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.

 

Oreilly says 9/11 believers are

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2006 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Mr Bill Oreilly, of Fox news The Oreilly Factor had a short piece on July 11th 2006.

In this segment he was giving his opinion on a University of Wisconsin teacher that discussed the 9/11 conspiricy subject.

The rant was that this was so stupid to let some educator discuss and present his views in a school that receives public funds. He was joined by a member of the Wisconsin legislature.

He did not give this educators credintials nor his co-founded web site.

The mans name is Kevin Barrett.

He teaches at the University of Wisconsin.

The web site states who he is, who his other founder is and others that agree on the fact that something is not right with the official 9/11 story.

The site link discribing who he is and who others are that believe in a like manner is :

www.mujca.com...


If you saw the Oreilly factor today, even if you didnt and do not like being categorized as a "Crackpot", perhaps you can do as I did and send Mr. Oreilly a e-mail protesting the fact that you and those like you are not "Crackpots" but concerned citizens that are just seeking the truth.


I just want the real truth, and if the real truth is they don't know, then say it. Then give people access to the artifacts and evidence for examination to find the real truth.

I resent being refered to as a crackpot, nut, idiot and ect. That is a broad brush to paint a lot of intellegent people with. Why not state that you do not believe it to be anything other than what the government stated and leave it at that?

Shame on Mr Oreilly for being so condesending.

Mr. Fair and Balanced! I dont think so




posted on Jul, 11 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I am recording the 2nd showing of it to see what you talking about, untill then I cant comment to much.

I think this should be on a torrent somewhere in a few days.. If I had something rigged to my PC I would torrent it myself unfortunately I dont..

Anyway after I watch it I will come back and talk about what he said.

::EDIT::

I really dont like O'Reilly that much anyway as much as dont like Sean Hannity.

[edit on 7/11/2006 by ThichHeaded]

[edit on 7/11/2006 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Jul, 11 2006 @ 09:59 PM
link   
HE doesnt spend much time on it, it is in the beginning of the show I beleive.

It is a quick "here is another crackpot teacher" shot.

Since Mr Fetzer, I may have misspelled his name, gave it to Oliver North and Alan Colmbs on the Hannity and Colmbs show a few weeks ago, there may be a onslaught of "nastys" to put the word"Crackpot" into the mainstream and brand many people in America and around the world as drulling, baballing, illiterate fools.

Their hope of course is to try to diffuse the growing desire to reopen 911. Or so it appears to me



posted on Jul, 11 2006 @ 11:26 PM
link   
He didn't directly call us crackpots, it was the guest speaker who did..

Anyway I sorta believe the guy they were talking about, come on its not exactly rocket science that NORAD stood down, or the bomb sniffing dogs were removed from WTC a couple a weeks before 9/11, bush's cousin was head security guy of the WTC, and on and on and on...

They can call us everything they want, in the end the truth will come out.. perhaps before i die.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
Anyway I sorta believe the guy they were talking about, come on its not exactly rocket science that NORAD stood down, or the bomb sniffing dogs were removed from WTC a couple a weeks before 9/11, bush's cousin was head security guy of the WTC, and on and on and on...


Contrary, NORAD was was working faster than on the Panye Stewart incident (yet not fast enough), bomb sniffing dogs were set back to normal operation (maybe you aren't aware but their number was higher just for a limited time as there was a threat warning, and as you maybe aren't aware one bomb sniffer died in the tower collapse) and Marvin Bush wasn't the head of security, but go on...



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by tuccy

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
NORAD stood down, or the bomb sniffing dogs were removed from WTC a couple a weeks before 9/11, bush's cousin was head security guy of the WTC, and on and on and on...


see his below.



Originally posted by tuccy
Marvin Bush wasn't the head of security,


Ya your right.. or not..........



www.whatreallyhappened.com...
Controlled demolition would have required unimpeded access to the WTC, access to explosives, avoiding detection, and the expertise to orchestrate the deadly destruction from a nearby secure location. Such access before 9/11 likely depended on complicity by one or more WTC security companies. These companies focus on "access control" and as security specialist Wayne Black says, "When you have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything." Stratesec, a now-defunct company that had security contracts at the World Trade Center and Dulles International Airport, should be investigated, among others, because of the strange coincidence that President Bush’s brother, Marvin P. Bush, and his cousin, Wirt D. Walker III, were principals in the company, with Walker acting as CEO from 1999 until January 2002 and Marvin reportedly in New York on 9/11. At least one report claims that a "power down" condition prevailed on September 8–9 (pdf, p. 45) at WTC to complete a "cabling upgrade," presenting an opportunity to plant explosives with low risk of detection.



Originally posted by tuccy
bomb sniffing dogs were set back to normal operation (maybe you aren't aware but their number was higher just for a limited time as there was a threat warning, and as you maybe aren't aware one bomb sniffer died in the tower collapse) and but go on...




www.prisonplanet.com...

Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday, bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.

"Today was the first day there was not the extra security," Coard said. "We were protecting below. We had the ground covered. We didn't figure they would do it with planes. There is no way anyone could have stopped that."


Ya they werent removed... or where they???



Originally posted by tuccy
Contrary, NORAD was was working faster than on the Panye Stewart incident (yet not fast enough),




911research.wtc7.net...

The Prevention of Interceptions of the Commandeered Planes

It is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost. Between September 2000 and June 2001, interceptors were scrambled 67 times. 1 In the year 2000 jets were scrambled 129 times. 2

There are several elements involved in domestic air defense. The air traffic control system continuously monitors air traffic and notifies NORAD of any deviations of any aircraft from their flight-paths or loss of radio contact. NORAD monitors air and space traffic continuously and is prepared to react immediately to threats and emergencies. It has the authority to order units from the Air National Guard, the Air Force, or other armed services to scramble fighters in pursuit of jetliners in trouble.

Routine interception procedures were not followed on September 11th, 2001.

(Link above has to much to quote there to prove my point. goto link and see it.)


Ya ok you win, Sorry I am completely wrong.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 03:36 AM
link   
Had you bothered to search details about those interceptions, all of them happened int he ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) hundreds of miles off the coast, against inbound planes. That is the area where NORAD has radar coverage and where it intercepts suspicious planes. In ten years prior to 0911 there was exactly ONE interception above USA - the Payne Stewart incident. Took better part of two hours and several unsuccessfull attmpts despite the plane was flying a straight line with its transpoder on.
By the way, what was the SOP for interception? Eh? Who asks the interception and where? And how long does it take?

As for the bomb sniffing dogs, agains, seems you didn't get it. on 0911 the protection of WTC was on a STANDARD level while you're implying it was sub-standard. Isn't it normal to call in more bomb sniffers when you have bomb threats and to remove them when the bomb threats end?



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 09:03 AM
link   
the lower levels were still covered tho, tuc



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   
You mean by the dogs? Yup, I've already written one of the sniffers got killed in the collapse
I was pointing out just that the "bomb sniffers removal" wasn't a) absolute and b) unusual, unusual was the high number of them over a short period



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Bomb dogs are not trained to find ALL explosives or MOST if ANY incendaries.

Just like drug dogs are not trained to find "Magic Mushrooms"...

You pick the MOST LIKELY substances and train the dogs to hit on those. You cannot train them for everything.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
So IOW there was no need to return to the normal bomb sniffer level even with the conspiracy and this coincidence is... well, let's say it... just a coincidence



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Simple answer to O'Rielly, Hannity and others ... if you don't like their message, write to the commercial sponsors and inform them that you are no longer buying their products because of the television shows.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join