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.

 

50 Facts Concerning 9/11 that Point Away from the OS (The Facts Speak For Themselves)

page: 12
268
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by Cassius666
 


Oh on the contrary. Our military service-members fight for this country and its charter (the Constitution), as opposed to any politician. When a soldier takes the oath, he is swearing to uphold the Constitution, not the wishes of any particular politician,

You may not agree with or understand the orders given to you, but as long as it isn't clearly breaking the Constitution or the law, then you carry out those orders, as it isn't your place to question them. If everyone tried to be the chief, then we wouldn't have a working military at all, therefore you do your job, regardless of any political leanings, beliefs or ideologies you may have. When it comes down to it, you do your job, so long as it is in the confines of your mandate. All else doesn't or shouldn't matter.
--airspoon


Even if that mandate is imposed by leaders whose policies and orders lead to crimes against humanity?

This is what those in the military are in essence doing... protecting the criminals and allowing this disease and evil to flourish.

The military is no longer a force that defends and fights for justice. Those who join and continue to serve under the guise of honor for these criminals aka the PERPS, are nothing more than brainwashed minions who only further the NWO agenda.

What do you call a government that stages attacks against its citizens?

What do you call a government that invades Iraq on 1000 lies?

What do you call a government telling lies about Iran, so they can attack Iran next?

What do you call a government that deploys several thousand tons of weapons of mass destruction?

United States Government are terrorists, war criminals, and horrific liars.

The terrorist United States Government makes any so called terrorist look like a boyscout!

So those who submit to and take orders from such a terrorist government and do so dismissing accountability because they were just following orders, are no better than the nazi soldiers who also claimed to have just been following orders.

The United States was founded on principles dictated by a secret society influenced by the agenda of the Illuminati... do some research on the USA's origins and charters... Its roots are satanic which explains 9/11 quite well the satanic ritual it was.

So those who serve the US government, are serving the Illuminati Zionist 9/11 Perps.


"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." The pioneers of a warless world are the young men (and women) who refuse military service."
- Albert Einstein




posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by elnine
 



Even if that mandate is imposed by leaders whose policies and orders lead to crimes against humanity?


It is not a soldier's place to question his superiors. That duty lies with the American citizen. In essence, the American soldiers follows orders from his chain of command and in turn, that chain of command follows orders from the civilian leadership who then in turn follows orders from the democratically elected government. It is the publics job to ensure that their government is issuing the correct orders. The soldier is only the fingertips of the hand, while the public is the brain and soul. It is ultimately the responsibility of the American citizen to ensure that the soldier has the correct marching orders and if the public doesn't agree with those marching orders, then it is their responsibility to hold government accountable. You would have a completely inneffective military if every soldier played "chief" and only did what he thought was right. Furthermore, you'd have a military dictatorship if the command only did what it thought was right. We take orders from the government who in turn takes orders from the American people. The disconnect that is there, is between the people and their government, not the government and the military or the military and the soldier.

You are placing blame in the wrong place.


The military is no longer a force that defends and fights for justice.


The military is a force that defends the will of the American people, always has been. As of yet, the American will seems to be perfectly fine with the missions that our soldiers are being sent on, as it is the responsibility of the American people to hold their government accountable and they even have all the tools to do so. So far, the American public has proven that they don't really care enough, which is ultimately expressed through their will and carried out by their military.

Again, you place the blame with the wrong entity. If people quit shifting blame, maybe some change could be made. However, until people wake up and take responsibility instead of putting it off on someone or something else, the status quo will remain and we lose.


What do you call a government that stages attacks against its citizens?


I would call it a criminal government. However, let me be very clear here: I'm not yet ready to blame the government for the 9/11 attacks. It hasn't been proven and unlike certain factions within the government, I still believe in the rule of law and our Constitution, thus one is innocent until proven guilty. Sure, I have my main suspects, though I'm not yet willing or ready to throw out the Constitution, which I swore an oath to defend, nor am I willing to subvert the rule of law.

The thing that seperates many so-called "truthers" from "trusters", is that these "truthers" aren't willing to conclude without something being proven. It has not been proven that the government or anyone therein, is guilty of the attacks on 9/11. I think it has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt that certain elements within government are guilty of a cover-up relating to the same, though it has not been proven that they are guilty of the attacks themselves. However and with that being said, enough has been proven to warrant a new investigation and if that investigation is viable, then pensing the results, some people should be prosecuted according to the rule of law and our Constitution.

We can't really say for sure what happened on 9/11, though we can certainly say what didn't happen.



--airspoon



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
For instance, I think we can say for certain that no plane hit the Pentagon. Why? Because there is no wreckage. There is no film of it. And please, dont tell me that those engines evaporated. Why you guys continue to try and defend this obviously flawed scenario only serves to make me question your motives even more.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
For instance, I think we can say for certain that no plane hit the Pentagon. Why? Because there is no wreckage. There is no film of it. And please, dont tell me that those engines evaporated. Why you guys continue to try and defend this obviously flawed scenario only serves to make me question your motives even more.


Hoiw some truthers can talk about " no wreckage " at the Pentagon is absolutely beyond me. This is pathological denial not seeking the " truth ". What is this then , including engine parts ?

www.rense.com...

And were scores of witnesses hallucinating ?



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Yes lets speak about wreckage!

Lets speak about the titanium engines that somehow did not leave a mark on the pentagon and melted!


Or lets talk about how only 5 frames have been released, none showing a 757.

and you want to bring up witnesses?
I have plenty of them for you hear that the OS is wrong
www.citizeninvestigationteam.com...

The charade is dissolving!



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
Yes lets speak about wreckage!

Lets speak about the titanium engines that somehow did not leave a mark on the pentagon and melted!


Or lets talk about how only 5 frames have been released, none showing a 757.

and you want to bring up witnesses?
I have plenty of them for you hear that the OS is wrong
www.citizeninvestigationteam.com...

The charade is dissolving!


Is it not a fact that the CitizenInvestigationTeam witnesses, such as they are, and who were in a position to see, say that the jetliner impacted the Pentagon ?

Is there a CIT witness who saw the plane fly over the Pentagon as CIT wish to allege ?



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 



Yes lets speak about wreckage!

Plenty of it on 9/11!

Lets speak about the titanium engines that somehow did not leave a mark on the pentagon and melted!

Well - go ahead and speak. Is there a factual basis for your hyperbole or are you just stating that because YOU didn't see a mark, then of course there was no "mark", and as we all know, you are the measure of all things.

Or lets talk about how only 5 frames have been released, none showing a 757.

Or lets talk about the process wherein they were ordering the cameras to record the comings and goings at a parking lot gate they had to chose between paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a high speed recorder to capture every nuance of movement of the guy delivering the bagels or maybe go with slightly cheaper model that only takes a frame every second or so. Which way to go on that one I wonder.

and you want to bring up witnesses?

Don't have to, there are plenty that saw the plane crash into the Pentagon.

I have plenty of them for you hear that the OS is wrong
citizeninvestigationteam

And if I am not mistaken all of them saw the plane crash into the Pentagon.

The charade is dissolving!

To quote Sarah Palin, "You betcha"!



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 

Lets speak about the titanium engines that somehow did not leave a mark on the pentagon and melted.

There was derby, everywhere. It was scattered all across the lawn. Loads of it. As for the titanium engines, they were immediately vaporised by the fuel tank explosion (before they hit the wall) explaining why there are no marks. The fuel tank didn't vaporise the aluminium body though, which crumpled up, acting like a bullet, penetrating a clean circular hole through 3 of the Pentagon rings. Sure, not one camera picked up the plane, but the evidence that a 757 hit the Pentagon is still overwhelming and conspiracy people are crazy for doubting it.
edit on 13-12-2010 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 


Oh, crap....yes, crap. WHY is this same crap getting repeated? Do people never do any research for themselves?? They merely parrot from the crackpot "conspiracy" websites that infest the Web??


Lets speak about the titanium engines that somehow did not leave a mark on the pentagon and melted!


"titanium" engines???

First...did you look up what titanium is, and WHY it's used in (some...not ALL) engine components?

For some reason, those who never bother to actually learn, seem to think that titanium is some "magic metal" and is incredibly strong, or something.

Quick!! Which is stronger? Titanium, or Stainless Steel??

Steel. BUT, it is heavier, for the equivalent strength. So, for a strength-to-weight reason, titanium is used. Steel would be stronger, but its greater weight makes it less desirable.

In any case, all these "conspiracy" sites bring up the "titanium engine" as if it were one solid block of metal...it is not. There can be anywhere between 15,000 to 25,000 different components all assembled together, in a modern jet engine.

Here is an image of a Rolls Royce RB-211-535 (same as on the American 77 Boeing 757) showing that the engine has a great deal of hollow areas, internally:




Mounted on the wing and pylon, with the nacelle cowling shown, for context:




posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


I love reading hoopers replies, theyre all adhominem! excellent job not touching any of my other questions hooper.
you did not fail to amaze me again.

im not even going to take the time to argue what you said, because i know it will continue down the well of not talking about the issues, but rather how I present the issue.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by hooper
 


I love reading hoopers replies, theyre all adhominem! excellent job not touching any of my other questions hooper.
you did not fail to amaze me again.

im not even going to take the time to argue what you said, because i know it will continue down the well of not talking about the issues, but rather how I present the issue.


The only question in your post was "and you want to talk about witnesses"? And I responded directly to that so-called interogatory as best as one can considering it sounded more like an unfounded challenge then a question.

Ask questions, but make them real questions, not baseless accusations terminated with a question mark.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   
I came across this bit of information a few days ago and don't know how many others may have seen it already.
I don't know these people personally but their backgrounds would indicate a resonable amount of credability.

1) Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a former director of studies at the US Army War College.

2) Gordon Duff, a veteran marine, host and editorial writer of the web site veteranstoday.

www.veteranstoday.com...


I hope some of you will take the time to watch the whole series before forming any definate conclusions. At any rate I hope you will draw some information from it.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by hdutton
I came across this bit of information a few days ago and don't know how many others may have seen it already.
I don't know these people personally but their backgrounds would indicate a resonable amount of credability.

1) Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran and a former director of studies at the US Army War College.

2) Gordon Duff, a veteran marine, host and editorial writer of the web site veteranstoday.

www.veteranstoday.com...


I hope some of you will take the time to watch the whole series before forming any definate conclusions. At any rate I hope you will draw some information from it.



Just out of curiosity - how exactly did you "come across" this particular website? I see that all the time - the innocent "just browsing the internet and happen to stumble over this little gem". But as we all know, thats not how the internet works. You pretty much have to be looking for something in the first place. There are literally hundreds of millions of websites. You just can't accidently find yourself at the veterans today website by starting out looking for say, plumbing suppliers in Baltimore.

Also, for a website that is, by title, infering that it deals with issues affecting veterans of the US military it seems to have more than its share of articles about Isreal. Tell you what -check out the websites for the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars and see if you notice any difference.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Answer to your question; Being a vet, I often go to sites of other vets and "some" to which they are linked.

As for it's content; I keep thinking THIS is a free country and you are even free to disagree and NOT read what you don't want to read. I know you watched all parts of this series. But, I will not ask you for your views.

If you, or anyone else, thinks of me as Anti-semitic, I ask you to do one thing. Look up the deffinitions of four terms. Hebrew - Jew - Zionist -Semite. If you can find a common statement showing the relationship between ALL four of these terms I "may' listen to your opinion.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


Calling somebody antisemite because he has a problem with something Mossad did is like calling somebody anti Italian because he dislikes some of the things the Italian Mafia/Gangs do.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 



Answer to your question; Being a vet, I often go to sites of other vets and "some" to which they are linked.

I'll accept that on face value having no evidence to the contrary.

As for it's content; I keep thinking THIS is a free country and you are even free to disagree and NOT read what you don't want to read. I know you watched all parts of this series. But, I will not ask you for your views.

No, I didn't watch all parts of the series. Didn't even feel a need to start. I wasn't born yesterday. A website with a title like "veterans today" and filled with articles about Isreal, Mossad, etc. seems to be more than a little off-kilter, if not all and out deceptive. Isreal, Mossad, 9/11 investigations, etc. are not exactly burning veterans issues.

If you, or anyone else, thinks of me as Anti-semitic, I ask you to do one thing. Look up the deffinitions of four terms. Hebrew - Jew - Zionist -Semite. If you can find a common statement showing the relationship between ALL four of these terms I "may' listen to your opinion.

Sorry, again, I am not a spring chicken that is worried about playing semantic games with anti-semites. I'll just be satisfied with the modern popular connotation, someone who dislikes Jews based on personal bias. I know the tactics, "I love Jews, I just don't like Zionist" or the ever popular "Jews aren't Semites". Been there, done that as they would say.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


I can hardly express my joy of finding yet another who so enjoys a challenge, as do I.

Myself, I just turned 65 and still believe a man is just as young as he feels.

Actually I was feeling about 19 the other day.. She slapped me so quick I began feeling a little older.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


Sounds more like you were feeling a 19.

I don't like playing all those word games. Semites, Zionist, etc. Those are the tactics of the modern anti-Semite.

The French Secret Service, for instance, has probably done as nasty if not nastier things than the Isreali secret service, yet I have never seen anyone trying to blame the French. Same thing goes for USSR/Russia and probably dozens of more.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 



Suites me just fine!

I don't really like the French; their fries or dressing.

I will admit I might have been mistaken. I thought this thread was about the events in New York City on
Sept. 11, 2001.

I must also admit though, I don't remember anyone else bring them into the mix.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Here's more pictures of engine debris at the Pentagon.

Here


We go through the same crud time and time again. The truthers just don't seem to learn. Or even try to do any rational investigating on their own. They just rely on other conspiracy web sites and conjecture.



new topics

top topics



 
268
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join