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.

 

The Proven Government Liars Re: 9/11

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Lies, lies, lies...

I never knew the 9/11 Comission admitted to LYING...


The recent release of the NORAD tapes from the morning of 9/11 documented that the Pentagon had repeatedly provided false information concerning how the national security defenses responded. The White House and EPA deliberately provided false information concerning the health andenvironmental risks from the WTC site, contributing to significant health problems among relief workers and residents. The Bush administration lied to the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq. The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission recently admitted it lied to the American public, covering up their finding that the US support for Israel’s occupations of Palestinian and other Arab territories was the central motivation behind the attacks.

The Bush administration seems incapable of telling the truth to the American public.” noted Hawkins. “The Bush administration and Congress resisted an investigation into 9/11 until the cries of the victims' families were too loud to ignore. Those finally appointed to the commission were selected based on their willingness to protect the national security establishment, not purse the truth. Their conflicts of interests were so overwhelming that all of its members at various points had to recuse themselves from the so-called investigation. Most galling was the effort by President Bush to appoint former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger as chair of the Commission. Kissinger is condemned world-wide as a war criminal and terrorist for his leadership role in the bloody overthrow of the elected Allende government in Chile on September 11, 1973."




posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Lies, lies, lies...

I never knew the 9/11 Comission admitted to LYING...


Kissinger is condemned world-wide as a war criminal and terrorist for his leadership role in the bloody overthrow of the elected Allende government in Chile on September 11, 1973."


Bolded by me. What a strange coincidence....September 11th. Maybe has nothing to do with anything, but still thought it strange.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:48 PM
link   
I recieved a U2U from Implosion about this little tidbit that I didn't know.


Perhaps you already know this, however if not, you might also find it interesting:


External Source


Prior to the construction of the Pentagon, the War Department (now the Department of Defense) was housed in a series of "temporary" buildings erected during World War I which nearly covered the National Mall. Ground was broken for the Pentagon on September 11, 1941, with construction completed in approximately sixteen months at a cost of $83 million.


Source. en.wikipedia.org...

Isn't that a sweet little synchronicity?


How strange that September 11 has more meaning to the US than it does Muslims. Implosion also showed me that the whole 9-11 Koran thing is an internet hoax.


Aparently, this is 9-11 in the Koran:



But if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, they are your brethren in faith; and We make the communications clear for a people who know.



This:


Quran (9:11) -- For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; and there was peace.



Just another internet hoax.

Cheers,
Implosion


I hope you don't mind me sharing this info Implosion. Cheers mate.



Makes you wonder huh?



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
Saying Bush lied about the first plane is a matter of translation. This is not a legitimate claim since the accusation is taking is words literally instead of what he actually meant.


Well, then...

1. What did he actually mean?
2. How do you know what he meant?
3. What words were taken literally that we should have taken figuratively?



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

I hope you don't mind me sharing this info Implosion. Cheers mate.



Not in the least.

Here are some sources for the 9-11 quote being rubbish:

democraticunderground.com

wam.umd.edu

truthorfiction.com

screamingpickle.com

snopes.com



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Well, then...

1. What did he actually mean?
2. How do you know what he meant?
3. What words were taken literally that we should have taken figuratively?


here we go with this discussion again which will make lots of circles.

1. He meant he saw on TV that the plane had hit a building. He was watching the news (hence saw) and the news mentioned the plane hitting the buildings. Hence him thinking it must have just been some bad pilot.

2. Because it would be impossible for him to have seen the first plane hit live on TV.

3. He abuses the english language every day. it becomes the butt of many jokes. Yet this is the one time people decide to take his wording literally?

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we. "

So by that logic, he is telling the public that he is planning on attacking our country? No we know it's an ironic slip up on his part.

"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test."

"My views are one that speaks to freedom."

"And it's a struggle between good and it's a struggle between evil."

"We cannot let terrorists hold this nation hostile or hold our allies hostile."

"If you choose to do so, when Iraq is liberated, you will be treated, tried and persecuted as a war criminal."

So as you can see he clearly cannot speak english very well and we have all come to accept this as one of his manerisms. Yet on that one specific quote people hold him to the literal wording. And ONLY on that quote. So why should we change our behavior just for that one quote. And why that one particular one? I have my suspicions why.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
1. He meant ...


wow, a mind reader... He TOLD A WHO FREKING STORY ABOUT IT TWICE! There is no "he meant" he SAID he saw the plane ad "I was a pilot and I thought MAN what a bad pilot..."

You are such a Bush apologist over this matter.


Originally posted by snoopy
2. Because it would be impossible for him to have seen the first plane hit live on TV.


Exactly why we know it is a fabrication.


Originally posted by snoopy
3. He abuses the english language every day. it becomes the butt of many jokes. Yet this is the one time people decide to take his wording literally?


This was a WHOLE STORY, not just the flubbing of a word. You do not FLUBA WHOLE STORY unless you are a big fat liar.


Originally posted by snoopy
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we. "


One word is a mistake... a whole story is a lie.


Originally posted by snoopy
So why should we change our behavior just for that one quote. And why that one particular one? I have my suspicions why.


Because it was a WHOLE STORY about him seeing the plane HIT the tower and him thinking MAN THAT was ONE BAD PILOT... We know it was not the second hit he was referring to because the first building would have been burning... Footage of the first hit was not released on 9/11 so we know he did not see the first hit at all.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 08:08 AM
link   
NEWST LIARS/ACOMPLICES ARE...

THE FCC!!!

Guilty of aiding the government in controlling media through the destruction of reports:

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Congratulations on your membership to this elite yet large and growing group of "a holes"!


[edit on 15-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by snoopy
1. He meant ...


wow, a mind reader... He TOLD A WHO FREKING STORY ABOUT IT TWICE! There is no "he meant" he SAID he saw the plane ad "I was a pilot and I thought MAN what a bad pilot..."

You are such a Bush apologist over this matter.


Originally posted by snoopy
2. Because it would be impossible for him to have seen the first plane hit live on TV.


Exactly why we know it is a fabrication.


Originally posted by snoopy
3. He abuses the english language every day. it becomes the butt of many jokes. Yet this is the one time people decide to take his wording literally?


This was a WHOLE STORY, not just the flubbing of a word. You do not FLUBA WHOLE STORY unless you are a big fat liar.


Originally posted by snoopy
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we. "


One word is a mistake... a whole story is a lie.


Originally posted by snoopy
So why should we change our behavior just for that one quote. And why that one particular one? I have my suspicions why.


Because it was a WHOLE STORY about him seeing the plane HIT the tower and him thinking MAN THAT was ONE BAD PILOT... We know it was not the second hit he was referring to because the first building would have been burning... Footage of the first hit was not released on 9/11 so we know he did not see the first hit at all.


Yesz he said it twice. Proving that it was NOT some slip up, it's just how he talks. The only one who is reading minds seems to be you. He has a poor english speech as I pointed out that is overlooked every single dqay. You don't post about them at all. But on this one you do. So the only diffference is your interpretation, not his speaking. You are simply looking for a witch hunt, hence the calling me a Bush apologist. Tell me, what am I aqpologizing?

And no that is not evidence of a fabrication, it's evidence that your claim holds no water at all.

Once again, as you said, it was a whole story, not a word. Once again more proof that your claims are baseless. it's how he talks. No one claimed it was a mistake, it's just his bad english. It's not like he accidentally said tha wrong thing, you just misinterpreted the way he speaks. It's jsut a way of talking. I already know you will never understand this, especially since you only want to believe in some big conspiracy. But at least someone has to make you aware of it.

If only one word is a mistake (and again those are your word not mine, I don't claim him to have made a mistake, you did) then how come you don't make a post about every time he speaks in public. Because he does this EVERY time he speaks, not jsut this one time, literally EVERY time. And that means he is lying in every speech about every thing he talks about. But you don't point those other times out. Why? Because they don't make for a good conspiracy theory.

Once again, it was *****NOT**** the 2nd plane he was talking about. he was talking about the FIRST plane. He ****Saw**** the news about it on TV. But you simply keep insisting he is talking about visually seeing the actual plane hit the building, which obviously he is not.

I said it before and I will say it again, this is a clear cut case of only seeing what you want to see, even if it defies common sense.



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Snoopy, even if I accept your statement about Bush... which I do not... please explain away the rest of the liars.

TIA



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Here is HOW large scale conspiracies go uncovered for so long:

"All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes." -HITLER



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   
This ought to re-enforce my previous post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

They were aware of these jokers in our country since 1999 huh - figures. Maybe someone should let Ms. Rice in on this stuff! Imagine how Ludicrous her Testimony would sound if this was widespread Public Knowledge?



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Almost forgot:

Norman Mineta speaking on the usage of planes os weapons by terrorists...


"We had no information of that nature at all," Mineta replied.

"There was nothing in those intelligence reports that would have been specific to anything that happened on the 11th of September," Mineta said. "There was nothing in the preceding time period about aircraft being used as a weapon or of any other terrorist types of activities of that nature.


Liar.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:06 PM
link   
So now Hitler was in on it and the memo specifically said that planes would be used as missles?

Congratulations on trying to prove some politicians have lied. I have news for you. They all do and all have. you are trying to make an assumption that this proves they engineered 9/11, but it does not. You're trying to win an argument through deception. How is that any better than what politicians do?



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
The CIA Faked Evidence and Lied
www.pbs.org...



Go to the video there "The Push for War with Iraq". Scroll to the 8:00 minute mark and listen for the next 22 seconds.

A perfect description of what I've learned about CT'ers. The speaker refers to "intelligence amatuers" that can take pieces of intelligence and "prove any case you want".

How any of your sources proves secret government/cia/pentagon/fbi/mayor of SF or any of the hundreds of others that CT'ers implicate had the wtc demolished is non-existent. Of course, other CT'ers will hear conclusive, this-proves-they-did-9/11 evidence in every sentence spoken.
What the film does present is persuasive arguments that the administration used 9/11 to go after Iraq.

[edit on 26-9-2006 by tooblue]



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
So now Hitler was in on it and the memo specifically said that planes would be used as missles?


No, Hitler just used the same tactics as the PNAC... I guess they did learn SOMETHING from history.

It has been WIDELY publicised that AQ had plans to use planes as weapons since the 90s... Mineta is a liar.

Since you just decided to jump in on Mineta... Please explain away all of the other lies/liars in this thread.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by tooblue
A perfect description of what I've learned about CT'ers. The speaker refers to "intelligence amatuers" that can take pieces of intelligence and "prove any case you want".


Which is exactly what the neo-con AMATUERS tried to do... COME ON... Al tubes, Yellowcake... IT sounded OK at the time, but it was ALL A FABRICATION. Liars.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 08:00 AM
link   
What is the point of this thread? Is this the first time you've noticed the government lying about anything?
How does this prove 9/11 was an inside job?
Are you thinking, "this proves they will lie about 9/11"? Well, sure they would lie about 9/11. So how does this prove they were complicit in the wtc disaster?
A lie does not confirm the truth about anything.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by tooblue
What is the point of this thread?


If you do not see the point of this thread then stop posting in it.


Originally posted by tooblue
Is this the first time you've noticed the government lying about anything?


The nuber of liars, what they are lying about and their affiliations are my issue... this is not dumbass Clinton saying "I didn't inhale" ir Regan saying "I don't recall." Of course, you understand this and are just wasting my time.


Originally posted by tooblue
How does this prove 9/11 was an inside job?


When did I say that these lies "prove 9/11 was an inside job"? I never typed that... this is just a rundown of various quotes concerning our elected officials... Funny that YOU make the connection that I never propose.


Originally posted by tooblue
Are you thinking, "this proves they will lie about 9/11"? Well, sure they would lie about 9/11. So how does this prove they were complicit in the wtc disaster?
A lie does not confirm the truth about anything.


I am just putting the evidence on the table....

Why does it bother you to allow mwe to refresh peoples memories regarding the lies told over the last five years?



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts


The nuber of liars, what they are lying about and their affiliations are my issue... this is not dumbass Clinton saying "I didn't inhale" ir Regan saying "I don't recall." Of course, you understand this and are just wasting my time.


Oh, I understand alright. You're trying to imply "See, this proves they were in on 9/11!" Typical CT tactic.



When did I say that these lies "prove 9/11 was an inside job"? I never typed that... this is just a rundown of various quotes concerning our elected officials... Funny that YOU make the connection that I never propose.


Then you're in the wrong forum. I've noticed time and again how CT'ers will imply something but when you get called on it, you conviently deny it.




I am just putting the evidence on the table....


Evidence of what??? That governments lie?? Thats your only point? If so, then you got the wrong forum (again).



Why does it bother you to allow mwe to refresh peoples memories regarding the lies told over the last five years?


Yeah, yeah, people forget how we are lied to so often, don't we.
Lies over the last 5 years? You gotta be kiddin. Why just the last 5 years? Could it be because 9/11 happened 5 years ago and these lies prove they did it?
No, I know what you're trying to slip in with this thread (despite the typical CT denial tactic) and am calling you on it.
You say I should stop posting in this thread? Seems to me that if you are not trying to tie this in with the 9/11 conspiracy then you are off topic and you should stop posting in it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join