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.

 

The Third Tower

page: 11
23
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


becuase you don't want to accept that your conspiracy claims are rubbish= opinion.


Because?


The conspiracies of the OS of 911 that a “few” of you cling too are completely rubbish and their opinions are, in desperately trying to support the proven lies. How does that work for you Dave?


-Your accusing NYFD deputy chief Peter Hayden of lying to cover up some some conspiracy that killed 343 of his brother firefighters entirely because


How about proving me wrong with some real evidence, instead of posting OS, hogwash claims?




posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


A better description would be "professional judgement" - result of years of hard won experience

I heard Chief Hayden along with several other FDNY chiefs at a seminar shortly after 9/11 describe their actions
that date

From the decison to withdraw the men from WTC 7 because of lack of water and concerns about building stability
to the setting up of the transit to watch the building and realizatuion that WTC 7 was begginning to "creep" or
move out of plumb and the subsequent decision to create collapse zone around it.

All were in accordance with FDNY procedures and with "best practices of fire fighting" as laid down by the NFPA
and other organizations

We all know the IMPRESSME lives in a truther fantasy world where anything that conflicts with his fantasy
is automatically dismissed as fakes or lies.....



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 



A shadow? Really? A straight down the middle shadow that can somehow be seen through the smoke but not on the smoke. That is some magic shadow. Strange how we dont see the shadow appearing on the smoke covering the wall, but somehow a shadow is cast as a straight line on the wall directly. Are you starting to drift into an alternate reality impressme?


Yes, a shadow, you see what you want to see. A straight line yes, that’s why we know it couldn’t be a gash with a perfect straight line, “priceless.” Only someone desperate into believing the OS would cling to that myth.

At lease you admitted to a straight line.


I guess you are going to tell us that WTC 1 fell on WTC 7 leaving the most perfect straight line in the shadow. WTC 1 exploded in every direction, down, outward, upward, across, sideways, in every direction. So tell me, what would put a perfect straight line from top to bottom on WTC 7? It would be possible for some parts of WTC1 being blasted into WTC 7, however it would not leave a straight line gash. “impossible”

Why don’t you show us a clear photo of this alleged gash like all the other photos that show real damaged and close ups?



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman


We all know the IMPRESSME lives in a truther fantasy world where anything that conflicts with his fantasy
is automatically dismissed as fakes or lies.....


This is about the single most ignorant statement I have read yet to date on ATS regarding 9/11.
IMPRESSME....well lets just say, impresses me with his knowledge, and ability to back up what he states with facts. Something that G.O.D., dereks, nor yourself do.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 



We all know the IMPRESSME lives in a truther fantasy world where anything that conflicts with his fantasy
is automatically dismissed as fakes or lies.....


Wow, You have “never” presented any credible evidence in supporting the OS just your opinions, nothing else. (truther fantasy world) So presenting the truth and credible sources and credible science is living in a fantasy world?

It is obvious that you have nothing credible to fight with, only your opinions so taking stabs at ridiculing me is all you have, this speaks volumes.

If you would put more time in researching the real facts of 911, instead of using ATS 911 threads as your entertainment of posting obtrusive posts against all Truthers, then perhaps people might take you seriously.


I heard Chief Hayden along with several other FDNY chiefs at a seminar shortly after 9/11 describe their actions
that date


Yes, we all have heard something. So tell me who is lying Berry or Hayden because both stories contradict each other?



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


Facts ?????

Seen lots of half baked opinions, but little hard evidence

Care to provide some ......?



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by DIDtm
 


Facts ?????

Seen lots of half baked opinions, but little hard evidence

Care to provide some ......?


From which side??
Haven't seen many provable facts from the trusters..
Just attacks on posters..
You got some facts??



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


becuase you don't want to accept that your conspiracy claims are rubbish= opinion.


Because?


I don't know why you do this, you tell me. You're the one who has this unrepentently dishonest double standard, not me. I accept the testimony of people like Barry Jennings and William Rodriguez as credible, while YOU accuse people like deputy NYFD chief Hayden of being secret disinformation agents entirely becuase they're saying things that contradict your conspiracy stories.

All you're doing is making up childish excuses off the top of your head for why you don't have to accept what they're saying. Even more repulsive, you've become so hypnotized by your preposterous conspiracy stories that you don't even realize you're accusing Hayden of being involved in the murder of 343 of his brother firefighters.



How about proving me wrong with some real evidence, instead of posting OS, hogwash claims?


How about backing up your claim that Deputy Chief Peter Hayden's eyewitness account is, "OS, hogwash claims"? He was physically there and you weren't. Neither, I should add, were your friends Dylan Avery or Alex Jones.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 



Yes, a shadow, you see what you want to see. A straight line yes, that’s why we know it couldn’t be a gash with a perfect straight line, “priceless.”


You CAN'T be serious . Oh wait , yes you are .

A gash can't produce a straight line ?
But something invisible , that no one can see , can produce a shadow ?


Here's a little something to "impress" you . Take a knife and stab it into a wall in your house . Wow , ain't that amazing how that leaves a straight-line gash in the wall ? Who'da thunk it ?

Now , please show us how an invisible object will cast a shadow . Hell , it don't even have to be a straight shadow , just show us how that works .

Gashes can't leave straight lines ...
That's priceless !
edit on 30-11-2010 by okbmd because: corrections



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

Interesting rant, to bad most of it is not true Dave. *Fact* Dave you have been on these 911 boards for some time, spewing nothing but your loathing against all truthers, and always rejecting every piece of credible evidence including all the science. You have demonstrated repeatedly that there is no conspiracy to 911; in fact, you have proven yourself to be “pseudo skeptic.”


I do *not* spew loathing against you trusters. I reserve my loathing against the unrepentent con artists manufacturing this bovine scatology and passing it off on those damned fool conspiracy web sites. I have shown many times how Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin, et al are lying through their teeth for personal financial gain and I will show it to you again if you so desire. You yourselves are simply the victims in their con and I'm simply trying to point out that your trust in these con artists is unfounded.

Come on now, seriously, doesn't is seem a little odd that the self styled Paul Reveres giving you all your information on these preposterous conspiracy stories have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING concrete in the past nine years except sell baseball caps and t-shirts?


I agree with the “faked crash” at Shanksville, and yes I am a stanch supporter of that particular conspiracy. You and some of the OS defenders have never been able to prove the government OS of Shanksville was true, and yes I am convince a missile hit the Pentagon and you and your friends here have “never” been able to disprove it much less prove a Boeing crashed in the Pentagon.


This is a false statement. We have shown many times it was a Boeing that hit the Pentagon, from photographic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony. The problem for you isn't that there isn't any evidence. The problem is that you don't want to believe the evidence that a Boeing hit the Pentagon so you'll play all sorts of desperate denial games like accusing everyone of being a disinformation agent, demanding to know the exact name of the photographer who took a particular photo, and ridiculous arguments over the definition of airplane vs. aircraft. Do you remember those exchanges with me? I certainly do.


As far as your ridiculous”10,000 secret disinformation agents everywhere, etc” You show one post anywhere on ATS were I made that claim? This is what separates you and I Dave when it comes to presenting the truth, I do not have to make up lies as you have just demonstrated against his opponent into trying to prove your case, the truth stands on its own merit and that’s something you cannot ignore.


Who the heck are you trying to fool? Impressme, there is no flipping way you can deny you've accused everyone from fire fighters to military officials to eyewitnesses out by the Pentagon of lying to promote some massive coverup. Not this morrning you've accused Deputy NYFD chief Peter Hayden out by WTC 7 of lying to promote a coverup. In case this is all some game to you and it hasn't dawned on you...and apparently it hasn't...you are necessarily accusing them all of being involved in the conspiracy, and the more people you accuse of lying, the larger the tally of co-conspirators adds up.

Let's settle this once and for all- after 9/11 we gave our intelligence showing that 9/11 was an Al Qaida attack to our NATO allies, and after comparing it with what their own intelligence services were finding out, NATO invoked article 5 in the first time in history. Either our NATO allies...thousands and thousands and thousands of people... are certifying it was genuinely a terrorist attack, or, they're lying to promote the coverup too. Which is it?

It's one thing to want answers to questions you legitimately may have, but it's another thing entirely to be such a near-religious zealot that you want to mold reality to your liking in order to accomodate your conspiracy stories.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You're the one who has this unrepentently dishonest double standard, not me. I accept the testimony of people like Barry Jennings and William Rodriguez as credible, while YOU accuse people like deputy NYFD chief Hayden of being secret disinformation agents entirely becuase they're saying things that contradict your conspiracy stories.


Fact, I never accused deputy NYFD chief Hayden of being secret “disinformation agents.”

Because?


Fact, Because NYFD chief Hayden or Berry Jennings story contradict with one another.
This is not about ”my conspiracy story.”


All you're doing is making up childish excuses off the top of your head for why you don't have to accept what they're saying.


Childish excuses?

It’s really interesting that you will not ask me what part of the story that is contradicting?
I believe you know. Insulting me and making up fallacies about what I think is the best you can do in defending your OS fairytale?


Even more repulsive, you've become so hypnotized by your preposterous conspiracy stories that you don't even realize you're accusing Hayden of being involved in the murder of 343 of his brother firefighters.


Interesting spin Dave, however, if it turns out that NYFD chief Hayden and not Berry Jennings is lying, then yes it would be fare to say he was helping the perpetrators by helping to bury the truth by lying, wouldn’t you agree?


How about backing up your claim that Deputy Chief Peter Hayden's eyewitness account is, "OS, hogwash claims"? He was physically there and you weren't. Neither, I should add, were your friends Dylan Avery or Alex Jones.


Dave all you have to do is read their reports to see the contradictions I am not going to waste my time doing your research for you, and it wouldn’t do any good to discuses these contradictions with you, because ”as always” you will reject them as “none existence” when the evidence is starring you right in your face.

You are correct that I was not at the WTC Dave, but neither were you.
Either you have a reading comprehension problem, or you have completely forgot what I wrote I am not a follower of Dylan Avery or Alex Jones, and you know that.


Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave

I am well aware that the information I post here will be met with resistance amongst the more zealous of Dylan Avery's and Alex Jones' followers, but for *you* to be discounted by your fellow conspiracy theorists here, well, that takes you to a whole other sublevel of [censored] poor credibility, doesn't it?

I would like to clear up a myth that you have invented again Dave, I am no followers of Dylan Avery's and Alex Jones' never have been and never will. I can think for myself, I do not need to be a cheerleader for someone else, especially when I do not agree with many of their theories.


Dylan Avery's and Alex Jones' are not my friends.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I do *not* spew loathing against you trusters.


Ok Dave, your nice to all truthers, is that what you want everyone to believe?


I reserve my loathing against the unrepentent con artists manufacturing this bovine scatology and passing it off on those damned fool conspiracy web sites.


Sure Dave, you are kind to all truthers.


I have shown many times how Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin, et al are lying through their teeth for personal financial gain and I will show it to you again if you so desire.


Moving the goal post again Dave? The thread not about Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin.


You yourselves are simply the victims in their con and I'm simply trying to point out that your trust in these con artists is unfounded.


Let me clear this up right now. You are not a psychiatrist so you have no business in giving advice on one mental state. You do not know what I believe in, or what my research consist of, or where I go to get all my information. You Dave, do not know me, you do not know what kind of education I have, or what I do for a living, or who my friends are. You Dave, do not know who I am, only what I want you to know.

I can assure you that I am no victim of my research, however I am qualify to say that you are a victim of the OS of 911and the proven lies that have been exposed and you ignorantly continue to support them.


Come on now, seriously, doesn't is seem a little odd that the self styled Paul Reveres giving you all your information on these preposterous conspiracy stories have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING concrete in the past nine years except sell baseball caps and t-shirts?


We live in a capital society what is wrong in websites making money, it is very expensive to run and operated and update some of these sites. Do you have a problem with ATS making money? You use ATS do you think the owners do all this work for free? They have every right to make money. Just because a website is making money it doesn’t mean the information on that particular website is all lies, as you like to put it Dave.


This is a false statement. We have shown many times it was a Boeing that hit the Pentagon, from photographic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony.


I completely disagree, you were shown photos of airplane parts with no chain of evidence to who, what, where, when, how, all these photos were taken, all it proves they are photos.
As far as I am concern, they are photos of bone yard debris from different airplanes and different parts, these photos are meaningless and would never hold up in any court of law as evidence.

Eye witness testimony are always in question, it is hearsay information. Are there witness with other motives we don’t really know, but for every witness you can come up with, I can come up with witness that say the opposite.


The problem for you isn't that there isn't any evidence.


Wrong Dave, you have absolutely no evidence to prove your OS claims, your OS does not stand up to scrutiny. As for evidence Dave, how do you explain a small entry whole at the Pentagon with the window not broken on each side and above of the impact area?
How do you explain the earlier photos taken of no airplane debris on the front lawn of the Pentagon, and then in later photos same angles, there are airplane debris? None of you OS defenders can answer these questions, but only give your opinions.


The problem is that you don't want to believe the evidence that a Boeing hit the Pentagon so you'll play all sorts of desperate denial games like accusing everyone of being a disinformation agent, demanding to know the exact name of the photographer who took a particular photo and ridiculous arguments over the definition of airplane vs. aircraft.


Wrong again Dave, it’s not that anyone doesn’t want to believe. It is none of you OS defenders have showing any credible proof that the alleged planes are said aircraft, or that the crash debris belongs to said aircraft, there are no serial numbers to be match to said aircraft. The problem you have Dave is you want people to take the word from people in our government as truth, when there is evidence that proves they are lying and covering up a crime. The proof is, no one cannot get any information on these alleged airplanes under the FOIA, the FBI flat out refuses to release any information and they have giving ridiculous excuses to why they will not. You should know this Dave, had you done your research.

As far as playing the denial game Dave, that game is played by the OS believers and that is a fact Dave. The OS believers give their opinions to what they think happened on 911 and want everyone to accept them as fact.


Do you remember those exchanges with me? I certainly do.


I remember exchanges to what you think, and nothing else.


Who the heck are you trying to fool? Impressme, there is no flipping way you can deny you've accused everyone from fire fighters to military officials to eyewitnesses out by the Pentagon of lying to promote some massive coverup.


Dave your desperation is showing again, I have not accused everyone of being a liar, you certainly like to embellish everything Dave. The fact is, I support the NYC Firemen, NYC Police, NYC First responders, how can you say something like that Dave.

Being a Truther one “must” keep an open mind Dave. Dave do you have an open mind?


Not this morrning you've accused Deputy NYFD chief Peter Hayden out by WTC 7 of lying to promote a coverup.


We have already covered this Dave, now you are repeating yourself again.


In case this is all some game to you


A game? Dave, do you think digging through a mountain of proven lies to find the truth is a game? Dave, do you think 911 is a game?


and it hasn't dawned on you...and apparently it hasn't...you are necessarily accusing them all of being involved in the conspiracy, and the more people you accuse of lying, the larger the tally of co-conspirators adds up.


Balance Dave, you lack balance. Do you see the insanity you are writing in here Dave, now you are being completely ridiculous? Dave, it is either all, or none and no in between. Again Dave, you and I have already covered this.


Let's settle this once and for all- after 9/11 we gave our intelligence showing that 9/11 was an Al Qaida attack to our NATO allies, and after comparing it with what their own intelligence services were finding out, NATO invoked article 5 in the first time in history. Either our NATO allies...thousands and thousands and thousands of people... are certifying it was genuinely a terrorist attack, or, they're lying to promote the coverup too. Which is it?


Yes Dave, I have, let’s clear this up I have told you and everyone were I stand on 911, or have you forgotten already?

I have made it “very clear” that there is enough circumstantial evidence that points to a false flag operation, done by a handful of experts inside our government, and covered up by our government with the help of our media, weather they knew anything or not.

As far as information about AL Qaida, and our intelligence plenty of it was proven to be a lie, like your WMD, phony intelligence to justify going to war.

Both countries, Afghanistan and Iraqi are now one of the worst corrupt unstable governments that we have helped set up.


It's one thing to want answers to questions you legitimately may have, but it's another thing entirely to be such a near-religious zealot that you want to mold reality to your liking in order to accomodate your conspiracy stories.


Mold reality to my liking, to accommodate a conspiracy story?

Dave, let me make this very clear, the truth does not need molding it doesn’t need any zealot accommodation to be preserve, the Truth Dave stands on it own merit, weather you like it or not. You can not make the Truth go away; no matter how hard you try to twist it and embellished it, to your liking.

edit on 30-11-2010 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Why bother??
It's like trying to convince a McDonalds manager that Big Macs are not very healthy..
Not gonna happen..



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
you were shown photos of airplane parts with no chain of evidence to who, what, where, when, how, all these photos were taken, all it proves they are photos.
As far as I am concern, they are photos of bone yard debris from different airplanes and different parts, these photos are meaningless and would never hold up in any court of law as evidence.


You are so funny, you demand a chain of evidence for the fact that a plane hit the Pentagon as it destroys your silly conspiracy theory, but you do not demand the same chain of evidence for the dust that Jones used to falsely claim he found thermite.


Pentagon with the window not broken on each side and above of the impact area?


Obviously you have no clue at all of what those windows are made from


How do you explain the earlier photos taken of no airplane debris on the front lawn of the Pentagon, and then in later photos same angles, there are airplane debris?


Yet another truther lie, that has been explained to you several times before, the photo's were NOT taken from the same position, and you have obviously never heard of perspective.


None of you OS defenders can answer these questions,


They HAVE been answered here many times before, but as the answers destroy your silly conspiracy theory, you totally ignore them!


there are no serial numbers to be match to said aircraft.


Oh dear, yet another truther lie, a serial number match HAS been shown here, but again you totally ignore it!


edit on 30/11/10 by dereks because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


Don't suppose you have a better theory of where the engines got to ?
Weedwhacker's idea doesn't make sense really..

Ya know, them 2 x 7' wide, 3500kg cylinder things that were still dishing out thrust when they hit the wall at around 500 mph..



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Don't suppose you have a better theory of where the engines got to ?


Pictures of them have been shown here before - once again truthers refuse to look at facts that destroy their silly conspiracy theories!



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by backinblack
Don't suppose you have a better theory of where the engines got to ?


Pictures of them have been shown here before - once again truthers refuse to look at facts that destroy their silly conspiracy theories!


Pictures? I saw one pic of a part that looked way too small IMO to be a part of that plane..

BTW, I'm not a truther..I'd like to know the truth but that's not the same thing..
So, have you got pics of both engines or not??
And where did the engines end up after impact??



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 



How do you explain the earlier photos taken of no airplane debris on the front lawn of the Pentagon, and then in later photos same angles, there are airplane debris?


Why don't you post these photos that show no debris , as well as the photos that show the debris , from the same angles , so that we all can see this anomaly ? Put up or shut up .

While you are at it please explain to everyone here how a shadow can be cast by an invisible object , and please show us some science that validates your claim that a gash can't leave a straight line .

Myself , I have no need to question your level of education or intellectual capacity .That is self-evident from your posts .



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
So, have you got pics of both engines or not??
And where did the engines end up after impact??


Why should I post them again here, just so you can ignore them once again?> Do some research



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by backinblack
So, have you got pics of both engines or not??
And where did the engines end up after impact??


Why should I post them again here, just so you can ignore them once again?> Do some research


lol, I have mate..Haven't seen much of the 7000kgs of engines pictured..
Thought you may have something I haven't seen but obviously you don't..

And I just don't see the 75' hole everyone is talking about..



edit on 30-11-2010 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join