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.

 

9/11 Truth: Hollywood Speaks Out (Full Lenght Film) - New documentary!

page: 10
126
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31

Originally posted by SmoKeyHaZe

Originally posted by Section31

Originally posted by SmoKeyHaZe
Actually, I'm debating. And so far, it seems as though I'm winning.

What you are winning is a seat on the bus to ignorance.


Originally posted by SmoKeyHaZe
My beliefs have research & knowledge to back it up...Whether some isn't completely accurate, I still hold substance.

So, you admit your substance is flawed, and you have no problem with believing in faulty information.

Congrats.

You won your seat on the bus.



Haha, I said "whether"...Until you completely prove me wrong kid, then it STILL holds more substance than your own opinion.


Is this really the best trolling you can do? If you're gonna troll, at least be good at it..

When you use the word 'whether' (as in whether or not), that means 'you do not know' if what you are reading is accurate.

You just declared your ignorance. You proved my point. You are ignorant to the facts.


Hey, you're the one who said nobody knows 100%. But that just means your opinion is as void? However, I'm trying to back everything up...You post one badly put together YouTube video & that's that?
edit on 16-6-2011 by SmoKeyHaZe because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmoKeyHaZe

Originally posted by morder1
reply to post by SmoKeyHaZe
 



Look at this guys post history... Its obvious hes a troll, he only posts on 9/11 threads, and discredits everything without offering any proof

Its time to stop feeding the troll...

Skeptic and Believer my @%%

That video he linked proves nothing to me... Fire does not melt steel, Even though it was damaged, it should have collapsed to that point, instead of straight down at near free fall speed...




A building free-falling like this at the rate of 10 floors per second, defies laws of physics, if you say fire did this.






posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmoKeyHaZe
Hey, you're the one who said nobody knows 100%. But that just means your opinion is as void? However, I'm trying to back everything up...You post one badly put together YouTube video & that's that?

...but, you are not proving your case. Look back over every single reply I made, since I arrived to this thread, and match it up to the quotes I grabbed from you. I just made you acknowledge that your whole 9/11 conspiracy theory was based upon ignorance. While you were yelling to the world that you were 100% correct, (trying to pass your assumptions as fact), I just proved to everyone that you do not know anything.

Your theory just ate itself.

Since its getting later her, I have to get going.

Keep the debate flowing. This was fun.

edit on 6/16/2011 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by morder1
reply to post by SmoKeyHaZe
 



Look at this guys post history... Its obvious hes a troll, he only posts on 9/11 threads, and discredits everything without offering any proof

Its time to stop feeding the troll...

Skeptic and Believer my @%%

That video he linked proves nothing to me... Fire does not melt steel, Even though it was damaged, it should have collapsed to that point, instead of straight down at near free fall speed...




No, fire does not usually melt steel.

But it sure as hell can weaken it to the point of collapse.

Like the I-75/I-696 bridge collapse In Michigan. Plain old 87 octane pump gasoline and diesel from a crashed tanker truck burned so hot it collapsed a steel and concrete overpass.

Or the Oakland bay bridge tanker accident where a burning tanker truck caused the collapse of an entire section of overpass.

No burning floor tiles and carpet, no cardboard or paper, no jet fuel, no furniture and desks, no chemical cleaning products, just a tanker truck full of pump gas.

It's an old arguement that has been debunked numerous times.
edit on 16-6-2011 by AGWskeptic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31

Originally posted by SmoKeyHaZe
Hey, you're the one who said nobody knows 100%. But that just means your opinion is as void? However, I'm trying to back everything up...You post one badly put together YouTube video & that's that?

But you are not proving your case. Look back over every single reply I made, since I arrived to this thread, and match it up to the quotes I grabbed from you. I just made you acknowledge that your whole 9/11 conspiracy theory was based upon ignorance. While you were yelling to the world that you were 100% correct, (trying to pass your assumptions as fact), I just proved to everyone that you do not know anything.

Your theory just ate itself.

Have a good night.

edit on 6/16/2011 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



And you are proving your case? You haven't really proved anything.

Sorry, but when did you "make" me acknowledge that my theory was based upon ignorance?

The only thing you've made me acknowledge is how little info you have & how you are constantly trying to put words into my mouth.

I've looked back on all your posts, & you've proved nothing. You've given TWO pieces of evidence: 1 crappy video link & a couple of pictures, where you've failed to properly explain the two different buildings collapsing.

When I broke down your posts, you then turn to trolling, in order to get a reaction. You barely read my comments or the links I posted, but then have the cheek to say I don't read your pointless comments.

No matter what you or anybody can say about fires taking down WTC7, it DOESN'T explain WTC 3, 4, 5 AND Building 6, not collapsing in the same way as WTC7, yet ALL of these buildings are surrounding the Towers.

I know you're frustrated, but it's ok, you tried.


edit on 16-6-2011 by SmoKeyHaZe because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-6-2011 by SmoKeyHaZe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Not only is the collapse of building 7 suspicious, but so is the entire story behind the 9/11 event. How did these hijackers manage to breach so many levels of security? How did they sneak in those box cutters? Why did the metal detectors not detect a box cutter knife? Were they made of plastic?
How is it that many of these hijackers that were shown to have been involved in the 9/11 attacks have been said to be living in Saudi Arabia? People who claim they recognize themselves on that list of suspects? And why does the media now ignore the story regarding the discovery of the hijackers passports: en.wikipedia.org...
Originally, media outlets reported it was found after the WTC had been hit, the OS later amended that by stating it was discovered before. Although no further details were given on that.
It's not making sense...
The official story is not comprehensible in a rational way, it has too many holes. But wasn't it convenient that it was the motivating factor that pushed us into Iraq?
The "Think Tanks" are relying on American gullibility....and so far it still seems to work.

edit on 16-6-2011 by laiguana because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana How did they sneak in those box cutters? Why did the metal detectors not detect a box cutter knife? Were they made of plastic?


My dad had a swiss army knife in his carry on lots of times when we went on family trips before 911, no biggie.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


Except it was a total of 19 hijackers, of foreign decent, mostly Saudis. Eleven of them had expired visas. Not a single one of them was discovered carrying a box cutter knife?

Sorry, not making sense there either. The chances of that seem to be rather slim.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Among the numerous things that bother me about 9/11 -- I have to say, that, it's the ONE INCIDENT where all the talking heads -- from the Right and the Left, all are so damn certain.

The Bush government's position, from day 1, was that they had NO CLUE that someone would want to fly airplanes into buildings -- sure, we can dismiss this as a face-saving line. But it's the day that they had "security drills" and had the military stand down. There was total confusion at every point.

The ONE THING, that everyone was so sure about by the end of the day; "Buildings fell because of the airplanes and it was al Qaeda that did it."

Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher and even more main stream media folks -- all agree, and they cannot agree on anything. People who will talk smack and some crazier stuff - but NOT about 9/11. It's like someone rang a bell, and instantly, everyone responded like it was the JFK Assassination. Yeah "EVERYONE" knows it was a single shooter -- yet a civil suit and the government's own investigation concluded "the result of a conspiracy involving more than one person."

Bin Laden didn't haunt America to put turf back on the Pentagon Lawn and confiscate 100 videos -- and that patsy in Texas didn't come back from the grave and steal JFK's brain. We CANNOT even get evidence of Bin Laden's supposed assassination. When the government's position is; "we cannot show you this evidence because it might make people angry at us" -- well, what about shooting someone without a trial in another country? Anyone who is going to be angry about Bin Laden's death, is already pissed that he wasn't given a trial and you dumped his body at sea. ON the off change that the government is telling the truth -- why they heck to they act like everything is a coverup -- are they just trying to be dicks about it?

>> I know, Charlie Sheen and a bunch of other actors -- but how can you dismiss what they say? It's questions I ask other people when I talk to them,.. and all these "crazy tin-foil-hat" people, are ready to debate all the "experts" given a proper forum. Popular Mechanics, and Rush, and all the "authorities" on the subject -- they are the no-shows. Is Charlie Sheen less intelligent or an authority figure than Donald Trump? He gets an interview and press coverage to display his ignorance.

Millions of unanimous voices who get paid lots of money, government backing, unlimited -- and they are cowards.


I think there are a lot of "theories" about a lot of topics -- but 9/11, was an obvious cover-up. If it was ANYTHING like what the government told us, they'd have at least a dozen videos to prove it. They'd happily have kept the crime scene untouched so that more than one agency could explore every nook and cranny. You know who doesn't like to be transparent? Liars.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
This will be my last comment to the trolls on this thread(SkepticAndBeliever, and Section31)

If 9/11 did happen the way it did... How did the "terrorists" Acquire ANTHRAX from a High security building in Maryland, and send it to 2 senators, and also kill 5 people, and infecting 17 people?

If you can not answer this, then please just move along, and stop wasting space in my thread... You guys have no proof, yet its all you demand from everybody else... Please... I would hope everybody else can see through your BS...



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


Except it was a total of 19 hijackers, of foreign decent, mostly Saudis. Eleven of them had expired visas. Not a single one of them was discovered carrying a box cutter knife?

Sorry, not making sense there either. The chances of that seem to be rather slim.


How did they manage NOT to appear on any flight manifests?

There was an "alleged" manifest that was FAXED to a court trial of Moussoui -- but it was thrown out of court as improper evidence, because you can print any list from any source and FAX it.

>> The "Visas" of the Saudis, were GIVEN TO THEM, at an Embassy in Saudi Arabia, staffed and well monitored by the CIA. These guys were allegedly on watch lists yet they had to be cleared by CIA -- they were NOT anonymous, if we are to believe the stories of the INTELLIGENCE AGENCY telling us al Qaeda was involved.

And since when was the CIA or Military "suddenly" a source of authentic information? I mean, these people train all day to lie.

I don't get it. Most of the people who "support 9/11", wouldn't accept these same sources telling them the sun would rise tomorrow, but the all nod heads in unison. Either the CIA is lying about the Saudis being on the plane at all -- or THEY helped them get there. Which might be why they are covering it up in the first place.

Well-meaning people might be assisting the cover-up, because they honestly feel guilty, or are trying to protect their agency assuming that it is an embarrassment but not true guilt. However, this allows the real culprits to get away with it.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Except it was a total of 19 hijackers, of foreign decent, mostly Saudis. Eleven of them had expired visas. Not a single one of them was discovered carrying a box cutter knife?


According to a speech (www.fbi.gov...) given by the Director of the FBI: "All 19 entered our country legally, and only three had overstayed the legal limits of their visas on the day of the attacks"

And once more, they don't have to carry the knife on them, they just have to have it in their carry on luggage. Like I said, before 911 the security wasn't as tight and even my dad carried a swiss army knife in his carry on luggage.
edit on 17-6-2011 by SkepticAndBeliever because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by SkepticAndBeliever
 


Except it was a total of 19 hijackers, of foreign decent, mostly Saudis. Eleven of them had expired visas. Not a single one of them was discovered carrying a box cutter knife?

Sorry, not making sense there either. The chances of that seem to be rather slim.


Boxcutters were allowed to be carried on before 9/11, lots of potentially dangerous things were. When I 10 I flew home from Orlanda with a metal sword I had bought at Busch Gardens. That was over 30 years ago, but I still have the sword, and it's surprisingly stout, and sharp. I cut a watermellon in two without much effort with that cheap chunk of Indian steel. Of course I sharpened it after I got home, but they never even checked it. If my dad had been a terrorist he would have had a 32 inch sword to use.

Airline security was a joke pre 9/11, I flew extensively in the 80's and 90's, it was nothing even close to what we have now.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst
 


Well, there's not much to add to that...
I still rest on the matter that the majority of Americans choose to ignore anything that incriminates their government on this matter. They prefer having a boogie man like Osama (the face of militant Islam) than admitting a faction of our government may have played a role in the 9/11 event.
Face it, the majority of Americans do not care to look deeper into the matter. They want to believe what they want to believe...It's easier to cater to that primal reactionary response people had after 9/11 than it is to properly uncover the sequence of events within our government and federal agencies, prior to 9/11 and also soon afterwards.
It may require a bit of...skepticism and common sense.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


Well, being that I was in my teens when 9/11 happened, I can also recall airline security as I made quite a number of travels also and can tell you that each time I flew, I had to go through a metal detector. I had to remove my belt one time because the metal detector had gone off.
I also recall opening up my bag to show a security officer my CD player.
Perhaps you were given a pass given that you were ten years old (depite that it still seems to go against airline protocol)...I'm not sure how it was when you were ten, but I certainly remember how it was when I was 17.




FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said keeping box cutters off planes was an industry requirement, not a government order. She said the FAA allowed airline passengers to carry blades less than four inches long before Sept. 11. Government rules now prohibit such items.


www.usatoday.com...

And despite this...not one suspect in the 9/11 hijackings was stopped and questioned by airline security.

Still not making sense.
edit on 17-6-2011 by laiguana because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


Well, being that I was in my teens when 9/11 happened, I can also recall airline security as I made quite a number of travels also and can tell you that each time I went through I had to go through a metal detector. I had to remove my belt one time because the metal detector had gone off.
I also recall opening up my bag to show a security officer my CD player.
Perhaps you were given a pass given that you were ten years old (depite that it still seems to go against airline protocol)...I'm not sure how it was when you were ten, but I certainly remember how it was when I was 17.




FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said keeping box cutters off planes was an industry requirement, not a government order. She said the FAA allowed airline passengers to carry blades less than four inches long before Sept. 11. Government rules now prohibit such items.


www.usatoday.com...



I remember what it was like august of 01, and as your own link points out, they were allowed onboard. You didn't have to sneak them you just put them in the dish with your keys.

The terrorists took numerous test flights to figure just how much they could get on board the planes, the boxcutter was universally allowed past checkpoints, that's why they chose it.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by morder1
 

Great video and thread thank you for sharing indeed people need to wake up more to what is truly happening in the world now. I will be watching this doco and writing things down.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


That doesn't answer why not a single one of the 19 hijackers was stopped and questioned about their carry on items. I figure if they were able to stop me and ask me to open up my carry on bag to show them a CD player...they would have no hesitation doing the same to a Saudi on an expired visa.
I don't see how you can get around that...because it's not making sense.

I'm also curious about the passenger manifests not showing any of the supposed hijackers of 9/11...does anyone have any sources on that?
edit on 17-6-2011 by laiguana because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Fantastic

edit on 17-6-2011 by solid007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


That doesn't answer why not a single one of the 19 hijackers was stopped and questioned about their carry on items. I figure if they were able to stop me and ask me to open up my carry on bag to show them a CD player...they would have no hesitation doing the same to a Saudi on an expired visa.
I don't see how you can get around that...because it's not making sense.

I'm also curious about the passenger manifests not showing any of the supposed hijackers of 9/11...does anyone have any sources on that?
edit on 17-6-2011 by laiguana because: (no reason given)


Would you be stopped and questioned for putting car keys in the dish? The dish goes around the metal detector, which wasn't there for knives, it was there for guns.

So why would any other approved item in the dish be a cause for stopping someone?

Even a boxcutter.




top topics



 
126
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join