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.

 

The end of "911 Conpiracy", and the beginning of "911 Common Knowledge"

page: 6
139
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
reply to post by jeasahtheseer
 


You're terribly mistaken.

We do care that our soilders are dying. That's why we think it is repulsive that they were sent to invade two sovereign countries that ADMITTEDLY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 911!

If you honestly believe that they actually had the means to attack American Soil, from caves in afghanistan, you need a coloring book and some crayons.

If you honestly believe that if North America was invaded, that we would stand around and do nothing, your out of your mind. We would all take up arms and resist the invaders, we would be terrorists 100%.

So don't quickly dismiss us as lunatics that don't care. Cause we do. But don't let the military propaganda that has indoctrinated you convince you that civilians had anything to do with this war. The people who are attacking our army are resisting our invasion. I cannot blame them for that.

Those same people would NEVER have had a chance to kill Americans if we simply never invaded them.

We need justice for the thousands that died 911, and we need justice for the thousands that had died since. And it all comes back to the fraud of 911.


what the hell? did I say any of that? no I didnt. I was just ranting. I plainly said that I believe terrorists didnt do 911. But that doesnt mean there arent terrorists in this world. Sorry to say but american government IS NOT the only evil. These people over there HATE US!!! And contrary to popular belief they are advanced over there, they arent just a bunch of people in caves, lol.

All I was saying is some people seem to have no respect for marines and some talk about us like we are evil, it is not us thats corrupt, its our government. People join the marines for many reasons, and most those reasons have nothing to do with wanting to kill. We arent cold blooded killers.

I didnt call any of you lunatics, lol, I agree with you guys! I just dont COMPLETELY believe the whole conspiracy theory, but I believe NONE of the official story.

And dont call me braiwashed, because Im not. I've had a hard life and joined the marines right when I turned 18 for discipline and college money before 911 even happened. I had NO IDEA I'd end up in war. My lil sister joined when she was 18 in 2004 for the same reasons I joined but she also thought she was doing good for the world. I regret letting her join.

Peace and love.



[edit on 19-7-2009 by jeasahtheseer]




posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   
I do not wish to defend someone that I know nothing about, personally.

It seems that these buildings where not optimum...so any stats regarding them would be incorrect. Another poster commented that many buildings, just scrape through inspections. I do not know if this is true or not, but I presume there has been cases. I expect someone like, a very rich buyer might be given a little breathing space, seen as they where creating such a loss and where undesireable.

What was the reason for buying them.? what plans did he have in mind.?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted
I do not wish to defend someone that I know nothing about, personally.

It seems that these buildings where not optimum...so any stats regarding them would be incorrect. Another poster commented that many buildings, just scrape through inspections. I do not know if this is true or not, but I presume there has been cases. I expect someone like, a very rich buyer might be given a little breathing space, seen as they where creating such a loss and where undesireable.

What was the reason for buying them.? what plans did he have in mind.?



Thanks for illustrating my point to a T.

"What plans did he have in mind?"

This is an example of something that we can never prove. But, the results sure give a good idea of "what he had in mind".

Why would anyone purchase a black hole, knowing full well it was a black hole?

Then coincidentally, after purchasing a KNOWN black hole profitted to the tune of 321.4 times his investment. A 300,000%+ profit on a 6 week investment.

Sure seems like he knew a bit more than anyone else... doesn't it?


Astronomical coincidence, or amazingly good luck? You tell me which answer you prefer.

[edit on 19-7-2009 by king9072]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   
I suppose good business sense, that is how he got to where he is. Another poster talked about how iconic these buildings where, if you knew you could get a good deal on a set of buildings, that under closer inspection needed a lot of work, I suppose you would take them on, restore them, and make them the center of attention again.

Do you not see this as a possibility.?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
God you love bouncing around in ignorance don't you.


I could say the same. Please keep it civil, there's a good chap. Nothing is gained by calling people ignorant and being rude. It closes down debate, which is of course what you may want.

Regards



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by eniac
That 'evidence' pretty thin. So these guys' math didn't work out right.

That may or may not be, but even if so, do you care to comment on the other evidence I posted earlier in this thread that's not so "thin"?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted
I suppose good business sense, that is how he got to where he is. Another poster talked about how iconic these buildings where, if you knew you could get a good deal on a set of buildings, that under closer inspection needed a lot of work, I suppose you would take them on, restore them, and make them the center of attention again.

Do you not see this as a possibility.?



Ok, what part of this don't you understand? This is a very simple concept, and the fact that I keep explaining it to you and you still can't grab a clue is a tad frightening and fairly disturbing on it's own. So let me take a moment to dissect this post.

"I suppose good business sense, that is how he got to where he is."

Wrong. Purchasing the world trade centers was an absolutely terrible business move. This is the opposite of what a successful investor like Silverstein would do.

"Another poster talked about how iconic these buildings where, if you knew you could get a good deal on a set of buildings, that under closer inspection needed a lot of work, I suppose you would take them on, restore them, and make them the center of attention again."

There was absolutely NOTHING about these buildings that made them a "good deal" alright? NOTHING.

He didn't decide to enter a multiple hundred million dollar deal without first deciding to inspect them. He knew full well that they needed extensive asbestos removal, they also were a negative investment in the fact that they could not fill the towers with tenants. They were losing money every single month. PERIOD.


THE FACT IS: EVERYTHING ABOUT THE DEAL SAID IT WAS A BAD MOVE.

THE FACT IS: SILVERSTEIN WOULD NEVER INTENTIONALLY ENTER SUCH A BLATANTLY BAD BUSINESS DEAL.

THE FACT IS: UNLESS YOU BELIEVE IN THE MOST AMAZING LUCK ON PLANET EARTH, SILVERSTEIN KNEW SOMETHING THAT WE DIDN'T IN JULY WHEN HE PURCHASED THOSE TOWERS.


This is the last time I am to explain such a simple concept to you. If you do not understand it now, go eat some tooth paste and get a swine flu vaccine.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Mark_Amy
 


My question would be if buildings can collapse on themselves so easily, why go through so much trouble placing explosives all through the building at exact locations? Why not just go a few floors from the top and blow out a couple floors and bada-bing.....Pancakes.....



But, I know nothing about explosives, only what I saw happen 3 times on 911....They say it happened, so I must be on to something....



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted if you knew you could get a good deal on a set of buildings, that under closer inspection needed a lot of work, I suppose you would take them on, restore them, and make them the center of attention again.


Well, SOMEBODY certainly made ' them the center of attention again ' !



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by king9072
God you love bouncing around in ignorance don't you.


I could say the same. Please keep it civil, there's a good chap. Nothing is gained by calling people ignorant and being rude. It closes down debate, which is of course what you may want.

Regards


[civil]
Perhaps instead of writing another off topic post, you could have answered the question. Tell me how a plane made WTC 7 collapse. My suspicion is that you cannot. Which is likely the reason that you are spending your time telling everyone to be civil, instead of actually bringing any logic or reasoning to the table.

Your actions and posts make it clear that your only intention here is not to prove your point, because you cant, but rather to frustrate those who do have a point and are living in reality.

I would appreciate that if you do not want to acknowledge serious questions directly addressed to you, and want instead to attempt to derail my thread - that you don't bother posting at all.

Thanks.

[/civil]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   
It seems that Larry Silverstein made a habit of buying real-estate at the right price. And it seems as though he had very big plans for the whole area.
As for the insurance, he probably appears to have been `greedy`, claiming for two seperate incidences, because he knew how much money he had lost, not seeing his plans completed and the complications that had to be overcome to try and salvage this regeneration of the area.

I do not know if he thinks like this, but see it as a possibility.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Doesn't matter at all. Notice how you wrote PRELIMINARY calculations? Not even FINAL calculations.

You've yet again commented on another one of my posts withing answering my original question. I want you to comment on the evidence I posted on the first page.



Originally posted by jfj123
Please refresh my memory and I'll be glad to address your points. Sorry I missed them.

Are you serious? Refresh your memory? You can't take your asphalt back to the first page and look at my post? I'm not posting it again. I don't think you "missed" my post, I think you just conveniently ignored it since you can't answer it or debunk it without conceding.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted
It seems that Larry Silverstein made a habit of buying real-estate at the right price. And it seems as though he had very big plans for the whole area.
As for the insurance, he probably appears to have been `greedy`, claiming for two seperate incidences, because he knew how much money he had lost, not seeing his plans completed and the complications that had to be overcome to try and salvage this regeneration of the area.

I do not know if he thinks like this, but see it as a possibility.



If 911 had not of occured. Silverstein would have 100% guaranteed lost HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS and spent probably a decade, before he ever seen a dollar of profit.

Are you actually this thick? Or are you intentionally derailing this?

The only way for anyone to possibly have profitted from those towers, was to purchase them, buy insurance, and have a terrorist attack completely LEVEL them. But, that would be quite the coincidence wouldn't it?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   
No need to shout...It is like space on here, nobody can hear you scream.

In your opinion it was a bad move, you where not privy to what other `perks` he may have received.

I do not feel as though I am defending this man, but you cannot throw such wild allegations around.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I think it's rather ironic that folks can say "The government was involved without any doubt!" ... and then, they disagree on all fronts how and to what degree they were involved. That's solid proof? Please. When many say "A different plane hit the Pentagon!" and more say "A missile did, there was no plane!" and even more say "The plane just flew over, and they used an explosion!"... it's a bit difficult to take any of it seriously.

You do NOT know that the government was involved. It's obvious from all the different viewpoints that no one is really clear what happened. There is no "open and shut case." Just lots of guesswork, supposition, and bias clouding everyone's opinions. Around here, it's almost funny. Those who oppose the ideas for whatever reason are attacked and even laughably accused of being "accomplices" in the "murders" of that day.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted
No need to shout...It is like space on here, nobody can hear you scream.

In your opinion it was a bad move, you where not privy to what other `perks` he may have received.

I do not feel as though I am defending this man, but you cannot throw such wild allegations around.



There's no such thing as wild allegations here. And I wasn't shouting, I was highlight a point that you continually after several posts want to completely disregard. What part of hundreds of millions lost can't you wrap your head around?

Fact: The world trade centers were losing millions *every month*
Fact: Asbestos removal renovations would cost hundreds of millions
Fact: On a 6 week investment, that cost $14,000,000 up front, turned into $4,500,000,000 in six weeks. Over 300,000% profit.
Fact: No one in their right mind would have purchased a black hole, especially an extremely successful man such as Silverstein.
Fact: Absent, a complete leveling of the buildings by a terrorist attack, the World Trade Center owner, would stand to lose hundreds of millions over years, before ever seeing a dollar of profit.

There is no need for wild allegations when the truth of the matter is so absolutely incredible to begin with.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I would not class myself as`Thick`, I am quite lean...no fast food, you see.

By what you have said, and the emotion contained, I realise that you care a great deal about this occurance. But emotion can often cloud judgement, and obsession can quite often produce an impatience, to complete a preconceived jigsaw by forcing the pieces into place.

Do you agree.?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
9/11 threads are the first target of intel operations. The truth movement has gained so much steam even people that don't say the believe the official story actually deep down know the truth.

Its for these reasons that cia and nsa have entire sections of their organizations that are paid to blog on sites like this. Its very easy to spot them because they essentially "troll"



Trolling is the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet, generally on message boards.


What generally happens is everyone wastes time trying to convince this person otherwise when that is never possible. I personally won't ever address them.

I will simply state my opinion and that is that i KNOW the official story is a lie and will no longer be fooled by False Flag events.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by eniac

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

A white paper released on February 3, 1964 by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson contained over 1200 pages of ...


...Analysis indicates that such a collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.


John Skilling, the head structural engineer had this to say:


"[...] A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there."
Same source from above.




That 'evidence' pretty thin. So these guys' math didn't work out right. These were projections and models... and they're being used as evidence of a controlled demolition now??



A 1,200 page white paper from a professional firm is NOT "pretty thin 'evidence'"... welcome to my ignore list for lack of backbone and common sense.
(I wouldn't ignore so quickly we've just had numerous run ins before in which I really dislike your eagerness to avoid facts and empirical evidence)



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
But isn`t Larry Silverstein the exception, would he follow everyone else.? something he appears to not have done in the past.

What are millions, when you have billions...this guy is quite old too, all the more reason to take one final risk, the big-one, the one that guarantees your place in American history.

Is this not possible.?



new topics

top topics



 
139
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join