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.

 

40 'Smoking Guns' Collectively Proving That 9/11 Was An Inside Job

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iblis

Operational support to our local communities does NOT refer to launching airstrikes against the next town.


I am grossly disappointed and hope that in the future, they rectify this mistake.



In all seriousness, Golden Fleece is one against .. what is it, three? Four?

Including you, it's four or five. But might doesn't make right, especially against former or current government employees who are arguing against all common sense and who won't acknowledge a mysteriously altered DCANG website that was changed shortly after 9/11.

I'm sure these guys would also argue that Flight 93 wasn't shot down, but most of us know that's also a lie. I even know the pilot's name -- Major Rick Gibney.


Originally posted by Iblis

Very childish.

I agree.


Originally posted by Iblis

Thank you guys, however, for continuing this debate. Debate is nothing without dedication to the truth.

No, thank YOU for a post that adds nothing to the discussion or the truth.


[edit on 10-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]




posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:35 AM
link   
You mean the same Lt Col Rick Gibney that flew to Bozeman, Montana to pick up Ed Jacoby (the director of the NY State Emergency Management Office) and then flew him to NY on 9/11? Pretty impressive that he was able to be in two places at one time like that. I know the F-16 is fast, but I didn't realize it was that fast.

[edit on 7/10/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 

Got any proof of that? (besides your impeccable word.)

Oh, and were Langley fighters used to fly civilians around instead of patrolling the skies on 9/11?

[edit on 10-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Dupe post

[edit on 10-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:50 AM
link   

As for the missile, according to an Air National Guard spokesman, Lt. Colonel Rick Gibney flew an F16 that morning from Fargo, North Dakota, to Bozeman, Montana, where he picked up Ed Jacoby Jr., head of New York state's Emergency Management Office; he then took him to Albany, New York. Jacoby told Popular Mechanics that Gibney couldn't possibly have shot down Flight 93 because he was with the fighter pilot at the time the plane went down and they never were anywhere near Shanksville. Additionally, the military did not know about the crash of Flight 93 until four minutes after it occurred.

www.oilempire.us...


Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes--it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."

www.yourdailymedia.com...

He claims that he was there, and the Director claims he was there.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 05:09 AM
link   
No, Gibney "declined to comment."

So the answer is yes (the official answer, anyway), that an F-16 was used to ferry a civilian to Albany instead of guard the skies on 9/11.

Anyone believe that? (besides the newly promoted Lt. Col. Rick Gibney.)

Hey, an "official account" from Popular Mechanics (now THERE'S a reliable source!)

And here's what another part of that website claims: "In reality, it was a coverup of a mountain of evidence that 9/11 was deliberately allowed to happen (and given technical assistance) to create the pretext to seize the Iraqi oil fields as we reach the peak of global petroleum production."

Except it was much more than "allowed to happen."


[edit on 10-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 05:17 PM
link   


Including you, it's four or five. But might doesn't make right, especially against former or current government employees who are arguing against all common sense and who won't acknowledge a mysteriously altered DCANG website that was changed shortly after 9/11.


You're right, an intelligent, supported answer 'makes right', and thus far three or four people with experience, evidence, and sources have proven you wrong on every account, yet all you have is a single website that you've been proven to have misinterpreted.

I'm beginning to think you're a troll for going on this long.


I'm sure these guys would also argue that Flight 93 wasn't shot down, but most of us know that's also a lie. I even know the pilot's name -- Major Rick Gibney.


Poor Rick. I hear he's even threatening to sue the guys who keep slandering his name over this nonsense. Care to provide name and address?
And don't say 'most of us'. No one here believes your theory, and 9/11 conspiracy theorists are the minority in America. Try not to promote yourself so much.



No, thank YOU for a post that adds nothing to the discussion or the truth.


AS opposed to doing what? I don't have evidence, because the argument's been taken care of. I don't have credentials, but other people who've posted have.

I don't need to say anything, because it's all-ready been said, and you have yet to effectively refute anything besides re-running the same arguments with the same website.

Talk about desperate.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Why do people think that flight 93 was shot down?

Is it because they couldnt find a plane in the shanksville crater?

Research fligt 93. Rememner that the shoot down theory was started by pseudo-skeptics in hopes to make it look like 'truthers' have the conspiracies all messed up.

N o plane i n Shanksville is all you need to know. THey lied, people died.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
Why do people think that flight 93 was shot down?

Is it because they couldnt find a plane in the shanksville crater?

Research fligt 93. Rememner that the shoot down theory was started by pseudo-skeptics in hopes to make it look like 'truthers' have the conspiracies all messed up.

N o plane i n Shanksville is all you need to know. THey lied, people died.


yea and all the phone calls from the people on the plane. So where did the plane and those brave people go? .. You dishonor there memory and its disgusting.

The Gov may have messed up, they may not have responded correctly, they may have know of An attack, (not total specifics) but.. Those people died, and they tried to take back their plane.

Do not dishonor that with your BS and totally debunked theories.

Its disgusting



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
Those people died, and they tried to take back their plane.

Do not dishonor that with your BS and totally debunked theories.

Please doon't dishonor their memory by believing the government's obvious lies.



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece


And then there's the professional, 24/7, pseudo-skeptic, grandmaster 9/11 debunker ThroatYogurt (God, I love that screen name!) who saves a lot of time and effort by simply stating:


Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
[Golden,

You posted 40 "smoking guns" that have been hashed over so many times in here. They have all been debunked as well.



The last 3 pages are the reason I posted that. A few folks in here dismantled the theories. Like that all have been in the past.

Thank you for the nice comments. Grandmaster sounds nice.



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 11:51 PM
link   
So in reading this, I grew curious and decided to do some research on my own. Primarily around Sibel Edmonds and Julie Sirrs, they presented the easiest out of those to find the most information about.

Sibel was fired wrongfully, and through all her three year fights about her burn notice the case was dropped and it was never looked at again, after many attempts for the FBI to try and convince the judges to drop it, they eventually did after being presented all of the facts, and then when she asked for a reason, they gave none. Then after that, they refused to review her case again. That was in 2005. ------> the evidence that the judges and jury on the case was presented, was top secret information that still isn't presented to the public, though threw private investigation in 2003 and 2004, proved that Sibel was right on her complaints, following the law suit.



External Source
2001: At some point during the year, Julie Sirrs, a Defense Intelligence Agency agent, travels twice to Afghanistan. She claims DIA officials knew in advance about both trips. Sirrs sees a terrorist training center there, and meets with Northern Alliance leader Ahmad Massoud, who is later assassinated by the Taliban on September 9. On her second trip she returns with what she later claims is a treasure trove of information, including evidence that bin Laden is planning to assassinate Massoud. However, upon returning, a security officer meets her flight and confiscates her material. The DIA and the FBI investigate her. She says no higher-ups want to hear what she had learned in Afghanistan. Ultimately, Sirrs' security clearance is pulled and she resigned. She eventually quits the DIA in frustration. [ABC News, 2/18/02]


This is very interesting.
And I highly believe it was a conspiracy. I would, for one, not put it past the government. It seems that they have been trying to weaken us as a nation for a very long time. And not only did we go to war looking for "Weapons of Mass Destruction," but we are still in way, and these 'Weapons' have never been found.

Hmmm....


Good info



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ConMi27
This is very interesting.

And I highly believe it was a conspiracy. I would, for one, not put it past the government. It seems that they have been trying to weaken us as a nation for a very long time. And not only did we go to war looking for "Weapons of Mass Destruction," but we are still in way, and these 'Weapons' have never been found.

Hmmm....

Good info

Exactly. If the Bush regime lied about WMDs and Flight 93 getting shot down, while other U.S. administrations have lied about nearly everything -- from Pearl Harbor to Gulf of Tonkin to the USS Liberty to TWA 800 to Waco to Oklahoma City to etc., etc., etc., -- is it really such a stretch to imagine that 9/11 could've been an inside job?

I think not.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Golden,

Where is the proof that 911 was an inside job?? You posted 40 "smoking guns" that have been hashed over so many times in here. They have all been debunked as well.



Throat, that is not true, they aren’t all debunked, they tried to YES, but succeeded NO.
Perhaps that is what you want or obvious believe it was.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Spacevisitor,

Perhaps you can provide proof that any of these 40 points have NOT been debunked. I believe page one of this thread does a pretty good job of dismantling them.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
You know this thread and the replies really amazes me, you call the OP a troll for sticking to their guns? sounds like a cop out to me.

Most of the rest of you are too busy comparing the size of your manhood and how much you know about the AF and procedures, than finding anything like the truth.

Fact is there are so many inconsistencies in the official explanations that raise issue with facts, but as i said you are too busy waving your manhoods around rather than trying to find the truth.

Maybe a lot of it can be explained away, but from where im sitting, so much of it does not make any sense whatsoever, one poster claimed that the hole in the pentagon even though it is smaller than a 757 its only by a small amount?? WHAT? ever heard of the trouble people have trying to get a object bigger than a hole into the hole? square peg round hole? ring a bell? you cant have a hole smaller than the object that made it.. IMPOSSIBLE!!

Opinions are opinions and fine everyone is entitled to one.

But i have to ask this.

Does anyone here anyone at all not have a problem with the official explanation? even one detail of it? a tiny detail even? does every single part of the official statement make sense to everyone?

I tell ya and this goes for everyone, anyone who is saying that every single explanation that comes from an official, Government agency, is real, then i call those people delusional, and im not even into the 9/11 conspiracy.

I can honestly put my hand on my heart and say, as a person who has sifted through thread after thread, official reports, eye witness testimony, and any other kind of information about 9/11, i can see as plain as the nose on my face, that something is seriously wrong with the whole official explanation, something does not add up, you can see the lies just by comparing reports, testimonies, and explanations.

Ask yourself even if there is just one lie, why? why has someone lied?

Its not really about a F16, with an anti matter turbo charged water engine which gets ya rocks off because you have sniffed the after burner, its not about i was on those bases at the time changing the change in the slot machines in the engineers bar, or i know everything about the Air force because i can read and write and everything, because i can tell you not even the AF knows everything about the AF, which is shown every day on ATS,

Its about the victims, and that includes every single person here.

While there is one single unanswered question about 9/11, the fight for the truth has to go on, and any self respecting American patriot would agree, you have to have the answers to stop it ever happening again, anywhere.

I apologize if any of the posters are females and i have accused you of waving your manhood, im sure your waving something.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by azzllin
 

Excellent post, azzllin. Thank you. You are absolutely correct, none of the official explanation makes sense.


Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Spacevisitor,

Perhaps you can provide proof that any of these 40 points have NOT been debunked. I believe page one of this thread does a pretty good job of dismantling them.

Can anyone believe this ThroatYogurt dewd? Now he's asking for proof that everything HASN'T been debunked!!! Unbelievable.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Golden...

What I meant was.... your points raised in you OP have been annihilated by Swampfox here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You were shown by several others in here where you made your mistakes. Is swampfox wrong in his thorough debunking of your OP?

If so, please show where.

Thank you



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   
ThroatJizz, reasonable people like this poster above can see through your games:


Originally posted by azzllin
You know this thread and the replies really amazes me, you call the OP a troll for sticking to their guns? sounds like a cop out to me.

Most of the rest of you are too busy comparing the size of your manhood and how much you know about the AF and procedures, than finding anything like the truth.

Fact is there are so many inconsistencies in the official explanations that raise issue with facts, but as i said you are too busy waving your manhoods around rather than trying to find the truth.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
ThroatJizz, reasonable people like this poster above can see through your games:


Originally posted by azzllin
You call the OP a troll for sticking to their guns?

Most of the rest of you are too busy comparing the size of your manhood

waving your manhoods around rather than trying to find the truth.



Nice dodge Golden Shower:

Did I call you a troll?

Have I posted anything about my manhood?

I haven't waved anything.

Now, sticking to the facts. Please show what swamp fox got wrong.

Thank you,

:TY:

NWO V.P.
Northeast Chapter


[edit on 13-7-2008 by ThroatYogurt]



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join