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.

 

One million New Yorkers to see Building 7 fall (AE911truth)

page: 9
41
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
I live in rural NY.

Will I have an opportunity to see this? Or is this something only going on where they had they billboard TV screens?

It really would be something to see the video of that "collapse" being played out in front of a bunch of people in public.




posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 
I agree about the suspicious building 7 demo...it fell in the same manner as bldgs 1 and 2. What put it over the edge for me was the pentagon crash. All videos confiscated and only one ever released. Rumsfeld on video saying the pentagon hit by a 'missile.' This makes the most sense, except.....how could Arab terrorists in Afghanistan set off a missile into the pentagon? There are many questions and no one will answer them; some who attempt to talk seem to wind up dead. Resembles the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers and Martin Luther King. Too many dead witnesses and perfunctory investigations.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by Paschar0
 


So the BBC are in on it? Just to clarify.

An organisation of what, 30000 people or something?


if you don't think that the major media is controled by a few people that tell us exactly what thay want us to believe, try looking at the news footage from the first 24 hours of the Oklahoma City Bombing .

during that first day, news footages CONFIRMS that there were multiple explosive devices in the building

but quicklly changed their story to a single truck bomb parked outside

www.youtube.com...


and lets not forget that 1993 WTC attacks that the FBI knew about

www.youtube.com...


so say that the government had no hand in the 2001 WTC event is preposterous... they knew about it

why did Bush just sit there after being told??

He should have politely excused himself and shown that he was on top of it...

but most of us know that Cheney was in charge of that administration. Bush didn't do anything that day because he wasn't in control in the first place.



[edit on 14-8-2010 by kalisdad]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Good Govt fanboys will no doubt have problems with your accusations, but I have no doubts at all about Cheney's involvement and probable control of some aspects of operation 9-11.

To be honest, I wouldn't doubt they left Bush out of the loop to allow for plausible deniability and more importantly he just can't be trusted to not say something stupid somewhere if he was given all the details.

Bush was put in a classroom of helpless children when the attack happened, putting aside why the secret service wouldn't instantly remove him after learning the nation was under attack, this was a good place for him. Cheney on the other hand was at the helm giving orders apparently.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 



Who controls the BBC? Why would they want to help cover up on behalf of the US government?

And why - for about the thousandth time - would the people who blew up the tower want to announce it on the news? What would be the point?



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   
As usual the theory is nice but convincing people is the hard part.

I have watched some footage of 9/11 and listened to various "experts" for both sides of the argument. I am still undecided and I am still suspicious when people try so hard to convince people of one thing or another.

People like Michael Moore do not help and people like Alex Jones just fear monger. So somewhere within their BS is a glimmer of the truth.

What we need to do is look between two lies. They say its the best place to find the truth!!!



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy
 


Thanks for still trying to get the word out.. But lets face it..

THey GOT away with it!

Hands down.. Those who planned and acted upon the events of 911 got off scott free!!

There will be no justice.. Its just the way of this world..

So we sit back, and watch the world kill itself.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
New Yorkers will not respond well to being reminded in ads about what many of them are still suffering PTSD over. One friend of mine, who now lives in Chicago, recently commented on her Facebook page about how an airshow there, with low-flying planes was giving her flashbacks and PTSD issues.

All this will do will antagonize people and piss them off. Big waste of money.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by kalisdad
 



Who controls the BBC? Why would they want to help cover up on behalf of the US government?

And why - for about the thousandth time - would the people who blew up the tower want to announce it on the news? What would be the point?


I have no clue who controls the BBC

why cover up on behalf of the govenrment? its there job to report what they are told to report... otherwise they have no job

-
the 'official' reports at the Murrah building, at the time of the bombing, were that there were multiple explosive devices on scene

'someone' told them that they had to ignore that and talk about a truck bomb

every following report told us that a truck bomb blew up the Murrah building
-

I can't know for sure why they would announce it before it happend, but I am willing to bet the 5 hour differance in time zones, someone did some bad math that day...

but that doesn't change the fact that the BBC announced that building 7 had collapsed before it did. Even while they had a reporter on scene, showing building 7 behind her, they were announcing it. I find it hard to believe that they made an error in the report, but mysteriously the building came down just as they said it had. (and conviently the BBC lost the footage of this blunder)

its insane how many people refuse to open their eyes and do some thinking and reasoning on their own... they would rather choke on the offical story that is fed to them, by people who have shown repeatedly that we can't trust them.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
All this will do will antagonize people and piss them off. Big waste of money.


Too late for millions of Americans, we are already pissed off, and at the cowardly bunch who are too apathetic or "traumatized" to take responsibility for their leaders as they should.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
While you're at it, be sure to remind all the New Yorkers that the planes they saw hitting the towers were all holograms and the WTC was really brought down by nukes in the basement. After all, if you're going to (cough cough) educate people on "material they don't know" then you might as well educate them on all the material you conspiracy people have.

Or, are you going to invoke censorship and only allow New Yorkers to know the material you yourself want them to know?


Wow, for the first post after the o.p., wouldn't it be nice if you had something logical or that made some sense, instead of the sarcastic drivel you wrote.


Posts should contribute to the discussion, right mods? Do ¥our jobs, why doncha?



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by kalisdad
 



Who controls the BBC? Why would they want to help cover up on behalf of the US government?

And why - for about the thousandth time - would the people who blew up the tower want to announce it on the news? What would be the point?


First off, any thing one might say about the BBC/Bldg 7 story is going to be pure speculation, other than noting that it happened. The fact that it happened is just one more anomaly in a very strange day, which makes it suspicious, or at least interesting.

Now, my speculation on the significance of this anomaly is that it suggests to me that there could have been a timetable preset for the events of the day, unknown to the talking heads of TV, but not to the news show producers and/or directors. If such a timetable existed, then that would be a smoking gun that the event was planned and orchestrated by TPTB, with help and collusion from the main stream media.

Again, pure speculation on my part.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad
I have no clue who controls the BBC

I can't know for sure why they would announce it before it happend


This is kind of key, wouldn't you say?

You're happy to sling around the idea that BBC journalists were complicit in murder, but you can't be bothered to even look into the command structure of the organisation.

And you can't come up with single reason why a criminal conspiracy would announce its acts on TV. Why not just let the building fall - why bother with a press release? The collapse will be reported anyway. And even if it's not, so what? Why would they want to publicise it's destruction and risk an error like this? Why would they want to involve more conspirators in the shape of news crews? It just makes no sense.

On that basis it seems much more likely to me that they erroneously relayed the Reuters wire reports that said the building was about to fall.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by without_prejudice
 


Fair enough. Any discussion of this is bound to be speculative, unless BBC reporters (who, it's alleged here have been threatened with their jobs) come forward. Indeed it's notable that that hasn't happened, but that's another issue.

I just can't credit that a criminal conspiracy would allow such a timetable into the hands of a foreign news agency. How would those wires cross? And if the BBC are controlled, surely it would be easy to stop such a report going out?

The report seems to me something that looks odd on first viewing, but as soon as one thinks about it for any length of time it actually almost makes a conspiracy less likely.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Regarding the BBC's actions on that day, I once again refer you to www.bbc.co.uk...

The particular program they did on this, Conspiracy Files: The Third Tower even had an interview with the particular reporter, who explained what had happened. It can be found on Google Video (amongst other places).



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

Repeating a bold faced lie ad infinitum doesn't now or ever will make it fact.

Apparently, you need a flashlight to find your way around in the daylight.

LOOK at the evidence. Not the manufactured press releases. You are not a Patriot. Your Country has been stolen and it has NOthing to do with Arabs or Martians from Outerspace.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by LifeInDeath
New Yorkers will not respond well to being reminded in ads about what many of them are still suffering PTSD over. One friend of mine, who now lives in Chicago, recently commented on her Facebook page about how an airshow there, with low-flying planes was giving her flashbacks and PTSD issues.

All this will do will antagonize people and piss them off. Big waste of money.


They need resolution or they will suffer their entire lives. As of now the crimes are unsolved and therefore they cannot have resolution no matter how much they want.

Being reminded is something that will help drive people to desire a resolution. It sucks the government is not willing to provide it and get it over with.

Never fear, we found out about Pearl Harbor, we'll find out about this.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by jprophet420]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 





Never feel, we found out about Pearl Harbor, we'll find out about this.



Are you implying that Pearl Harbor was an inside job?

Many have asserted that, and there is even some evidence indicating at the very least that some poor decision making and early warnings were ignored.

If that is what you are implying, then do you actually think that the average American knows about those rumors?

IT certainly is not common knowledge, and even among Conspiracy Theorists it is doubtful that it was intentionally botched.

There are mountains, and mountains of more significant evidence that something fishy happend on 9/11. If we use Pearl Harbor as an example, then we will never know the truth, and sadly that is exactly what I expect.

The Truth does not always set you free, nor is it always the best answer. Knowing the truth might just cause more heartache, civil unrest, and anguish. While I do seek the truth, I often question whether or not releasing the truth to the masses would be a good thing.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by jprophet420
 





Never fear, we found out about Pearl Harbor, we'll find out about this.



Are you implying that Pearl Harbor was an inside job?

Many have asserted that, and there is even some evidence indicating at the very least that some poor decision making and early warnings were ignored.

If that is what you are implying, then do you actually think that the average American knows about those rumors?

IT certainly is not common knowledge, and even among Conspiracy Theorists it is doubtful that it was intentionally botched.

There are mountains, and mountains of more significant evidence that something fishy happend on 9/11. If we use Pearl Harbor as an example, then we will never know the truth, and sadly that is exactly what I expect.

The Truth does not always set you free, nor is it always the best answer. Knowing the truth might just cause more heartache, civil unrest, and anguish. While I do seek the truth, I often question whether or not releasing the truth to the masses would be a good thing.


It was FOIA'd actually. I don't care who or how many know about it, only that those that want to can. And Pearl Harbor has a lot to do with 911 for the record;

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


I went to your thread, and in my opinion that doesn't even begin to compare. Baiting Japan into attacking a juicy target is much different than actually planning, paying for, and executing the attack yourself. Attacking docked military ships at a remote location is different than attacking civilians in your biggest urban center. Joining an ongoing war is different than creating not only a new war, but a whole new type of war where your enemy is undefined and you have carte blanch to attack anywhere and everywhere.

The two scenarios are not comparable. Also, you said yourself that the documents were immediately reclassified, and the truth is not known by the public.

If they won't release the truth about the relative innocuous activities leading up to Pearl Harbor after 60 years, then you better believe they will NEVER release any info about 9/11.

Although, I contend that the official report writers have already released the truth, but the spin doctors are too good at publicizing a summary that does not fit the actual data. Most will never know, or ever be able to read the official report and see that the truth is all there, and the public has chosen to believe the marketing instead of the research.




top topics



 
41
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join