Debunk This Video

page: 1
38
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+1 more 
posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I am issuing an open challenge to anyone here on ATS to debunk the 9-11 related information presented in this film...
video.google.com...

It's feature length, 1 hour 40 minutes, so pop some popcorn and sit a spell. Have at it, if you can debunk the piece in it's entirety, you will have struck a major blow to the conspiracy theorists contentions that 9-11 was an inside job.




posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 02:51 PM
link   
shouldn't this be put in the "9-11 conspiracies" forum? honestly, this isn't my deal on ATS so i really won't comment further than that



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
shouldn't this be put in the "9-11 conspiracies" forum? honestly, this isn't my deal on ATS so i really won't comment further than that

If you think it should be moved to the 9-11 forum, then perhaps you haven't watched the video. It goes back to JFK, Mena AK, etc. it covers a lot more than just 9-11, that's why I posted here.
Yes it's 9-11 related but considering the content of the video, I'd like to formally request it remain on WOT forum if possible.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I will have a watch Twitchy, not necessarily to try and debunk it, but i will watch, pick out the main points, and post what my thoughts are on the points in question, if that involves any debunking along the way, then so be it..
Did you put it together Pal?



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Your link brings up a Google search.

Is that correct, or did you want to show us
a specific video ?

Lex



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lexion
Your link brings up a Google search.

Is that correct, or did you want to show us
a specific video ?

Lex

I didn't want to link to a specific instance of that video in case the web page crashed or somebody had screwy browser settings and couldn't view it. The google search should be a list of several pages which show a video entitled "who killed john o'neil", that's the one you're looking for.

Fowl Play...
No I didn't put it together. I emailed the guy that did though and we communicated briefly, he seems a pretty decent guy. One hell of an actor to boot I might add.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   
A great video for a Saturday afternoon. Thanks for linking to this. I watched it in full, my father caught parts of it, but he is full fledged into the truth behind 9/11 as well. This video has a lot of connections in it that I have not heard of, and explained in great detail those that I already know. There is no debunking this, in my opinion. The only thing I would see people trying to debunk is the "speculations" but they make perfect sense.

I will definately pass this video on. I am surprised this has been around for almost a year and I have not came across it yet.

Thanks again, very informative.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 02:07 AM
link   
I am extremely surprised that nobody else has commented on this since this afternoon, not even the OP. Maybe there are other things more important than this in the real world, but in my opinion, this IS the real world. Seems like ATS has become a haven for youngsters that are on the fringes of knowing the truth. This video pulled me in from the beginning because I have owned both "Rule By Secrecy" and "Behold a Pale Horse" for a long time, which are both shown at the beginning of this movie. How do we get the rest of the public to acknowledge that our own government set up and ......



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 02:16 AM
link   
With respect, i think you should be careful in your assumptions, unless of course you can back your allegations up with evidence, but as of yet, i have seen absolutely no evidence to suggest " The Government" did it, i very much dispute that, and it is a dangerous accusation to make.

Correct me if i am wrong.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quasar
I am extremely surprised that nobody else has commented on this since this afternoon, not even the OP.

I'm watching and waiting to see if anybody steps forward here to make an effort to debunk it. I'm afraid it looks like we have no takers so far. I really would like to see what some of our more skeptical members have to say about it, in my experience so far, they completely avoid it.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 04:30 AM
link   
Who killed John O'neil
That is the question...

Is a very good video, watched it then linked it here on ATS some time ago. Can't say it is debunkable, the info presented is very well done.

The guy goes into alot of detail, and gets really deep and drawn into it all. Have to say obsessed with it, from what I remember. He has a very good point though, and it makes one think really hard on the angles presented.
It is a good chunk of the puzzle so to say, in my opinion at least.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I watched this before,and this guy really did his homework.I agree alot with what Advisor said above.Great video.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fowl Play
i have seen absolutely no evidence to suggest " The Government" did it,


There is no "hard evidence", which goes well in court, but the links and connections between everything pretty much sums it up.

It's kinda funny how even John Kerry is in on it too. I am looking forward to researching the next candidates who win the primaries.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fowl Play
With respect, i think you should be careful in your assumptions, unless of course you can back your allegations up with evidence, but as of yet, i have seen absolutely no evidence to suggest " The Government" did it, i very much dispute that, and it is a dangerous accusation to make.

Correct me if i am wrong.


I'm guessing you have no clue what 9/11 truth is about if you think most truthers believe that "the government" did it. We are simply putting the idea out there that criminal elements within the government may have had a hand in the events leading up to and on 9/11. If your going to play skeptic, then please at least do a little research on the subject.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Originally posted by Fowl Play



With respect, i think you should be careful in your assumptions, unless of course you can back your allegations up with evidence


The evidence has been outlined and presented in numerous threads here n ATS. I don't think there is any doubt (at least for the informed, thinking individual) that the government was complicit and active in the perpertration of the 911 fiasco.


, but as of yet, i have seen absolutely no evidence to suggest " The Government" did it,


Then you haven't been paying attention. First of all you need to know that those of us who blame the 'government' are referring to 'those in control of the alleged hijackers, the alleged hijacked planes, the remote controlled planes (if any), NORAD, the FAA, the U.S. Air Force and the entire news media at the time of 911'. If you have another definition of 'government' I would like to see it. As far as the 'evidence' to back up their involvement you need to take these specific steps. First of all check to see that your computer switch is in the "ON" position. Then check to see that the monitor switch is in the "ON" position. That should get you off to a good start.


i very much dispute that,


And that is your right, but you really should look at the facts.


and it is a dangerous accusation to make.


The word 'dangerous' here has me wondering. Are you making some sort of threat and if so is that threat on behalf of the government? You should know that the preservation of Freedom is, in fact, a dangerous business. Those who espouse the concept of freedom will not be intimidated or cowed by threats of 'danger'.


Correct me if i am wrong.


Yes, please allow me. You are wrong if you belive the government had no connection with and was not specifically complicit with the perpetration of 911.

You are wrong to threaten anyone here with 'danger' for believing that the government was complicit in the perpetration of 911. If you represent a body or part of the 'government' and are threatening us on their behalf you need to make that clear by naming who it is you represent and who you are.

But whoever you are and whoever you represent you are welcome to post here as long as you eliminate your implied threats. Thanks.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
The first time I watched this piece, not knowing what to expect, I was awestruck at the sheer amount of material he covers and manages to do it in an entertaining enough format to launch it out of the documentary category so much of the 9-11 and terrorism related material is stuck in and straight into film, if not dramatic genius.
The second time I watched it, I had a notepad and a finger on the pause button and took notes to fact check and compare with my own research, and this guy to best of my knowlege has done his homework.
As to why I posted this in the WOT forum and not the 9-11 forum was because the subject of this piece is an alleged murder of John O'Neil, probably the FBI's top man in Counter Terrorism who was chosen to head the efforts against Al Quaeda. In this war on terror, he was the go to man. He took a job after his investigations were railroaded as the head of security at the World Trade Center, 9-11-01, assumably replacing Marvin Bush.

Edit:
I thought this was a creepy quote on the wikipedia site...


Source
O'Neill started his new job at the World Trade Center in August 2001. (According to New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, "That Tuesday (9-11) was his first or second day on the job.") He was appointed by Kroll Associates, namely by the controversial managing director Jerome Hauer. Later that month, he talked to his friend Chris Isham about the job. Jokingly, Isham said, “Well, that will be an easy job. They're not going to bomb that place again.” O'Neill replied, “Well actually they've always wanted to finish that job. I think they're going to try again.”

O'Neill's remains were recovered from the World Trade Center site on September 22, 2001 and identified by Jerome Hauer. [1], although Richard Clarke would later recall that only "parts of" O'Neill had been recovered.[2]

Jerome Hauer identified his remains personally.


[edit on 17-6-2007 by twitchy]



posted on Jun, 18 2007 @ 10:47 AM
link   
There was a LOT of steam during the beginning of the 9/11 research and investigations. After the video was first released, it picked up fairly well for awhile, but as every thing seems to do, petered out shortly after.

It seems to me, that there is only a select handful of individuals, who have maintained interest, and continued digging in the topic. Perhaps, due to a lack of places or material to sort through, I have no idea.

JohnLear, makes a valid point though, all one has to do is look. If they want to, that is. The above comment of his, just may be one of the few subjects I agree with him on, this side of the fence that is. The government had people in the know, who did nothing.

There are many older threads on that matter though, and is a topic for those threads however.

Now if I could only find that older thread on John O'neil that was posted around here before...

Found it!
If you just read over the below linked thread, there is a lot of material and some research a few members contributed to this subject.
John Patrick O'Neill

A couple of source links;

Video WKJO
As above different site



posted on Jun, 18 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
I found a really good write up of just some of the problems John O'Neil had with officials in his efforts to investigate various terrorist acts. The more I read about his efforts and how they were railroaded, the angrier it makes me, and the more it becomes apparent that something just doesn't smell right about the events of and leading up to 9-11.
Find something to bite down on, you'll need it, and have a read...
www.unknownnews.net...

Again this thread is an open challenge, I feel like that guy in the Highlander Movie wondering around the battle field saying "fight me!", so far not a single skeptic has stepped forward in either thread. I'm intensely interested in getting a second opinion and I wish there was some way I could sweeten the deal for somebody. Is there any way for me to offer a say 500 or a thousand of my ATS points in exchange for a reasonable effort to debunk this piece, or something?



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Whaddyaknow, three days, zero takers. Behold fellow theorists, these soothsayers will not even take the field when some basic facts are wielded against them.



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Well, it certainly isn't the type of "softball" that our resident debunkers generally love to comment on. If you had posted a 10 second video clip, or a photo; they could just drop in and say "Fake!!! Obviously photoshopped!", and then be on their merry way.


Where do you get off posting something that would require them to actually research a topic (or in this case, numerous avenues of information)!





new topics
top topics
 
38
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join