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.

 

Just what evidence would you believe

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phatcat
I don't suggest they should have rebuilt the buildings, I suggest they should have gone through the wreckage with a fine comb.

much like an archaelogical site, with a toothbrush if necesary.

So you believe that they should have immediately abandoned all hope of rescuing survivors? Perhaps you should educate yourself as to the attitudes of people immediately following collapse. Most people were convinced there would be "pockets" of survivors and the initial efforts focused on this.


firefighters reported 'streams of lava-like substance in the basement.
I do believe it's Thermaid though, which is a form of Thermite, a brand used for Demolition

You're probably thinking of 'thermate'. Even so there are many candidates for lava-like materials, including things like glass, which we know was obviously everywhere in the towers.


And I suggest that any sane President, one with nothing to hide, should have been first among equals to demand an investigation, and make sure no stone is left unturned in pursuit of the thruth, not stonewall it for as long as possible..

Not going to disagree with you here, I am no fan of Bush and I suspect he was very much trying to cover his ass.


And the obvious foreknowledge of several partys leading to potentially the biggest heist of insurance money ever.. and several companys are making gazillions because of it, to this day. Companys which so happen had politicians as boardmembers.. how convenient..

This is an often repeated topic, but there's never been any solid figures released showing how Silverstein supposedly made this money. What you probably didn't know is that Silverstein was forced to take out a larger insurance amount. He initially wanted to insure the buildings for less. Not only this but he is contractually obligated to rebuild, and rebuilt WTC7 without any major client having signed on.

He may well have made money, but that is just a sign of someone who has taken care over their investments, rather than evidence of a conspiracy, especially when we know he tried to insure them for less.

I appreciate that you are angry, and you want to see people held responsible for this, but it is a very complex subject and the people who are telling you some of these facts are not without an agenda. You should take time to investigate the claims from the 'debunker' side too, you may be surprised at just how much the evidence doesn't stack up




posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomis_Nexis
What would make me believe it was as advertised was if more planes struck the towers (since each was designed to take 4-5 hits)

They were not, this statement was from Frank DiMartini, who died in the towers. He simply guessed.


if the towers hadn't fallen into a neat pile without swaying

A "neat pile"? They utterly destroyed the WTC complex and killed many hundreds of first responders in the nearby area. Incidentally they did sway at impact and both towers upper sections tilted as they failed.


if the air force actually did something to prevent the planes from hitting

They did.


if explosions hadn't gone off prior to the towers collapsing

Both towers had significant amounts of fire on multiple levels, fire will typically result in explosions from any number of sources. Hell there was even ammunition stored in some areas of the towers. There has never been any solid evidence of pre-collapse explosives, simply speculation.


and finally if Larry A Silverstein hadn't wanted to build two new modern towers to replace the WTC's because the cost of maintenance for the towers would have been equal to that of building two new towers.

The only source for this claim I have ever seen is a rather dubious first person narrative with absolutely no supporting evidence. The narrative also displays several factual errors and misunderstandings of tower construction. Can you show any solid evidence to support this?



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by irongunner

Please answer the question.
This bit of rambling has nothing to do with 9/11 and evidence provided.


If, this is your answer to "proof," then you are in a round about way admitting to my assertion that you indeed have taken an indefensible position (one that all criticism and evidence against can be cast aside do soley to your opinion on the source and not the content or context.)


Listen, I really don't care anymore what you lovers of lies think. I got my posting "privileges" revoked from another account because I got SICK and tired of being punished for dealing with your types and I'll probably get revoked on this account as well. I really don't care.

We are no longer in a time where stupidity and ignorance can be laughed at and joked about. We are in a SERIOUS time in history at this moment and the smugness that we, the ATS Mods, etc. should respect and be "civil" of all members opinions, is over. THis type of political correctness is what will bring down this country and it's happening at this very moment.

If you want to deny that Israeli spies have infiltrated the US, doing survellance and monitering "terrorists" INSIDE the US, and pass it off as inconsequential, then I have nothing else ever to say to you or anyone else that thinks like you on the 9/11 topic.

This was on FOX NEWS!!!! Of all places, in Nov. 2001!!!



www.youtube.com...


If you cannot understand how and why this is so significant, then there really is no hope for you for ever discovering any form of truth in your lifetime.






[edit on 22-9-2008 by JimBeam]

[edit on 22-9-2008 by JimBeam]

[edit on 22-9-2008 by JimBeam]

[edit on 22-9-2008 by JimBeam]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by JimBeam
 


Okay so we have established that there is absolutely no evidence that Jim Beam would be willing to accept that could lead to proving the government did not conspire to commit the events on 9/11.

So, in terms of discussion he is being irrational. Are there any other 9/11 Truthers out there that wants to actually have a dialog?



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by irongunner
 


Typical.

Go ahead and skip over the EVIDENCE of Israeli spies in the US prior to 9/11. It's obvious that it's too "complicated" for you to understand.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimBeam
reply to post by irongunner
 


Typical.

Go ahead and skip over the EVIDENCE of Israeli spies in the US prior to 9/11. It's obvious that it's too "complicated" for you to understand.



Jim,
If you want to comment on these things by all means find/start a discussion on the Israelis, Saudis, and Halliburton's involvement in jello if you want to, but please stay on topic HERE!

You came to this discussion, you did not start it. We here are not discussing conspiracies, only what level of evidence would cause people to turn away from them.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by irongunner


Jim,
If you want to comment on these things by all means find/start a discussion on the Israelis, Saudis, and Halliburton's involvement in jello if you want to, but please stay on topic HERE!

You came to this discussion, you did not start it. We here are not discussing conspiracies, only what level of evidence would cause people to turn away from them.


Guy,

You clearly don't have any understanding of how this current world works. Deception has been integrated into every aspect of westernized society. You, going up to Mary Jane in a party and start to talk about how "cool" you are(which or course you are not cool) is a form of DECEPTION, it started from the top and is now everywhere: advertising, movies, blahhhhh, blahhh, etc.

If you deny that Israeli spies have and still are infiltrating our national security and are doing so with help of elements in our own government, then you're on your own pal. I can't open your eyes for you.

You want to discuss about things that the government has either hidden the evidence from the public, distroyed evidence, or making the evidence "classified". That's not enough EVIDENCE for you to question the OS? You have absolutely no idea about what being a true patriot means.

Ingored.


[edit on 23-9-2008 by JimBeam]



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JimBeam
 


Are you 12? We have been trying to talk about a very specific topic. If you want to talk about deception fool someone into posting on that topic.

If you do not want to tell us here in the conversation what kind of evidence you would need to see to believe the official story about 9/11 DON'T POST HERE.

If you continue to post off topic you will find your self ignored.

But, then again that would just be another example of the government silencing another voice of freedom in your little paradigm right?



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
So you believe that they should have immediately abandoned all hope of rescuing survivors? Perhaps you should educate yourself as to the attitudes of people immediately following collapse. Most people were convinced there would be "pockets" of survivors and the initial efforts focused on this.


Makes sense for the first days.. maybe even a month if you want to stretch it.. I'm sure an in-depth analysis of the debris in the basement levels would have concluded once and for all wether or not explosives where or where not used.

The fact the majority of it got shipped of to china and the fact there's no oversight as to which levels any 'samples' got taken still are on the table though..



You're probably thinking of 'thermate'. Even so there are many candidates for lava-like materials, including things like glass, which we know was obviously everywhere in the towers.


again, an indepth analysis would have cleared this up, as well.. or do you believe when the cleanup crews made it there they still believed survivors where present ?



Not going to disagree with you here, I am no fan of Bush and I suspect he was very much trying to cover his ass.


Not just his ass.. he made very sure that any 'investigation' would basically be group therapy at most, when a crime is committed you need to start investigating asap, not when the evidence has allready been reprocessed into god knows what.

The CIA was 'investigating' well enough suddenly to find a passport allegedly miraculously floating down to set itself perched on some rubble, cars filled with 'evidence', and the names of the 18 terrorists.. how many of those did turn up alive and unconnected again ?

And when they did provide 'answers', their answers only served to obfuscate the matter even more..



This is an often repeated topic, but there's never been any solid figures released showing how Silverstein supposedly made this money. What you probably didn't know is that Silverstein was forced to take out a larger insurance amount. He initially wanted to insure the buildings for less. Not only this but he is contractually obligated to rebuild, and rebuilt WTC7 without any major client having signed on.

He may well have made money, but that is just a sign of someone who has taken care over their investments, rather than evidence of a conspiracy, especially when we know he tried to insure them for less.


It wasn't just Silverstein.. remember those put options 'gambling' on a dive in market share for the airline companys that where involved? (with the regulatory commision tasked with finding out these irregularitys happened to be located in Building 7..

And frankly, Silverstein is a rodent.. his tearjerking tales of how he loses money don't exactly fill me with confidence and trust.. he tried to hold up the insurance companys for twice the 'jackpot', claiming two planes = two attacks, luckily the courts basically told him to take a flying hike (into a building of his choosing if it where up to me!)


I appreciate that you are angry, and you want to see people held responsible for this, but it is a very complex subject and the people who are telling you some of these facts are not without an agenda. You should take time to investigate the claims from the 'debunker' side too, you may be surprised at just how much the evidence doesn't stack up


With all the money that's involved, I'm sure it's easy to buy 'independant' research.. just look at the mega-millions made by 'war-contractors' like Halliburton, Blackwater e.a, then look at Afghanistan and Iraq, bombed back into the stone age. Qui bono ?

Without 9/11, the Patriot acts would never have had a chance of steamrollering through. Homeland Gestapo.. err.. security would never have been the monolith it was today. And the US of A would still have independant friends.

[edit on 25-9-2008 by Phatcat]



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phatcat
Makes sense for the first days.. maybe even a month if you want to stretch it.. I'm sure an in-depth analysis of the debris in the basement levels would have concluded once and for all wether or not explosives where or where not used.

Do you really think that it would have concluded this? There are many conspiracy theorists who believe in only explosives at the impact level. This certainly would not satiate them. Frankly it's always going to be impossible to satisfy everyone, and considering your requirements have changed in the course of two posts it is very hard to expect people on the day to have done anything specific.


The fact the majority of it got shipped of to china and the fact there's no oversight as to which levels any 'samples' got taken still are on the table though..

I don't understand what you mean by "which levels", and as far as I know only a small amount was shipped to China. You should check out the procedure for filtering and searching through debris at the dumps, it was quite thorough.


again, an indepth analysis would have cleared this up, as well.. or do you believe when the cleanup crews made it there they still believed survivors where present ?

This is very wrong, there's no level of analysis that would satisfy many conspiracy theorists, for reasons I have illustrated above.


Not just his ass.. he made very sure that any 'investigation' would basically be group therapy at most, when a crime is committed you need to start investigating asap, not when the evidence has allready been reprocessed into god knows what.

I don't see how Bush was responsible for this, if you read the various accounts available, most people were not even aware who was responsible for what.


The CIA was 'investigating' well enough suddenly to find a passport allegedly miraculously floating down to set itself perched on some rubble

This was actually found by a passerby and handed to a cop.


cars filled with 'evidence'

Not hugely hard to find when you have peoples names and addresses.


and the names of the 18 terrorists.. how many of those did turn up alive and unconnected again ?

There were 19. None turned up alive, the FBI initially produced incorrect photographs for some of the people which added to confusion, but the reports of hijackers being alive cleared up after the first few months. In fact there are a few articles from the original sources for these claims explaining why they were wrong. Even Saudi Arabia has formally admitted 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals.


It wasn't just Silverstein.. remember those put options 'gambling' on a dive in market share for the airline companys that where involved? (with the regulatory commision tasked with finding out these irregularitys happened to be located in Building 7..

How could the people tasked with finding this out be in Building 7? The put options didn't occur until 911 and there could be no investigation started until after Building 7 was destroyed. Even so they were traced to a single investor tip. There were some reports of hard drives being recovered from the WTC7 rubble showing insider trading, but this was never substantiated I believe.


And frankly, Silverstein is a rodent.. his tearjerking tales of how he loses money don't exactly fill me with confidence and trust.. he tried to hold up the insurance companys for twice the 'jackpot', claiming two planes = two attacks

This is called being a smart businessman. I don't see how it qualifies him as a rodent? I imagine in another situation many people would be happy to think of an insurance company being forced to pay out more than the usual. I usually would!


With all the money that's involved, I'm sure it's easy to buy 'independant' research.. just look at the mega-millions made by 'war-contractors' like Halliburton, Blackwater e.a, then look at Afghanistan and Iraq, bombed back into the stone age. Qui bono ?

Using this logic, you can deny all evidence that disagrees with you. You don't have any actual evidence that this research was influenced, but by speculating like this it allows you to dismiss it without serious critical thought. Please don't fall into this trap.


Without 9/11, the Patriot acts would never have had a chance of steamrollering through. Homeland Gestapo.. err.. security would never have been the monolith it was today. And the US of A would still have independant friends.

Possibly, I obviously don't support any of the rather radical laws Bush has imposed, and indefinite detention without trial is extremely worrying. It might be worthy of pointing out (if I haven't already) that I am not American, in case you think I am sitting by idly.

Anyway this has been a relatively extensive post, and while I understand that perhaps you made a simple mistake by saying "18 hijackers" instead of 19 but it also may indicate a lack of research. I urge you to read non-conspiracy sites too, which may provide a counterpoint you weren't aware of.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Frankly it's always going to be impossible to satisfy everyone, and considering your requirements have changed in the course of two posts it is very hard to expect people on the day to have done anything specific.


I considered your argument for searching for survivors, had to admit it had some merit, and thus re-adjusted my own outlook. Isn't that what discussions are usefull for?



I don't understand what you mean by "which levels", and as far as I know only a small amount was shipped to China. You should check out the procedure for filtering and searching through debris at the dumps, it was quite thorough.


I ment relative depth, to ascertain to some degree what lvl of the buildings it belonged to, sorry for not being very precise, post lenght limitations.
It's useless to debate how much was shipped off, because the trail was so cold by the time an investigation was conducted.. fact remains that some of it did..



I don't see how Bush was responsible for this, if you read the various accounts available, most people were not even aware who was responsible for what.


Isn't Bush the Commander in Chief, the head of intelligence (now thàt's a hoax..) and basically A Nr.1? You know, that guy in a class room ? If he did not know, he was hopelessly incompetent, and if he did know he's a traitor. How many Intelligence agencys of friendly countrys had issued some pretty specific warnings?




This was actually found by a passerby and handed to a cop.


It's not who finds it that matters here, but how it got there in the first place. They could harldly claim they found it themselves, when they couldn't even find their own bottom before?

I mean, you debunkers have to make up your minds.. flames hot enough to melt through steel, but selectively choosing to 'spare' a damning piece of 'evidence' made of paper and plastic? Any bets on the propability odds for that happening in a real world ?


Not hugely hard to find when you have peoples names and addresses.


offcourse they had them.. one of them even had his handler as a landlord.. they where just patsys employed and sacrificed.



There were 19. None turned up alive, the FBI initially produced incorrect photographs for some of the people which added to confusion, but the reports of hijackers being alive cleared up after the first few months. In fact there are a few articles from the original sources for these claims explaining why they were wrong. Even Saudi Arabia has formally admitted 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals.


and yet, they invade Afghanistan and Iraq.. that's some deep logic used mate.



How could the people tasked with finding this out be in Building 7? The put options didn't occur until 911 and there could be no investigation started until after Building 7 was destroyed. Even so they were traced to a single investor tip. There were some reports of hard drives being recovered from the WTC7 rubble showing insider trading, but this was never substantiated I believe.


Right, that's what I was referring to, thanks for setting the story straight.
Was the gold story also refuted? just curious.



This is called being a smart businessman. I don't see how it qualifies him as a rodent? I imagine in another situation many people would be happy to think of an insurance company being forced to pay out more than the usual. I usually would!


I would agree, if it was ma and pa Baker's new car, or house, or whatever.
But trying to financially hit the jackpot over 3000+ corpses? That set of business 'ethics' is what caused America to be in the position it is in now mate..


Using this logic, you can deny all evidence that disagrees with you. You don't have any actual evidence that this research was influenced, but by speculating like this it allows you to dismiss it without serious critical thought. Please don't fall into this trap.


What would you accept then? A publishment in some scientific journal titled 'How we rigged the most influential investigation Ever, and came away with it' , depicting the crew of scientists all showing a big thumbs up with a cheery smile and champagne?



Possibly, I obviously don't support any of the rather radical laws Bush has imposed, and indefinite detention without trial is extremely worrying. It might be worthy of pointing out (if I haven't already) that I am not American, in case you think I am sitting by idly.


I'm not an American, either, ain't we the lucky ones? :p
My vibes go to all the Americans that have been brave enough to voice dissent.. I fear for y'all.



Anyway this has been a relatively extensive post, and while I understand that perhaps you made a simple mistake by saying "18 hijackers" instead of 19 but it also may indicate a lack of research. I urge you to read non-conspiracy sites too, which may provide a counterpoint you weren't aware of.


I must admit I'll never know the full thruth of it, but have heard enough testimonials from people that where thére, to have become convinced there has to be something to it.

The Pentagon mini-hole and Phantom-Boeing also convinces me.

If I want the Official 'thruth', I just have to listen to the mainstream 'news'. The thruth will set you free (of ever having to think for yourself)



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phatcat
I considered your argument for searching for survivors, had to admit it had some merit, and thus re-adjusted my own outlook. Isn't that what discussions are usefull for?

Sure it is, but my point is that you had your mind changed by a single post from me. It's a lot easier to sit on the internet and decide with hindsight what should have been done. It may not have been anywhere near as clear on the day. Even if they had dissected some of the lower levels forensically, there's still no guarantee that would satiate any truthers.


I ment relative depth, to ascertain to some degree what lvl of the buildings it belonged to, sorry for not being very precise, post lenght limitations.

Oh right I see, well steel was identified due to stamping marks, but there were several situations in which this was hard, when the steel was stencilled instead of stamped, or when it had undergone extensive damage etc. NCSTAR 1-3 should give you a good overview.


It's useless to debate how much was shipped off, because the trail was so cold by the time an investigation was conducted.. fact remains that some of it did..

Some of it certainly was and I guess I can't really argue against wanting more steel to study, more information is always good. What I can argue against though is that people feel that they know how the investigation should have been handled, despite them typically being unqualified people who've simply done a little bit of internet research. That is a world away from the experience and qualifications of people who actually conducted these investigations. At least in the case of WTC1 and 2 it's not clear that access to more steel would have provided a stronger case.


Isn't Bush the Commander in Chief, the head of intelligence (now thàt's a hoax..) and basically A Nr.1? You know, that guy in a class room ? If he did not know, he was hopelessly incompetent, and if he did know he's a traitor.

This is a false dichotomy. It's also possible that he did not know because his intelligence agencies were at some level incompetent. I don't pretend Bush is any sort of person with above average intelligence, but saying he should have known requires evidence we just don't have.


How many Intelligence agencys of friendly countrys had issued some pretty specific warnings?

It depends what you mean by "pretty specific". I think the maximum level of specificity was that an attack was due 'soon' and that it would be conducted by Bin Laden and possibly involve aircraft. There may have been more specific warnings though, this is not my area of expertise.


I mean, you debunkers have to make up your minds.. flames hot enough to melt through steel, but selectively choosing to 'spare' a damning piece of 'evidence' made of paper and plastic? Any bets on the propability odds for that happening in a real world ?

Neither of these are what we believe. Flames were not hot enough to melt through steel, and the passport was found almost immediately after the collision along with things like aircraft seats, lifejackets and plane tickets. It's unlikely, but by no means impossible.

Lets consider the alternate case. Assume this passport was planted. Now we know that a duplicate of this passport must have existed in order for the hijacker to board the plane, imagine what would happen if by some coincidence that one survived! (Personal effects survived even the collapse of the towers). That would be absolute undeniable proof of something suspicious going on. It simply offers no benefit to the supposed shadowy conspirators to bother planting it, it was hardly used as strong evidence.


offcourse they had them.. one of them even had his handler as a landlord.. they where just patsys employed and sacrificed.

Not exactly, but I'm running out of characters in this post and I don't know this too well. They certainly had some sort of FBI informant as a landlord, but he was not a 'handler' I don't think.


and yet, they invade Afghanistan and Iraq.. that's some deep logic used mate.

Well I didn't say I agreed. Afghanistan was somewhat justified but Iraq was ridiculous.


Right, that's what I was referring to, thanks for setting the story straight.
Was the gold story also refuted? just curious.

It was never substantiated, there was certainly gold in the towers but I am not aware that any credible report was ever made that it was being stolen. I can look into it if you want me to.


But trying to financially hit the jackpot over 3000+ corpses? That set of business 'ethics' is what caused America to be in the position it is in now mate..

Well I see what you're saying, but surely you could make the same argument about claiming on the insurance at all? Regardless it certainly doesn't point to any sort of suspicion of an "inside job", simply a potential slimy businessman.


What would you accept then? A publishment in some scientific journal titled 'How we rigged the most influential investigation Ever, and came away with it' , depicting the crew of scientists all showing a big thumbs up with a cheery smile and champagne?

There's many types of evidence which could be used to disprove the "official story". Physical evidence would of course be the best, blasting caps, detcord etc. Unfortunately none of this was found. A thorough analysis indicating NIST had serious issues with their simulation would also be good evidence. It's hard to give specifics because there are many many things which would be hard to explain.


I'm not an American, either, ain't we the lucky ones? :p

We'll see, if you're a Brit as I am, Brown is a worrying person.


The Pentagon mini-hole and Phantom-Boeing also convinces me.

You should check out some of the 911 debunking sites, even if you don't agree with their conclusions you will find evidence which is hard to ignore. There is a good composite image of Pentagon damage which is quite convincing, but I don't have it to hand and can't easily locate it. Lets start a separate thread for specific topics though.



posted on Sep, 28 2008 @ 11:15 PM
link   
So, maybe you would be convinced if another jet was flown into the pentagon on the same plight path? I mean that would be a great answer to the OP question.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimBeam
Few replies because you bring absolutely nothing to the table. My little post probably went right over your head.



Not really, it just sounded paranoid, so it sort of went around my head.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Just a quick note to say that the composite image I was looking for can be found here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join