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.

 

A New Enquiry into 9,11 would it work ?

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by REMISNE
 


You have a pretty low opinion of "most people'. Actually I have found that most people are pretty sharp and for the most part pretty inquisitive. But they are also capable of knowing when to say when.



Mr Hooper

More people are questioning 911 now , then on Sept 12 2001

the numbers are GROWING,

the OS is a sham and MOST people can see that

[edit on 3-1-2010 by Sean48]


Well, I am sure you believe that - the irony being that you present that you are in pursuit of the "truth" yet you are suffering under the significant delusion that anybody thinks the US government orchestrated 9/11.




posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper


Well, I am sure you believe that - the irony being that you present that you are in pursuit of the "truth" yet you are suffering under the significant delusion that anybody thinks the US government orchestrated 9/11.


I'm in good company .

I can link several "truther site" with numbers growing

1/3 of Americans question government involvement in 911

I wont be alone in my delusion.

Will you ?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I admit that some "conspiracy minded" theories are way out there. But that does not discount (and should not) the myriad of flaws, mistakes, errors, fabrications within the OS. Let's start at the beginning, the OS is the result of the 911 Commission. I think we ALL know that to be a fact, if not then there is no reason for you to continue reading here. The Commission members are on record saying they did not have all of the facts.

So by the 911 Commission's panel members own admission the OS is indeed flawed. Again thats a fact and regardless of which side of the incident you are on it must be taken into heavy consideration regardless of what you want to believe.

And I'll add, do not re-post to this post and ask me to "cite evidence" or "name sources" because they are are readily available and easy to find including having been stated in the same context as I mentioned above in the MSM.

Its a fact - The OS is flawed, its a panel who collected evidence that is not in it's entirety regarding the incident (911).



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by hooper


Well, I am sure you believe that - the irony being that you present that you are in pursuit of the "truth" yet you are suffering under the significant delusion that anybody thinks the US government orchestrated 9/11.


I'm in good company .

I can link several "truther site" with numbers growing

1/3 of Americans question government involvement in 911

I wont be alone in my delusion.

Will you ?


I never said you were "alone" in your delusion - just practically so. I am sorry but 1/3 of Americans do not think their government orchestrated 9/11. They may think the government may have been able to do more, or think some people are being protected for screwing up and not seeing the signs before 9/11 but they do not think the government carried out this great big magic trick.

Oh, and please give me the names of the "truther sites" were traffic is growing- I would love to see them and maybe post a comment or two.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
"Does it ever suprise you that every human adult is satisfied with the basic understanding of 9/11 and yet YOU have questions that YOU need answers for before you will accept what every one else has already accepted? Are you really that substantially smarter than the entire rest of the world? Well maybe you and half a handful of other conspiracy enthusiast. At some point don't you think that maybe you should question the questioning."

And does it ever surprise you that most people who post 'honestly' to conspiracy sites are NOT doing it for the purpose of sucking up to a corrupt Government, a disreputable mainstream media and a greed infested corporate establishment?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by hooper


Well, I am sure you believe that - the irony being that you present that you are in pursuit of the "truth" yet you are suffering under the significant delusion that anybody thinks the US government orchestrated 9/11.


I'm in good company .

I can link several "truther site" with numbers growing

1/3 of Americans question government involvement in 911

I wont be alone in my delusion.

Will you ?


I never said you were "alone" in your delusion - just practically so. I am sorry but 1/3 of Americans do not think their government orchestrated 9/11. They may think the government may have been able to do more, or think some people are being protected for screwing up and not seeing the signs before 9/11 but they do not think the government carried out this great big magic trick.

Oh, and please give me the names of the "truther sites" were traffic is growing- I would love to see them and maybe post a comment or two.


No need to do that my friend

I wrote 1/3 question government involvement

NOT "1/3 think their government orchestrated 911"

lets be civil, I don't misquote you



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Scripps Howard News Service:


More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll. The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be. Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.


Link



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


I don't like to be the one that sits here and goes "prove it, prove it'. But really, what are you basing this 1/3 statement on? I am not trying to misquote you, however, I really have no idea what you are talking about when you talk about "government involvement".

What does that mean, and what do you think it means? Somebody could question their "governments involvement" in 9/11 and simply mean that they think their government should have been a little more involved in preventing 9/11.

What we are talking about here is the "inside job" standard. Do you contend that 1/3 of the US population (about 100 million people) believe that their government orchestrated 9/11 as a big magic trick with disappearing planes and buildings pre-planted with explosives?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee

Scripps Howard News Service:


More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll. The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be. Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.


Link


Ty MikeLee

[edit on 3-1-2010 by Sean48]



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
"Oh, and please give me the names of the "truther sites" were traffic is growing- I would love to see them and maybe post a comment or two."

Google: 109,000,000 results for a search of "911 inside job"
Google: 50,300,000 results for a search of "9 11 lies"
Google: 13,300,000 results for a search of "9 11 conspiracy"
Google: 2,260,000 results for a search of "9 11 false flag"

Start posting.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
firefightersfor911truth.org...

www.st911.org...

patriotsquestion911.com...

these are newer sites , will growing membership

Quite informative , I'm sure you will learn things



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
Link


that was done 4 years ago, dont you have anything more up to date?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


Really - a three-four year old poll of 1000 people and 1/3 think it was either MIHOP or LIHOP? That's it?

That's about all she wrote then.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"Oh, and please give me the names of the "truther sites" were traffic is growing- I would love to see them and maybe post a comment or two."

Google: 109,000,000 results for a search of "911 inside job"
Google: 50,300,000 results for a search of "9 11 lies"
Google: 13,300,000 results for a search of "9 11 conspiracy"
Google: 2,260,000 results for a search of "9 11 false flag"

Start posting.


Are those the names of the sites or just google searches?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"Oh, and please give me the names of the "truther sites" were traffic is growing- I would love to see them and maybe post a comment or two."

Google: 109,000,000 results for a search of "911 inside job"
Google: 50,300,000 results for a search of "9 11 lies"
Google: 13,300,000 results for a search of "9 11 conspiracy"
Google: 2,260,000 results for a search of "9 11 false flag"

Start posting.


Are those the names of the sites or just google searches?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


you asked for sites that you will be posting at

I gave 3 , there are more ,

Will you be posting under Hooper ?

Look forward to you asking questions on these sites



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 



Oh please Dereks, don't pester me with your petty citations regarding the date. You know its true now as it was then because the OS continues to be unraveled more & more by the day.

That article came out on December 10, 2006. Just fyi regarding your incorrect timeline.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


Well, actually that's four. And are those the names of the sites or google searches?



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


umm


you can't tell the diff?

I linked 3 sites

Sphinx linked 4 searches



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
That article came out on December 10, 2006. Just fyi regarding your incorrect timeline.



The article stated "submitted by Thomas Hargrove on Tue, 08/01/2006"

8th January, 2006 if you yanks worked out how to write the date correctly!




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join