you serious? Wow
Let us know when you decide to join the real world truth...


And I only pointed out that you mentioned Bush a couple times. If you didn't think he had a hand in it, then why would you mention him?


I DO think he knew about it, though.

Intel agencies from around the world knew they were up to something.
But doesn't this contridict your stance that this was the government's doing?
Why would other countries warn that terrorists might attack? Why didn't they just say the US government might attack?

No one knew when either. If you have any proof that Bush knew when the attacks would take place, please share.



9/11 originally planned for earlier date

In 2001, bin Laden apparently pressures Khalid Shaikh Mohammed for an attack date earlier than 9/11. According to information obtained from the 9/11 Commission (apparently based on a prison interrogation of Mohammed), bin Laden first requests an attack date of May 12, 2001, the seven-month anniversary of the USS Cole bombing. Then, when bin Laden learns from the media that Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon would be visiting the White House in June or July 2001, he attempts once more to accelerate the operation to coincide with his visit. [9/11 Commission, 7/16/2004] The surge of warnings around this time could be related to these original preparations.



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Excuse me, Delirious, but I gotta jump in here.

I think he was referring to WTC 7. If he was, please explain how this "super jihadi fire" started in an extraordinary way.


As for the country invaded first, I think he also is referring to how almost ALL of the hijackers were Saudi Arabians, including Tim Osmond himself. Hell, maybe one guy was from Afghanistan?



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Where did you hear firefighters were pulled out because of explosives?
How would they even know there's explosives?

The "explosions" people heard was the building collapsing. You think buildings collapse quietly?
Trees falling or snapping are loud so you can imagine what a building would have sounded like.



video.google.com...
Fire fighter 1: "Here we go again"
Fire fighter 2: "Bomb in the building, start clearing out"
Background voices: "Get the f@#% out of here…secondary device..."

USA Today (FBI believed bombs brought the buildings down):
terrorize.dk...

CNN (New York Fire Department):
media.putfile.com...

NBC (New York Police Department):
media.putfile.com...


Also, the "explosions" you're trying to dismiss were actually pre-collapse explosions:
www.mypetgoat.tv...

[edit on 3-4-2006 by noto]



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by truthseeka
I guess your Bush-loving eyes made you see me put Bush as the mastermind.

lol
So because I think terrorists are real and are willing to carry out attacks like 9/11, I'm a "Bush lover"
Are you serious? Wow
Let us know when you decide to join the real world truth...


And I only pointed out that you mentioned Bush a couple times. If you didn't think he had a hand in it, then why would you mention him?



You're a liar.


Don't make me quote you. You SAID that you thought I was blaming Bush for orchestrating it. Nice to see you are still quite the backpedaler. As for terrorists, only a fool would say terrorists don't exist. You must not have looked at the title on this thread, or you really think I'm a fool.

Just because I think it was an inside job doesn't mean terrorists aren't real. And, of course, just because the govt has carried out terror attacks before doesn't mean they did it this time, riiight?



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   
oh ... i see... so if you say that the Goverment is behind soemthing, you dont mean the President... ooohhhh...
good one..

well, who do you mean than? what memebrs of the goverment ? I mean with all the "fantastic" web info outhere, its about time to have some names right ?

FACE IT... there are religious nuts who want you head and my head and everyone else who does not got to Meca like they do, hanging on a wall... believ it or not... after you acceopt this fact, you'll have alot mroe Peace of mind...



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by noto
video.google.com...
Fire fighter 1: "Here we go again"
Fire fighter 2: "Bomb in the building, start clearing out"
Background voices: "Get the f@#% out of here…secondary device..."

USA Today (FBI believed bombs brought the buildings down):
terrorize.dk...

CNN (New York Fire Department):
media.putfile.com...

NBC (New York Police Department):
media.putfile.com...


Also, the "explosions" you're trying to dismiss were actually pre-collapse explosions:
www.mypetgoat.tv...

Oh

I thought you had evidence.
Do you know how much stuff was reported that day? Do you know how much confusion there was that day? There were tons of reports of bombs everywhere (especially here in DC - the most famous being at the State Department). There were lots of reports of other planes being hijacked.
Death toll up to 10,000.

I'm not dismissing those "explosions" at all. Once whatever was continuing to hold up the building finally gave way there's no doubt you would have heard a loud bang or snap. And as the building collapsed on itself you would have continued to hear loud bangs and other noises. That doesn't mean it's a bomb or bombs.


truth...

You're a liar.

Don't make me quote you. You SAID that you thought I was blaming Bush for orchestrating it. Nice to see you are still quite the backpedaler.

I'll quote myself

You mention Bush several times truth so I'm left assuming that you think Bush was behind this.

And I'll quote my previous post which you haven't answered yet...

If you didn't think he had a hand in it, then why would you mention him?


You're the one that's backpedling...
You say Bush has ties with this, Bush has ties with that, suggesting you think Bush had something to do with it (or you wouldn't have mentioned it). Then you say Bush didn't do it?
Make up your mind!


As for terrorists, only a fool would say terrorists don't exist.

So if terrorists exists, and they're willing to carry out the attacks I listed before...then what makes you think they wouldn't be able to or willing to carry out 9/11?


And, of course, just because the govt has carried out terror attacks before doesn't mean they did it this time, riiight?

or
And, of course, just because terrorists have carried out terror attacks before doesn't mean they did it this time, riiight?



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by noto

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Where did you hear firefighters were pulled out because of explosives?
How would they even know there's explosives?

The "explosions" people heard was the building collapsing. You think buildings collapse quietly?
Trees falling or snapping are loud so you can imagine what a building would have sounded like.



video.google.com...
Fire fighter 1: "Here we go again"
Fire fighter 2: "Bomb in the building, start clearing out"
Background voices: "Get the f@#% out of here…secondary device..."

USA Today (FBI believed bombs brought the buildings down):
terrorize.dk...

CNN (New York Fire Department):
media.putfile.com...

NBC (New York Police Department):
media.putfile.com...


Also, the "explosions" you're trying to dismiss were actually pre-collapse explosions:
www.mypetgoat.tv...

[edit on 3-4-2006 by noto]


This post gets you Way Above from me.


Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 3/4/2006 by Umbrax]



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Is it that hard?

Bush knew about the attack, but he didn't order it. Is that so hard to understand? He signed W199I, taking the Feds off Tim Osmond's tail; do you deny this? He has an extremely cozy relationship with Tim Osmond; do you deny this? He has an extremely cozy relationship with the Royal Saudis, when damn near all the hijackers were Saudis, including Tim Osmond; do you deny this?

Maybe this will help you understand. It would be like if I knew some thugs were going to knock off a liquor store, and I was acting as the lookout for the po pos. Then, when the cops came, I gave them a false description of the robbers. In this case, did I order them to rob the store?



posted on Apr, 3 2006 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
Is it that hard?

Bush knew about the attack, but he didn't order it. Is that so hard to understand? He signed W199I, taking the Feds off Tim Osmond's tail; do you deny this? He has an extremely cozy relationship with Tim Osmond; do you deny this? He has an extremely cozy relationship with the Royal Saudis, when damn near all the hijackers were Saudis, including Tim Osmond; do you deny this?

When you say "he" are you talking about Bush 1, Clinton, or Bush 2?
Because each of those questions have a different answer...

You still haven't pieced all that you're saying together yet either.
What's your version?



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 06:43 PM
link   
openfire, ProudCanadian, a bird, and SKL, thanks for the support.

But, I gotta ask y'all, do y'all feel an insult to your intelligence from the official story pushers? The politicians, you know, the ones who are ALREADY KNOWN to lie to you on a regular basis?



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaastetNoir

oh ... i see... so if you say that the Goverment is behind soemthing, you dont mean the President... ooohhhh...
good one..

well, who do you mean than? what memebrs of the goverment ? I mean with all the "fantastic" web info outhere, its about time to have some names right ?

FACE IT... there are religious nuts who want you head and my head and everyone else who does not got to Meca like they do, hanging on a wall... believ it or not... after you acceopt this fact, you'll have alot mroe Peace of mind...


So...

The president and the govt are interchangeable? By your logic, the entire govt got brain from Monica Lewinsky...


Of course there are crazy Muslims who want to kill the infidels; no argument here. The PROBLEM is that the govt has killed and planned to kill way more people than radical Muslims. These guys with no nukes are REALLY gonna come over here and cut my head off, riiight.
At the same time, criminal elements in the govt, who nerve gassed people in New York in 1968 and cooked up Operation Northwoods, are loving and are going to protect me...



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka

Originally posted by Stateofgrace



Hey man,

I'm not so bullheaded that I wouldn't believe the official story if it were proven to be true. In fact, that honestly would be best, as it would squash all this and be the first step to justice for the victims. That being said, there are just too many unanswered questions. I would like for someone to give a DECENT explanation for...

Why certain people were warned not to fly to New York that day.
Why Bin Laden, a CIA asset, has so many ties to our PRESIDENT.
Why PNAC would make a list of countries to be invaded, and magically, the list is being followed so far.
Why there was not the MOST THOROUGH crime scene investigation in US history on 9/11.
Why the Feds confiscated surveillance tapes and won't release them, just like at Waco.
Why there were war games paralleling the attacks, but NO ONE could snap back to reality and do what they have been playing for real.
Why NORAD didn't go after the planes, or at least scramble fighters to attempt to take them down.
Why our leaders had troops ready to go into Afghanistan BEFORE 9/11.

I have tons more questions, but I'll leave it there for now.


I did not say you were bullheaded but I am surprised you won’t believe the truth even it was proved to be true.

"The speed of light in a vacuum is exactly 299,792,458 metres per second"

This is fact, it is proven scientifically. This fact was scientifically theorised, proved, passed onto the entire scientific community, who reviewed and came to the same conclusion (peer approved), it is not speculation.

So does that mean it absolute, does that mean this scientific fact is true?

Here are my questions.

Has anybody seen light travelling?
Did they measure it?
Do the different colours that make up light travel at the same speed?
Does light stop travelling at this speed when there is no light source?
If light stopped travelling at this speed would time stop?

I could go on but my point is that even though I believe my make believe questions to be relevant they do not alter the fact that light travels at exactly 299,792,458 metres per second.

Applying the same principle to your questions regarding 9/11, do your questions alter the facts at all, do they actually mean anything?

I will not patronise, nor take cheap shots at anybodies right to question; it is our basic right, our freedom to do so. I will not defend the findings of FEMA, NIST or the 9/11 commission. I will not be draw into a debate whereby I have to defend their finding. But I will debate with anybody scientific, peer approved facts which is at the opposite end of the spectrum to speculation.

I have said before and I repeat, the truth is absolute, it does not reply on speculation, offer up absolute undeniable peer approved fact that there is a conspiracy and I will be happy.



posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Don't play me, Stateofgrace.

You know I didn't say I wouldn't believe the official story, even if it were true. In fact, I said the opposite.

You keep going on about scientific, peer reviewed facts, so let me ask. How are we supposed to have these kinds of facts when the evidence was sold to China? That right there stinks BIG TIME to me! Since when do you sell evidence from a crime scene? How about the Feds confiscating video tapes from gas stations and other places that had a shot at the Pentagon? Since you go on about "fact," you would agree that videotape evidence is quite strong, no?

You should have a look at the posts from the doubters with much better knowledge of physics than I have. They have offered tons of evidence that refutes the official story. As I am a retard when it comes to physics, I stick to the "facts." You know, like the stuff I already posted, that really is public.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join