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.

 

911 Conspiracy Facts - Incriminating

page: 5
77
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You presume for us not to accept Don Phillips, reporter for the Washington Post, Al Baker, Craig Gordon or Liam Pleven, reporters for Newsday, Matthew Purdy or Matthew L. Wald, Don Van Natta Jr., reporters for the New York Times, or Pat Milton, wire reporter for the Associated Press -- as being able to tell us anything useful about the facts in this matter. Neither would you allow us to accept Robert E. Francis, Vice Chairman of the NTSB, Joseph Cantamessa Jr., Special Agent In Charge of the New York Office of the F.B.I., Dr. Charles Wetli, Suffolk County Medical Examiner, the Pathologist examining the bodies, nor unnamed Navy divers, crash investigators, or other cited officials, including Boeing Aircraft representatives a part of the crash investigative team -- as a qualified party in this matter, and thus, dismisses this material out of hand. Good logic, -- about as good as saying 150 eye witnesses aren't qualified. Then you demand us to produce evidence which you know is not accessible to us, evidence held by FBI, whom we accuse of cover up. Thus, only YOU are qualified to tell us what to believe? Witnesses be damned? Radar tracks be damned? Satellite tracks be damned? Reporters be damned? Photographs be damned? Government statements be damned? Is there a pattern here?

[edit on 10/22/2008 by cashlink]




posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
For example, someone above claimed the supposed flight path was not the real one (it instead flew north of the Citgo). What was their proof for this? Apparently a handful of eyewitnesses.

Please explain why the FAA showed the flight path of the alleged plane was North of Citgo.

In case you don't realise it, the FAA is a government agency.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

The Bush admin can do NOTHNG right, what makes you think they could possibly silence or frighten anyone.


Good post. It highlights the now-almost-8-year-long facination that those suffering from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) have with this wild and crazy soup sandwich of an idea that the BFEE (Bush Family Evil Empire) is the very personification of galactic evil and that they control every element of the world and the universe - press, people, money, power, science and technology, foreign governments, weather, space, the moon, everything.

In the very next breath those same people claiming all the above say that Bush and his crew are history's biggest buffoons and couldn't find their backside with both hands even if someone told them where it was.

THAT is what makes this whole thing so funny and enjoyable.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by mind is the universe
It's call agendas, and everyone has one

I quoted this to say
EXACTLY

The same goes for the youtube videos people put so much trust in along with the 9/11 conspiracy sites.

Since most of them are started from people who harbor anti government feelings in the first place, what makes anyone believe those sites and videos are unbiased and the truth? That makes no sense. Of course they're biased and are only going to show one side. So why do people put so much trust in them...

Are people foolish enough to believe propaganda only goes one way? I know the word "sheeple" is used a lot. What is the argument that the people who follow these biased videos and websites aren't sheeple?



Neocons, have created these regimes so carefully, processed and cautiously in the the hope that you don't wonder the deception, or ask the questions of the real agendas behind the scenes, the ones they hide from you.

Is this conjecture or is there substantial evidence to back this up. I ask because every "neocon" regime has so far failed miserably.


The Neocons/Coops/Admins could do all you have asked and wondered above. But in order, to do the nasty gritty work. They need the good image behind them, right. Good image is what we the sheeple are fooled by.

So...Bush and his admin has a record low approval rating because...........all part of the plan right? lol



Your last question, was a good question to point out. They "could" just go in and dominate go the ME and wipe out a few million But would this represent the people afterall?

Back then it would have.
Again, the first Gulf War and worldwide approval.
If their main goal was to "dominate" the ME, why didn't they do it then?
They had 500,000 troops to do so (compared to just



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
sO TO THE DEBUNKERS.....



Do you think the Wargames of 911 impeded the government or aided the terrorists?



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ThatsJustWeird
 


When are you going to stop attacking everybody “opinion”.


(Since most of them are started from people who harbor anti government feelings in the first place)

WOW! That is a strong statement to make, so you are Dr Sigismund Shlomo Freud, and you have examined all of the people who make videos on youtube about 911.
You are not a psychiatrist, so stop psychoanalying every one!


(what makes anyone believe those sites and videos are unbiased and the truth? That makes no sense. Of course they're biased and are only going to show one side. So why do people put so much trust in them...)


The Government version of 911 is one sided and is biased Why do you put so much trust in them?


(What is the argument that the people who follow these biased videos and websites aren't sheeple?)

Really! What are they?


(Is this conjecture or is there substantial evidence to back this up. I ask because every "neocon" regime has so far failed miserably.)

What is your point? care to explain this?


(So...Bush and his admin has a record low approval rating because...........all part of the plan right? lol )

Whould you like to explain your point here?


(all part of the plan right? lol)

would you explain your point on this comment?



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 




Your alice in wonderland logic does not take away from the facts presented in the Original post on page 1.

Do you think the wargames on 911 involving fake hijacked aircraft aided the terrorists or impeded the government??

Everytime a debunker gets schooled in my threads, they disapear and a 'new' user appears witht he same ignorant banter, baiting, name calling, ad hominen attacks and derailing?

Remember the 1st past of this post has undebunkable facts.

[edit on 22-10-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
dble post. see above post.

[edit on 22-10-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
When are you going to stop attacking everybody “opinion”.

I'd really like you to start quoting when you say stuff like this.
This is yet another post were you attribute something to me that is completely false.
I'd ask you to stop but I know you won't since that seems to be your only defense, or whatever.



(Since most of them are started from people who harbor anti government feelings in the first place)

WOW! That is a strong statement to make, so you are Dr Sigismund Shlomo Freud, and you have examined all of the people who make videos on youtube about 911.
You are not a psychiatrist, so stop psychoanalying every one!

What in the world are you talking about?
All you have to do is look at their previous works. No psychoanalysis needed.



(what makes anyone believe those sites and videos are unbiased and the truth? That makes no sense. Of course they're biased and are only going to show one side. So why do people put so much trust in them...)

The Government version of 911 is one sided and is biased Why do you put so much trust in them?

Exactly.


(What is the argument that the people who follow these biased videos and websites aren't sheeple?)

Really! What are they?


I don't think you understand the question. If the people who blindly follow the Government's version are sheeple, then why aren't the people who blindly follow these conspiracies sheeple also?
I'm pointing out there is no difference.



(Is this conjecture or is there substantial evidence to back this up. I ask because every "neocon" regime has so far failed miserably.)

What is your point? care to explain this?

This (and the rest of my quotes you quoted) had to do with my converstation with 'mind is the universe'.....which is why I quoted him....



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
These are people that happily tie bombs to themselves at the age of 15, and blow themselves up for their cause. You really don't know how their minds work.


Again that is a false belief, sprayed by the media


People don't just strap bombs to themselves for a cause. ffs. Turn off fox news. People who kill themselves are fighting for freedom. It was taken from them. The Western World has no respect for nations within the ME. 50 years of the Neocons, CIA and the millitary ravsihing, killing and taking their homes. Setting up terrorists organisations, putting in dictatorships and all the likes. Millions have died in the ME due to these regimes. The survivors that are left have to grieve the one's they have lost. What about Palistine??? What has happened to the people of the ME, is unnacceptable. They cannot stop the US millitary, so they take their own lives instead. Sad but that is the logic.

You don't actually know what reality is sir.


Your notions of reality, is like a tiger eating cake..............




After the prior two wars, which included flimsy lack of evidence about WMD, we were able to go to war. Why in the world would we first of all, need to do something this extreme to do so again, and moreso, why to this extent? Flying two planes into the twin towers wouldn't be enough? Why would they need to plan even more?
Well it worked, it took two towers and your wallowing trust behind your government to create this mess, shouldn't that answer your question.




If I were a terrorist, I'd plan as many targets as possible, in case some don't work our (ala PA plane). If I were the government, I'd choose a large, single target, so that there was a much lower chance of being found out. And why WOULD we choose the Pentagon? We'd attack and kill our own soliders and leadership? That makes no sense at all.
It does, it was to make it look even more like a terrorist attack. The funny thing is we have no pictures, evidence or anything that shows what hit the Pentagon, it makes it even more convincing the government just wanted to hide the evidence, and just make people only realise that they were "terrorists" trying to hit us





As far as believing the government, that's not really the case. I am believing common sense, the mass of media coverage (especially the day off), and the preponderence of evidence available. The burden of proof falls on those claiming our own government would commit mass-murder, not on those who already have established a solid mountain of evidence.
Well you haven't seen common sense
If a government can kill 1,000,000 Iraqis civilians illegally, what makes you think they care about 3,000 people in the twin towers. Now where is the common sense here. People live in Iraq and People live in New York.




[edit on 22-10-2008 by mind is the universe]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

The same goes for the youtube videos people put so much trust in along with the 9/11 conspiracy sites.


It doesn't matter if it's from youtube or wherever, it's your choice to believe sources, there is nothing wrong with youtube. There also is a difference with youtube and the T.V, for example. T.V you are only shown what's provided, youtube is instant info at your fingers. Even though both are still monitored by the government


But onto my point.

If you see George Bush sitting down in a classroom, what do you see?

"pretending" he was distracted
which is visual evidence, doesn't mean there is something wrong with youtube or wherever the source is. He's sitting there, why was he flimed that day? How come he wasn't filmed for been in more classrooms throughout his presidency, why just this day? Why was he sitting down looking like he was "spaced" why? Was there a reason for this


The fact is, no matter where the evidence is, your eyes cannot lie. It's your own fault if you cannot see for what it is. Unless you want to follow the govenment and media bandwagon, which I know you do already.

I see Bush sitting in a classroom been filmed intentionally that day, uh the day the towers was gonna hit. amazing timing really
It's perfect, who is everyone going to look at when everyone knows that the towers was hit, BUSH. So they need to plot something to make sure that he's not aware of what's to happen. God it's so obvious.

Where is the most serene, calm and distractive place for a leader to be if an atrocity was to happen. A classroom full of kids for christ sakes. The logic is here, it's such a fake stunt show. All setted up to make your president like he's "unaware" of what's to happen. When he is told, his behaviour again, looks guided, played out and not changing?. Why?

If your a leader and you just heard from offiicial's your country was under attack. What would you honestly do?

Would you stop reading the poem? would you stop and say "excuse me classroom for a moment" That would be the logic right? Do you have the discernment to see with what I'm trying to tell you here? Take a deep breath and look at things closely please, just try.

"if" he was not aware of the towers been hit for example, how come he didn't react when he was told, Imagine yourself as Bush in that moment, honestly you would not sit there if you just heard this, the fact is he knew it was gonna happen his behaviour didn't change and was following a damn script, because the deception is enough to convince anyone of that

In reality he knew the towers was coming down end of story. all part of the elitss goals, and this video was to fool you, it didn't fool me......

Why was he filmed
Why was their officials been flimed when he was told?, how come he didnt react. The whole situation was far from real or logical. Anyone who has clear rational thinking will no that the whole Bush not knowing that those towers was comming down before he was told, are not that intellegent................

Learn this word please. It's called DECEPTION. The evidence is there if you just clear your head and become aware to reality.




Since most of them are started from people who harbor anti government feelings in the first place, what makes anyone believe those sites and videos are unbiased and the truth? That makes no sense. Of course they're biased and are only going to show one side. So why do people put so much trust in them...
I don't pay attention to the waffle and conspiracies. what does that make me then?

I look at what I've seen with my eyes. I look at before event, then after. I look at the government's every move and behaviour in relations to 9/11. I look at the reasons for and against each story. I look at the reaity, I look for balance in my views, that hold clarity and sense.

Then I use hindsight, I look back over the 7 years, and try to gradully bring pieces together that hold reasonable logic. For example look at how many times. Bush in interviews stumbled over the 9.11 questions that are still not answered today
Look at the constant lies, been sprouted





Are people foolish enough to believe propaganda only goes one way? I know the word "sheeple" is used a lot. What is the argument that the people who follow these biased videos and websites aren't sheeple?
EXACTLY, this is precisely what the Governments want us to do, get lost in conspiracies, so you don't look at them or associate them to 9/11. Now there is logic




Is this conjecture or is there substantial evidence to back this up. I ask because every "neocon" regime has so far failed miserably.
Well guess you know nothing about the CIA then




So...Bush and his admin has a record low approval rating because...........all part of the plan right? lol
There is people like me existing in the world
alongside many more non sheeple. Other people are starting to wake up, are you? Explains his low approval rating. See that make's sense.



Back then it would have.
Again, the first Gulf War and worldwide approval.
If their main goal was to "dominate" the ME, why didn't they do it then?
They had 500,000 troops to do so (compared to just


As I said, to the people they don't want to be seen as a dictatorship, but in reality they are, but people like you just don't get it
Remember it's sheeple that approve wars, because it's only sheeple who fight wars. If you really think about it.

The people will wake up, if the neocons push the envelope to far. Other's would wake up to much. The government need to keep people dumbed down. My gut instinct tells me, that 9/11 for them was a step to far and people are waking up, They didn't expect people to waken up. As society in general are to dumb to see clear logic today. They are trying to desperate to cover it up


That's why even on this site, you have the place teaming with secret government agents trying to sprout sheeple talk for sheeple to respond and believe in.





[edit on 22-10-2008 by mind is the universe]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Please explain why the FAA showed the flight path of the alleged plane was North of Citgo.

In case you don't realise it, the FAA is a government agency.


That "FAA" video also showed the aircraft slamming into the side of the building. You going to accept that, as well? Great. We're done here. We've established the aircraft hit the building. Someone turn out the lights' please.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by pinch
That "FAA" video also showed the aircraft slamming into the side of the building. You going to accept that, as well? Great. We're done here. We've established the aircraft hit the building. Someone turn out the lights' please.

So you can't explain why the FAA video showed the plane flying North of Citgo?

Interesting, pinch. Thanks for admitting that you can't do it. Why should one Federal agency contradict other Federal agencies? They've had seven years to get it right by now, so what's the problem? It must be a sore point for people who believe in the official story, to watch the FAA show a flight path that goes North of Citgo. At what point do you feel cheated that Federal agencies can't agree what happened with the alleged Flight AA77?

pinch, you have not yet validated your claim that the FBI have all of the parts by serialised numbers and are not releasing them. Do I need to post your quote again to jog your memory?



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Is this conjecture or is there substantial evidence to back this up. I ask because every "neocon" regime has so far failed miserably.



Really can you explain this more please? I'm not sure what your stance meaning on what they failed


Did they fail you? or themselves?


Hope you see light, right now your surrounded by darkness. I pray to god, you will see things through one day!!!!!



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 08:15 PM
link   
A Detailed Response to Ivan’s “Incriminating Facts”



Originally posted by IvanZanaOn the very morning of 9/11/01, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise using REAL planes.


From the USA today article you sourced:


"We have planned and executed numerous scenarios over the years to include aircraft originating from foreign airports penetrating our sovereign airspace," Gen. Ralph Eberhart, NORAD commander, told USA TODAY


Foreign Airports.

Let’s look at your next part of the War Games statement:


Originally posted by IvanZanaMoreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were MOVED UP to September 11th by persons unknown.



As the 9/11 attacks are taking place, a large military training exercise called Global Guardian is said to be “in full swing.” It has been going on since the previous week.

source:[Omaha World-Herald, 2/27/2002; Omaha World-Herald, 9/10/2002]

You state that it was moved up by persons unknown. How is this in anyway incriminating? It was supposed to me in October, but it was changed. So? There could be a thousand reasons why this happens.

Most importantly, these “war games” are not atypical:


Global Guardian is an annual exercise sponsored by US Strategic Command (Stratcom) in cooperation with US Space Command and NORAD. One military author defines Stratcom as “the single US military command responsible for the day-to-day readiness of America’s nuclear forces.”

Source: [Arkin, 2005, pp. 59]

I don’t understand how this is incriminating at all.


Originally posted by IvanZana
Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks.


No he wasn’t in charge of ALL of the war games. I will direct you to here:

Statement by the President
Domestic Preparedness Against Weapons of Mass Destruction

www.whitehouse.gov...

Clearly he was responsible for overseeing the "Office of National Preparedness" he was not personally involved with everything they did.

The order mentions the DOD, but only in connection with “programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction consequence management “. This is more about planning and training for what might happen if a WMD were to be used in a US city. To claim this let Cheney take charge of NORAD exercises on 9/11 is not accurate.

Your source Mike Ruppert at his “From the Wilderness” site is grasping at straws here.

Your next “Fact” regarding Transportation Secretary, Norman Mineta is an old, rehashed, recycled, and debunked.

To put it simply… his timeline is inaccurate.

I ask that you read this incredibly detailed webpage dedicated to his testimony and the inaccuracies surrounding it:


www.911myths.com...

Questioning the Mineta timeline


One immediate issue with Mineta's story is the implausible number of activities he squeezes in to a very short time. The second impact at the WTC occurred at around 9:02:59, for instance, and Mineta told the 9/11 Commission that he reached the White House at 9:20: around 17 minutes later.
Mineta has said the White House was 7 minutes away, though, something that was confirmed with Google maps.
10 minutes remaining.
Mineta also explained that he talked with Richard Clarke for "4 or 5 minutes" in the White House Situation Room. We'll take the lower estimate: that's 6 minutes remaining.
He also has to make three shorter journeys: office to car, car through White House security and to the Situation Room, Situation Room to PEOC. If we allow 60 seconds for each of those (implausibly short: can anyone really check in to White House security and get into the Situation Room in a minute) then we have three minutes remaining.
And in those three minutes Mineta must react to the sight of the second crash, go to his conference room, cancel a meeting, return to his office, exchange words with Jane Garvey, talk on the phone to the CEOs of United and American Airlines, consult with his officials, and decide to go to the White House.
This all sounds ludicrously optimistic. Here's an example timetable, just conjecture, but still useful as an example of how tight this scheduling is:

• 9:02:59 - 9:03:15 - see and react to second impact

• 9:03:15 - 9:04:00- leave office for conference room, cancel meeting, return to office, discuss situation

• 9:04:00 - 9:05:30 - take call from CEO of United Airlines

• 9:05:30 - 9:07:00 - call CEO of American Airlines

• 9:07:00 - 9:08:00 - receive update from Flaherty, told to go to White House

• 9:08:00 - 9:08:45 - gets manual, papers, alerts driver and security guy who travel with him

• 9:08:45 - 9:09:30 - leave office, go to car

• 9:09:30 - 9:15:00 - leave building for White House, arrive at White House security

• 9:15:00 - 9:16:00 - pass through Security, go to situation room

• 9:16:00 - 9:19:00 - arrive at situation room, talk to Richard Clarke for "four or five" minutes

• 9:19:00 - 9:20:00 - leave situation room, go to PEOC


Please go to the link for a more detailed explanation but this is one jam packed 17 minutes don’t you think?
www.911myths.com...


Originally posted by IvanZanaMoreover, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings…


This is a typical appeal to authority at it’s finest. But hey, lets talk about your ATC person, Robin Hordon who was fired during the airline strike in 1981 as an ARTCC controller in Boston. Been a long time since he has been in the tower huh? He was no where NEAR airport on 911, so he has ZERO clue as to what was going on.

Instead of listening to the now “comedy producer,” why would you not listen to
Colin Scoggins who was the military liaison at Boston ARTCC on the morning of 9/11? He became the lynch pin of the air defense response by providing constant information to the NEADS control center. He thinks 9/11 was not an inside job. Why haven’t you researched him?


Why not listen to Lieutenant Colonel Timothy Duffy? He was Operations Manager for an air defense squadron and was a pilot on alert duty on 9/11. He was lead of the PANTA flight that was scrambled from Otis ANGB to intercept AA11. He also answered the call that would be the FAA's first scramble request from Cape TRACON at about 0835. Further, he also intercepted Lufthansa Flight 592 in February 1993 - the only hijack escort in the ten years prior to 9/11. Have you looked into him?? No? Why not? Was he in on it too?


Originally posted by IvanZana
Additionally this diagram shows that the hijacked planes flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing.


What does that show you? That on one point in time these planes flew over military bases? So? These bases all had fighter jets on stand by? They knew what plane to look for ??


Originally posted by IvanZana……see this war game proposal created before 9/11 revolving around Bin Laden and including "live-fly exercises" involving real planes, later confirmed by this official Department of Defense website.


You didn’t link the proposal correctly as you failed to do on many of your links to sources in your OP. But you did link a source to the DOD that does not in any way shape of form confirm ANY live-fly exercises revolving around OBL before 911:


The exercises, Snyder said, focus on possible threats in U.S.-Canadian skies in today's post-Cold War world. The purpose of the exercises is to improve preparedness and interagency coordination for a variety of airborne threats and contingencies, he added. -- planned before the Sept. 11 attacks, Snyder said.

www.defenselink.mil...

Then you post this:

Which scenario is more likely from a strictly logistical perspective:
(1) An outsider sitting in a cave defeating the air defense system of the sole military superpower; or
(2) Someone like Cheney….

This is an ignorant point. Making OBL and Al Qaeda look like “cavemen” is inaccurate as we all know that many of his followers are very well educated, including many of the hijackers. OBL himself is very intelligent. As shown above in my post Cheney was NOT involved in all of that. It was also shown that these war games happen ever year.

Your final point:


Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks (testimony of Senator Mark Dayton), so as to neutralize their ability to intercept the hijacked airliners.

I believe Pinch is better versed with this. What I do know is that the pilots flew out over the Atlantic because it was assumed to be an attack from outside the United States.

To sum it up; your OP has presented little facts at all. The facts that you do present do not in anyway show anything incriminating. Therefor the title of your thread and the contents of your OP are inaccurate.











[edit on 10/22/0808 by ThroatYogurt]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:04 PM
link   
I guess you didnt read anything otherwise you would of not typed all that unsourced versions of your reality.
Provide sources for your un coroberated claims or bugger off for you have yet to provide anything with substance.

Just because you are having a hard time excepting the truth that the official story has been debunked, you need not come here and share your delusions or hope people would be that ignorant or naive.







[edit on 22-10-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:11 PM
link   
MstU:
The whole first part of your post is just opinion at best.
Fact is Bush is videoed and photographed at EVERY event. EVERY single one. ALL politicians and celebrities are.
You don't see it because....well why? The schools will have a copy of the video and the photos but why would anyone else? You can get I suppose if you wanted. But..again...why?
We see the vid of 9/11 oh maybe it was one of the most important times in U.S. history.


Originally posted by mind is the universe
.....For example look at how many times. Bush in interviews stumbled over the 9.11 questions that are still not answered today
Look at the constant lies, been sprouted

Got any vids or links. I can't recall him being asked any tough questions about 9/11, at least not recently.



Well guess you know nothing about the CIA then

What?

Truman was a neocon?


There is people like me existing in the world
alongside many more non sheeple. Other people are starting to wake up, are you? Explains his low approval rating. See that make's sense.

So, their plans aren't working. Right.
Like I said.


As I said, to the people they don't want to be seen as a dictatorship, but in reality they are, but people like you just don't get it
Remember it's sheeple that approve wars, because it's only sheeple who fight wars. If you really think about it.

You didn't address my post at all.
Again, they had the "sheeple" on their side!
They had the means.
They had the manpower.
They had the support.
etc.
etc.

Yet the all powerful neocons didn't finish the job.


My gut instinct tells me, that 9/11 for them was a step to far and people are waking up, They didn't expect people to waken up.

Nonsense. You're telling me their able to plan and execute something like 9/11 and all the other allpowerful stuff you claim they do and plan with godlike foresight, yet couldn't see that? lol


That's why even on this site, you have the place teaming with secret government agents trying to sprout sheeple talk for sheeple to respond and believe in.

Is this opinion or fact?



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
I guess you didnt read anything otherwise you would of not typed all that unsourced versions of your reality.
Provide sources for your un coroberated claims or bugger off for you have yet to provide anything with substance.

Just because you are having a hard time excepting the truth that the official story has been debunked, you need not come here and share your delusions or hope people would be that ignorant or naive.



Are you serious!?
That stuff Throat posted is in YOUR sources!!!! Wow, you didn't even read your own links!?





(he provided sources to everything that wasn't. He also has the source next to EVERYTHING he quoted. Seriously, what are you talking about?)

I would honestly like to hear a response...a real response....to his post instead of doing what you just did (which unfortunately is typical. If this is about finding answers, why would you just completely dismiss something without a reason?)

[edit on 22-10-2008 by ThatsJustWeird]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Did the WARGAMES using multiple simulated hijacked aircraft taking place on September 11th aid the 'terrorists' or impede the government?


[edit on 22-10-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
I guess you didnt read anything otherwise you would of not typed all that unsourced versions of your reality.
Provide sources for your un coroberated claims or bugger off for you have yet to provide anything with substance.


Once again Ivan you have failed and failed miserably. As it was pointed out to you, I used your sources. (the ones that worked) I find it laughable that roughly 64 people starred your OP. It is obvious they didn't read your sources because many of them didn't work. I even found an error (i wont call it a lie) on one of them.

The additional sources I used I provided links to. I will however give you more if you are interested in educating yourself:

Let's start with Norman Mineta:

60 Minutes II (8:00 PM ET) - CBS October 24, 2001 Wednesday

govinfo.library.unt.edu...

www.dailycal.org...

www.msnbc.com...

www.achievement.org...

www.boston.com...


Lieutenant Colonel Timothy Duffy hewas lead of the PANTA flight that was scrambled from Otis ANGB to intercept AA11:

www.gwu.edu...

Colin Scoggins who was the military liaison at Boston ARTCC on the morning of 9/11:

www.gwu.edu...


Robin Hordon claims to have worked on a hijacking and assisted with another. Hordon worked in Boston from 1970-1981; were any planes hijacked heading to or from Boston in that time frame? I can tell you that I have lived in Boston (Suburban) during that entire time and I can not remember any hijackings that took place. (I was young back in his early days at Logan.

You want a source? www.Pilotsfor911Truth.com He is a member there.


Just because you are having a hard time excepting the truth that the official story has been debunked, you need not come here and share your delusions or hope people would be that ignorant or naive.


Ah, the one having a hard time around here with "truth" is not me sir. I suggest you edit your OP and place the corrections as I have pointed them out to you.



new topics

top topics



 
77
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join