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.
Please be my guest - name some names and post some evidence that the "media" is in on it.
Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by hooper
Please be my guest - name some names and post some evidence that the "media" is in on it.
Scroll up.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 24-8-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)edit on 24-8-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)
Be specific, your post went to the top of the page, there is no "up". Moot anyway, no one has ever posted anything specific that would make the "media" suspect. Not even going to bother with the silly concept of the "media".
Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by NewAgeMan
Would you like to collaborate with me to eliminate the media as suspects?
something just hit me, yank...that video i posted of bush talking about the terrorists planting the bombs high enough in the building so that the people up top would be trapped....sounds like he messed up and had to cover...he didn't say anything about planes hitting the buildings, only that the operatives planted bombs up there....why would he say that? then he had to say, that they planted them far enough up to trap the people up top? why didn't they plant them closer to the bottom so they could trap EVERYBODY, in the tower?....why just the people up top? doesn't make a lick of sense....there might be something to your no plane idea......
Originally posted by itsatrap
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by tpg65
Can you back up up anything you have just wrote , with facts ?
Yep and you know what they are. Which way you going with this? Are you going to try the straight denial routine? Or maybe the old "they're all in on it" schtick.
9/11 Commission Report.
Hooper, they won't believe anything associated with the govt, however...
How about the popular mechanics special edition where they debunk each 9/11 conspiracy one by one....
I saw loose change years back and for a couple years, thought it was plausible. Although, I was never extremely nasty and aggressive with those views, like the "truthers" who go to ground zero and yell at the family members of victims, firemen, cops, and emts saying its all a lie. I still don't know how none of them got knocked the f### out!
The popular mechanics issue broke it down piece by piece with *gasp* science and it made me feel kind of stupid for even entertaining those conspiracies. Loose change was made by a couple college kids; popular mechanics debunked them with specialists in aeronautics, architecture, engineering, chemistry, physics, etc....who's explanation is more valid objectively?
I know it is hard to be objective when you have subscribed to an idea with all your heart, but the facts are there.
And op, you can't say that someone's opinion isn't welcome here because you don't agree with it. Who are you? The govt?
Originally posted by Dilligaf28
The OP in this thread is nothing more than trolling and trying to stir up "debate" for stars and flags. If you show him a serial number off of a part of the plane sticking out of a piece of rubble he will deny it is evidence. If you show him a video showing the demolition to be caused by the Borg he will believe it to be fact.
Confirmation Bias at its best. No need for me to offer any input into this thread when the OP is so biased.
Originally posted by galdur
When you have a 1300 feet high skyscraper you obviously reinforce this structure excessively to prevent gravity from pulling it down to earth. It´s not minimally designed, its reinforcing design is way redundant. The probability that it would ever fall through itself practically without resistance in a gravity driven event is thus zero. If you still believe that this could be realistic according to the official sttory you can not also believe that parachutes work. Can´t have it both ways.
Originally posted by lamabomb
reply to post by tpg65
Put Options, Put Options , Put Options
The largest number of put options on the market in history on 9/10, 2001---
the numbers speak beyond most accusations of an insider job......
100,000,000 was made---lucky guess??
Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by tpg65
Where is the evidence of a demolition? Physical evidence. Not a picture, video or paint chip. Where, after 10 long years, is the evidence. That is a question that I have asked for on these forums for over 5 years.
Problem is that most people only look at part of what happened that day and also think that anything considered the OS is not valid based of not their own research but by paraphrasing the AETruth site or any of the prison planet references.
I do not believe that the WTC complex collapses involved explosives nor was there a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon. I do however feel 93 was covered up as well as 587. Sad part is, that even though I do not believe the government on this issue I am branded a 'sheeple' or OS'er because i have actually read the 9/11 Commission report as well as the entire NIST report. The largest problem with the Truth movement is that you immediately discredit it without your own investigation or taking the time to read the facts an not paraphrased website or web links.
I have watched Loose Change and the continuation and the update. To me it is brainwashing in the way the information is presented. It is like interrogating someone. If you beat them long enough they will tell you they are your father. In these cases, the uneducated to 9/11 watch a video and immediately think BUsh and Co pulled it off yet they think Bush was the stupiest president ever. Which is it? It is the one that fits the post at the time.
Please do not take this as a cut to your thread but I want you, as the OP, to understand that most that understand, not believe, what happened that day are not pushing an agenda but simply trying to stop the disinfo that is spread based on assumption, perception and ones one reconstruction of the laws of physics.
Originally posted by galdur
Also, the way these massive structures are constructed is that the closer to ground the more massive the reinforcing structure becomes. This should be pretty obvious. So, the reinforcing steel at the top is maybe one fourth or less of that of the bottom, So, you have according to the official story lesser mass driving down greater mass practically without resistance in a gravity driven event.. Face it folks, this bunk is all out of Hollywood.