It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hal Sisson, 86 - Author, Lawyer ... talks about 9/11

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 06:05 PM

Im about half way through so far so good .... jokes .... law .... 9/11 from the view point of a 86 year old Lawyer...

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link a third year law student, I am frustrated by this presentation.

Let me give you a story, (like Hal uses) A car accident where a drunk driver kills a mother and her 6 kids. One side says that the guy wasn't drunk and it was the mother that fell asleep at the wheel. The other side says "he was drunk" but.....he also was a pedophile that raped 1,000 kids in the past week.

Do you see the problem? People will focus on the insane claim that the guy raped 1000 kids in a week and will focus on that rather than the "incidental" fact that he was drunk.

This guy is doing that. one example for you, Silverstein being on National T.V. saying what he said. They showed an CBS video and had Silverstein's voice played over it when we all know that it was a PBS interview. WHY!!!?? do that? There is so much evidence out there to debunk the official story, why sabotage the credibility by introducing plain lies? How will we get to the truth that way?

If you saw an alien space craft and decided to add that they communicated with you that you would one day be the ruler of this planet. Who the hell is going to believe the part about you actually seeing an ET ship?

Hal did a bad job. I like him. He could have, should have, done a better job. He glossed over the thermite, ther"mate" part like it was the "drunk driver" part of the story. Stick to the science, the facts, don't throw in a bunch of crap. Was that hole he showed pictures of, "the actual photos" or did he use it as a demonstrative aid? Not admissible as evidence unless stated as such. He knows better.

I also didn't think it was helpful to portray the offical report as some "pixie dust" stupid, hard to follow story for people that don't know what he is talking about.

Bad. Bad. Bad. for those of us that want the "TRUTH" we aren't stupid and this presentation was a dog and pony show. Stick to the facts.
1) 3 buildings fell in a way that they all 3 shouldn't have.
2) they took the steel away
3) they were sheared off in some amazing coincidence like they would in a controled demolition
4) the molten fires for weeks
5) Silversteins amazing good fortune
6) the amazingly bad luck of John O'Neil
7) Cheney telling dude to ignore the one plane heading for the Pentagon
8) The confiscation of all the video around the Pentagon.
9) The Brits reporting WTC 7 coming down before it actually did.
10) The military exercises that got moved up to that day.
.....there is alot more of course. stick to the facts. The offical story is bunk but it doesn't mean that Bush was behind it. I'm not saying he wasn't or Cheney...but I'm not going to say they were unless the facts say that.

I just want the truth! This guy isn't helping.

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:26 PM
ever been to Japan ... they have the worlds most authentic artifical foods - to the degree you can't tell which is real and which is fake ... every restuarant displays their menu in their front window and it never spoils.
*moral just because something looks real does not necessarily mean it is.... until proven in a court of law...

[edit on 18-2-2009 by BornPatriot]

new topics

log in