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.

 

All right debate me 9/11 was NOT an inside job!!!

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 02:55 AM
link   
Why would a government attack its own people? This is too horrible to imagine.


America was caught by surprise and failed to respond to this attack quickly enough.


Anyone who says it was our government is a paranoid kook.


It was not a controlled demolition.






Obviously I am wrong, and I'm wrong on purpose. But this is what the average Joe thinks. Debunk my statements.




posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:04 AM
link   
it is rather simple, point them in the direction of the plethora of evidence that proves it was an inside job and say

"you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink"

then leave them alone to ponder their existence in a world full of lies. maybe they will wake up...
if not take a look at the quote below, that will explain a lot.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Here we go again!!!!! I'm not going to even bother with this. All I can say is sorry. Sorry that you are blind to the truth and WAKE UP.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthOut25
 


Why are we getting an influx of new members starting threads like this??

Heard of the Liberty?? Gulf of Tonlkin??

No, our Goverment loves us all equally....



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthOut25
 


Also, why would you start a thread like this and then log off within minutes??

Just trying to stir the pot??

Guess what, you lose...ATS members are smarter than that.

I dont think you will get the pages of reasons you expect.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthOut25
 



Why would a government attack its own people? This is too horrible to imagine.


The only kooks are people who continue to ignore and hand wave all the scientific evidence that proves 911 was an inside job. False flags always have their collateral damage, the people who are behind the scene’s could careless how many people they kill to justify their means.
Anyone who is convince 911 happened the way the government said it happened, has not researched the subject or are ignorant to all the uncovered facts.


America was caught by surprise and failed to respond to this attack quickly enough.


The proven evidence does not support your statement.


Anyone who says it was our government is a paranoid kook.


Anyone who says the OS is true is in denial, or again is ignorant to all the facts.


It was not a controlled demolition.


The scientific evidence supports demolition. You should to go here, to research the demise of the WTC.
www.ae911truth.org...




[edit on 16-7-2010 by impressme]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Dont feed the trolls...

The OPs headline was.

All right debate me 9/11 was NOT an inside job!!!


Then he logs off???? He doesn't want a debate, he just wants to stir trouble.. If not he would have stayed on to debate...



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
Well if anyone actually READ the OP, at the end he says he does not believe that but the average joe does believe the things he listed.

I think he is trying to get a laundry list that he can use when discussing this with people who do believe the OS.

My advice is, do your own research. The people here who believe that 9/11 was an inside job can give you a whole list of things to say, but it would be very tough for you to make an argument against anyone if all you intend to do is parrot the opinions of others. Do your own research, do it honestly and let the evidence take you where it may. Good luck to you in your search for truth.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:34 AM
link   
Here you go - video.google.com...#

Can we lock this thread now?



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Did any of you read the OP?
Cuz I see just 1 poster who has...



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 04:50 AM
link   
I don't believe the gov't executed the attack nor had anything to do with it. However, I do believe they knew every detail about it and allowed it to happen. This was the golden ticket they needed to kick things off in the middle east. Many of great men and wise philosopher's have stated through the ages, time and time again:

You never pass up a tragedy nor let it bring you down. It's a positive thing that you take advantage of.

And that's exactly what they did/are still doing. Sure, there are lot's of things that point to the gov't executing that attack. But nothing i've seen so far is set in stone nor 100% undebateable. The building's collapsing, stock dumping days before 9/11, and on and on and on. None of that means the gov't did it because those claims themselves cannot ever be proven. You can always speculate, but look at how powerful speculation is. If we were to solely rely on that we have all kinds of crazy things in our heads.

But seriously, I believe some of the most popular points people bring up that the gov't did it, can be debated. Personally, I feel like the gov't only knew and allowed it. I think if "this" gov't, the U.S. Gov't were to pull a false flag it would be much worse than 9/11. The U.S. has so many enemies it's not hard to find one who hates us and would love to have the green light to harm us. The gov't didn't need to pull a false flag to many out there will gladly do it for them.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   
cont.. from my previous post.

Take for instance the buildings collapsing. When they fell on the morning of 9/11, I believed it. When those jets flew into the tower's I believed they fell because two huge jets flew in, and did so for many years. I was glued to the tv all day and remember bulding 7 falling.

I remember something about the news reporting that it was going to be brought down. Then later on I was told it was brought down because of fire. I never thought no more of it. I figured, "hey, if the other two fell due to fire and structural damage, this one could easily do so."

Then in 2008 when I fell in love with conspiracies, this was the one of the first ones I came across. For the longest time I believed the gov't did plant explosives. You guys know how the story goes.

Anyway, ok, so if the gov't only "knew" about the attacks and let them happen, how did the building's fall?

For one, I know nothing about architecture. I'm not about to learn anything about it from an architect screaming "Inside Job" on video. We don't know if this guy is just upset with the gov't. We don't know if this guy is being paid to say these things. We don't know if this guy is a really good or really bad architect. For all we know he may not even be an architect. And this goes for any and every one of the people claiming this on the radio or video about 9/11.

Am I being to harsh on these people? No. It's true. Think about it. You don't know these people. Propaganda works both ways. Especially in the political realm. I'm basically saying anything that we truly can't research on or on, we have dismiss as evidence. Can you find out if these people are who they say they are (architects) yes. But what you can't find out easily on your own is all about architecture itself. Remember, people will say anything. Their word is not evidence.

In order to do your OWN research about the building's not collapsing, you would have learn a lot about construction, material's, and so on and so on. But even if you spent years doing that your going to run into a huge problem that will stop you dead in your tracks.

No one knows what materials were used to build the towers. Sure, they used steel, but no one really knows how well those particular buildings were buitl. This was a huge project, one that could not fail. The builder was under lots of pressure. We don't know...and will never know if "cut corners" (term used in the construction industry meaning to take shortcuts to build instead of doing it right) or what they might have done. Think about how many people are rewarded contracts and money to build, but don't always use the material's they're suppose to. Instead go with a substitute or bypass it all together. Why do this? Because the customer will never know and you pocket the money.

I'm not saying this IS what the builder did, i'm saying COULD have. But now, we will never know. Those towers could have been built with cheap materials to save money. Or the construction could have been rushed because of deadlines and the importance of it. We're talking about the skyline here of the greatest city on earth. That's pressure. Especially in that time.

Before we can say a building would never collapse due to that, that's not necessarily true. We don't know that. It is possible the buildings collapsed without the help of bombs. Squibs you say? That could have been the dust shooting out from the above floors falling.

The official story says "due to fires and structural damage". Everybody always say's, "that's the first time in history a building has ever fell due to fire". Okay, maybe it wasn't just fire. Structural damage. That could have been the big big factor, but no one ever discusses that as much. Most people stick with the fires.

This is just a small example of why I dismiss this. I wrote this up in 5 minutes. I'm sure many of u out there can add alot more.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:42 AM
link   
It wasn't.

Because in the world we live in today, a globalized world, there are no boarders and boundaries for the those in power, and you cannot be sure what or whom someone holds allegiance to.

So we are A$5h0les for thinking they were for us and our protection.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Juanxlink
Did any of you read the OP?
Cuz I see just 1 poster who has...


So, he got tricky and presented the other side - the topic and content is nothing new - my point.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthOut25
Obviously I am wrong, and I'm wrong on purpose. But this is what the average Joe thinks. Debunk my statements.


From the last few posts the "average joe" thinks you're posting this to see what kind of trouble you can stir up so you can sit back and laugh at us.

It's a rare case when I agree with the conspiracy people here, but I do agree on this being a troll. If the bazillion other posts discussing every nut, bolt, and door hinge aren't enough to settle the issue, then one more thread won't make any more difference. Lock this thread please and let it die a graceful death.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthOut25
Why would a government attack its own people? This is too horrible to imagine.


America was caught by surprise and failed to respond to this attack quickly enough.


Anyone who says it was our government is a paranoid kook.


It was not a controlled demolition.






Obviously I am wrong, and I'm wrong on purpose. But this is what the average Joe thinks. Debunk my statements.


Actually I don't think it was an inside job at all

Take a walk down Longsight Market in Manchester one day where you will see islamics - no s**t - stood on a soapbox playing recordings of 'speeches' in english (the dub reggae esque effects are a bit amusing though) calling for islamic revolution, trying to force this religion onto the 'infidels', looking at you like you're a piece of s**t as you pass them in the street, plotting to blow up the printworks because drinking is against their religion (i highly doubt that was false flag - next to nothing was made of it in the media). I have worked with some of these people, and they really talk with venom about subjects like drinking, promiscous girls (not men, mind, because that is apparently ok) - NOTE don't get me wrong i also have moderate islamic friends that i get on well with - so easy to be labelled a bigot these days.

These are people who imprison women for the 'crime' of being raped by a man - this happening in even dubai to british women on holiday there - again i'm not labbelling all of them just the extremists

Islam CAN be a very sick religion when it is interpreted in this type of way (as can any religion) and do believe there are such people out there who would perpretrate an event like 9/11, like 7/7 or the madrid bombing.

just my 2 pence

tired sorry for the grammar



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthOut25
 


First off "an inside job" doesn't necessarily mean our government.

So, to debate your OP is very easy! We can crush that point right away.

Now, it is also easy to rule out the local involvement, because the firemen were rushing up the stairs when the first building fell. Obviously the local authorities were not privy to information.

BUT, the fact that the experts on the scene were firefighters, and firefighters battle blazes in tall buildings quite frequently, and they deemed it safe to go up, that tells us that the building did not fall simply because of fire. The firefighters were well aware that this was a jet-fuel (kerosene) fire, and they were well aware of the structure, floor plan, age, and materials in the building. Their expert opinion was that no danger of collapse was present. These guys are familiar with much, much hotter fires from chemicals and and accelerants, and they know that kerosene is not sufficient to collapse a building.

Now, as for the "pancake" collapse. There are literally thousands of videos of buildings that do not pancake collapse. Even controlled demolitions sometimes fail to produce a pancake collapse. If the fire had melted the steel girders on those floors, the girders would have given way, and those floors would have collapsed unevenly and fallen to the side. It is absolutely impossible that all the supporting girders collapsed simultaneously. The heat from room to room would have been dramatically different, and the steel structures would have been at varying degrees of structural integrity. No way they all gave at once, and came down simultaneously, and produced an impossible pancake effect.

Now, as for the steel structures. There is data in another thread, where I researched the steel, the fire retardent, and the concrete encasement. It would have taken 100x more heat than kerosene is capable of, and dozens of hours of exposure to that heat before the steel could have melted. Also, lets not forget that all that black smoke was evidence of a severly damped fire. In other words it did not have sufficient air flow to be burning efficiently. Even at optimal conditions it would not burn hot enough, but in damped conditions it is even more impossible! It is absolutely physically impossible for that fire to melt those beams in that time frame. Some may argue one piece of the possibility, but NO ONE can say that that fire, in a building of that structure, in that time frame could cause that collapse.

So, how much further would you like to debate. Why amateur pilots couldn't have hit that target? Why the insurance was upped, the owners didn't make their meetings that morning, GS shorted the airlines, Bush ignored the call, Cheney was in charge of Norad, the existing terror drills causing confusion, or the news reporting the collapse of Bldg 7 prematurely? Or is it acceptable just to say that a 1 in a million chance of any one of those happening, becomes a 1 in a kazillion chance of them all happening at the same moment.

Some may not realize that chaos theory gives odds of silly things, for instance a 747 materializing out of thin air in my front yard. There is a statistical probability of that happening. Out of all the atoms in the make up of that plane, and all the atoms in the Universe, it is highly likely that at some point, that plane will materialize by a random alignment of atoms! In fact, it is more likely than all of those odd random coincidences occuring simultaneously on 9/11. So, I will believe the official story the day a 747 appears on my front lawn!

[edit on 16-7-2010 by getreadyalready]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusthestuntbum
 


...besides why?

if the tptb were to perpetrate or even allow anything - why the very symbols of their own power i mean WTF why not something that wouldn't mean anything to them like the brooklyn bridge etc why these huge symbols of globalist wealth and the centre of the US military respectively?!?!?!?!?

i do know ats though and no doubt this thread could turn volatile, but this is my opinion, i'm not forcing it anyone else

[edit on 16-7-2010 by rufusthestuntbum]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusthestuntbum

Islam CAN be a very sick religion when it is interpreted in this type of way (as can any religion) and do believe there are such people out there who would perpretrate an event like 9/11, like 7/7 or the madrid bombing.

just my 2 pence

tired sorry for the grammar


Rufus, your grammar may be off but your message rings through as eloquently as a poet. Thank you for an often...and if you ask me, intentionally...overlooked viewpoint: there are in fact people out there who have their own agenda separate and distinct from what the US wants.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by virgom129

Also, why would you start a thread like this and then log off within minutes??

Just trying to stir the pot??

Guess what, you lose...ATS members are smarter than that.

I dont think you will get the pages of reasons you expect.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Right here is why truthers fail.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join