It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by fleabit
After the attacks, sure, he is in hiding. After the attacks he ADMITTED to planning.
Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks
September 17, 2001 Posted: 11:21 AM EDT (1521 GMT)
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Islamic militant leader Osama bin Laden, the man the United States considers the prime suspect in last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, denied any role Sunday in the actions believed to have killed thousands.
In a statement issued to the Arabic satellite channel Al Jazeera, based in Qatar, bin Laden said, "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it.
"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons," bin Laden's statement said.
As far as Operation Northwood or any other operation goes, that's misdirection on your part to try and prove this was a coverup. It proves NOTHING other than what people will TRY to plan. You are suggesting here, that they managed to carry it off successfully.
Er.. and Fleece.. which is it for you? I thought you supported the flyover theory? Um.. but now you say it's a painted jet. But.. no.. it's a missile! Hm.. I am not sure you know what you really believe. As long as it was a government cover-up, you're happy.
And if a single WTC building had been flown into and collapsed, it would STILL be 9/11. It would still be a vivid statement. Heck.. why not just blow up the stock exchange, since supposedly they were trying to do in our economy?
And yes.. it WAS perfectly conducted, if the best you can go on is light poles would have flown farther, "pull out" means it was demolition, and someone saying missile could ONLY mean they are apparently brilliant enough to pull this off.. but STUPID enough to blurt this out to the public. Hmm.. he couldn't possibly be talking about using planes as missiles.. because it doesn't fit in with your theories.
Originally posted by Trolloks
fine, you saw the planes, but your still avoiding answering the question.
How can 2 planes bring down 3 buildings??
Originally posted by tezzajw
The most active of all imaginations would be the one that tries to define a commercial passenger aeroplane as being a missile.
How often did an ex-pilot, such as yourself, ever refer to any other plane in the sky as a missile?
Active imaginations, indeed...
[edit on 10-1-2009 by tezzajw]
Originally posted by cluckerspud...decide over chicken or fish...
Originally posted by pinch
Originally posted by tezzajw
They're all laughing at us.
You got that right. Laughing at you because of of your creative imaginations. One of the definitions: "Mis"sile\, n. [L. missile.] A weapon thrown or projected or intended to be projcted (sic), as a lance, an arrow, or a bullet."
Read that again - "a weapon...projected" A 90 ton airliner used as a weapon on an attack against a building is indeed, a missile. A manned-missile, in this case. A car can be a weapon, depending on how it is used. A hammer can be a weapon. A pencil can be a weapon. An airliner can be a weapon.
So yes, we are ALL laughing at you and will continue to do so on a regular basis.
[edit on 10-1-2009 by pinch]
If you really want to hear PROFESSIONAL opinions go check out Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. These are guys who know what they are talking about, who DID NOT PROFIT from 911 and don't have any reason to lie about what they know.
Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by fleabit
Made of very dense metal,tungsten,which is also used as a high production cutting bit at up to red heat.
Didn't think so.