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 facts even Alex Jones doesn't discuss...

page: 17
1
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Condorcet
Bump for the most important topic of our era.

The Bush administration is guilty of criminal negligence or criminal conspiracy. Either way they deserve prosecution and imprisonment.

Let's deal with this situation before it gets worse.

Two bumps and a thumbs up




posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone

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 ?


They aren't. And I do remember the news saying (almost constantly) that these flights were picked because first thing on Monday mornings they weren't very full.

The terrorists did their homework. They found the flights where security was lax and where there were likely to be the fewest passengers (and thus the least trouble.) If YOU were going to take over a facility/vehicle, would you pick a time when it was crowded with people or a time when there were only a few around?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Guys, Osama Bin Laden was in the U.S. on 9/11/01.

He was at the World Trade Center that day, that is why they sent the planes to destory it. To kill Bin Laden. He is dead!

This government sucks!!



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Alternatively they werent in it to kill that many people. They could have hit 1-2 hours later and killed, literally, 10x more.
Instead they chose the early morning flights before most people had arrived at the office.
I think it was more symbolic to show the US that it isnt invincible, rather than to kill people.

-- This is just a new viewpoint I have literally just taken on, feel free to explore it



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by subzero360
Guys, Osama Bin Laden was in the U.S. on 9/11/01.

He was at the World Trade Center that day, that is why they sent the planes to destory it. To kill Bin Laden. He is dead!

This government sucks!!


3 words....

What the #?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   

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


Seems to me that monday morning the planes would be more full than say.....tuesday.
It is the start of the week right?
Thats when most business people fly isnt it?
What is the logic behind your thought?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:50 PM
link   
First, it was a Tuesday morning, not Monday, and secondly these flights were indeed routinely over-booked. They are never at 25% capacity (IMO) or they will not fly them inter-continentally at that loss of revenue. They are delayed/cancelled instead...but not this time.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Let me quote you

"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?"



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Are you going to provide facts and statistics to back that up or just leave it as your opinion?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kano
Are you going to provide facts and statistics to back that up or just leave it as your opinion?


Agreed.

Put up or shut up.


.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Byrd: You really need to see the whole 60-minutes clip. This guy, Andy D. died trying to rescue (and this is close a direct quote from the clip as I can recall) people "trapped in the debris in the Port Authority command center on the 23rd floor," AND "we had to tunnel through the debris to try to get them out."

When you recall that, seperately from taping this off of "60 Minutes", I had interviews Lou Cachiolli twice and he confirmed hearing bombs go off in that part of the building (two of them a minute apart) as he was ferrying younger guys to the upper floors from his elevator, you come away with the impression that this floor was bombed, especially since it was 60+ floors below the impact point and could not have been affected by the airliner.

MANY, MANY witnesses/survivors describe hearing bombs going off well before the collapses. My mention of John O'Neill and the Dick E. story on Alan Greenspan is admittedly just an attempt to understand (possibly) the motive for those bombs.


Kano: 3 points from your post:
I can not accept that CNN leased only 200SF based on two sites (at least on of which was a government-controlled, or at least "affected/influenced" whatever weaker word you want to use) that were created after 911....not with the way I've seen evidence shift/disappera on my multiple other 9/11/ related links.

My thread with this exact same opening three pieces of information was CLOSED TWICE and I had to vehemently protest to get this thread ever to stick.

I thought this was a discussion forum. Why must I always be accused of not having provided enough documentary material?? Are not others supposed to contribute to a discussion forum?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mepatriot
ZZZ: Since when is absolute dissmissal of one of the most acknowledged high-level conspiratorial agencies in this country (The CFR) a pre-requisite for being a moderator on a site that advertises itself as basically a home for conspiracy theorists?? Very, very odd...

ZZZ...checked off.

Since when is not believeing in every conspiracy that comes to town an issue? Do, you believe that everyone (especially those that question) need to follow your ramblings as fact?

Maybe you'll notice that you have discrepancies in your story as well. So because I don't blindly believe you...I get a "checked off" on your list. Well, gee...so sorry to not be a blind sheep. You claim the whole country is on fact blind to the truth, but then expect everyone to fall into step with your theories with nothing but your word? Interesting.

Now, you seem to be looking to who would "benefit" from 9/11 and then of course that must be the responsible party, which is of course a conspiracy. This is an often used method, but hardly definitive of guilt. If you go through the history books and mechanically applies the "who benefits" principle, you will find it a poor guide to actual understanding. Did the USA entice the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor just so it could test the A-bomb? Maybe the Japanese wanted some "culling" due to overcrowding and so they masterminded the whole matter?

The "who benefits" process has another issue. You could plan to kill your father, knowing you would get the inheritance money, but what are the consequences of plotting to do so with an entire country on the edge of recession? Bush Sr. didn't get much war "popularity" and lost his re-election. It is true that Presidents often get blamed for things that fail during thier time in office, so you believe that the entire country, with all the random factors included...fell for the whole matter with not one shred of actual proof coming to light? Nothing but speculation of events?

Ten members of the government could possibly conspire to kill 1,000 people in another country and keep the secret forever, but it is much less likely that those same people could conspire to kill 1,000 Americans and be sure that it would remain a complete secret.

You certainly can identify events that need an explanation. But, a puzzle becomes addictive. You find one, and then another, and another. It's mysterious. It is dramatic, vivid, and entirely human. There seems to be a steady progress and it seems like an investigation, although jaded by preconcieved notions and fueled by the desire for retribution. It just overlooks certain matters of logic, method, and prioritization.

You imply with your theories, that everything was good and with Bush removed all will be good again. We pull the weed, but leave the garden alone. It is convenient and seductive. We can reject Bush himself, but not the government as a whole, specific companies but not capitalism, specific Moderators but not the owners of the site, other posters, or the media in general. We reject those we suspect of manipulating, but not basic institutions.

Well, congrats to you because you have migrated the matter from Conspiracy Theory to a Scapegoat Theory. You are trying to establish that with Republicans in general, those right-wing, big business, oil-hunting crazy loons. You glorify those who were not involved supposedly, like the Democratic party. They were not in office, so certainly they had no part in the matter. It must have been Bush. It could not have been terrorists, they had nothing to gain...it had to be Bush.

No matter how lacking of serious evidence.

Now you take attention away from discussing the world situation to investigate "who knew what and when". You spend energy on Bush, with no credible true evidence, instead of where our focus needs to be. Could we apply the "who benifits" model and think that the Democrats planned everything to discredit Bush because of the election, and then take back over the country? Sure we could and then in that light, they look guilty too. So, where does your theory end and reality kick in? Where does the evidence actually come out or does it stay a theory that you wish all of us to hash and re-hash unto death?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by browha
...Instead they chose the early morning flights before most people had arrived at the office...


They chose early morning flights because the airports would be incredibly busy, and the security resources would be taxed to beyond their effectiveness.

DC



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mepatriot
MANY, MANY witnesses/survivors describe hearing bombs going off well before the collapses.

You claim your interviews describe "bombs" going off. Could it possibly have been just "explosions" rather than "bombs"? Is that possible? A janitor's closet with chemicals and spray cans? It could literally have been many things. If you have been involved in something like that or the closest equivalent...war, then you would know. Why the leap right to "bombs" without due consideration of the possibilities?

Being sensationalistic? You will probably say the the towers had no janitor closets now...

Well, I could interview soldiers in Iraq who might have heard shots coming from the sky. It doesn't mean that birds now carry guns.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:28 PM
link   
ZZZ: You have displayed an utter lack of understanding of the globalist plot to destroy America, and the underlying cause of this country's economic malaise and the ill-will felt for us across the globe. It has nothing to do with Republicans or Democrats. I really have no idea where you got the idea I was blaming the Republicans. Both parties are equally controlled by the financial powers behind the scenes--through their secret society connections. This is all about the ball--keep you eye in the ball--the really big one--It's about building the excuses for (and a perceived need for) world government.

I'm just finding it so depressing that there aren't at least an equal number of moderators on this BB who understand this as there are common members like myself. Among the common membership, it seems to be about 50-50. Among the mods...I haven't found one yet who isn't pro-government coverup on the 9/11 story and an earlier (since deleted) thread exposed that pretty well, IMO.

As for my theories on 9/11...did I ever say...HEY I'VE GOT ALL THE ANSWERS, YOU MUST BELIEVE ME OR YOU ARE STUPID?? I'm sorry if that's how I come off, but it is/has not been my intention. My intention is to get some information to this board that people might not have thought seriously about before. I'll let the interest in this thread be a piece of evidence that I may, perhaps, have accomplished that to a degree.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:31 PM
link   
The search for truth is not a process of speculation. It is a process of separating fact from fiction. You will find the staff and senior members here have moved from speculation, to finding fact and discarding fiction. Why do you detest the process of peer review so much? After all, that is what is happening. Truth that survives intense skeptical analysis is the stronger, prevailing truth. Should we not seek out that truth? Should we not find these items that stand the test of relentless examination? What good would be be if we did not responsibly subject every theory to the same level of extraordinary scrutiny as every other? If you fear questions, doubt, scrutiny, and skeptical analysis, then perhaps you should avoid this and a few other discussion boards. [Edited on 22-4-2004 by SkepticOverlord]



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:32 PM
link   
ZZZ: I am reporting what a 20+-year veteran of the NY Fire Department told me (and told People Magazine.) They no what things smell, taste, sound like in a fire.

Wow...I'm really getting worried about this website if that's the best a mod can do...

Done talking to you pal, unless I see a change of heart/understanding later.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
DC: "they chose early morning flights because the airports would be incredibly busy.." .....and the flights were incredibly empty. Does anybody else see a conundrum in that, but me???



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
SO: I'm still here. Do all the checking into my information that you like. Prove me wrong...



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Not that I really care that much, because I really don't, but whichever mod just voted about 20 times and knocked my thread score down to 3.8 is showing me something for sure.

This thread was at about 17-18 votes with a score of around 5.1 until just a couple minutes ago. Now it's 38 votes with a score of 3.8.....how laughably immature!

You have to get up pretty early to beat this old geezer.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join