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: 7
268
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 05:11 AM
link   
This is golden now maybe more people will open their eyes and see the truth behind 9/11.
Odd isnt it? How in the beginning over 68% of Americans believed Arabs in a cave could pull off such a complex operation. Maybe we need to fear our government more than other countries. We should just get all those old fools out of the congress and the senate then start new all over again. Were getting screwed America lets stand tall and take our country back! who's with me? lol




posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Wonderful Thread!!! S+F X 1,000,000,000 Now I have a perfect place to point to for those certain people that still have their heads in the sand. My Paralegal in particular since she lost a cousin on 9/11 and is from Jersey will have a tough time facing the music.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


The Terrorist attack was planned well in advance of the Bush Era, and it was started during the Clinton years. They didn't do in Antisipation of Bush Winning and wanting to start Dubya Dubya Tree. Therefore: the terrorist's were not against any Political Party, just the continuation of the White Theme. That's your Problem. It doesn't matter if the Left or Right wins, and is determined to do the Complete Opposite of the Previous Dictator (Obama), they still follow the same Theme with respect to the Mid-East.

If anything then, they Kicked your A, before they could kick yours.

Maybe Americans just can't come to terms with the Governments spending Hundreds of Billions of Money inventing new Weapons of Mass Destruction every year, and were beaten with $2 Box-Cutters.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by skeptic_al
 


I would think it is far harder to come to therms with the fact that your own goverment lied to you.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
please read this link: Why George Bush wanted attacks on 9/11

portland.indymedia.org...

please read the entire article anyone who decides to check it out. I completely believe and have believed for some time that George Bush and the Isralies were behind 9/11. This link article provides 100 percent motive why the Bush family is evil...



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


how do I know your not lieing



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
I just want to say that I am certainly not ready to put the blame on anyone, not Al Qaeda, not the government or not any faction within the government. We just simply don't have enough information or better said, there is a lot of information that we don't yet have and that could easily be obtained with a thorough investigation. I am however ready to say that I don't believe in the official conspiracy theory one iota. It has been proven false in my opinion or it has been proven false beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Did Bush or the CIA do it (if you can really seperate the two)? I'm certainly not ready to conclude on that, in the same way that I'm not yet ready to conclude the level of responsibility that lies with Al Qaeda, if any at all. I believe that I have leading suspects, though nobody's guilt is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, at least in my opinion.

With that being said, I think that the official conspiracy theory or the official cover-up, at the very least, proves culpability on behalf of certain individuals or factions within the government and industry alike and which also helps me identify who I believe to be the main suspects.

I do however believe in the rule of law, even if the rule of law is completely broken and doesn't pertain to us. I'm loyal to my country (and Constitution), thus I'm willing to assume innocense over guilt, until proven so for those I believe to be responsible. However, I believe that it is paramount that we task ourselves in seeking justice by proving the guilt of whomever may be responsible and until we can do that, I believe that my country is under attack by those who would go to great lengths in order to obfuscate the truth, whatever that truth may be and for whatever reason.

As I said, I'm loyal to my country and I believe in the rule of law but until my country can secede from this apparent coup d'etat and serve justice to those who have thus far obstructed the same, the rule of law remains compromised, as does this country and justice is the joke on us, which ultimately occludes both my loyalty to and belief in this country.






--airspoon



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kapsinupe
please read this link: Why George Bush wanted attacks on 9/11

portland.indymedia.org...

please read the entire article anyone who decides to check it out. I completely believe and have believed for some time that George Bush and the Isralies were behind 9/11. This link article provides 100 percent motive why the Bush family is evil...


Motive is always mundane isn't it? And that is the trouble with 9/11. If you don't believe the OS, then you need an alternative motive, the money trail. And the same names keep popping up. Vince Foster, Lt. Vreeland, Leo Wanta, both Bush's, both Clintons, and the rest. Somalia, Whitecloud Petroleum, The Phillipines, Bank of Hong Kong and Shanghai. Credit Suisse and the rest. Building 5 WTC, building 7 WTC, Then there are on the "lower scale", even more misappropriated slush funds, some designed to possibly to buy back weapons systems, or buy secret foreign weapon systems..but then again, some bugger may have ran off with the readies. All that is above, is about a money trail in huge dimension, insurance from WTC would be petty cash in comparison, probably not for the likes of you and me to consider, if it was not for the internet.
edit on 25-11-2010 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Okay first off the was no real significant damage done to wtc7.Where's the proof of that?The reason they said building 7 fell was because of fire!Go to any demolition company and ask them if fire can bring down tall steel and concrete buildings like a controlled demo..and you'll be laughed at.If fire could bring down tall steel and concrete buildings like a controlled demo then we wouldn't need demolition companies now would we?

Another thing..buildings 3,4,5 AND 6 were right below the towers and were nearly cut in half and guess what?....they still stood,AND had to be pulled down.

Building 7 was the 3rd tallest and was farther away from the towers and the debris was pebbles compared to what all the other buildings received.

Listen to what Barry Jennings says.!
www.youtube.com...

That's proof!

Barry was stepping over bodies in the lobby of building 7.An explosion knocked him back into the 8th floor.The landing below him blew away.Barry was trapped for several hours.
www.youtube.com...

"Trapped for hours"?

Barry said all these things but then came out with another video saying that's not what he meant.Perhaps he was threatened to change his story but the damage was done and Barry would have been the perfect witness for building 7..sadly Barry died mysteriously two days before the release of the NIST Final Report on the collapse of WTC7. Jennings was Deputy Director of Emergency Services Department for the New York City Housing Authority. On September 11th, 2001, he saw and heard explosions BEFORE the Twin Towers fell, while attempting to evacuate the WTC 7 Command Center with NYC Corporation Counsel Michael Hess.

Then you have Nist lying.Saying "nobody said anything about molten steel".
www.youtube.com...

Then you have George Bush lying and said he saw the first plane just before he went in the classroom on 9/11..he even jokes about it.Why does he joke about it??
www.youtube.com...

Then you have the commission report saying they were set up to fail.
www.youtube.com...

Then you have floors in the towers exploding to dust 3 to 4 floors at a time way below the collapse.
www.youtube.com...

Then you have former FBI coming forward saying it was an inside job.
www.youtube.com...

Then you have firemen coming forward saying it was an inside job.
www.youtube.com...

Then you have people dying in the basement from explosions.
www.youtube.com...

Then you have the pentagon situation where no 757 hit.
www.youtube.com...

What about Lloyd England the cab driver who's cab supposedly got hit by a light pole says it was planned and that he was "in it" and that "we" meaning him and the planners, "came across the highway together"!

You can't get more blunt than that!

What did Lloyd mean when he said "it was planned".."i'm in it"...WE CAME ACROSS THE HIGHWAY TOGETHER"-Lloyd England "You and their event"?Craig renke "That's right"-Lloyd England
www.youtube.com...

George Bush's brother AND cousin were security for the WORLD TRADE CENTER!!Out of all the jobs the president's brother chose a mere security job for the World Trade Center of all places.And was there right up until a couple of months before 9/11..hmm I wonder why he quit just before 9/11?Odd.He could have hired some of his buddies while he was there huh?I guess it's just another coincidence..just add it to the pile.

According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites.".
Securacom (secure-a-con)differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

Larry Silverstien and his 17 million dollar insurance policy he put on the towers that specifically covered terrorism just a couple of months prior to 9/11 would normally be considered suspicious behavior by any investigator!

Larry made 7 billion!3.5 billion each tower, because they were considered 2 separate attacks!

Larry and his Daughter were both absent on 9/11!

Only about 200 pieces of the thousands of steel was handed over to investigators to examine because they did not have the authority to preserve wreckage!

Accept for the steel that was handpicked for them by the clean up crew!

The rest was sold to China without examining any of it..EVIDENCE FOLKS..sold to recycling companies over seas!

Under Armed guard!!

Why do you suppose they guarded it for??

What was left over after 80 percent of the steel was removed without being examined even though it could have(would have)showed evidence of blasting from explosiveswas sent to "fresh kills Landfill"..fresh kills landfill?Yeah well people did just die so fresh kills landfill was first pick??Sickening.

Larry knew, going into the lease purchase that the Towers were asbestos-laden bombs, the first 60 floors sprayed with the building material when built from 1968 to '72. And they were supposed to be taken down eventually, according to a 1971 New York Council ban on asbestos..Obviously, the buildings couldn't be legally taken down by explosion or implosion. They would have to be taken down piece by piece. The cost would be in the billions by today's standards. But there was another way to take them down, wasn't there?

Lucky Larry Silverstein keeps popping up. Hes back and hes bad again. Not content with the nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments he received to cover his losses at the World Trade Center, he is now seeking $12.3 billion in damages from the airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack in a suit filed in 2004.

Silversteins laundry list for the $12.3 billion goes like this, $8.4 billion for the replacement of destroyed buildings and $3.9 billion in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the Port authority and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings..it's not about the money...he swears...hmm good enough for me....not.

Evidence was sold and shipped right from ground zero before and real investigator could investigate.That's illegal.

There's just too many things to list really.I mean when are people going to look and see all the things wrong here?Some don't want to see because they're scared.They're afraid of change..And you know something?Maybe not knowing is better for certain people.They can live easier without the burden of truth.


edit on 25-11-2010 by XxiTzYoMasterxX because: typo



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by XxiTzYoMasterxX

Then you have former FBI coming forward saying it was an inside job.
www.youtube.com...

edit on 25-11-2010 by XxiTzYoMasterxX because: typo

link doesnt work
second line



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 


Ex FBI thinks 9/11 was an inside job.
www.youtube.com...

Sorry about that.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


Excellent thread and well done research. The more facts that are presented here on ATS and on the internet, may help force a new and impartial investigation on 9/11. We need answers to all these questions! Our congressional leaders need to take their head out of the sand and push for this.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Great thread thank you



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
It is OBVIOUS that the official story is FICTIONAL to the extreme. Taking that as a given, ask ourselves why. Why would anyone or any group want to stage the event? It's a great reason to PISS OFF AMERICANS TO GO TO WAR. "Successful" wars require public support. We learned all about that in Vietnam. You MUST win the hearts of Americans on Main Street in order to properly set the gears of war into motion. For soldiers to be HEROES instead of VILLAINS, the public must have something at stake. How to you get public "ownership?" You hit them hard, hit them where it counts... You make them buy the team colors.

Public manipulation is a highly intelligent science as much as it is a highly creative art.

Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) at its highest form took place on 9-11. They've been at it for decades.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Buildings 3 4 5 and 6 weren't damaged below 10 to 30 floors they had to support. And if you look at the arial photos of ground zero after the collapses and tell me those buildings weren't totally destroyed then we are looking at two different things.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


wow that was full of looney


I really appreciate your straw man arguements! Ha, i was wondering who would have the mental dullness to argue this thread. You did not disapoint



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
They ceased fire only after hours (1+ or 2 hours) and arguably because a Soviet war-ship steamed over the horizon, thus a witrness and the ship managed to squeeze a "mayday" to their fleet, thus a witness. They didn't simply fire, then realize it was an American vessel as they had hours and multiple passes from fighters and torpedo boats to see the humongous American flag or American markings on the modern warship.


I'm not going to follow you down this conspiracy rat hole. Why these Israeli conspirators would give a flip about whether a Soviet ship showed up is beyond me since if they're so mad dog trigger happy that they'll want to sink a US ship to frame the Arabs they're certainly not going to be scared of a Soviet ship; they'd just sink the Soviet ship too. I asked how it was a conspiracy and true to form, the answer includes yet another conspiracy, so I think I know how the rest of the conversation is going to go down.

The only thing I will say before moving on is that a pattern is emerging that the people who subscribe to these "9/11 is an inside job" claims seem to subscribe to a blizzard of other conspiracies. The 9/11 attack isn't simply a conspiracy, it's really just the latest conspiracy in a long line of other conspiracies to advance some master conspiracy. It's as if once someone is able to accept a runaway train of circular logic as legitimate evidence, then they'll accept runaway circular logic for pretty much any anythign else. How can the 9/11 attack NOT be seen as some secret conspiracy by you?


That seems to be your fairy-tale, not mine or anyone else I know of. I don't think I have ever heard anyone but you suggest that 10,000 agents planted secret controlled demolitions in the WTC, nor have I ever suggested that crash sites were faked, missiles were launched at the Pentagon, wreckage was fakes or black boxes were planted. That seems to be your nefarious and sad tactic to avoid intellectually debating the real issues. Your attempt at connecting me to outrageous claims is noted, though sadly so.


Then you are either lying through your teeth, or you haven't thought your own conspiracy claims all the way through as you should have. For even a smidgeon of your conspiracies to be true, it would take a hell of a lot more support infrastructure than just the actual bomb planters to pull it off. You are necessarily accusing the engineers in FEMA and the engineers in NIST, plus all the people they interviewed, plus the people on the 9/11 commission, plus all the people THEY interviewed, of involved in some massive coverup to get people to think it was an attack by islamic fundamentalists regardless of whether you or your fellow trusters are coming out and actually saying it. That doesn't include the thousands of people clearing out the WTC wreckage who would have seen all this evidence of sabotage but said nothing, nor the NYPA security who'd be on the lookout for bombs since the first WTC attack, nor does it even include our NATO allies who invoked article 5 after we presented them the evidence we had that Al Qaida was behind the attack.

It's one thing to conjure up these make believe comic book plots as a mental exercise, but it's another thing entirely to drag your fantasia kicking and screaming into the real word. The only way they're even remotely believable is if you trusters intentionally keep yourself as ignorant as possible about how the attack actually happened, so it's little wonder why people are even bickering over whether interceptors were scrambled.


So, 19 cave-dwelling Arabs who are jealous of our freedoms, on a mission from Saddam who is harboring WMDs just seemed to shake authorities who had been spying on them, only to come to our country and be trained to fly right here, is just as absurd as alien death-rays or no-planes.


Your credibility is sinking further and further the more you need to rely on hyperbole to keep your conspiracy claims alive. The war in Iraq was over WMD, not over 9/11, while the Islamic fundamentalists and their backers were all from midldle class and wealthy families and who were all highly educated. Khalid Sheick Mohammed has a degree in mechanical engineering, while Mohammed Atta had a degree in Architecture and never stepped foot in a cave as far as anyone knows.

At what point will it finally dawn on you trusters that those damned fool conspiracy web sites you're getting all this drivel from are pulling your leg? Did you even know that NATO invoked article 5 in the first time in history?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


No they weren't totally destroyed.With building 5 more then half the building stood.
www.cbp.gov...

Building 4 was even more badly damaged and still stood.
911research.wtc7.net...

Building 3 was split in half...still stood.
jonesreport.com...

Yes building 6 was the worst out of the WTC buildings but even though the building has huge holes deep in the middle of it...it still stood..and had to be pulled down.Look at the building!It looks like it should have collapsed
www.attivissimo.net...

Building 7 the famous "damage" shot.
www.rense.com...

That's not damage...that's a scratch.And since when does a scratch on the outside make a building collapse on the inside?Clearly the middle sinks in first then it collapses straight down..classic demo.If there was a hole in the corner then it should have toppled over not collapse straight down like a controlled demo.If anybody can find a real pic of that damaged corner I'd be glad to see it because it's hard to see with the one pic I found because it's obscured by smoke.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
guys lets stay on TOPIC!

dont let these charlatans derail this thread and make it about the liberty incident, pertinent as it is.

Stay with the 9/11 topic and this article!



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
guys lets stay on TOPIC!

dont let these charlatans derail this thread and make it about the liberty incident, pertinent as it is.

Stay with the 9/11 topic and this article!


What did that have to do with the topic?

I think everything I provided was factual.



new topics

top topics



 
268
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join