Ooops nearly forgot, entered the South face, cut through some centre core columns, and exited the North face, I really do find this mind boggling -
The toughest x3 items are nowhere to be seen, yet we have some fibre glass nose cone ripping through so much steel it`s laughable ,`Yeah man, but that
was 9/11`.
And to most of you debunkers, address the questions as they are asked, no complete twisting them to suit with a completely derailed and side stepped
answer to a question I did not ask, I will ask them again.....
Voice recorders microphones and being turned on to hear passengers, in planes that can hold up to 300 people, screaming hysterically - 300 - people -
I take it they didn`t want to hear the Captain and co then, in an emergency environment?, or was this purely for the court case as evidence?.
The explosions - Apart from the blatant colour difference there is also a lot more debris shown with the secondary explosion, explain this please.
Laymen terms and the parts normally found after a plane crash, what is the normal ratio to parts found in accessible areas here we have x2 landing
gear, an engine that shrunk as to fit in a waste bin next to it, and the Pentagon part not vaporised which proves that the engines were not vaporised
but has lashings of `Yeah man, but this was 9/11`, attached to it, and a passenger area flight recorder, so 9/11 yielded 5 items from 28, roughly 18%,
I just done a little google search relating to found plane parts around crash sites, every single one had engines, landing gear, flight recorders.
What was the difference of the four planes that day, that their crashes defined the stringent tests that flight recorders are subject to, which covers
explosions, heat, cold, being crushed, in fact every single aspect a plane crash can through at them - they survive it.
So, in the nutshell, the four planes involved only had one flight recorder between them, or, whatever destroyed them had nothing to do with any aspect
of a plane crash, thus they were not designed to take it.
I showed with my original post x3 engines that had been subjected to every single angle of a plane crash - heat and hitting a solid object, a high
altitude descent plunge, and being jettisoned into a road so hard it embedded in the road, all however, still look, exactly like, what they are
supposed to look like, so, as this is regarded as normal, please post pictures etc of other plane engines that shrunk or completely disintegrated but
left one part perfectly cylindrical, if however there are absolutely no engines whatsoever that look anything the same, but hundreds upon hundreds
that do, why is it that this is regarded as perfectly normal due to the situation, which by all accounts was what exactly?, Jet Fuel and hitting
things.
To our forum plane experts - shame on you., page 4
privacy
. 
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 08:33 PM by rainfall
reply to post by Seventh
Seventh,
You do realize that there were NO planes involved in the attacks on Sept. 11.?.......don't you..
Seventh,
You do realize that there were NO planes involved in the attacks on Sept. 11.?.......don't you..
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 11:36 PM by sr_robert1
reply to post by AnonymousMoose
I guess that explains why there was no debris found at the towers site. No debris of anything, moving fast from outside or sitting still inside the building. No evidence of anything even being in the building, except for a whole lot of steel and concrete in powder form. Those desks, filing cabinets, people, etc must have been moving real fast to not leave any debris at the collapse site.
I guess that explains why there was no debris found at the towers site. No debris of anything, moving fast from outside or sitting still inside the building. No evidence of anything even being in the building, except for a whole lot of steel and concrete in powder form. Those desks, filing cabinets, people, etc must have been moving real fast to not leave any debris at the collapse site.
reply posted on 8-10-2009 @ 11:49 PM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by lozenge
Umm no, I never said the parts were vaporized by kerosene. No clue how you came to that decision reading my post. I said I wished that the man who first used the word "vaporized" wouldnt have used it.
Umm no, I never said the parts were vaporized by kerosene. No clue how you came to that decision reading my post. I said I wished that the man who first used the word "vaporized" wouldnt have used it.
reply posted on 9-10-2009 @ 12:00 AM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Seventh
Well if you had bothered to actually do some research (which I know, is asking a lot of a truther) you would have found out that the only time the passenger voices were captured on Flight 93's CVR was when the passengers were trying to gain access to the cockpit. In other words, they were close to the microphones.
Voice recorders microphones and being turned on to hear passengers, in planes that can hold up to 300 people, screaming hysterically - 300 - people - I take it they didn`t want to hear the Captain and co then, in an emergency environment?, or was this purely for the court case as evidence?.
Well if you had bothered to actually do some research (which I know, is asking a lot of a truther) you would have found out that the only time the passenger voices were captured on Flight 93's CVR was when the passengers were trying to gain access to the cockpit. In other words, they were close to the microphones.
reply posted on 9-10-2009 @ 12:21 PM by weedwhacker
reply to post by Seventh
What is with this attitude???
Of course they had locks on them. The doors were made of the same material as your average lavatory door. Or non-structural bulkhead partiton.
Very flimsy aluminum frames. Insubstantial knobs, that BTW would accept a universal key, that worked every Boeing door it encounterd, at least within a particular Company. In fact, my key worked on EVERY airplane cockpit door in our fleet, for the entire 18 years since I was hired, and until the doors were REPLACED with the current, heavy-duty versions.
Now, that is just flat-out rude!!!!
Having trouble with the thread's "Theories" and mistaken "Conclusions"???
Arghhh. If the concept of storming through a door that has been innocently opened by a Flight Attendant to bring food or drink into the cockpit, OR if a pilot is exiting to go tinkle his winky, THIS seems like a foreign "9/11 moment" to you???
I just shake my head, sometimes.
Now, this was also a discussion of the CVR microphone in the cockpit. It is abbreviated "CAM" in transcripts, that stands for 'cockpit area microphone'.
HERE is where it's located in the cockpit:
www.airliners.net...
This is called the 'overhead panel'.
Look near the bottom center, you see the wet compass (the magnetic compass) --- find that for orientation purposes. It is located, as you see, aligned with the center windshield post.
Look left, then UP slightly. (which would be AFT). You see some sliver switches, and some concentric knobs and a square button. Everything there controls various lights -- the switches are the exterior "Runway Turnoff" lights (think cornering lights in your car), the other panel with knobs is for interior cockpit lighting, and the square button is called a "Thunderstorm Light"...it is a master that overrides most other controls for interior lights, and turns them on to bright....for those times that bright lightning flashes may destroy your night vision...or just because you want instant bright lights, at night.
NOW, the next little panel there, that is the CVR panel. That's the microphone on the left, there is a impedance meter in the middle, and the green TEST button, and red ERASE button next to that. ALSO, you can see the headphone jack, because we are supposed to plug in and listen, to ascertain that the mic is working.
Oh, and BTW....loud noises that occur right there in the galley area, just outside the cockpit door, even when it's closed? Yes, we can hear them. Shouts, plates or drinking glasses falling and breaking, even sneezes and loud arguments.....and the mic can pick all that up, too.
What is with this attitude???
Are you saying that cockpit doors have locks on them?
Of course they had locks on them. The doors were made of the same material as your average lavatory door. Or non-structural bulkhead partiton.
Very flimsy aluminum frames. Insubstantial knobs, that BTW would accept a universal key, that worked every Boeing door it encounterd, at least within a particular Company. In fact, my key worked on EVERY airplane cockpit door in our fleet, for the entire 18 years since I was hired, and until the doors were REPLACED with the current, heavy-duty versions.
...did four Captains that day forget to lock their doors, wow what another `Yeah man, but that was 9/11` moment.
Now, that is just flat-out rude!!!!
Having trouble with the thread's "Theories" and mistaken "Conclusions"???
Arghhh. If the concept of storming through a door that has been innocently opened by a Flight Attendant to bring food or drink into the cockpit, OR if a pilot is exiting to go tinkle his winky, THIS seems like a foreign "9/11 moment" to you???
I just shake my head, sometimes.
Now, this was also a discussion of the CVR microphone in the cockpit. It is abbreviated "CAM" in transcripts, that stands for 'cockpit area microphone'.
HERE is where it's located in the cockpit:
www.airliners.net...
This is called the 'overhead panel'.
Look near the bottom center, you see the wet compass (the magnetic compass) --- find that for orientation purposes. It is located, as you see, aligned with the center windshield post.
Look left, then UP slightly. (which would be AFT). You see some sliver switches, and some concentric knobs and a square button. Everything there controls various lights -- the switches are the exterior "Runway Turnoff" lights (think cornering lights in your car), the other panel with knobs is for interior cockpit lighting, and the square button is called a "Thunderstorm Light"...it is a master that overrides most other controls for interior lights, and turns them on to bright....for those times that bright lightning flashes may destroy your night vision...or just because you want instant bright lights, at night.
NOW, the next little panel there, that is the CVR panel. That's the microphone on the left, there is a impedance meter in the middle, and the green TEST button, and red ERASE button next to that. ALSO, you can see the headphone jack, because we are supposed to plug in and listen, to ascertain that the mic is working.
Oh, and BTW....loud noises that occur right there in the galley area, just outside the cockpit door, even when it's closed? Yes, we can hear them. Shouts, plates or drinking glasses falling and breaking, even sneezes and loud arguments.....and the mic can pick all that up, too.
reply posted on 9-10-2009 @ 10:40 PM by rush969
reply to post by Seventh
Seventh. I have to say, you are one of the best examples of “truther logic” at work.
Let´s see. So far. You are an expert on photography, video and how color can be interpreted in those media. Your explanation to the difference in color from some images to others is the ONLY ONE THAT IS VALID. In other words you´re the only authority on interpretation of the meaning of each of the colors seen in those fireballs.
Then you turned “magically” into aviation accident expert. (This by the way is no accident.) And you are the ONLY ONE who can decide how many, what size, and what type of debris or parts are to be found at each crash site on 9/11.
You complain there has been “no positive assessment as to why there was only 5 (also something you arbitrarily set) from 28 of the “normally” found plane parts??? Normally???
The fact is, the assessment as to why this happened, should be COMPLETELY OBVIOUS to you or anyone else.
Where you totally lost credibility and showed your lack of seriousness, respect for those who died and a lack of proper research in aviation related matters is when you go discussing the CVR. (Cockpit voice recorder.)
People have been trying to help you on the subject.
But in complete accordance with “truther´s logic” you have dismissed their help and information. It´s of no value to you.
Seventh. I have to say, you are one of the best examples of “truther logic” at work.
Let´s see. So far. You are an expert on photography, video and how color can be interpreted in those media. Your explanation to the difference in color from some images to others is the ONLY ONE THAT IS VALID. In other words you´re the only authority on interpretation of the meaning of each of the colors seen in those fireballs.
Then you turned “magically” into aviation accident expert. (This by the way is no accident.) And you are the ONLY ONE who can decide how many, what size, and what type of debris or parts are to be found at each crash site on 9/11.
You complain there has been “no positive assessment as to why there was only 5 (also something you arbitrarily set) from 28 of the “normally” found plane parts??? Normally???
The fact is, the assessment as to why this happened, should be COMPLETELY OBVIOUS to you or anyone else.
Where you totally lost credibility and showed your lack of seriousness, respect for those who died and a lack of proper research in aviation related matters is when you go discussing the CVR. (Cockpit voice recorder.)
People have been trying to help you on the subject.
But in complete accordance with “truther´s logic” you have dismissed their help and information. It´s of no value to you.
reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 02:17 AM by Seventh
reply to post by rush969
Do you seriously believe you have to be an expert in any aspect of all this to spot the flaws?.
I specifically introduced `Yeah man, but this was 9/11`, for replies like yours, now, the explosives, I think I have mentioned this part at least three times in this thread...... The debris showers are completely different also. No expertise in plane crash investigations is needed, to put forward common knowledge facts.
Apn the debunkers make the whole 9/11 fiasco some sort of intricately unique event that had it`s own set of rules, it was the day that science, physics, time, maths, did not exist.
Now, you can make out the whole event was so complex that anyone putting forward some basic summaries of what is the norm, are obviously suffering from illusions of Grandeur, that`s fine.
If I believed the OS I would make threads with relevant pictures to enforce what is quite plain to see, the reason I do not, is very simple, there is no hardcore evidence whatsoever to back it up, now this may escape your attention, but, every single aspect of 9/11 has more signs of being an inside job, than the work of terrorists, to enforce this, do as I do..
Create a thread relating to the OS, using pictures, film clips, maths, science, whatever, that strengthens it and concludes that it is 100% fact, you will find this nigh on impossible, which brings us to the reason why so many people do not believe the OS.
When something happens identically to the way it was explained, two things happen...
1). There is so much proof and evidence to enforce it, that there is no need to argue it out, it plain and simply speaks for itself.
2). There are no indications and or bucketfuls of anomalies to prove otherwise.
There is not one single aspect of 9/11 that is not subject to discrepancies, changed stories, bending of science, maths, physics, pyrotechnics, forensics, normal defence protocols, and ignoring 503 first responders stating they heard, witnessed, or both, explosions, this beggars belief, it could have been the terrorists who planted the bombs.
To this day there is still no explanation of how the towers collapsed, there are only so many things that can cause a building to collapse.......
1). Acts of God (Earthquakes, Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Landslides, Avalanches, Floods, etcetera).
2). Subsidence.
3). Fire.
4). Explosive devices.
Now, we can rule out 1 and 2, fire was a contributory factor no doubting that, but it was not the sole cause, by the powers of elimination it is not rocket science to work out what else was involved, 503 people said so, and the timings of the collapses, the way they collapsed, and even though they have been explained as something else, loads of evidence pointing towards explosions and c/d`s, why has the only possible cause of collapse left, not been investigated?. And does putting this forward make me a a buildings expert?.
When playing Cluedo and all that`s left are Mr Peacock, Library, Gun, then, that is it, you do not have to prove that it was [random aspect] that done something, but prove that every other probability to cause it, did not.
Do you seriously believe you have to be an expert in any aspect of all this to spot the flaws?.
I specifically introduced `Yeah man, but this was 9/11`, for replies like yours, now, the explosives, I think I have mentioned this part at least three times in this thread...... The debris showers are completely different also. No expertise in plane crash investigations is needed, to put forward common knowledge facts.
Apn the debunkers make the whole 9/11 fiasco some sort of intricately unique event that had it`s own set of rules, it was the day that science, physics, time, maths, did not exist.
Now, you can make out the whole event was so complex that anyone putting forward some basic summaries of what is the norm, are obviously suffering from illusions of Grandeur, that`s fine.
If I believed the OS I would make threads with relevant pictures to enforce what is quite plain to see, the reason I do not, is very simple, there is no hardcore evidence whatsoever to back it up, now this may escape your attention, but, every single aspect of 9/11 has more signs of being an inside job, than the work of terrorists, to enforce this, do as I do..
Create a thread relating to the OS, using pictures, film clips, maths, science, whatever, that strengthens it and concludes that it is 100% fact, you will find this nigh on impossible, which brings us to the reason why so many people do not believe the OS.
When something happens identically to the way it was explained, two things happen...
1). There is so much proof and evidence to enforce it, that there is no need to argue it out, it plain and simply speaks for itself.
2). There are no indications and or bucketfuls of anomalies to prove otherwise.
There is not one single aspect of 9/11 that is not subject to discrepancies, changed stories, bending of science, maths, physics, pyrotechnics, forensics, normal defence protocols, and ignoring 503 first responders stating they heard, witnessed, or both, explosions, this beggars belief, it could have been the terrorists who planted the bombs.
To this day there is still no explanation of how the towers collapsed, there are only so many things that can cause a building to collapse.......
1). Acts of God (Earthquakes, Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Landslides, Avalanches, Floods, etcetera).
2). Subsidence.
3). Fire.
4). Explosive devices.
Now, we can rule out 1 and 2, fire was a contributory factor no doubting that, but it was not the sole cause, by the powers of elimination it is not rocket science to work out what else was involved, 503 people said so, and the timings of the collapses, the way they collapsed, and even though they have been explained as something else, loads of evidence pointing towards explosions and c/d`s, why has the only possible cause of collapse left, not been investigated?. And does putting this forward make me a a buildings expert?.
When playing Cluedo and all that`s left are Mr Peacock, Library, Gun, then, that is it, you do not have to prove that it was [random aspect] that done something, but prove that every other probability to cause it, did not.
reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 09:41 AM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Seventh
Do you or do you not realize that a fueled airliner is a very large potential explosive device? Under the right conditions (i.e. slamming into a building) it is going to explode.
There were three types of damage incurred by the towers that day, initial impact damage, then damage caused by the exploding airliners and finally the damage by the unchecked fires.
You can scream all day long that there has never been an explanation for the collapse of the Towers. And all day long, you will be wrong. There has been an explanation issued, you just refused to accept it.
Then you mention the first responders. You really should be careful using them. Very few of them think that were bombs that day. Actually several of them have gotten quite pissy because people like yourself try to use their words to support the bomb theory.
Now, we can rule out 1 and 2, fire was a contributory factor no doubting that, but it was not the sole cause, by the powers of elimination it is not rocket science to work out what else was involved, 503 people said so, and the timings of the collapses, the way they collapsed, and even though they have been explained as something else, loads of evidence pointing towards explosions and c/d`s, why has the only possible cause of collapse left, not been investigated?
Do you or do you not realize that a fueled airliner is a very large potential explosive device? Under the right conditions (i.e. slamming into a building) it is going to explode.
There were three types of damage incurred by the towers that day, initial impact damage, then damage caused by the exploding airliners and finally the damage by the unchecked fires.
You can scream all day long that there has never been an explanation for the collapse of the Towers. And all day long, you will be wrong. There has been an explanation issued, you just refused to accept it.
Then you mention the first responders. You really should be careful using them. Very few of them think that were bombs that day. Actually several of them have gotten quite pissy because people like yourself try to use their words to support the bomb theory.
reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 10:41 AM by Seventh
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Firstly my apologies regarding my earlier post, I did not intend to insult, sorry for that.
Secondly, I have read every single one of these testimonies I earnestly plead with you to do the same.......
Source.........
graphics8.nytimes.com...
How would the commission have fared if all of the above gave evidence?
Also........
www.911truth.org...
We have on the spot written and verbal accounts from 503 first responders, every one of them tell of explosions, but once again, this aspect from your side of the fence gets tarnished with
On a footnote, the only reason the plane impacts have been deemed responsible for the collapses is down to the outrageous explosions seen from WTC2, deep down inside when you look at that explosion you know something is horribly wrong with it, same with WTC1, look at any report relating to the 1st impact and see if it contains any references to to this, and even more importantly - Why not?...
Again - An outrageously over the top reaction from a plane crash and Jet Fuel, WTC1 was hit nigh on dead centre, for that rear explosion to have happened it would have to have cut through the centre core.
The engineers whom designed the Twin Towers has clearly stated they were designed to withstand a fleet of 707`s hitting them........
911research.wtc7.net...
All aspects of a plane crash were taken into consideration and incorporated into their structures, why is it that 3 towers collapsed, that were over engineered to cope with the major causes blamed for causing it?, planes and the resulting fires that should have been, had all been taken into consideration and duly accounted for in their designs.
When the engineers worked out the design needed to cope with a fully loaded 707 hitting them, the speed, damage, and the initial explosion and resulting fire, were all brought into the equation, so what part had they glaringly overlooked - that must have been such an apparent design flaw that not only did it fail once, but twice, and a 3rd tower collapsed also due to this.
If there was such an oversight to the Towers designs, that was seemingly exposed by the planes, then is it not the case that the architects and structural engineers are guilty of - Gross incompetence and neglect resulting in the loss of life?.
/cheers.
Do you or do you not realize that a fueled airliner is a very large potential explosive device? Under the right conditions (i.e. slamming into a building) it is going to explode.
There were three types of damage incurred by the towers that day, initial impact damage, then damage caused by the exploding airliners and finally the damage by the unchecked fires.
You can scream all day long that there has never been an explanation for the collapse of the Towers. And all day long, you will be wrong. There has been an explanation issued, you just refused to accept it.
Then you mention the first responders. You really should be careful using them. Very few of them think that were bombs that day. Actually several of them have gotten quite pissy because people like yourself try to use their words to support the bomb theory.
Firstly my apologies regarding my earlier post, I did not intend to insult, sorry for that.
Secondly, I have read every single one of these testimonies I earnestly plead with you to do the same.......
The Sept. 11 Records A rich vein of city records from Sept. 11, including more than 12,000 pages of oral histories rendered in the voices of 503 firefighters, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians, were made public on Aug. 12. The New York Times has published all of them. The oral histories of dispatch transmissions are transcribed verbatim. They have have not been edited to omit coarse language.
Source.........
graphics8.nytimes.com...
How would the commission have fared if all of the above gave evidence?
Also........
www.911truth.org...
We have on the spot written and verbal accounts from 503 first responders, every one of them tell of explosions, but once again, this aspect from your side of the fence gets tarnished with
Then you mention the first responders. You really should be careful using them. Very few of them think that were bombs that day. Actually several of them have gotten quite pissy because people like yourself try to use their words to support the bomb theory.
On a footnote, the only reason the plane impacts have been deemed responsible for the collapses is down to the outrageous explosions seen from WTC2, deep down inside when you look at that explosion you know something is horribly wrong with it, same with WTC1, look at any report relating to the 1st impact and see if it contains any references to to this, and even more importantly - Why not?...
Again - An outrageously over the top reaction from a plane crash and Jet Fuel, WTC1 was hit nigh on dead centre, for that rear explosion to have happened it would have to have cut through the centre core.
The engineers whom designed the Twin Towers has clearly stated they were designed to withstand a fleet of 707`s hitting them........
911research.wtc7.net...
All aspects of a plane crash were taken into consideration and incorporated into their structures, why is it that 3 towers collapsed, that were over engineered to cope with the major causes blamed for causing it?, planes and the resulting fires that should have been, had all been taken into consideration and duly accounted for in their designs.
When the engineers worked out the design needed to cope with a fully loaded 707 hitting them, the speed, damage, and the initial explosion and resulting fire, were all brought into the equation, so what part had they glaringly overlooked - that must have been such an apparent design flaw that not only did it fail once, but twice, and a 3rd tower collapsed also due to this.
If there was such an oversight to the Towers designs, that was seemingly exposed by the planes, then is it not the case that the architects and structural engineers are guilty of - Gross incompetence and neglect resulting in the loss of life?.
/cheers.
reply posted on 10-10-2009 @ 11:11 AM by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Seventh
One of the engineers who helped design the Towers said that they would survive an airliner impacting them. It was Frank DeMartini who offered his opinion that the towers could withstand multiple airliner impacts. Now this is where I would normally point out that engineers are wrong all the time and even offer examples, however, it would do no good.
I do find it curious however, that you keep trying to use the color of the explosions to try to prove your theories. Well, maybe entertaining would be a better word than curious........reminds me of the people that used to claim black smoke was proof the fires were going out.
graphics8.nytimes.com...
Ah yes...I know that site well...since I am one of the first people to have posted it....long ago.
Psst....seeing the word "explosion" does not show/indicate/prove there was a bomb involved. Most large office building fires have explosions at some point.
[edit on 10-10-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]
One of the engineers who helped design the Towers said that they would survive an airliner impacting them. It was Frank DeMartini who offered his opinion that the towers could withstand multiple airliner impacts. Now this is where I would normally point out that engineers are wrong all the time and even offer examples, however, it would do no good.
I do find it curious however, that you keep trying to use the color of the explosions to try to prove your theories. Well, maybe entertaining would be a better word than curious........reminds me of the people that used to claim black smoke was proof the fires were going out.
graphics8.nytimes.com...
Ah yes...I know that site well...since I am one of the first people to have posted it....long ago.
Psst....seeing the word "explosion" does not show/indicate/prove there was a bomb involved. Most large office building fires have explosions at some point.
[edit on 10-10-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]
An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
Posted 17 days ago with 12 member flags
Posted 17 days ago with 12 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Final Decision: Court sanctions lawyers behind September 11 conspiracy case
Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
I'm 24 and I feel Doomed- A rare Case - 28 reported Worldwide
Medical Issues & Conspiracies, Posted 31 minutes ago
Medical Issues & Conspiracies, Posted 31 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Just got through watching "Casino Jack and The United States of Money"...Then I threw up
US Political Madness, Posted 15 hours ago, 49 flags
US Political Madness, Posted 15 hours ago, 49 flags
Brainwashed Cops Shoot Unarmed Woman Motorist To Death For Rolling Up Her Car Window
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 8 hours ago, 47 flags
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 8 hours ago, 47 flags
Thomas Jefferson, A man of the past who may have seen the future
US Political Madness, Posted 13 hours ago, 26 flags
US Political Madness, Posted 13 hours ago, 26 flags
***Programming The Nation FULL Video- Limited Time Only!!***
Education and Media, Posted 8 hours ago, 19 flags
Education and Media, Posted 8 hours ago, 19 flags
Cop allegedly pulled gun on pregnant woman over too many grocery items in checkout
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 13 hours ago, 19 flags
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 13 hours ago, 19 flags
Greek Doctors Battle Hospital Superbug as Crisis Depletes Budget
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 16 hours ago, 17 flags
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 16 hours ago, 17 flags
Scientists Warn Supervolcano Will Destroy U.S Much Sooner Than You Think
Fragile Earth, Posted 11 hours ago, 16 flags
Fragile Earth, Posted 11 hours ago, 16 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
Brainwashed Cops Shoot Unarmed Woman Motorist To Death For Rolling Up Her Car Window
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 8 hours ago, 93 replies
Social Issues and Civil Unrest, Posted 8 hours ago, 93 replies
U.S. Navy: Iran prepares suicide bomb boats in Gulf
Middle East Issues, Posted 10 hours ago, 92 replies
Middle East Issues, Posted 10 hours ago, 92 replies
Hollow Earth Theory Using Cold Fusion as evidence of the possiblity.
General Conspiracies, Posted 12 hours ago, 74 replies
General Conspiracies, Posted 12 hours ago, 74 replies
The Illuminati and the Free Masons and their TRUE relationship
Secret Societies, Posted 14 hours ago, 67 replies
Secret Societies, Posted 14 hours ago, 67 replies
The most abused word in the English language?
Deconstructing Disinformation, Posted 17 hours ago, 64 replies
Deconstructing Disinformation, Posted 17 hours ago, 64 replies
Scientists Warn Supervolcano Will Destroy U.S Much Sooner Than You Think
Fragile Earth, Posted 11 hours ago, 60 replies
Fragile Earth, Posted 11 hours ago, 60 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.003 seconds
Page processed in: 0.510 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.003 seconds
Page processed in: 0.510 seconds
