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.

 

Is there any truth in this post?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Ah, what the heck, I'll follow you down this conspiracy rat hole of yours. Silverstein's wife not only made the appointment for her husband, but made him actually go to it. She's not simply a side participant to the event, she's the one who made the event happen.

If this is all some cover story for Silverstein then how on EARTH could Silverstein's wife be going along with it if she wasn't involved? Either Silverstein's wife knew what was up and she openly cooperated with creating a cover story for her husband, OR, the whole thing was made up and she as well as the doctor Silverstein went to are openly pretending that the fake story she knows is fake is actually true. So please, explain that one to me- Did the secret conspirators hypnotize her and plant false memories into her head, or something?
.


Just one possible way....ILL POST IT AGAIN for you Dave, because you lack the ability to read posts.

First of all, there are ways to establish an alibi using psychology and manipulation.

Sometime around the first week in Sept.
Larry talking with his wife.
LS: I really should get this looked at.
LW: Yes honey, you should.
LS: I could probably get some time off the week following next. I dont think I have much on the table for Monday. But Ill have to check. I probably have a meeting in the afternoon though.
LW: Ill make the appointment for the morning, if theres an opening.
(SEE WHAT HAPPENED HERE? Planted a seed and casually mentioned a time when he might be available. Yet would have to further check to see if he would be available.)

Fast forward to day of the attack:
LS: I really should go in this morning, there is some stuff I could handle.
(Being the loving and caring wife she is responds like this)
LW: No. No. No. You need to get this looked at. Ill make you breakfast, you can go to the doctor and you'll be back to work in time to do everything you have to do.
(SEE WHAT HAPPENED HERE? Put her in control. Seeming as if she is making him go by claiming that he really should be at the office)

This way, he has an alibi of his wife making the doctors appointment, and making him go the day of, that she would not ever say wasn't true.
Im not saying this is how it happened, but this is just one way to form an alibi, without an innocent party knowing that their helping cover something up.

Again Dave...this is just one way she could have been involved WITHOUT needing to know or be involved in the cover-up. Try to stay with the rest of us, Dave.




posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


OK, thank you for correcting me, it shows it was even less of a coincidence then it sounds. By your own account, Larry only had breakfast at the WTC during the work week between July 27, 2001 and Sept. 10, 2001. Thats what -about 25 times? And then he didn't one day because he had a Dr.'s appointment? Thats your evidence that it was an "inside job"? Hell, I have a relative who ate there more times than that. She was even there that morning but left before the first plane strike. I guess she is "in on it" too. Damn.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by DIDtm
 


By your own account, Larry only had breakfast at the WTC during the work week between July 27, 2001 and Sept. 10, 2001. Thats what -about 25 times? And then he didn't one day because he had a Dr.'s appointment? Thats your evidence that it was an "inside job"?

Yes hooper, that's our only piece of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by DIDtm
 


By your own account, Larry only had breakfast at the WTC during the work week between July 27, 2001 and Sept. 10, 2001. Thats what -about 25 times? And then he didn't one day because he had a Dr.'s appointment? Thats your evidence that it was an "inside job"?

Yes hooper, that's our only piece of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.


Again, I stand corrected - that is more the "nature" of the evidence that you have that 9/11 was an inside job. Half-truths, innuendo, assumptions and rumors of gossip.

It starts:

"Larry Silverstein had breakfast every moring except on 9/11/2001"

Then:

"Larrry Silverstein had breakfast every WORK DAY morning except on 9/11/2001"

Then:

"Larry Silverstein had breakfast ALMOST every WORK DAY morning except on 9/11/2001"

Finally:

"Larry Silverstein had breakfast ALMOST every WORK DAY morning starting in LATE JULY OF 2001 until 9/10/2001"

Conclusion:

Larry Silverstein had breakfast often at the World Trade Center towers starting about a month before 9/11/2001 when he aquired the lease but had a doctors appointment on the morning of September 11, 2001.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 




Half-truths, innuendo, assumptions and rumors of gossip


Isn't that how most conspiracy theories work?

Second line.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by DIDtm
 


By your own account, Larry only had breakfast at the WTC during the work week between July 27, 2001 and Sept. 10, 2001. Thats what -about 25 times? And then he didn't one day because he had a Dr.'s appointment? Thats your evidence that it was an "inside job"?

Yes hooper, that's our only piece of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.


Again, I stand corrected - that is more the "nature" of the evidence that you have that 9/11 was an inside job. Half-truths, innuendo, assumptions and rumors of gossip.

It starts:

"Larry Silverstein had breakfast every moring except on 9/11/2001"

Then:

"Larrry Silverstein had breakfast every WORK DAY morning except on 9/11/2001"

Then:

"Larry Silverstein had breakfast ALMOST every WORK DAY morning except on 9/11/2001"

Finally:

"Larry Silverstein had breakfast ALMOST every WORK DAY morning starting in LATE JULY OF 2001 until 9/10/2001"

Conclusion:

Larry Silverstein had breakfast often at the World Trade Center towers starting about a month before 9/11/2001 when he aquired the lease but had a doctors appointment on the morning of September 11, 2001.


My mistake..it was EVERY MORNING. Not just working morning.
Care to hear him admit it?
Here you go....
www.americanpendulum.com...

Never did I say 'ALMOST EVERY WORKING DAY'.
If I did, please tell me the page and post number on this thread, or any other thread.

When making an argument, its best not to make things up to enhance your side. More times than not, you will get caught and look as foolish as you do now for all to read.
-Just a word of advice.
LMFAO



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Judge_Holden
reply to post by hooper
 




Half-truths, innuendo, assumptions and rumors of gossip


Isn't that how most conspiracy theories work?

Second line.


Indeed most conspiracy theories work with half truths, including the official conspiracy theory. I can not see half truths with debunkers.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by DIDtm
 


Just one possible way....ILL POST IT AGAIN for you Dave, because you lack the ability to read posts.

First of all, there are ways to establish an alibi using psychology and manipulation.

Sometime around the first week in Sept.
Larry talking with his wife.
LS: I really should get this looked at.
LW: Yes honey, you should.
LS: I could probably get some time off the week following next. I dont think I have much on the table for Monday. But Ill have to check. I probably have a meeting in the afternoon though.
LW: Ill make the appointment for the morning, if theres an opening.
(SEE WHAT HAPPENED HERE? Planted a seed and casually mentioned a time when he might be available. Yet would have to further check to see if he would be available.)


Are you seriously suggesting that Silverstein infected himself with a skin ailment entirely to plant the idea into his wife's head to make an appointment with the doctor? I'd have thought your conspiracy claims have gotten so outer space, Wile E. Coyote cartoon convoluted as it was with these secret controlled demolitions and staged hijackings without your wanting to introduce more Rube Goldberg mechanics into them.

Here's a wild, out of the park idea for you to consider: what if there really isn't any secret conspiracy and Silverstein really did have a skin ailment, his wife really did call in for an appointment, he really did niss the 9/11 attack out of a chance occurance, and you're simply seeing things that aren't there? Why does every flipping thing in your world up to and including some old guy going to a doctor have to be part of some sinister secret plot to take over the world? That's what I don't get.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 



My mistake..it was EVERY MORNING


From the time he signed the lease about 6 weeks before 9/11, you keep forgetting to tag that on to the statement.

What's that July 27 to Sept 10?

Then he has a doctors appointment on Sept 11.

Just earth shattering.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Relax dave, nobody says that is hard evidence that Larry knew about it. All we are saying is that Larry coincidently cheating death, his son coincidently cheating death, his daughter coincidently cheating death and many of his friends and associates as well is just one more piece of the puzzle that neatly fits in.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
 


Indeed most conspiracy theories work with half truths, including the official conspiracy theory. I can not see half truths with debunkers.


Of course you won't. It's pretty well established at this point that you think everything that debunks your conspiracy stories is the work of secret gov't disinformation agents and you will refuse to believe it. This isn't research- this is making up excuses for why you don't have to admit your conspiracy stories are wrong.

The more the conspiracy people attempt to flesh out their conspiracy claims, the more the organizers pulling the strings behind all these secret plots sound like a bunch of stoned college kids. After all the work involved in crashing a cruise missile into the Pentagon, manufacturing fake aircraft wreckage, planting bodies and a fake black box, planting armies of fake eyewitnesses everywhere to give false testimony, and making the real flight 77 disappear somewhere else, wouldn't it be easier just to crash an actual plane into the thing?



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Cassius666
 


Indeed most conspiracy theories work with half truths, including the official conspiracy theory. I can not see half truths with debunkers.


Of course you won't. It's pretty well established at this point that you think everything that debunks your conspiracy stories is the work of secret gov't disinformation agents and you will refuse to believe it. This isn't research- this is making up excuses for why you don't have to admit your conspiracy stories are wrong.

The more the conspiracy people attempt to flesh out their conspiracy claims, the more the organizers pulling the strings behind all these secret plots sound like a bunch of stoned college kids. After all the work involved in crashing a cruise missile into the Pentagon, manufacturing fake aircraft wreckage, planting bodies and a fake black box, planting armies of fake eyewitnesses everywhere to give false testimony, and making the real flight 77 disappear somewhere else, wouldn't it be easier just to crash an actual plane into the thing?


Actually I am the one who thinks just because somebody does not agree does not make him a disinfo agent. I asked for proof other than "I said so" from the people who do think there are disinfo agents active. I opened a related topic today if you look up my posting history. I dont recall talking about commenting on planted airwreckage either way to begin with either. Also I disagree that just because engineers, architects and chemists find fault with the NIST report and evidence for thermite makes by proxy something true that is just a theory.

You suffer from selective reading. Or you dont suffer from selective reading at all, but are looking to pain a certain picture.
edit on 23-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Relax dave, nobody says that is hard evidence that Larry knew about it. All we are saying is that Larry coincidently cheating death, his son coincidently cheating death, his daughter coincidently cheating death and many of his friends and associates as well is just one more piece of the puzzle that neatly fits in.


...and as I repeatetly point out...and which you repeatedly ignore...eight out of nine people who worked in the towers "coincidentally cheated death". The planes hit before 9:00, when people were still on their way to work, so the towers weren't fully populated yet. Plus, the towers stood long enough for the majority of the people who were in the buildings to leave. Most of the casualties were in the sections above the impact areas becuase the planes destroyed the elevators and stairs. Plus, as other posters have pointed out here, Silverstein didn't go to Windows of the World every single day so there's no evidence he was even going to be in that area on 9/11. Once these missing facts are provided, the freak occurrence doesn't sound so freakish as it did before, does it?

This is my entire point. Of course the piece of the puzzle is going to "neatly fit in". Those damned fool conspiracy web sites you get all your information from are artifically embellishing everything to make sure it "neatly fits in". Dylan Avery and Alex Jones are the ones manufacturing the puzzle it will "neatly fit in" to begin with.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Again you are trying to paint a picture of conspiracy nuts who get their info from Alex Jones and think nukes brought down the tower. Others pointed out he was in the towers every single day except for 911. His son and daughter were running late, so they were supposed to be in the towers around the time of the attack. Meetings ended early or were postponed, people received messages to leave the building and it does not stop there.


edit on 23-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
 


Actually I am the one who thinks just because somebody does not agree does not make him a disinfo agent. I asked for proof other than "I said so" from the people who do think there are disinfo agents active. I opened a related topic today if you look up my posting history. I dont recall talking about commenting on planted airwreckage either way to begin with either. Also I disagree that just because engineers, architects and chemists find fault with the NIST report and evidence for thermite makes by proxy something true that is just a theory.


You are being disingenuous here and we both know it. A few days back when I was posting eyewitness accounts from deputy fire chief Peter Hayden who was physically there next to WTC 7 describing the destruction the fires were causing, you said, and I quote:

"I trust people with expertise on the field over somebody who knows how to put out fires."

I shouldn't need to tell you a deputy chief firefighter IS an expert in the field as to what fires can do, so when a firefighter standing there next to a building sees unnatural bulging on the side of the building at a location where he knows out of control fires are burning, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to believe what he says. The only reason you're going to believe your "people with expertise in the field" who weren't even there over eyewitnesses who were is if those "people with expertise in the field" are telling you things you want to hear. If you're not relying on the excuse that deputy chief Hayden is a disinformation agent, then what excuse are you using so that you don't need to believe what he says?

You asked me to open up your posting history. You should be careful what you ask for.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Did you seriously just say it is truthers who are the ones who listen to experts only when they have something to say they want to hear? You ? Seriously? Really?

Hayden said there were fires in the building. Nobody is calling him a liar over that. Also we were talking about something else, that you think I think everybody who says otherwise is an disinfo agent on this board.

So far you are the one who has been postulating wild conspiracy theories, mininukes, laserbeams, holografic planes, now according to you, Hayden must be an disinfo agent.

People Who Live In Glass House...
edit on 23-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Again you are trying to paint a picture of conspiracy nuts who get their info from Alex Jones and think nukes brought down the tower. Others pointed out he was in the towers every single day except for 911. His son and daughter were running late, so they were supposed to be in the towers around the time of the attack. Meetings ended early or were postponed, people received messages to leave the building and it does not stop there.


Of course you people are getting your information from the con artists behind those damned fool conspiracy web sites. How can you deny this? Every time you people quote Barry Jennings, you're admitting you're listening to Dylan Avery. Every time you people mention energy weapons from outer space, you're admitting you're listening to Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. Every time you mention cruise missiles at the Pentagon, you're admitting you're listening to Thierry Meyssan. Whenever you people mention Jesse Ventura, you're admitting you're listening to Alex Jones and Robert Balsamo. Whevever you gripe about cell phone calls from the planes, you're admitting you're listening to David Ray Griffin. And so on and so forth. I don't know who invented the nukes in the basement claim or the no planes claim, but we both know whoever it was, their motives AREN'T to find out the truth of the events of 9/11 any more than these other conspiracy mongors.

As for Silverstein, it'a already been pointed out that some eight out of nine people survived the attack, and it's only in your mind that Silverstein was even involved in the events of 9/11 to begin with, so the only reason you're concentrating entirely on his survival is becuase you want to embellish this whole "isn't THAT suspicious (wink wink)" bit for innuendo dropping exactly like Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin, etc are doing. I don't know whether Dylan Avery was the one who first started circulating the whole "Silverstein went to the doctor on 9/11" bit, but it might as well have been him becuase he's been passing it along like a counterfeit twenty dollar bill.
edit on 23-12-2010 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


When did I say that Silverstein was involved? I just said it fits neatly in the puzzle. He didnt surivive the attack, he along with his family was not there to begin with. As usual you only see Alex Jones and whoever you mentioned as his peers, because those are the people you want to see. Yet more evidence you suffer from selective perception, no news there. What about EAfor911truth.org? What about everyone else?

Oh I forgot that an expert is an "expert" if he does not support your point of view.
edit on 23-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Did you seriously just say it is truthers who are the ones who listen to experts only when they have something to say they want to hear? You ? Seriously? Really?

Hayden said there were fires in the building. Nobody is calling him a liar over that. Also we were talking about something else, that you think I think everybody who says otherwise is an disinfo agent on this board.


Those aren't MY words. Those are the words of your fellow conspriacy theorists here...or at least, this is the innuendo they're dropping. They're either too much of a coward to come out and openly accuse them of being disinformation agents, or they're simply mindlessly repeating the drivel they read off some damned fool conspiracy web site somewhere and they never thought it critically all the way through.

We have people sneering at the NIST report and how it's "OS fairy tale", but I always point out that NIST didn't just conjure up their analysis out of a drunken stupor. They researched the events up to and including interviewing eyewitnesses who were there, with Deputy fire chief Peter Hayden being one of them. It was his testimony that informed NIST engineers that there were out of control fires and that there was a three story tall bulge in the side of WTC 7 to begin with. If you're refuting the NIST report, then you're necessarily refuting his eyewitness testimony and, need I remind you, expert opinions.

Every time I post this and ask you to clarify this contradiction, you people always run away from having to think for yourselves the same way vampires run away from sunlight. Perhaps you can be the first to provide an answer.


So far you are the one who has been postulating wild conspiracy theories, mininukes, laserbeams, holografic planes, now according to you, Hayden must be an disinfo agent.


Dude, every flipping third post being left here is coming from someone who thinks the towers were destroyed by secret controlled demolitions planted by sinister ninja assassins, so if you genuinely think I'me the one postulating wild conspiracy theories here then you've completely lost your mind.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


So it is Ninjas too now. Anytime I read laserbeams and what not mentioned I see your avatar. You are the one who believes the towers collapsed the way they did because of random fire due to a freak chance. Somehow you seem to think that the official conspiracy theory is more logical than the use of explosives, despite the fact that for to occour what the NIST report says occoured is borderlining on the impossibel. Are you here to convince us or to convince yourself? What are you here for Dave?
edit on 23-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join