9/11 What evidence would make you believe in a conspiracy?

page: 109
9
<< 106  107  108    110  111  112 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123Sorry for the confusion.


Oh, there is no confusion.

I can post facts and evidence to support what i post and you cannot post facts and evidence to support your claims or the official story.




posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123Sorry for the confusion.


Oh, there is no confusion.

I can post facts and evidence to support what i post and you cannot post facts and evidence to support your claims or the official story.


Maybe you can... I don't know as you have not done so as of yet.
You have made claims which myself and others have debunked. Can you prove us wrong? Obviously not or you wouldn't keep changing the subject each time you get caught.

Why don't you try posting factual information that debunks what myself and others have posted ??? I'll wait patiently for you to prove your claim that you can actual post factual information. I hope you can as it would make things more interesting.
1...2...3...GO !



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


I'm still hanging out for evidence no matter which way it points. Keeps me here at ATS because this is likely to be the place to find it.

So far there's nothing definitive, just questions with ambiguous answers (if any).



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Maybe you can... I don't know as you have not done so as of yet.
You have made claims which myself and others have debunked.


Why must you lie?

I have posted lots of factual information and have been the only person on here to post sources to photos.

Plese show me which claims have been debunked because i do not remember seeing any factual information debunking what i have posted.


[edit on 23-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Maybe you can... I don't know as you have not done so as of yet.
You have made claims which myself and others have debunked.


Why must you lie?

I have posted lots of factual information and have been the only person on here to post sources to photos.

Plese show me which claims have been debunked because i do not remember seeing any factual information debunking what i have posted.


[edit on 23-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]


I'll make this simple for you. Prove I'm lying. If you can't then claiming that I am lying is nothing more then a personal attack.

Let's get this thread back on track. Show me your "evidence" .



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
I'll make this simple for you. Prove I'm lying. If you can't then claiming that I am lying is nothing more then a personal attack.

Let's get this thread back on track. Show me your "evidence" .
\

I have posted tons of factual evdience, which ones would you like me to repost to keep proving you wrong?

By the way i am still waiting for anyone to post any factual evidence to support the official story.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well i do not have evidence (yet) of the governemnt being directly involved but i have aleady posted evidnece that they had lots of warnings and could have stopped it.

Also the government should release videos, photos, reports and evidence so it does not appear that they are covering up.


That's from the 1st page of this thread.

Have you found the elusive evidence of direct involvement after all this time?

You're posting as if you have but you haven't presented it as yet. I agree that there appears to be a coverup of incompetent/inadequate response in an emergency but all emergencies go like that when 20/20 hindsight is applied. It could be as simple as they underestimated how much damage a handful of suicidal maniacs could do, all the while planning to use it (without knowing exactly what action was planned or what targets were involved) as an excuse for extreme retaliation. Of course that's just conjecture like the other theories.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum I agree that there appears to be a coverup of incompetent/inadequate response in an emergency but all emergencies go like that when 20/20 hindsight is applied.


If any agancy involved was incompetent how come no one has been punished?

In fact the people at NORAD involved were given promotions and awards.(FOR FAILING TO STOP 4 PLANES)



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Pilgrum I agree that there appears to be a coverup of incompetent/inadequate response in an emergency but all emergencies go like that when 20/20 hindsight is applied.


If any agancy involved was incompetent how come no one has been punished?

In fact the people at NORAD involved were given promotions and awards.(FOR FAILING TO STOP 4 PLANES)


Since the government hasn't told us why, we must speculate. I believe a reasonable speculation would be the usual reason why incompetence in government is rewarded. The old boys club mentality. You wash my back, I'll wash yours.... etc....

The same reason why Bush said Brown was doing a good job with FEMA after the New Orleans disaster even though he was about as incompetent as a person could be and still breath on their own.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
If any agancy involved was incompetent how come no one has been punished?

In fact the people at NORAD involved were given promotions and awards.(FOR FAILING TO STOP 4 PLANES)


Well there's considerable conjecture that they perhaps were instrumental in stopping one of the planes (the last one at Shanksville). Would they have been rewarded for that success while the details were (and still are) considered unacceptable to the public at large if they were, in fact, successful in stopping one plane with an unknown intended target saving far more lives than were lost on that plane?

I know which story the families of the victims on UA93 would prefer to hear.

[edit on 24/6/2008 by Pilgrum]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Well there's considerable conjecture that they perhaps were instrumental in stopping one of the planes (the last one at Shanksville).


Well according to the OFFICIAL STORY, NORAD failed to stop all 4 planes.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Well there's considerable conjecture that they perhaps were instrumental in stopping one of the planes (the last one at Shanksville).


Well according to the OFFICIAL STORY, NORAD failed to stop all 4 planes.



So what's the point? From my understanding, based on the info they had at the time, they did the best they could with an unimaginable situation.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
So what's the point? From my understanding, based on the info they had at the time, they did the best they could with an unimaginable situation.



The point is they failed to do thier job. How many times has NORAD failed to do its job?

If they were incompetent why was no one punished?

Why were they given promotions and awards for failing to do thier job?



[edit on 25-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
So what's the point? From my understanding, based on the info they had at the time, they did the best they could with an unimaginable situation.



The point is they failed to do thier job. How many times has NORAD failed to do its job?

If they were incompetent why was no one punished?

Why were they given promotions and awards for failing to do thier job?



[edit on 25-6-2008 by ULTIMA1]


Like I said before

Since the government hasn't told us why, we must speculate. I believe a reasonable speculation would be the usual reason why incompetence in government is rewarded. The old boys club mentality. You wash my back, I'll wash yours.... etc....

The same reason why Bush said Brown was doing a good job with FEMA after the New Orleans disaster even though he was about as incompetent as a person could be and still breath on their own.

It's not like incompetence in government hasn't been rewarded before. It happens all the time.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Since the government hasn't told us why, we must speculate.


Which brings up the question, why wont the government release more infomration on what happened so that there would be no speculation?



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
It would help me immeasurably if the 9/11 Truther community could agree on their story.

I've noticed the 9/11 Truth Movement can't seem to agree on anything. Every Truther seems to have his/her own version of the theory. This is very troublesome to me, because if there were really any solid evidence that 9/11 is an inside job, it seems like the theorists could agree on what that evidence was.

But they don't agree with one another at all. For example, Truthers love to make long lists of "9/11 smoking guns," or 9/11 coincidences, or 9/11 anomalies--or whatever.

There are lists like these all over the web. Unfortunately, no two of them are the same.

Do you see the problem? The Truthers agree that the "official story" is nonsense--and most of them claim there is plenty of evidence for this.

Yet they can't agree with one another on the slightest detail of what actually happened.

It seems highly unlikely to me that there could be a ton of evidence that the official story is bunk--and yet not enough evidence for the Truthers to agree on anything.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by BarryLogan
I've noticed the 9/11 Truth Movement can't seem to agree on anything. Every Truther seems to have his/her own version of the theory. This is very troublesome to me, because if there were really any solid evidence that 9/11 is an inside job, it seems like the theorists could agree on what that evidence was.


Well the biggest problem is that fact that the government agencies involved (FAA, FBI, NTSB) are not releasing much information.

There is tons of evidence though that does prove reasonable doubt about the official story.

Although there is not enough evidence yet of an inside job there is plenty of evindece of prior warnings of the attacks.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by BarryLogan
I've noticed the 9/11 Truth Movement can't seem to agree on anything. Every Truther seems to have his/her own version of the theory. This is very troublesome to me, because if there were really any solid evidence that 9/11 is an inside job, it seems like the theorists could agree on what that evidence was.


Well the biggest problem is that fact that the government agencies involved (FAA, FBI, NTSB) are not releasing much information.

There is tons of evidence though that does prove reasonable doubt about the official story.

Although there is not enough evidence yet of an inside job there is plenty of evindece of prior warnings of the attacks.


Although I agree that I would like to see ALL available evidence related to the 9/11 attacks, how often do agencies release information to the public with regards to their investigations? So I'm wondering if we're making too much out of the lack of available information to the general public.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Although I agree that I would like to see ALL available evidence related to the 9/11 attacks,


Well we do not need to see all the information just the information that can and should be released. Like the serial numbers for the 9/11 planes to match the parts found to the planes.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Although I agree that I would like to see ALL available evidence related to the 9/11 attacks,


Well we do not need to see all the information just the information that can and should be released. Like the serial numbers for the 9/11 planes to match the parts found to the planes.



Who decides which information we should see then? Info. you may want to see might be different then someone else. Do you expect the government to set up a "take a number" system to hand out information upon request?

And if they only hand out some of the info, we'll be right back to where we started with accusations of them hiding information.

Even if they release all the information, people will still claim they're not releasing all the information or that the info. has been manufactured so they can't win no matter what they do.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 106  107  108    110  111  112 >>

log in

join