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.

 

How to convince others?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well it comes down to getting people to do actual research. Problem is most people that beleive the official story are afraid to do research becasue they do not want to know the truth, they want to live in their safe fantasy world.


You stated in another thread that you dont believe the US Government was in on 9-11.
So who did it then?




posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   
I don't believe the conspiracies, but I have done a ton of research.

The thing is... when I do research I look at as many angles of a subject as I possibly can.

I first watched Freedom to Fascism- and I was like Wooaah! But it delt alot with tax law and financial institutions-- so what do I do? I ask experts in the financial field questions regarding some of the claims-- Do you know what the first thing BOTH of the CFP's said to me? On two different occasions? "Are they trying to sell you gold-- Like those gold scammers?"
They laughed that the premise that the USA needed to go back to the gold standard-- their explaination? "Our economy dwarfs gold and it's total worth" Legitimate answers.

I then saw where Russo was taking Visa/ Mastercard and American Express on his website-- Hmmmm-- I suppose making a buck was more important than his premise that "Big Banking was Evil" Or else he wouldn't be supporting them when he DIDN'T HAVE TO. He just had the instant pay option on there to make snatching a buck that much easier.

Scammers? Hmmmmm... Ok, on with my "research"

I watched Loose Change - WOW, my golf pro (who was South African) was like ZOMGdllz! Inside Jorb!

I thought "wow, those are mighty big claims" -- so I looked for a counter point. (And the whole Cleveland thing was pretty much laughable from the get go)

I found many websites which I read ad nauseum from BOTH sides of the issue. I found screw loose change and watched the rebuttle.

I watched Alex Jones videos, and 911 mysteries, press for truth, some weird truther convention video with Ed Begley. ON and ON...I started seeing a pattern and repetition. I started seeing calls to spread tha truth-- to do so would only cost ya $9.99 -- If you were a really good truth spreader you TO could make a video and then people would pay YOU a nominal fee to *really* do some keen truthspreadin' -- the possiblities were endless-- They were building a religion, living comfort eagle.

I saw people becoming truth moochers-- just torrenting material and not paying--(and getting called-out for it)

I saw truth beggin'-- asking, nay pleading for donations due to their poorly planned business decisions--

I saw truther bickering-- about who's gonna get comp'ed for free admission to truther conferences/viewings. (too many comp's cut into that glorious profit)

It didn't take long to realize this was a cheap carney shell game to fleece the gulible from their cash-- all done with conjecture, rhetoric, unsubstanciated claims, and the aire of covertness. You feel all James Bond and "edgie' when yer "shaken' tha Foundation!!" and whatnot.

Those feelings are real enough-- but the whole fantasy is really a scam. Run by people with clear monitary and political agendas. The whole fantasy is a TIME-WASTER where people can "feel" like they are doing something crucially important-- but really do NOTHING at all-- but surf the web.. watch em' some YouTube.. and reguratate banal commentary upon deaf or dwindeling ears-- and feel "edgie, enlightened, and important" for doing basically nothing.

Like I have said before-- It is a good thing the internet didn't exist when Orson Wells was doing his War of the Worlds stuff-- you would have 1000's of pages devoted to how Aliens wiped-out some Ohio township...and BELIEVE it with all their factless hearts...Or better yet how the Gubment framed the Martians so THEY could wipe out some Ohio township.




[edit on 17-7-2008 by Taxi-Driver]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


How much do you think KBR, Haliburton, Exxon-Mobil, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc, etc, have made on the Iraq war????

Do you think it might be a tad bit more than David Ray Griffin and Alex Jones???

C'mon get real!!!



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:32 PM
link   
My thing on this.
Who? Put all the puts on the airlines the day before?
We were never entitled to this information.

Who put a huge insurancy policy on the toweres weeks before there takedown?

Let me put it like this again.

If I take out a million dollar policy on my wife. And she turns up dead a month later....I got a lot of 'xplainin' to do.

Follow the MONEY! Always.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


How much do you think KBR, Haliburton, Exxon-Mobil, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc, etc, have made on the Iraq war????

Do you think it might be a tad bit more than David Ray Griffin and Alex Jones???

C'mon get real!!!


Iraq? They were going down regardless of 9/11, supersleuth. The Iraq stuff was an ongoing saga since the eighties.. damn.

How much did American Airlines, United Airlines, Merrill Lynch, Hilton, Wyndham, Chase, Verizon, and countless others LOSE on 9/11? and the years directly folowing 9/11?

Yeah like those companies and their leaders are just goona take-it up the ass-- so "Jack" their country club golf buddy can make some money off their misfortune 6 years later.. THEY would be SCREAMING from the mountaintops.. THEY would be all over the news and in print because they have the voice to do so... NOT a PEEP.. Why? Because it is WEBJUNK of the highest degree.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


You don't have to be a supersleuth (just conscious) to see what is happening around you. An oilman and executive VP from haliburton are running the country...who benefits??? I guess that Alex Jones and Dylan Avery in your book.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jpm1602
My thing on this.
Who? Put all the puts on the airlines the day before?
We were never entitled to this information.


The puts went unclaimed, but a lions-share were traced to a short sell investor (in Chicago--IIRC) The option activity came on the heals of announced company cut-backs just before third quarter earnings were announced-- (Stock tip: if you see a company taking drastic measures BEFORE earnings are reported, it is a fairly safe bet the earnings results are not going to be favorable)

It wasn't even the highest put activity on the airlines in 2001-- March was higher during second quarter speculation. HTH .. feel free to doublecheck my "research"


Who put a huge insurancy policy on the toweres weeks before there takedown?


Silverstien didn't want to have the expensive insurance policy-- He was forced to take it from the underwriters.. Can you imagine a lender leaving that much of an asset UNINSURED?

I don't know about you but in my experience insurance companies are not just gonna roll over and take a huge loss on something unless it is legit-- OR ELSE THEY WOULD BE SCREAMING FROM THE MOUNTAINTOPS.-- and it would be all over the news in print because they have the power to do so.


Let me put it like this again.

If I take out a million dollar policy on my wife. And she turns up dead a month later....I got a lot of 'xplainin' to do.

Follow the MONEY! Always.


So you feel there was no explainin' -- Did you do your "research?' or just accept the first bit of "edgie' propaganda that fell into you lap, without even scrutinizing the source?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Iraq? They were going down regardless of 9/11, supersleuth. The Iraq stuff was an ongoing saga since the eighties.. damn.

How much did American Airlines, United Airlines, Merrill Lynch, Hilton, Wyndham, Chase, Verizon, and countless others LOSE on 9/11? and the years directly folowing 9/11?

Yeah like those companies and their leaders are just goona take-it up the ass-- so "Jack" their country club golf buddy can make some money off their misfortune 6 years later.. THEY would be SCREAMING from the mountaintops.. THEY would be all over the news and in print because they have the voice to do so... NOT a PEEP.. Why? Because it is WEBJUNK of the highest degree.

Hmmmm, maybe you should look at their stock? Maybe you should look and see how bad the market was doing pre-911. Were you in the market pre-911? I was. It was bad off. The media portrayed 911 as the catalyst to the bad market but as i pointed out in another thread a catalyst cannot happen after an event. That's the spin, and its a lie. AA price to earnings was very low prior to 911 and went back up for half a year (directly after 911) before bottoming out. They peaked again this year and went down again. Did they go down again this year from 911?

WEBJUNK indeed.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Oy vey. What a lead of coinkidink. I buy that like your 64 dodge with a rusted frame.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


You don't have to be a supersleuth (just conscious) to see what is happening around you. An oilman and executive VP from haliburton are running the country...who benefits??? I guess that Alex Jones and Dylan Avery in your book.


Bush isn't that good of a businessman-- that's why he went into politics--heh. He probablly made more money owning the Texas Rangers baseball team.

Alex Jones SELLS conspiracy-- ONLY-- he hasn't ever owned a failed oil company, he has never owned a baseball team-- he sells conspiracy books , conspiracy dvd's, and advertising space on his conspiracy show.

He is a conspirational speaker at conspiracy conventions where he conspires to separate his conspir-a-taztic minions from their very REAL dollars.

Avery.-- pffbt-- he's just a kid with a sophmoric world view.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Silverstien didn't want to have the expensive insurance policy-- He was forced to take it from the underwriters.. Can you imagine a lender leaving that much of an asset UNINSURED?

I don't know about you but in my experience insurance companies are not just gonna roll over and take a huge loss on something unless it is legit-- OR ELSE THEY WOULD BE SCREAMING FROM THE MOUNTAINTOPS.-- and it would be all over the news in print because they have the power to do so.


Let me put it like this again.

If I take out a million dollar policy on my wife. And she turns up dead a month later....I got a lot of 'xplainin' to do.

Follow the MONEY! Always.



So you feel there was no explainin' -- Did you do your "research?' or just accept the first bit of "edgie' propaganda that fell into you lap, without even scrutinizing the source?

Silverstein took out insurance that was so large that he had to pay double deductable. It was questioned pre-911, and he was certainly not forced to do it. He had to get lawyers just to be allowed to take out that much insurance because it was non standard.

Also, if you play follow the money, the 2 entities that made the most off of 911 are Isreal and Blackwater. Not Afghanistan, not Iraq, not Saudi Arabia.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420


Hmmmm, maybe you should look at their stock? Maybe you should look and see how bad the market was doing pre-911. Were you in the market pre-911? I was. It was bad off. The media portrayed 911 as the catalyst to the bad market but as i pointed out in another thread a catalyst cannot happen after an event. That's the spin, and its a lie. AA price to earnings was very low prior to 911 and went back up for half a year (directly after 911) before bottoming out. They peaked again this year and went down again. Did they go down again this year from 911?

WEBJUNK indeed.


Well there was the tech-stock bust in 2000 BUT we ALL know that had nothing to do with 9/11.

So you are going to sit there and take the stance that a signifigant sector of American business (BIG BUSINESS) didn't take a huge hit due to the 9/11 attacks, and the national disposition that followed?

WOW you are really down deep dude.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by Taxi-Driver]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420

Silverstein took out insurance that was so large that he had to pay double deductable. It was questioned pre-911, and he was certainly not forced to do it. He had to get lawyers just to be allowed to take out that much insurance because it was non standard.


Source? (please don't insult the viewers intelligence with a prisonplanet link)

I am sure you will find that just the opposite is truth.


Also, if you play follow the money, the 2 entities that made the most off of 911 are Isreal and Blackwater. Not Afghanistan, not Iraq, not Saudi Arabia.


WTF? Afghanistan? Iraq? Saudi? Israel? Blackwater is making money of of the Iraq war- not 9/11. Only a simpleton would forget the whole Iraqi saga that has spanned decades both before and after 9/11. I know people want to lump iraq into the whole 9/11 thing-- but it only works because the war (really any war) is unpopular and a easy target for rabble rousing...

Saddam abused his power.. and he did it in the 80's, he did it in the 90's.. He was under heavy sanctions WORLDWIDE, and was still defiant, and uncooperative in the new century. The scud missles, standing army, and possiblity of WMD's were enough to put a stop to his antics..with or WITHOUT 9/11. Had Saddam complied completely with UN inspections, there would not have been suspicion, had he pulled his standing army off of the Saudi border, we wouldn't have needed to place military bases in the muslim "holy land" (at the request of King Fayd).. Blackwater.....



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Blackwater is making money of of the Iraq war- not 9/11.


You crack me up. Iraq may have been an issue for a while, but Saddam was linked by our "glorious" leaders to 9/11 specifically so that we, the sheeple, would accept a "preemptive" (read, aggressive move) strike there.

So yes. Blackwater is profiting from 9/11.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBobert
You stated in another thread that you dont believe the US Government was in on 9-11.
So who did it then?


I never stated that.

I stated that there is not enough evidence that the Governemnt was in on it. But there is enough evidence that they had prior warnings.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Blackwater is making money of of the Iraq war- not 9/11.


You crack me up. Iraq may have been an issue for a while, but Saddam was linked by our "glorious" leaders to 9/11 specifically so that we, the sheeple, would accept a "preemptive" (read, aggressive move) strike there.

So yes. Blackwater is profiting from 9/11.


So you missed the whole Desert Storm thing, the whole Gassing the Kurds thing, the whole NON compliance with UN inspectors thing, the whole no fly zone thing, the whole volitile and agressive threat to Saudi thing.. and the whole WMD thing? And you think the Iraqi war is about 9/11?

The Iraqi war is NOT about 9/11. And *if* it were it *might* be to eliminate the threat that was the cause for US troops to even be in Saudi Arabia in the first place (at the request of King Fayd) Notice that 15 of the hijackers were from Saudi... They were extremists pissed that the US (infidels) would be in their holiest of holy lands (Mecca & Medina)

Also notice there are no more US military bases in Saudi Arabia-- No threat, no need for us to assist the moderate Saudi leadership anymore. No more pissed off Saudi extremists *for THIS particular issue*



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Blackwater is making money of of the Iraq war- not 9/11.


You crack me up. Iraq may have been an issue for a while, but Saddam was linked by our "glorious" leaders to 9/11 specifically so that we, the sheeple, would accept a "preemptive" (read, aggressive move) strike there.

So yes. Blackwater is profiting from 9/11.


So you missed the whole Desert Storm thing, the whole Gassing the Kurds thing, the whole NON compliance with UN inspectors thing, the whole no fly zone thing, the whole volitile and agressive threat to Saudi thing.. and the whole WMD thing? And you think the Iraqi war is about 9/11?


Wow. You are very skilled at inserting words into others' mouths I see. The WMD thing??? Hahaha. Where do YOU see evidence that that was not a lie? Seems to me there was none. As for "NON compliance with UN inspectors..." When we decided to throw our weight into eliminating Saddam for the oil (which he was threatening to sell in Euros), he WAS compliant. Did you miss THAT?

You crack me up.


The Iraqi war is NOT about 9/11.


I said they USED 9/11 to motivate us to allow them to behave heinously. The war was all about the threat to the value of the dollar (which is on the oil standard now) that a glut sold in Euros represents. But because of 9/11, they had that nationalistic fervor going in the sheeple, and got us into that war - which allowed Blackwater to profit.

What words will you place in my mouth next, I wonder...



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Where do YOU see evidence that that was not a lie? Seems to me there was none.


As far as WMDs, there were signs of them like the hidden and buried MIG planes and several defectors who have stated that WMDs and material were taken to Syria.



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Where do YOU see evidence that that was not a lie? Seems to me there was none.


As far as WMDs, there were signs of them like the hidden and buried MIG planes and several defectors who have stated that WMDs and material were taken to Syria.


MIG planes are WMD...? [snicker] Really, though, the WMD were given away to another country? Well then. Let's go get THEM!!!

Where's the proof of this? Where is the assurance that the "defectors" weren't paid to say this? Where are the actual WMD???



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

MIG planes are WMD...? [snicker] Really, though, the WMD were given away to another country? Well then. Let's go get THEM!!!


Are you really that immature? Just more proof that you beleivers are too afraid to do research to find the truth.

The MIGS were not WMDs but they carreid very new banned equipment, banned by the UN.

Also the WMDs were not given to another country they were taken there to be hidden from the inspectors.

Please do research before posting so you do not look so immature.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join