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.

 

9/11 Comprehensive Concise Evidence---please contribute

page: 11
6
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
A single video would be easier to fake than the eyewitness accounts of dozens of people who don't know each other.


Wrong Dave. If the videos were easy to fake, we'd have seen dozens of them already and Craig Ranke wouldn't be taken seriously by anyone. They are hard to fake. The five fake frames released by the government prove it. That's why we won't see the dozens of fakes for quite a while.

When you start having trouble spotting the CGI stuff in Hollywood movies, the government will finally relent and show their fakes to you. I'm sure, if you are still around, you will have an "I told you so" moment.

[edit on 20-8-2010 by ipsedixit]




posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by monkeySEEmonkeyDO
"I know enough physics to know that it is strictly impossible for those buildings to collapse in their own footprint, at free-fall speed


Except that the buildings did not fall at free fall speed (except WTC7 for a short time) nor did they collapse in their own footprint.

It is lies like this that just show the "truther" movement is not at all actually interested in the truth!



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doctor Smith
1 No Trusters have been able to come up with just one example of a steel frame building globally collapsing as the three buildings 1, 2 and 7. Without explosive demolition. Never in the history of mankind before or since 911.


Care to show us a steel frame building that was hit by a high speed jet airliner that has not collapsed?



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Hello,

I do not believe that actual airplanes hit the buildings or Pentagon, or hit the ground in Pennsylvania. But few people are concentrating on where these four planes actually went as well as the 300-500 passengers.

I think three or four planes were crashed into the Atlantic. There was a navy task force in the area as well as a major hurricane off the coast on 911. Most people have forgotten the hurricane off NYC on 911. The Navy task force probably had a small copter force out to make sure no survivors or wreckage remained afloat from the 3 or 4 ditched airliners. The hurricane was the main blocking force of aircraft and ship coming and going in this area of the Atlantic. So no civilian interference or eyes were present to see the 3 or 4 ditched airliners.

And lastly another airplane crashed off Long Island several weeks later. This crash was probably deliberate also to cover any wreckage that might come ashore from the four ditched planes on 911. Then any wreckage found could be blamed on the recent airplane crash.

SO I think remote viewers and ship salvage crews might locate three or four missing 911 airplanes in fairly shallow waters just off the coast in the Atlantic.



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by antelopone
 


Sorry...this is SO incredibly devoid of any facts, doesn't even deserve to be considered as even a shred of consideration...and it thusly deserves this:




posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Wrong Dave. If the videos were easy to fake, we'd have seen dozens of them already and Craig Ranke wouldn't be taken seriously by anyone. They are hard to fake. The five fake frames released by the government prove it. That's why we won't see the dozens of fakes for quite a while.


So you're genuinely telling me that a bunch of sinister boogeymen could successfully sneak in and plant secret controlled demolitions in an occupied building without anyone noticing or leaving any evidence behind, as well as running out and planting aircraft wreckage all over the front of the Pentagon lawn in broad daylight without anyone seeing them, and getting 20,000 investigators to go along with the coverup, and yet they can't even superimpose a picture of an airplane on a video still when Hollywood has been showing ultrarealistic movies of terminator cyborgs and seven foot tall wookies long before 9/11. Dude, It's blatantly obvious you're just making things up as you go along to suit your purposes.

Tell me something, in all honesty. Eyewitness accounts aren't enough for you. The black box isn't enough for you. Wreckage lying all over the Pentagon lawn isn't enough for you. Even the Boeing fuselage sized hole punched into the walls of the Pentagon aren't enough for you. Why in the name of Ronald McDonald should I think you're not just lying through your teeth with this Pentagon footage bit and you'd just brush any such video off as fake like you do with everythign else that disproves your conspiracy ideas?



When you start having trouble spotting the CGI stuff in Hollywood movies, the government will finally relent and show their fakes to you. I'm sure, if you are still around, you will have an "I told you so" moment.


This sounds more like the viewpoint of a religious fanatic than a serious researcher. I already know you're never going to find what you're looking for becuase Bush is long gone and Obama is in the White House now. True to form, you're just coming up with more excuses of coverup to explain why Obama isn't on board with your conspriacy stories in runaway circular logic, the same way you make up excuses to explain all your other failings. Go ahead, admit it- you think Obama is a patsy in this conspriacy too, don't you?



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by antelopone
 


Or they could of just had three airliners just crash into the buildings, have the fourth crash into a field, and that way there is less to worry about with all this ridiculous Rube-Goldberg style planning. Dont you realize that sometimes, the simplest explanation is the correct one?



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I guess we just have a different take on 9/11, Dave. I'm sure, like most mature adults, you will have no difficulty accepting marked differences of opinion.



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 06:29 AM
link   
Im writing this in memory of one of the witnesses Barry Jennings who died mysteriously recently!

Emergency coordinator for the New York Housing Authority, and key 9/11 eyewitness, Barry Jennings has passed away with controversy about WTC7 still hot as the BBC hit piece and NIST report have been released to counter Jennings exclusive testimony of explosions inside Building 7. Jennings passed away at age 53 from circumstances not yet disclosed.

A spokesperson for the Housing Authority has now confirmed his death, after weeks of rumors circulating online, but refused to give any further details. Several other individuals at the Housing Authority also confirmed that they knew Barry Jennings, and that indeed he had passed away about a month ago. No other details were available.
It is very unusual that a prominent — and controversial 9/11 witness would die only days before the release of NIST's report on WTC7 and shortly after a firestorm erupted over his testimony that he heard explosions inside the building prior to collapse of either tower and that there were dead bodies in the buildings blown-out lobby.

The BBC aired The Third Tower in July in attempt to debunk Barry Jennings' account, which is both contradictory and damaging to the official 9/11 story by making issue over whether or not he said he saw dead
bodies in the lobby.



The truth about WTC7 will come out, and Barry Jennings' testimony will not be in vain.



Source,,naturalplane.blogspot.com...



posted on Sep, 10 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
So you're genuinely telling me that a bunch of sinister boogeymen could successfully sneak in and plant secret controlled demolitions in an occupied building without anyone noticing or leaving any evidence behind,


I wonder if it was the same boogeymen that sneaked in to plant nanoo nanoo thermite in the WTC buildings? Or did another team do that. And which went off first - the explosives, or the nanoo nanoo thermite?. And how did they ensure the explosives did not disrupt the nanoo nanoo thermite, or the nanoo nanoo thermite did not set off the explosives?



new topics




 
6
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join