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 we know is that no one has refuted the massive evidence from hundreds of independent sources and thousands of individuals that converge on the conclusion that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.
And no one has been able after eight years to demonstrate anything to the contrary or that the "government" was behind 9/11.
Originally posted by kcfusion
J Thomas,
I have been following your posts and replies on ATS for a while now and I have to say, they reveal quite a lot about your character and intelligence. Every time you reply in one of these threads, you completely ignore the unanswered questions surrounding 9/11, ...
Originally posted by ZombieOctopus
Let me guess; you lost an argument recently and you're trying to make yourself feel better about it by convincing yourself it was a paid government operative.
Calling someone a paid agent of the government, is like comparing something to Nazism or someone to Hitler; it concedes that you have nothing of substance to say.
Originally posted by jthomas
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by redoubt
You sound like someone out on thin ice. You don't know me from any other stranger you have never met nor or ever likely to in your lifetime.
Care to walk out any further?
Ooh, that sounds like an e-threat. Some people think they're so tough behind their keyboards...
Funny enough, some people are ignorant enough to think "9/11 was an inside job."
Originally posted by TrueTruth
reply to post by GoldenFleece
Are you kidding me? Professional debunkers?
This is how you respond to getting debunked? Slandering people who disagree with you, and urging people to go with their 'gut' as opposed to evidence?
Bravo. Your answer to having one conspiracy theory disproven is to invent another.
Have fun in la-la land.
[edit on 29-11-2009 by TrueTruth]
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by GoldenFleece
I think your post is really just an excuse to be narrow minded and dismissive. Not everybody believes in the NWO conspiracy, not everybody is readily behind the 9/11 truther community. Firstly, where'd this notion come from where proffesional government agents would waste their time with conspiracy posters on ATS? I mean I like being on ATS but I doubt the stuff being posted on here would be that much of a concern if the PTB really existed. I mean jewiz, anybody who is remotely objective to the 9/11 conspiracy or the NWO conspiracy is often enough shot down... so long as you post anything in favour of the 9/11 or NWO conspiracies, you'll get plenty of support and pats on the back.... and being this fact wouldnt it be more effective for these supposed NWO agents online to pose as conspiracy theorists only to dilute these theories with more lies??
Secondly, what are you on about "proffessional debunkers"? Even if there were disinfo agents on here, at the end of the day they are still members participating in discussion. Instead of aiming for them personally, why not address their arguments? If an NWO agent were to post a comment against an NWO thread with their views and points, what good would it do to your cause to automatically dismiss them as agents as opposed to actually addressing their points? I mean at the end of the day, regardless of whether their NWO agents, conspiracy theorists or Tom Hanks, isnt this forum really about addressing points and arguments? What good does it do to automatically dismiss somebody for who they supposedly are, not what their argument is? This isnt what ATS is about in my opinion.
SG
[edit on 29-11-2009 by Southern Guardian]
Originally posted by Bodhisattva420
reply to post by RipCurl
So, let's start with the assumption that there are not professional debunkers here working on behalf of the conspiraters.
What are you hoping to accomplish then?
If you aren't being paid to debunk, and you are not here to further CT research then you are spending vast amounts of your own time in a conversation that you'd have no logical reason to care about.
So that's my question. Why do the CIA's job for them if they're not even compensating you for your time?
Originally posted by rexusdiablos
I think it's extremely naive to think that professional debunker's or shills don't exist on the more popular or dare I say 'influential' online communities, ATS being one of them of course.
Shills are usually an obvious breed to spot. They'll commonly spout off words like 'illogical', 'science' and 'fear-mongering' and on the whole their systematic approach towards rebuttal is generally highly repetitive and highly systematic.
S&F for the OP for having the reverence and courage for his submissions. Personally, I lose a little more faith in mankinds ability to resists the globalists each time I'm told that 911 wasn't an inside job.
[edit on 30-11-2009 by rexusdiablos]
Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
Originally posted by jthomas
Funny enough, some people are ignorant enough to think "9/11 was an inside job."
Yeah...right. Because an inside job has never happened before...right???
Originally posted by RipCurl
Originally posted by GoldenFleece
\
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a3b266208771.jpg[/atsimg]
smoke covers every floor of the building later in the day.
Listen very carefully to the audio. the firefighters on scene were very clued in and believe the building would collapse.
Southeast and southwest face of "fully-engulfed" WTC 7: (upper right)
In contrast, here's a high-rise fire in Madrid, Spain that burned for 10 hours and never collapsed:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2578d659fda1.jpg[/atsimg]
yes, a photo taken of a raging fire at NIGHT will definitely be more dramatic that one TAKEN during the day.
apples and oranges dear. WTC 7 fully constructed STEEL high rise building with a cantilever design for the first 6 floors (due to the CONED station it was built right over) - so unlike the CONCRETE CORE supported structure of the MADRID tower, the two buildings had nothing in common. YOU however, omit that the STEEL PORTIONS of the Mardrid Tower DID collapse due to the fire. Why do you omit that? Why are you leaving out this information? Also, the MAdrid tower, despite efforts of the firefighters, was able to fight the fire, but unable to save the portions that collapse.
Care to explain where the Madrid tower is today?
Oh sorry deary, it doesn't exist. it was so heavily damaged that they government CONDEMNED the building at it was subsequenlty torn down.
First 17 floors of the Madrid tower was supported by a concrete core. The top floors were steel only. The floors affected by the fire collapsed.
Why do you truthers continue to misrepresent the events of MAdrid tower, when NOTHING in that fire even SUPPORTS anything you claim.
If the Madrid fire wasn't so "bad" as you are trying to make it out to be, why was the building deemed unsafe and then demolished?
As a matter of fact, no steel-framed high-rise building in history has ever collapsed due to fire.
still trotting out this false choice fallacy? So, i guess you dont believe that we can fly? go to the moon? invented the wheel? First time for everything, however the EVENTS of 9/11 to all three buildings are based on a set of unique circumstances.
NO time in history has a nearly fully fueled aircraft used as a missile to take out two of the largest buildings in the New York skyline. Yet that is what happened on 9/11/2001. Guess that didn't happen by your logic.
You conveniently forget that wTC7 was hit by the collapse of WTC 1 causing sever damage to the building. And the fact that WTC 1 and WTC 2 were hit by giant aircrafts that had the equivalent energy of an atomic bomb.why do you denier continue to misrepresent the facts?
So much for your honesty and credibility.