It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


40 Questions which make believing the OS Grotesque

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 11:06 PM
reply to post by 7redorbs

Here's the fact, my friends. This forum is for the two sides of ANY conflict which isn't readily discussed in the media to converge. There's gonna be disagreements, there's going to be emotion, irrationalism, and outright flaming. I've never believe that 9/11 was inside job. But... having been of that camp for a loooong time, even I understand there is some damning evidence. However, forming opinion without a first-hand account is only going to be speculation. Bring in any evidence you want and someone with a large amount of stubbornness will find a convincing way to disqualify it.

Arguing over whether or not 9/11 was a government conspiracy is an EXCELLENT way to hash out fact from bull. That's the FUN of ATS. You read stuff here you don't see anywhere else. You get a lot of information on a subject and you can weed out for yourself what is the truth and decide where your opinions will lie.

Prophet, reading through your posts on these forums, it is my resolute opinion that you are one the most closed minded individuals that post here. There doesn't seem to be any reason for your presence other than to get angry and, without any logical argument on your behalf, proceed to bash other users and their opinions. If your intention is to incite a riot, you won't succeed can't succeed. We're ATS and far above that level of maturity (for the most part). Alot of the folks here in the conspiracy ring already think you are a disinformation agent/conspirator against the truth who is only trying to distract from the issue at hand with inflammatory posts and comments deriding the character and virtue of the truly interested posters.

This, however, is something I enjoy. Your opinion is respected to me. If I find that I agree with you on ANYTHING, I give the topic another, deeper look and find out where I went wrong. We agree on a few issues, but nothing of consequence. I appreciate your bing here, sir, and would really like to see you become a more involved member. Please remain calm and reason your words out before you post them. Civility will take you so much farther than rage.

posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 11:09 PM
reply to post by kiwifoot

Pretty much, they have all been answered, numerous times, on ATS..

Put Options---investigated and found to have been based on legitmate decisions involving airline performance...and not 9/11.

Ashcroft--was still flying civilian aircraft for personal travel up until 9/11.

2.3 trillon--was an issue known about for at least two years prior to 9/11. (and it wasnt missing cash)

Secret Service allowing Bush to stay--they were rescouting the area and making alternate plans for his movement.

If I get bored, I'll look at answering more of them later.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 01:21 AM

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by Arrowmancer

Right. And you really think its "grotesque" to be of the opinion the OS is true? Why even bother posting in that case? Don't fight propaganda with propaganda, fight it with facts. I don't care which "side" you're on its a waste of time.

Ah you've shown your true colours here Prophet. I'm fairly sure, in your unbias way, you haven't called in on the suspect thread in question and voiced your concerns over his use of grotesque, have you?

But when a truther does it in RESPONSE, ALERT ALERT DANGER DANGER!

One has to laugh really, points for trying mate!

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 02:21 AM
reply to post by jprophet420

Hi Jprophet, you seem to be confident about your belief's about 911.... The OP has outlined many interesting questions that need to be answered. Why not answer the questions he posted instead of derailing the thread with silly arguments over the reasons for the OP creating the thread!

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 05:37 AM
Good post, covers alot of the topics that pop up when truthers start talking. But what I want to know is WHY did this happen? No one gives the WHY question very much thought. Its always about proving the thing we all know happened. Either the goverment was involved in or let these events happen. I personally think it might be a mix of both...

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 06:08 AM
How does the believers in the official stories explain the refusal of information from the agencies?

1) why does NIST, FBI, SEC, Department of the Navy, and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey withhold information and pictures and videos despite FOIA requests?

2) NIST are still holding on to the 7000 videos and 7000 pictures they used in their investigation, despite FOIA requests...

3) FBI confiscated 80 videos at pentagon, only 4 have been made avaiable via FOIA.

4) The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey refused to release the audiotape of firefighters' communications from the World Trade Center. In early November 2002, the tape was released to the New York Times, then to other unspecified "news outlets" (according to the Associated Press). the NYT is the only outlet to post excerpts from the tape; no one has yet posted the entire thing...
quotes from the new york times recordings...
original recordings released by new york times..

5) NIST didnt look for explosives because acording to NIST... "it would be a waste of time to look for something that wasnt there...."

"There was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions."--Firefighter Richard Banaciski

"I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?"
--Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

"[I]t was like professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."
--Paramedic Daniel Rivera

"I hear an explosion and I look up. It is as if the building is being imploded, from the top floor down, one after another, boom, boom, boom." FDNY Captain Dennis Tardio

Battalion Chief John Sudnik: "we heard a loud explosion or what sounded like a loud explosion and looked up and I saw tower two start coming down.

Firefighter Timothy Julian: "First I thought it was an explosion. I thought maybe there was a bomb on the plane, but delayed type of thing, you know secondary device. . . . I just heard like an explosion and then a cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down."

Emergency medical technician Michael Ober said: "We heard a rumble, some twisting metal, we looked up in the air, and . . . it looked to me just like an explosion. It didn't look like the building was coming down, it looked like just one floor had blown completely outside of it. . . . I didn't think they were coming down. I just froze and stood there looking at it.

"I started walking back up towards Vesey Street. I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down." -- Paramedic Kevin Darnowski

"I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now." --Gregg Brady, an emergency medical technician

"it almost sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight." -- firefighter Thomas Turilli

"heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. . . . We then realized the building started to come down." -- firefighter Craig Carlsen

"I . . . looked up out of the office window to see what seemed like perfectly synchronized explosions coming from each floor. . . . One after the other, from top to bottom, with a fraction of a second between, the floors blew to pieces." --Wall Street Journal reporter John Bussey

Another Wall Street Journal reporter said that after seeing what appeared to be "individual floors, one after the other exploding outward," he thought: "'My God, they're going to bring the building down.' And they, whoever they are, HAD SET CHARGES. . . . I saw the explosions."

"It just descended like a timed explosion--like when they are deliberately bringing a building down. . . . It was coming down so perfectly that in one part of my brain I was thinking, 'They got everyone out, and they're bringing the building down because they have to" Beth Fertig of WNYC Radio

"There were reports of an explosion right before the tower fell, then a strange sucking sound, and finally the sound of floors collapsing." Los Angeles Times

[edit on 7-9-2009 by conar]

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 07:12 AM
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

I personally never understood why the bush sitting around part was indicative for anything.
Now if on the other hand the SS would have gone "There are terrorists hijacking planes - get bush into airforce 1 immediately!!" I would understand some folks frowning

But yes: I saw the other flame baiting thread, and that is what it was, flame baiting. Not answering it is the only way you can answer it.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 07:13 AM
First I would like to extend my appreciation for your effort in this thread. I appreciate it because all of these questions and many others have been answered with unbelievable excuses. The contradictions and coincidences are off the charts. Anyone with a modicum of sense would question the official story.

Does questioning the "official story" make one a traitor? If so, why?

The traitor seems to be the ones who garnered immense new powers, bankrolls, and positions of influence.

NORAD standing down - even with pre-planned drills being known well in advance it does not compute that NORAD was "confused" and unable to distinguish between "real" and "drill". I can't buy it. That is the one point that can't be obfuscated nor explained away, nor ridiculed for noticing that the security of the entire country lies in the incapable hands of the easily confused. If NORAD couldn't defend the country on that day, what makes me confident that they can handle any emergency in the future? I'll answer that myself. Nada, nothing, nil. But keep them in power, keep funding them, keep America thinking they are safe because NORAD is on the job? NORAD who couldn't handle one day in history that changed everything for the America I used to know, that paved the way for the Patriot ACT which was prepared and ready to go at least 2 years before Tuesday, September 11, 2001.

The 9/11 issue is as ridiculous as the chemtrail/contrail debate.

There are serious, intelligent, well-thought-out, informative indicators that 9/11 was handled by a bunch of inept, bungling fools. The chemtrail deniers seems to cohabit this particular group of individuals. The similarities in argumentative tactics and denial of common sense are also shared in these two debate groups. I find you all hilariously funny while being extremely sad for those who could be swayed by their constant fear of being ridiculed for posting their thoughts. Its a plan, people. Bullies bully. Dont expect bullies to be reasonable, open to intelligent debate, expect them to use every tactic available to them to twist your reasoning and insert diversions to derail (by force of emotion) any attempt to discuss the discrepancies by common folks.

Common folks are being targeted at an extreme rate and at a level I haven't witnessed since the 5th grade playground. Where the bullies tried and succeeded in intimidating the 1st graders. Not because they were better, but because they were bigger. Take note. No bully ever lasts in the face of patience, common sense, intelligence and determination.

The official story of 9/11 by the joke of a commission is itself a reflection and shining example of that joke.

Last, before I get banned for telling it like it is, I would point out that It took up to 2 minutes for the page to reload each time after I gave posts a star. I've been on this thread (before posting a comment) for over 15 minutes just waiting for the page to reload. So, it probably isn't just your computer going whacky OP. Just an FYI to add to your list of probabilities.

Again, I appreciate you putting up this thread.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 07:51 AM

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by kiwifoot

Pretty much, they have all been answered, numerous times, on ATS..

Put Options---investigated and found to have been based on legitmate decisions involving airline performance...and not 9/11.

Instead of parroting "they have all been answered", it would be more helpful if you could cite the research to which you refer.

We could then check its credibility against the two meticulous, in-depth, peer reviewed studies of 2006 and 2007. Produced by academics unconnected to the so-called "truth movement", they both determined independently that there is strong evidence of foreknowledge of the attacks demonstrated by the unusual put options in the days leading up to September 11.

...there is evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks.

Unusual Option Market Activity and the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001
Allen M. Poteshman, 2006, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

...the probability that there were trades based upon foreknowledge is strong for American Airlines, United Airlines, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, Citigroup and JP Morgan.
[translated from French]

11 septembre 2001 : des volumes inhabituels sur les options peu avant l'attentat
Marc Chesney and Loriano Mancini, 2007, University of Zurich - Swiss Banking Institute

You blandly state that the Put Options were investigated - but to this day there's been no official investigation - instead we're fobbed off with the 9/11 Commission Report's cryptic claim that they were placed by "a single U.S. based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al-Qaeda."

[edit on 7-9-2009 by EvilAxis]

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:28 AM
Brilliant thread Kiwifoot! You have taken the most critical pieces
of the puzzle and put them together in a very informative and
logical manner.
Honestly this is the most convincing single thread I've seen on 9/11
that trashes the 9/11 commission report.

When speaking with people who are unfamiliar with the facts of
that day, one of the greatest difficulties in getting them to understand
the commission report is a sham is the sheer amount of evidence to
choose from. Your video choices were the best and most concise for
explaining your points, many of them I'd never seen (Bush talking to
reporters about testifying for instance).

With this thread I think I can get some minds to open up to the truth
without forcing them to spend countless hours. Thank You! This was
an important contribution. S&F and applause from my heart. Keep up
the excellent work!

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:29 AM
Good Job Kiwifoot.

As someone who was born and raised in Brooklyn, right across the bridge from the WTC and it being a part of my upbringing with family who helped build it, family working for police and fire who were there during it's destruction, you can't argue. And being someone myself who is tired of hearing ridicule from people who have never been there, never heard the accounts from the many people who were there on that day, and who dont know any of the facts, this thread is a great way of getting all of the LEGITIMATE questions out there so that hopefully people turn off fox news and open their eyes and ears.

I cannot believe that in this day and age, we have people who eat coverups as they are handed to them without questioning, even to the point where they deny what they see right in front of them.

When I had so many family and friends there on the day this happened (1 dead now) all telling me the same things, and being credible people, I will never accept anything the media, the president, or anyone says ever again, simply because 9/11 was a perfect example of how your "leaders" WILL INDEED mislead you in defiance of the reality that unfolded on that day.

The sheer audacity of our government and media to lie has shown me who the terrorists really are.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:53 AM
3)Why was there no significant plane wreckage in Shanksville, especially compared to other vertical plane crashes in the past?

Logic is a wonderfull thing, perhaps it has to do with the fact that in most every plane crash the person piloting the plane are trying there best to survive. The High Jackers Intended to crash this plane. These Nutter Sent the plane in to a nose dive, at high speed.

also somthing people often overlook, avgas is heavier then water per gallon, In emergency landings or ditches they dump the full if possible the terrorist did not so the plane was fuel of fuel Large explosion!

[edit on 9/7/2009 by Verd_Vhett]

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 09:21 AM
reply to post by kiwifoot

There are a lot of things the "truth" movement takes out of context, and therefore ruins its credibility (at least in my mind)...


I find one question that holds more water than all the rest...No matter the excuse it screams of negligence and/or complicity more than all other arguments in my mind.

How is it that it took 2 hours for the first jets to be scrambled once contact had been lost and a hijacking was suspected?? Especially considering when this happens many times a year, and is a somewhat routine operation?

Even if there is nothing nefarious behind such non action there should have been some sort of reprimand and lots of job "losses" for the individulas who ignored protocal and did not do their jobs appropriately...just the fact those that "allowed" these event to unfold were given promotions and recommendaions smells very fishy to me.

I mean here is a guy, Cheney...who believes torture is a way to truth, but he wont give the order to shoot down a jumbo jet headed straight for the pentagon?? What...are we supposed to believe he is some sort of humanitarian? Like he gave a crap about the lives on board? HA! Thats the funniest thing I have ever heard! The protocol is to shoot down any threat approaching our military headquarters...the multi billion dollar building that houses top personnel for the defense of our nation! Why in the hell did it not get shot down!?

Ill repeat myself because I just can't figure out how the order was not given...

It is the PENTAGON... the headquarters of our entire military...why was the trigger not pulled?

...just thinking about it is unbelievable...makes me sick...the implications are staggering in my mind...but many times I dont believe it could be true...

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 09:36 AM
reply to post by EvilAxis

Here you go...

Hmm, the individual who purchased the put options on one of the airlines...had actually also purchased 100k+ shares of the same airline......

July and August were loaded with bad news from the airlines. Investor guides were actively advising investor's to place options on the airlines. As with all things 9/11, if you do the research you find that reality is less sinister than some would have you believe.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 09:36 AM
don't know if anyone has posted these before. these are from a set of
trading cards that were produced by a resident of texas.
the guy is a freemason, who it seems likes to antagonise with claims of belonging to the Illuminati. eccentric i would say. the game was
created in 1991. then redone in '95. the copy right on the deck is

i think the order is probly correct.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by randyvs]

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 09:41 AM

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by kiwifoot

Pretty much, they have all been answered, numerous times, on ATS..

Put Options---investigated and found to have been based on legitmate decisions involving airline performance...and not 9/11.

Ashcroft--was still flying civilian aircraft for personal travel up until 9/11.

2.3 trillon--was an issue known about for at least two years prior to 9/11. (and it wasnt missing cash)

Secret Service allowing Bush to stay--they were rescouting the area and making alternate plans for his movement.

If I get bored, I'll look at answering more of them later.

Yea, I'll be holding my breath. pfft. Yea good try on those 3 or 4, only 35+ left to go, better call weedwacker, and cameroon.

Face it the OS is just that a "story" sold to the public.

I don't know why you and the handful of same posters are still here trying to convince the 90% of ATS who are free thinkers. Well I can think of a few resons, all of them "grotesque".

For the other 10% ignorance is bliss.

But for you and you co-work... errr, cronies all I can say is Karma is one bad mother.

OP Starred, Starred, Starred , Flagged, and added to favorites, so I can just pullthis list out whenever some "liar" (weel if we are truther, they are....liars, yes?) opens his/her cake hole.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 09:50 AM
reply to post by Nola213

ATS is full of threads where most of those (if not all) questions are answered in detail. Do some studying.

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 10:01 AM

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Nola213

ATS is full of threads where most of those (if not all) questions are answered in detail. Do some studying.

Why dont FBI release all the Pentagon videos?

Why dont NIST release all the building 7 pictures and videos so we can have a clear look at the damage to the building before collapse, and if the collapse starts at 13. floor as they say, and not below floor 8, (a witness that NIST ignores heard explosions below floor 8)

Why did FEMA ignore the core of the twin towers?

Why did FEMA say the damage to building 7 would probably not cause a collapse?

Why did NIST ignore all the witnesses who heard explosions?

Why didnt NIST at least LOOK for explosives?

[edit on 7-9-2009 by conar]

posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 10:10 AM

Originally posted by kiwifoot
reply to post by ugie1028

I must have irked somebody, my pc has gone haywire, I cannot fix some of the you-tube vids that don't work, will keep trying!

Back soon!

Viewing this thread has caused my browser to crash 4x, so Good job OP, I think you have pissed someone off!!


posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 10:12 AM
The pattern we become used too on ATS is this:

Those posters who disagree with the official line offer up evidence to support their views..

Those who believe the official story offer up opinions,for the most part,or government sponsored "evidence" which reinforces said official line,and is often easily debunked by reality.

Now we have the "national geographic" brigade claiming anyone who believes in "conspriracy theoies"is mantally ill.

I would say to those who believe in in the official story,that it is they who have the problem,as they cannot see any of the blatant discrepencies in the official story.

They are either paid up members of "cointelpro" type groups,or are so in love with their crimminal government that if their brains actually worked out the official story is lies,they would have some kind of breakdown.
Denial is a wonderful thing for these types,as it protects their world view and sanity at the same time.

Fantastic information you provided Kiwifoot.
Anyone who after viewing such info still believes the official story has their heads in the sand,and will never change their opinions IMHO.

Like I said in another thread-it must be really nice to believe the government has never murdered its own people,but when the evidence points to the opposite-I prefer to believe the evidence,rather than the garbage offered up by people who have,and will continue to lie cheat steal and murder in order to hold on to power,and continue to control the populace.

Again,Good Job Kiwifoot

[edit on 7/9/2009 by Silcone Synapse]

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in