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.

 

Truther throws in the towel, admits it's all B.S.

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Someone should start a thread about the hundreds, maybe thousands of people every day who are waking up to the fact that 9/11 was an inside job.




posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I am still waiting (after almost 7 years) for any official investigation reports and actual physical evidence that supports the official media story.

The biggest evidence against the official story is the lack of evidence that supports it.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


I agree. You should. What's stopping you?



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

Thanks for your reply Ultima.

Do you have anything to add concerning this thread and the subject it's about?

You may have been thrown off by the verbiage but, this isn't about 9-11 and every facet thereof. This is about one truther waking up to the scams, lies and deceit propagated by the leaders of the "truth movement" and what he has to say about it.

I know you like to say "there are no official reports" in every thread you enter but, this isn't a thread about "official reports". Please start a thread with "Official Reports" in it's title somewhere and I will be happy to discuss those myths with you there.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
This is about one truther waking up to the scams, lies and deceit propagated by the leaders of the "truth movement" and what he has to say about it.


But when are the beleivers going to wake up to the lies and deciet of the official media story? When are the believers going to stop being afraid to do actual research to find out what really happened that day instead of just believing what they are told?

There is more evidnece that questions the official story then supports it.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Yes, I have heard your claim before. In a lot of threads. This thread isn't about "official reports." I don't believe "official reports" was contained in any post before yours. The OP certainly didn't contain any "official reports".

This thread wasn't started to discuss "official reports". This thread should not serve as basis for you to claim, again and again and again, there are no "official reports". In addition, I am not interested in one of your locally famous, page-bending exercises in linguistic gymnastics.

Please Ultima, I can't prevent you from posting anything you feel like. All I can do is ask you to stay on the topic of this thread and talk about "official reports" somewhere where it is warranted.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Please Ultima, I can't prevent you from posting anything you feel like. All I can do is ask you to stay on the topic of this thread and talk about "official reports" somewhere where it is warranted.


Sorry but you brought up about the scams and lies.

Do you need me to show you the scams and lies in the official report and that there are no official investagation reports released, so people like the beleivers who state they know what happened that day do not really know?



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Ultima, are you doing a comedy bit? I ask that in all sincerity.

If not, no. I don't want to discuss "official reports" in THIS thread. If you feel the undeniable urge to spew forth with "official reports" in a rain man sort of way, please start your own thread.

Again, do you have anything of substance to talk about in this thread? That applies to this subject matter?

"No" (preferably silence) is a legitimate answer.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:29 PM
link   
When you're talking about scams and lies, NOBODY can compete with the government, whether it's the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, Operation Northwoods, USS Liberty, TWA 800, Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, Iraq, etc., etc., etc.

9/11 is no different.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

Do you have anything - anything at all to say regarding this topic?

Specifically, the former head of the U of Albany's decision (and reasons for said decision) to disown the very movement he was so involved with?

You're comments aren't bad, per se. They just don't have a thing to do with the OP. If you want to lament what idiots you think skeptics are - have at it.

In your own thread, perhaps titled "Skeptics Suck!11!!1!"?

[edit on 14-7-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Mikey Metzger says

"No structural, civil, or any engineers agree with the truthers."


Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

I dont believe he was ever was a truther!



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


Sorry SAP but it is basic psychology. The best way to try and throw doubt into any viewpoint, especially a CT like this one, is to fabricate a character that is a shining light for the CT and then show him/her completely doing a 180.

Believe me, I know. I was on the other end of this CT. I was a HUGE skeptic and Bush supporter. The only problem is that I also have a lot of experience with building design. I'm sorry, that right there is where they lost me. They being the 'Official Story' people. I never watched the buildings coming down again after 911. I only watched it 2 times that day. I was sickened and then quickly enraged because my president said who had done it. I wanted to get back into service and go over and kick their rears!

Then, while doing some searches, I came across this site. I never even knew that a CT existed about the towers. Then I finally watched the collapses again and instantly realized that I had done one thing the first time I watched them. I ignored reason and allowed my emotions to get involved. That's what the majority of the country did. They didn't watch with sound reason. They watched with horror, anger, sadness and every other powerful emotion. Many are still to this day like I was. They didn't go out of their way to watch the collapses again.

Sorry my friend. I have yet to see a real explanation of why the three towers that fell that day. I can go into details but I KNOW that everyone has read them over and over in the ongoing debates.

So, I could write up a blog about how I used to believe wholeheartedly in the 'Official Story' and then all of a sudden my eyes were opened to reality and I had a change of heart. But I won't. Why? Because anyone can start a blog and write this crap and say how much they were for something and now they have seen the light. It's psychology 101 my friend.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

Do you have anything - anything at all to say regarding this topic ?

What's to say about this silly topic? It shouldn't be a thread in the first place.

Next time, choose something worthy of discussion.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 

Sorry my friend. I have yet to see a real explanation of why the three towers that fell that day. I can go into details but I KNOW that everyone has read them over and over in the ongoing debates.

So, I could write up a blog about how I used to believe wholeheartedly in the 'Official Story' and then all of a sudden my eyes were opened to reality and I had a change of heart.

One of the thousands every day who are waking up.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by driveshaft08
 


Caught that too - he's undeniably wrong with that statement. If you would like to discuss your enclosed link, start a thread and I will be happy to talk with you there. There is a lot to discuss concerning Gage.

You might find this funny: a while ago a skeptic found a picture of a true Nazi sympathizer, a holocaust denier (in real life, truly), made up a fictitious CV and submitted his "credentials" with the enclosed snap shot. You already know where I am going with this. Yup, he was listed as an "expert" almost immediately. There are quite a few names on his list that are completely, utterly made up - and obviously. Most are still there, it's worth having a shot of your favorite adult beverage and reading through the names - I guarantee you a good laugh (at least). The really easy Jack Meoffs are gone but, they were there for months.

Thank you for taking the time to actually read the blog (even if you don't think he's a truther).

Let me assure you, he most assuredly was a truther. Founded the U of Albany truth movement. Organized rallies. Attended functions, etc.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Ultima, are you doing a comedy bit? I ask that in all sincerity.

If not, no. I don't want to discuss "official reports" in THIS thread. If you feel the undeniable urge to spew forth with "official reports" in a rain man sort of way, please start your own thread.

Again, do you have anything of substance to talk about in this thread? That applies to this subject matter?

"No" (preferably silence) is a legitimate answer.



You crack me up my friend. First you start a post with 911 in the topic but you want the people to NOT discuss 911 but the second part of it which was about how conspiracy theorist, especially 911 CTers, begin to expand it until it is out of control. Then you post this and yet if someone doesn't follow the OP to the letter you start to do what many skeptics claim CTers do. You start to throw insults around and try to belittle people.

You are starting to show your true colors I'm afraid.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


Thank you for your point of view and for taking the time to write back to me. I appreciate your effort and sincerity.

Concerning your post: you just used the Inflationary Model to account for the ex-truthers change of heart.

That is, he's either fictitious, or in on it.

I assure you, he's quite real. I am well aware there are people on either side changing sides...if that makes any sense? this post is about just this one guy, just his experience and his opinion.

I value your opinion and I appreciate that we can disagree without you calling me a Nazi sympathizer, etc.

I welcome your post and hope you have more to say.

If your interested in the Inflationary Model you can read about it here and here.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


Hey pecks - All I know is I was told by a family member that I absolutly should not join the marines in Aug 2001... They were right -- They had a very high position in a very bush friendly industry!



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


Well, I read your latest post after I wrote my previous response.

It's really simple. This thread is about a truther throwing in the towel on the movement. Did you catch that?

Is it your position that anything with 9-11 in it should serve as a spring board for ranters to discuss anything they so choose concerning 9-11? How do you propose we organize such information? How can you find things of interest to you if the title and contents of a post have nothing to do with what it's actually about?

Anyone, who has anything at all that can be attributed to having anything to do with the subject matter has been responded to. Ranters and rain men are being dealt with in a manner you don't approve of. I get that.

I am sticking to my guns. I started the thread and it is not unreasonable to ask people to stick to the topic.

So, do you honestly believe that if I start a thread about someone quitting the "truth movement" its appropriate for another poster to start up a second conversation about.....say.....the airphone calls from flight 93? What does one have to do with another?

If someone starts a thread ion the military sub section about the new stealth plane, would it be appropriate for me to start talking about my new Cessna? And when challenged as to relevance to the topic claim the OP said the word "Plane" and therefore anything about planes is appropriate?

Come on now.



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
If not, no. I don't want to discuss "official reports"


Why did you bring up scams and lies? If you are going to bring up scams and lies you should also bring up the fact there are no official investigation reports that support the official story.




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join