Dealing with 9/11 Madness (argumentum ad hominem veritas), page 7
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9    10  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 100 times


reply posted on 18-11-2008 @ 12:17 PM by matrix911
Originally posted by martrax40

has any one seen this

Another UN official goes public on 9/11 doubts

uk.youtube.com...


I tried very hard to watch the entire 9 minutes, but couldn't handle it after the first 2. sorry. Can you elaborate on why its so important or at least the jist or overall point of the interview?


oh, and btw,,, Nice handle MARTRAX40

Rofl


begs the perverbial question which came first, the chicken or the egg
lol


reply posted on 22-11-2008 @ 01:13 AM by vBreezo
Being new to this site and noticing that the last posting to this forum was in Dec 07; I am probably following a dead thread. However, I would like to mention that many very well researched and documented books have been written about 9-11; all presenting good evidence that the "official" version is loaded with inaccuracies, distortions and apparent lies. I have seen nothing containing any valid supporting evidence of the government version.

It is not practical to read all the material published; many contain duplications of information and others are purely speculative. If you can read only one book, I recommend "Crossing the Rubicon" by Michael Ruppert who is now in exile or hiding somewhere in So. America.

What 9-11 has shown us, again, is that the methods of manipulating public thinking as practiced by the Nazis in Germany 80 years ago, still work.
"Make the lie big, repeat if often and people will believe it". The American public has accepted the lie and does not want to be exposed as gullible fools. The 5 to 10% of us who refuse to accept the lies are easily marginalized and pushed to the outer fringes of society.

The focus of the 9-11 sympathy campaign is on the Twin Towers; the lack of evidence at the Pentagon, the collapse of WTC building 7 and the fact that the PA crash site (2 sites - 8 miles apart) indicate that the aircraft was shot down are all ignored by the media and the public in general. If the story doesn't fit the myth, don't talk about it.

Those who accept the official version of the 9-11 story probably also believe that JFK was shot by a lone gunman.


reply posted on 27-2-2009 @ 06:01 AM by 911thology
Hello to everybody. I am new to this Forum, but it appears to me that I have found a right place to address this issue.

Please, everyone HELP !!!!

There is an article on Wikipedia that describes in exact detail a demolition procedure in regard to both - the WTC Twin Towers and the WTC-7. Here is a direct link to the main article:

en.wikipedia.org...

This is the first article that simply explains the truth without involving any speculations whatsoever.

This article is going to be removed by Wikipedia watchdogs any time soon and has been already scheduled for deletion. But, because Wikipedia tries to pose itself as "free" from any "political correctness", it removes articles by a certain seemingly "democratic" voting procedure (though the invited "voters" themselves are all politically correct). Here is a discussion page in regard to its removal here when everyone can leave his opinion - "keep" or "delete":

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nuclear_demolition

(cyberlink can not be created here for the above link, but you can simply copy this entire link "as is" to your brouwser and it will bring you to the page; this deletion discussion page is also acceible from within the main article mentioned above)

Everyone is welcome to visit this page and say word "keep" followed by some short opinion to prevent this valuable Wikipedia article from deletion. Only a few people who will vote "Yes" might save that article.

Your help and help of some of your few friends you might involve might really do a good job.

Thanks a lot.



reply posted on 15-5-2009 @ 03:49 PM by billybob
reply to post by SkepticOverlord


how does it assail their character to state a fact that they are a member of a certain group?
like, if i say someone who witnesses low level flashes, also goes to my church, is that a blemish on them? if these groups that people belong to make them seem guilty just because they belong, then maybe they are! it seems rather like the bad kind of censorship to not allow us to point out that say, three witnesses were all in the biker gang, and they all told the exact same story but that story is contradicted by all the other witnesses who weren't in the biker club.
i think it's going too far.
it's good, and essential even, to keep the ad hominem argument out of the 911 forum, but there is a difference between an insult and a statement of simple fact.

he was a cop.
he was in the military.
he's a taxi driver.

like, loydd's a taxi driver. he is therefore in the 'club' of taxi drivers.

i think the number of USA today employees is off the scale in regard to pentagon witnesses. USA today is a propaganda outlet. they 'advertise' their 'truth'. if craig ranke had not found those associations, the witnesses would seem 'independent'.

now, relevant information will be squelched because some people are being rude.

i never liked it when ONE KID would act up and then the teacher would make the whole class do detention. it is injustice at it's 'finest'.

911 is the biggest thing since JFK, and it is the single most blatant example of how the media/government/banker cabal controls the 'truth' that the CHATTLE believe.

if we want to stop being 'chattle', we need to buck the increasingly heavy yoke of the controllers. if these uber-rich 'humans' that have us ALL under their thumb are allowed to stop us from even discussing their most heinous crimes, then they have already won, and we may as well just prepare ourselves to LOVE bootlicking and having much, much less than the 2% of the population that OWNS us all.

the 911 forum is the key reason i'm here, now. it started with sacred gematria, but i see that's too far fetched for most, so now, the single most important topic to me is the release of the truth of the MEDIA/GOVERNMENT/BANKER cover-up of 911.

if ATS closes that forum, ATS is no longer "denying ignorance', and is in fact encouraging it.

[edit on 15-5-2009 by billybob]
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9    10  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 7 days ago with 6 member flags