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.

 

Penn and Teller" tricked" into admitting 9/11 might be an "inside Job".

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Were I in Penn's place, I'd have done the exact same thing. The questioner came off immediately as a nutball, and I'm sure Penn has no more desire to engage in pointless discourse with a nut than I do. Answering the question with a simple "no" effectively stopped the ranting and the "show" could go on.

He could have gotten into a discussion with the guy, but there would be no point. No matter what facts or science is put in front of fellas like that they are simply ignored while they continue to spout off about whatever their theory du jour is. You can't argue against a "belief".

I still have questions about 9/11. I used to have more, but research has put many of them to rest.
The problem is the people who don't have questions so much as they have "answers".




posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


So, lemme get this straight:

Your assertion is that Penn & Teller are "shills" for the so-called (nonexistent) "official story" because you "feel or think" that one or both of them have right-leaning tendencies??


You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about them. If anything, Penn Jillette was a BUSH HATER!! He is probably best described as a Libertarian, if I would come up with a "label". Might even be a Ron Paul supporter (don't know).


Now, you are so far off (not least of which, is the idea of the "inside job" crap)....BUT, trying to pin it on public personalities, because of your "feeling" about their political leanings....weak.

Are you familiar with Bill Maher? Do you think or "feel" that he is a right-leaning Republican Bush-lover???








edit on 11 February 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by subject x
Were I in Penn's place, I'd have done the exact same thing. The questioner came off immediately as a nutball, and I'm sure Penn has no more desire to engage in pointless discourse with a nut than I do. Answering the question with a simple "no" effectively stopped the ranting and the "show" could go on.


Yes, exactly. All you need to do is listen to the exchange to see that Penn tried to answer the guy's questions but he kept getting interrupted. It was such a blatant attempt at a fillibuster that Penn actually asked, "will you let me answer your question now", to which the guy said yes.., and Penn could only get out, "well..." before the guy launched into yet another tirade cutting Penn off again. Even the audience started laughing at him at that point.

It's blatantly obvious this guy WASN'T there to really ask any questions. He was a fanatic who went there simply to hear himself talk and he had the gall to say "Penn was being rude" after being escorted out, when it's pretty blatant he was a nutball who would have squandered the entire evening wasting everyone's time arguing over his 9/11 fantasies. It didn't help that the guy went there looking like what a kidnapped woman tied up in someone's bedroom would see after the date rape drugs wore off.

...and how the flip is Penn even remotely admitting there might be an inside job in any of this? All he said is that he didn't see the footage of the WTC 7 collapse.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Why don't you run for the official Global-Know-It-All?


I don't know anything about Penn yet you do? How in the world do you have time to 'know' so much WW? I do hope you plan on leaving your brain to science.

Penn himself says he was told (not verbatim) to make light of the 9-11 situation seeing the sensitivity the country was under.

As far a Bill Mahr? He lost my respect immediately following his anti 9-11 Truth comments.

If you don't think for a second, these celebrities aren't told how to act or conduct themselves in a certain way (whether being 'pro' or 'con' about certain topics) then, that would REALLY help to explain your over-all attitude about believing everything you're told.
You see, you are the epitome of being brainwashed by people such as Penn.

Life is an illusion. In fact, it's not even real.
Now WW, put that in your pipe and toke on that for awhile.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Human_Alien
You might want to pay a little closer attention before bending facts to fit your argument.
This guy wasn't a heckler.


I watched the video and his comments. This guy was completely pissed off, acted like it, failed to win the crowd with an impolite demeanor and failed to ask any sort of rational question. He then cut away to a pair of frat boys: evidently the only two people who found this guy interesting. There's a way to ask a question and a way to act like a jackass and he chose the latter.


Once again, this isn't a tread about the character of the 'questioner'. Rather, it's Penn's blatant disregard for the question.
The question was: "What about WTC7"?

Now, seeing there isn't any 'good' answer on how and why that building fell, people like Penn (who is putting on an act) just avoid the question and the audience (like yourself) hone in on the unimportant aspect of the matter.

But.... we really can't blame Penn for he probably got his information from the 911 Commission (Omission) Report who, in so many unspoken, unwritten words suggest: 'Don't worry about. It's a non-issue and we're not worried about it. For if we were, we would've reported on it!'



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
penn & teller douchebags. just like the rest of the lamestream media. to stay ontopic
before this post gets deleted, anyone remembers 'the daily show' producer wanting to
knock some truther the f**k out (a few days before jon stewart's 'rally to restore sanity')
just because he couldn't stand being wrong? i think his name was rory albanese. what
a douche.
edit on 12-2-2011 by psyop911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by subject x
Were I in Penn's place, I'd have done the exact same thing. The questioner came off immediately as a nutball,


sorry mate, but penn (and you) came off as a pair of douchebags. so tell me, how does a
douchebag explain anything to a nutball and vice versa? i see you must be college educated
so please endulge myhumbleself with an (you've guessed it) - 'answer'. thank you.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by vermonster
 


They are a banal double act and are a dire and repulsive duo that are in the media.

Any attention keep this 'dated conmen act' in the spotlight. Obnoxious TV acts are pure scum



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by psyop911
 


Once again, the lies that keep being repeated, and spread, morph into the "truths" that the "turhters" share amongst each other....


...anyone remembers 'the daily show' producer wanting to knock some truther the f**k out...


Total fabrication (there is an ATS thread about it, actually). Absolute LIE, started by a "truther" somewhere, and the rest all fell for it. The true event, of the altercation, occurred many months before the "Restoring Sanity" event in October, 2010....AND it happened in New York City...in Manhattan (NOT in Washington, D.C.) at a book signing at a Border's or Barnes & Noble.....where Jon Stewart was autographing his latest book...all LAST SUMMER!!!



Facts --- never getting in the way of a good "truth movement" story and rant!



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


And when it comes right down to it.....


The question was: "What about WTC7"?


....is just about the stupidest "question" the so-called "truth movement" have latched on to, out of them all.

Any person who thinks rationally, and pays attention to the facts of the area around "Ground Zero" (and looks at diagrams) can see the numbers of buildings in proximity to the two Towers that were demolished as part of the overall clean-up. Torn down, because of irreparable structural damage.

That means, they could not be fixed, and made structurally sound again.

Building 7 was going to be coming down, regardless. It managed to save the effort (and potential danger to any crews who would have had to undertake its tear-down) by collapsing on its own....since it had suffered extensive damage from the TOWER debris that impacted it, and the out of control fires that raged for the rest of the day.

The NYFD saw it was severely damaged, and cleared a perimeter...no one got in, so HOW (?) did anyone "set the controlled demo explosives"???

THIS is why, once again....rational people, who stop to think it through logically, just
at people like that crankcase in the video.....(the one in the audience)....

Here, a map/diagram of the buildings (marked in dark gray) that were demolished:



See the "Verizon Building" there, just to the West of WTC 7??


The south and east facades of the Verizon Building were heavily damaged in the September 11, 2001 attacks, from the collapse of the adjacent 7 World Trade Center, as well as the collapse of the Twin Towers. No fires were observed in the building on September 11.[11]

The building's older design utilizes thick masonry and gives the building added strength, which helped the building withstand the attacks and remain structurally sound. The building has thick, heavy masonry in the infill exterior walls, which encloses the building's steel frame. Brick, cinder, concrete and other masonry materials encase interior steel columns, beams, girders and other structural elements. The masonry allowed the structure to absorb much of the energy from debris hitting the building.[12] Nonetheless, the building had extensive damage to its east and south facades.


Read more: en.wikipedia.org...


WTC 7 was NOT constructed in the conventional manner....as described for Verizon. NEITHER were the Towers!!!



edit on 12 February 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   


penn & teller douchebags. just like the rest of the lamestream media.


The Penn & Tellers, the Bill Mahers, the Jon Stewarts (or whatever his name is) have only one purpose on this planet. That is to collect paychecks catering to the Lowest Common Denominator: the ignorant simpletons who eat up any garbage you dish out to them. Heck, even O'reilly's and Beck's audiences are geniuses in comparison to the morons who religiousy follow those other four clowns.

This moron Penn doing a show on 9/11 and having no clue about WTC 7 is the epitome of ignorance. What's the old saying? Life attracts life. In this case, moron (Penn) attracts morons (Penn's fans).

Since the media was no doubt complicit in the 9/11 attacks, what position do you expect these cowardly sell out windbags to take? Here is a hint - guess who signs their paychecks? These phony idiots probably do not even have a choice on what to believe about 9/11. They're obviously just told what to think and to support the OS fairy tale at all costs. Such is the price to pay for being a gutless and soulless coward.

This is why when the Penns, the Mahers and the Stewarts (or whatever his name is) or their reps are confronted about 9/11, they become defensive sniveling little children. Actually, that is not fair to children, since most children display more maturity than these frauds. Don't you love it when these guys lift the veil and show their true colors?

Jon Stewart's Executive Producer arrested for assaulting 9/11 Activist:



edit on 12-2-2011 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


I feel the same way. These people are TOLD how to behave...or, how to embrace 'serious' matters etc. Penn even admits to that at the end of the video.

Do you think David Letterman can actually SAY what he thinks about matters? There's heavy duty censorship, guidelines and 'acts'.

The days of 'free' thinking and 'free' opinions (via high profiled or MSM figures) died along side Edward Murrow!



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Having trouble with 'serious matters' and David Letterman. Sorry if I missed your point. But I'm hoping your response will explain.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


And when it comes right down to it.....


The question was: "What about WTC7"?


....is just about the stupidest "question" the so-called "truth movement" have latched on to, out of them all.




No, the stupidest question would be: What the hell are you doing on this forum!???

WTC 7 is the most pivotal question out there. And I am not putting this out for you because personally, you exasperate and exhaust me to the point I can't get through any of your posts.

Penn (not Teller because we don't know what his deal is) is a 'celebrity' who took a stance. Whether it was orchestrated (which it looks like it was) or on his own volition he has put himself up and out there for debate.

Not too many 'celebrities' do this for this EXACT reason! They keep their personal beliefs out of the way of the public eye.

But when you have the Charlie Sheens and the Ed Begley jrs and the Bill Mahrs and the Penn Jillette and the Rosie O'Donnels and the Bill O'Reilly's etc .....make PUBLIC statements about such a personal matter then it's fair game to corner them whenever possible to ask them to expound on their stance.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by WhateverHappens
 


LOL. I'll try.

I was using David Letterman as an example only because most, know him.

You won't see David Letterman ever say "I myself question the official story of Sept 11 2001'. Nor will you ever hear him say "Yeah, I too, wonder whether Obama was born here...."

They DON'T want controversy. They usually stay neutral or silent.

So when Penn Jillette took this stance (which was done on purpose) he MUST expect people to react. Good, bad or indifferent.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


LOL

So there's a late night comedy show, that does not want controversy? Still not seeing your point.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhateverHappens
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


LOL

So there's a late night comedy show, that does not want controversy? Still not seeing your point.


Celebrities don't usually speak from the heart. They speak from a script.
They usually CAN'T tell the public how they REALLY feel.

I don't know what you're not understanding.

Let me ask you this, besides the few I named earlier, what other high profiled people believe 9-11 was an inside job?



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Celebrities don't usually speak from the heart. They speak from a script.
They usually CAN'T tell the public how they REALLY feel.


LOL, And you know this how?



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Queue the crickets, this thread is dead.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhateverHappens

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Celebrities don't usually speak from the heart. They speak from a script.
They usually CAN'T tell the public how they REALLY feel.


LOL, And you know this how?




Ummmm, common sense and observance!

Try it some time!



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join