Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

9/11, THE CASE FOR TRUTH: Part 1; The Build up to September 11th 2001

page: 2
80
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 29 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Nice work kiwi....

I feel sorry for dave and weedy and hooper etc.....it must be a hellava decision to take employment as they have chosen to.....one can only surmise that the depressed state in the US means "desperate measures need desperate actions".....and theres bucket-loads of desperation there!!

You all suit each other though....


And its good that you are stickin' together thru thick and thin...

I wouldnt employ you though.....too sneaky and underhanded for my line of work.




posted on Oct, 29 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Incorporate the fact into your conspiracy claims as you see fit.

Let's incorporate fact into your (the official) conspiracy claims, shall we?

-- FACT: the beginning of the NIST report states that nothing in their report can be taken as factual or be used as evidence in a court of law.

Why? They used guesses, theories, and made-up computer calculations to try to explain how three WTC towers collapsed on 9/11 which can't be held up to scrutiny in a court of law.

What trusters fail to realize is that since the NIST report cannot be taken as factual, then it is not a fact that three WTC towers were not brought down with explosives. It's only a theory, period.

What's more believable:

1.) A government-paid agency that uses guesses, theories, and computer calculations, but admits their findings can't be used as evidence in a court of law.

or

2.) The witnesses and first responders who were there that testified to seeing/hearing the exact signs of controlled demolitions in the form of timed booms and flashes going up, down and around both towers with popping or exploding sounds associated with the flashes.

Plus, what we can see with our own eyes:







Plus, the continuously growing list of architects, engineers, scientists, victims' family members, and others from every corner of the world, that are speaking out about the official (unprovable) conspiracy theory.


I'll pick #2 any day of the week because I'm smarter than that. Are you?



S&F to the OP for the work making this thread.






edit on 29-10-2010 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   
This has all gotten really OLD. Don't get me wrong, I thank any and everyone who LOOKS into the disaster, but its the same people argueing the SAME points and counter points, over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. I used to think it was good, and that persuasion would be swayed towards a new investigation, but no, its not.

Humanity lost a long time ago, we are just grasping at straws. This constant circle of the same disagreements makes me think you are all disinformers. Some of you phrase your wording in such a beaurocratic way, and others in a very vague way, but you all just bicker and repeat yourselves. Sometimes I don't even know whos argueing what point anymore. This has gotten very OLD. This arguement will not be won on a conspiracy forum, or in a textbook, or even in congress, but in the streets, one sad day. But we all missed that day.. A long long time ago.



posted on Oct, 29 2010 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Sorry to burst your bubble, but 80% of this, from Northwoods, to the ISI to the presidential briefings are straight out of Loose Change. I distinctly recognize the cover of the terrorism study referencing the 1993 WTC terrorist attack that Dylan Avery used to insinuate as being some sinister hint of the 9/11 attack, exactly the same way you're doing. There isn't anything you're providing here that hasn't been presented already many times previously.

This of course does nothing to address the fact this is still 100% innuendo dropping. Implosions leave blatant signs of sabotage on the steel and hordes of steel workers cleaning up the wreckage at ground zero...many of them being the ones who helped build the thing to begin with...say there was no such thing there. Thus, the towers were NOT brought down by implosion so two plus two still equals four regardless of how much evidence you present to make it look like it really equals five.

Incorporate the fact into your conspiracy claims as you see fit.




So you start out with an attack on loose change, which is typical since we know how much you hate that documentary. Then you don't even dismiss the fact that the terrorism study showed the WTC in cross hairs, but rather you ad hominem attack Dylan Avery (part and parcel with your hatred of loose change) by saying he used it sinisterly, as if he should have just ignored the fact that the Bush administration said there were no prior warnings and yet a terrorism study shows the WTC in cross hairs. I'm sorry but Dylan Avery doesn't ignore the facts like you do. If nothing new is being presented, why is it that it has 20+ flags? If nothing new is being presented, why do you care? It would make sense for a conspiracy theorist to come to a conspiracy theorist website in order to talk about conspiracy theories, but you are coming to a conspiracy theorist website to dismiss conspiracy theories, LIKE IT'S YOUR JOB, much like an atheist has no business in a religion/spirituality chat room yet here you are, day after day, almost as if this is your job to come here and spout your tired old semantics like...

"hordes of steel workers cleaning up the wreckage at ground zero...many of them being the ones who helped build the thing to begin with...say there was no such thing there. "

How many times are you going to repeat this blatant lie? The clean up workers committed a crime called tampering with evidence of a crime scene, so the clean up workers were not like the fire fighters, average americans who went out to do their country a service. The fire fighters reported hearing explosions, meanwhile the clean up workers were hired by the government in order to cover up the tracks, so obviously they wouldn't talk about damage to steel, which there was by the way, the molten metal. And how ridiculous it is to say the clean up workers were the same people who built the buildings? Where do you get this nonsense from? Why would they hire the same people who built the buildings to clean it up? Because they are the only ones qualified enough to clean up the debris, since they built it? Your logic is hilarious. The towers were finished in 1970, so given the average age of the builders at the time to be 30-35, these clean up workers must have been 60-66 years old, what, did they have a special come-out-of-retirement event to clean up the building they built? I'm going to laugh myself to sleep with that statement. Of course the clean up workers couldn't find evidence of tampering, they were 60 years old! "many of them being the ones who helped build the thing to begin with" just priceless. By the way, the real builders of the towers said they were built to withstand airplane impacts.

So how is it that you have time to be on here so much? It's almost like it's your job.
edit on 29-10-2010 by Lord Jules because: emphasis on how hilarious it is to assume the clean up workers were also the ones to build the buildings.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Well done Lord Jules
You ripped the heart out of his "arguements".... was realy stupid to say the ppl. who built it were the clean up ppl.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Wow, hats off to you, my friend! It's refreshing to see a quality post, well laid out, sans grammatical and spelling errors. Flagged and added to my favorites. Well done.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 04:01 AM
link   
BY the way, I gave you your 4000th star.


Second line says "Hello Mods."



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


Although I appreciate your point, this can never get old. You see, every year more and more people start questioning the official story of 9/11 and the events that followed. This can never get old, it may take another 20 years but the fact is, we can never forget and we can never forgive until the truth is told to the masses.

9/11 wasn't just a single event in history, it was a catalyst to large series of events that has only just begun.

You think that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the only outcome? Think again man, this is just the start.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



This of course does nothing to address the fact this is still 100% innuendo dropping. Implosions leave blatant signs of sabotage on the steel and hordes of steel workers cleaning up the wreckage at ground zero...many of them being the ones who helped build the thing to begin with...


Hey Dave, I didn’t see 80 year old men in wheel chairs cleaning up ground zero did we miss something here? Dave were is your “proof” that the builders were the clean up crew at ground zero?



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   
You are expressing many of the same thoughts and questions which I have had since Sept. 11, 2001.

I would like to point out one thing of which you may not have been aware, or may have simply overlooked within all your research.

You included a statement from the CIA which denied any link to Bin laden. If you would Google "tim Osman", you may be surprised at what you find...(ie)..www.livevideo.com/.../9-11-coincidences-tim-osman-.aspx

I know there are those who will try to debunk any point we make and I am not making a statement of any belief in the O S or some deep dark conspiracy, I will, however, continue to ask questions until all possible questions are answered.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 09:27 AM
link   





posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Hey Great post, Ive learned a bit that i didnt know before... But What about the "Power Downs" in the week prior to 9/11 also? And wasnt one of Bushes close relatives(brother or cousin) doing security at the WTC towers during 9/11 when those power downs happened?

Lord Jules, that post was priceless...



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Thanks for the link to the Frontline piece on John Oneill. Nice to see hear the story from people that knew him. I do think another story from FBI whistle blower SIbel Edmonds needs to be added.


Google Video Link


Also, don't forget the missing trillions that was never mentioned again. I do believe those records were destroyed, miraculously, by the events of 9/11. It's just a coincidence, though, really nothing to bother with, nudge nudge wink wink say no more.




posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Everybody know the official story doesnt add up, who is going to do something about it...

The media wont cover the fight for the truth... I think we are stuck.






edit on 30-10-2010 by conar because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLoony
reply to post by kiwifoot
[Also, don't forget the missing trillions that was never mentioned again. I do believe those records were destroyed, miraculously, by the events of 9/11. It's just a coincidence, though, really nothing to bother with, nudge nudge wink wink say no more.

Bloody hi-larious!


"Never mentioned again", except when they were mentioned 5 months later



Billions of dollars of DoD taxpayer-provided money haven't disappeared, Zakheim said. "Missing" expenditures are often reconciled a bit later in the same way people balance their checkbooks every month. The bank closes out a month and sends its bank statement, he said. In the meanwhile, people write more checks, and so they have to reconcile their checkbook register and the statement.

DoD financial experts, Zakheim said, are making good progress reconciling the department's "lost" expenditures, trimming them from a prior estimated total of $2.3 trillion to $700 billion. And, he added, the amount continues to drop.

www.defense.gov...
edit on 30-10-2010 by roboe because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Great post OP, I have read most before and admire your stance on not taking one. The truth will never come out all we can to is not forget it.

F and S from Gooney



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Another well put together thread Mr. Foot....

I'm still reading it, but so far so good...thanks..



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by roboe
 


Might as well have been "never again". Oh, I see, it's only $700 billion now. So that makes a difference?

It was just recordkeeping, then? Just like the bankers tell us when a discrepancy is found on their books?

"Don't worry, it's just the way we cook, erm, um, keep our books. Nothing to see here, move along......"

Sure.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Oh for god sake give up already. JFK was shot from obvious multiple locations and all these years on you and your government don’t seem to care. Try and solve one overly blatant case before you try another.

The time is gone.

50 years from now not one of you will give a crap, because you will have your own death on your minds.



posted on Oct, 30 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLoony
reply to post by roboe
 


Might as well have been "never again". Oh, I see, it's only $700 billion now. So that makes a difference?

A difference to the tune of $1,6 trillion.

And it shoots a hole through your "they lost the money and never talked about it again".

Want to hear something else I found funny? The story wasn't even new on 9/10 2001. Here's an article from 03/03 2000: hv.greenspun.com...






top topics



 
80
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join