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.

 

I have never convinced anyone else that 9/11 was an inside job

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyline666
I think the word research means basically, is to undertake any activity to extend knowledge.


OK, if this is truly what you are seeking to do, I set a challenge for you. If you can find out the actual truth of the quote I paste below, I will happily discuss any topic in your post thoroughly and help you understand why I believe you are wrong.


It is also publicly known that George Bush's brother and cousin had a lot of control with, and were on the board of the Security Firm that looked after the WTC complex.




posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 



Bush-Linked Company Handled Security for the WTC, Dulles and United

George W. Bush's brother was on the board of directors of a company providing electronic security for the World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines, according to public records. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for years to the Bush family


www.commondreams.org...


9/11 Security
Courtesy of Marvin Bush


whatreallyhappened.com...




It is also publicly known that George Bush's brother and cousin had a lot of control with, and were on the board of the Security Firm that looked after the WTC complex.


I hope this helps.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Why don't you do your own research into what is publicly known.

I'm not going to go over this again and again.

impressme has put you on the right path with his post.

I went through all this a long time ago, that's maybe why the part of my post you quoted me on sounds a bit vague and misleading.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


This is where I messed up, confusing confusion, sorry about that. I saw this when it was first reported, and havn't spoken about it on ATS before I posted, that reply.



"..Bush's cousin had a fortunate change of venue for a September 11 business conference...
President Bush's cousin should have been in the World Trade Centre when it was attacked. Jim Pierce, managing director of AON Corporations, had arranged a business conference on the 105th floor of the South Tower where its New York offices were based. But his group was too large so they decided to move across the street to the Millennium Hotel."

...and it just so happens that Marvin was in New York on 9/11.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyline666
Why don't you do your own research into what is publicly known.

I'm not going to go over this again and again.

I have done the research, which is why I know that Marvin Bush had no control over the security at the WTC on 911, and if the people who claim he does had read the sources clearly, it would be obvious.

For example i googled "marvin bush security wtc" and the second link was this: screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

This alone should be enough information to conclude that indeed he was not part of the company at the time. Was it really that hard to google 4 words?



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


I have been very careful in what information I am reading.

I would be very careful if I was you, stating:

screwloosechange.blogspot.com. is one of your sources!

Have you checked their other outlandish claims on all matters regarding 9/11, what they say is evidence?

I'm finishing up on this thread now, I've got a lot of things to do, before the AE convention and Prof Jones comes to Australia.

Some of the Australian media will help the cause more, especially in Melbourne.

Cheers



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyline666
I have been very careful in what information I am reading.

I would be very careful if I was you, stating:

screwloosechange.blogspot.com. is one of your sources!

Have you checked their other outlandish claims on all matters regarding 9/11, what they say is evidence?

They are not my source, that is a page with a link to the sources. If you have been so careful about the information, why are you repeating something which has been known to be incorrect for many many years?



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Welcome to 9/11 thread de-railment land. I leave for 2 days, and now we have morphed from a discussion about the effects of propaganda on the masses, back to "YES IT WAS!!!!.......NO IT WASN'T".







posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Marvin Bush left Securacom in June 2000, before his brother was even the GOP nominee for President. Wirt Walker, the "cousin" is not related to the family.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 




Marvin Bush left Securacom in June 2000, before his brother was even the GOP nominee for President. Wirt Walker, the "cousin" is not related to the family.



You have a source for that, or are you posting your opinions again.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Stay clear from disinfo sites and disinfo blogs

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...



Marvin Bush has not responded to repeated telephoned and emailed requests for comment on this story.

The American Stock Exchange delisted Stratesec's stock in October 2002. Securacom also had a contract to provide security at Los Alamos National Laboratories, notorious for its security breaches and physical and intellectual property thefts.

According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down." Yet instead of being investigated, the company and companies involved with it have benefited from legislation pushed by the Bush White House and rubber-stamped by Congressional Republicans. Stratesec, its backer KuwAm, and their corporate officers stand to benefit from limitations on liability and national-security protections from investigation provided in bills since 9/11.
FULL REPORT:
anderson.ath.cx:8000...


911review.org...



[edit on 9-6-2009 by impressme]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
the "truth" as you seem to regard it isn't the truth. It's a SUSPICION. Moreover,it's a suspicion based not upon the truth, but speculation being used to fill the large gaps in your knowledge of the events of 9/11. Are you a demolitions expert? Are you a materials engineer? Have you ever actually set foot inside the WTC? Did you talk to anyone who was actually there and saw what happened with their own eyes? Did you even read the 9/11 commission report?

I'll wager it's all a big, fat NO, so when you try to claim you're all oh so wise and in the know when the entire summary of your knowledge comes from con artists running those conspiracy websites trying to get paranoid people to buy their books, DVDs, t-shirts, baseball caps, etc, well, let's just say that it's sorely lacking in credibility.


This handily summarizes the entire situation for people arguing issues on 9/11 on conspiracy sites. It becomes an opportunity for a community to gorge itself on speculations and disinformation that for believers have morphed into fact with constant repetition and amplification. A quick Google check will show a dozen websites pushing the same untruths.

Those who come in and point out that while there are questions on the so-called Official Story there are much larger ones on the amorphous Unofficial Story - are branded heretics.

Going on 8 years now, a warped version of history has solidified where the US planned 9/11 and blew up the WTC buildings. And it starts to look like it will never go away.

It's become now not what is the actual truth, but which version you prefer.


Mike



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyline666
If NIST and the 9/11 commission had researched and investigated high rise building fires and many other things properly originally, why did the 9/11 commission fail to mention WTC 7 at all in their report?


The 9/11 commission report didn't comment on the reasons for the WTC 7 collapse becuase that's not what the purpose of the report was for. It was to document who committed the attacks, how they did it, and the federal response to it, not the physical mechanics of the collapse. It was the NIST and FEMA reports that covered all that.


1000's of people were not needed, just a few chosen "ones"in each profession/division. (the NYPD, NYFA, the Mayor, Lucky Larry, and all the others you mentioned like the FAA, NORAD etc..., if you ad them up, it is not 1000's of people.


Ahem. Rigging over 43,000 controlled demolition charges (49 columns x 110 floors, four sides per column, for two buildings) is obvuously a complex and time consuming project, and they'd need to use thousands of technicians to do it really quickly, otherwise the plot would eventually have been discovered. The NYPA did have their own army of inspectors, custodians, security, etc, watching out for the buildings, you know.

THEN, there's the infrastructure necessary to a) coordinate crashing airplanes into the buildings, and b) hide the fact from the rest of the world. I don't know how many people it takes to get four passenger jets into the air, but it's a hell of a lot more than just "a few chosen ones".


I don't agree with you when you mention it would have taken years and years for a "handful of technicians" to set it up. There was work done there, between 9 and 12 months worth which is PUBLICLY known. This wasn't just a "handful"of people and they had access to the core columns.


Everything I've read says that all internal maintenence was handled exclusively by the NYPA's own army of personnel. Any other work would have been brought in by the tenants, and they'd only have access to the specific tenants' area. Even then all they would do is put up drywall and lay down carpet. They would have no access to any critical areas.


It is also publicly known that George Bush's brother and cousin had a lot of control with, and were on the board of the Security Firm that looked after the WTC complex.


Unless you're claiming that GWB's family went around and planted those explosives personally, it necessarily means they'd need the active cooperation of all the layers of administration between themselves and the NYPA personnel. How many more layers of co-conspirators does THAT add?


If indeed, The Police helicopter pilots were looking at some steel beams glowing some planted thermite in that impact area, not jet fuel, because a lot the jet fuel fire ball that everyone saw just after impact was mostly outside of the building.


The steel beams the pilot saw were the structural beams on the perimeter of the building, where placement of your thermite would have been impossible. It was tenent office space on the interior, and open air on the exterior.


Yes there were fires and heat inside, not that huge and not temperatures between 1500F & 1800F, but approx 1250F-1320F( - and this only when the jet fuel had maximum oxygen), especially going by the colour of the smoke, The smoke changes very quickly - and if you look to the far right of the impact area you can see people standing right in front of the hole of the building, not long after the impact.


I am going by the report of MIT structural engineer Thoma Eager, that says the killer wasn't from the fires melting the steel. It was the steel being heated irregularly from uneven exposure to the fire, and one location heated to different temperatures than another. It caused abnormal stress from uneven thermal expansion and contraction, leading to structural failure. It's this temperature differential that's relevent, not the specific fire temperatures or color of the smoke.


Every ones' focus, especially the media was on the impact areas, not the bottom of the buildings or anywhere else.


This is becuase the initial structural failure was at the impact areas, not the bottom. This is shown in every video footage of the collapse and it cannot be refuted. Whatever caused the building to start falling, it happened there.


As you know, there are many witnesses including firefighters that experienced explosions from all around them and underneath them.


Of course they heard explosions. The towers were chock full of flammable object that would naturally explode when the fires reached them I.E. fuel tanks, electrical transformers, etc. We know this becuase the explosions were completely random, not in sequence as controlled demos need to be.


These witness accounts support the huge plume of dust and smoke rise from the bottom of WTC 1 before it's Collapse.


I know exactly what you're referring to. It wasn't before the collapse, it was during the collapse, and this was from the air being forced out of the building from the building being compressed. Skyscrapers have their own air circulation system, you know.


Remember all of the broken steel columns that were shipped off to Korea and which Country???


This was steel from areas in the building that weren't in the area of the airplane impact area. The steel recovered from those critical areas are still sitting in a hanger at LaGuardia airport even now.

Not that it matters. A photographer by the name of Joel Meyerowitz talked his way into ground zero, and he took many, MANY beautiful photographs of the cleanup efforts. Any photos you see of the cleanup of ground zero were almost certainly taken by him. His photos show images of the support columns in almost ever photo, and not one, NOT ONE, showed any evidence of explosives or thermite. Every single one shows they either snapped like a twig, or twisted into ghastly angles before tearing like a sheet of paper.

No offense intended, but these "gotcha" news flashes of yours have long been posted on dozens of conspiracy websites, which is how I knew all this before you posted it. When I say you're getting all your bad information from these self serving con artists, you're not really proving me wrong.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Hey Mike,

You think you are right - then support the Truth activists cause for a new - multi-national independant investigation!

That's what WE are after - and you know why that is - it;s because the science doesn't lie!

If you don;t support that - you are a chicken sh*t who is afraid to face the possibility that the US Govt. - or criminal elements therin - were culpable for the events of that day!

And don't give us some bs about the official commision report - even they admit that they were a whitewash - and that their investigation was underfunded and derailed from day one!

Now who's afraid of the GD Truth!!!!!




posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyline666
I'm finishing up on this thread now, I've got a lot of things to do, before the AE convention and Prof Jones comes to Australia.


...and the conspiracy con artists keep on raking in the money, since I know full well Jones' audience have to pay him to hear him speak, and even then he's just repeating the same rubbish circulating around these conspiracy websites. Yet, this same fellow who wrote this comment claims he does his own research and never gets his information from these web sites. Incredible.

Is it just me, or is it the case that if someone genuinely believed there was some secret cabal engineering murdering thousands of innocent people left and right he'd be going around screaming it to anyone who'd listen, rather than demanding that people pay him to hear "the truth". I can only imagine Paul Revere riding around during the revolution, and instead of yelling "The redcoats are coming", he'd be yelling "Something dreadful is coming, and I'll tell you what it is for $19.95, and I also have a lovely selection of T-shirts, books, baseball caps..."

I guess P.T. Barnum was right after all.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthMagnet
Hey Mike,

You think you are right - then support the Truth activists cause for a new - multi-national independant investigation!

That's what WE are after - and you know why that is - it;s because the science doesn't lie!


I can't speak for Mike, but as for me, go ahead, hold another investigation. Have as many investigations as you want. That was never the problem. The problem is when these investigations tell you something that you DON'T want to hear (I.E. it really was a terrorist attack), in which case you arrogantly brush it off as "a pile of gov't disinformation and lies" becuase it doesn't agree with what you yourself want to believe, and then demand yet another investigation. When it gets to the point where you keep demanding more and more investigations until you happen to get one to rubber stamp your conspiracy stories...and then have the gall to say it's fair...that's the time when you really need to drop this nonsense and go find another hobby.

Oh, an if I may ask, just who would ever be on this "independent" investigation who'd have the credentials to be on an investigation committee and still be independent? It's a fancy sounding buzzword I keep hearing repeated over and over but I have yet to hear ONE explanation of who it'd be.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



It was to document who committed the attacks,


I am so glad you mention this because the government still doesn’t know who attack us eight years later. That is why we know the 911 commission report is a lie.


FBI Director Mueller acknowledged in 2002 there was no legal proof to prove the identities of the hijackers. Yet the bureau insists it correctly has identified them.

What does the FBI director think now? Mueller no longer is commenting on the charges. However, Carter insists the FBI got it right. End of story.


www.prisonplanet.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
I am so glad you mention this because the government still doesn’t know who attack us eight years later. That is why we know the 911 commission report is a lie.


You are deliberately quote mining, here. The link you posted says that a) there's no doubt it was the work of al Qaida agents, and b) the majority of the hijackers I.e. Mohammed Atta, Hani Hanjour, etc were correctly identified. They may or may not have been six misidentified hijackers, but the fact remains that the evidence still shows it was the work of al qaida, and the majority of the hijackers (including the ringleaders) were correctly identified. You are deliberately misrepresenting this as intentional impropriety to use as innuendo to support your claim "the 9/11 commission was a lie", which is being intellectually dishonest.

When I say that these conspiracy websites are putting out bad information for their own self serving ends, you're not proving me wrong, becuase I know you didn't come up with this yourself. You had to have gotten this bit from one of those con artists. You didn't spend any money getting any of this, I hope.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   
To the OP.
Does not matter if they believe you or not. Unfortunately.
Nothing will continue to get done about it.
The peeps will continue to let the ptb do what they want,
which they will just end up doing anyway, of course.
See the big picture? We are so insignificant, I can't tell you.
If they fear they might be found out, they will just change the rules.
Am I pessimistic? No just astute.
Wanna all keep wasting your breath arguing, go ahead.
Meanwhile they are screwing EVERYONE of you,
black, white, brown, red, blue, whoever.
How much more clear can the clues be?
We mean nothing to them. Only our money is important.
Um, ya...I don't know how many more wake up calls we can take people. Hello, just nod if you can hear me.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
[
There, now, you got your way about wanting to hear about reactions to people approaching others with something other than the official story. Happy, now?

Well Dave, it is comforting to hear that you have known all along the actual intent of the OP.
Especially so, considering he has asked members ( You included ) to stay on topic three times.

With respect to the three, actually four people I've introduced to theories other then the ones
put forth by our trustworthy government, they include a Judge, film maker, criminal attorney and a retired Marine Col. who also spent ten years in the Secret Service. I have known these folks for years. I can reassure you they are very critical thinkers. After the intro we engaged in some friendly debates over the validity of the OS. The consensus was three agreed there was something very disingenuous with the OS. One disengaged ( The Criminal lawyer ) stating he picked his fights and this was not going to be one of them. There are actually many more who required no prompting from me.
So Dave I am curious, how many have you managed to turn more toward the OS ? As in most issues of this magnitude, I suspect the ' Truth' lies somewhere in the middle. There you have it Dave, no BS , no conjecture, just my experience. I hope you can simply accept that without any speculation on my intelligence, academic credentials or sanity. Cheers



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join