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.

 

History Channel Special: "The 9/11 Conspiracies" August 12, 2007

page: 10
10
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Interesting bit on informationliberation...


you watched the History Channel '9/11 Conspiracies' show last night, you may have noticed how right off the bat they went for the old guilt by association method of associating truthers with the practically nonexistent "Jews did it" crowd. What you may have missed is that in the end of the segment they do a slow zoom into a website in an "evil type way", with the implication it was a truther website, which says "JEWS DID WTC" and flashes Stars of David, the twin towers, and other 9/11 related pictures. What they didn't mention was that this site is a ytmnd parody site! You can see the site right here: jewswtc.ytmnd.com... The history channel is so desperate to slander 9/11 truth that they actually attempted to link the movement to a ridiculous ytmnd parody site! Talk about desperation!


www.informationliberation.com...




posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Azriphale
Interesting bit on informationliberation...


The history channel is so desperate to slander 9/11 truth that they actually attempted to link the movement to a ridiculous ytmnd parody site! Talk about desperation!




YTMND... Your The Man Now Dog. This is what their site says:


What is YTMND?
YTMND is a site created for the purpose of furthering the creativity of its users. It stems from an idea that, using sound, and image, and some text, the users can convey a point, funny, political, or otherwise, to the general media.

ytmnd.com...

I don't see anything where it says that, that particular AD was a parody. I may have missed something though.

The History Channel is by far "desperate" to slander the 911 Deniers, they do that job fine themselves.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by C0le
 


Prison Planet... run by the master of all idiots Alex "Galileo" Jones. The same site that states that the FDNY was "in on it."

It was a two hour program that CT'ers were given quite a bit of airtime. Remember kids....if it aint sexy, it wont get ratings. Dust particles won't keep the lay persons attention very long. IMO... Alex Jones should have been left out of the entire documentary...he came across as a loud mouth and an idiot! Nothing new from him actually.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   
During the show, there was one video of WTC 7 collapse that I had never seen before. This angle of collapse, showed the squibs coming out the building very well.

Also, I'm sorry but there has been papers and tests done about the cell phones actually being able to be used on planes at that altitude moving that fast. The chances of these calls being able to hold a signal is very, very slim.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
reply to post by C0le
 


Prison Planet... run by the master of all idiots Alex "Galileo" Jones. The same site that states that the FDNY was "in on it."

It was a two hour program that CT'ers were given quite a bit of airtime. Remember kids....if it aint sexy, it wont get ratings. Dust particles won't keep the lay persons attention very long. IMO... Alex Jones should have been left out of the entire documentary...he came across as a loud mouth and an idiot! Nothing new from him actually.





I have yet to hear one credible theory regarding any 9/11 conspiracies, but I am always reading and researching just in case, but if I was a "truther", I'd want nutjobs like Alex Jones to get off my side.

It's like a Michael Moore movie, It's so full of lies that when a truthful element does emerge, it has no credibility left.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vinadetta
During the show, there was one video of WTC 7 collapse that I had never seen before. This angle of collapse, showed the squibs coming out the building very well.

Also, I'm sorry but there has been papers and tests done about the cell phones actually being able to be used on planes at that altitude moving that fast. The chances of these calls being able to hold a signal is very, very slim.


Only 2 of the flight 93 calls were from cell phones, the rest were from airphones in the seatbacks, they said this last night. I flew to NYC in 2004 and I had as many as 3 bars on my signal meter at times.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObviousRemember kids....if it aint sexy, it wont get ratings. Dust particles won't keep the lay persons attention very long. IMO... Alex Jones should have been left out of the entire documentary...he came across as a loud mouth and an idiot! Nothing new from him actually.

Though I agree with you about AJ, the reason he has a following is because he is a loudmouth and over the top. You have to admit he gets ratings, but I would not go so far as to say he is sexy.


I would say that if you would make a documentary on 9/11 conspiracies, you would have to mention him. If you didn't, you wouldn't be making a complete documentary.

I think that what they showed in the documentary were simple attacks on the messenger and not the message. The way I look at 9/11 conspiracies, I find the mysteries intriguing regardless of who brings it up. I think that there are holes in the official story and I think there was prior knowledge within the government, but am not willing to go so far to say George Bush and Co. planned the whole thing.

My point is if it weren't for people like AJ, no one would even be asking questions about 9/11.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Check out this call to Popular Mechanics asking them to back up their sources!!! Why is he so afraid to answer a simple question. I guess it truly shows how much integrity they really have

VIDEO LINK TO CALL



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Vinadetta
 


Vindetta, first of all, have you backed up your claims about flight 93's calls?

I just listened to that phone call. Did you? He was VERY polite on the phone, even apologizing for puting the guy on hold for 20-30 seconds to get a phone number so that he can get his questions answered. His bosses instructed him NOT to answer questions via the phone and gave him the appropriate channel to do so.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   
"When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to 1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with, and 4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range. This procedure, called an electronic handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. "


Yeah,
I know it's easy for people to hide under the Corporate Cloak instead of just having some integrity and answering the guy's question.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
His bosses instructed him NOT to answer questions via the phone and gave him the appropriate channel to do so.


Yeah but by not answering every little question by everyone that wants to look him up and call him, surely he must be hiding SOMETHING, mustn't he? I mean, it isn't like he has a job or anything, DOES HE?



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by zysin5
 


Where did my edit button go? I didnt want to make a whole new post, but here we go...

I saw it last night at 1 in the morning. It did what TV does best!!
It took a look at a bunch of high school kids trying to push DVD, and make some money off others pain.. If you notice the vitcums of the families said that they are hurting them everyday with these lies.
The LC kids then say, we are going to back off the whole thing. And work on WTC 7.

They slice and dice up the truth movement. I dont have much to add other than the guy from skeptic mag I would like to punch in the face..
He was so smug and such a smart A$$ know it all, I didnt even want to watch the program.. ACK!! its true, Im glad I dont watch TV anymore.

What can I say? I mean Im just some dude sitting in a chair. IM not going to say something brillant, and IM NO HERO!!

They got away with it guys, and they will contiune to get away with it..
Sorry, but its the truth of this world...

In the End, the debunkers made their claim, and to most would seem solid enough. But to me, they where smug, and said no way can the government keep a secert..
Then right after the program it says.. Government secert held for more than 20 years.. The government cant keep a secert? yah right..!

Okay thats the last for me on 911 forums.. You have great hearts and I know you just want what is best.. But this is so far out of my hands, I will respectfully bow out in shame...
Good luck



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by PriapismJoe
I have yet to hear one credible theory regarding any 9/11 conspiracies,


Let's take a walk down memory lane...

The Pre-9/11 web was very different than the web of today. There were fewer people online, and "conspiracies" were not a popular topic. Nearly all of the handful of conspiracy-centric websites of that era are either no longer running, or no longer carry a record of pre-9/11 content.

For those of us who were paying attention to the dark web-corners where conspiracy aficionados spend time, we recall a general feeling of "something big is coming" in the months leading up to 9/11. In fact, there was direct speculation of a late-summer False Flag operation running rampant. And one should note that during this time of a more low-profile online stature of conspiracists, we had a unique mix of insiders and connected people providing information. Unfortunately, there appears to be little remaining record other than this tantalizing tidbit:

Web.Archive.org - RumorMillNews

I heard Mr. Webb speak on WLW 700am on Sci Zone www.scizone.com... last night and he said, he has proof we will be attacked in August 2001, and it's a conspiracy of our govt.


A few other rumors circled out of independent "alternative" newspapers in July out of Portland and San Francisco of covert preparations for a "police state" styled national crackdown coming within months.

And in mid-August, the mysterious "Dove of Oneness" (who some now feel was mixing hints within nonsensical ramblings about NESARA) created a mass email with no mention of NESARA, but mention of something like, "Be ready, everything changes in 2-3 weeks."

I'm sure some "old hands" will jump in to confirm this "pre-history" for 9/11/2001.

Now, combine this with:


en.wikipedia.org...
A wealthy Saudi named Osama bin Laden was a prominent organizer and financier of an all Arab islamist group of foreign volunteers...



www.counterpunch.org...
Read Cockburn and St. Clair's Whiteout: the CIA, Drugs and the Press and discover how the CIA gave a helping hand to the opium lords who took over Afghanistan, thus ushering the Taliban into power and helping to finance Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network.


These are but two examples of a wealth of online and offline information that points to the very distinct possibility that Osama was a trained CIA asset, receiving funding to build the Mudjahadeen in Afghanistan.

Toss into this seemingly disconnected mix the buried aspect of Al-Zargawi's widow's tale: That al-Qaida gave him up in exchange for the CIA's promise to back off the hunt for Osama... which, in fact, has happened.

Add all of this up and we have...

1) The well-connected pre-9/11 conspiracy circles warned something was coming

2) That "something" certainly happened within the timeframe discussed, 9/11/2001

3) A former CIA asset, Osama bin Laden was immediately blamed for the attacks

4) Six years and two wars later, we do not have Osama

The possible conspiracy shapes up to be one of these two:

1) A former asset went rogue, organized the attacks, and his capture is avoided to prevent potentially exposing him to people that may not be secure.
-or-
2) He is still an asset and was directed to launch a large-scale attack that would bring about the "police state" we were warned would be coming (but the scale of the attack was more than expected)... his capture is avoided because he is an active and useful asset.


How's that for a theory that has some credible meat?



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


an excellent post. I am hoping to see this history channel documentary when it is aired as a rerun.

I am definetly with Bill on this one, and in my first thread on this site i go into detail about the nature of 9/11, the official story, and the rise of conspiracy theories surrounding unexplained aspects of the story.

Let me go back to what I had said in my thread and with this I hope to give debunkers and supporters of the official story a bit of perspective.

Okay, lets put aside the event of 9/11 itself and commence some sort of analysis of our governments conduct after the fact. Even a cursory study of actions, executive orders, laws enacted seems to feed the suspicions of CTs and their assertion that 9//1 was a staged event designed to consolidate power.

So, proponents of the official story, what say you to that? What is your defense of the bush administration/DOD/justice department/congresses wholesale disregard to the philosophy of the constitution and decades of laws protecting American freedom?

Is it all temporary sacrifice to extinguish an unspeakably evil enemy? Then why have we accomplished so little in the fight against al qaeda? Why does the 2007 NIE itself place al qaeda at "pre 9/11" strength?

What about rhetoric expressed throughout all branches of our government following 9/11, that if we live in fear and fail to live to the extent of our everyday freedoms, the terrorists will win?

under that logic... they already have won. This country is a mess, and frankly, it seems to me that the only current assault america is facing is one from within our government. Like i stated before, disregard 9/11 altogether and just study the policy shifts we've experienced since 9/12/01.

Our governments actions support the conspiracy theorist's assertions more than anything else.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Well the History Channel won't go against its record.

What is it, an arm of British Intelligence telling us tales from WWII.
If one recearcher can dig up so much we have not been told, why
hasn't any one else stepped up to the plate.

So giving these confused Conspiracy Theorists a chance won't change a thing.

Lyne accused the UFOologst of feeding off dis info, 9/11 may have been
set the same trap.

You have no planes, no explosives, dogs finding vans with trace of
explosives, in side jobbers, official power downs in the WTC, official terror
in the air training from VP Cheney while magic planes are hijacked....,
bad TV interviews, suspect TV coverage and video, bad retrospectives
next will we have bad CTers.


Will the good the bad and the ugly be exposed?


On the no good list: airlines, TV, Pentagon, Cheney, WTC security,
Afgan pipeline negotiators, IRAQ oil for food and drugs swindlers,
WTC upgrade costs... all together now, how could it happen without
the hijackers.

Its got me puzzled.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Wow skeptic overlord is my hero. I may have attacked him in the past but it means a lot for somebody who people respect to come out and point out the inconsistencies about 9/11.

My opinion is that you have to be an idiot to think the government wasn't involved. People who think Al-Qaeda 2.0 did this and muslims hate us for our freedoms are either agents, in denial or successfully brainwashed by the media.

Its an open and shut case the attacks happened under the nwo cost benefit analysis. Bring in police state, usher us into foreign entanglements, insider trading, bring down buildings with low occupancy without having to shut down new york (it would have cost millions to shut down ny if they wanted to demo asbestos ridden towers)

The war on terror would cause enough distraction over the years in the news so that they can form the north American union and eventually an Amero. All the while we debate Muslim hate.

Cost benefit analysis they don't do things for 1 purpose they do things for many reasons. Heroin from Afghanistan also and increased police state in Europe even Zionists liked it too because now Palestinian oppression is fighting terror not blatant occupation.

This is Steven Harper PM of canada's response to protesters at the secret spp meeting in canada.

"I've heard it's nothing. A couple hundred?" he said. "It's sad."

They nwo think we are sad people and i am starting to agree. We need to get angry. Not at Alex Jones what has he done, did he kill 3k people? What is he doing that makes him so envied and hated. 9/11 was a false flag end of story lets get angry people. At the same time keep trying to debunk it just backfires haha!

Truth is generally the best vindication against slander.- Abraham Lincoln.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
3 things caught my attention rather quickly about this show last night:

1. The body language of the "demolition expert" seemed to indicate he wasn't being very truthful. His eyes darting around and looking off to the side while he was making one of his statements just seemed to scream liar.

2. No mention of the many witnesses who claimed to have seen something streaking through the sky and impact Flt 93.

3. No mention of a former Israeli counter terrorist operative being on Flight 11.


I also found it absolutely laughable that they interviewed the pilot of the C-130 that was seen flying over the Pentagon moments after impact. As if he would have come right out and said "Hell yea I fired a missile at that building". Why bother putting him on there?



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 03:49 PM
link   
The "demolition expert" seemed to lie about no explosives or the use
of explosives.

Bad documentation if witnesses can't be named or used, then its vapor tales.

Same for a former Israeli counter terrorist operative being on Flight 11,
who's to say ... some Israeli organization that won't come forward.


The C-130 launching anything to hit at ground level seems impossible.
I'd say the hole was blown out from inside, but I suppose the small
pieces outside might not fit if its all dust.


Yes, I see they helped a lot, not.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 03:56 PM
link   
I was looking around for something about PM being untrusting besides the ATS thread here that DEBUNKED their article in less than a week.

Anyway check this out.. The radio guy on here asks how they got DNA evidence for the hijackers..




posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by PriapismJoe
 


FIRST off let me apologize to many of the CD theorists out there taht i have blasted in the past. ive said several times that its frustrating that ya'll want experts to talk about these topics BUT only if the agree with you. im sorry, yer not the only ones that do it it seems.

becuase it seems that even those in the NO CD crowd will turn on you the first time you show the slightest bit of intellectual integrity.

somehow, by me coming out as someone with demo experience, even expertise, and stating that YES it is POSSIBLE to do a top down demolition of a building and even POSSIBLE (if however unlikely, im pretty sure i used terms like "implausible" didnt i?) for it to be rigged covertly, that is somehow a defacto endorsment of the theories and wipes out the PAGES of posts ive made explaining why, in my own opinion, what we saw was NOT a CD involving high explosives.

correct me if im wrong but i believe i ALSO went on to say that IF, read that again...IF i was going to buy into a cd theory it would be one involving an explosion in the BASEMENT of the building. no wiring of the floors, no thermite/mate, none of that.

again i could be wrong but i think ive gone to great lengths to show how what we saw that day was NOT a top down CD using high explosives, and i think ive provided some pretty accurate forensic analysis as to WHY it wasnt.

now joe, as a new member maybe youve never read any of these posts, ok no problem, but even if that thread you replied to was the first time you had ever seen me post....HOW in the WORLD did you come up with me implying that it was a...

a precision operation
when i had specifically stated

most of you know im most definatly NOT in the CD crowd because ive yet to see any physical evidence that really refutes what i know from first hand experience. however there are some making statements even in this thread to refute a CD i disagree with.


i never once used the term "precision operation" and i dont appreciate having words put in my mouth. i dont appreciate being taken out of context. but most of all dont try to make my honesty seem like ignorance. if you really want to know what i think of a CD scenario, go read this: www.abovetopsecret.com...

because i laid out my case against a CD once in detail and at length and i reallly cant be bothered to post it all again simply becuase you apparently didnt read the entire post you were responding to.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join