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.

 

So you still believe the official story?

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


I am asking you what freedom you have lost since then, and you have not been able to answer, or do not wish to.

Don't say "whatever you post isn't going to be good enough" because you haven't posted an answer to the question yet. Once you answer the question and I respond you can gage my response.




posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
I am seriously considering starting a new demolition business. I will not need to hire high- priced demolition experts, nor will I need expensive explosives, nor will I need weeks or even months of planning and preparation to wire the buildings for controlled demolition.

What I will do is buy some jet fuel and a lighter. I will then scatter the jet fuel over seven or eight floors, light it, wait about an hour and then watch the building tumble straight down. Since my costs will be just a fraction of what real demolition companies spend, I will be able to outbid every demolition company out there and make a fortune.

Hey, if this jet fuel fire method was able to collapse two of the largest buildings in the world in what appeared to be a perfectly controlled demolition manner, it should easily be able to collapse much smaller buildings.


so true, and sad.
Sad because we bought the lies so easely 8 years ago.
Sad because ground zero was never treated as a crime scene.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by conar

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
I am seriously considering starting a new demolition business. I will not need to hire high- priced demolition experts, nor will I need expensive explosives, nor will I need weeks or even months of planning and preparation to wire the buildings for controlled demolition.

What I will do is buy some jet fuel and a lighter. I will then scatter the jet fuel over seven or eight floors, light it, wait about an hour and then watch the building tumble straight down. Since my costs will be just a fraction of what real demolition companies spend, I will be able to outbid every demolition company out there and make a fortune.

Hey, if this jet fuel fire method was able to collapse two of the largest buildings in the world in what appeared to be a perfectly controlled demolition manner, it should easily be able to collapse much smaller buildings.


so true, and sad.
Sad because we bought the lies so easely 8 years ago.
Sad because ground zero was never treated as a crime scene.


Well, it is true, but not the way you think its true. I've demolished plenty of buildings. Do you think the demo contractor would have like to set fire to them first? You're damn right they would. But you can't. It is against the law for a whole host of very good reasons - first and foremost is that you can't control fire, it has this bad habit of going wherever the wind may blow. And the nieghbors would generally frown on that. So I know you are being a wiseguy - but fire will bring down buildings.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by The_Zomar
Q: "How could something of such magnitude be kept so secret? Someone would SURELY leak information!"
A: Easily. The hydrogen bomb was conceived in complete secrecy at Las Alamos. Research the Manhattan project. It took over a thousand people and it never leaked.


The Manhattan Project was the ATOMIC bomb not the Hydrogen bomb. It was only fission not fusion.



Ah thank you for correcting that.


As for the others... What did American's loose?

Could the patriot act have been passed if 9-11 didn't happen? Could they have got the war in afganistan without 9-11?

We lost lives, and your helping them.

I love a good debate.


So can someone recap what questions haven't been answered thus far?



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by dodadoom
 


I am asking you what freedom you have lost since then, and you have not been able to answer, or do not wish to.

Don't say "whatever you post isn't going to be good enough" because you haven't posted an answer to the question yet. Once you answer the question and I respond you can gage my response.


Patriot Act ????



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SirPatrickHenry
 

Thanks for that post!
Apparently it does no good when I say it.
He may want to look up the meaning of "rights".
Lord knows I gave him enough linkypoos to do so!
It doens't sound like he read a one of them!

And not even a thanks for all that good reading either! Wow.
I'm obviously not one who could convince anyone.
So I won't try. Hope he reads this, I've already responded enough.
I'll patiently wait for someone else to do a better job of explaining it.

I guess our "right" to be secure in our own homes doesn't much matter!
Or maybe it's not a right....

Or how about the right to not be held indefinately either.....

Or the right to not be labeled a terrorist.
Or the right to not be tortured.
Now I know how the right wing fanaticals feel!

Thanks again Sir!



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 

I'll try this yet once again just to be fair and affable.
If for no other reason than you are on my friends list.
Why, I'm not sure other than you must of said something I agreed with.
Try to read and comprehend this. It will be my last time.

Rights you have lost since 9/11:
#1 The right to be secure in your own home free from warantless intrusion.
#2 The right to a fair and speedy trail, and not be held indefinately without one.
#3 The right to privacy of your phone calls, emails, etc, etc.

You wanted one example, I just gave you three good ones!
Now answer me this Mr P, to be fair of course....
did you vote for bush or do you think he did a good job?
You have the choice of answering either one!
That's more than fair!
And thanks for your reply and your welcome for the answers.
Geez.


Edit: yap, still waiting for your answer!

[edit on 10-11-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420


I am asking you what freedom you have lost since then, and you have not been able to answer, or do not wish to.




Maybe your the only one aloud to carry toenail clippers onto a plane but the rest of us cannot.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


Please, not the dreaded nanothermite. The same stuff that looks amazingly like primer paint? The stuff that is in such a thin, paint-like coating that it would have virtually no effect if it was nano-thermite? The stuff that was hidden in cans of primer paint in the 1970's long before it existed so it could be painted on the towers as they were built? That same stuff that was so deadly and powerful that ten tons of it, unburnt, are estimated to be in the dust?
Or maybe you are referring to some other nano-thermitic materials.....



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


The red particles


so it could be painted on the towers as they were built?


You have not proof of this. You are only making an assumption.
You want everyone to believe that Jones is an idiot and all seven of his scientists were total incompetence to distinguish the different of red particles to red paint chips to nano Thermite and nano Thermate.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by pteridine
 



so it could be painted on the towers as they were built?


You have not proof of this. You are only making an assumption.
You want everyone to believe that Jones is an idiot and all seven of his scientists were total incompetence to distinguish the different of red particles to red paint chips to nano Thermite and nano Thermate.


Jones knows that it doesn't make sense that the chips did any demolition so he tried to say the chips were part of a fuse system but forgot that ten tons of them were in the dust. Note that we haven't heard anything from him recently.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 



Jones knows that it doesn't make sense that the chips did any demolition


Where is your sources for your ridiculous claim I am sure you have plenty of internet sources where Jones’ “said” that it doesn't make sense that the chips did any demolition.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 

In his Norwegian radio interview on May 9, 2009, Jones promised another paper that was "nearing completion" but this has not been spoken of lately. When Greening pressed Jones, Jones responded as below:

"So when I bounced my calculations and conclusions off Jones et al, all he could come up with was the suggestion that there were probably other explosives used in the WTC and the nanothermite chips were maybe just fuses!

Thus, after all the fuss about high-tech nano-thermites, we are back to good-old "bombs in the buildings" as the answer to how the buildings were destroyed."

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

[edit on 11/9/2009 by pteridine]



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 



Jones knows that it doesn't make sense that the chips did any demolition

Where is your sources for your ridiculous claim I am sure you have plenty of internet sources where Jones’ “said” that it doesn't make sense that the chips did any demolition.


I knew you couldn’t answer the question because Steven Jones never said it.
You know it a shame people have to make up stories because; they can’t disprove Jones creditable science.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


They aren't good ones because none of those things has happened to either of us, which is why I asked you what rights you've lost since then.

What you have lost:
pre 911 it was illegal to be searched/seized without a warrant regarding terrorism.
pre 911 it was illegal to be searched/seized without a warrant regarding any other crime.
post 911 it was legal to be searched/seized without a warrant regarding terrorism.
post 911 it was illegal to be searched/seized without a warrant regarding any other crime.

What have you lost? If they use the law out of context its still illegal. Have they done this to you? If not then YOU have not lost any freedom.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


So if you don't like the answer, you say that it never happened?

Greening called him on the half-baked idea that painted-on thin layers of anything could demolish a building. Jones hadn't thought it out and had to come up with something or abandon his minor celebrity and speakers' fees. He quickly came up with "fuse material." He obviously hadn't thought this one through very far, either, as there were tons of unburnt material. This means that there were miles of unburnt fuses. What were they attached to? Why would anyone bother with this paint-on stuff which doesn't burn very well when they had regular, reliable fusing materials.

Jones will continue to con the gullible, collect his fees, and bask in the dim glow of admiration from true believers as long as possible. He knows that there are some who so desperately want there to have been a giant conspiracy that they will grasp at anything. He will continue to do bad science and the true believers will lap it up without question and defend it against all criticisms. He is unethical in that he is taking advantage of the technically uneducated by using his degrees to give credence to his fantasies, while feeding theirs.




[edit on 11/10/2009 by pteridine]



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
"post 911 it was legal to be searched/seized without a warrant regarding terrorism"

So, this would not be alarming in the least, as long as the government does not consider you a terrorist. What if groups like ae911truth.org are soon deemed to be terrorists for using the internet as a political tool for espousing radical and dangerous political views? And everyone who has signed a petition on any such web site is put on a terrorist watch list? We've recently seen the swift political damage that can be caused by a person simply having signed their name to a web site that is seeking new investigations into 9/11.

Our constitutional republic was founded upon the fundamental right to ask questions, demand answers, and to seek truth and justice. This is the spirit of the 9/11 truth movement.

I'm sure the founding fathers of our nation would have been deemed terrorists by some, no?



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
I am seriously considering starting a new demolition business. I will not need to hire high- priced demolition experts, nor will I need expensive explosives, nor will I need weeks or even months of planning and preparation to wire the buildings for controlled demolition.

What I will do is buy some jet fuel and a lighter. I will then scatter the jet fuel over seven or eight floors, light it, wait about an hour and then watch the building tumble straight down. Since my costs will be just a fraction of what real demolition companies spend, I will be able to outbid every demolition company out there and make a fortune.


Well, I would say this would be a hell of a lot easier (not to mention, probable) than sneaking into two gigantic, heavily occupied buildings and planting controlled demolitions without anyone noticing or leaving any evidence behind.

It's one thing to denouce something as unlikely. It's another thing entirely to try and replace it with something utterly nonsensical.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Zomar

Maybe your the only one aloud to carry toenail clippers onto a plane but the rest of us cannot.


Ah yes, right up there with the freedom of speech and religion, and the right of due process, being able to carry toenail clippers has to be one of our more precious constitutional rights, right up there with smoking dope and threatening to murder the president.

Good grief, there are people in the world being machine gunned for trying to escape from their god awful countries to have even 1/100th of what these people here here, and yet they're getting all paranoid because they can't carry toenail clippers onto airplanes. No wonder these Chicken Littles are swallowing utter rubbish like controlled demolitions and lasers from outer space that these conspiracy web sites are pushing out. Get some perspective, people!



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
goodoldave, one would not have to be "sneaking into two gigantic, heavily occupied buildings"
....Port Authority of New York & New Jersey World Trade Center property assessment Freedom of Information (FOI) records from the December 2000 Merritt & Harris Inc. report entitled "Due Diligence Physical Condition Survey World Trade Center", which contained recommendations for immediate major renovations throughout the World Trade Center complex during the year prior to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Previously released portions included those recommending immediate renovations upon major steel support columns located within the elevator shafts of WTC towers 1 and 2 just prior to September 11, 2001.
www.911blogger.com...


No sneaking required when you have permissions to have access to all the steel support columns in the building.....



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join