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.

 

David Ray Griffin, pillar of the 9/11 Truth Movement

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
99.99% of all recorded historical events do not have video footage.

Please prove this.


Originally posted by mmiichael
In the case the Pentagon attack there were witnesses at all stages from the minute the plane took off till it crashed at the Pentagon.

Please supply the names of the witnesses who observed the alleged Flight AA77, #N644AA while it was flying above 10,000 feet?

Please prove your statement: "One should keep in mind the destruction of the WTC and the Pentagon attacks are the most real time recorded and examined events in history. Thousands of ordinary people were there as witnesses, many with cameras, and provide accounts later."

Please show how the 9/11 attacks were recorded more than the recent Olympic Games opening ceremony, the recent Super Bowl, Obama's inauguration, etc... You made this claim, so please substantiate it.


Originally posted by mmiichael
I am calling you a troll, repeatedly haranguing rather than dealing with issues in a straightforward manner. This behaviour has been seen on other threads.
Just stop.

Yes, yes, yes... enough of the off-topic nonsense, mmiichael.

Just prove the claims that you've made and all will be well for you.




posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by mmiichael
99.99% of all recorded historical events do not have video footage.

Please prove this.


Originally posted by mmiichael
In the case the Pentagon attack there were witnesses at all stages from the minute the plane took off till it crashed at the Pentagon.

Please supply the names of the witnesses who observed the alleged Flight AA77, #N644AA while it was flying above 10,000 feet?

Please prove your statement: "One should keep in mind the destruction of the WTC and the Pentagon attacks are the most real time recorded and examined events in history. Thousands of ordinary people were there as witnesses, many with cameras, and provide accounts later."

Please show how the 9/11 attacks were recorded more than the recent Olympic Games opening ceremony, the recent Super Bowl, Obama's inauguration, etc... You made this claim, so please substantiate it.


Originally posted by mmiichael
I am calling you a troll, repeatedly haranguing rather than dealing with issues in a straightforward manner. This behaviour has been seen on other threads.
Just stop.

Yes, yes, yes... enough of the off-topic nonsense, mmiichael.

Just prove the claims that you've made and all will be well for you.



I am calling you a troll again. You repeat the same questions to answers given. As I have said repeatedly, newsworthy events that were reported extensively do not require links to articles, websites, videos as proof. WWII happened, as did Katrina, as today's sunrise. I can refer to them, I don't have to prove them.

A quick keying in to Google on the Pentagon attack will bring up tens of thousands of published article. If you are incapable of doing a fundamental search then you shouldn't be on a board like this.

Try to show some self-respect.


M


[edit on 2-11-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
I am calling you a troll again. You repeat the same questions to answers given.

But you have provided no answers, mmiichael.

You made your claim without any further follow-up proof.

Here again is your claim:

Originally posted by mmiichael
One should keep in mind the destruction of the WTC and the Pentagon attacks are the most real time recorded and examined events in history. Thousands of ordinary people were there as witnesses, many with cameras, and provide accounts later.


You have not shown me how this is true. You have not shown me how 9/11 was recorded more than the Olympic Games Opening Ceremony, the Super Bowl, Obama's Inauguration. All of the events that I have listed have a minimum of nearly a hundred thousand live eyewitnesses. Many of those eyewitnesses would have had cameras, as they were expecting to see the event that they were attending.

You have failed to support your claim.


Originally posted by mmiichael
A quick keying in to Google on the Pentagon attack will bring up tens of thousands of published article. If you are incapable of doing a fundamental search then you shouldn't be on a board like this.

Is this the extent of your attempt to prove your claim? Are you serious? You claimed that 9/11 was the most recorded event in history and you're trying to prove it using a Google search???

Please, mmiichael, I suggest that you concentrate on making claims about what you can prove instead of relying upon your anonymous Twitter, Blog and Google sources.

Here's a comparison for you:
I Googled up Pentagon Attack and got 1,120,000 matches.
I Googled up Olympic Games and got 22,200,000 matches.
I Googled up Super Bowl and got 37,800,000 matches.

Please, mmiichael, prove your claim about 9/11 being the most recorded event in history.

[edit on 2-11-2009 by tezzajw]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Please, mmiichael, prove your claim about 9/11 being the most recorded event in history.



You probably never heard about them - there are things called books.
They are permanent records used for decades often as educational tools in schools and universities. There hundreds of books covering all aspects of 9/11 in at least 50 languages in over 100 counties.

As it occurred in the 21st Century, in the age of instant communication and cameras, there is an unprecedented amount of primary source recorded and documented material on the subject unlike historical events of the past.

Additionally the names of people and organizations that dealt directly with the event and it's aftermath are available for communication, a few have their own sites.

More details, analysis, pictures, videos and discussion of 9/11 are on the Internet than any previous event in history.


M



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Maybe an investigation of the methods and motives of these people is due.


Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The problem is getting these conspiracy theorists' heads out of the clouds and have them take a closer look at what these conspiracy stories are saying.


You both seem to think that action is needed but you don't want an examination of the issues involved in 9/11. I'd have thought that would be the way to proceed. Put a rest to all this grumbling about 9/11, but you two guys seem to see it a little differently.

mmiichael seems to want a McCarthy-style witch hunt. Or maybe the sort of wire tapping and surveillance rodeo that was inflicted on the Kennedys and Martin Luther King by that crime busting cross-dresser, J. Edgar Hoover.

GoodOlDave on the other hand seems to be advocating re-education camps on the Communist Chinese model, complete with running-dog, free thinking 9/11 truthers wearing dunce caps with slogans painted on them, being subjected to harangues by the "politically correct".

I think we should just air out the issues thoroughly, press charges where it is warranted and let the people, after proper exposure to the allegations and the rebuttles, make up their own minds.


[edit on 2-11-2009 by ipsedixit]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
You probably never heard about them - there are things called books.

I know what books are, mmiichael. I've read a few in my time.


Originally posted by mmiichael
They are permanent records used for decades often as educational tools in schools and universities. There hundreds of books covering all aspects of 9/11 in at least 50 languages in over 100 counties.

Please show me how there are more books about 9/11 than there are about the Olympic Games, the Super Bowl, etc...

I notice that you're shifting your own goalposts about the event being 'recorded' to make it seem like you're discussing books and not various photographic/video recordings.


Originally posted by mmiichael
As it occurred in the 21st Century, in the age of instant communication and cameras, there is an unprecedented amount of primary source recorded and documented material on the subject unlike historical events of the past.

Similarly, JFK, UFOs, the Moon Landings... please show me how 9/11 was recorded more than any of those three topics?


Originally posted by mmiichael
More details, analysis, pictures, videos and discussion of 9/11 are on the Internet than any previous event in history.

Prove it. You claim it without proof. You believe your own baseless rhetoric without giving any consideration to the fact that you could be wrong.

Prove that 9/11 is the most popular internet event in history.

[edit on 2-11-2009 by tezzajw]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Prove that 9/11 is the most popular internet event in history.


Reported and documented as the first real time historical event in the mass communication era.

Check it out online. Prove you're capable of Googling deeper than a Truther Youtube.

Prove you can provide any information.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Reported and documented as the first real time historical event in the mass communication era.


I guess you are a little too young to remember the Vietnam war.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Check it out online. Prove you're capable of Googling deeper than a Truther Youtube.
Prove you can provide any information.

Casual readers, it is at this point where mmiichael again degenerates his argument by asking someone else to prove his claims!

Yes, it's all too familiar.

mmiichael made the following claim:

Originally posted by mmiichael
One should keep in mind the destruction of the WTC and the Pentagon attacks are the most real time recorded and examined events in history. Thousands of ordinary people were there as witnesses, many with cameras, and provide accounts later.


We can all clearly see that miichael is challenging me to prove that it's true.

Please, someone make him stop. I can only laugh so hard before lunch time!



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
I guess you are a little too young to remember the Vietnam war. [/qu

The Vietnam war was on broadcast television and radio, newspapers and magazines. Photographers had to be flown in and housed.

Marginal interest as news in most of the other parts of the world.

No Internet, little video, few on site witnesses. No great magnet for discussion and analysis.

One has to understand the saturation level of media coverage with modern technology. More photographs and video frame pictures in a day now than in all the 20th Century.

Geometrically greater level of public and amateur input.

I doubt many can provide a chronology or highlights of the Vietnam war. itself an extension of the now forgotten Korean and Indo-China conflicts.


M



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

Above is a video of a very popular Russian clairvoyant predicting a terrorist attack on the USA in the later half of 2009. We have two more months here. I don't know if I believe it but it makes me ponder none the less.

Another odd thing I've been thinking about is 2012, supposedly the apocalypse of the new world, and how it falls in line with the next presidential election for the USA.

I've been watching some of the Nostradamus Files on history, and according to the show, it will not be the end of the world, but the end of this age, and the beginning of the new one. This is marked by earth falling under a certain constellation.

I forget what constellation we are under currently, but I know it started supposedly at the time of the birth of Jesus Christ. Certainly we can say these last 2000 years have been the time of the Christian. Rome, Great Britain, France, Spain, and of course the USA have all been the leading nations, all of them Christian states, but what is more deep than the religion of Christianity is the people behind it, the Caucasian. You can not deny white people have been the kings for the last two millenniums.

However, come 2012 we are no longer the leaders of the new world. Smarter, more advanced, craftier beings have began to take momentum, one that is about to peak. These beings are the Asians, in particular, China. People don't like to say it but some races are smarter than others, and the smartest of all are Asians. China needs America to maintain power, but not as badly as we need them. Their restrictive, communistic, and conservative lifestyles and values are viewed as barbaric in the Western world, but we can not deny this makes for a stronger and superior society.

Thats why we in America are beginning to adapt the behaviors of the Asian people and government. Our govt. wants to ration health care, spy on us through the patriot act, take over the banks and massive industries. I am not saying this is a bad thing, but people look to leaders to guide them, and our leaders look to better leaders and learn from them.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Sorry, had to chime in on this one.......

First, your omitting the fact the building was designed to withstand an impact from a airliner type craft, because of the Empire State Building accident in the 40's.

Second & Third, Temperature, Temperature.....Still not hot enough no matter what was burning.

Fourth, WOW....Blacksmith's are called in as Forensic Expert Witnesses. Now that closes the case!

Fifth, Yeah... your so right and at near free fall speed and no one knew it's weakness, please.....

Come on, your grasping at all the lame excuses the commission did in their report. When you find different material other then the same old same old, let me know.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by ipsedixit
I guess you are a little too young to remember the Vietnam war.


The Vietnam war was on broadcast television and radio, newspapers and magazines. Photographers had to be flown in and housed.

Marginal interest as news in most of the other parts of the world.

No Internet, little video, few on site witnesses. No great magnet for discussion and analysis.

One has to understand the saturation level of media coverage with modern technology. More photographs and video frame pictures in a day now than in all the 20th Century.

Geometrically greater level of public and amateur input.

I doubt many can provide a chronology or highlights of the Vietnam war. itself an extension of the now forgotten Korean and Indo-China conflicts.


M


Forgive me for quoting your entire post but I desperately want to be sure that no-one thinks I wrote the whole thing.

You're not a web forum answer bot are you, or a visitor from another planet? You don't sound as if you are very familiar with that war, particularly it's omnipresence in the media at the time.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Forgive me for quoting your entire post but I desperately want to be sure that no-one thinks I wrote the whole thing.

You're not a web forum answer bot are you, or a visitor from another planet? You don't sound as if you are very familiar with that war, particularly it's omnipresence in the media at the time.


I was working as a journalist in Europe in the last years of the Viet Nam war. Produced a number of reports, did a few interviews, political pieces, etc. Even spent a couple weeks in the country.


M



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
The Vietnam war was on broadcast television and radio, newspapers and magazines. Photographers had to be flown in and housed.


Yeah . . . right so far.


Marginal interest as news in most of the other parts of the world.


Are you writing in a drug induced stupor?


No Internet, little video, few on site witnesses. No great magnet for discussion and analysis.


Man oh man! Dude, you should edit these comments out. Try to get them off the web. Anybody reading this stuff is never going to take anything you say say seriously again.


One has to understand the saturation level of media coverage with modern technology. More photographs and video frame pictures in a day now than in all the 20th Century.


One has to understand the way the media is controlled today and the way it is limited. Having the tools to do saturation coverage means nothing if there is no will to use it, or worse, if there is a will to pervert the truth and skew the impression the public gets of events.


Geometrically greater level of public and amateur input.


The course of the Vietnam war was altered by omnipresent media coverage of it. Everyday America got its dose of burning peasant huts, shot up, triaged marines, and riots in the streets on television.

It was the first war to receive such massive coverage. The course of the war was even altered by the coverage. Never again were journalists allowed the sort of front line access that they had in Vietnam. The coverage of Iraq is nothing to compare with the coverage of Vietnam. The only improvement would be in digital movie cameras carried by the soldiers in Iraq.


I doubt many can provide a chronology or highlights of the Vietnam war. itself an extension of the now forgotten Korean and Indo-China conflicts.


You can bet they know about it at West Point. "How to Lose a War 101". And a big part of that course would be the dangers of the kind of media exposure given to a dirty war by a completely unfettered press.

And you say you were a journalist covering that war? I flat out don't believe it.

Here's a sampler from Michael Maclear and Peter Arnet's "Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War". 65 video clips tell the whole story.





[edit on 3-11-2009 by ipsedixit]



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
I can only remind ipsedixit that he has yet to address this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

One has to understand the way the media is controlled today and the way it is limited. Having the tools to do saturation coverage means nothing if there is no will to use it, or worse, if there is a will to pervert the truth and skew the impression the public gets of events.



Y'know I don't want to have a debate on the impact of Viet Nam in this particular thread or provide my credentials. If you knew what I do for a living now you'd understand. You can drop me a U2U.

I think there's a bit of confusion by your response. What I said was that 9/11 was the most thoroughly and real time documented event in history. Cameras running, people interviewed, every news station in the world covering it as it happened. Endless detailed articles, books, in every corner of the world.

Note on this forum easily a thousand long threads literally debating what was found in the debris, timing building collapses, etc. How many threads on Viet Nam are there? How many people can knowledgeably talk about the My Lai Massacre or know who William Calley was? Historically significant and of course the first war covered extensively on American television. But sadly a protracted brutally ugly conflict with no real beginning or end.

9/11 was a singular event and iconic. Maybe the first time 3-4 billion people were watching something occuring the very same day. A singular turning point that happened within a few hours. Much of the documentation comes from the general public.

Can anyone provide a date, a place, a name that is instantly recognizable and emblematic for Viet Nam?


M


[edit on 3-11-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
GoodOlDave on the other hand seems to be advocating re-education camps on the Communist Chinese model, complete with running-dog, free thinking 9/11 truthers wearing dunce caps with slogans painted on them, being subjected to harangues by the "politically correct".


My, don't *we* embellish! I have been saying from day one that I don't think the truthers are stupid, as I know full well they are not, so if you're claimign this is my point, then you're lying.

My point was that the truthers are being taken in by these damned fool conspiracy web sites becuase they simply accept whatever rubbish they read there, without even a microbe of critical analysis. Let's face it, it ain't critical analysis that's coming up with these goofball claims of hologram planes and nukes in the basement. I find this to be an intellectually dishonest double standard becuase we all know these are the same people who analyze every nut, bolt, and door hinge relevent to the (as you call it) the official story with an electron microscope.

Tell me something, in all honesty- when I say that the conspiracy people are making mountains out of molehills and chasing shadows to instigate false paranoia in people, how does your post of "my wanting to put people into re-education camps" disprove the point, exactly? I'm trying to discuss a legitimate point while you are running around screaming that some boogey man is out to get you.


I think we should just air out the issues thoroughly, press charges where it is warranted and let the people, after proper exposure to the allegations and the rebuttles, make up their own minds.


I absolutely, positively agree. However, we need to perform REAL investigations, such as how we failed miserably in estimating what Iraq really was up to and how it led to this pointless war. It is a gargantuan waste of time to be investigating idiotic five degrees of separation Kevin Bacon games linking Bush to Hitler via an irrelevent chain of a grandfather who knew someone working for someone who knew someone who worked for someone who once knew Hitler.

The problem for you is, ridiculous innuendo exactly like this is what makes up the bulk of the truther's "proof" that there was an inside job to begin with.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
With the advent of the Internet and instant information gratification everyone so inclined thinks they are an historian and news investigator.

All it takes is searching a name on Google.

So bin Laden was backed by the CIA fighting the Russians in Afghanistan in 1987. So therefore he was a CIA employee. So therefore the CIA did 9/11. A fireman saying an explosion sounded like a bomb proves it.

Everyone from retired theologians to bored teenagers are now experts. They can publish books, make videos - and they have a waiting audience. In fact a whole sub-culture has developed around all this.

They get tremendously insulted when it's pointed out their analysis is off the mark.

It need to be pointed that the world operates on more complex lines than a video game.


M



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ufoptics
First, your omitting the fact the building was designed to withstand an impact from a airliner type craft, because of the Empire State Building accident in the 40's.


So who's saying the towers *didn't* withstand the impact of the aircraft. We all saw with our own eyes that the towers remained standing for some time, after the plane impacts. It wasn't the damage from the impact themselves that brought the towers down, it was the chain reaction of events the impacts caused.


Second & Third, Temperature, Temperature.....Still not hot enough no matter what was burning.


NYPD helicopter pilots flying eye level to the impact areas reported that the support girders were glowing red from the fires and appeared like they were about to collapse, and about 1/2 hour later, they did. Eyewitness accounts do not support your educated guess.


Fourth, WOW....Blacksmith's are called in as Forensic Expert Witnesses. Now that closes the case!


I don't have to tell you that it's your side, not ours, who's consistently introducing false claims that the steel melted from the fires. I mentioned blacksmithing as a physical example that steel does not need to reach temperatures of actual melting point melt before losing its structural integrity. Do you doubt that statement?


Come on, your grasping at all the lame excuses the commission did in their report. When you find different material other then the same old same old, let me know.


Go back and reread what you just posted. Nowhere in the commission report did they ever address the reasons for why the towers collapsed. It was meant to document who committed the attack and how they did it, not to document the physical process of the collapse. They left that to the specialists at NIST and FEMA. If your genuine intent is to learn the truth about the events of 9/11 then it would be your obligation to know this before you started posting on this topic.

However, if you still insist on more material, I myself subscribe to the report written by MIT materials engineer Thomas Eagar, who lays out his own diagnosis for why the towers collapsed. I absolutely positively guarantee that those damned fool conspiracy web sites you get all your information from won't be showing you this-

MIT engineering report for the WTC collapse

I have yet to encounter ONE person who could ever explain why this material is wrong. Perhaps you can be the first.

[edit on 3-11-2009 by GoodOlDave]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join