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.

 

O'Reilly Equates 9/11 Truthers With Terrorists

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astygia

Surely you can admit that O'Reilly could have given Fetzer a chance to say his piece, then this thread would be about how well/awful Fetzer did presenting his case.


No problem there. Not many people could deal with O'Reilly. I have seen Fetzer on other shows though. He did no better. I don't think his group has any evidence. I think they are trying to influence an election which makes this whole thing an act of fraud. I don't think they believe the stuff they are saying any more than I do. I think those who have fallen for this are victims of a real conspiracy.




posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Fox News' Bill O'Reilly had Jim Fetzer on his "Talking Points" the other night. I have reviewed Bill's clippits and it disturbed me so much that I had to respond.



Talking Points Transcript from 10/12/06 - O'Reilly Takes on 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist!

Ta lking Points Video from 10/12/06


Talking Points Transcript from 10/13/06 - When Freedom of Speech goes too far.

Talking Points Video from 10/13/06


Here is a link I made to a response email I have sent to Bill O'Reilly, Keith Olberman, and to James Fetzer. What do you think?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infoholic
Quote from O'Reilly Interview taken from Infoholic's Email - "in order for any conspiracy of this magnitude to take place, thousands of Americans would have to buy into it, would have to know about it, and would have to keep their mouth shut about it."


I think you misinterpreted what he meant. He is saying that the hundreds if not thousands of people who would have been directly involved in this would have to remain silent. Every single one involved would be a mass murderer and would have to never reveal their involvement. That's a lot of people and it's hard to believe they could keep silent. At least some of them would, because of their guilt, spill the beans so to speak. I would think some of them would be eventually driven mad by the knowledge of what they had done. People who could help kill thousands of innocent people and keep silent about it don't grow on tree's. Most are in prison or in mental institutions.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Either way.

I just find it hard for anyone with a right mind to not question what has happened. And to insinuate that I don't believe the "official" story, or anyone else for that matter, because I "hate" America... That is absurd!

As I said, it bothered me so much, I just had to reply.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infoholic
Either way.

I just find it hard for anyone with a right mind to not question what has happened. And to insinuate that I don't believe the "official" story, or anyone else for that matter, because I "hate" America... That is absurd!

As I said, it bothered me so much, I just had to reply.


You are right that is "absurd". I don't believe you hate America. I just think you have a different opinion than I do. I don't like the Republican or Democratic Parties and refuse to join either. That does not mean I hate Republicans and Democrats. It means I think they have been fooled by corrupt leaders. To do the same thing to people that don't believe this theory is also absurd. The fact that I don't believe in this theory does not mean I am not in my "right mind". It means I looked at the evidence and found no proof. I instead found lots of wild speculation based on no true evidence. The fact that no normal media source has touched this story would indicate that I'm not nut's for not believing it. The fact that the DNC can not find any evidence should greatly enhance the chances of me being right. They have the best researchers money and party loyalty can buy. The fact that neither the Democratic leaning media or the Democratic Party can find any proof should scream to people to have a second look with an open mind. Could it be you have been tricked by people like Fetzer and websites who make their money by pushing conspiracies? Very likely. Even this website has a lot at stake here. If people don't believe this stuff the site would be a ghost-town. Unless the Amigo's are rich philanthropists they are drawing an income of some sort. Or, someone is financing this by covering their needs. You don't run a site like this without some full time paid help. I don't mean anything bad by that. I think the Amigo's are legit. I also think they deserve to make a good deal of money for creating such a great board. I do hate people like Fetzer who spread hate and lies for profit or to influence elections. Which is exactly what I think is going on with this. I can't stomach Bush either, but I refuse to let that cloud my judgement. Everyone is wasting time with this while both the Democrats and Republicans screw us royal.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Blaine


This would lead one to believe you don't like O'Reilly?


Correct.



It also seems to be that you are blaming this on God?


God = the Universe in my personal opinion. The Universe is responsible for creating this man, and all other men, so yeah, I think it's safe to say I blame God for populating the earth with a lot of little Bills.



Or that you hate God too?


What on earth would lead you to think that? I've said nothing of the sort...



Nutter? You must be British?


Swing and a miss...



Not what I would expect from someone adult enough to be a "moderator". Sounds more like rantings from an illiterate school child.


An illiterate school child, eh? I'm going to take this chance to remind you of something. We're entitled to our opinions, and we're free to discuss public figures, as long as we stay within the boundaries delineated by the T&Cs, but insulting your fellow members is not allowed. Since I haven't insulted you, I suggest you extend the same courtesy to me and to others - or, find somewhere else to hang your hat. I honestly don't care which path you choose...



I don't suppose you have any proof of the 9/11 Conspiracy that would be admissible in court? Anything at all? I have a contact in the media who could get it into the NYT. All I would need is a single piece of credible evidence.


I don't have anything of the sort.

All I have are questions about the circumstances surrounding that day - primarily having to do with the gross negligence displayed by the authorities in handling evidence. If the cops find a crime scene, they don't dismantle it and send it overseas to be destroyed. They don't bury it. They don't sell it. If they do any of those things, they're incompetent at best, and crooked at worst.

What's all this got to do with the topic anyway?


[edit on 17-10-2006 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Quoted from WyrdeOne's Post Above



I don't suppose you have any proof of the 9/11 Conspiracy that would be admissible in court? Anything at all? I have a contact in the media who could get it into the NYT. All I would need is a single piece of credible evidence.


What good would it do to even offer a suggestions of placing some of this credible evidence into NYT? The New York Times Newspaper wouldn't dream of putting some piece together to belittle the man they voted for, for the presidency. Politically speaking, maybe... but something to bury him as a human being? Never.

1)www.nytco.com... - New York Times Company

2)www.freerepublic.com... -A Conservative News Forum - GEORGE W. BUSH, ENDORSED BY NEW YORK TIMES AFFILIATE

Easy enough to explain, isn't it?

I don't suppose the idea of corporate capitalism would happen to come into play here, would it? I'm no scholar, and I'm no professional investigator, but as this Nations' true inner self exposes itself more and more every day, I would begin to believe it to be true.

I don't see NYT being able (or even willing) to assist in our cause on this one.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   
The NYT was exposed by Carl Bernstein in the late '70s or early '80s as having CIA agents in it working as journalists. This led to quite a bit of info, apparently, or at least was a piece of it. Check out Operation Mockingbird. Not surprisingly, one journalist is more than worth the effort on the part of the CIA to implement them. I wonder why?



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I don't suppose you have any proof of the 9/11 Conspiracy that would be admissible in court? Anything at all? I have a contact in the media who could get it into the NYT. All I would need is a single piece of credible evidence.


I've said this before and I'll say it again. What "proof" can we come up with when EVERYTHING has been taken away? BTW, observable evidence IS admissable in court....i.e. natural PHYSICAL observance.

Or are you saying that you can go into a liquer store and rob it but don't leave fingerprints but they have your face on camera, that they can't use that in a court of law?



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
[I don't suppose you have any proof of the 9/11 Conspiracy that would be admissible in court? Anything at all? I have a contact in the media who could get it into the NYT. All I would need is a single piece of credible evidence.


Another thought. Why not tell your friend to finally air the collapse of WTC7 in the media. Or are they scared to? You know over 80% of America doesn't even KNOW that tower 7 collapsed (my estimation so don't flame me with proof). Don't believe me? I have a friend that used to be in the NSA. Until I told him that WTC7 collapsed, he had no idea?



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
How has O'Reilly taken away your freedoms? Is it not you who is wanting to take away his right to free speech? Or does free speech only apply to those who agree with you? Why do you have to use the "f" word to express yourself? Or did you mean you want to have sex with O'Reilly? Are you old enough to be on the internet without parental supervision?


Bill and FauxNews are a TOOL of the administration.

Do you know they NEVER had a camera at ground zero and got ALL of the footage from inside the "cordoned off zone" from..


GUESS!

GUESS!
FEMA!

Yeah... news.

Bill is a puppet of a #ty admin. nearly as bad as Rush the Oxycontin head.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 08:26 PM
link   
what schumck orielly is,
nothing but putrid filth spurts from his mouth in favour of this admin.
Wasnt the Nazi propoganda minister tried for war crimes?
Its a warm feeling knowing people of his standard are going to one day have to face the court and explain why they told thus rubbish, when it was clear it was fake.

The only way America is going to save its self from the cancer that has taken over ,
is to find a public medium where the truth, and the real stories can be presented
so that every day armchair joe type americans, dont have to stray to far to see the truth.


How do you think they got this war in the first place?

THey appealed to the slack people who take there 9-5 as gospel. And thats what they continue to do today.
If there was another channel, 9-5 that presented nothing but the TRUTH
we wouldnt be in this eternal mess.

But how hard is it to get a TV Station that doesnt throw positive light on the bush admin?
can we all say Rupert Murdoch?

[edit on 22-10-2006 by Agit8dChop]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join