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.

 

My beliefs have changed regarding 911

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   
After spending some time away from the 911 forum and doing some investigation into the 911 events to satisfy my own curiosity I now have some changed beliefs in what happened. I have always thought that anyone stuck or hanging onto a beleif or opinion without the satisfaction to go out and explore additional probablities is muddling through life with their blinders on. And that does not allow anyone to have a good wide view of what lies in front of them.

Regarding the WTC Towers and after looking at a variety of materials on the internet as well as those I recieved from additional sources I can say that the towers, in my opinion were not imploded by demolitions at all. The examples of free falling towers no longer holds water in my opinion. I have observed several days worth of videos of controlled demolitions as well attended an actual one in person. After speaking with one the controllers at the site I'm convinced that the WTC Towers were not caused to fall by explosives. However with this stated, I do believe that WTC 7 was caused in part, by demolitions as it was beyond repair obviously and the use of demolitions only aided in brining it down for the safety of the public and others on site that day. WTC 7 was brought down because it had to be. No other reason in my mind exists.

The NIST Report is flawed but not to any degree that it allows for a total assumption that the Towers were brought to the ground by explosives. It was put together in a rush to a conclusion is now my opinion and well know very well how many mistakes can happen when things are rushed like that. I believe people should sit back, grab a cold one and understand that this was the most dramatic event in our time and those who were responsible and held to a degree of providing the answers did so under great pressure with no intention of malice whatsoever.

Did two planes strike in NYC on 911? Of course they did and anyone who has their eyes open can determine that. All of the misinformation regarding no plane theories is just an attempt to extend an improbable theory that is baseless in context as well as any concrete evidence to prove it. In short, its a load of manure pure & simple. There were way too many people on scene that day to even consider this in any way to be true and, contrary to popular opinion there were many people who filmed them and took photos whose cameras and/or video cams were not "confiscated" as some have noted falsely. In many of the videos the planes were filmed at varying angles and none have ever been proven to be faked, manipulated or otherwise despite attempts by some whose editing skills outweigh their skill of telling the truth.

Did a plane crash into the Pentagon? I can now state without any doubt that one did. I have posted before the Global Hawk theory based on some bad stills from the video at the Pentagon entrance gate that we all know and have seen before. Only after talking with some of my former friends who were on scene that day in September, I can say without any doubt that an airliner crashed into the building. In my career of working in law enforcement I actually do seek evidence depsite what I have posted on ATS in the past without any conrete evidence, afterall it is a theory based site. But after being privilaged enough to see private individual's photos taken on that day by those who were there, that have not been released anywhere I now can confidently tell anyone who doubts that there were any sizable aircraft debris or bodys of the passengers that not only were there indeed but that there are plans in place to release a good amount of information with photos that will more than discount any of the theorys I have posted and others as well regarding "no plane at Pentagon" or "it was a missile".

As for the Donald Rumsfeld slip, after this I now think he is just an o0ld fart whose mind was elsewhere that day when he made that comment. It IS very convincing but it is not conclusive now in my opinion.

Now many of you know what I think happened in Shanksville and that has not changed. Why? Because in my quest for the truth regarding flight 93 I have yet to speak to any military personnel (intelligence, enlisted, officers & civilians) that was directly involved with operations on 911 and who would be in a position of knowledge who can say without a doubt within full confidence that it was NOT shot down. In fact what I learned was that many think it was. I did try to locate the unknown Airman who alledgedly wrote a letter to another 911 website stating one of the fighter jets returned to it's positioned based with one less missle than it left with originally. I could not locate anyone of the sort but I did hear from those I spoke with regarding this, that they "heard something to that effect" or something similiar but none would go on record and say anything of the sort even within a personal opinion context. I really do not blame them either.

I just have a difficult time thinking that an entire airliner vanshied into the ground then only 8% of the remains were recovered and that allowed for 100% indentification of those onboard, that math does not add up. In addition I still am firmly rooted in the belief that based on the fact that Shanksville was not the only confirmed debris site that the other two sites held the truth about what really happened. But, without any concrete proof such as a peice of the airliner or soil samples to test for explosives that too, remains only a theory. I think though that many will remember the national media reporting that the crash site was located deep within the woods of Pennsylvania and was difficult to access and that resuers were trying to reach the site. We all know that the Shanksville location is NOT located deep within the woods and is fully accessible by roads leading to it. But this fact regarding the sites has been forgotten by many except a few. I think that flight 93 will remain a mystery for years to come.

In closing I do not in any way expect everyone to agree with my conclusions but it is for my own satisfaction of the truth that must be based in not only common sense but practical evidence as well. I do not believe everything the government tells us as I have operated during my career within that very environment and know full well that there are events, occurrences and activitys that go unreported, covered up and sealed by those whose reasons we may never fully comprehend or even get close to understanding. I also think that much of it is done for reasons of national security but in part, is also done for the purpose of allowing actions to be taken that the general public may not fully understand and that it is best to keep it secret than expose the entire scenario. If thats right or wrong I cannot say but I do want the truth about flight 93 because in my own opinion I think it will unlock some other unknown aspects regarding the events of 911 and perhaps expose those who enabled this to be covered up.

I do admit though perhaps I'm totally wrong about flight 93 being shot down, maybe it did vanish in a hole and there was just too much energy released at the impact point for the average person to understand and therefore everything in it just vaporized. Or maybe thats just too much of a fantasy to believe and we are all right to doubt it. After all we have never seen the landing gear of flight 93 in any confirmed government photos and the experts all agree that if anything, those should have survived the impact.

I do also believe that the TPTB realized what was going on and allowed it happen to further their war agenda as that aspect has well been proven to be a fact that they planned for Iraq well in advance of 911. The events of 911 only was a coincidence that those in power either played dumb, or were dumb, and allowed it to unfold in order to establish their baseline for their plans. afterall, they did do just that.

[edit on 6/9/2010 by mikelee]




posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
I do admit though perhaps I'm totally wrong about flight 93 being shot down, maybe it did vanish in a hole and there was just too much energy released at the impact point for the average person to understand and therefore everything in it just vaporized. Or maybe thats just too much of a fantasy to believe and we are all right to not believe it. After all we have never seen the landing gear of flight 93 in any confirmed government photos and the experts all agree that if anything, those should have survived the impact.


If flight 93 was really shot down and the gov't is covering it up, then why did representatives from NORAD come out and admit to the 9/11 commission they were hunting flight 93 with a shootdown order from the president, and they admitted they would have shot it down if they had found it?



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I believe they made a hasty error and feared public outrage plain and simple. They ordered it to be shot down and when they realized it was, backed off from admitting that it was shot down.

By saying they would have shot it down provides them with an out if ever in the future it was discovered that it actually was shot down and they never admitted it.



[edit on 6/9/2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
So do you know when these never before seen pictures will be released?

Will they be released to the public?



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


What I was told that the Gov & Printing Office is working with all agencys involved to assemble a collection of photos as well as text describing the events on 911. Other than that, its all I know.

I know some will not accept what the Gov releases in any way but its better than what we have now for sure.



[edit on 6/9/2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


There is a lot of science and credible expert testimony that supports your opinion.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by iamcpc
 


I believe so too. More than trying to continually prove a theory for which none exists.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by gamma 49
 


No, I'm not. But one could very well state the same about youself as well. But I won't.

The evidence supports what many of the conspiracys simply do not. The majority of conspiracy theorys of 911 are rooted in nothing more than opinions, deceptions & half truths and while an opinion is neither right nor wrong, an opinion cannot hold it's water in a courtroom. So why should it hold any here?



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by gamma 49
 


It being a false flag does not go against what he believes. They are not mutually exclusive.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I believe they made a hasty error and feared public outrage plain and simple. They ordered it to be shot down and when they realized it was, backed off from admitting that it was shot down.

By saying they would have shot it down provides them with an out if ever in the future it was discovered that it actually was shot down and they never admitted it.


Interesting how you ascribe complete and utter cowardice to our military leaders by accusing them of "fearing public outrage".

Further interesting that the military did admit that it couldn't do anything on that day and that by the time the system worked its way through its post-cold war lethargic alert status, the aircraft had already hit the buildings or had crashed.

Seems to me it took more cojones to admit they failed, for whatever reasons, than it would have taken to say "Yeah!!! We shot that sucker down and saved the Capitol!"



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by gamma 49
reply to post by mikelee
 

Dude you are completely brain washed i mean brain out of your head and washed in a tube and dropped a few hundred times before being put back. It was a total false flag end of discussion.


It's your position that the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, the Journal of Structural Engineering, the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, the Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Civil Engineering staff at the most prestigious engineering university on the planet, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as all the other universities engineering staffs' who contributed to the papers, in addition to the teams of professors at Northwestern and Perdue are all brainwashed for thinking that the twin towers were not demolished?

These sources have been cited here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
who cares if the towers were demolished or not, really!

when the own commission investigation members say they were hiding information from the public, and the real truth is something horrible ...

I dont really need to know how they did it ... it is a FACT that they are lying, and thats enough to be an ACT OF WAR and to put bush and others to death:

simply because they used lies to engage in WARs and kill innocent people and destroy lives of their own soldiers



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Proof, please: links and photos or it's just hearsay that doesn't illuminate anything.

I've yet to hear or see anything that changes the base equation: government complicity in the attacks.

Arguing over the details doesn't change that very basic reality.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by trebor451
 


Nothing of the sort. While your misunderstanding the context of what I wrote to incite some sort of unpatriotic stance on my part. It only fails yourself to allow for an understanding outside of the unproven, no evidence based, often outlandish conspiracy theories of 911.

How much more "awful" is it to say that there no passengers on any flights because there were no planes compared to saying that the establishment feared public outrage?...



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


As stated, its my opinion and a noted change of what I now think. The typical handwaving for the cry of "proof" , "sources" and the like does not apply here. Go play somewhere else now...And don't foget to be home for dinner.


[edit on 6/9/2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
oh cheers, thank you letting us know! we al love to hear your opinion.

i don't posess any opinions what may have caused 3 buildings, - two of them designed to endure a plane collision - to collapse within few hours time, one of them wasn't even hit by plane. all we know that 3 buildings collapsed when they should've not. there are lot of reasons to assume that there were something fishy going on, but then there may be the possibilites of flaws in design.

few thousand people died on that day, many millions suffered in it's aftermath - those are facts, not opinions. whatever happened that day, the reaction to the event was completely unethical (if such thing as ethics exists than only in human mind), unjustified (if such thing as justice exists, only than in human mind) and overscaled. there are perhaps just too many flaws in whole official story, starting from failures of intelligence when the attacks were predicted to happen; even the target was approximately known. when the attacks began, failures multiplied, no defensive measures were taken, because of military drills which just happened to take place on the very same day, just like on those london bombings. it seems that the terrorists were more clever - to design their offensive so cunningly - thus their success were justified by evolution itself.

then there are really the question that who has profited most from the attacks? terrorists? israel? united states? afghanistan? irak? i mean c'mon - use your own logics and quit relying on "official information", "professional" and "official" statements - make your own mind, rely merely on the facts, not on "opinions" of others.

but hey, thanks for sharing your opinion and letting us know "what you believe in"; those are actually the key words. i am pretty certain that the truth about this issue can never be found by research, especially via internet. so i highly recommend on relying on facts that are so well know, that they can be called such: the collapses, the following war(s) and so on. be critical, be logical and maybe in the end one can build an "opinion" which is credible. who knows. sorry, didn't mean to offend anyone.

[edit on 9-6-2010 by Geemor]



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
Proof, please: links and photos or it's just hearsay that doesn't illuminate anything.


There is no proof. I've already went over this so many times. There is only evidence that supports theories. I've, on several occasions, offered 100 dollars via paypal to anyone who can prove that the earth is round.

People have presented a lot of evidence. Just like the ones that have been cited previously. Not one shred of proof. I can present a lot of evidence that supports the twin tower airplane fire collapse theory. I can't offer one shred of proof.



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Regardless of what other posters have said or will say , I personally commend you for this thread .

It takes a lot of balls to stand up and say we are wrong .

I started out as one who didn't believe anything that we were being told about 9/11 , and clung to that position for a long time .

Like you , there came a day that I realized that everything I believed was not supported by anything . The more I studied , the closer I came to realizing my position was wrong .

Once admitting that here on ATS , I was attacked and ridiculed by the 'truthers' more-so than I had ever been attacked by the 'trusters' (or whatever the heck we are calling them now) .

My position on 9/11 pretty much coincides with your OP , for the most part . I have still not come to any real conclusion concerning Flight 93 , so I don't comment on it , for the most part .

Get ready to be flamed from both camps tho , the truthers will do it because you have 'hopped the fence' . The other camp will do it because of the opinion you hold on Flight 93 .

Good luck to you sir . Been there , done that ...


+11 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
As long as you believe that ANY of the WTC complex was brought down by explosives, then you must believe that ALL of it was.

Why? Because there wasn't time to properly plant explosives after the planes crashed into the buildings. It takes weeks, and must have been done before-hand. And this means that somebody with complete access to those buildings knew that 911 was going to happen far in advance of the event.




top topics



 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join