I think the winner should get points and jokers like this guy above me should get banned.
As if this isnt a serious matter. You fools playing around like your freaking country isnt going down the toilet.

1. The Twin Towers were Corroding away and it was recommended they be eventually rebuilt at a massive cost back in an official report in the mid 80's.

2. The CIA trained and supplied the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan which created a terrorist organisation eventually called Al Qaeda in the late 80's.

3. Saddam Hussein was sucked into thinking invading Kuwait would be ok by Madalaine Albright in 90 and hence fell out of favour with the US who backed it during the Iraq-Iran War.

4. Israel Lobby groups and representation in Clinton's Term is disproportionate and leans the US toward conflict in the Middle East.

5. A failed Oil Baron steals the Presidency in 2000 with vote fraud.

It doesn't take much to link the above conspiracies together and all are pretty well verifiable facts that are direct influences in the precusory events to 911.

Administration and moderators, I am sorry for being off-topic but I wanted to briefly reply to a reply made to my post.

Originally posted by 11Bravo
I think the winner should get points and jokers like this guy above me should get banned.
As if this isnt a serious matter. You fools playing around like your freaking country isnt going down the toilet.

11Bravo, I was just posting a few theories on what may have happened on 9/11 and am not suggesting that the USA is truly corrupt. I was devastated by the event as were millions if not billions of others. As you probably do, I like to search for the truth through questions and answers.

God Bless the USA!!!

God Bless ATS!!!

God Bless All!!!

Relax, he was talking about the post above yours, calm down.

You had very .......interesting points in your list.

I should have read it first......





[edit on 14-2-2007 by Tiloke]

Originally posted by GreatTech
These are not my beliefs, but 5 of my theories are:

1) The planes were never hijacked; the "regular" American pilots formed a suicidal/murderous cabal because of psychiatric problems and they could have had links to a secret part of the U.S. government, al-qaeda, Afghanistan, Iraq, or other parts of the world.

2) The video of planes crashing were made-up; no planes crashed and there were no deaths on 9/11: the twin towers were partly or wholly detonated to reorganize systems and boost the economy.

3) U.S.A. military pilots flew the 4 aircraft that crashed and did so to blame the middle east for the event in order to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and prevent nuclear war.

4) Russia threatened nuclear war with the U.S.A. if the U.S.A. did not at least slightly self-destruct.

5) George Walker Bush implemented one of many plans to defend a war in the Middle East in order to deter the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear war.



[edit on 14-2-2007 by GreatTech]

I was indeed talking about him, and the guy above him, and a few others that have hijacked this thread or tried to make funny statements or 'debunk'.

His 'theories' appear to be little more than a jab at those of us who are really concerned about what exactly happened on 9/11.
There are times to play and have fun, but when it comes to 9/11, a day in which 3000 Americans died, there is no room for silly behavior.

Edit to ask......What are his good points?


[edit on 14-2-2007 by 11Bravo]

Originally posted by 11Bravo

Originally posted by GreatTech
These are not my beliefs, but 5 of my theories are:

1) The planes were never hijacked; the "regular" American pilots formed a suicidal/murderous cabal because of psychiatric problems and they could have had links to a secret part of the U.S. government, al-qaeda, Afghanistan, Iraq, or other parts of the world.

2) The video of planes crashing were made-up; no planes crashed and there were no deaths on 9/11: the twin towers were partly or wholly detonated to reorganize systems and boost the economy.

3) U.S.A. military pilots flew the 4 aircraft that crashed and did so to blame the middle east for the event in order to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and prevent nuclear war.

4) Russia threatened nuclear war with the U.S.A. if the U.S.A. did not at least slightly self-destruct.

5) George Walker Bush implemented one of many plans to defend a war in the Middle East in order to deter the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear war.



[edit on 14-2-2007 by GreatTech]

I was indeed talking about him, and the guy above him, and a few others that have hijacked this thread or tried to make funny statements or 'debunk'.

His 'theories' appear to be little more than a jab at those of us who are really concerned about what exactly happened on 9/11.
There are times to play and have fun, but when it comes to 9/11, a day in which 3000 Americans died, there is no room for silly behavior.

Edit to ask......What are his good points?


[edit on 14-2-2007 by 11Bravo]

11Bravo, no humor ever intended. In fact, I work in medical research, where life/death issues are treated extremely seriously.

The power of theoretical thinking: "if we had the theory that we would die if we walked into a fire, we would not walk into a fire." A quote from me.

We all should get back on-topic. All of us should be interested in other people's 5 theories.

Dble post sry...

[edit on 15/2/2007 by ANOK]

The towers were built to be destroyed, as a worldwide distress signal.

That emergency, is peak oil production and the imminant decline of civilization, on this planet, as we know it.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by In nothing we trust]

I have to tell you, when I first started learning of the facts of 9/11, I was amazed, and almost ashamed that I wasn’t more educated on the subject. But now, I realize the average person isn’t educated on the subject, or even aware of the simple and most basic facts of 9/11, and that is the true shame.

For instance, the majority of general public is not aware of the extensive planning, and the amounts of explosives required to demolish a building successfully. Successfully meaning the building collapses and implodes into itself falling strategically vertically until it is leveled onto it’s own base, the way the two World Trade Center Towers did simply by being hit by an airplane apparently. The point being, a building hit by a plane, an earthquake, or a fire, cannot imitate the well orchestrated demolition of explosives and planning, perfectly exhibited by the falling of the WTC towers.

The second fact I learned, was that found in the aftermath, was melted metal. I didn’t know what exactly that meant, but I learned the only explanation for molten metal is the high degree of fires which come from a few certain substances, such as the use of explosive charges. Buildings, even doused in jet fuel, cannot burn at the temperatures necessary to melt metal-but explosives can cause fires hot enough to, and in the event of the WTC on 9/11…they did. Metal wasn’t tested by the government, and was actually quickly shipped off before investigation into them could ensue, but residue from debris was gathered by independent and reputable sources and tested and evidence of explosives was indeed found.

Then I learned more! I learned that even though the crash proved to start fires high up in the building, was blamed for destroying buildings which fell demolition style, and melted metal…through it all, the fire did not destroy the passports of the terrorists! Imagine that?! It killed thousands, demolished buildings, melted metal…but on a twist of good luck the passports of the terrorists were along for the ride on their suicide mission, and then recovered in tact by the authorities. That’s just too convenient if you ask me.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I am not one to believe in coincidence of that extreme nature or the illogical probability of it all: the orchestrated style falls, the molten metal, the explosive residue, the death destruction and mayhem still leaving the terrorists to be identified in the lucky twist of fate of their preserved passports.

So then, looking further into the facts not publicized by the media or known by the general public, I find more disturbing facts. Beyond the fact that those in office disregarded the intel that warned of imminent attacks on American soil, there were actually war games being played on 9/11, in New York coincidentally, which exercises included scenarios coincidentally duplicating the reality of the hijacking of planes and suicide missions of such planes being crashes into buildings etc. When the actual attacks were happening then, it was near impossible for those who should have been responding to the actual crisis, to know if it was war game exercise or real life scenarios requiring real action. Apparently not knowing the actual crisis at hand, they were ordered to stand down and not engage in trying to thwart the hijackers. Boy, just one convenient coincidence after another.

Also, besides other areas of 9/11 interest such as the Pentagon, flight 93, there is the fact that terrorism’s goal is power. It may use threats, destruction, fear and death, but its goal is power. However, who has gained the most power from 9/11? Who has claimed responsibility? Al Qaeda, has been all but shut down, Bin Laden denied his involvement instead of boasting of his success like a typical terrorist, however America remains as powerful as ever, and even more powerful since 9/11 flexing it’s arms in war. Not to mention the fact that some people in government may have gained financially by insider trading in the airline industry, oil interests, etc.

There are just so many facts the public is unaware of. I found the greatest way to deny ignorance of 9/11 is to gain knowledge of the facts, and I found the best place to do it is on ATS. It is found by going to WWW.Abovetopsecret.com. There, I have found facts about 9/11, research on the subject, links to some of the best, most reliable research on the subject of 9/11 from all over the Web, intelligent conspiracy theories along with skeptics on both sides, either debunking the “official” story of 9/11 given to the public, or debunking the conspiracy theories. It is the most knowledgeable, reputable, and user-friendly site of it’s kind on the Web and it’s wealth of resources extends beyond 9/11.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by 2l82sk8]

Dear Sir,

When does this contest end and can we enter more than once?

I could make the above more "list like" if necessary for structure, or include links if more proof is desired... but as far as "what to tell and how" ...like a conversation in an elevator with an Average Joe, "concise issues and details" to "shed doubt on the official story " and spark curiousity without sounding like a conspiracy nutcase ...well thats what I've got for you for now SO.

I don't know if it reads as well as it sounds when I'm saying it near ver batim to the above to the Average Joe, but I can say I've had good response in person with total strangers and friends and family alike.

2l8

[edit on 15-2-2007 by 2l82sk8]

Most of the points here have been hashed out over and over throughout this site and many others. No matter how solid the evidence is supporting the fact that it was an inside job there will always be skeptics that will refute it. It was 'swamp gas' after all or 'ball lightning'.

Anyway, here is my biggest question for everyone to consider and one that is very important yet often overlooked in the debates.

Why hasn't there been another attack since that fateful day?

Oklahoma city introduced us to domestic terrorism. The initial bombing at the trade center set us up for an even bigger event. We can point fingers all we want at other religions and countries and state that these people are capable of this. However, one must only look at the history of our own country. Not the one that is taught in the education systems but the 'true' history. The history of the Federal Reserve and all of the other central banking systems throughout the world.

As one poster said. Follow the money. War creates debt and debt creates free money for the lenders (the Federal Reserve that just happens to be able to create money out of thin air on demand) via interest. Every war has benefitted the money lenders and this war against a foe that no one can truly pin down is exactly one that would create an endless need for military financing.

Just follow the money. It was perpetrated by some in power within the visible government but ultimately put into play by the so-called 'elite' behind the scenes.

I'm glad this topic was created and I hope that people can bring forth some solid evidence other than what has been hashed over many times.

For now, because of the media and 'official story' manipulation of the events, the facts stand as reported. This is simply because 'they' say so.

Remember, our president said it himself, "If you are not with us then you ARE with them!" Talk about typical psychological manipulation. There is no middle ground according to the authorities on this. So, they attack those that question the events by labeling them terrorists.

Just too many questionable events and disinformation to conclusively state that it was actually pulled off by a made up terrorist organization called Al Qaida.

To the CIA: That's what happens when you keep supplying people with money and weapons to fight for what they believe in. One day they decide to do what is right and then you are forced to contrive a BS story in order to label them a terrorist.

Just my two cents.

Originally posted by dariousg

Anyway, here is my biggest question for everyone to consider and one that is very important yet often overlooked in the debates.

Why hasn't there been another attack since that fateful day?

As one poster said. Follow the money. War creates debt and debt creates free money for the lenders (the Federal Reserve that just happens to be able to create money out of thin air on demand) via interest. Every war has benefitted the money lenders and this war against a foe that no one can truly pin down is exactly one that would create an endless need for military financing.

Just follow the money. It was perpetrated by some in power within the visible government but ultimately put into play by the so-called 'elite' behind the scenes.
Just too many questionable events and disinformation to conclusively state that it was actually pulled off by a made up terrorist organization called Al Qaida.
Just my two cents.

I think you have a whole seperate thread in that question waiting to happen.
Good post.
***************************************************

My entry Skeptic

1. Lack of accountability by members of the US Government
and military for incompetence before, during and after 9/11.
2. The initial government response: Why was Cheney running the country on 9/11? Where was Donald Rumsfeld, commander of the US armed forces? Why didn't American Airlines immediately alert the FAA headquarters and the military at 8:20 when the airline first learned from flight attendants onboard that a hijack was underway?
2. The ignorance of the FBI and CIA: With Al-Qaeda firmly on the radar for years, why were they unable to see this coming? The failings of the FBI's translation department: Why wasn't the Bureau set up to decipher the transmissions within its grasp?
4. The role of Pakistani secret intelligence: As the attacks were planned in Afghanistan, who was watching and who was invested?
5. The 9/11 Commission's investigation: Why weren't even the most obvious questions addressed?

Originally posted by sp00n1
What are the top five arguments to cast doubt on the official story, and how can it be stated succinctly?

Well... To me, anyway, the ultimate conspiracy is the effort to create these conspiracy theories. As I attempted to point out earlier, there is nothing new about Americans blaming "The Government" for every tragedy — natural or manmade — that befalls this country. Blaming the government seems like our national passtime, stretching back to the Lincoln assassination and probably before that. To me, the greater mystery is why we are so motivated to concoct these elaborate theories.

I understand that it may be simply part of our national heritage — Americans don't trust the government, and we never have. The Founders of this country didn't trust the very government they were establishing, and tried to build-in certain failsafes to the Constitution that would allow the American people to overthrow the central government should it became corrupt or oppressive.

Thanks to socialist infiltration of our great halls of learning, we're not proudly taught about our American heritage of rebellion anymore, and I seriously doubt that we've been in control of our government since the days of "The Great Socialist" FDR. But I know, or feel very certain, that we're still a nation of anti-government rebels, as is evidenced by our long history of dreaming up conspiracy theories.

I don't know and wouldn't try to guess how many of you out there have ever actually worked with a government agency, but I can tell you, in my experience, that our government simply isn't smart enough to pull off the Rube Goldberg conspiracies that fill this forum. The ingenuity required just doesn't exist among our combined branches of government and intelligence-gathering agencies. The people that populate our government couldn't come up with an original idea, much less an epic conspiracy, if you held their toes to the fire. If anything, members of the government elite are more adept at fighting lateral thought and innovative thinking, preferring the status quo of governmental mediocrity.

So... I'm not quite clear on the value of constructing a Top Five list of conspiracy theories attributed to the government. To me, it seems like giving them credit for a high level of creativity that they just do not possess.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
So... I'm not quite clear on the value of constructing a Top Five list of conspiracy theories attributed to the government. To me, it seems like giving them credit for a high level of creativity that they just do not possess.

I agree with you for the most part.

Fortunately, SO never said anything about blaming the government or figuring out "how THEY did it." This contest is about paring down the...

..top-5 concise issues that shed doubt on the official story of 9/11

Big difference, wouldn't you agree?

Originally posted by Essedarius
This contest is about paring down the...top-5 concise issues that shed doubt on the official story of 9/11
Big difference, wouldn't you agree?

Well, no. Who are the officials behind the "official story"? That would be the government, would it not? To shed doubt on the official story is to suggest that the government is not telling the truth regarding the events of 9/11, presumably to cover-up government complicity in the attacks.

Therefore, to shed doubt on the "official story" is to indict (blame) the government. I mean, who else is being blamed in the vast majority of conspiracy theories? (Not including the fringe theories that may point to malevolent aliens, demonic possessions, evil stockbrokers, et cetera.)

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/16/2007 by Doc Velocity]