Mike Bellone's shocking claim on "Conspiracy Theory"

page: 10
38
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 25 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by shasta9600
reply to post by cayrichard
 


Great post. There's only a couple explanations. People are in full shock and denial mode and can't handle the truth, or they have their own agenda for spreading disinfo. This is the only way anybody that has taken the time to look at this in an objective manner, could deny that 911 was an inside job.



Wow. How can you generalize a whole group of people with a snap of your fingers? I was a "truth" seeker since the day it happened. Thanks to the truthers, i have been able to disassemble the info that was given, and come to my own conclusions. I am now leaning more towards the OS and i am no DIS INFO agent for Heavens sake. If Mike said he seen a black(red/orange/yellow whatever color it is) box then lets just say he seen it. What's on there that is going to change the story? We seem to be fighting over where the black boxes are located but what difference does it make? We know where the planes ended up. You really have to be a different individual to really WANT to believe that the US Govt killed its own people. This has got to be the most ridicules thing i just can not except. It makes no sense, if we wanted to go to war with Iran/Afgan/Korea/Vietnam we will just go as we did for years and years, we do not need to sacrifice American citizens for a secret common agenda by the US Govt. If you want a conspiracy, you will find it in anything.. I just do not understand the difference if we find the black boxes for the two planes that went into the towers or not, 1000's witnessed the planes crashing into the two towers, black box or not, we know what happened.

Bud316




posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by samhouston1886
 


I just want to commend you on your search for the truth ! Keep it up and the truth will one day be revealed ! I want to extend my heartfelt sorrow to anyone on ATS who lost relatives on that terrible day and hope one day they finally find closure and can at last start to live their lives again ! Indeed there are many many aspects of this that do not 'add up' and real investigation by an independant international panel (NON American) needs to take place !

Peace to all !


[edit on 073131p://12America/Chicago26 by ProRipp]



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Wow, Dick Cheney has a long reach. Even out of office !

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by bud316

Originally posted by shasta9600
reply to post by cayrichard
 


Great post. There's only a couple explanations. People are in full shock and denial mode and can't handle the truth, or they have their own agenda for spreading disinfo. This is the only way anybody that has taken the time to look at this in an objective manner, could deny that 911 was an inside job.



Wow. How can you generalize a whole group of people with a snap of your fingers? I was a "truth" seeker since the day it happened. Thanks to the truthers, i have been able to disassemble the info that was given, and come to my own conclusions. I am now leaning more towards the OS and i am no DIS INFO agent for Heavens sake. If Mike said he seen a black(red/orange/yellow whatever color it is) box then lets just say he seen it. What's on there that is going to change the story? We seem to be fighting over where the black boxes are located but what difference does it make? We know where the planes ended up. You really have to be a different individual to really WANT to believe that the US Govt killed its own people. This has got to be the most ridicules thing i just can not except. It makes no sense, if we wanted to go to war with Iran/Afgan/Korea/Vietnam we will just go as we did for years and years, we do not need to sacrifice American citizens for a secret common agenda by the US Govt. If you want a conspiracy, you will find it in anything.. I just do not understand the difference if we find the black boxes for the two planes that went into the towers or not, 1000's witnessed the planes crashing into the two towers, black box or not, we know what happened.

Bud316


You're missing the point. It's not whether or not they could have found any info in the boxes, it's the fact that they're hiding something. Not just in this example, but several others. When you hide something, it shows that you're not comfortable with sharing the truth.......and they clearly are not.

The American people would not have supported a war unless there was a good reason. Terrorism and 9/11 provided that 'good reason'.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by samhouston1886
I am not here to debate you, I am here to tell you how I feel.


Thank for that admission. Now that I know you're not here to discuss the events of 9/11 or to add any meaningful discussion here, but to vomit your emotions onto people who don't believe in your conspiracy stories, this will be my last post to you.


My Brothers were murdered and you and others are working very hard to obstruct any investigation or discussion of who was responsible, you do not simply disagree, you attack, ridicule and insult the character of anyone who asks question or reveals information that goes against your agenda.


I don't care if the moderators yank this, I'm not going to allow this unrepentent, bald face lie go unchallenged. If you had read my posts...and it's pretty clear that you hadn't...then you'd know I do NOT come here to "attack, ridicule, or insult" people. I have never concealed why I'm here- to show exactly how badly all these damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing out absolute rubbish to get people all paranoid over shadows. I post the information these conspiracy web sites are deliberately leaving out and I openly invite people to show why what I'm saying is incorrect.

What tells me the most about you isn't what you're posting, but what you're not posting. Despite your self-declared indignation you have not shown why even one microbe of what I've been posting here is false.


I called you all those things and I meant it, I mean it when I say that I will never give this up and while you can sit here with these kids going back and forth wasting their time I will not subject myself to it, I have been at this for 8 years and I know well that 9/11 stinks to high heaven.

No amount of evidence will sway you and we both know why.


Yes we do both know why. So far eveything your side posted as "evidence" is complete and utter [censored]. You have nothing, NOTHING, but innuendo, internet rumors, quotes taken out of context, "undisclosed secret reports released by anonymous sources", and outright lies. Half the times, you conspiracy theorists are all but getting into fistfights amongst yoursleves over what this "secret conspiracy" actually is becuase you don't even know yourselves, and of course, everythign that disproves what you want to believe just has to be gov't disinformation. Hell, only 1/100th of you have ever even read the 9/11 commission report to even know what it says.

Case in point- in the 9/11 report, NYPD helicopter pilots flying eye level to the impact areas in the towers reported the steel was glowing red from the fires and looked like they were about to collapse, and 1/2 hour later, they did. When *I* see this, I have to conclude it was the fires that instigated the collapse. When *you* see this, you conclude the towers were brought down by secret bombs and the NYPD are disinformation agents. Good grief, you have to WANT these secret conspiracies to be true, at this point. These are your own fellow cops!

The only one with an open agenda here is you.



I don't feel that you are genuine and I am calling you on it, I could care less about how anyone feels about it.


Then I hope you enjoy getting kicked off ATS, becuase I'm not here to swap childish insults or to be anyone emotional punching bag. If you can't conduct yourself in a civil manner here then don't waste my time. I am not subject to your rules of conduct. You and I are vstitors here at ATS so we're subject to their rules of conduct. You're an adult so I shouldn't have to be pointing this out to you.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


Thank for that admission. Now that I know you're not here to discuss the events of 9/11 or to add any meaningful discussion here, but to vomit your emotions onto people who don't believe in your conspiracy stories, this will be my last post to you.


That is a rather dismissive attitude for someone who seems to care so much for the truth, isn't it?

debate: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

discuss1 obsolete : dispel
2 a : to investigate by reasoning or argument b : to present in detail for examination or consideration c : to talk about

As you can see, he is here discussing 9/11.

What he said he is not here to do is DEBATE and specifically, debate YOU.

I hope this clears things up.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Bellone wasn't the only one to claim black boxes had been found. The other guy they talked to, the journalist, said that he had been told by a federal employee that all 4 black boxes had been recovered, but that this was not their official position on the issue if you were to call their press office. That would mean that the feds KNEW that the black boxes had been found, and lied about it.


It means no such thing. IF...and it hasn't been fully established that Bellone wasn't embellishing hsi story or whether it actually was the black boxes he saw...IF the black boxes had been recovered all it means is that they were misplaced. Whether they were intentionally misplaced or wherther some dope in the FBI misplaced them and he doesn't want to fess up to his horrid mistake is to be determined. This is why I agree with you that we do need to look at Bellone's claim, as I'd think it would be an easy matter to identify the FBI agent it was turned over to.

...and my statement still stands- you have not shown why possessing the black boxes would be any benefit to you to begin with. The black boxes of AA77 were found and yet the conspiracy theorists aren't accepting what it contains becuase they simply don't want to accept it was really AA77 that hit the Pentagon. There is an obviosu agenda here on the part of the conspiracy people so the true reason why there's so much ado over the black boxes is suspect.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
IF...and it hasn't been fully established that Bellone wasn't embellishing hsi story or whether it actually was the black boxes he saw...IF the black boxes had been recovered all it means is that they were misplaced.


One question:

How do you know?



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

That is a rather dismissive attitude for someone who seems to care so much for the truth, isn't it?


All right, then, consider this- in the 9/11 commission report, and I'll give you the exact page number if you want, it specifically says that NYPD helicopter pilots flying eye level to the impact areas reported the steel supports were glowing red from the fires and looked like they were about to collapse, and 1/2 hour later, they did. That right there tells me that there's an unmistakable corelation between the fires, the heating of the steel, and the collapse, as I have no reason to believe the NYPD helicopter pilots were lying about what they saw.

This guy OTOH does NOT believe what his fellow cops are saying, either becuase he thinks they're secret disinformation agents for the gov't, or, just like 99/99% of the so-called 9/11 researchers here, he didn't bother to read what the 9/11 commission report said and doesn't even know what his fellow cops are even saying. Either way, this is hardly indicative of someone who "cares so much about the truth". It tells me that there's a agenda at work here to support these conspiracy stories regardless of what the truth actually is.

This is neither here nor there. When the guy calls me a "criminal" and "traitor", it's blatantly obvious he's not here to discuss OR debate the events of 9/11. He's here to vent his intolerance against those who disagree with what he himself wants to believe. I don't have to tell you that such blind zealotry is the reason for why we were attacked on 9/11 to begin with, do I?



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

One question:

How do you know?


Easy- becuase I don't know where they are. Do you?



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Lillydale

That is a rather dismissive attitude for someone who seems to care so much for the truth, isn't it?


All right, then, consider this- in the 9/11 commission report, and I'll give you the exact page number if you want, it specifically says that NYPD helicopter pilots flying eye level to the impact areas reported the steel supports were glowing red from the fires and looked like they were about to collapse, and 1/2 hour later, they did. That right there tells me that there's an unmistakable corelation between the fires, the heating of the steel, and the collapse, as I have no reason to believe the NYPD helicopter pilots were lying about what they saw.




Well, aside from the fact that that has nothing to do with telling someone you will ignore them because you do not know what the word "discuss" means, huh?

I think you have that Thomk infection that causes you to respond to my response and then use it to just rant about whatever else seems to be on your mind. You told someone you would ignore them because you did not know the definition of the word "discuss." That was all I said. If you have a response to that cool.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
Well, aside from the fact that that has nothing to do with telling someone you will ignore them because you do not know what the word "discuss" means, huh?


When the heck have I ever said that? You forget that I have the facts on my side, and my philosophy is that it isn't the truth that has to run and hide from falsehoods, it's always falsehoods that have to run and hide from the truth, so I'll willingly discuss this with anyone, anywhere, anytime. I'm going to ignore him becuase he's not here to discuss OR debate, but to "tell me how he feels", and "what he feels" is that I'm a traitor and a criminal. These are his own word, not mine. Am I a criminal becuase I robbed a bank, and am I a traitor because I sold nuclear secrets to North Korea? NO! I'm a "criminal" and a "traitor" entirely becuase I have the audacity to critique the stories those damned fool conspiracy websites are pushign out. What matter of goofball (censored) is that??

If you want a response, here's my response- I'm not under any obligation to put up with anyone's bad manners. The guy is NOT that important, and besides, I'm simply listening to the ATS moderators telling us to behave ourselves and stay out of insult-fest conversations.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Lillydale
Well, aside from the fact that that has nothing to do with telling someone you will ignore them because you do not know what the word "discuss" means, huh?


When the heck have I ever said that?


Right here -

Thank for that admission. Now that I know you're not here to discuss the events of 9/11 or to add any meaningful discussion here, but to vomit your emotions onto people who don't believe in your conspiracy stories, this will be my last post to you.


He did not say discuss, he said DEBATE.



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
He did not say discuss, he said DEBATE.


Let me get this straight- are you genuinely continuing this argument entirely upon the difference between the words, "discuss" and "debate"?



posted on Dec, 26 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Let me get this straight- are you genuinely continuing this argument entirely upon the difference between the words, "discuss" and "debate"?


No. You are still arguing with me because you do not understand the difference between the two and used that ignorance to berate someone else for saying they did not feel like walking in these same pointless circles with you. Need it any straighter?



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 





Jet fuel pouring down elevator shafts - volatile fuel/air mist was then ignited and exploded.
Numerous witnesses in lobby and basement report fireballs blowing out of elevator shafts along with smell of kerosene
Most people can make the logical connection fireballs blowing out of elevators + smell of kerosene = jet fuel explosions


The explosion of the nature that we witnessed on television on 911, if it was due to jet fuel A that was "pouring down the elevator shafts", would have been contained to the shaft in a downward motion. For the type of explosion witnessed on 911, some type of compression is needed (AKA gas tank).

Please learn more about the nature of explosions.

Besides that, you never answered my question IN FULL.

How can that explosion happen, and then the same fuel BURN FOR THIRTY MINUTES.

It can't. It violates the second law of thermodynamics.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


All right, then, consider this- in the 9/11 commission report, and I'll give you the exact page number if you want,


Dave my friend , you seem to have a great knowledge of the 911 report.

Could you please tell me which pages cover Building 7 , as this

building interest me the most .

TY



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
No. You are still arguing with me because you do not understand the difference between the two and used that ignorance to berate someone else for saying they did not feel like walking in these same pointless circles with you. Need it any straighter?


Excuse me?!? I'm not arguing with you at all. I was responding to that Sam Houston guy posting emotional personal attacks against me, not to you. I have no idea why you're interceding, becuase I can't believe that you're really that passionate over whether this guy is "in contention by words or arguments" or whether he's "presenting in detail for examination".

*I* am here to talk about the subject of Mike Bellone and Ventura's Conspiracy theory. The only person dragging it away from that subject and arguing over circles here is you. What IS your point, anyway?



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48
Dave my friend , you seem to have a great knowledge of the 911 report.

Could you please tell me which pages cover Building 7 , as this

building interest me the most .

TY


If you really want to know, I'll look it up, but I can tell you right now that all it documents is when the building fell. It wasn't the commission's objective to document the physical progression of structural collapse of any of the buildings, it was to document who was behind the attack, how they did it, how the US responded, and some recommendations.

It was NIST that researched how WTC 7 fell.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


If you really want to know, I'll look it up, but I can tell you right now that all it documents is when the building fell. It wasn't the commission's objective to document the physical progression of structural collapse of any of the buildings, it was to document who was behind the attack, how they did it, how the US responded, and some recommendations.

It was NIST that researched how WTC 7 fell.

If you could point out the pages on WTC 7 , i would be indebted

To me this is the crux of sept 11 and I realize you don't back away from

discussions on this topic.

TY for your time





top topics
 
38
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join