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.

 

What if a new investigation reveals the same as the first?

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
Most of us on here have already put esdad71, goodoldave on ignore they are playing a game they just want to disrupt this thread and see how mad they can get you or even hoping you will lose it and get yourself BAND by attacking them. IGNORE THEM!
Stop responding to them they want you to waste your time bickering back and forth over nothing. If you say black they will say white and so on.


I can't allow such a statement to go unchallenged.

First of all, you put me on ignore becuase we both know you LOST that debate. You kept posting things you couldn't back up, you wouldn't answer my questions on statements that YOU YOURSELF made, I kept posting information you refused to look at, and I kept showing over and over the things you were posting were just plain wrong. You couldn't deal with it so you bailed.

Second, I went out of my way NOT to insult you or attack you personally, but to concentrate on discussing these conspiracy claims. I've said time and time again that I have no beef with any of you, but rather with these self serving conspiracy websites putting out these paranoid stories in order to get people to buy their rubbish. The problem is that it's obvious that you identify with these conspiracy theories so dogmatically that you perceive any attack on these conspiracies as an attack on you personally, in which case, I'm no the one who is introducing the difficulty, here.

Third, in my mind, when you tell others to "don't listen to them" or "ignore them" it's a de facto admission that they're saying dangerous things that you don't want others to hear, which is NOT the mark of anyone genuinely wanting to learn the facts of the events of 9/11. If you yourself don't want to listen to what I have to say, fine, whatever floats your boat, but don't be telling other people what to listen to or what not to listen to. Let them make up their own minds on who is credible and who isn't.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled program...




posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
You can keep claiming it all you want, but fires have never brought down steel-structured highrises to this day. Nor have fires ever been able to accomplish what well-placed explosives have in all the years past:


Never in human history has anyone ever been able to successfully plant hidden controlled demolitions in an *occupied* building without any of the occupants noticing what was going on, either. Thus, your own standard of logic dismisses any possibility of explosives as well.

You are conveniently overlooking that small detail, I notice.



actually, no, we're not overlooking that fact because Stratesec (Securacom) was in charge of security for the World Trade Center, one of whose principals for the company is none other than Marvin P. Bush, George W. Bush's younger brother.

As far as occupants noticing anything fishy going on, look up Scott Forbes, who worked for the Fiduciary Trust, a tenant of the South Tower's 90, 94-97th floors. He noticed suspicious activities in the days and weeks leading to 9/11.

Lack of proof doesn't prove anything Just because you didn't look for/find the evidence, doesn't mean it's not there, nor that it didn't happen. You didn't prove anything



Originally posted by GoodOlDave
First of all, you put me on ignore becuase we both know you LOST that debate. You kept posting things you couldn't back up, you wouldn't answer my questions on statements that YOU YOURSELF made, I kept posting information you refused to look at, and I kept showing over and over the things you were posting were just plain wrong. You couldn't deal with it so you bailed.



And thanks for ignoring my replies to your post. Looks like YOU are the one "refusing to look at information" and making me "show over and over" the assertions you make are illogical.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 

Esdad, can you please stop quoting people's whole posts? You've been here since 2004 and should know the forum rules by now. This is getting annoying to have to scroll so far to read something. I'm actually surprised the mods haven't cleaned up your posts yet.



Originally posted by esdad71
Bush was no longer on the board so he had nothing to do with the security in 2001.

But he was on the board from 1993-2000. Ample time to get the work done. This could have been planned for years. We won't know until a new investigation.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by whateverYOUsayman

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by whateverYOUsayman
 

who think they are engineers and architects and secret military operatives ?


You're right, i'm not an engineer, nor an architect. Are you?

You're welcome to discuss your wild theories with for example, Steven E. Jones. A physicist from Brigham Young University who wrote a thesis on why he thought nano-thermite was used to cut the steel in the buildings. And later on, discovered evidence in rubble that they were actually used. ...... Let me guess, he and all the other engineers, scientists, and architects are all nutjob burger flippers too, right???

This is an example of how twisted esdad71's logic is:
I believe the earth is round.
How do i know this? Scientists and satellite images.
Am I a scientist or a satellite? No.
Based on esdad71's twisted logic: Since I am neither a scientist nor a satelite, my claim that the earth is round is false/unfounded/lunacy.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by whateverYOUsayman]


You started down this road be prepared to defend yourself or you can simply bail out and put the OP on ignore. Still can't get over that one.

As far as your little analogy, it is nice that you made it fit your train of thought and not how a real person would discern fact from fiction.

If someone tells me that a building was bought down using nano-thermite as well as shaped charges since there were explosions and we know that thermite is not an explosive but an incendiary, I want evidence. Hard evidence. One blasting cap...piece of wire..remote detonator...anything out of the ordinary but there is, and always will be nothing that can be produced.

However, since you feel and believe that the government did it, you agree blindly that it was a CD without any proof except Disinfo JOnes. (www.abovetopsecret.com...)


So, someone does not need to be an CD expert or an architect to realize that with no proof there is no truth to your story.

PS- I have also attempted contact with MR Jones and he will not return my emails regarding chain of evidence for the dust and if he is willing to share a sample to be tested.Nothing but silence but I am sure you will say that is because there is no need to since it is truth...see, I can read your mind it is so easy.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Never in human history has anyone ever been able to successfully plant hidden controlled demolitions in an *occupied* building without any of the occupants noticing what was going on, either.

Looks like they were able to in WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7. You do know that most, if not all of the explosives required to bring the towers down would have been in the cores. The core was not visible to the occupants and therefore cancels your logic. Anyone bringing materials into the building would have looked like normal construction workers working on the various projects that were happening over the years at the WTC.

Even with your logic, it still doesn't explain away the plumes that have only ever been seen in controlled demolitions. Your logic doesn't explain away the explosions heard in "9/11 Eyewitness" that are also corroborated by first responders. Your logic doesn't explain away the first responders' testimony to seeing flashes and explosions going up, down and around the towers in the lower levels and middle levels, mimicking what we normally see in controlled demolitions. Your logic also doesn't explain away the survivors and by-standers that heard the "boom, boom, boom" detonations as both towers were being brought down. Your logic doesn't explain the destruction of the lobby, basement levels, parking garage and deaths or injuries from the numerous explosions at the bases of the towers.

So you keep telling yourself whatever you need to help you sleep at night. I bet you sit right in that chair and flat-out call all these first responders liars. It's really sad of how much evidence suggests controlled demolition and you people ignore it because of your denial, egos, or just plain not wanting to entertain the idea of a conspiracy.

Oh and thanks for your drive-by, Dave while not contributing anything to the thread.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Let's stick to the thread yourself. You call him out when you yourself are acting like most posters and attempting to derail the thread.

This is not about WTC 1 but I answered those questions.
This is not about WTC 7 but I have addressed those questions.
This is not about the Pentagon but someone bought it up.
This is not about CIA?Mossad secret agent construction workers putting thermite in the core columns...


This thread was about one thing and one thing only and it sucks that people derail good conversation.

If there was another investigation, run by Stephen Jones if you wanted, and it came back the same as the 9/11 commission as far as intel failures and independent Architects and Engineers came to the conclusion no explosives were present, would it be accepted by those who do not believe any part of the Official Story of 9/11.

I think I will make a new acronym and call those who derail the threads in this forum NADS for Nine-Eleven Attention Deficit Syndrome.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71

If someone tells me that a building was bought down using nano-thermite as well as shaped charges since there were explosions and we know that thermite is not an explosive but an incendiary, I want evidence. Hard evidence. One blasting cap...piece of wire..remote detonator...anything out of the ordinary but there is, and always will be nothing that can be produced.


Maybe the reason there is no 'dearth' of evidence is because of the fact that the rubble was shipped off to China before a full proper investigation was done? This is well-documented. What ever happened to 'not disturbing a crime-scene' that day? Why did they break that cardinal rule that day?



As far as your little analogy, it is nice that you made it fit your train of thought and not how a real person would discern fact from fiction..


Uhh, my "little analogy":


This is an example of how twisted esdad71's logic is:
I believe the earth is round.
How do i know this? Scientists and satellite images.
Am I a scientist or a satellite? No.
Based on esdad71's twisted logic: Since I am neither a scientist nor a satelite, my claim that the earth is round is false/unfounded/lunacy.

is based on YOUR statements and how they contradict the laws of logical implication; contradictions to the laws which you and GoodOlDave exhibit in every post. How's that for science??

I'll give another example of your twisted logic:



PS- I have also attempted contact with MR Jones and he will not return my emails regarding chain of evidence for the dust and if he is willing to share a sample to be tested.Nothing but silence but I am sure you will say that is because there is no need to since it is truth...see, I can read your mind it is so easy.


You claim, 'i have tried to contact Mr Jones'. 'Since he did not get back to me, he is lying and his claims are unfounded'. This is not directed at esdad71, but the masses reading this: WHERE IS THE LOGIC IN THAT STATEMENT?



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


You got nothing, partner.....and after this post you'll be on my ignore list, so don't waste your time with a reply. You see I'm not here to pick fights, I try my best to be courteous to all. I'm here for the truth and since you are not, there's no point in responding to anymore of your BS. SHAME ON YOU, SIR!

You've provided no proof to your claims concnerning Marvin Bush, you so cleverly paint it as if he is inconsequential to 9/11. This is why you're a ....

Your're thread is worthless and you're contributions on ATS are even more meaningless.

But to all who might think that Marvin Bush is some kind of pattsie because of his name and that he shouldn't be investigated......here's the truth.




WHO IS MARVIN P. BUSH?

The public rarely sees Marvin P. Bush, brother of President Bush II.

Marvin P. Bush is the founder (1993) and Managing Partner of Winston Partners Group of Vienna, Virginia. It's a private investment company. He is also the Managing General Partner of Winston Growth Fund, LLP; Winston International Growth Fund, LP; Winston Small Cap Growth Fund, LP; all related companies.

Before this, he spent 12 years in the investment business with the firms of Mosley, Hallgarten, Estabrook and Weeden, Shearson Lehman Brothers, and John Stewart Darrel & Company.

In January, 1998, Marvin Bush was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Fresh Del Monte Produce company, the giant fruit company (major product bananas) that makes the canned goods we buy in our markets. Del Monte is owned by a very wealthy family from Kuwait, the Abu-Ghazaleh family. Mohammed Abu-Ghazaleh is the CEO and he has several family members on the Board alongside Marvin Bush. Another member of the Fresh Del Monte Board of Directors is Stephen Way, who is a major Bush fundraiser. Way is the head of the Houston-based HCC Insurance Holdings Company. In early 2000, Stephen Way acquired the appointment of Marvin Bush to the Board of Directors of HCC. In that transaction, Bush not only landed a very large salary, but a sweet stock option deal. He purchased about $130,000 worth of HCC stock which is now valued at close to $600,000, not even one year later.

Marvin Bush is also on the Board of Directors of something called the Kerrco Company.

Marvin also was named to the Board of Directors of the Stratesec Company, another large publicly-traded firm. This company is very secretive and you can find virtually nothing about it. Their website does not allow entry to several links unless one has a password. Virginia-based Stratesec is a provider of high-tech security systems. Two of the major customers for which they provide security are the Dulles International Airport at Washington, D.C. and the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Stratesec's revenues recently went up by 60%, due to what the company describes as "new customers" Prominent people at Stratesec also include former Reagan operatives including Barry McDaniel and Air Force General James A. Abrahamson (who was involved in the Reagan "Star Wars" project). Stratesec is a company is heavily inter-related with the Kuwam Corporation ("Kuw" = Kuwait; "am" = America). Kuwam is a major Kuwaiti Company into many, many activities including the aircraft business. Stratesec's Chief Executive is also the Managing Director of Kuwam Corporation and Kuwam's Chairman Mishal Yousef Saud Al Sabah sits on Stratesec's Board of Directors. Stratesec is providing the primary security for one of the most sensitive airports in the world. Dulles in D.C., has a heavy middle eastern airline connection.




PROVE THIS IS FALSE!



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71

This is not about WTC 1 but I answered those questions.
This is not about WTC 7 but I have addressed those questions.
This is not about the Pentagon but someone bought it up.
This is not about CIA?Mossad secret agent construction workers putting thermite in the core columns...


This thread was about one thing and one thing only and it sucks that people derail good conversation.


I beg to differ. All of those points are valid in this conversation seeing as how there are so many anomalies and quirks they haven't even looked at in the commission report. Without these very anomalies that we keep bringing up, your original question about what we would do if a new investigation returned the same results becomes completely irrelevant. Let the moderators decide if this should be considered topic derailment or not instead of being a fascist thought-policer.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt
PROVE THIS IS FALSE!


He is the last person you want to ask to "prove" something. Check my previous replies to his posts regarding his twisted logic. I hope they still teach the laws of logic in school these days.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by whateverYOUsayman
 


Wow, you can psychoanalyze someone within an internet post?You are the man. How do you do that? As far as the commission, it was created to find the intel failures and why 9/11 occurred, not why the towers collapsed. Just like NIST is used to provide information so something does not occur again and not trying to prove how it occurred conclusively. Showing your ignorance again as to what is what and who is who and stating things out of context.

As far as you on the Felt, Marvin Bush was on the board until 2000 but they stopped handling security in 1998 for the WTC when the contract ended. Read a book and maybe you would know that. Kroll handled security on 9/11 for the WTC so get your facts straight before you accuse people of spreading false information. Sounds like someone is just jealous that they are not part of the global elite who all make money and you are taking your frustration out in this thread. Am i close?

Now please, go derail another thread the both of you as you are adding nothing of value here.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by esdad71]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by whateverYOUsayman
 

Wow, you can psychoanalyze someone within an internet post?You are the man. How do you do that?


I didn't psychoanalyze anyone. In fact you did. I just showed everyone reading this thread the twisted reasoning in your logic, over and over again, and you keep proving me right. If you want to learn more about the laws of logical implication, google it and we'll be here waiting after you're able to make logically sound statements.


Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by whateverYOUsayman
 

every Friday so I can have time to harass burger flippers and high school kids in this forum who think they are engineers and architects and secret military operatives ?

I like how you accuse me of "psychoanalyzing" you and then in the very same post you follow up with:

Originally posted by esdad71
Sounds like someone is just jealous that they are not part of the global elite who all make money and you are taking your frustration out in this thread. Am i close?


So who's psychoanalyzing who again??? I kinda wanted to ask you the same question: "Wow, you can psychoanalyze someone within an internet post?You are the man. How do you do that?"


[edit on 16-7-2009 by whateverYOUsayman]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   
i see what you're saying OnTheFelt, he just keeps contradicting himself and accusing me of doing things he does himself, hahaha
It's hilarious if you ask me.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by whateverYOUsayman]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


It's important to remember 'truthers' aren't interested in a new investigation. They are vested in a new conclusion.

It's a sad mental trap, really: any new investigation would draw the same conclusions, which in turn would yield yet another round of paranoid "inside job!" accusations and on it goes.

Remember, this is a group that seriously (not kidding) entertains the notion of space beam weapons, nuclear explosions, mini-nuclear explosive devices, sonic vibrations, thermate, thermite, "nano-thermite", thermetic ceiling tiles, Doppler sound machines, holographic projectors, and other modalities as yet discovered, either brought down the towers, or played a part in their destruction.

When faced with this kind of thinking, do you believe any conclusion excluding a conspiracy would be embraced?



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt

Marvin also was named to the Board of Directors of the Stratesec Company.... Virginia-based Stratesec is a provider of high-tech security systems.

PROVE THIS IS FALSE!


Prove that being on the board means that he's in charge of security for the buildings.

Prove that being a maker of security *systems* means that the company was in charge of security.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by OnTheFelt
 


Interesting choice of quote.

"But until we can get pass all the a@# grabbin and at least accept that a new investigation is warranted, we'll unfortunately continue to play ring around the rosie with each other".


"Ring around the Rosy" is a nursery rhyme reference to the Black Plague and from that period.

The evidence supporting the need for a real investigation is overwhelming.

Most do not know or somehow forget that the original 'truthers' were the First Responders.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   

It's important to remember 'truthers' aren't interested in a new investigation. They are vested in a new conclusion.

Which is why I get so jacked off when people call me a truther. There is no logical conclusion with the evidence presented. We need a new investigation
There is NO WAY that the illogical conclusion we have now will be reached if there is an unbiased investigation.

I freely admit that I may be proven wrong if that point in time is ever reached, but every day we ignore truth pushes me closer to the conclusion that it will never happen (eg. there be a new unbiased investigation that supports the 1st 100%).



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


Thanks for the post. I understand your train of thought and it is true. However, there are 2 sides to the Truth movement which is why there was a split. Jones was looking at a scientific reason and discredited the space laser notion which is why he left the original founder.

I personally think Jones is a government agent who is causing conflict within a group who believe strongly in something. It would not be the first time the CIA or FBI or any other government acronym infiltrated a movement.

I was honestly just looking for the responses I would get as to if anyone is open minded and sadly I got my answer.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


This is where we agree. I totally welcome a new investigation because maybe something else would come to light...like what really happened to 93.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
This is where we agree. I totally welcome a new investigation because maybe something else would come to light...like what really happened to 93.




Originally posted by esdad71
I am concerned with a lot of money spent and resources wasted to come to the same conclusion in this day and age since the government is now a trillion dollars in debt.


Contradiction after contradiction.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join