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.

 

Video: Jesse Ventura Slams '911 Conspiracy Debunkers' for 30 Minutes

page: 7
58
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by jfj123
I have no doubt there were explosions but I don't believe there were bombs "downstairs" exploding. The reason is that the buildings fell from the top down and not the bottom up so bombs at the bottom wouldn't have done anything.


It is a known fact that in order to implode a building, the supports need to be cut, angled inward. This would be true whether imploding top down or bottom up, because either way, the angle needs to be focused inwards.

And?


You really need me to spell this out for you. Maybe I overestimated your skills at reasoning... How does one weaken and cut supports? With cutter charges and explosions.




I can't answer your hypothetical question as I cannot read the mind of the firefighter.


Tsk, tsk. Implying the firefighter is lying. I roll my eyes.

Because all firemen are good people who never do anything wrong. I roll my eyes right back.


Because you have to suggest a whole cadre of firemen are bad people who conspired to tell the same falsity. And, as a rule, firemen do tend to be good people - better on the average by far than, say, politicians...






Now as to calling me a "blind patriot". Look at my avatar and comments below. Obviously I'm not a blind patriot. In fact, I believe this particular administration to be the most corrupt in our nations history. That being said, there's no evidence to support they planned and executed 9/11. If there were, I would not only be on the band wagon, but driving it !!!


Hmmmm. Maybe the problem is that you have difficulty identifying the plethora of issues that, if one takes the view that it was an inside job need no explanation, but if it WASN'T an inside job either have no explanation or the probability of the occurrence is astronomical - and with multiplicity of such improbabilities stacked, become virtual impossibility.

[shrug] Sorry you have that difficulty.

What a useless paragraph
This is me rolling my eyes again


Sorry you are incapable of using those data. Any honest individuals capable of thinking, I would wager, would have better luck gleaning use from what I said. [shrug]




posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Originally posted by jfj123
Originally posted by Amaterasu
Originally posted by jfj123
I have no doubt there were explosions but I don't believe there were bombs "downstairs" exploding. The reason is that the buildings fell from the top down and not the bottom up so bombs at the bottom wouldn't have done anything.

It is a known fact that in order to implode a building, the supports need to be cut, angled inward. This would be true whether imploding top down or bottom up, because either way, the angle needs to be focused inwards.

And?

You really need me to spell this out for you. Maybe I overestimated your skills at reasoning... How does one weaken and cut supports? With cutter charges and explosions.

Yes and charges are exploded sequentially from the top down, not from the bottom up or randomly first lower then upper levels.


I can't answer your hypothetical question as I cannot read the mind of the firefighter.

Tsk, tsk. Implying the firefighter is lying. I roll my eyes.

Because all firemen are good people who never do anything wrong. I roll my eyes right back.

Because you have to suggest a whole cadre of firemen are bad people who conspired to tell the same falsity. And, as a rule, firemen do tend to be good people - better on the average by far than, say, politicians...


Apparently you're missing ALL my posts where I indicated that I believed they heard explosions. So let me restate that I believe they heard explosions. So when I said that I believe they heard explosions, I mean I believe they heard explosions. Ok get that part?
I just don't believe the explosions were part of a sequential/non-sequential demolition.


Now as to calling me a "blind patriot". Look at my avatar and comments below. Obviously I'm not a blind patriot. In fact, I believe this particular administration to be the most corrupt in our nations history. That being said, there's no evidence to support they planned and executed 9/11. If there were, I would not only be on the band wagon, but driving it !!!


Hmmmm. Maybe the problem is that you have difficulty identifying the plethora of issues that, if one takes the view that it was an inside job need no explanation, but if it WASN'T an inside job either have no explanation or the probability of the occurrence is astronomical - and with multiplicity of such improbabilities stacked, become virtual impossibility.

[shrug] Sorry you have that difficulty.
What a useless paragraph
This is me rolling my eyes again

Sorry you are incapable of using those data. Any honest individuals capable of thinking, I would wager, would have better luck gleaning use from what I said. [shrug]
You mean deluded?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
That's because this was planned for a long time. We have seen videos of the terrorist 'training camps' all around the Middle East. These guys were fanantical, rabid and dedicated.

And, they practiced and rehearsed...third world commandos aren't as stupid as you would hope to believe.


Second, flights were selected because of their particularly low passenger count...easier to control. Control accomplished by fear...fake bombs, and one report of mace or pepper spray. NOT allowed on airplanes, but lax security, bored screeners, on that day at least one was overlooked. And, if it had been discovered, it would have been taken away, and the guy sent onwards.


They planned and rehearsed? ....Flights were selected because of a low passenger count? You seem to think that they had a great deal of foresight...

So you should have no trouble answering this this question.



[edit on 9/16/2008 by CallMeBlu]

[edit on 9/16/2008 by CallMeBlu]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


I read in demolitions the basement is blow out so some of the rubble falls into it...But either way, we have so many witnesses that said they saw/heard or were physically affect by it.

[edit on 9/16/2008 by CallMeBlu]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:14 PM
link   
It's funny how I see debunker's ask the 9/11 movement questions with hopes to make them swallow on their own tongue. Guess what. They are trying to find the exact same questions from the people needed to be questioned. They are not hypocrites, they are just trying to see why the government's answer does not make sense.

It is okay to ask questions. I do not know why people are afraid. I think it is because they might find something so bizarre they will lose all belief in their elected powers.

Mr. Ventura came up with some really great points about the politician debates. Him and Ron Paul should team up.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Cudos to Mr. Ventura. He is a true American Patriot and will get my vote if he decides to run for president in 2012.

I think the truth to 9/11 lies not within the physical evidence since that has all been conveniently whisked away. I believe the truth can be found within the connections between the CIA, Bush family and the Bin Ladens, and the most important one of all, money.

As for the debunkers, I just have two serious questions that I would like answered.

1. Why did Condoleeza Rice lie when she said they would never imagine terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into the WTC?

2. Why did Bush and Cheney both refuse to testify under oath, seperately, and off the record?

Those two questions alone lead me to believe they are lying about the official story. Whether they planned it themselves or simply had for-knowledge and looked the other way, they had some hand in on it.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by b4christ15]

[edit on 16-9-2008 by b4christ15]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by CallMeBlu
reply to post by jfj123
 


I read in demolitions the basement is blow out so some of the rubble falls into it...But either way, we have so many witnesses that said they saw/heard or were physically affect by it.

[edit on 9/16/2008 by CallMeBlu]


Again, there were some witnesses claiming EXPLOSIONS were heard. That doesn't mean BOMB. Are there any witnesses that said they SAW bombs?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
The government, corporations .. Illuminati.. have more 911 liars than
911 truthers.

Who the heck pays for the truth.
The lies and crimes are all paid for.

Lehman Brothers is another big Manhattan building going empty.
Just think more big buildings going down and Osama had nothing to with it.

The only worthwhile activity in the tall buildings of Manhattan was
Tesla's lab.
And the FBI took his papers and labs.
Tell the FBI to bring back Tesla's papers and give the people their free energy.
One could fill a book with lies and crimes since 1943.
Yeah, someone did : Lyne.

ED:You think defending the 911 truth against the 911 liars is tough.
Here is Lyne verses the government agent pushing ET UFO lies:
Date / Time: 9/5/2008 12:00 PM
The UFO Town Meeting!
www.blogtalkradio.com...
ET vs. Tesla craft vs. historical UFO origins.

No ET UFO lies means investment in free energy can go ahead.

ED: The 911 Lie Movement is all part of a well paid established
corporate empire from at least 1943 and the death of Tesla.

[edit on 9/16/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 9/16/2008 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by yellowcard
 


"At least the "official story" has answered 99.9% of all concerns with scientific analysis"- YELLOWCARD


Wrong.
The pseudoscientific answers offered by obvious propagandists defy the laws of physics.
To claim there was no evidence of pre-planted explosive "shape" charges is simply a lie.
To insist that building 7 was not taken down with demolition techniques is another outlandish lie.
Do you think the Chinese took custody of the crime scene evidence?
Perhaps it was simply dumped into the sea.
Look at the angular cuts on the steel beams of the twin towers superstructure.
That is not the way metal beams collapse, and thet would never collapse due to a cold burning fire (all the black smoke indicated a "rich" condition, or an incomplete burn, which is proof that the temperatures were NOT high enough to melt steel beams).
We need a REAL investigation into 9-11, by investigators who are not compromised.
Perhaps the Chinese hold evidence of thermate cutting charges.
I think they are far too street smart to dispose of incriminating evidence.
I'd go into more detail of the buildings destruction, but it's all out there for those with an ear to hear, and an eye to see.
Someone, possibly You mentioned the Oklahoma bombing.
That evidence was taken to an area where a pit had been dug for it, then it was concreted over. It remains under armed guard even today. Why?
Are you familiar with the story of the Oklahoma city cop who was a first responder and KNEW the official story was a lie?
He was murdered, that was the only way they could stop this dedicated and honorable officer from performing his SWORN duty.
Not that race matters, but he was a black man, I mention this only because the public tends to hold black men in low esteem, and this man demonstrated to the world that heros come in all colors.
Yellowcard, you needn't reply to this message as I will not see it.
You are my first "ignore user" on ATS.
Sincerely
Luminaught


[edit on 16-9-2008 by Luminaught]

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Luminaught]

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Luminaught]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


" All I'm saying is I don't think the explosions were from planted bombs. There would be no need if the whole building was already wired in sequence. "


You're entitled to your opinion, but how do you know it would not need other explosions to do the deed if it was already wired?

Ever read what William Rodriguez had to say? He worked there! He survived it! He got decorated for his bravery! His testimony was OMITTED from the commission report.

www.911keymaster.com...

Ever watch the new jersey video from across the river, where you could hear the explosions prior to the collapse?

Ever watch the you tube vids where the people on the street talk about the explosions they heard and felt?


Personally, it looks to me like you did not do your homework.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Yes and charges are exploded sequentially from the top down, not from the bottom up or randomly first lower then upper levels.


In a conventional implosion, yes. This was not a conventional situation. They really didn't care a whole lot what damage might befall the area surrounding the implosion, and it was rather a miracle (if one believes in such) that they handily slipped into their footprints.


Apparently you're missing ALL my posts where I indicated that I believed they heard explosions. So let me restate that I believe they heard explosions. So when I said that I believe they heard explosions, I mean I believe they heard explosions. Ok get that part?
I just don't believe the explosions were part of a sequential/non-sequential demolition.


Many said they were sequential - as in "Boom, boom, boom, all around the outside, like a demolition..." (Paraphrased) So why do you cling to this assurance that they were NOT as described?


You mean deluded?


No. Capable of connecting dots, putting the puzzle together, Holmesian deduction. Clearly you are lacking that - from my perspective, of course.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by toasted
reply to post by jfj123
 


" All I'm saying is I don't think the explosions were from planted bombs. There would be no need if the whole building was already wired in sequence. "


You're entitled to your opinion, but how do you know it would not need other explosions to do the deed if it was already wired?

Because the building would be wired to fall in sequence so whatever charges they needed would be wired at part of that sequential fall.


Ever read what William Rodriguez had to say? He worked there! He survived it! He got decorated for his bravery! His testimony was OMITTED from the commission report.

www.911keymaster.com...

Ever watch the new jersey video from across the river, where you could hear the explosions prior to the collapse?

Ever watch the you tube vids where the people on the street talk about the explosions they heard and felt?

Again, provide evidence that those explosions were from bombs.



Personally, it looks to me like you did not do your homework.


Personally it looks to me as if you've decided what you're going to believe without actually seeing any evidence that what you believe is correct. You mentality is obviously GUILTY until PROVEN innocent.

Large planes hit buildings, releasing incredible chain reactions such as fire and massive structural damage. I would be shocked if this did not create explosions throughout the buildings. Gas pipes be severed and ignited, volitile chemical storage area's igniting, oil drums, etc...



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by jfj123

Yes and charges are exploded sequentially from the top down, not from the bottom up or randomly first lower then upper levels.


In a conventional implosion, yes. This was not a conventional situation. They really didn't care a whole lot what damage might befall the area surrounding the implosion, and it was rather a miracle (if one believes in such) that they handily slipped into their footprints.

You're relying on a "miracle" needed to fit your pattern. Interesting....
Could you show me one non-conventionally wired building that would lead you to believe that a non-conventional demo is possible?


Apparently you're missing ALL my posts where I indicated that I believed they heard explosions. So let me restate that I believe they heard explosions. So when I said that I believe they heard explosions, I mean I believe they heard explosions. Ok get that part?
I just don't believe the explosions were part of a sequential/non-sequential demolition.


Many said they were sequential - as in "Boom, boom, boom, all around the outside, like a demolition..." (Paraphrased) So why do you cling to this assurance that they were NOT as described?
I've watched a number of videos and there were no sequential explosions in them.


You mean deluded?

No. Capable of connecting dots, putting the puzzle together, Holmesian deduction. Clearly you are lacking that - from my perspective, of course.

I like your holmsian thinking. Did holmes conclude guilty until proven innocent?



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


On September 11, 2008 the History Channel aired a program titled "102 Minutes That Changed America"

I have it on DVR....can only see it it bits, very hard to watch in between the tears.

BUT...there is video footage that clearly shows how the Towers 'pancaked'.....floor by floor. NO demolition needed, just gravity.

AND, someone who talks about explosions being heard from as far away as New Jersey just doesn't understand the difference between the speed of sound and the speed of light.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by jfj123

Yes and charges are exploded sequentially from the top down, not from the bottom up or randomly first lower then upper levels.


In a conventional implosion, yes. This was not a conventional situation. They really didn't care a whole lot what damage might befall the area surrounding the implosion, and it was rather a miracle (if one believes in such) that they handily slipped into their footprints.


You're relying on a "miracle" needed to fit your pattern. Interesting....
Could you show me one non-conventionally wired building that would lead you to believe that a non-conventional demo is possible?


Oh, now you are using that book to twist my words, sir. I am NOT relying on a miracle. Only insofar as the fact that they slipped into their footprints was it amazing. Since the job was unconventional, it is a surprise. But they could have fallen willy-nilly and made no difference in "the pattern."

And as for the possibility of it, there have been computer models done. And likely WERE done by the perps prior to the event. Your approach tells me about YOUR interests, sir.



Many said they were sequential - as in "Boom, boom, boom, all around the outside, like a demolition..." (Paraphrased) So why do you cling to this assurance that they were NOT as described?


I've watched a number of videos and there were no sequential explosions in them.


And I have watched "magic" shows and failed to see all that took place. Just because you watched a few vids does NOT mean the events in question were shown. Maybe they happened before the camera started rolling. Maybe they were not angled correctly. This means nothing.

You are trying to discount the many WITNESSES who reported these sequential explosions by claiming to have watched video. That's rather absurd, sir.




You mean deluded?


No. Capable of connecting dots, putting the puzzle together, Holmesian deduction. Clearly you are lacking that - from my perspective, of course.


I like your holmsian thinking. Did holmes conclude guilty until proven innocent?


LOLOL! Holmes DID conclude guilt when the evidence and testimony provided him with enough information to make the deductions. And if all I was working with was the reports of sequential explosions, I doubt I would be piecing it together the way I have. But the list is long - VERY long - of things that occurred that, if one presumes no inside job don't make sense, or require astronomical improbabilities.

Whereas, when one presumes an inside job, there is NOTHING that requires explanation. Old Occam would have a clue.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I think what is most disturbing is: 4 airline crashes, no bodies, no wreckage. That alone is cause for concern , especially the PA crash.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by InterestedObserver

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
So you BELIEVE everything the gov has told you about 911?


When did I ever say that? How does my post at all imply that? I'm not saying that I believe everything, there is always doubt to be found in ANYTHING. But I don't believe the government would have gained anything by planning the 9/11 attacks.

A giant mess in the Middle East, increased terror activity worldwide, horrible approval ratings of the President, Vice President, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, etc., a depressed US economy, no positive legacy.

Okay, you'll say "more control over the people", but really if that was their concern I think there would have been many more terror attacks to terrify Americans into surrendering ourselves to our government. Which has never happened.

So for the most part I believe what I SAW that day and that was a terrorist attack. I don't call it the "official story" I call it the truth. Now whether the Bush Administration had a plan ready in case of such an event that would allow us to invade the Middle East, that's a whole other story.


Is this some type of joke? nothing gained? look at the military industrial complex.. look at big oil, look at cotractors such as haliburton.. all these companies, industries have allot to gain... The admin is heavily involved financially with all these industries.. I would say theres a little more then a conflict of interest there.. there was much financial gain from this.. and military strategic gain as well.. not to mention the curtailing of civil liberties , the increase of power of the executive branch. I suggest your look at the PNAC(project for a new american century) which stated before 911 that we needed a new pearl harbor event. PNAC members include cheney.. So to say there was no gain is really ludcricous...



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Amater....gravity.

I've seen many videos of 'controlled demolitions' and the buildings are always falling inwards, in those vids.

The WTC Towers fell straight down. That's kinda how gravity works, for anyone who lives here on Earth.

ALSO, please remember how gravity works. You accelerate at 32 feet/per sec/per sec (About 10 m/sec/per sec)

The term to remember is ACCELERATE.

A human body in free-fall will accelerate, until air resistance begins to stabilize the free-fall speed....spread-eagled, the human is at about 120 MPH. Tucking in his/her arms and legs, the human can reach a higher speed....but before hitting the ground, will still achieve an equilibrium speed, based on air resistance.

Hopefully, the parachute will open before it's a red bloody mess on the ground......



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Amater....gravity.

I've seen many videos of 'controlled demolitions' and the buildings are always falling inwards, in those vids.

The WTC Towers fell straight down. That's kinda how gravity works, for anyone who lives here on Earth.


With no resistance from intact floors beneath. What removed that resistance? And *I* have watched implosions in abundance, and mostly...they fell straight down.


ALSO, please remember how gravity works. You accelerate at 32 feet/per sec/per sec (About 10 m/sec/per sec)

The term to remember is ACCELERATE.


Yes... And if there is no resistance, that is what one would expect. However, there SHOULD HAVE BEEN resistance - pauses in the collapse process as the weight held a moment or two before giving way.

Please remember how structures work.


A human body in free-fall will accelerate, until air resistance begins to stabilize the free-fall speed....spread-eagled, the human is at about 120 MPH. Tucking in his/her arms and legs, the human can reach a higher speed....but before hitting the ground, will still achieve an equilibrium speed, based on air resistance.


Yes. I am fully aware. But what happens if he falls on the top rung of a ladder, say? His acceleration is slowed as the rung strains to hold the weight. Then it breaks and the guy falls to the next rung and slows. If the rung is strong enough he will stop. If not, he will break through to the next rung, and so on.

THAT is what we SHOULD have seen with the OCT (Official Conspiracy Theory). That is NOT what we saw. We saw virtually NO RESISTANCE.

So.

Something removed that resistance. Maybe explosions at the base...? Thermite at intervals (also explaining the tidy lengths)? Makes sense to me.

And if there were explosions that so neatly removed resistance... Who do you suppose had their hand in that?



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join