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.

 

What evidence would accept to prove 9/11 was an inside job?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   
how about we stop bitching and moaning about each others side and work together to find some sort of truth

there is possibility that both sides are wrong to some extent.




posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
www.telegraph.co.uk...


This states that the US are going to seek the death penalty for the 9/11 plotters.

How can they do that is it was clearly an inside job?

Surely they need proof to convict them and if they didn't do it, they can't get it!

Were they set up by the CIA?

Something is not right here!



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 





Exactly what did VP Cheney "gain"? He was already powerful, he was already rich, what did he gain? He is a multimillionaire, vice president of the USA, president of the senate, a leader in his party, a leader in industry, what did he gain? What evidence do you have that Cheney would intentionally and purposelly murder 1000's of American's?


I guess you have never heard of greed. Sometimes enough is not enough sometimes we can never get enough.



Dick Cheney: War Profiteer


www.commondreams.org...


Congress Must Cut Off Bush Family War Profits


www.globalresearch.ca...


Looting Iraq by Executive Order


www.globalpolicy.org...



George W. Bush
TUESDAY, JUL 25, 2000 12:30 PDT
Conflict of interest
Activist Pratap Chatterjee says Dick Cheney's move from Defense to the world's largest oil services company illustrates how business and government make money at the expense of the environment.

Before he was tapped to be George W. Bush's running mate, Dick Cheney was best known for his years as secretary of defense under President George Bush.
But after he left government, Cheney became CEO of Halliburton Co., the world's largest oil services company, which he joined in 1995. With Bush himself a former oil executive tapping Cheney, the former secretary's years at Halliburton are sure to receive scrutiny. A Reuters headline Tuesday screamed "Bush-Cheney is U.S. oil industry dream team," doing the Gore campaign's dirty work for them.
Halliburton does business in more than 120 countries and employs more than 100,000 people worldwide. Most interesting, in light of Cheney's work as defense secretary during the Gulf War, the company made hundreds of millions of dollars cleaning up after that war in Kuwait.
As Democrats race for their paint brushes to color the GOP ticket black, for big oil, Salon talked to activist Pratap Chatterjee, who has monitored the oil industry, and Halliburton, for years. Chatterjee is author of "The Earth Brokers: Power, Politics and World Development," and the architect of a World Bank spoof site on the Internet. He has also worked with Project Underground, a Berkeley, Calif., group which monitors the activities of the oil industry, and the environmental impacts of oil drilling projects
Halliburton is the world's largest oil services company. It was started in 1916, and it became the biggest employer in Houston. It's very prominent in Texas. The thing that really made it big was when Dick Cheney took it over and merged it with Dresser Industries. After the merger, they became a kind of one-stop shop for all the different elements and services involved in drilling for oil. Whether you need a drill bit or seismic testing, they offer the complete array of services. Halliburton is now the biggest company in that business. They are in 120 countries around the world. Their income last year was $15 billion.

www.salon.com...
This article was written before 911



Published on Tuesday, September 5, 2000 in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Lingering Question: Is Dick Cheney Guilty Of War Crimes Against Iraqis?
by Robert Jensen

There has been much criticism lately of Republican vice-presidential candidate Dick Cheney�s business record -- the propriety of his stock options, his role in getting government contracts, and whether or not he earned the millions he was paid. Earlier this summer we also heard much about some of Cheney�s less compassionate conservative votes in Congress -- against gun control, Head Start and Nelson Mandela.


www.commondreams.org...

Notice the date this article was written way before 911 happened.


KBR Got Bonuses for Work that Killed Soldiers

The Department of Defense paid former Halliburton subsidiary KBR more than $80 million in bonuses for contracts to install electrical wiring in Iraq. The award payments were for the very work that resulted in the electrocution deaths of US soldiers, according to Department of Defense documents revealed.


www.thenation.com...


The 25 Most Vicious Iraq War Profiteers


www.businesspundit.com...


Halliburton Makes a Killing on Iraq War
Cheney's Former Company Profits from Supporting Troops
by Pratap Chatterjee, Special to CorpWatch
March 20th, 2003


www.corpwatch.org...


23 CIA agents convicted
in kidnapping, torture trial in Italy

CIA station chief defense: 'I am not guilty. I am only responsible
for following an order I received from my superiors'

They acted under orders from Bush and Cheney. Today, however, an Italian court convicted 23 American involved in the CIA's kidnap and rendition/torture program.


www.impeachbush.org...

Un-flipping believeable!

The more I dig the deeper I go the dirty it gets, and I am just getting started. It is disgusting what these two men did alone and the wealth they have accumulated and the over sea’s policies they created just for them yet most of you OS believer see nothing wrong with this. We voted people in to run our country NOT to loot our financial system and get filthy rich and make all the friends filthy rich and pass policies to only benefit them and their greedy friends. In order for these criminals to make all this loot they needed a false flag operation so we the people will approve for their illegal wars and by golly they got it didn’t they. Yeah while our troops are dying in Bush and Cheney’s two illegal wars these, two are laughing all the way to the bank.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Offer proof that Cheney had anything to do with plotting 9/11. Besides your obvious political differences.

Back to the OP.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Swing Dangler
What evidence would you accept as proof that the attacks of 9/11 were committed by individuals within the U.S. states government?


Nixon and his crew were fifty times smarter than Bush's bunch ever was, and Nixon even had a full time staff called the Plumbers to stop all the unauthorized leaks to the public. Not even he could keep Watergate from spilling out from some unanticipated crack (I.E. Deep Throat, who turned out to be the #2 man in the FBI). If someone came forward to expose a presidential backed break-in, then somone is sure as shooting going to come forward to expose a gov't staged terrorist attack.



The problem with your statement is that there HAVE been people coming forward to say it was a government-staged attack. You just discredit all of them!

patriotsquestion911.com...



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
What evidence would accept to prove 9/11 was an inside job?
Not evidence i think a new and proper investigation will name the real people behind it . Khalid Sheikh Mohammed going on trial after being water boarded 150+ times and god know's what else yeah its going to be fair trial i bet his head is mashed afer all that torture he won't no what he's saying!



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


I can defend it quite easily. How long did it take between the impacts of the aircraft and the collapse of the towers? There wasn't enough time to get enough aircraft there to effect a rescue. One of the towers had a huge antennae array on top that would have interfered with a helicopter rescue. When the towers were first constructed there was a helipad on the top of one of them for a Pan Am shuttle helicopter (CH-46 type) to take people to JFK airport. This service was suspended due to the unpredictability of air currents around the towers. Now you add huge fires in both towers and the resulting updrafts to the mix.

The down draft from the helos could cause the collapse of the towers. We have the advantage of 20-20 hindsight now and know that the towers did collapse.

Another thing is the only feasible way to pick somebody from the towers would be a long hoist pick-up. Nobody in those towers were trained in helicopter rescues. Do you know that you have to ground the hoist cable before you touch it? If you don't you can be electricuted. Do you know the proper way to put on a horse collar sling? Do you know how to signal a pilot that you are ready to hoist?

At the time, the collapse of the towers was inconcievable. The thought was to put out the fires and then rescue the people on the upper floors. To take nothing away from the firemen who lost their lives that day, if there was a thought of collapse, they probably wouldn't have been sent into the towers. What they saw were fires on about ten floors of each tower, they thought that they had a good chance of being able to put out those fires before they spread through the upper levels.

Only in Hollywood will the things you are talking about work. This wasn't a movie. If you want to reference the hotel in Puerto Rico that had the helicopter rescue several years ago, they never told you that three people fell to their deaths because they dislodged themselves from the rescue hoist.

By the way the thing hanging below the helo in my avitar is me.

[edit on 13-11-2009 by JIMC5499]



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
The title of this post is What evidence would accept to prove 9/11 was an inside job?

To prove that it's an "Inside" job, you would need to provide proof that at least one official of the administration was involved.

So far, there is no evidence that I heard of that links any official of the Bush administration with the 911 crime.


I am not trying to debunk this. This would have to be proof that would stand up in court so that this member of the Bush administration would be convicted in a court of law.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by bsbray11
I still wonder why everyone seems incapable of answering your question.

What evidence would it take to prove to you 9/11 was an inside job?

Are you "debunkers" so far gone that you would never accept anything?


Suggest something. Since I don't know what you mean by "inside job" I don't know what to expect.


That anyone besides the 19 hijackers made this happen and it was subsequently covered up in any way whatsoever.

What would it take? Give me some ideas.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by impressme
 


Offer proof that Cheney had anything to do with plotting 9/11. Besides your obvious political differences.

Back to the OP.


Well, He definitely had motive.


Cheney was part of Halliburton, an this company has reaped MASSIVE PROFITS, from this war on terror.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Uhh As the OP states, "individuals within the United States Government".



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Swing Dangler
What evidence would you accept as proof that the attacks of 9/11 were committed by individuals within the U.S. states government?


That would imply you actually had at least some legitimate evidence that it was an inside job, rather than blizzards of idiotic innuendo, quotes taken out of context, junk science, and five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" games, but that's besides the point. Have an insider who has intimate knowledge of the details of the conspiracy come forward and spill the beans, and provide details like names, time tables, and contacts. You know, like how every OTHER gov't conspiracy like Iran contra, Watergate, Laos bombing, etc. was exposed?

Nixon and his crew were fifty times smarter than Bush's bunch ever was, and Nixon even had a full time staff called the Plumbers to stop all the unauthorized leaks to the public. Not even he could keep Watergate from spilling out from some unanticipated crack (I.E. Deep Throat, who turned out to be the #2 man in the FBI). If someone came forward to expose a presidential backed break-in, then somone is sure as shooting going to come forward to expose a gov't staged terrorist attack.

Now here's the same question for you- what evidence would you truthers ever accept that would finally convince you 9/11 really was a attack by foreign terrorists, that you *wouldn't* simply brush off as disinformation from gov't secret agents? A public investigation wasn't enough. Photographic evidence wasn't enough. Eyewitness testimony wasn't enough. NIST, FEMA, MIT, etc reports weren't enough. Even bin Laden coming out and saying he was behind the attack wasn't enough. What the heck is left???


There is no "implication" associated with the OP.

So instead of answering the question, you dodge it my suggesting there is no evidence. In doing so, 9/11 is placed int he echelons of religion for you. Correct?

Or are you suggesting 9/11 would only be an inside job if someone confessed to taking part in it or ratted someone else out. Is that a correct assessment of your response?

It was the lying behavior of individuals within the U.S. Government that led me to believe something was amiss in the official story.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


Please offer what you would accept as evidence proving that 9/11 was committed by individuals within the U.S. Government.

Thanks for your response.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Swing Dangler
 


I would accept some inside jobbers explaining how and why they did it. Physical evidence of the "how." So far there is none. There is much speculation and many questions, but no real evidence, no complete story, no detailed proposal backed by anything.


So you, like Good Ole Dave, would only accept a person involved confessing to the crime as evidence that 9/11 was committed by individuals within the U.S. Government.

You state "physical evidence". Can you please list or describe physical evidence that would convince you 9/11 was committed by individuals within the U.S. Govt.?

Thanks!



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by minkey53
 


Please respond to the OP and not with litter. Thank you!



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Swing Dangler
 


Evidence that would stand up in court.

That could take a number of forms.

Email that links the "Insiders" to the actual deed.
Direct payments to the people that committed the crime
Pictures of "Insiders" in the building prior to 911, preferrable dressed as construction workers.
Confession(s) by one or more of the "Insiders" (Even a dated signed deathbed confession")
Links from any explosives used to the "Insiders"

You can use your imagination but basically for me to believe that "Insiders" committed this crime, someone would have to provide some sort of proof that would stand up in court.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 30_seconds

The problem with your statement is that there HAVE been people coming forward to say it was a government-staged attack. You just discredit all of them!

patriotsquestion911.com...


You are deliberately misrepreenting your statement. Noone on the list you provided had any intimate details or inside knowledge of any gov't conspiracy. They are 100% outsiders who are looking at the exact same second and third hand information you're looking at (and as soon as that general said it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon, I knew full well he got it from the exact same damned fool conspiracy web sites you get your info from), which means they're simply posting their personal unsubstanciated opinions the same way you're doing. It's just that you're mentioning their background to give it a false veneer of credibility.

Deep Throat (who turned out to be the #2 man in the FBI) they ain't.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Deep Throat (who turned out to be the #2 man in the FBI) they ain't.


I didn't realize it took the "#2 man" from the FBI to come clean on what would be a very mundane political conspiracy compared to 9/11.

And that man still had to remain anonymous, for fear of what would happen to him for speaking out.

That says a couple of things to me. For one, none of the people "below" him at the FBI came forward. I wonder why? Maybe a little something called the "need to know." The second thing it tells me is that spilling this kind of stuff, even over a break-in like Watergate, could cost him something very dear to him, that he had to do it anonymously. Maybe his career, maybe even his life.

And that's just for Watergate. And only one man.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
I didn't realize it took the "#2 man" from the FBI to come clean on what would be a very mundane political conspiracy compared to 9/11.


You miss the point. The police caught the burglars almost immediately becuase they overlooked the possibility that a security guard in the vicinity of the break in was on the ball. Someone who had intimate knowledge of what the FBI knew turned it over to reporters, who screamed the information to the public, including publishing a book. Moreover, Nixon resigned becuase he knew impeachment proceedings had started in Congress. This directly refutes the truthers' paranoid claim that the gov't can pull off their conspiracies with the perfection of a supernatural act. It directly refutes that insiders would never come forward to spill the beans, since they don't necessarily need to expose themselves publically to do it. It directly refutes that the media is some willing pawn in covering up everything the gov't does. It likewise directly refutes that despite there being bad apples in the gov't, therre are also good apples who'll press for the truth, regsrdless of how ugly it is.



That says a couple of things to me. For one, none of the people "below" him at the FBI came forward. I wonder why? Maybe a little something called the "need to know."


From what I understand, Woodward and Bernstein was reporting their information almost up to the minute that the FBI was discovering it. It may have been the case the FBI was still building its case up and would have charged Nixon during the imminent impeachment proceedings, I don't know.

Not that it matters, as all of this happened back in the 70's which was a completely different world. Nowadays, Bush can't even out a CIA agent without hordes of journalists tracing it back to him.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swing Dangler
So you, like Good Ole Dave, would only accept a person involved confessing to the crime as evidence that 9/11 was committed by individuals within the U.S. Government.

You state "physical evidence". Can you please list or describe physical evidence that would convince you 9/11 was committed by individuals within the U.S. Govt.?


Operations plans, e-mails, personnel lists, or communications intercepts would show who was involved. To show that there was something other than the aircraft that caused the collapse, there should be unexploded charges, fuses, detonators, blasting machines, explosive residue, and other such related stuff.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join