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.

 

If 9/11 was a inside job, How many people were involved?

page: 11
34
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by coughymachine
 


Are YOU SEAN HANNITY OR WHAT?

It would be really simple to clarify the question on the Pentagon/Flight 77/911.

Where's the complete video-tape from the Hotel across the street? DUH?

Air it ! In it's entirety.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by mcguyvermanolo
Where's the complete video-tape from the Hotel across the street? DUH?

Air it ! In it's entirety.


Why did the FBI take the 2 cameras from the gas station? (along with the videos)

[edit on 20-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mcguyvermanolo
 



It would be really simple to clarify the question on the Pentagon/Flight 77/911.

Where's the complete video-tape from the Hotel across the street? DUH?


What you've suggested might well work for Flight 77. But wtf has that got to do with establishing whether there was a pod on Flight 11?



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine
reply to post by seanm
 



You just revealed yourself as not serious. Too bad.

In the absence of photographic evidence investigators know what to do. So do I.

What would you do?


Is this meant to embarass me into silence?


Not at all. I find your statement incredible.


I don't know what I'd do. Now you tell me.

In the absence of any photographic evidence, please show how it's possible to prove that Flight 11 - or, perhaps more accurately, the plane that hit WTC2 - did not have a pod.


I am trying to get you to think how you would go about finding out in the absence of photographic evidence. Think it through. Pretend your boss has given you that assignment.



[edit on 20-10-2007 by seanm]



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by seanm
 


I'm too lazy to play your games. Either explain how, in the absence of photographic material, you can prove that the plane that struck WTC2 did not have a pod or I'll just assume you cannot.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
2 conspiracies i often cite are
a. pearl harbor
b. the manhattan project

both went off without a hitch, and the manhattan project literally involved 10's of thousands of people. The most of the poeple involved did't even know what they were doing with b. They just took the job and did their part.


Area 51 is also a good one. How long have the facility been around? How many hundreds of thounsands of people must've worked and been thee? I haven't seen too many people talk.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine
reply to post by seanm
 


I'm too lazy to play your games. Either explain how, in the absence of photographic material, you can prove that the plane that struck WTC2 did not have a pod or I'll just assume you cannot.


You're too lazy to think. Why is that?



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by NegativeBeef

Area 51 is also a good one. How long have the facility been around? How many hundreds of thounsands of people must've worked and been thee? I haven't seen too many people talk.


Do not forget NSA, over the years little has been leaked out.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by seanm
 


If you had any way of showing how to prove whether or not the plane that hit WTC2 had pods, you'd have given it by now.

You're a fraud.

Force me to retract that.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine
reply to post by seanm
 


If you had any way of showing how to prove whether or not the plane that hit WTC2 had pods, you'd have given it by now.


I have many ways to demonstrate it. Like with AA77, we need no videos nor photos.

What you are demonstrating is the number one problem of your 9/11 Denial Movement: the refusal to think. So far, you are illustrating that problem rather blatantly.

I'm giving you the opportunity to think for yourself and demonstrate that you actually can tell us how you would go about attacking the problem in the absence of photos. That you are lazy is not an excuse.

Will you continue to refuse to, coughymachine?



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by seanm
 


I have accused you of being a fraud - twice now. You have had the opportunity to humble me and force a retraction by simply substantiating a claim you made. Instead, you hop from foot to foot, trying to pretend you have an answer, when in fact, it appears you have no clue. Are you going to continue to duck and dive? Is this how septics behave when challenged to back-up their claims?

Show me how to prove, without photographic evidence, that the plane that hit WTC2 did not have a pod.

If you do, I will publicly apologise for insulting you.



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Why did the FBI take the 2 cameras from the gas station? (along with the videos)

[edit on 20-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]

This is basic police work, you take the videos to collect evidence.


Originally posted by NegativeBeef


Area 51 is also a good one. How long have the facility been around? How many hundreds of thounsands of people must've worked and been thee? I haven't seen too many people talk.


Nothing illegal happened at Area 51, if you believe in aliens or whatever the crap, I guess. Unfortunately I don't believe any aliens were ever at Area 51. Area 51 is just a test site for secret government airplanes.

[edit on 20-10-2007 by ccaihc]



posted on Oct, 20 2007 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ccaihc
This is basic police work, you take the videos to collect evidence.

Nothing illegal happened at Area 51, if you believe in aliens or whatever the crap, I guess. Unfortunately I don't believe any aliens were ever at Area 51. Area 51 is just a test site for secret government airplanes.

[edit on 20-10-2007 by ccaihc]


You might want to try to read the post a litlte more before posting.

Yes i understand police work, i am a former federal police officer. But the question was why did the FBI remove 2 of the cameras?

Its not the point that anything illegal happened at area 51, the point is thousands of poeple that work there keep quiet about whats going on there. Which is to disprove the idea that people that think thousands of people could not keep a secret.



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by ccaihc
This is basic police work, you take the videos to collect evidence.

Nothing illegal happened at Area 51, if you believe in aliens or whatever the crap, I guess. Unfortunately I don't believe any aliens were ever at Area 51. Area 51 is just a test site for secret government airplanes.

[edit on 20-10-2007 by ccaihc]


You might want to try to read the post a litlte more before posting.

Yes i understand police work, i am a former federal police officer. But the question was why did the FBI remove 2 of the cameras?

Its not the point that anything illegal happened at area 51, the point is thousands of poeple that work there keep quiet about whats going on there. Which is to disprove the idea that people that think thousands of people could not keep a secret.


...but they didn't keep quiet, and the reason that a lot more people have kept quiet is because there is nothing illegal going on there so why would they tell anyone?

They removed the 2 cameras to look at the evidence. What are you asking me? Why they didn't return it?



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ccaihc
...but they didn't keep quiet, and the reason that a lot more people have kept quiet is because there is nothing illegal going on there so why would they tell anyone?

They removed the 2 cameras to look at the evidence. What are you asking me? Why they didn't return it?


1. The thousands of poeple that work at area 51 have kept the secret of what goes on there for years. The only sort of illegal thing going on there is the fact that because they are exempt from EPA regulations poeple are getting sick and dieing.

2. Why would you need to remove 2 cameras from the roof of the gas station if you already have the videos from the cameras? Are the cameras looking at somthing they should not be looking at?



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 03:19 AM
link   
1. How do you know that people are getting sick and dieing? You just answered your own question.

2. I don't know? I don't know how the FBI works, why does it matter if they took the cameras down after the fact, it's not like more planes flew into the pentagon after they took them down.



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ccaihc
1. How do you know that people are getting sick and dieing? You just answered your own question.

2. I don't know? I don't know how the FBI works, why does it matter if they took the cameras down after the fact, it's not like more planes flew into the pentagon after they took them down.


1. Because their were law suits filed before they were exempted from the EPA regs.

2. Why take the cameras unless they did not want them to be pointed were they were pointed?

Why have the FBI not released any photos or videos from the Pentagon or the nearby builidngs? They were not used in trial, so unless they have a national secrurity reason they should be released.

[edit on 21-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine
reply to post by seanm
 


I have accused you of being a fraud - twice now. You have had the opportunity to humble me and force a retraction by simply substantiating a claim you made. Instead, you hop from foot to foot, trying to pretend you have an answer, when in fact, it appears you have no clue. Are you going to continue to duck and dive? Is this how septics behave when challenged to back-up their claims?

Show me how to prove, without photographic evidence, that the plane that hit WTC2 did not have a pod.

If you do, I will publicly apologise for insulting you.


In actual fact, you are not insulting me. You're discrediting yourself. What you are demonstrating to all of us is that you do not possess the capability to understand the most fundamental elements that go into an investigation. And that you are "too lazy" to start.

Amazing.



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by seanm
 

Its sad to say but he's right. you dont post evidence 9 times out of 10, you simply make references to it.



posted on Oct, 21 2007 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by mcguyvermanolo
 

i had heard about all of the videotapes many times until i actually researched it. i cant say if any of those tapes are actually good enough to show the impact. However, when i found this site i saw that the government does have camcorder footage of what happened but will not release it, not to mention still photographs.




top topics



 
34
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join