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.

 

If The Official Story Is True, Why Hasn't Gov't Sued?

page: 2
70
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


The goverment is not going to legitamize these KooKs or loons, thats pretty much the reason why, and oh, "Freedom of Speech". Where do you live, this goverment in my lifetime has never silenced free speech, yes in vietnam they didnt allow cameras in but you could still say every little bad thing you wanted too and even burn the flag. If some ignorant person was going about saying you were purple and had flies living in your butt, would you defend yourself or just understand sane people will know thier crazy. If you recognize them you are giving there point of view credit. Anyway if the goverment sued , these people would more than likely use the "im crazy defense". lol




posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by adam_zapple
 


Bravo Adam, haters will always be haters.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


The 9-11 for truth movement is widely perceived as being a bunch crack pots with bunch of loonies being thrown for good measure . So nobody is bother taking any legal action against any group of persons they view in such a manner . Also since a lot of the 9-11 truth movements activity's occur on the internet which presents its obstacles to anyone who wants to take legal action .

Cheers xpert11 .



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


If the government sued every person who claimed they did or did not do something, that's all the government would be doing.

Let's be honest, these little DVD's don't bother the government one way or the other. If the DVD's were accurate and the government was guilty, don't you think those people would "go away" ? Do you honestly think that if the government killed 3000 people on 9/11, plus 5000 more US troops because of 9/11, that they would even hesitate for a second to "remove" anyone else that was in their way?



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   
They don't sue because there is freedom of speech. But I also think sunlight is the best disinfectant. Let the truthers get their weird conspiracies and kooky theories out into the sunlight of public opinion where they will (eventually) shrivel up and blow away. Real truth flourishes in the light of public opinion.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 06:36 AM
link   
If the official story is true, why didn't we see structural engineers crawling over every skyscraper in the world to see if this could happen again, as pesumably those towers weren't built to collapse so easily.

Why weren't insurance companies freaking out about the possible consequences and pushing up their premiums.

The silence after 911 was deafening. I've seen more ramifications from a bread toaster being thought unsafe and being recalled, than the reaction to the most astonishing structural failure in history.

Case closed - inside job. Gangsters run the world and will come for us all eventually.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWorldReallyIsThatBorin
They don't sue because there is freedom of speech. But I also think sunlight is the best disinfectant. Let the truthers get their weird conspiracies and kooky theories out into the sunlight of public opinion where they will (eventually) shrivel up and blow away. Real truth flourishes in the light of public opinion.


You don't find the "OCT" a little weird or kooky?

If you think that the "OCT" is so cut and dry then why all the "Truther" sites in the first place??

The proof is in the pudding my friend!



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
lol, thanks for the flags and stars folks. A very simple question indeed.




TA,

Sometimes the simple ones are the most damaging and most thought provoking, in your case I think you are 100% correct.

Some in the governmental sector would say that they do not want to give the 911 truther's any credit or attention, but the fact is that they would get their collective hats handed to them in a court of law and the truth would come out.

To many experts have become obsessed with 911 and have dug up countless facts that totally contradict the official story, not to mentions new facts that are very damning.




posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Or maybe they have better things to do, exploit. Like trying to lull you to sleep so they can steal more of your liberties?

911 consiparacies are so much garbage anyways. All of the Proof is always bunk anyways or no proof at all. People want to believe their is a conspiracy, and thus see a consipiracy when none exist.

Something happened. Was it a conspiracy? According to the dictionary, it was, since it involved more then one person. So I guess they got that right.

I think G.W. himself planted the bombs and pushed the buttons that brought down the Trade Centers. He got all dressed up in a Workmen Uniform and a mop and started plunging toilets until the whole building fell.


Satire aside. I think the government has better things to do dont you think? Why would they sue? It boils down to, NOT MATTERING! They are more concerned with lining their pockets with your gold and grabbing power.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


I would love to see it go to court....but they'll never go down man.

I heard Bush bought several thousand acres in Venezuala..and Cheney has a villa in Dubai. Guess what those two places have in common??

You guessed it..no extradition! I bet they've got their learjets on 5 min standbye!



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWorldReallyIsThatBorin
Let the truthers get their weird conspiracies and kooky theories out into the sunlight of public opinion where they will (eventually) shrivel up and blow away. Real truth flourishes in the light of public opinion.


Hmmn... so why is the MSM so afraid to expose them to the light of public opinion?
Why do you only hear about them on the internet? Why does the MSM consistently refuse to show them and pretend they don't exist?

Such as the U.S. Press For Truth about the 9/11 families' struggle against a government that blankly refused a public enquiry into ostensibly the greatest intelligence and national defence failure in U.S. history. And further documenting their dismay and disgust with the resulting 9/11 Commission whitewash.

Or the British Elephant in the Room about the growing international 9/11 truth movement.

Or the German 9/11 Flase Flag or the Italian Zero: 9/11 - in-depth exposés of the official 9/11 myths.

Or Blueprint for Truth - the Architecture of Destruction exploring the implausible idea that two planes and some fire caused the implosion of three steel-framed buildings.

Whatever you think about the issues and how they're handled in these documentaries, you must ask yourself - why doesn't the MSM want you to see them? Is the BBC fulfilling its charter of impartiality by refusing to air a single documentary which challenges the official story while making programmes which attempt to defend it?

When a German TV channel commissioned and screened 9/11 File Unsolved, the flack from the rest of the MSM was so great the channel issued an apology and fired the film-makers.


"Real truth flourishes in the light of public opinion." When it reaches the light of public opinion it does.


[edit on 17-2-2009 by EvilAxis]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 08:56 AM
link   
I'll tell you why the government doesn't bring a lawsuit. In a civil lawsuit, there is a thing called "discovery" that forces disclosure of all data, and the government cannot let that happen in open court. Besides, with all the evidence out there, the government would lose the case, and they know it.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
i've often wondered the same thing. why haven't they arrested anyone? brought charges against...well something. too much publicity maybe. as to your question, well there could be a lot of reasons for it not happening...just off the top of my head...

1. they want someone to ridicule
2. they enjoy the divisiveness
3. they don't want to lend credence to or even acknowledge the "nuts"
4. it's a psyop to counter a psyop to counter a psyop and intentional
5. (your guess) they're afraid to enter discovery

probably some combination of all of the above, but if i had to pick one, i'd say number 5.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Of course it's 5.

... nothing more needs to be said ...



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Law suits are pursued for one reason, to collect money for damages, or to prevent losing money from false claims. These conspiracy theorist's have little resources to pay damages making a suit moot.

You can't bleed a rock. All Lawyers know this.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   
For those claiming that the government hasn't sued truthers because it's "afraid of discovery"....

Does the discovery process still take place if the government is the one being sued? If this is the case, any old truther could sue them and subject them to the same discovery process, couldn't they?



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
This thread is confusing me. There are thousands of websites, documentaries, movies, and books blaming and blatantly accusing the government for every thing from the Hindenburg explosion, to being behind Al Capone, to UFOs, to RFK's assassination, up through the plane that crashed the other day. There are literally endless hypothetical suits against these so-called 'dissenters'. I doubt the government calls them dissenters, and yet I think they know that these people have influence. Whether the CTs are right or not, they have freedom of speech and they promote healthy debate and evolution of the status quo. America is not as 'blind' as some love to think (wanna feel special). People have raged against the government from time immemorial. This is not grounds for a suit, it's just America as usual.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


If the government sued every person who claimed they did or did not do something, that's all the government would be doing.

Let's be honest, these little DVD's don't bother the government one way or the other. If the DVD's were accurate and the government was guilty, don't you think those people would "go away" ? Do you honestly think that if the government killed 3000 people on 9/11, plus 5000 more US troops because of 9/11, that they would even hesitate for a second to "remove" anyone else that was in their way?



They have removed the people standing in their way. The lady that just died in the Buffalo crash. As if that was an accident. She met with Obama about an independent 9/11 investigation and dies in a plane crash a week later? I'm not buying that at all.

William Cooper predicted the NWO would commit 9/11 before it happened, and he was gunned down by police months later over him "not having a permit for his hand gun" or something along those lines. Um, yeah as is that is the reason he was gunned down.

Aaron Russo died of a "heart attack" right after he came out and said Nick Rockefeller told him about 9/11 before hand. Not specifically, but that it would be an "event", and out of the "event" we were going to go into Afghanistan, etc. Russo also made the "Freedom to Fascism" documentary about the illegal IRS income tax. I'm sure it was just a coincidence he got this heart attack shortly after giving the interview.

The facts are, they Powers that Be are removing the people that are important enough to remove.

I haven't seen those documentaries, the people behind them probably aren't seen as a big enough threat for the Powers that Be to care.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by burth179
They have removed the people standing in their way. The lady that just died in the Buffalo crash. As if that was an accident. She met with Obama about an independent 9/11 investigation and dies in a plane crash a week later?


Let's see some documentation supporting this claim (bolded)



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I haven't read the entire thread, so excuse me if someone already pointed this out. In order to "sue" someone, you'd have to be able to prove not only that what they said was incorrect, but that they knew it was incorrect when they wrote about it or said it.

That's not possible to do.



new topics

top topics



 
70
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join