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.


911 facts even Alex Jones doesn't discuss...

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 01:53 PM

Originally posted by mepatriot
Tell me all about why you came to ATS and I will answer in kind.

OMG, I haven't heard that kind of response to a legitimate question since 4th grade!
So, at the risk of sounding equally 4th grade, I'll respond---
I asked you FIRST!

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 01:59 PM
ED: My aren't we petty. I didn't have those exact numbers in front of me as I posted.

What are you here for? Just to nitpick on totally meaningless things?

My point was that we've been over that first point from my original post a thousand times and it really is time to move on now...but you can't, can you? because your whole purposed for being here is exactly as stated above.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:02 PM
No, elevatedone was trying to point out that the only reason that your at ATS is to get into RATS.

And this topic is just a point-well.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:06 PM
Browha: Be my guest.

I am already in correspondence with many people on these topics. Who I choose to be in correspondence with on them, is my prerogative. You are free, however, to do whatever you like.

(I have already been referred to the Secret Service--because they told me I had been, and been interviewed jointly by the State Police, FBI and BATF on my "activities.")

DTOM: OMG, 4th grade? What, it's been a whole year??
If you won't respond first, I am under no obligation to do so. If I were to ask you a question, are you under obligation to respond to me if I wouldn't offer to do so in kind first?

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:08 PM
Mig: I don't even know what "RATS" is, and couldn't give a RATS a** if I ever went there or not.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:11 PM
Well, my point is, that if you only discuss it with conspiracy theorist it'll never get out in mainstream.
If you discuss it with the big news papers then everyone finds out if they think they have sufficient basis for it. They would be the people who have the most to gain from printing it, and also the most to lose if it's not true, so they will scrutinize.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:12 PM
From this point forward I will be responding only to those posts that are directed at the major issues I have raised about 911 on this thread. I am finished responding to nit-picky nonsense that is (IMO) only intended to insult, discredit or add point to others quest for this mythical RATS place.

(I was told I could have gone there with 3500 points. Have I been there yet???)

So, it is official. Do not whine at me if I no longer respond to nonsense. You who intend to post garbage unrelated to the major 911 information provided in this thread will have to get your jollies picking on someone else on some other thread. I'm done with your childish games.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:14 PM
RATS - Really Above Top Secret

Really, you don't have to use stars when you wanna curse, there are filters.

But I have them turned off, cause I've been here more than a month, and don't act like a 15 year old politician....

EDIT: Oh, so you do know what it means...

[Edited on 22-4-2004 by mig12]

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:15 PM
Browha: Do you see the major papers covering ANYTHING that challenges the government cover story on 911??? What makes you think they would listen to me?

Have at it. If you have any luck, let me know.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:15 PM
I would like to know if you intend to respond to my post just above.

Edit: Bad timing on my part..

You need to consider that perhaps there isnt enough solid evidence for them to provide a basis for challenge?

[Edited on 22-4-2004 by browha]

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:16 PM
I thought I did...Am I missing something??

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:21 PM
Okay. Basically he's quoting Eastman (who has been howling around for some time, trying to get folks to believe HIM.) (among others)

I did a search on Peter Jennings for that purported two hour news story on all the destroyed investigations at the FBI because of the WTC bombings, and although I come up with a bazillion things that Jennings has done, I see no particular mention of that.

So... we have early morning weekday flights with not a lot of people on them (guys... I fly a lot. If I want to be on a Mostly Empty plane, I pick early flights or late flights on weekdays. You've got 5 terrorists against a planeload of people. They are NOT going to pick flights with 400 passengers.)

Next we have allegations of tenants on various floors of the WTC -- tenants supposedly hanging out in the spaces that other tenants are renting (including Sun Microsys.)

Then we have something about a heroic firefigher who died in action.

Following that, the allegation that this somehow "covers up" evidence from an FBI investigation (whose offices aren't in the building) ... on a case that is ALREADY (by Sept 11) being tried in Washington DC -- a "coverup bombing" that misses its target by...well... by however far it is from New York to Washington DC.

Then we have the lawsuit about gold price fixing. It was brought by one man (Howe.) He keeps filing, and apparently no lawyer will take it:

The lawsuit comes after Howe loses money on stocks (I love it... "I LOST MONEY IN THE STOCK MARKET-- ALL YOU GUYS ARE FIXING THE PRICES TO CHEAT ME!!! God should be a ZILLION dollars an ounce!!!")

Yes, governments do and have fixed the price of gold around the world ... it's for their exchange rate:

China has fixed the price of its gold internally to encourage people to buy jewelry.

Currently the price floats, as it has for some time, at about the $300-$450 level. It's going to continue to do this for some time to come. You've gotta ask why this bozo was in the markets in the first place. Apparently he believed the rules would change because he was buying gold stocks (talk about not understanding your market commodities!!) and when they didn't, he shrieks "FRAUD!" and tries to bring lawsuits.

...and this, folks, is why you don't invest in gold for the long term. The price is controlled within a range and you're never going to get rich from it. You can play the futures markets... but the wibble in the price is pretty small and you can really get burned if you don't move quickly with the price fluctuations.

...and the WTC was taken out to avoid discovery of something that anyone who invests in the futures markets is aware of and has been aware of for years and years and years.


posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:22 PM
I do have to admit one thing to you mepatriot .

I have been searching through all of the 9/11 threads for the topic of why the airliners were not full of passengers on 9/11.

I'm about 1/2 way through the 9/11 posts, so far I have not found where that topic has been covered.

If anyone else knows where we might find that information, please link it here.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:25 PM
The planes weren't full cause it was 9 am on a monday morning!

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:27 PM
We were posting replies at the same time, I edited it appropiately, please go back and re-read

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:27 PM

Originally posted by mig12
The planes weren't full cause it was 9 am on a monday morning!

But the way mepatriot is portraying it, they should have been ? this is a I think / you think arguement here, should we consider this point done along with the CNN WTC office space point ?

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:29 PM

Originally posted by mepatriot
So, it is official. Do not whine at me if I no longer respond to nonsense. You who intend to post garbage unrelated to the major 911 information provided in this thread will have to get your jollies picking on someone else on some other thread. I'm done with your childish games.

Oh my, isn't this rather handy. Have you not taken to heart my well-intended advice about burying your high-horse and discovering the genuine pleasures of collaborating with a community such as this?

I think you have not. How terrible.

I can't imagine anyone, even those who might support your theories, would take you seriously if you're unwilling to address the claims of those who ask you to look at the inaccuracies in your statements. If we all were to act this way, how wonderfully introspective and self congratulatory the entire world would be. We could simply say, "Those to are against me are speaking nonsense and I will have none of that!" How delightful that must be.

These "childish games" as you claim, are learned and intelligent people who are repeatedly attempting to help you understand error in your statements, or missing pieces in your research.

I sincerely fear for the future of your participation here if you adopt a policy of ignoring those who are honestly pointing out error. Or, one wonders, as we wonder, if an ejection from this fine community is that which you hope to achieve? Will it play to some bizarre attempt at a unique form of "credibility" you hope to establish? Certainly we have seen it before, "They banned me from ATS! I must have been getting too close to the truth and they couldn't handle it." Now that I ponder the potential of this agenda, every action of yours seems to be designed to provoke a reaction from the hard working people who run this domain, free for you to use.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:31 PM
mepatriot, perhaps I can help explain why this thread has lingered so long on one thing. It is simply because you are refusing to accept the evidence people are giving you. For the most part of the thread it simply looks as if you are not even reading the posts others are making.

Then later in the thread as the truth becomes more apparent with regards to your first point. The fact you continue not to accept others posts merely serves to make sure they will continue arguing this with you. If you want to move on to your other topics. Either concede the first point and start building a case for your others or you will never have any credibility.

As far as your other thread trying to 'call' out the mods who don't believe the official story. There seems to be a rift in your understanding of the staff and older members here.

None of us believe the official story simply because it is the official story. That would indeed be ignorant, and not what ATS is about. The reason senior members and staff are not instantly jumping on to your bandwagon. Is because we have all been up every possible road relating to 9-11 and have seen all the theories collapse in one form or another. There are many thousands of posts dedicated to this discussion floating around the board. That doesn't even count the discussions we had on earlier versions of the board that have since been lost.

Now, your claim about CNN was one that jumped out for me at least as it was one I had not heard of before. It is probably the only reason your thread wasn't closed and directed to another. That is why everyone began looking into that point, because it was new. It had promise.

As it so happens under closer inspection the flaws in the suggestion became evident. People tired of it and the discussion in general. You have other points, maybe you have a new insight onto the underbooked flights (which noone has ever brought up actual statistics of as far as I remember). Maybe there is even something in the Goldspan Goldprice fixing suggestion. But it is up to you to make a case for those arguments.

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:33 PM
Scratch that. I don't like talking about 9/11.

[Edited on 22-4-2004 by DeltaChaos]

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:34 PM
Indeed Winston,

I believe it is his way of saying, "Come on guys! Stop it!"

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in