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.

 

So You Want *PROOF* of a Conspiracy?

page: 3
30
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 02:55 AM
link   
well nick, its no secret i disagree with your, and most "truth movement" peoples opinions in many of the areas surrounding 9-11. but its also no secret that i dont think we're getting the whole story for one reason or another.

what you have provided is something that, while may or may not be valid, IS layed out in an orderly well presented fashion.

it shows you put more effort into it than a few minutes of random babbling to spout off a baseless accusation about an uninformed opinion.

you stated an opinion and then provided evidence to back it up. evidence doesnt equal proof, but it does provide things to consider.

of all of the theories surrounding 9-11 this in my opinion is an example of a good one.

for this type of great work, ill kick you a WATS, even if im not sure i agree with you.




posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 03:55 AM
link   
You have voted nick7261 for the Way Above Top Secret award.

Thank you for your time and effort in researching this information - I for one appreciate it.

Putting the pieces together ....



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:28 AM
link   

You have voted nick7261 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Good job on all the research man. it took a while to read all of it but damn! Keep up the good work Nick



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
well nick, its no secret i disagree with your, and most "truth movement" peoples opinions in many of the areas surrounding 9-11. but its also no secret that i dont think we're getting the whole story for one reason or another.


I try not to form many opinions without facts to back them up. Just because I don't accept the "official story" doesn't mean that I've ruled it out either. It's just that in my opinion the government has asked us to believe a lot of things and asked us to just take their word for it.

Sort of reminds me of the whole WMDs in Iraq issue. I'm not saying that there were or weren't WMDs in Iraq. It's just that it would be nice to have some evidence.




what you have provided is something that, while may or may not be valid, IS layed out in an orderly well presented fashion.

it shows you put more effort into it than a few minutes of random babbling to spout off a baseless accusation about an uninformed opinion.

you stated an opinion and then provided evidence to back it up. evidence doesnt equal proof, but it does provide things to consider.

of all of the theories surrounding 9-11 this in my opinion is an example of a good one.

for this type of great work, ill kick you a WATS, even if im not sure i agree with you.



Thanks!

I have no idea what really happened, but I do know that the whole Berger-Stonebridge-Hamilton issue raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest and quid pro quo deals.

Thanks again for the kind words and the WATS! (We probably agree on a lot more than we disagree on.)



ShAuNmAn-X and Burginthon:

Thanks! I appreciate the feedback! I'll keep digging to see what else is out there...

[edit on 26-2-2007 by nick7261]



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by savage99

Good question... IS there anyone that knows what was on the documents that were stolen and destroyed? Since it was considered classified...I doubt we will know.


I'm no expert on legal matters, but shouldn't stealing and the destroying stuff like this be treated more like treason?


If not treason, at least a felony. That's pretty important documentation which while potentially embarassing to Clinton, could've been used to help improve our defenses against terror attacks.


137

posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Nice research!

Is there anything officially known about the motives of this crime?



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by 137
Nice research!

Is there anything officially known about the motives of this crime?


Thanks!

Officially?

No, only self-serving bs stories coming from Berger's associates who claim he swiped the docs to help prepare for this 9/11 Commission testimony. When he realized what he had done, he decided to cut up the docs with scissors.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
We must spread the truth, before its too late. I encourage everyone to make fliers with ATS or other truth websites, and put a catch phrase on it like "deny ignorance" be original though. Put these up everywhere, EVERYWHERE!!!!! Schools, buses, bathrooms, restaurants, light posts, cars, office buildings, you get the point. Please help spread the truth, or at least, encourage the search for it. It is almost too late for us. We reached the point of no return.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:03 PM
link   
[


And you don't see anything at the very least unethical about this?

I didn’t say that. I was just wondering what conspiracy you were referring to.

I understand now what you are saying and I agree these corporate cowboys are collaborating and there are obvious conflict of interests. I would say that war profiteering is the motivation for the WOT and I think it should be made illegal. That is the only way to stop what is going on. The only thing these people care about is money and corporate profits, and the security of this country is the last thing on their minds.

The definition of conspiracy is when 2 or more people plan an activity that breaks the laws of this country. The Supreme Court has ruled that an overt act is not necessary to convict for conspiracy, just talking about breaking the law is enough to imprison anyone for conspiracy.

The preponderance of evidence shows that there is some question regarding the timing of Hamilton's hiring. The fact that Hamilton is now a paid employee of Berger's, shows the appearance of impropriety.

This is enough to indict any other citizen.

I am tiring of those who dismiss government conspiracies as ridiculous, while the USA imprisons more people for conspiracy than any other country in the world.

Why would one think that those who work in the government are any different than citizens?



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Hi, I'm a new member here. Thanks for your research. As usual, I find that the pieces of the puzzle are not really kept secret. If the apocalypse were starting tomorrow I suspect that there would have been a little noticed article on page 56 pointing out what will happen, if not exactly when.

I thought the key statement in the OP was Berger's comments:"I'm glad that the 9/11 commission has made clear that it received all the documents that it sought, all the documents that it needed, and I'm pleased to finally have this matter resolved"

So he's happy that the commission got what they wanted and then later demostrates that they want similar things by hiring the commision head.

The 9/11 commission was only seeking documents to support the Arab superpilots plot, if I'm not mistaken.

As Caustic Logic pointed out, Berger was designated as THE representative to take the fall, so maybe the story is just to plant the suspicion that they are covering up incompetence. Much like the Scooter Libby story, there is the timing that suggests a need for more distractions from what is really going on.

Whether the docs were important or just a distraction or some combination of both, I do find the corporate connections interesting.

Interesting stuff. Thanks nick7261

PS I'd be real interested in the Curt Weldon info as well.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Sorry, New to this. If I made any more errors than I noticed please forgive my ignorance



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by pesky george
[


And you don't see anything at the very least unethical about this?

I didn’t say that. I was just wondering what conspiracy you were referring to.


Sorry for the misunderstanding!





The preponderance of evidence shows that there is some question regarding the timing of Hamilton's hiring. The fact that Hamilton is now a paid employee of Berger's, shows the appearance of impropriety.

This is enough to indict any other citizen.


I would be that if somebody had time to investigate Stonebridge there would be a lot of appearances of impropriety.



I am tiring of those who dismiss government conspiracies as ridiculous, while the USA imprisons more people for conspiracy than any other country in the world.

Why would one think that those who work in the government are any different than citizens?


Great point! Look at Enron, Worldcom, and AIG for example. These were huge multi-billion dollar conspiracies all about greed. Why would people believe it can only happen in the private sector, and not the government?

I guess the people in the government can get away with it because they get to investigate themselves.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by thx1137
Hi, I'm a new member here. Thanks for your research.


You're welcome!





I thought the key statement in the OP was Berger's comments:"I'm glad that the 9/11 commission has made clear that it received all the documents that it sought, all the documents that it needed, and I'm pleased to finally have this matter resolved"


I though this was key too! I bet he was pleased to have the matter resolved. So pleased he's paying Hamilton now to "work" for his company.




The 9/11 commission was only seeking documents to support the Arab superpilots plot, if I'm not mistaken.


It seems the Commission was seeking to make sure that the Clinton administration didn't take any heat at all. Jamie Gorelick's appointment to the Commission made sure of this.




PS I'd be real interested in the Curt Weldon info as well.




Curt Weldon stirred up the hornets' nest, and was promptly taken out, politically speaking. The entire campaign to take out Weldon centered around Stonebridge. The entire Able Danger chapter has now been officially closed, without any of the officers testifying before any panel. The Senate Intelligence Committee simply declared that the officers who came forward re identifying Att pre-9/11 were mistaken. Case closed. Cover-up successful.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Ther is little difference between Democrats and REpublicans when it comes to 9/11. There is enough evidence to convince me that there is more than politics envolved with the attack. Both parties are covering up what really happened. Everything boils down to money and corporations.

Reality - 2007 is the year the trade centers would be required to replace the aluminum outer shell. The cost of the scaffolding alone was in the billions.

5 of the hijackers were trained at United States military bases.

Airline stocks were sold short on the exact day of the 'attacks'.

These facts alone should be enough to start an investigaton the size never before seen by this country, but denial is all we get, that and being accused of being a tin hat wearing fool.

Being somewhat familiar with criminal law, those facts alone is enough to investigate.

Not to mention all the other "coincidences".



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by pesky george
Ther is little difference between Democrats and REpublicans when it comes to 9/11. There is enough evidence to convince me that there is more than politics envolved with the attack. Both parties are covering up what really happened. Everything boils down to money and corporations.

Reality - 2007 is the year the trade centers would be required to replace the aluminum outer shell. The cost of the scaffolding alone was in the billions.

5 of the hijackers were trained at United States military bases.

Airline stocks were sold short on the exact day of the 'attacks'.

These facts alone should be enough to start an investigaton the size never before seen by this country, but denial is all we get, that and being accused of being a tin hat wearing fool.

Being somewhat familiar with criminal law, those facts alone is enough to investigate.

Not to mention all the other "coincidences".


You're right, it has nothing to do with Democrats vs. Republicans.

I just found an article today from the NY Times from Sept. 2005 re the Senate hearings on Able Danger. Note that Senators from both sides are outraged that the DoD is trying to cover-up Able Danger.

All you have to do is follow the Able Danger story from beginning to end to see what's going on.




posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 05:20 PM
link   

I have no idea what really happened, but I do know that the whole Berger-Stonebridge-Hamilton issue raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest and quid pro quo deals.


And Reality, this is exactly the point you need to look at. Other CTers are different, no doubt, but Nick and I both share this position and it's a position worth noting. We do not claim to know what happened. All we claim is that there are holes in the official story, and those holes have been pointed out (and as for the writing of this, have not been filled) time and time again.

You have requested proof for the outrageous claims that many CTers make. But what about the CTers who don't claim to know what happened, who simply claim the official story doesn't make sense? The burden of proof lies with the people making claims. The official story is a claim, and therefore the burden of proof lies with the proponents of this story (such as yourself).

Yes, people making claims about pods, missiles, remote control planes and the like are required to provide proof of these claims. People simply questioning the official story and pointing out the holes in said story are not required to provide proof (other than proof of the holes, which has been provided time and time again) - in fact, they should be provided with proof by their opponents, by those claiming the official story to be true.


And no, explosion-proof, building-collapse-proof passports do not constitute proof.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheStev
The burden of proof lies with the people making claims. The official story is a claim, and therefore the burden of proof lies with the proponents of this story (such as yourself).

Yes, people making claims about pods, missiles, remote control planes and the like are required to provide proof of these claims. People simply questioning the official story and pointing out the holes in said story are not required to provide proof (other than proof of the holes, which has been provided time and time again) - in fact, they should be provided with proof by their opponents, by those claiming the official story to be true.

And no, explosion-proof, building-collapse-proof passports do not constitute proof.

Damn TheStev! Welcome to the discussion, and what an excellent point from a clear mind. Things were starting to suck around here other than Nick. Things are looking up tho thanks to you and a couple others...



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheStev

I have no idea what really happened, but I do know that the whole Berger-Stonebridge-Hamilton issue raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest and quid pro quo deals.


And Reality, this is exactly the point you need to look at. Other CTers are different, no doubt, but Nick and I both share this position and it's a position worth noting. We do not claim to know what happened. All we claim is that there are holes in the official story, and those holes have been pointed out (and as for the writing of this, have not been filled) time and time again.


Nice post!

I think you've captured my frustration exactly. The government has made claims, and has not only failed to show the evidence of these claims, but has also intentionally kept the evidence hidden, or worse yet, destroyed the evidence.

Then when their story is questioned, the debunkers come back with something like, "Where's your evidence that the official story isn't true!?"

Well, some is in China and India, most is locked up at the FBI, some may have been in the 2.5 terabytes of info the DoD ordered destroyed, and some may have even been stuffed into Sandy Berger's drawers (and I don't mean his desk drawers!).

It's indisputable that something is being hidden about 9/11. Is it just the government's incompetence, or is it some part of the government being complicit in the attacks?



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by GwionX
Al Gore must ba a DAMN good actor then...Seems like He, and about half of America was really pissed when Bush won. I guess that was all a part of this government plot.

Interesting research Nick. My focus now is on the Neo-Nazi opportunists that want to use the "9/11 Truth Movement propaganda campaign" to mobilize people against the USA.

I am satisfied that the Government did not actively participate in the events of 9/11...contrary to what the "truth movement" is preaching to the young and/or feeble minded.

I will concede that the 9/11 Commission's investigation and report are not as competent and comprehensive as a work of this magnitude should be.

Cheers! and palms down.


[edit on 25-2-2007 by GwionX]


That post doesn't even make sense in the context of this thread. You even copy and pasted that from another thread. lol again with the neo-nazi's



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
All you're doing is linking articles, which may or may not be related. Its like playing "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon". Im sure that if I wanted to, I could implicate Santa Claus by doing the same thing.


I again plead, go get some real evidence. Oh wait, its all locked away...

Are you sure? ALL of the evidence is locked away in some Raiders of the Lost Ark type secret warehouse? Not one shred exists? Are you sure of that?


***What about participants? Hmm? Surely people remotely controlled those planes. Talked to their spouses about it, their buddies in the service…

***Speaking of planes, they don’t just materialize from space. They’re built. And building them costs money. Someplace there must be order forms from Boeing.

***Someone fired that cruise missile…..from a launching platform of some kind. Real flesh and blood people. People that aren’t in some box in a warehouse.

***Somewhere there are requisition forms for Tomahawks, and item and inventory logs. Losing a tomahawk leaves a paper trail, and its all public record.

***I don’t know how to rig a building the size of the WTC for demolition, do you? The list of people who can collapse not one building that size, but 2, into their own footprint cannot be that long. There may be 20 people in the world who can successfully do it. Who are they? Where were they? Did they travel? Will they provide credit card bill summaries to prove that they were elsewhere on the week leading up to 911?

***Who were the pilots who shot down flight 93? Where are they? Do they drink in excess?

***If they didn’t shoot it down, where are the passengers? Locked away? They need care, that takes people to do it. And food and water, which leave a paper trail. Were they killed? By whom? Who are the killers and can they lead you to the bodies?


I could go on and on and on. But I won’t continue to do your job for you. Go. Find evidence. Find proof. It is out there, you’re just not looking.

My opinion? (A general opinion and not necessarily indicative of anyone in particular) Its soooooo easy to say “OMG Bush killed those people for oil!!!” over the internet, and not actually DO anything, or provide anything. Conspiracy theorists are getting lazy, all they want to do is type, not actually prove anything. Its all about the E-ego, not the actual fact.

Why do you keep bringing up remote control planes and panes materializing from space and missiles hitting the pentagon? Those theories are stated again and again to be untrue. Why don't you focus on the REAL conspiracy theories.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join