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.

 

A place for actual Proof of 9/11 events

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I do want to encourage anyone with anything pertaining to the pentagon and PA to post stuff too. I would like to look at the entire events surrounding that day. If it is a document proving foreign intelligence warned us for example. Anything relating to what happend that day and is in line with what has been posted lately eg pics, links to source documents, quotes, etc.

[edit on 9/21/08 by MorningStar8741]




posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 05:37 AM
link   
www.asile.org...
www.asile.org...
www.asile.org...
where is the boeing at the pentagon
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
www.thepowerhour.com/news2/hunt_the_boeing_shanksville.htm
killtown.911review.org...
hunt the boeing at shanlsville



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 05:46 AM
link   
htbwtc2.blogspot.com...
hunt the boeing WTC2



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 05:48 AM
link   
911taboo.magnify.net...
hunt the boeing WTC1



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 05:57 AM
link   
www.spl.com...
more plane web sites

[edit on 22-9-2008 by fmcanarney]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 06:14 AM
link   
www.historycommons.org...:00am%20Sept%2011%202001
events preceeding 911 including warnings from intelligence overseas.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 06:17 AM
link   
www.globalresearch.ca...
the credentials of the WTC experts



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 06:38 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I was hoping to actually see things posted on this thread instead of link after link. Kinda disappointing as it seems to be the lazy way out
What a shame


[edit on 22-9-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


I was kind of hoping for that too but considering how hard it was to coral it this far, I am happy.

It has been suggested, and wisely so, that this should be more broken down. Say tackling a specific issue at a time. I have to admit I am a bit overwhelmed with the scale of the entire 9/11 phenomena so I was trying to figure out just how to do that and thought that maybe I would ask for any suggestions. I would really prefer U2U so we do not muddy this board for pages with people suggesting ideas of things.

I do appreciate all the links. It is still alot closer to what I was hoping for than we started out at.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
www.serendipity.li...
www.patrickcrusade.org...
911research.wtc7.net...
www.studyof911.com...
www.rense.com...
9-11themotherofallblackoperations.blogspot.com...
groups.google.com...
www.studyof911.com...
www.globalresearch.ca...
www.patrickcrusade.org...


Stuff like this would be much nicer if there was something about each link as in what it is supposed to be about. What is it evidence or proof of? What are you offering. It is kind of tough to just run through random link after random link. I appreciate the contribution but if you could at least tell us in here what it is that you are linking us to or planning to show with your lnks that would be really swell.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   
I read and studied the majority of those links I posted, plus more.
I read in the OP that links were okay.
I will not do that again since it seems they are below the standards and expectations of morningstar.
Given the fact that some of the links are not presented with what exactly is being discussed I will return and do that to the post in contention.
here is a good link,
www.saunalahti.fi...
for speculation on nuclear device, 4 th generation. Takes the evidence and deducts backward to conclude that a small hydrogen bomb was employed.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney

here is a good link,
www.saunalahti.fi...
for speculation on nuclear device, 4 th generation. Takes the evidence and deducts backward to conclude that a small hydrogen bomb was employed.



Looks like you forgot that you agreed with me that a nuke would result in an absolute minimun blast yield of 1.5 kt of TNT.

This is pure crazy. You have now discredited yourself to the point that any more posts of yours should be viewed as comedy/spam.



ETA: I forgot that you also claimed that the cores in the towers were concrete, with 3" rebar. This discredits your opinions even more, to the point that any person can only come to the conclusion that you have done absolutely ZERO research at all, and rely solely on CT sites. A truly pathetic effort. The only one that is worse is Labtops failed efforts at interpreting radar data for FL 77, and his utterly failed effort at interpreting seismic data to provide proof of explosives.



[edit on 23-9-2008 by Seymour Butz]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
I read and studied the majority of those links I posted, plus more.
I read in the OP that links were okay.
I will not do that again since it seems they are below the standards and expectations of morningstar.
Given the fact that some of the links are not presented with what exactly is being discussed I will return and do that to the post in contention.
here is a good link,
www.saunalahti.fi...
for speculation on nuclear device, 4 th generation. Takes the evidence and deducts backward to conclude that a small hydrogen bomb was employed.



Unfortunately, we're not discussing that subject on that website but here on ATS. Links are good for sourcing your comments but not as comments. Of course this is just my opinion. I was expecting more from posters on this thread. I'm still hoping to learn something from this thread so it would be wonderful to post the information here. Sorry to repeat myself morningstar and I won't mention it again but I was just so excited to see this thread appear.
I give you 41.5 thumbs up for trying
x 41.5

[edit on 23-9-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
I read and studied the majority of those links I posted, plus more.
I read in the OP that links were okay.
I will not do that again since it seems they are below the standards and expectations of morningstar.
Given the fact that some of the links are not presented with what exactly is being discussed I will return and do that to the post in contention.
here is a good link,
www.saunalahti.fi...
for speculation on nuclear device, 4 th generation. Takes the evidence and deducts backward to conclude that a small hydrogen bomb was employed.



Hey do not get me wrong, I did not mean to say your posts were below my expectations or standards. I did not mean to come across like that at all. It is just that a list of links without even something in the names of those links to give us a hint as to what it is for. I mean, even a one or two word summary would make me happy.

Evidence of such and such -link here

evidence of such and such - link here

get it?

I did not mean to disparage your contributions, I appreciate all everyone has added. I just feel it will more informative and relative to ATS if your post at least tells us what we might be looking at because honestly, how many people jump on random links with no description to see what it is. But you know if it says "proof of thermite here" and then the link, people are going to want to read that one. I just thought that the closer to ATS things stayed, the more conducive to and ATS forum it would be. Sorry if it came across as not being appreciative of your contribution. Like I have said before, I appreciate everyone's additions and I do know that some stuff is just to big to repost here so I get links. Just give us a hint what that link goes to. Just think of all the people who will not follow random links for fear of viruses and other malware. If you tell us it is something worth looking at, chances are people who agree and disagree will want to see what it is you are using for that claim.


Seriosuly, thanks for any on-topic addition. I really appreciate them, even if they have to be links. Just set us up for what your post is going to provide us with evidence of before the links, pretty please.

I hope it came out a little better this time.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   
blueprints for world trade center:
911research.wtc7.net...

911 proof of prior warnings, war games, eyewitnesses, pentagon:
911proof.com...

complete 911 timeline:
www.historycommons.org...:00am%20Sept%2011%202001

more evidence of insider knowledge prior to 911
www.globalresearch.ca...

[edit on 24-9-2008 by fmcanarney]



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


Thank you, that is much more helpful and I would bet more enticing to people passing over your posts.




top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join