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.

 

Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I had to pull this new Video, Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III, head of all intelligence, Says no way the buildings where attacked.






A terrible pilot hits pentagon accounting office holding records of missing 3 trillion in oil for money scheme & missing 2.3 trillion in DOD expenses, Pentagon debris a single 3 foot engine Proven not related to 757,FBI took all recordings & refuses to show, The FCC had all records on criminals like Paulson, Geithner, Ruben, Summers & others engaging in that illegal activity. But all the records of those illegal trades were destroyed when WTC 7 was brought down by thermite on 9/11! 911 was used to the public and enact the end of the Bill of Rights & invasion of oil bearing countries, & make money for private companies like Halliburton, (stock from 10 to 50 a share)!By destroying the WTC, they were able to cover up theft of gold bullion & destroy illegal financial transaction records performed just prior to the attacks, Silverstein spends 140 million to make 7 billion almost over night; Silverstein said it was demolished by explosives






[edit on 3-7-2009 by HulaAnglers]




posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 08:34 AM
link   
I like his comment: "The free press isn't free anymore, its very, very expensive!"
It baffles me why, when even a guy of this caliber openly questions 911, that there still isn't an official move on to get to the bottom of it. I think the truth in this case really has to be stranger than the fiction the government has spun.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
There was a man who said that a lie said loud enough and often enough will become truth. This is what we have seen in the last 8 years. Nice to see bigger names coming forth and calling out the "official story" on their BS.

It is indeed a bitter pill when you finally wake up and realize you have been lied to. I have seen so many in denial over this and it never ceases to amaze me with the rationalization and excuses they make for the official story.

Welcome aboard, General. Hopefully this interview wont be your undoing.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
It baffles me why, when even a guy of this caliber openly questions 911, that there still isn't an official move on to get to the bottom of it.


"A guy of this caliber"? He's a crackpot.

Do a google search on him.

"First Earth Battalion?" "The Men Who Stare at Goats"?



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by HulaAnglers
I had to pull this new Video, Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III, head of all intelligence, Says no way the buildings where attacked.


"Head of all intelligence"? He was the head of the US Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 until 1984. Not really the head of "all intelligence".



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


The f4 video I posted sort of debunks what he says about the plane, but I am still sure 9/11 was an inside job



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by HulaAnglers
 


It debunks nothing. The F4 is flying into highly reinforced concrete made specifically to withstand that kind of torture. The pentagon was not made of this same material. Not only that, you would still see the outline of the wings had the target been wide enough. Also, the plane is not reduced to dust as stated in the video. There would still be identifiable parts left. Please see the mythbusters experiment in NM with the car into concrete target. Even though the car seems to "turn to dust" when you see the parts left, it was clearly a car and you can also see the imprint of the car as it made contact with the target.

debunking? hardly. It makes a stronger point that even if the pentagon was made of reinforced concrete, a plane would have left a lot more evidence of the wing strikes. Anything that comes in contact with another things always leaves evidence of this contact. No matter how big or small.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Sorry, but people lose credibility with me as soon as they use words like "crackpot".

If he is a crackpot, then almost everyone who thinks outside of the box is a crackpot. Copernicus, Galileo, Einstein, and Hawking are crackpots then? Anyone who has anything to do with quantum theory/mechanics are crackpots?

Our world is far stranger that you could ever imagine.



posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Stubblebine has been around for a while - wasn't he interviewed by the makers of In Plane Sight? He's definitely in Zero and 9/11 Ripple Effect.

I've gotta say, from someone who a couple of years ago was an ardent no plane at the Pentagon type I now think that if anything the evidence at the Pentagon is more realistic than that at the WTC. After all, you wouldn't expect an aluminium plane to penetrate reinforced concrete, or steel columns. So the cartoon plane outline at the WTC are less realistic, in my view, than the rather jagged, inconsistent mess on the outer wall of the Pentagon.

However, the best evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon is still the black box data they released which says the plane did not hit the Pentagon.



posted on Aug, 2 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Sorry, but people lose credibility with me as soon as they use words like "crackpot".


Well, I used crackpot since it was simple, easy to spell and easy to understand. And since this is a "family" board, I didn't want to use the first words that did pop into my mind when I read about Stubblebine.


Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
If he is a crackpot, then almost everyone who thinks outside of the box is a crackpot. Copernicus, Galileo, Einstein, and Hawking are crackpots then? Anyone who has anything to do with quantum theory/mechanics are crackpots?


So, you're putting Stubblebine in the same catagory with Copernicus, Galileo, Einstein, and Hawking? You have got to be kidding me. These men were geniuses. Stubblebine isn't fit to even carry their books.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


You think he is a crackpot because he talks about killing goats with your mind and walking through walls. What does that make all the people that set up the department for that and funneled our tax dollars into funding it? It is not like he went out on his own with this, he was put into it by our military. Either we send our money to a lot of crackpots who use it on guys like this or he was on to something. Targeting him alone for that is ignoring all logic and reason.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by HulaAnglers
 


Not at all does the fighter video debunk anything imo.

First the wall it hits is much thicker and significantly more massive.

Secondly, the fighter is much smaller and significantly less massive than a 757 jetliner.

To appreciate the differences, an analogy would be the difference in damage between a motorcycle hitting a concrete wall at 200MPH, and a train hitting the same wall at 200MPH.

Which vehicle is going to disintegrate first and more completely?

See what i mean?

If the 'test' video featured a 757, and not a fighter it would have been a more applicable comparison.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Of course he's not a crackpot for talking about 'mind control' and manipulation using only the mind, if an EXTREMELY well funded and ongoing area of study, dating from the 1960's until now.

Not in the slightest bit 'crackpot'. It's a genuine and valid area of research.

The CIA spent million upon million on this research, and still does.
So too did other countries. Most research was during the 'cold war', with both sides spending fortunes on this.

You don't spend hundreds of millions on something for decades if you don't see results.

As for goats, it could just as well been pigs, horses..humans as test subjects. Stated goals included remote viewing..a kind of ESP storyboard type affair, to locate missile sites, and subs etc.
Another goal was to create a 'psychic soldier'. An assassin capable of killing remotely using telekinesis, or able to psychically make people do as they want them to do would be quite a weapon to have.

This in no way shape or form make the General a 'crackpot'.

It seems to me that someone is getting very worried about what this man has to say, and the knives have been drawn very quickly before he makes any headway.

I hope the murdering scumbags are quaking in their boots, and aging rapidly due to lost sleep for fear of being exposed. Hopefully, a rat will desert what they consider a sinking ship, and expose the whole conspiracy and the perps in order to save themselves.



posted on Feb, 11 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
You don't spend hundreds of millions on something for decades if you don't see results.


Yeah, I am really having a hard time understanding how it is that people can dismiss him as a crackpot without acknowledging that would mean that our military has a very well funded crackpot division as well as many crackpots in charge running crackpot programs with our tax dollars. It seems to me that either he was a crackpot or what he claimed about the military program is true. Well...we know it existed and was well funded so that usually means to me - true. I think these people do some of the most fascinating mental gymnastics I have ever seen.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join