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.

 

Baloney Detection Kit In Action - 911

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   


Baloney Detection KIT - Put into Practice for 911:

Point one: How reliable is the source of the claim?

The government has lied throughout history about false flag attacks that have allowed illegal wars to take place, removal of rights to happen, and unconstitutional laws to be passed. Additionally, since 911 they lied about practically every aspect of that day, proven over time through actions that contradict their comments.

Point two: Does the source make similar type claims?

Lusitania, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, 911.

Point three: Have the claims been verified by anyone else?

No, and in most cases, the complete opposite has been proven. Like the fact that thermite residue was found in every sample of dust taken from ground zero. It's also not provable or scientifically replicable that a 50 storey building could experience complete and uniform failure, then collapse into it's pad without ever experiencing a hit from a plane.

Point four: Does this fit the way the world works?

Actually no, for 911 to take place according to the official story the laws of physics would have to have been rewritten for that one day in history.

Point Five: Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?

Yes, thousands of people. And not just amateur researchers, hundreds of Architects and Engineers, as well as high ranking military officials disagree with the official story and it's ludicrous statements.

Point Six: Where does the preponderance of evidence point?

It points to those who profited that day, all of which profited in the billions. The same people who systematically lied about practically every aspect of that day prior to and since. It also seems to point to the same people who were granted sweeping new powers thanks to the event. The same point who were able to launch two illegal wars, introduce unconstitutional laws and murder millions of civilians.

Point Seven: Are the people making the claim playing by the rules of science?

No, they aren't. As previously mentioned their hypothesis would require the suspension of the laws of physics. It also would require astronomical anomalies to have occurred, multiple times in one single day. There is no scenario other than controlled demolition that allows a steel structured building to fall into it's pad at nearly freefall speed. This additionally evident when one looks at the fact that prior to and since 911, there has never been another scenario which is leveled a steel skyscraper. Even though some steel skyscrapers have burned for 20 times the length of time as the World Trade Centers, with more complete, full damage to the building. None had the same ending.

Point Eight: Is the claimant providing positive evidence?

Yes, they only provide evidence that "seems" to prove their point. Although it is all theoretical speculation at best, like the pancake theory. Despite the fact that no one can come up with a pancake scenario that would allow for free fall speeds.

More importantly, is the evidence that they choose to completely ignore such as:
- What happened to WTC 7, the official investigation did not even mention this building in it's final report. I suppose I am the only one who feels 50 story buildings that collapse are relevant.
- Why was there molten metal discovered in the rubble upto 6 weeks after the attacks?
- Why was there a lack of a substantial amount of "plane" at the pentagon and in Shanksville.
- Why are numerous tapes that would show in full, real time, color, the plane that attacked the Pentagon, never released - when those videos alone would completely end every bit of speculation about the Pentagon?

Point Nine: Does the new theory account for more phenomena than the old theory?

Yes, and in fact the entire "old theory" does not account for any phenomena that took place that day. All of which has been pointed out several times during this post. The new theory provides more sound, reasonable and scientifically replicable evidence than the original theory ever did. And that's what the official story is, it's a theory, that's full of holes and was supplied by (coincidentally) the only people that benefited from the event.

Point Ten: Are personal beliefs driving the claim?

Well, since the plan to invade Afghanistan was on Bush's desk on September 9th, I would have to think that his explanation of 911 would have to have been driven by his personal beliefs. Despite the lack of any evidence that proves OBL or Al-Qaeda had any part in that day, they still used the (problem) to launch a pre-planned war on a sovereign nation.



Hey look everyone, I found a big pile of BALONEY!




posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
awww shucks, Ididn't need your kit to come to that conclusion. I just used my own little kit, some folks call it common sense.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
It would be great if the no-planers could adhere to this kit, then we wouldn't have to hear any more of their theories because none of them would be in compliance to the rules in the kit!



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
It would be great if the no-planers could adhere to this kit, then we wouldn't have to hear any more of their theories because none of them would be in compliance to the rules in the kit!


We look forward to the day when you choose not to be a 9/11 Denier. Will you?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
It would be great if the no-planers could adhere to this kit, then we wouldn't have to hear any more of their theories because none of them would be in compliance to the rules in the kit!



HEY! WATCH YOUR DAMN MOUTH! :p

Ok ok, your right bonez, fine you happy?


I noticed this posted in the UFO forum, when I actually watched the video all I could think of was 911 and how well it fit with this baloney detection kit.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Now, try it the other way around.. with the Truther Propagandists.

THAT is a baloney Dagwood.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Now, try it the other way around.. with the Truther Propagandists.

THAT is a baloney Dagwood.


Hey! Thanks for not even reading. The truther theory is held as the alternative when testing the official story baloney. It holds much more water, though no perfect, it still solves many unsolved portions of the official story.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Now, try it the other way around.. with the Truther Propagandists.

THAT is a baloney Dagwood.


Hey! Thanks for not even reading. The truther theory is held as the alternative when testing the official story baloney. It holds much more water, though no perfect, it still solves many unsolved portions of the official story.


Oh good! Well, lay it out then.

Provide a sensible timeline of events corraborated with hard facts, solid evidence, and names of the accused that builds a more substancial narrative than the investigations you wish to refute.

I want to see every aspect of your hypothesis from the initial planning stage all the way through the goal objective. Leave no stone unturned.

Please explain in detail: The initial planning of this conspiracy: who was the person that first proposed killing 3000 innocent civilians, and who else was present at this nefarious meeting.

Prove in detail the logistics involved in carrying out this plan with dates, personnel, equipment, training ect that places your named suspects in the correct location at the correct time.

Provide the money trail of receipts and monitary transfers implicating the domestic perpetrators.

Explain in detail the necessity of destroying WTC 7. And how this building was important to any overall objective the domestic perpetrators wished to achieve.

If your rendetition of these events is more compelling than the wealth information already avalible as a result of hundreds of investigations, then I will change my stance on this issue.

Simple. Can you? Can you formulate a comprehensive narritive backed with undisputible fact? Can you even come close?

[edit on 20-7-2009 by Taxi-Driver]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Can you formulate a comprehensive narritive backed with undisputible fact? Can you even come close?
[edit on 20-7-2009 by Taxi-Driver]


I think it's safe to say "no" Mr Taxi Driver.

Do you know who I'm disappointed with though? The F.B.I. The amazing Federal Bureau of Investigation! I always thought they were supposed to be up there with the best of the best crime-fighting, crime-solving units in the whole world.

Yet to this day, no one has been brought to justice for 9/11 and they have no suspects...well apart from those ones who were supposed to have died in the attacks, but then turned up alive and kicking all around the world.

The F.B.I. must be rubbish!

How on earth do any complex crimes get solved in the U.S.A.?



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver

Originally posted by king9072

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Now, try it the other way around.. with the Truther Propagandists.

THAT is a baloney Dagwood.


Hey! Thanks for not even reading. The truther theory is held as the alternative when testing the official story baloney. It holds much more water, though no perfect, it still solves many unsolved portions of the official story.


Oh good! Well, lay it out then.

Provide a sensible timeline of events corraborated with hard facts, solid evidence, and names of the accused that builds a more substancial narrative than the investigations you wish to refute.

I want to see every aspect of your hypothesis from the initial planning stage all the way through the goal objective. Leave no stone unturned.

Please explain in detail: The initial planning of this conspiracy: who was the person that first proposed killing 3000 innocent civilians, and who else was present at this nefarious meeting.

Prove in detail the logistics involved in carrying out this plan with dates, personnel, equipment, training ect that places your named suspects in the correct location at the correct time.

Provide the money trail of receipts and monitary transfers implicating the domestic perpetrators.

Explain in detail the necessity of destroying WTC 7. And how this building was important to any overall objective the domestic perpetrators wished to achieve.

If your rendetition of these events is more compelling than the wealth information already avalible as a result of hundreds of investigations, then I will change my stance on this issue.

Simple. Can you? Can you formulate a comprehensive narritive backed with undisputible fact? Can you even come close?

[edit on 20-7-2009 by Taxi-Driver]



Oh great job making a completely pointless post. Perhaps you could prove the flipside, and show me all the proof that Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda planned that day.

I want to see every aspect of your hypothesis from the initial planning stage all the way through the goal objective. Leave no stone unturned.

Please explain in detail: The initial planning of this conspiracy: who was the person that first proposed killing 3000 innocent civilians, and who else was present at this nefarious meeting.

Prove in detail the logistics involved in carrying out this plan with dates, personnel, equipment, training ect that places your named suspects in the correct location at the correct time.

Provide the money trail of receipts and monitary transfers implicating the domestic perpetrators.

Explain in detail the necessity of destroying WTC 7. And how this building was important to any overall objective the domestic perpetrators wished to achieve.


---

Ok, and maybe well you're at it, you can tell me why WTC 7 collapsed into it's pad. Then you can tell me where the Pentagon Plane is. You can then also provide me with ONE credible reason to NEVER release one film from the numerous security and other cameras that captured the entire attack that day.

Then, well you're at it, tell me how any single person known as a terrorist including OBL and any member of Al-Qaeda, benefited from the attacks that day financially or otherwise. Alright? Thanks.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   
I guess you missed the whole Zacarias Moussaoui trial and all

oh and the capture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Does the CIA count?

" More than 5,000 terrorists have either been killed or captured in the five years since the September 11 terror attacks in the US with al-Qaeda's 'core operational leadership decimated', according to CIA Director Michael Hayden. "

www.expressindia.com...

Have fun in 2001



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072



Oh great job making a completely pointless post. Perhaps you could prove the flipside, and show me all the proof that Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda planned that day.



Sure... YOU FIRST. As was asked first.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


Perhaps you can just explain how World Trade Center 7 collapsed after experiencing 100% uniform failure across every section of the building. Despite the fact that only small sections were damaged.

Then provide one valid reason for not releasing anything more than 6 frames from one camera that would show what hit the Pentagon.

Then provide photographic or other proof that a 757 hit the Pentagon, including but not limited to, the impact damage from the 124 foot wingspan, the two engines and the vertical stabilizer.

Then please continue by providing proof that kerosene or any fire can melt steel. Then additionally prove that it can melt steel 80 floors below where it is actually burning.

Also provide a valid reason for the astounding amount of Nano Thermite that has been scientifically proven to be found in New York that day.

Please explain how a jet impact near the top of the building will result in molten metal in the basements of the building, able to hold their molten state for several weeks after the event.

Then I want you to explain how Terrorists in a Cave, were able to have Norad stand down on one day in history, luckily for them, the only day in history they attack with planes.

Then tell me why normal protocol was not followed by the Secret Service when the country was under direct attack. Bush sat in a publicly announced location like a sitting duck putting himself and the children in grave danger.

Then I want a reasonable explanation for every single lie that the administration told which has been PROVEN to be a lie due to contrary actions to their statements.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Baloney Detection KIT - Put into Practice for 911:

Point one: How reliable is the source of the claim?

first salient point.. since you and you alone are making the claim..

The government has lied throughout history about false flag attacks that have allowed illegal wars to take place, removal of rights to happen, and unconstitutional laws to be passed.

yes..

Additionally, since 911 they lied about practically every aspect of that day, pr oven over time through actions that contradict their comments.

not proven.. but assumed..

Point two: Does the source make similar type claims?

pot meet kettle..

Lusitania, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, 911.

Point three: Have the claims been verified by anyone else?

good point.. how about peer review?

No, and in most cases, the complete opposite has been proven. Like the fact that thermite residue was found in every sample of dust taken from ground zero.

really? every sample? the existence of nano-thermite as is claimed has not been verified..

It's also not provable or scientifically replicable that a 50 storey building could experience complete and uniform failure, then collapse into it's pad without ever experiencing a hit from a plane.

not exactly uniform.. not exactly into its pad.. and not exactly honest in implying it sustained no, or minimal damage by saying a plane did not hit..

Point four: Does this fit the way the world works?

it fits reality..

Actually no, for 911 to take place according to the official story the laws of physics would have to have been rewritten for that one day in history.

Point Five: Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?

Yes, thousands of people. And not just amateur researchers, hundreds of Architects and Engineers, as well as high ranking military officials disagree with the official story and it's ludicrous statements.

for the casual observer let it be known that the (hundreds) do not reflect anywhere near the majority of professionals in these fields.. there are thousands who do not even give this the credibility of discussion..

Point Six: Where does the preponderance of evidence point?

It points to those who profited that day, all of which profited in the billions. The same people who systematically lied about practically every aspect of that day prior to and since. It also seems to point to the same people who were granted sweeping new powers thanks to the event. The same point who were able to launch two illegal wars, introduce unconstitutional laws and murder millions of civilians.

anytime there is an event of this magnitude, there will be suspicion.. as always follow the money..

Point Seven: Are the people making the claim playing by the rules of science?

look into the critiques of Steven Jones latest paper..

No, they aren't. As previously mentioned their hypothesis would require the suspension of the laws of physics. It also would require astronomical anomalies to have occurred, multiple times in one single day. There is no scenario other than controlled demolition that allows a steel structured building to fall into it's pad at nearly freefall speed. This additionally evident when one looks at the fact that prior to and since 911, there has never been another scenario which is leveled a steel skyscraper. Even though some steel skyscrapers have burned for 20 times the length of time as the World Trade Centers, with more complete, full damage to the building. None had the same ending.

this whole fallacy has been discussed to death.. not just here but every other conspiracy site on the web..

Point Eight: Is the claimant providing positive evidence?

Yes, they only provide evidence that "seems" to prove their point. Although it is all theoretical speculation at best, like the pancake theory. Despite the fact that no one can come up with a pancake scenario that would allow for free fall speeds.

it was near freefall.. remember? how about staying consistent?


More importantly, is the evidence that they choose to completely ignore such as:
- What happened to WTC 7, the official investigation did not even mention this building in it's final report. I suppose I am the only one who feels 50 story buildings that collapse are relevant.

it was overlooked.. but it was also overlooked by the truthers as well until it seemed relevant..

- Why was there molten metal discovered in the rubble upto 6 weeks after the attacks?

nice.. you said metal instead of steel.. the fire was hot.. that large of an area will burn for quite a while.. there was loads of material to fuel a smoldering fire..

- Why was there a lack of a substantial amount of "plane" at the pentagon and in Shanksville.

the Pentagon has been done to death as well.. Shanksville? not much to either prove or disprove the OS..

- Why are numerous tapes that would show in full, real time, color, the plane that attacked the Pentagon, never released

because they really were not aimed at the sky for oncoming objects.. but rather aimed at the grounds around the building.. just like any surveilliance system would be.. watching for people and or vehicles..

- when those videos alone would completely end every bit of speculation about the Pentagon?

Point Nine: Does the new theory account for more phenomena than the old theory?

Yes, and in fact the entire "old theory" does not account for any phenomena that took place that day. All of which has been pointed out several times during this post. The new theory provides more sound, reasonable and scientifically replicable evidence than the original theory ever did. And that's what the official story is, it's a theory, that's full of holes and was supplied by (coincidentally) the only people that benefited from the event.

WRONG.. the story was supplied by a lot of citizens and amature journalists as well.. many private parties took film of the event and were a large part of our knowledge of what happened..

they still used the (problem) to launch a pre-planned war on a sovereign nation.

this may be the only point you have raised that has any merit.. JMO

[edit on 20-7-2009 by pccat]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


When you ask the question what happened because the evidence doesn't match the story, you aren't presenting a theory to be made baloney of. I cant speak for all truthers but this is the stance I take. I don't know what happened on September 11th, 2001 because the evidence does not match the story, and therefore we need a new investigation.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join