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.

 

Americans do you feel comfortable discussing 911 irl?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by blackrain17
Anyway, in real life, people become pussies and do not want to stray away from the herd. They have this innate fear, maybe insecurity, that they believe once you stray away from the herd, you'll get abducted by aliens or get eaten by monsters and never be able to join the herd again. I on the other hand, do not give a #. I don't know if that's necessarily a good or bad thing but I think if you truly believe in something, you shouldn't really care what your alleged friends think of you or anyone else for that matter. Speak your mind and act accordingly...



Originally posted by blackrain17
I don't know about Yankee but do you know who Rashard Mendenhall is? He is the starting running back for the Pittsburg Steelers. He hinted about Osama not being involved in 911 and questioned about 911. He got shunned by the MSM and lost some endorsement deals also. So speaking your beliefs can lead to negative repercussions.


As your second quote states, there are definite financial repercussions. For those of us that have families to feed, it goes far beyond caring what your friends think of you. It directly impacts others dependent on you. Is it being a sheeple, pussy, or insecure person to not want to negatively impact those around you? Is it being dishonest to not publicly speak of something? Why is it that you think you must speak your mind at all times? Could it be that you want others to agree with you? Why do you have this need? Could that be labeled as insecurity? I understand acting according to what you believe to be the truth because that it what honesty in action is. But, do you have to talk about it? No, I don’t think so…




posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


You should have common sense to express your views, especially if you are a public figure. Would I have done what Mendenhall did? No. Why? Because there is a time and place for everything and Twitter isn't it.

Honestly, I couldn't care less what you or anyone else thinks. Maybe I struck a nerve with you or my message wasn't as clear as I wanted to convey but all I'm saying is if you believe in the same thing, don't try to disparage others just to fit in. Just shut your pie hole and there won't be any problems.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
It is tough to bring up in America. I was bartending one night after the Osama murder had taken place. And the herd mentality was unbelievable. I brought up that you don't mind government agents infiltrating houses, shooting unarmed civilians, basically being their own judge/jury/executioner, and the response was, well as long as no more 9/11 doesn't happen, sure. Then I asked where is the connection between Osama and the WTC/Pentagon attacks. They said, the news said so. Basically I tried to elicit a critical thought (shoulda known better at the bar), and the hate and anger that arose, was startling.

Not going to say everyone is brainwashed, because I know there were a few at that bar that night that left with a question mark in their head. But, there are too many repercussions for not buying the O/S hook line and sinker. Not that getting made fun of has bothered me before, but the discrediting of everything I might say, due to being a "conspiracy theorist" is comical. On the other hand, when I do get audience time, I have garnered a lot of respect from others that say, "wow, I can't believe you thought of that." which i reply, "it was the only logical conclusion to come to when you eliminate the mainstream media and government talking heads, and start looking deeper into it all, first by reading up on middle school physics."

I will admit, I bought the O/S for the first few months maybe even a couple years. But when the direction turned to Iraq as being the next invasion...it made me really question, how a country that has never been known for terrorist attacks, or financially supporting them could be involved with 9/11.

But question the O/S and you're unpatriotic. Ask what the reason is behind the planes hitting the towers, and you're flooded with insensitive @#@hole comments about the innocent victims that perished that day. My response is usually, if we look deeper, we can honor these victims in the best way possible, by getting the real @#@holes that did it, and insuring that we don't allow an organization to do this again. And no, the org wasn't Al-quaeadaaada...



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by saabster5
 


I'm betting a lot of folks in the bar would agree with you if you weren't surrounded by the herd. Alcohol makes people stupid too.



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


Personally, I dont give it a moments thought.
I knew no one that got killed and I do not know who did it.

So I do not really care to much anymore. We have bigger problems now!! Today!!



posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Six6Six
 


The problems today are likely caused by the same folks who gave us 911,



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 

I pushed the events of 9/11 back into the darkest recesses of my brain. Actually, I refused to even call it "9/11" for many years, because I was struck with discomfort by the immediate (if not simultaneous) and intense campaign to label it as such. Why the truncation? Do Americans have such a short attention span that we need to slap on a catchy and abbreviated name to represent the day? But I digress. I think part of me refrained from discussing it because I was so appalled by the events and even the tone of America in the months following. Something wasn't sitting right, so it was easier to just avoid thinking about it. Americans are well versed in escapism.

It wasn't until years later that questions began to surface. Certain things about that day just didn't make any logical sense. And my brain wanted logical resolution. But to my dismay, those questions only begat more questions. The questions multiplied, yet there was no factual evidence to be found to put them to rest.

When I first began to revisit that day, I was startled to find I had completely forgotten that WTC 7 had collapsed as well. It's as if it was erased entirely from my mind. That, more than anything, led me to ask more questions. How could something so major be wiped from my memory as if it never happened? How scary.

I don't have the answer to that and to the hundreds of other unresolved questions from that day. However, my desire for logic and truth has increased a thousand-fold. It only seems natural that this need would propel me to discuss the events with people. What I cannot understand is that the typical reaction is one of blind emotion, lacking all semblance of reason. Therefore, a compelling and absorbing discussion is rare.

Even in the most current news regarding Bush speaking about his delayed reaction on that day - it emphasizes the emotional angle - from the recounting of Bush himself regarding the immediate emotions he felt, to the article citing Bush's thoughts and feelings and "intimate details". The persuasion is so very subtle. But if one can step back, the subtlety becomes a scream. It's as if any mention of the zippy, slangy label of Nine-Eleven instantly triggers our basest of emotions.

I believe we have desperately needed an intelligent dialogue regarding that day, but even seeking information or trying to locate facts is somehow "unpatriotic" or "nutty" or "perverse". What an incredible leap. And why? How does that make any sense at all?

So I guess to answer your question... I don't feel comfortable discussing 9/11 in real life. I don't even feel that comfortable discussing it in unreal life either. Simply because the way the events were handled, the many contradictions, the lack of resolution... the entire thing makes me uncomfortable. That's not to say I won't discuss it. I will. And I do. It's unfortunate that we, as a nation, cannot truly come together in a time of crisis to resolve and close this wound. It will never close as long as the spaces remain where pieces of the puzzle are missing or destroyed.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by HolographicPrincipal
reply to post by Cassius666
 

It wasn't until years later that questions began to surface. Certain things about that day just didn't make any logical sense. And my brain wanted logical resolution. But to my dismay, those questions only begat more questions. The questions multiplied, yet there was no factual evidence to be found to put them to rest.


That day was very strange.

For about two weeks afterward it was all I could think about. But my pledge fater was an architect and we could see the Sears Tower being constructed from campus.

So for two weeks I was thinking about what it took for a skyscraper to hold itself up and the distribution of steel was very prominent in my thinking. Airliners could not do that in that little time.

So I dismissed it from my mind and assumed the problem would get resolved. It wasn't until 2006 that I began discussing it on the net and read all of the ridiculous conversations. I didn't even know the steel had been shipped out of the country in a few months.

After TEN YEARS the question is why didn't the physics profession shut this crap down in six months. Now people have to come up with rationalizations for why they believed silly crap. They keep talking about floors coming down on floors while ignoring the core coming down on the core.

Why hasn't a single engineering school built a collapsing model by now?

psik



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



For about two weeks afterward it was all I could think about. But my pledge fater was an architect and we could see the Sears Tower being constructed from campus.

Uh, wasn't the Sears Tower built in the early 1970's?

So for two weeks I was thinking about what it took for a skyscraper to hold itself up and the distribution of steel was very prominent in my thinking.

Why?

Airliners could not do that in that little time.

Case closed then, huh?

So I dismissed it from my mind and assumed the problem would get resolved.

It was.

It wasn't until 2006 that I began discussing it on the net and read all of the ridiculous conversations. I didn't even know the steel had been shipped out of the country in a few months.

You still don't know that. A lot of it is still here. After a "few months" the recovery process was still ongoing.

After TEN YEARS the question is why didn't the physics profession shut this crap down in six months.

Actually the NIST reports "shut this crap down" years ago. However, sometime crap just keeps on flowing.

Now people have to come up with rationalizations for why they believed silly crap.

Those rationalizations are called science and engineering. You should look those up, some interesting stuff.

They keep talking about floors coming down on floors while ignoring the core coming down on the core.

You should read the report - a lot of good stuff in there, may answer some of your questions - but why bother, you've already drawn your own conclusions and require no further data.

Why hasn't a single engineering school built a collapsing model by now?

Because they are smarter than you and don't need to build models to understand basic principles of science and engineering.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by blackrain17

Originally posted by Cassius666
What kind of repercussions? Do you fear that you might lose friends you made among your coworkers, or do you fear it will negatively impact your career or even get you fired?


I don't know about Yankee but do you know who Rashard Mendenhall is? He is the starting running back for the Pittsburg Steelers. He hinted about Osama not being involved in 911 and questioned about 911. He got shunned by the MSM and lost some endorsement deals also. So speaking your beliefs can lead to negative repercussions.


edit on 29-7-2011 by blackrain17 because: spelling


Oh I see. So its like think what you want, but keep it to yourself.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
holograms believers are no more than "cops being dressed as protesters", so scared people can use that to ridicule the debate even more.

not that hard to understand it is it..
edit on 1-8-2011 by notonsamepage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Depends on the area. Everyone around here thinks its pretty fishy.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



For about two weeks afterward it was all I could think about. But my pledge father was an architect and we could see the Sears Tower being constructed from campus.

Uh, wasn't the Sears Tower built in the early 1970's?

So for two weeks I was thinking about what it took for a skyscraper to hold itself up and the distribution of steel was very prominent in my thinking.

Why?

Airliners could not do that in that little time.

Case closed then, huh?

So I dismissed it from my mind and assumed the problem would get resolved.

It was.

It wasn't until 2006 that I began discussing it on the net and read all of the ridiculous conversations. I didn't even know the steel had been shipped out of the country in a few months.

You still don't know that. A lot of it is still here. After a "few months" the recovery process was still ongoing.

After TEN YEARS the question is why didn't the physics profession shut this crap down in six months.

Actually the NIST reports "shut this crap down" years ago. However, sometime crap just keeps on flowing.

Now people have to come up with rationalizations for why they believed silly crap.

Those rationalizations are called science and engineering. You should look those up, some interesting stuff.

They keep talking about floors coming down on floors while ignoring the core coming down on the core.

You should read the report - a lot of good stuff in there, may answer some of your questions - but why bother, you've already drawn your own conclusions and require no further data.

Why hasn't a single engineering school built a collapsing model by now?

Because they are smarter than you and don't need to build models to understand basic principles of science and engineering.


Yeah, It was built in the '70's and that is when I was in college.

Duh, skyscrapers have to hold themselves up. That means the farther down a skyscraper you go the more weight must be supported. That means more steel. But more steel means more weight which must be supported by more steel farther down. So talking about the top 15% of a skyscraper crushing everything below without talking about how the steel had to be distributed in the building is UTTER NONSENSE.

But apparently it will soon be TEN YEARS after the event and lots of people with degrees in physics have allowed this to happen.

I guess that means in the United States SCIENCE does not qualify as a TRUTH MOVEMENT.

Read a 10,000 page report that doesn't even specify the total amount of concrete that had to be supported by the steel. ROFL

There is very little more disgusting than STUPID LIARS who expect other people to BELIEVE LIES SO STUPID they are not even worth paying attention to. They expect to be able to order people to be more stupid than they are.

The case is now about the psychology of these ten years of stupidity. Psychologists too dumb to understand grade school Newtonian physics. This gets into the psychology of conformity.



You gotta conform to the majority. 75% of the population scores below 111 on the Idiot Quotient tests.

There is nothing stopping anyone from testing it for themselves however.



But after TEN YEARS how do the engineering schools that charge $100,000+ for four years of education explain not testing it themselves? How many structural engineering graduates have they turned out in that time?

psik



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I have no problem discussing it in real life. Of course the majority of my discussions have been with colleagues of the United employees who died that day, members of National Guard units accused of shooting down Flight 93, members of other Guard units responsible for Air Defense, friends that were at the Pentagon that day, a couple of civil engineers.......and the ones I get to actually read stuff on ATS.....think the truth movement is full of idiots (their word...not mine)

Oh, yes, there was the "leader" of the local truth group where I live too. A few statements of fact and the gent threatened violence against me.... Most truthers I have talked to in real life, end up threatening violence as a matter of fact.........



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Duh, skyscrapers have to hold themselves up. That means the farther down a skyscraper you go the more weight must be supported. That means more steel. But more steel means more weight which must be supported by more steel farther down. So talking about the top 15% of a skyscraper crushing everything below without talking about how the steel had to be distributed in the building is UTTER NONSENSE.

And yet you have admitted time and time and time again that you reached a definitive conclusion without any of this supposedly vital information and then call everyone else stupid or liars because they allegedly reached their conclusions without the benefit of the same information.

Read a 10,000 page report that doesn't even specify the total amount of concrete that had to be supported by the steel. ROFL

ROFL - advising the world was is and what is not in a report that you never read!!!



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 



Oh, yes, there was the "leader" of the local truth group where I live too. A few statements of fact and the gent threatened violence against me.... Most truthers I have talked to in real life, end up threatening violence as a matter of fact.........


So, essentially anyone who doesn’t support the lies of the OS are Truthers and this gives you the right to insult and ridicule them because they refuse to stay ignorant.

You claim: that most Truthers in real life have threatened violence, where do you go to discuss 911, in a bar full drunks? I can assure you that most Truthers are opened minded and do not threaten violence, such as Scientists, Engineers, Firemen, Police officers, Demolition experts, first responders, surviving families and so on… I haven’t heard or read of any of these Truthers threatening any violence towards anyone.

I talk to a lot of people about 911 all the time. I have made it one of my life missions to spread the truth, to point out the flaws in the OS and to show where all the circumstantial evidence supporting a False Flag attack ends at the Bush administration.

I am very comfortable talking about 911, I have seven years of hard research under me and I can back up most of my claims with credible sources. I always tell people who do not believe me that they don’t have to take my word for it. I always tell them where they can go on the internet to check out the facts for themselves.



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Hey Hoop,

You mostly post as a naysayer, namely someone who simply poo-poos the work of other folks, but I don't recall reading anything from you that describes why you believe what you believe. Disdain and ridicule is what I usually get, or "It was on TV" , but when pressed you say you believe the OS because your sister witnessed it.

I'm really interested in hearing you make your case beyond the defaults, because you are the classic example of the reason why most of us don't speak in public. Group thinkers like you must have a more convincing reason than TV, and not everyone can claim their sister was there (not everyone is capable of such a thing).

I like to focus on the north tower, because that's the one that housed the bond certificates...that means it was the primary target...

In your own words, can you describe how the impact damage to the North tower is consistent with a jet crash?



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Duh, skyscrapers have to hold themselves up. That means the farther down a skyscraper you go the more weight must be supported. That means more steel. But more steel means more weight which must be supported by more steel farther down. So talking about the top 15% of a skyscraper crushing everything below without talking about how the steel had to be distributed in the building is UTTER NONSENSE.

And yet you have admitted time and time and time again that you reached a definitive conclusion without any of this supposedly vital information and then call everyone else stupid or liars because they allegedly reached their conclusions without the benefit of the same information.

Read a 10,000 page report that doesn't even specify the total amount of concrete that had to be supported by the steel. ROFL

ROFL - advising the world was is and what is not in a report that you never read!!!


So you don't know how to use a computer to do searches. My are you brilliant.

Because what supposedly happened is IMPOSSIBLE! The physics profession has made a fool of itself by not demanding that information but then if most of them figured out it was impossible then they also figured out that some organization has a lot of power to do whatever it wants and no scruples about exercising that power.

So there has really been a hell of a lot of SILENCE from most of the physics profession on so public a subject.

psik



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Because what supposedly happened is IMPOSSIBLE!


There you go again! Declaring that something is impossible and then demanding more information!

By the way, search does have its limitations. You should try reading the whole report! You've had years and years and years - if only a few pages a day you probably would have been through the whole thing a couple of times already. Can you imagine some student in an "engineering" school telling their instructor that they didn't bother reading that whole thing on Strength of Materials, that they did a little search to find the important stuff?



posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by vipertech0596
 




So, essentially anyone who doesn’t support the lies of the OS are Truthers and this gives you the right to insult and ridicule them because they refuse to stay ignorant.


Gee, where did I say that in my post? Although, from the way you react to posts that point out where your beliefs are inaccurate I would be careful in bringing up ignorance.




You claim: that most Truthers in real life have threatened violence, where do you go to discuss 911, in a bar full drunks? I can assure you that most Truthers are opened minded and do not threaten violence, such as Scientists, Engineers, Firemen, Police officers, Demolition experts, first responders, surviving families and so on… I haven’t heard or read of any of these Truthers threatening any violence towards anyone.


No, I said that the majority of the ones I have talked to in real life, threaten violence. And actually, it was a public library on the one occasion. I could mention that I have several friends who have had to change phone numbers and install security systems in their houses because of harassment from "truthers"...oh wait, I just mentioned that....



I talk to a lot of people about 911 all the time. I have made it one of my life missions to spread the truth, to point out the flaws in the OS and to show where all the circumstantial evidence supporting a False Flag attack ends at the Bush administration.


Hayden Fry used to refer to that as throwing a bunch of BS at a wall.....at some point..something will stick. And if you are spending your life spreading ignorance....my condolences. We only get one trip on this marble and you are wasting it.



I am very comfortable talking about 911, I have seven years of hard research under me and I can back up most of my claims with credible sources. I always tell people who do not believe me that they don’t have to take my word for it. I always tell them where they can go on the internet to check out the facts for themselves.


Ive seen some of your "sources" ....its funny how few of them stand up under investigation.




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join