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.

 

To all Believers of the Official Story:

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Two reasons why I am posting:
1 to get my quota up so I can PM a couple of people (I need 20 posts).
2 to ask a question to the BELIEVERS of the OFFICIAL story.

My question to them is: Do you believe EVERYTHING on the 9/11 story and how it has been explained by the US government ? If not, I would like to know what you think may be on your mind that even for a spilt second does not add up to you.

Thanks,

watchZEITGEISTnow

*Caps lock title edit*

[edit on 2-1-2008 by dbates]




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:44 PM
link   
This ONE document from a GOVT> website..it has made me question WHY we were so intent on putting our hand picked man in Afghanistan..was it for this??? The Taliban changed their minds about us and our pipelines..so we needed an excuse....9/11 was the excuse..Read it and weep.....Check the date..BEFORE 9/11...plenty of time to plan it.

commdocs.house.gov...



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Thanks gingerly, appreciate your info, but this is for the BELIEVERS of the OFFICIAL verdict, not those that already smell the BS.


I want to see if those that believe actually harbour any doubts on the official line and if so what they are.

Cheers

watchZEITGEISTnow



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 01:51 AM
link   
I ask the conspiracy guys to give me chance here and read the post in its ENTIRETY, before coming all out at me. READ, ANALYZE AND TELL ME WERE IM WRONG. May be you convince me as you convice yourself.

What is so complicated about a group of 19,20 well finance people to get access to the US, some of then go to fly school, then get together be able to sneak by boxcutters, hijack 4 planes, and crash them to buildings?

Im going to try to analize those one by one to the best of my abilities:

1. Get 19 to 20 fanatical radical muslims willling to die for their cause?, not problematic at all.

2. Get access to the US at that time?, well we basically put the red carpet out everytime a Saudi visit this country, so no that problematic either IMO.

3. Well finance?, they were Saudis, of course no money problems there.

4. Go to fly school?, we have people from the ME going to Harvard and Princeton, why not a couple of flying school.

5. Box cutters?, to this day TSA is exposed not able to spot weapons and explosives, so back in 01 sneak boxcutter wouldnt be a problem.

6. Hijack 4 planes?, a terrorist practice that had been done for quite a while, so nothing new besides that the 4 were done the same day, which showed a good amount of coordination.

7. Crash them to building?, I had a chance of flying in a simulator once, flying can be a daunting task for someone that has no training, like plotting your course and stuff like that, the hardest part for me in the simulator was landing something this guys didnt need it to worry about.

Im not going to get into the CD arguement because to be honest Im not to technical savy, with all the physics and other lingo.

Another point, people saw planes, people heard planes, people saw planes crash into buildings.

Now let me stop here and make a comment, if you have read my post til this point, I gave you a specific set of conclusions that I can assume are true to the best of my knowledge and I consider myself an above average educated person. When the offical story comes out it makes sense to me and I go mad and want revenge from the radical muslims, the heck with Bin Laden and lets bomb the crap out of them. Not too hard of a story to make people believe IMO, if its not true.

Now this to the conspiracy folks out there:

-For every conspiracy put out there, either CD, or no planes, hollograms whatever there is someone else debunking those.

-The conspiracy supporters cant even agree on which one was it.

And am I supposed to believe a story that make sense, or something that doesnt (holllogram,no planes, control demolition)? The reality is that for all the conspiracies that are out there the one that makes the most sense is the one called "THE OFFICIAL STORY".

Maybe thats why so many of us get caught up in it.

My .02


[edit on 2-1-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Bunch]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Bunch
 


This is the first hurdle in your hypothesis must resolve with proof, not hearsay from US bureaucrats and their beloved "official"report.

How do people, not trained or solo practiced, for many,many hours just to be co-pilots, going to fly real commercial jetliners, and suddenly be touted by the US bureaucrats to be "expert commercial jetliner pilots"?



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by Bunch
 


This is the first hurdle in your hypothesis must resolve with proof, not hearsay from US bureaucrats and their beloved "official"report.

How do people, not trained or solo practiced, for many,many hours just to be co-pilots, going to fly real commercial jetliners, and suddenly be touted by the US bureaucrats to be "expert commercial jetliner pilots"?


Again follow me here, we are discussing why some people choose to believe the real story rather than some of the conspiracies, now for all the conspiracies that I have heard, I have not see anyone producing the "smoking gun" proof that would kill the official story.

I have seen or heard of a thing here and there which amounts to a lot of circumstancial and suspicious actions that might very well raise some questions or concerns about what happen that day, but no solid proof that would make me go: "OMG it was definately [insert your conspiracy here]"

Like I said to me the thing about the oficial story is that makes SENSE, many of the conspiracies dont. Which is ironic because usually conspiracies tend to make more sense than other official stories, like in JFK for example.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Bunch]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by Bunch
 
How do people, not trained or solo practiced, for many,many hours just to be co-pilots, going to fly real commercial jetliners, and suddenly be touted by the US bureaucrats to be "expert commercial jetliner pilots"?


Turns out that some of the hijackers had training in a B767-sim in Saudi Arabia.

A couple of them even had ATPL.

It doesn't take a expert pilot to program a route into the FMC and follow it, or even pratice simple VOR or NDB navigation.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Freaky_Animal
 


If they were allegedly training in Saudi Arabia, why were they alleged to be training in the US on single engine planes and flight simulators only? It has been reported they could not handle single engine planes or pass the written test on those.

Doesn't Saudia Arabia buy their commercial jetliners from Boeing?



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:15 AM
link   
I the government has nothing to hide..then why hide the camera footage of the pentagon being attacked?



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:01 AM
link   


I the government has nothing to hide..then why hide the camera footage of the pentagon being attacked?


Thats because the Pentagon has its own security force which patrols the
area on foot/vehicle instead of stringing TV cameras to have someone
sit and watch.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Do you believe EVERYTHING on the 9/11 story and how it has been explained by the US government?


100% yes. it doesnt make me a idiot, nor does it make me a shill. it just means that i believe it, like truthers believe their conspiracy.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I am pretty sure there are cameras all over the pentagon and surrounding areas that would have captured the plane hitting....they are hiding something.

www.infowars.net...



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by Freaky_Animal
 


If they were allegedly training in Saudi Arabia, why were they alleged to be training in the US on single engine planes and flight simulators only? It has been reported they could not handle single engine planes or pass the written test on those.

Doesn't Saudia Arabia buy their commercial jetliners from Boeing?


They trained in US and some in Germany to fly.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to
 


If they were allegedly training in Saudi Arabia, why were they alleged to be training in the US on single engine planes and flight simulators only? It has been reported they could not handle single engine planes or pass the written test on those.

Doesn't Saudia Arabia buy their commercial jetliners from Boeing?


Please back up your post with a source. Thank you.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by CaptainObvious]



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
I believe that two aircraft traveling over 500 MPH with large loads of fuel hit the towers and the impact and heat weakened those floors enough to cause those floors to collapse and then the towers.

I believe those who were reported to cause the highjacking actually did it, but as to their motives and all who were involved I am open to further proof.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Hmmm

Perhaps another angle:

Why if you believe the official story, would you bother to come onto a conspiracy site to begin with?

I believe it is your subconciousnesses that have bought you here. A minghty powerful tool it is.

watchZEITGEISTnow



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:00 PM
link   
With all the conspiracies out there it has now gotten to the point that many are contradicting others.

A more plausible and probable theory that would go in line more with what truthers and non truthers both believe is that the US Govt probably knew about the events that were unfolding, yet let it happen to fulfill their agenda. Though they may not necessarily have been directly responsible for the orchestration and planning of 9-11, they may have known enough to have been able to get a play by play of events and just sat back and let it happen.

Now, does this make them directly responsible? I would say no, but still guilty to some degree.

But with all the current conflicts in the world today involving the "Religion of Peace", to say that the CIA is involved and pushing all the buttons in all these issues is intellectually irresponsible.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


Good question, because is human nature I guess, to be specific what brings me here, is the hope of finding that pice of the puzzle that would expose the cover up.

For example I believe that there is a lot of evidence, circumstancial for the most part, pointing to the fact that our goverment has UFO's. The past actions of our government suggest that they conspire for things. And I come here to see the argument pro and cons and to for my opinion.

In regards to 911, could have been a conspiracy? Of course
-A Al Qaeda conspiracy
-A Israeli Conspiracy
-A US Government Conpiracy
-A NWO Conspiracy
-A GW Conspiracy
-A combination of more than one conspiracy
-And whatever esle conspiracy you might want to throw out there.

Right now the conspiracy that has the lead IMO is the Al Qaeda Conspiracy, that dont mean that it could not change. Thats why im here to keep myself informed.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   
The govt. never lies to us. Expect soon a new Mount Rushmore type monument with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice.



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by WZN
Why if you believe the official story, would you bother to come onto a conspiracy site to begin with?


Simple, I feel there IS a conspiracy! Not from the government though.

I feel that the propaganda machines are purposly cranking out misinformation in attempt to villanize the USA, to re-write history, and to play on the naivity of America's youth...oh and to make some cash.

My interests are into the origins of these YouTube myths. And all I can ask is why do the original conspiracy theorists get a free pass on scrutiny? Why do some people believe the spin that Alex Jones, or Dylan Avery are selling-- and take that as gospel fact...when that brand of spun "truth" couldn't be more inaccurate.

When I began this journey I implemented critical thinking techniques I had learned in college, and investigation techniques I had learned in the field..

For the first 4 months of doing "research" I would, as an example, read one PRO conspiracy website, then read one CON conspiracy website-- Watch one PRO conspiracy film like Loosechange, zeitgeist, 9/11 mysteries, freedom to facsism.e.t al.-- then I would watch or read a rebuttal in turn.

This lead to reading the NIST report (which I haven't finished) Papers by Bazant and Zou, Frank Greening, The 9/11 commission report, analyzing the Moussaoui Trial information. Reading countless accounts of Firefighters and people in the demolition field and much more.. I "truly" wanted to find the truth (or as close to the truth as could be expected)

The perponderance of evidence is overwhelming-- in favor of the most accepted account of what transpired on 9/11/2001.

After investing all of this time 'researching' on a deeper level than watching a youtube shockdoc--I began to take it personal when a truther claim, presented as fact, was slam-dunked shown to be false. An example would be-- "The hole at the Pentagon was too small for a Boeing 757" -- erm, not true... I began to ask myself...how many more of these "facts" are not true.. "Hijackers still alive! claim" Erm...NOT TRUE! "flt93 landed in Cleveland! claim" Erm..NOT TRUE!" "ZOMG PODZ!!" This goes On_and_On.

Another thing I began to notice is circular referencing --that is: Say, loosechange citing articles written in The American Free Press, same article linked to Rense.com then manufatured into a story on Prison planet... when you see this, red-flags HAVE to be going up all over the place... it shows a consorted effort to mislead ( that is, if you feel the sources are disreputable-- which I do)

Another is the use of non-contempraneous information, and countless instances of cherry-picking quotes and articles which manipulate the original context. These are the tools of the BIASED, and AGENDA DRIVEN. Not even-keeled truthseekers- "just askin Questions"

Sure there are still people out there that believe this stuff...For me it is a been there, seen that haggard old claim, it is B.S.

Sometime last year Alex Jones and the writers of Prisonplanet and Infowars were announcing a strategy, a mandate if you will to "truth spreaders":"Don't waste your time with someone who has advanced opinions of 9/11 that disagree with you... Just move on to someone who is ignorant about 9/11 conspiracy theories"

You can spin this into "open mind" (ignorant) or "closed mind" (done the research and doesn't buy the lies)

But that mandate is quite telling IMO. Sounds like what the movement wants IS Sheeple!! Moldable sheeple. Moldable sheeple that buy DVD's!.. Moldable people that buy DVD's for Truth! Heh,it is sad.

There is a reason the 9/11 truth movement is shrinking exponentally...It is beacuse when people actually "do the research" (ya know the "hookline" for totally ignorant newbs that might not have the skills to get through the propoganda maze ) when semi-smart people actually do the reasearch they start seeing that this whole fantasy is just that.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Taxi-Driver]




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join