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.

 

None-believers

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 04:02 PM
link   
For those who don't believe the slightest chance that 9/11 was an inside job, I would like to know what is your reason for thinking this? I'm not talking about people who just doubt it, I'm talking about people who won't even consider the remote possiblility. Is it because you think that our government is somehow so benevolent as to be incapable of such acts?

[edit on 24-2-2007 by NegativeBeef]




posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
1. Incompetence

2. Complacency

3. Vanity

4. lack of communication between departments.

5. too many departments

6. TOO MUCH RISK

Since the American democracy is IN power, they do not need to attack their own largest city to seize power. However, if this extremely hypothetical 9/11 "job" went astray ( or any one little element of it) This Administration would be RUINED, possibly the republican party as a whole.

With all of the chaos that went down that day, you mean to tell me that our "less than competent" Federal Government could have pre-planned and executed this scenario to perfection without one shred of solid evidence surfacing almost 6 years later?

This whole "Truth Movement" is based on --what if's-- unproven theory, or proven theory that cannot be applied-- bad examples based on LACK of evidence-- Hyperbole -- Quantum leaps of faith-- And a hidden agenda beginning to show itself through laymans propaganda.

Ask yourself this about the whole "Truth Movement" and what's driving it: Whom within the US *isn't in power, utilizes the proliferation of *propaganda to gain acceptance, and would love to see our American Democracy fail?







[edit on 24-2-2007 by GwionX]



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   


1. Incompetence

2. Complacency


The US Authorities knew that there were, Al - suspects in the US prior to the 9/11 attacks, and they done nothing about it.....




4. lack of communication between departments


Maybe it should be the heads of those departments who are interrogated, about the events running upto 9/11 eh?



With all of the chaos that went down that day, you mean to tell me that our "less than competent" Federal Government could have pre-planned and executed this scenario to perfection without one shred of solid evidence surfacing almost 6 years later?


They knew before hand that those Al - suspects, were already in the USA, then why didnt they act on it? They must be that incompetent, that they cant even run their own country nevermind, defending the US from attack. As has been proven alot of information, and other data has been witheld from the public, due to national security? Whos security? The folks in Gov?



This whole "Truth Movement" is based on --what if's-- unproven theory, or proven theory that cannot be applied-- bad examples based on LACK of evidence-- Hyperbole -- Quantum leaps of faith-- And a hidden agenda beginning to show itself through laymans propaganda.


And the official report is based on what? I find it rather insulting and offensive when someone says "unproven theory", when the offical 9/11 cimission report into 9/11 is so full of holes in it you could put it through a cheese grater, that report has so many unsovled answers in it, do you wonder why people are in the truth movement? Why else to find out the truth. Dont you think they should be allowed to do? Is that not waht democracy is? Ask questions seek answers? Without being lied to?



Ask yourself this about the whole "Truth Movement" and what's driving it: Whom within the US *isn't in power, utilizes the proliferation of *propaganda to gain acceptance, and would love to see our American Democracy fail?


Ordinary people in the US and around the world, oh does that word scare you? Who are out to find out the exact truth about 9/11, without being brain washed by them numpties in Gov, you have to give them some credit, the US Gov that is they will go at arms lengths to stop anyone from findout the truth. Has it stopped anyone who wants to find out the truth no it has not...........



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GwionX
1. Incompetence

2. Complacency

3. Vanity

4. lack of communication between departments.

5. too many departments

6. TOO MUCH RISK

Since the American democracy is IN power, they do not need to attack their own largest city to seize power. However, if this extremely hypothetical 9/11 "job" went astray ( or any one little element of it) This Administration would be RUINED, possibly the republican party as a whole.

With all of the chaos that went down that day, you mean to tell me that our "less than competent" Federal Government could have pre-planned and executed this scenario to perfection without one shred of solid evidence surfacing almost 6 years later?

This whole "Truth Movement" is based on --what if's-- unproven theory, or proven theory that cannot be applied-- bad examples based on LACK of evidence-- Hyperbole -- Quantum leaps of faith-- And a hidden agenda beginning to show itself through laymans propaganda.

Ask yourself this about the whole "Truth Movement" and what's driving it: Whom within the US *isn't in power, utilizes the proliferation of *propaganda to gain acceptance, and would love to see our American Democracy fail?







[edit on 24-2-2007 by GwionX]

Simply saying that the government cannot cover it does not discredit any theories. Do you remember WWII and Germany. Well guess what? THE FACT THAT THE NAZI'S SYSTEMATICLLY KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS WAS NOT REVEALED UNTIL AFTER THE WAR AND THE NAZI'S WERE DEFEATED. So the German government was able to cover up the fact that they killed 6 million jews but somehow our government is incapable of covering up a much less elaborate terrorist attack? Does that even make sense? Tell me in your own opinon. Do you think the government are "good guys?"


Oh yeah..don't you think this administration is ALREADY ruined?

[edit on 24-2-2007 by NegativeBeef]



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by NegativeBeef
Simply saying that the government cannot cover it does not discredit any theories. Do you remember WWII and Germany. Well guess what? THE FACT THAT THE NAZI'S SYSTEMATICLLY KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS WAS NOT REVEALED UNTIL AFTER THE WAR AND THE NAZI'S WERE DEFEATED. So the German government was able to cover up the fact that they killed 6 million jews but somehow our government is incapable of covering up a much less elaborate terrorist attack? Does that even make sense? Tell me in your own opinon. Do you think the government are "good guys?"


Oh yeah..don't you think this administration is ALREADY ruined?


I suggest you read a book called "Abandonment of the Jews" The world knew what was going on ... the world didnt seem to care. IF you would like i can archive some Boston Globe articles that were printed at the very beginning of the holocaust. There were reports that 100,000 had been killed. This was printed i believe on page 3 of their newspaper.

Lets look at the current genocide going on in Sudan .... We know hundreds of thousands are killled.... thousands raped.... millions homless...
No oil? We don give a shi*

Sorry to go off topic.



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Heh, In pre-WWII Germany, the Nazi's were NOT in power..UNTIL staged events lead to Hitler taking control..Propaganda, and deceit fooled the average German citizen.

Do you think the Nazi's and their Ideals were irradicated off the face of the earth after the faggot Hitler cowardly offed himself?

Don't be naive. They need a Reightstag fire to build numbers, and although I don't think the "residual American right-wing radicals" carried out 9/11 (as they did OKC) they are exploiting it in a "new media" propaganda campaign...all this veiled as "truth -seekers" Blah!

[edit on 24-2-2007 by GwionX]



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by NegativeBeef
Simply saying that the government cannot cover it does not discredit any theories. Do you remember WWII and Germany. Well guess what? THE FACT THAT THE NAZI'S SYSTEMATICLLY KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS WAS NOT REVEALED UNTIL AFTER THE WAR AND THE NAZI'S WERE DEFEATED. So the German government was able to cover up the fact that they killed 6 million jews but somehow our government is incapable of covering up a much less elaborate terrorist attack? Does that even make sense? Tell me in your own opinon. Do you think the government are "good guys?"


Oh yeah..don't you think this administration is ALREADY ruined?


I suggest you read a book called "Abandonment of the Jews" The world knew what was going on ... the world didnt seem to care. IF you would like i can archive some Boston Globe articles that were printed at the very beginning of the holocaust. There were reports that 100,000 had been killed. This was printed i believe on page 3 of their newspaper.

Lets look at the current genocide going on in Sudan .... We know hundreds of thousands are killled.... thousands raped.... millions homless...
No oil? We don give a shi*

Sorry to go off topic.


Are you trying to tell me that the Nazi's didn't try to coverup their killing of Jews? I suggest you read these 2 articles:
library.thinkquest.org...
www.ushmm.org...

They forced Jews in the concentration camps to send postcards to their families that they were doing well.

[edit on 24-2-2007 by NegativeBeef]



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I support the inside job side of the argument, but ive seen a bunch of comments on youtube and google video next to loose change and expecially the penn and teller "documentary" and these are my observations:

It seems that the majority of people posting their opinions haven't done any extra research, that is, they are reflecting their views after a single view of the video without prior knowledge. Also, there are a great deal of patriots that simply refuse to believe that something like that could have been orchestrated.

I think that if they open their minds just enough to entertain the possibility that such a thing is possible, they will always reject fact as made up or as fabricated.



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 06:25 PM
link   
My rule: to be objective is to watch/read one PRO conspiracy video/site then watch one CON conspiricy video/site

What I have found is the "pro-conspiracy" sites and videos far outnumber the debunkers..

Furthermore -- if what these people are producing for mental consumption were truly -- What they have found on their Truth Seeking Mission-- then many of the outright fallacy would be sifted through. and my time wouldn't be wasted.

But they are ALL the same...Same old recycled myth..packaged up...hell even sometimes with the same colored bow on top.

It is as if, people were given software intitled "Propaganda made easy: InTrAWeB Version 1.1"

Full of ERRORS this stuff is clap-trap and heaved out there--everyday many times a day. Something is starting to stink.



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Negative Beef writes:

Do you think the government are "good guys?"


I think the Government is comprised of people, some smarter, some dumber, some nicer, some meaner, some moral, some unscrupulous. I don't de-humanize them...they are not perfect...they are goofy everyday people really.



Oh yeah..don't you think this administration is ALREADY ruined?


Nope not until Nov. 2008.. But that is what's great about this country. Hell Jesse "the Body" Ventura could run for president in 08 ..I might even vote for him if he does (he won't) I voted for Perot back in the day..But there is still a little variety (not enough)

What do you think would happen if THIS the U.S. Government were to crumble due to dissent...What kind of choice would you have then..do you envision a Utopia, a Lawless Anarchy, a Nazi facist state... What?

What is the BIG Goal? If there isn't one, we are just wasting our time...IMO





[edit on 24-2-2007 by GwionX]



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 09:10 PM
link   
No reply? Anyone?.....heh.

Well chew on this for a bit: *Speculation*...IF there IS an uprising due to the "Truth Movement" what will it look like?

Will it be homegrown terrorist attacks..Will it be homegrown terrorist attacks making the government look culpible?

What is the point of this attempt at Information Age Brainwashing from the "9/11 Truth Movement?" To set a precidence of belief in the minds of American's?

Will there be riots in the streets? If so if the Authorities try to control it ..will it look like a "Police State?"

Of course it will.

I suppose I won't be getting much discussion anymore due to Alex (Das furer) Jones' latest mantra which is: "Um, don't waste your time with non-believers" "just move on to people who haven't put much thought to the issues."

Kinda like an evil Amway that doesn't want to be contradicted.



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by NegativeBeef
For those who don't believe the slightest chance that 9/11 was an inside job

I don't beleive that there's absolutely no way in the world it could've been an inside job. I just don't beleive that it was an inside job.



, I would like to know what is your reason for thinking this?

Two things, one good, the other not so good.

The not so good is that, there are some really cracked out, flat out stupid 911 'theories' out there, I suppose its a case of one bad apple spoiling the bunch. Except in this case its hundreds of bad apples, and not any good apples yet. Maybe a not so bruised or wormy granny smith here and there.

THe good reason to not accept that its an inside job is that there is no sensible evidence yet presented that it was an inside job.

What evidence convinced you that it was an inside job?



I'm not talking about people who just doubt it, I'm talking about people who won't even consider the remote possiblility.

I don't think that there is ANYONE that wouldn't allow a tiny, remote, much less that .000000000000001% chance that it is physically and conceivably possible that it was an inside job. I think that most people just look at whats out there and see no good reason to think it was infact an inside job.



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 09:57 PM
link   
I don't understand the title of your thread.

Are you trying to say that none of us are believers? Believers in what?



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by GwionX
Since the American democracy is IN power, they do not need to attack their own largest city to seize power. However, if this extremely hypothetical 9/11 "job" went astray ( or any one little element of it) This Administration would be RUINED, possibly the republican party as a whole.


The only problem with this logic is that the CIA and FBI, two agencies that would almost have to have some complicity if there were a conspiracy, were both run by Clinton appointees prior to 9/11 -the CIA by George Tenet, and the FBI by Louis Freeh. Robert Mueller wasn't appointed to head the FBI until a week before 9/11.

Maybe it was a covert group within the CIA and FBI who were allied with Clinton and the Democrats, and they were pissed off that Bush "stole" the election so they wanted to embarrass him and his new administration. Or maybe they were pissed off because of "the wall" that was erected by Jamie Gorelick to keep the CIA from sharing information with the FBI, and they wanted to get some attention.

Or maybe it was orchestrated by bin Laden and his low-tech band of pirates, and they pulled it off just to make sure they had their asses targeted with 1000 cruise missiles so they would have to hide in caves the rest of their lives.



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Here's about 361 reasons it was an inside job:
(WITH SOURCES!)

www.wanttoknow.info...


Took me three hours to read this timeline.
SOME of my favorite snippets:


Mid-1980's: The ISI starts a special cell of agents who use profits from heroin production for covert actions "at the insistence of the CIA."

1993 (A): Canadian police arrest Ali Mohamed, a high-ranking al-Qaeda figure. However, they release him when the FBI says he is a US agent.

September 1994: Starting as Afghani exiles in Pakistan religious schools, the Taliban begin their conquest of Afghanistan. [MSNBC, 10/2/01] "The Taliban are widely alleged to be the creation of Pakistan's military intelligence [the ISI]. Experts say that explains the Taliban's swift military successes." [CNN, 10/5/96] Less often reported is that the CIA worked with the ISI to create the Taliban. A long-time regional expert with extensive CIA ties says: "I warned them that we were creating a monster." He adds that even years later, "The Taliban are not just recruits from 'madrassas' (Muslim theological schools) but are on the payroll of the ISI." [Times of India, 3/7/01]

1995: For the first time, though not the last, the government of Sudan offers the US all of its files on bin Laden and al-Qaeda. The US turns down the offer. [Guardian, 9/30/01]

1996-2000: The CIA officer in charge of running operations against Al Qaeda from Washington writes, “I speak with firsthand experience (and for several score of CIA officers) when I state categorically that during this time senior White House officials repeatedly refused to act on sound intelligence that provided multiple chances to eliminate Osama bin Laden.” [Los Angeles Times, 12/5/04]

March 1996: The US pressures Sudan to do something about bin Laden, who is based in that country. Sudan readily agrees, not wanting to be labeled a terrorist nation. Sudan's Minister of Defense engages in secret negotiations with the CIA in Washington. Sudan offers to extradite bin Laden to anywhere he might stand trial. US officials turn down the offer, but insist that bin Laden leave the country for anywhere but Somalia. [Village Voice, 10/31/01, Washington Post, 10/3/01] CIA Director Tenet later denies Sudan made any offers to hand over bin Laden. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 10/17/02]

April 1996: In continuing negotiations between the US and Sudan, the US again rejects Sudan's offer to turn over voluminous files about bin Laden and al-Qaeda (See also 1995 and May 2000). Another American involved in the secret negotiations later says that the US could have used Sudan's offer to keep an eye on bin Laden, but that the efforts were blocked by another arm of the federal government. "I've never seen a brick wall like that before. Somebody let this slip up," he says. [Village Voice, 10/31/01, Washington Post, 10/3/01]

June 25, 1996: Explosions destroy the Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 American soldiers and wounding 500. [CNN, 6/26/96] Bin Laden admitted instigating the attacks in a 1998 interview. [Miami Herald, 9/24/01] Ironically, the bin Laden family is later awarded the contract to rebuild the installation. [New Yorker, 11/5/01]

September 27, 1996: The Taliban conquer Kabul [AP, 8/19/02], establishing control over much of Afghanistan. A surge in military success of the Taliban at this time is later attributed to an increase in direct military assistance from Pakistan's ISI. [New York Times, 12/8/01] The oil company Unocal is hopeful that the Taliban will stabilize Afghanistan, and allow its pipeline plans to go forward. In fact, "preliminary agreement [on the pipeline] was reached between the [Taliban and Unocal] long before the fall of Kabul." [Telegraph, 10/11/96]

December 4, 1997: Representatives of the Taliban are invited guests to the Texas headquarters of Unocal to negotiate their support for the pipeline. Future President Bush Jr. is Governor of Texas at the time. The Taliban appear to agree to a $2 billion pipeline deal, but will do the deal only if the US officially recognizes the Taliban regime. The Taliban meet with US officials, and the Telegraph reports that "the US government, which in the past has branded the Taliban's policies against women and children 'despicable,' appears anxious to please the fundamentalists to clinch the lucrative pipeline contract." [BBC, 12/4/97, Telegraph, 12/14/97]

1998 (A): A military report describes a program called "Joint Vision 2010.” The article mentions that the military is working on a "variety of new imaging and signals intelligence sensors deployed aboard the Global Hawk, DarkStar, and Predator unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)..." [Department of Defense Annual Report, 1998] Global Hawk is a technology that enables pilotless flight and has been functioning since at least early 1997. [Department of Defense, 2/20/97]

August 9, 1998: The Northern Alliance capital of Afghanistan, Mazar-i-Sharif, is conquered by the Taliban. Military support of Pakistan's ISI plays a large role; there is even an intercept of an ISI officer stating, "My boys and I are riding into Mazar-i-Sharif." [New York Times, 12/8/01] This victory gives the Taliban control of 90% of Afghanistan, including the entire pipeline route. CentGas, the consortium behind the gas pipeline that would run through Afghanistan, is now "ready to proceed. Its main partners are the American oil firm Unocal and Delta Oil of Saudi Arabia.

January 2000 (A): Former President George Bush Sr. meets with the bin Laden family on behalf of the Carlyle Group. He also met with them in 1998. Bush’s chief of staff could not remember that this meeting took place until shown a thank you note confirming the meeting. [Wall Street Journal, 9/27/01, Guardian, 10/31/01]

May 2000: The CIA and FBI send a joint investigative team to Sudan to investigate if that country is a sponsor of terrorism. Sudan offers again to hand over their voluminous files on al-Qaeda, and the offer is again turned down. [Guardian, 9/30/01]


but wait, there's more!



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by GwionX
Negative Beef writes:

Do you think the government are "good guys?"


I think the Government is comprised of people, some smarter, some dumber, some nicer, some meaner, some moral, some unscrupulous. I don't de-humanize them...they are not perfect...they are goofy everyday people really.

Don't you think there are evil people in the government as well? And isn't it the evil ones that would be capable of doing this?



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 12:03 AM
link   
As far planning as the illuminati is (oh oh, what did i just say?
) it would make sense, to me, that they have been placing the constructs for many acts that go both used or unused all around us for a long time now. I'm interested on reading up more on the twins costruction and those people involved in the design process.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 12:07 AM
link   


January 31, 2001: The final report of the US Commission on National Security/21st Century, co-chaired by former Senators Gary Hart (D), and Warren Rudman (R) is issued. The bipartisan report was put together in 1998 by then-President Bill Clinton and then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The report has 50 recommendations on how to combat terrorism in the US, but all of them are ignored by the Bush Administration. Instead, the White House announces in May that it will have Vice President Cheney study the potential problem of domestic terrorism, despite the fact that this commission had just studied the issue for 2 1/2 years. According to Senator Hart, Congress was taking the commission's suggestions seriously, but then, "Frankly, the White House shut it down."

Spring 2001: The Sydney Morning Herald later reports, "The months preceding September 11 [see] a shifting of the US military's focus. Over several months beginning in April [2001] a series of military and governmental policy documents [are] released that [seek] to legitimize the use of US military force in the pursuit of oil and gas." An article in the Army War College's journal by a former staff member of the Senate armed services committee argues for the legitimacy of "shooting in the Persian Gulf on behalf of lower gas prices." He also "advocate[s] the acceptability of presidential subterfuge in the promotion of a conflict" and "explicitly urge[s] painting over the US's actual reasons for warfare as a necessity for mobilising public support for a conflict." In April, the commander of US forces in the Persian Gulf/South Asia area, testifies to Congress that his command's key mission is "access to [the region's] energy resources."

April 23, 2001: A Global Hawk plane flies 22 hours from the US to Australia without pilot or passengers. A Global Hawk manager says, "The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from takeoff, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway". [ITN, 4/24/01]

Mid-July 2001: John O'Neill, FBI counter-terrorism expert, privately discusses White House obstruction in his bin Laden investigation. O'Neill says: "The main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were US oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it."

Late July 2001 (A): The Taliban Foreign Minister learns that bin Laden is planning a "huge attack" on targets inside America. The attack is imminent, and will kill thousands. He learns this from the leader of the rebel Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), which is allied with al-Qaeda at the time. He sends an emissary to pass this information on to the US consul general, and another US official, "possibly from the intelligence services," also attends the meeting. The message is not taken very seriously. The emissary then takes the message to the Kabul offices of UNSMA, the political wing of the UN. They also fail to take the warning seriously. [Independent, 9/7/02, Reuters, 9/7/02] Isn't it ironic the US destroyed the Taliban, who tried to warn them of the attacks?

August 2001 (A): The German newspaper Der Spiegel later reports that this month the US company Raytheon landed a 727 six times in a military base in New Mexico without any pilots on board. This was done to test equipment making future hijackings more difficult, by allowing ground control to take over the flying of a hijacked plane. [Der Spiegel, 10/28/01]

August 24-29, 2001: The hijackers book their flights for 9/11, using their real names. Most pay using credit cards on the internet. [Miami Herald, 9/22/01] So 9/11 must have been the confirmed date of the attack by August 24. Why would they pay using credit cards in their real names?

September 10, 2001 (J): Former president Bush is with a brother of Osama bin Laden at a Carlyle business conference. The conference is interrupted the next day by the attacks. [Washington Post, 3/16/03]

September 11, 2001 (C): Data recovery experts later looking at 32 hard drives salvaged from the 9/11 attacks discover a surge in credit card transactions from the WTC in the hours before and during the attacks. Unusually large sums of money were rushed through computers even as the disaster unfolded. Investigators say, "There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million. They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed." [Reuters, 12/18/01, CNN, 12/20/01]

September 25, 2001: As details of the passengers on the four hijacked flights emerge, some are shown to have curious connections to the defense company Raytheon, and possibly its Global Hawk pilotless aircraft program (see 1998 and August 2001).
Stanley Hall (Flight 77) was director of program management for Raytheon Electronics Warfare.[AP, 9/25/01]
Peter Gay (Flight 11) was Raytheon's Vice President of Operations for Electronic Systems and had been on special assignment to a company office in El Segundo, Calif. [AP, 9/25/01]
Kenneth Waldie (Flight 11) was a senior quality control engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems.
David Kovalcin (Flight 11) was a senior mechanical engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems. [CNN, 9/01]
Herbert Homer (Flight 175) was a corporate executive working with the Department of Defense. [CNN, 9/01, Northeastern University Voice, 12/11/01]
Raytheon employees with possible links to Global Hawk can be connected to three of the four flights? There may be more, since many of the passengers' jobs and personal information have remained anonymous. A surprising number of passengers, especially on Flight 77, have military connections. [Chicago Tribune, 9/16/01] Could these Raytheon employees have known too much? Or is it possible they, along with others, were not even on the planes?


These are just a very few examples that have convinced me it was an inside job. I believed the official story till about a year ago, when I came across ATS. Its only a matter of time before 9-11 gets investigated again, and again.. The lax attitude and dismissiveness of the odd facts surrounding 9-11 is deplorable.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 02:03 AM
link   
Why is it not conceivable,
that the meanest,
most sinister,
unscrupulous,
yet smartest, individuals are filtered through
the most elite colleges, and filtered further inside
these insititutions through secret societies such
as Skull and Bones (like Kerry and Bush) so that they
can have a place in very-powerful positions?
You know, like in Government.

These are the people that need to be contradicted.

"I don't pay taxes to buy lies"
I, and many others, are tired of being lied to by
these smart, mean, and unscrupulous people that
run this government. Enough is enough. There
used to be a few bad apples, now its just
a few good ones.

Some 9-11 theories are bad apples.

If so, this gov't handed us a rotten core.

This once glorious nation will not crumble from
dissent, but rather from corruption, ignorance and
outright dismissiveness.

The goal is the truth.
Accountability.
Retribution.
Delicious truth apple sauce.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 02:18 AM
link   
its not impossible, just improbable. I mean, really think about what you are suggesting. Aside from the fact that this would be treason at almost every level in our government, not just the top, it would be nearly impossible for a government to do this. It would mean that the US government has near absolute power and I just dont believe that.

Also, I have heard theories from missile strikes to hydrogen bombs, none of these theories are ever supported. You are overlooking evidence such as the prior activities of mohammed atta, the phone calls made on board the other flights, etc.

I think the main push behind the 9/11 conspiracy are left wing fanatics who are apologists for the radical muslims. Think about it, if the left wing fanatics can remove the sole justification for the war on terror, it accomplishes their goal of making this admin look like some totlitarian regime and secures their place in politics for a very long time. Thats all this is, politics. In fact, most of these conspiracy theories werent even that prolific until moore's farenheit 9/11 coupled with a string of radical rhetoric websites funded by george soros. The real conspiracy is the effort to undermine the war on terror, the administration, the american image all in the name of politics.

I suggest all you "believers" take a look at the south park episode about 9/11 conspiracy theories. Although it is only a cartoon, it makes a wonderful social and political commentary on this whole situation.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join