It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Win 250,000 Points: What Are The Top-5 9/11 Conspiracies?

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 05:10 PM

Originally posted by 11Bravo
Im sure this wont go over well and it will probably get me banned but I must speak my mind.

Why would your post get you banned?
You didn't do anything wrong, you didn't violate any of the T&C.

I'm sure SkepticOverlord will respond in due course (and this comment of yours has been raised in the mod forum so he can easily pick it up), but something that people must bear in mind is that Bill (S.O.) is "the man in charge" and is leading the way in terms of advancing ATS and the other websites within The Above Network. His time is greatly strained with the amount of multi-tasking he is currently carrying out.

As I was not involved in the 9/11 contests and events on ATS, I can not speak first-hand for Bill, but I can say that it is likely any lag or "un-ending" to contests is very much due to his time restrictions.

We most certainly have no issue in handing out prizes to winners, lets not forget previous contests involving books, ATS merchandise and the gold ATS rings! Real-world prizes, not just virtual points.

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 05:18 PM

Originally posted by 11Bravo
This isnt shoes we are selling, its truth we are telling, and no logo is neaded IMO.

I couldn't disagree more. All information needs to be packaged and delivered...I don't care if it's a punchline on "Seinfeld" or a government report on the dearth of wheat grass in Missouri...there is no information that cannot benefit from appropriate delivery.

The Truth Movement, in my opinion, is a perfect example of a large group of people who have decided not to unify and streamline their message and have, therefore, completely lost the message altogether.

If this post does get me banned...

Ahhh don't worry. SO has pretty thick skin and I'm sure it's not the first time someone has implied that he has knowledge regarding the untimely death of a New York 9/11 Truther.

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 05:32 PM
Banned Of Brothers

Originally posted by 11Bravo
If this post does get me banned, its been nice chatting with you all.

The only way I know of to get banned around here is to willfully violate the Terms And Conditions Of Use and make it clear you don't plan to stop.

There's nothing in the T&C that prohibits criticizing or questioning the motives of the staff or publicly expressing your suspicions, so I'm really not seeing anything to worry about here.

As for what Bill's been up to, I would never presume to speak on his behalf, but I can definitely attest that he has been incredibly busy in recent months and hope you can see clear to cut him a little slack.

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 06:39 PM

Originally posted by 11Bravo
S.O. visits with NY Truth on or around January 11.
I found this odd because in my time here at ATS I have seen S.O. as one of the more aggressive 'debunkers' reguarding 9/11.

How in the world could you say that? It's been perhaps my most focused topic on ATS. Just because I disagree with certain 9/11 related theories, does not mean I'm "aggressively debunking" it.

Soon there after S.O. set up The 911 pound gorilla in an attempt to 'brand' and 'market' 911 truth. ?

Yes, on hold. The "truth movement" is a fragmented mess with dozens of groups all in-fighting in an effort to gain a foothold of awareness. It's disheartening... and has only gotten worse sense I extended a hand of assistance.

No winner was ever announced that I saw, and as the thread is still open I assume no winner was named.

There's been some interesting posts and ideas, but no solid list of "9/11 essentials" that I was hoping for.

I find it odd that at the beginning of the years ATS seemed poised to finally throw their weight behind the truth movement, then it all just fizzled out with out so much as a wimper.

Well... we were poised to offer a high-profile conduit... but yes, it fizzled, and it was my call.

Over the past few months, I've personally become exasperated and disheartened over the state of the "Truth Movement." There are dozens (if not more) of "camps" each with their own unique spin on aspects of 9/11 conspiracies ranging from the dubiousness of "no planes" to the conspiracy profiteering of Alex Jones. Each vehemently defends their dogma, attacks those who disagree with terms like shills and COINTELPRO, and insults those who refuse to believe in conspiracies. It's a madness akin to religious fundamentalism, and there appears to be no improvement in sight.

So yes... I'm remiss in following up on these items because it hardly seems worth the effort. If we condense certain main theories into a concise list of talking points, we'll be attacked as "defending the perps" by the TV Fakery crowd. If we create professionally composed copy and artwork, we'll be attacked as disinformationists by another group. If we seek simplistic presentations that are palatable for "Joe Mainstream" we'll be labeled sell-outs by yet another 9/11 faction. And so on. And so on. I'm open to suggestions.

There are many "leaders" of various 9/11 groups who are aware that our extended hand of help will always exist... but first, they must come together and cooperate on a common message.

Sad really. Especially for those of us who have been studying conspiracy theory since before 9/11/2001. We knew something was coming. And the information was out there. But it lacked the "sizzle" of missiles and controlled demolition... but just maybe, if it weren't for the madness, stuff like this may have been properly tracked down...
Web Archive: April, 2001

"In taping an interview with Stew Webb, he mentioned that his government sources feel we could see war in this country possibly as early as August. Stew said his sources definitely think it's coming before the end of the year. I heard Mr. Webb speak on WLW 700am on Sci Zone last night and he said, he has proof we will be attacked in August 2001, and it's a conspiracy of our govt."

Damn... pretty spooky huh?

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 07:12 PM

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So what ever happened to this thing? Had I known it was going for this long I wouldn't have been so rushed and could have made it more efficient. O well I guess, just stopping in to take a couple of my examples to expand on...

SkepticOverlord hasn’t heard what he “wanted” to hear. That’s an educated guess why he hasn’t ended the “contest”. To get closure, I suggest he himself post the five points he wanted to see. That way the members at ATS can move on.

The Wizard In The Woods

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 07:16 PM
It is sad when "truth" movements start going after each other instead of going after the issue. If all this energy that these groups expend on bad mouthing each other and such would be spent on digging and digging for the truth I think that this conspiracy could be broke wide open.

Perhaps thats a part of the conspiracy...

The government seeing that there are several groups all reaching for the goal of exposing the lies and manipulation of this event. Works to turn these groups against each other. That would be a perfect way to create disinfo and crush the movement.

Kinda like in the roll playing game paranoia, No one will suspect your treason if you have everyone terminating everyone else for their treason. (sorry I geeked that up and probably lost everyone on the point I was trying to make)

So this might be one of the top 9/11 conspiracies.

That and many of the points listed here.

I still think that the fact that of all the buildings that were damaged in New York the only ones that were destroyed were the buildings of the WTC complex.

Also the fact that for years we backed O.B.L. against the commies and NOW he turns on us? I mean is there no loyalty? Seriously? We give him training, money, weapons, support, and he repays us with attacking non military targets?

And the weird thing that total global collapse of a high rise has never occurred because of fire.

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 07:22 PM

Originally posted by whatukno
Also the fact that for years we backed O.B.L. against the commies and NOW he turns on us? I mean is there no loyalty? Seriously? We give him training, money, weapons, support, and he repays us with attacking non military targets?

Unless, of course, that was his "assignment." Which was the #1 conspiracy theory that nearly all active conspiracy theorists were following for the first three months after 9/11/2001.

posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 09:10 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Unless, of course, that was his "assignment." Which was the #1 conspiracy theory that nearly all active conspiracy theorists were following for the first three months after 9/11/2001.

Course I was hoping not to go that route, but lets look at it that way.

Back in the day O.B.L. America's buddy against the commies,

Back in the day Sadam gets the key to the city of Detroit. obviously hes our buddy. (or we REALLY hate him depending on how you would see getting the key to the city of Detroit.)

Fast forward we got a suspicious election in 2000 that puts GWB in the white house. America is divided even more than normal. We have lost the most valuable resource a government can have Fear. There is really no fear of a foreign enemy out there. No great fear of an enemy real or imagined is dangerous for a government cause it creates an opportunity for people to take a serious look at the government as a whole.

So we have a problem in the government. No fear and no ignorance of that fear among the people. Thats dangerous. They had to come up with an enemy FAST!

So November 2001 we get a bunch of supposed hijackers together, take out two civilian targets. (cause attacking an military target would not give the government the leeway enough to go for a full blown assault on the middle east as we have seen.)

Well people wouldn't buy the attack on the twin towers as a terrorist attack if they were the only things that were hit. So the brainchild's of this entire thing had to come up with another target. So enter the pentagon. Well we don't really want to destroy this monument so we will hit it on the one side that was under renovation.

Well the American people aren't going to stand by and let themselves get spanked like this without a fight right? We have to have that hero story. Enter flight 93 "OUR HERO'S", the flight that brought the rallying cry to the nation. "Let's Roll"

So O.B.L. Get's set up as the patsy and the scapegoat for the most horrible, horrific attack sense Pearl Harbor. Perhaps he was "assigned" the job by a unknown shadow source, or our own government. As S.O. pointed out.

But I am sorry in my opinion after working in new construction of high rise buildings I have to say there is no way on this earth that jet fuel is going to cause steel to weaken to the point where there is a total global collapse of an entire building. Not once not twice but three times. One of which wasn't even hit directly by the aircraft.

Still Paul O'Neil I think is the most unluckiest person in the world. As a part of this conspiracy this does play a important roll because this was one of the primer experts in anti terrorism for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He knew the players he knew the game. For some unknown reason he had a falling out with the FBI and where does he end up working? The exact place that is the target for this attack. Were these buildings taken down to take this guy out? No, that would be like using napalm against a fly. But is it a coincidence that this man died on his second day on the job at a known target for terrorists? Was he perhaps ordered or maybe coerced into taking the job at the twin towers? That is a possibility.

I know this isn't what you wanted Skeptic. But seriously I don't think that anyone of us is going to come up with exactly what your looking for.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 07:31 PM
What you would need is a five step plan that brings the people behind this dark matter to justice.
There must be way's in American law to hold people in goverment responsible for their deeds?
They got Clinton on trail for less !?
I realy don't understand this.
There is enough to go with for a law case i think.

Buildings dont fall down that easy.
Armies dont stand down that easy.
That alone should be enough to sack some people.

Better stop them before they kill of an other 650.000 in far away countries.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 07:57 PM
Go on TV ATS!

You could blow the lid if anyone can we are here to support you. If not close the thread.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 07:58 PM
Here we go:

1. Not ONE of the airline crew was able to place an ' highjack code ' even though it only took a second. Four times in a row the transponders blinked out without a Mayday or highjack code or radio signal from any pilot or crewmmber. This alone proves the case mathematically.

2. The Norman Mineta testimoney, placing Cheney in the bunker ' fully in charge' well before his stated arrival time. Mineta story tells a tale of the stand down in unmistakable and clear terms, with the ' order ' being only one possible thing: to allow the incoming craft to proceed. That also is prima facia evidence of collusion and foreknowledge.

3. The pulverization or dustification of the steel and concrete in the Twin Towers is a testament to an energy source far more vast than allowed by gravity and physics. Forces of massive energy and temperatures from beyond the gate's of hell could not have resulted from a gravity collapse; it is impossible. This alone is scientific evidence of energy other than gravity being used and thus a proof of deliberate and controlled demolition.

4. The Odigo message system delivered warnings to several customers on 9-11 specifically foretelling danger and logically some person or persons from that point or past had foreknowledge of the event and used it to warn specific people. A specific warning means foreknowledge under all circumstances and so this is a proof of a conspiracy involving at least one business entity and unknown individual(s), perhaps not coincidentally related to the Isreali nation or people , who seem to have a habit of popping up at many junctures in the story. This alone indicates foreknowledge.

5. In the sense that the Twin Towers displayed the evidence of exotic and high tech weaponry to accomplish the goals, Building Seven stands as a testament to a case of obvious ' controlled demolition ' in the most normal and accepted way of performing the chore. Building 7 shows all of the signs of a controlled demo, with experts agreeing on that fact, as well as having anomalies such as molten steel, etc. in the lower levels. So even as 7 retains some elements of mystery, it is without a doubt a classic controlled demolition into it's own footprint at freefall speed, just like the textbook shows. Since the government cannot and will not explain the ' collapse ' of Bldg. 7 adequately and with peer reviewed certainty , it gives us convincing proof of a conspiracy and foreknowledge, as evidenced by massive related proofs, not gone into here. This event alone refutes the official story and is proof sufficient to establish with certainty a crime has been committed. Case Closed.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:09 PM
Sceptic Overlord

Your post about all the different theories fighting each othe is true.

What we need to establish is where is there common ground with everybody.

For example for the pentagon, we all can't agree on WHAT hit the pentagon
but maybe we can all agree that it was an automated device, something like that.

Or that heat and fire and impact alone could not have brought down WTC 1 & 2. We can all agree on that. A poll on what we can agree on.

Forget about what we disagree about, just focus on the agreement parts.
And build from that.

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:23 AM
Here are the 5 top conspiracies surrounding 9/11

The debate over molten metal and why the towers fell.

Why videos from the pentagon are not being released.

Why did we invade iraq instead of going after bin laden.

How where the calls made from cell phones able to connect with such success.

Why did W.t.c building 7 fall when it wasn't hit buy a plane.

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 08:49 AM
Came back to the thread to see what's happened and still no winner declared, so I'll give it another whack. The idea is to skip the niceties and appeal to physical evidence so basic that anyone with a functioning brain and an internet connection can verify and grasp it; and secondly to get them, through simple means, to start to question the massive withholding of evidence by the gov't.

1. When you get home & are sobered up after the cocktails, go to YouTube and watch any video of either tower collapsing. What you are watching is a physical impossibility without a massive energy source behind it. A blossoming chrysanthemum-cloud of destruction that sends massive steel beams hundreds of yards outward, and a cascading demolition wave that moves faster than gravity.

2. Watch the video again, this time look at how the top of the tower, soon after it begins to collapse in a mass, simply explodes. What caused this, and why didn't it just topple to earth? Look at it again, and watch demolition squibs explode in the center of the facades, sometimes twenty or more floors below the destruction wave. Google "floorplan core WTC" and notice that the heart of the structure that held up the towers, the core, was reinforced with central cross of doubled up core columns. Add 2+2. Ask yourself why that huge core, with box columns of structural steel over six inches thick at their base, collapsed like burnt matchsticks within moments after the towers fell.

3. Google "Pataki 9/11" and watch the Governor of NY explain on 21 September 2001 that virtually all of the concrete in the towers was "pulverized" into a fine dust-cloud that covered lower Manhattan with several inches of powder, and that there was molten steel in the basements beneath the twin towers and WTC 7 that lingered for months. Ask yourself how a gravity-driven collapse could have created such incredible energies to do the manifestly impossible, as the Governor himself was surely doing as he spoke.

4. Google "WTC 7 collapse" and watch a modern, 47-story steel-frame skyscraper, un-hit by any airplane and with intermittent fires, collapse into its own footprint at free-fall speed. Watch how its entire internal structure gives up the ghost in a moment as it slumps in a classic controlled demolition. Watch the BBC report it as having already collapsed, with the building in full view, a half hour before it actually comes down. Remember as well that it had the same molten steel in its basement afterwards. As a lark, watch its owner, Larry Silverstein, explain that he and NYFD honchos decided to "pull" the structure in an infamous clip from PBS.

5. Google "NIST WTC 7" and discover that you find nothing--at least no official mention of the collapse of WTC 7 by the governmental body charged with explaining the mechanics of the collapses of the WTC towers. Ask yourself why, nearly six years after the event, NIST has not yet issued its promised report on WTC 7's collapse.

Bonus reason:
6. Do a Google picture search of "Pentagon security cameras" and look at all those security cameras lining the Pentagon's cornice. Ask yourself why you haven't ever seen any of that footage.

[edit on 16-7-2007 by gottago]

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 09:46 AM
All conspiracy theories are subject to opinion or speculation, but some "safe" points that have the most intriguing and questionable suspicion surrounding the events are:

1. All structural steel "evidence" was removed and sent elsewhere or melted down. None remain to this day for further investigation. Being that Guiliani was a former head prosecutor, you would think he'd have an idea how important evidence could be.

2. Much data and information from the investigation, such as "tweaks" made to computer models of the WTC that were required to make said models collapse and also video of the plane hitting the pentagon, has not been released to the public.

3. No fighters were scrambled to intercept, though they had trained (and were training at the time of the event) for years in advance for exactly such an event.

4. No mention of the cause of collapse WTC7 (a steel building that supposedly collapsed due to fire damage) in the NIST report. The announcement by BBC of 7's collapse before it had taken place. It's also convienent that to this day because of so little investigation of this building, much of the public is un-aware of a third building's collapse.

5. Many EYE witness, including firefighter, police and WTC workers accounts of bomb blasts occuring on multiple other level. Opposed to tv coverage, 9-11 Commision or the NIST "official story" that dismissed all claims of explosions without a full investigation.

These, in my opinion, are some of the most viable questions raised by the events of 9/11. Granted, there are many, many more. Though, if you were to try to explain some of the more controvertial events to stangers on an elevator, you'd likely loose credibility with them and be dismissed quickly were you to mention these alternative theories.

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 10:36 AM
Before i write, i only ask you consider what i do with an open mind, SkepticO. Im not here for the points, but i am here so that if i do win, others can take note that what i've said has validity, in the hope that it will only further and facilitate the speed at which the truth comes out (it will in the end anyway).

I believe these to be the top 5, because they dissolve all of the official story, every single aspect. OK..

1 - Wargames/Prior Knowledge/Flight 93

2- No plane theory/CGI

3- Bush seeing first plane before it came out on TV

4- Molten Metal - Thermate vs Micronuke

5- Israeli/MOSSAD involvement


This is all one/linked, because the prior knowledge shows that something was in the works, then the wargames convieniently happen on the day for the attack, and then Shanksville being the only plane to crash and clearly not leave any physical evidence (all within a military corridor, and the ONLY witness to see it crash was ex-military), showing that there was some kind of plan being implemented from high up in command.

Various videos by "bsregistration" and others, on YouTube. (911 Octopus) (Unedited Newsfeed) (Plane Mathematics) (Nose out errors) (WESCAM) (WESCAM)

The point behind this one is that newsfeed was taken, and CGI footage added into it to create the illusion of planes hitting the towers. Premade animations put over realtime news footage involves only a handful of people, rather than dozens, as would be the case if the planes were actually real, remote controlled or otherwise.


Bush "seeing the first plane on TV" shows he had prior knowledge at the very least, because no footage came out of the first impact until the next day. This also brings into question the legitimacy of the Naude Brothers, who just happened to capture the event.. It also ties in with the "No-plane/CGI", because if there were no planes, then how could he have seen one? Again, he had inside information as to what was going to happen.

Any collapse video (shows disintregation of both buildings into powder)

The molten metal should not have been there in the first place, let alone burning the inside of the "pit" for 100 days, with continous water spraying. Tritium levels show that micronukes were used. Steven Jones accepted validity for testing, but has already done the truth movement a big dishonor by stating that thermate is what caused the towers to disintegrate. Now he has no choice, the truth is out. Thermate was used, but it was not the sole cause of the towers "collapse".


MOSSAD agents contributed the most to 9/11, highly ironic, yet deceptively evil. In order to keep the operation fragmented/compartmentalized, mossad agents would do the dirty work, also enabling them to take the blaim should the truth come out, allowing the orchestrators to walk away.. Also, the fact that it wasn't completely done from within the US government/agencies shows that there is high level organisation going on with the days events, coordinating many operatives/agencies, yet done in a way that the paper trail is not easy to see.

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 10:01 PM
Belated attempt (for fun) but obvious USA complicity beyond incompetence

1. Crime Scene Investigation - Perpetrators

The standard process is to assess all possible hypothetis's. Identify culprits , establish motive (a must) and be certain justice punishes proven guilty parties

The 19 random ME persons blamed were official said to be islamic extremists led by OBL and part of AQ.

There is clear evidence that many of the said perps did not behave like Islamic fundamentalists (drinking womanising) See Able Danger they already were said to be under surveilance. Unclear claims that the passports were stolen and some of the names are alive

No attempt to clearly beyond reasonable doubt identity the culprits. WHY?
The implication is USA did not want to know EXACTLY WHO and HOW MANY were involved and therefore gave no justice to the deceased innocent and their families.

2. Simulated military exercise event on the same day near the same time

Famous named military quote "The hyjacking was not supposed to happen for another hour". WHY wasn't the detail of that exercise explored to eliminate conjecture and follow any possible inside leak to the perps?
Cover up.

3. Pentagon- no clear picture or video of F 77 plane

This means that at the time the HQ which spends trillions on defence (USD 2.3 trillion missing on 9/10/01) and is responsible for national security has no reliable survelience of the pentagon.

Anyone could crash a truck filled with fertiliser bomb ( already cases in USA so can't claim "didn't expect it") straight into the pentagon without any video evidence. Complicit by incompetence or cover up!

4. No alert code sent from flights

Can 4-5 looney terrorists fool 60 or so passengers maybe!?... but can they breakinto a cockpit and wrestle two trained (some ex military pilots) and gain control with box cutters without some form of alarm being raised either vocal or code. NOT POSSIBLE

5 WTC7

For over 6 hours the building stood burning attended by the most highly trained Fire units in the world. WHERE is the picture of the extreme damage on the blind( closest to tower) side?. Thousands of pictures but where is evidence of the substantial uniform damage necessary to cause almost uniform collapse at free fall. DOESN'T EXIST- WHY?

Forget the molten steel, the shill of cessna pilots and the miracle cell phones..... THE FACT IS USA GOVT FAILED to SOLVE THE CASE!

OH, but in USA you can plead the "fifth" can't you!

posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:02 PM

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Win 250,000 ATS Points!

--- original post ---

A question for our members who are adept at 9/11 conspiracy issues and details.

If you could list the top-5 concise issues that shed doubt on the official story of 9/11... what would they be?

The the points should be simple to state and explain, so that anyone can understand. Imagine having 90 seconds in an elevator to help a complete strange be aware of some important issues.

What top-5 issues would you tell them, and how would you say it?

--- update ---

I'll give 250,000 ATS Points to the member that creates the most eloquent, and concise list of 5 solid items, with irrefutable supporting evidentiary links.

Then I'll move your post to a new thread, give you credit and link at the top of the site.

I am the sole judge.

Points awarded to runners up also.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by SkepticOverlord]

I was just noticing that the people you put on your list for having the best post on this subject Did not put links to these claims. I am not disputing what they are saying but if i was a stranger in an elevator, It would take much longer than 90 seconds to explain these things that the people on your list posted. Its obvious to me that you are looking for the 5 political reasons and not the actual events of 9/11. The problem is that it is impossible to list even 5 things they can be told to someone in just 90 seconds. And i guess it comes down to what is conclusive to some may not be so conclusive to others. And also depends on If you are a truther or a debunker.
So i have a question for you S.O, Why dont you start a thread on this subject and join in on the debate. Maybe that way You can set an example on how A thread on this subject should be presented and debated. and yes, i may be new to ATS but i am not new to this world. I am stating this because i have noticed that new comers dont get much respect from the majority of people here. Maybe i came at the wrong time.( Summer) And people are trying to weed out the temp. crowd until winter. But getting back to the main point, The list of people you picked didnt have any links to look at what they where talking about and was more than just 90 seconds worth of info. Thank you. And good luck to all of you.

posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 03:01 AM
A 90 second argument is however it could roll out from the brain -to the tongue- of the presenter. Memories are physical constructs of the brain, as are other things like language, skills, mindsets and so on. So even if someone posted a rattatatat speech, it's actually subjective because the concept of timeframe applies to the writer, obviously because someone writing such a thing would be doing so from their unconscious brain (that is the collective structure of memories and such which are used when articulating).

From all of that we get this: Even if someone posted the perfect set of arguments, it's still up to the new speaker to be able to rattle off said arguments fluently in 90 seconds. If these arguments are merely concepts from the person having merely conceptual understanding of the specific dynamics of the issues that feed the conclusions presented, then therefore they wil struggle to say the 90 piece.

This reality would arguably remain the norm even if the new arguer did know the articulation. unless it was rehearsed. In either case, the argument parrot would need to attempt to rehearse the presented argument before deciding. But then there's the reality where the parrot onyl has a conceptual understanding of the potentially new arguments, and in such a case it'd actually be best that there was more contextual information provided of the new concepts as it'd make it more natural to enable the arguments to "roll off the tongue". Otherwise, assuming there are indeed new complicated contexts involved, and especially if there aren't ample resources provided, the potential parrot would have to go and check up on the claims and concepts which were presented, yet even if there were links they'd still have to.

Assuming there are new arguments utilizing broad concepts that the potential parrot doesn't fully grasp the dynamics of, it would therefore seem best that the presentation submit'ee would want to submit 3 sets: 1-Overview Explaination; 2- Broad Resources Listing; 3- Compounded 90-sec. rattatatat speech example. It would seem that following my own logic I came up short with my entry.

That's what neuroscience tells me anyways. I could bore you with more than the above to explain such...

[edit on 6-8-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 05:55 AM
5. Osama Bin Laden and the Al Queda Network were trained and funded by the United States Government.

Made in America

4. Who benefits from the 9/11 attacks?

No one link for this line of questions. However, common sense should allow you to come to your own conclusions about who benefitted from the attacks of 9/11/01.

3. Why would a government do this to their own people?

Gov. "Insider"
Reichstag Fire and 9/11

2. Why did WTC building 7 collapse? It wasn't hit by a plane was it?

WTC 7 collapse

1. THE PHYSICS OF 9/11. (All caps because this is the ONLY argument needed to show us that 9/11 did not happen as we were told it did. This fact alone leads us to question what really happened on 9/11 and if the government wasn't involved, WHY LIE?)

How did the WTCs 1, 2 and 7 collapse at near the rate of freefall in a vaccum? At 8, 10 and 6.5 seconds, these buildings fell at near the same rate as a ball dropped from the tops of them would have fallen. How is this possible given that they would have encountered massive resistance if they would have indeed fallen in a "pancake" fashion as we were told?

Physics 9/11
Stephen Jones on 9/11
Stephen Jones Again
Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics

The above provide adequate "proof" that 9/11 didn't happen how we were told it did happen. From that important first step, one should logically ask, "Well, if that is wrong, what are they trying to hide?".

Finding the truth to any lie must always start with a question.


EDIT: Note: I set this up how you asked S.O. I believe this could be easily explained in 90 seconds or less and I set it up that way. Naturally, you can't prove anything of this magnitude in 90 seconds on an elavator. However, you can put the idea out there and give your audience the chance to look into it further for themselves. Below is an example of how this could be done using my points.

Take into an account that the subject had already been brought up.

Person 1. Did you know that O.B.L. was trained and funded by the U.S. Gov?

Person 2. No f'n way!

P1. Don't take my word for it, go home and google it and check for yourself. Start by checking out Tim Osman. See, the way you have to look at this is, just ask "Who Benefits?". Seriously, what did OBL get out of doing this? To spend the rest of his life in a cave hiding? What about the government? They got the war they wanted and the public support they needed to start that war. Not to mention the BILLIONS of dollars that have been made off that war. Think about it.

P2. But why would they do that to their own people?
P1. It wouldn't be the first time. Check out Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. While you are at it look up Hitler's involvment and motives in burning the Reichstag. If you really want to piss yourself off, check out the evidence that FDR allowed and provoked the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor. Not only were those our citizens killed, but OUR MILITARY citizens.

P2. That's f'n crazy. I'll have to check into it.
P1. Tell me about it. You should check into the collapse of WTC 7 also. I know they say WTC 1 and 2 collapsed because of the planes, but what caused building 7 to fall? I didn't see any planes hit it. Not to mention that buildings 1, 2 and 7 physically COULD NOT HAVE FALLEN as fast as they did without some kind of help from the inside.

P2. Help?
P1. Like demolition charges.

P2. What???
P1. Like I said, check it out.

[edit on 7-8-2007 by SimiusDei]

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in