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.
Originally posted by mithrawept
I would suggest that the majority of ATS members are neither investigative journalists or professional investigators. Like me, they are regular people, with regular jobs and a wide range of expertise.
Is it for truthers to create plausible doubt to prompt a genuine impartial investigation? Consider this:
A woman disappears without trace and it is suggested to the police that the woman has run off with another man. ... [SNIP] ... We do not expect the neighbor to dig up body, arrest the husband and drop both off at the local court house with the appropriate paperwork.
While this study may or may not be properly peer reviewed (as is contended), does it create sufficient plausible in the establishment depiction of events? If the government had spent more on investigating 911 than on Clinton's sex life, then wouldn't this be considered to be an avenue of investigation?
If we all accepted the version of events as espoused by the government and Dr Jones had found a piece of a hijackers boxcutter, would not the FBI be interested in it, even now? Considering that 911 is (arguably) the biggest terrorist/criminal event in American history?
Originally posted by mmiichael
I think the US government and it's intelligence agencies are capable of terrible deeds.
But when you start accusing people and agencies of treason you need evidence not speculation and theories.
Paraphrasing another ATS member, just for starters evidence of controlled demolition of the WTC buildings would require:
Naming anyone involve in the planning, providing dates, and places.
Naming anyone who supplied and installed explosives, detonation devices, the type and quantity specifics
A paper trail consisting of any combination of letters, emails, written notes, invoices, purchase orders, etc.
Testimony with corroborating evidence from anyone involved, witnessing or having reliable information.
Serious investigators spend months travelling to sites, interviewing dozens of witnesses and officials, reading through thousands of pages of documents and professional analysis, before drawing tentative conclusions.
Maybe what's called the Official version isn't the final word. But a lot of people from a lot of countries made their best effort to properly track the perpetrators and assemble evidence.
Five young Israelis are "on the verge of collapse," according to family members, as their incarceration in New York on charges relating to the Bin Laden attacks continues. They were arrested on Sept. 11, only hours after the World Trade Center attack, on charges of "plotting to blow up" a New York bridge. Katie Shmuel of the Galilee town of Yokne'am, says that her son Yaron is in "a very critical psychological situation," given that they are not allowed to have visitors and the difficult conditions in which they are being held. "The Israeli Consul-General in New York was allowed to visit only after asking several times and receiving a special permit," Katie told Arutz-7's Yosef Zalmanson today. "He was allowed to talk to them only in English, and only from behind a glass partition. The Consul told me that the boys are in a bad state and that they are being held under difficult conditions."
Going on 8 years we're all still waiting for the equally well documented and countering Unofficial version.
Originally posted by Nunny
But, more important, WHY does Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda ADMIT to doing it then?
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.
"I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations," bin Laden said.
Asked Sunday if he believed bin Laden's denial, President Bush said, "No question he is the prime suspect. No question about that."
FBI says it has “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”
By Ed Haas
06/18/06 "Muckraker Report " - June 6, 2006 – This past weekend, a thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups, and was sent to the Muckraker Report by Mr. Paul V. Sheridan (Winner of the 2005 Civil Justice Foundation Award), bringing attention to the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist web page for Usama Bin Laden.[1] (See bottom of this web page for Most Wanted page) In the e-mail, the question is asked, “Why doesn’t Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster make any direct connection with the events of September 11, 2001?” The FBI says on its Bin Laden web page that Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. According to the FBI, these attacks killed over 200 people. The FBI concludes its reason for “wanting” Bin Laden by saying, “In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorists attacks throughout the world.”
On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
Surprised by the ease in which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How this was possible?” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” I asked, “How does that work?” Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”
It shouldn’t take long before the full meaning of these FBI statements start to prick your brain and raise your blood pressure. If you think the way I think, in quick order you will be wrestling with a barrage of very powerful questions that must be answered. First and foremost, if the U.S. government does not have enough hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11, how is it possible that it had enough evidence to invade Afghanistan to “smoke him out of his cave?” The federal government claims to have invaded Afghanistan to “root out” Bin Laden and the Taliban. Through the talking heads in the mainstream media, the Bush Administration told the American people that Usama Bin Laden was Public Enemy Number One and responsible for the deaths of nearly 3000 people on September 11, 2001. Yet nearly five years later, the FBI says that it has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.
Originally posted by Jezus
This debate is really starting to remind me of Evolution VS Creationism.
Sciences PROVES the official story is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
Science is OBSERVED not BELIEVED.
But no matter how much undeniable evidence piles up, no matter how many holes in the official story are exposed, and no matter how many experts explain these facts people continue to go...
"Well the Government/News/Corporations/Bible told us it was Arabs with box cutters"
We understand what the Government told you...but this discussion is not about what people told you happened this discussion is about science...and the proof is so blatantly obvious.
Originally posted by pteridine
There is no evidence of any conspiracy, only unsubstantiated claims of conspiracy.
Originally posted by pteridine
The evidence of conspiracy is not undeniable; it is non-existent.
Originally posted by mmiichael
I think the US government and it's intelligence agencies are capable of terrible deeds.
Are any of those terrible deeds false flag attacks?
But when you start accusing people and agencies of treason you need evidence not speculation and theories.
When you start invading a nation because some cave dweller supposedly committed a terrorist attack, you should have evidence as well.
Paraphrasing another ATS member, just for starters evidence of controlled demolition of the WTC buildings would require:
Naming anyone involve in the planning, providing dates, and places.
This is a failsafe for 911 "critics" so you can ignore the physical evidence of CD, whether or not I can provide planning, dates and places doesn't change the physical impossibility of a gravity driven collapse demolishing steel and concrete in mid air, it doesn't change the physical impossibility of a simple fire bringing down a steel building in it's own footprint.
Naming anyone who supplied and installed explosives, detonation devices, the type and quantity specifics.
That would be nice, but we both know 911 truth "critics" would never accept evidence that was not spoon feed to them by the MSN, you never did it before and you suddenly start tomorrow.
A paper trail consisting of any combination of letters, emails, written notes, invoices, purchase orders, etc.
Testimony with corroborating evidence from anyone involved, witnessing or having reliable information.
We know how much credence you give whist blowers.
Berry Jennings, Lee Hamition, Norman Minetan... Yeah
Playing armchair James Bond uncovering world destruction plots as exposed by talk radio show hosts and their DVDs, amateurish websites, and Youtube analysis has become a popular sport.
Apparently, it is also popular sport for debunk- er, "911 truth critics" to pretend to be receptive to the truth when you know good and dam well that you will side with conventional wisdom(aka, the "historical account") in perpetuity.
Serious investigators spend months travelling to sites, interviewing dozens of witnesses and officials, reading through thousands of pages of documents and professional analysis, before drawing tentative conclusions.
Did any of you serious OS investigators come across the tape of Dick Cheney stopping NORAD from intercepting a plane?
Maybe what's called the Official version isn't the final word. But a lot of people from a lot of countries made their best effort to properly track the perpetrators and assemble evidence.
They did a poor job considering the evidence that was left out. The insider trading, destruction of the crime scene, warnings from other countries about 911 etc..
Going on 8 years we're all still waiting for the equally well documented and countering Unofficial version.
Debunkers are doing no such thing, your job is to defend conventional wisdom. Period, it doesn't matter how ridiculous, how absurd, how preposterous the OS is, you will do it and will do it with the confidence that you are 100% right 100% of the time, because according to your wold view, the OS is always right.
Stop asking for evidence you decided a priori is non existent.
Originally posted by GoldenFleece
How many times in this thread have we seen examples of the tired old tactic, "when you can't dispute the information, attack the source."
I'll take this group over the "scientists" at NIST who spent seven years trying to explain the collapse of WTC 7 and could only do so by inventing a new scientific principle they called "thermal expansion."
They could've saved seven years of effort by catching Larry "Pull It" Silverstein on PBS.
[edit on 8-4-2009 by GoldenFleece]
Originally posted by GoldenFleece
How many times in this thread have we seen examples of the tired old tactic, "when you can't dispute the information, attack the source."
I'll take this group over the "scientists" at NIST who spent seven years trying to explain the collapse of WTC 7 and could only do so by inventing a new scientific principle called "thermal expansion."
[edit on 8-4-2009 by GoldenFleece]
Originally posted by Jezus
Originally posted by pteridine
The evidence of conspiracy is not undeniable; it is non-existent.
undeniable VS non-existent
Those two descriptions of the situation are so completely contradictory that one of us must be making a completely absurd, unsubstantiated, and asinine statement.
The evidence is non-existent?
Maybe in your mind it is non-existent because you have not analyzed any of it but just putting your hands over your ears and saying, "That's not evidence!" is not much of a point of view.
Originally posted by GoldenFleece
You couldn't read half of everything that's been published in five years.
[ New-Pearl-Harbor-Revisited-Cover-Up ]
This book would be a good start, written by a theology professor who mostly offers information and asks questions without drawing conclusions. You'd be shocked to learn what you never knew and to discover that the "thousands of experts" consensus you believe exists isn't what you think.
Will you take my challenge and read this book?
I guarantee you'll spend a lot less time trying to defend the indefensible.
As federal agency declares 'new phenomenon' downed WTC 7, activists cry foul
Stephen C. Webster
Published: Thursday August 21, 2008
According to a federal agency report released Thursday, a "new phenomenon" known as thermal expansion was directly responsible for the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.
This study, posed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology -- a federal scientific agency which promotes technical industrial standards -- marks the first 'official' government theory on the collapse.
The building's demise occurred some seven hours after the twin towers collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, and has been the source of numerous conspiracy theories key to the "9/11 Truth" movement, most of which argue that the symmetrical, seven-second collapse was brought about by a controlled demolition.
Dr. Shyam Sunder, director of Institute's building and fire research laboratory, oversaw the government's three-year research efforts. The report aims to disprove the controlled demolition argument.
However, Richard Gage, founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and a member of the American Institute of Architects, doesn't believe a word of the theory.
His group, which has swelled to over 400 architectural and engineering professionals, immediately responded to the Institute's claim in a press conference.
"Tons of [molten metal] was found 21 days after the attack," said Gage in an interview with a Vancouver, Canada television station. "Steel doesn't begin to melt until 2,700 degrees, which is much hotter than what these fires could have caused."
"There are holes in this story that you can drive a truck through," Gage added during the press conference. His group asserts that thermite, a steel cutting agent, was used to bring the building down.
Dr. Sunder disagreed.
"We conducted the study without bias, without interference from anyone," said Dr. Sunder. "We have only one single-minded goal in this effort."
While the Institute said it considered the possibility of a controlled demolition taking place at WTC 7, the notion was dismissed due to the absence of any recordings of an explosion sound.
Thermite, however, does not make an explosion sound. And while this was raised to Dr. Sunder in the media's Q&A session, he dismissed it as impossible.
"FEMA found it," said Gage. "Dr. Steven Jones found it, in the dust that landed in the entire area of lower Manhattan. And he finds it in the chunks of previously molten metal [from the towers]."
Specifically, in Appendix C of its World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA claimed:
"Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel... The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified."
Yet, no study of the mysterious sulfur or melted steel was included in the NIST report.