Enough with the dishonest behaviour Truthers - I'm calling you out.

page: 3
60
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


A few points.

Dozens saw the plane hit the Pentagon. Dozens. The testimony is widely available.

The buildings were NOT built to be hit by a plane that big AND even if they HAD been that doesn't mean they'd actually DO it.

Things fail to do what they were built to do EVERY DAY.

Again, not evidence.




posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


i never tried to convict them based on that. I want to for their lack of response whil it was their job to do so. People have been convicted with less though.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 06:59 AM
link   
For once, the thread creator name is not correct, its clearlyverymuchobvious what you try to do here, but, your utter failure to present anything, and mean anything to debate really points to a rant. Is it that you OSrs feel your little sand castle crumble? Going to the spoiled brat attitude already? WAWAWA you dishonest truthers WAWAWA. Go educate yourself and find out why 7 should have never collapsed.

Edit to add: the towers WERE built to whistand a 707 fully loaded, with comparable or higher weight to the planes the day of the impact. The fact that you choose to ignore the fact that the towers were built with plane hitsin mind after a bomber hit the ESB, and no, as we all know it did not collapse (even tho it was not designed to take it in the first place) only shows that you are just anothe internet troll, wich leads to another point, is ATS being taken away fron the truth? Deny ignorance and all that you know?
edit on 12-9-2011 by Saltarello because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Myendica
 


Jesus. The French do this ALL THE TIME.

It doesn't need to destroy all 90 floors at once, just the ONE floor underneath it. That's such a basic mistake.


The demolition technique you are referring to has never been used on steele framed buildings, because it wouldnt work. The frame is too sturdy to be taken out in that manner.



If you look at the videos where that technique is used, the buildings dont collapse at freefall either, as the upper floors take out the floors below there is a slight delay, a hicup if you will. And most importantly, the top section does not immediately tilt. It comes straight down smashing the floors below. In the case of wtc 1 and 2 the top immediately tilted and FOLLOWS the rest of the building as it gives way underneat it. Had the top encountentered resistance it would have fallen off to the side.

And finally in all of those examples there are no "puffs of smoke" coming out of the windows.
edit on 12-9-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   
okay a little honesty from truthers....now the part about no other buildings have come down like this....hmmm...and your fine example of top down technique......STEEL

steel structures with a core......the way in which a skyscaper is built....now i know you were in another thread that Tupac put a lot of effort into..and you tried to debunk it with some things...and you got shown otherwise....So in a bit of showmanship i can only gather you have made this thread.

You basically are calling truthers dishonest right in your title to i don't know...anger us...i am not sure...

Now in this top down demo that is being shown it is a concrete structure...and you know something it is actually following bazant zhous crush down crush up model......IMPORTANT NOTE the crush up phase of the upper block does not start until the crush down phase has COMPLETED.....

Is that the case in the towers...no it is not...and also the resistance has been removed from the lower floors in the middle of the structure......as you can see over and over in those demolitions....

the laws of physics have not been broken there....Keep in mind all structure in the making of this video were harmed...also keep in mind...all structures in this top down demolition are CONCRETE.

but then again i guess i am being dishonest here....

now lets look through the art of pictures...this is my own work by the way.












now not quite sure what you see but i see the top completely destroyed before the crush down phase has even begun....so can you explain this phenomenom so i can understand the process



as we see here in the model
edit on 073030p://f05Monday by plube because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by hmdphantom
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


1.What is your explanation for this ?






Normally if someone decides to jump of a tall building I'd expect them to move their arms and legs around. But this person clearly has hands tied up. He must have seen something which he shouldn't have which cost him his life.



2.What is your explanation for the dollar bill ?



3. How about this one ?


September 11, 2001 -- Eleven years to the day after President Bush [Senior] delivers his speech to Congress entitled Toward a New World Order, and 1 year and 1 day after the official birth of the New World Order, "terrorists" attack and destroy the World Trade Center and severely damage the Pentagon.


source

4.How about this link ?

Masonic and Illuminati symbols
edit on 12/9/11 by hmdphantom because: sorry
edit on 12/9/11 by hmdphantom because: (no reason given)


1. Clearly tied up? Lol no!! Its prolly just like one of those derp face screenshots, and also, How do we know this is a TT pic? It looks too clear....

2. Seriously? I belived the dollar bill theory when i was 12 dude....
www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net...

3. So your saying that a speech called "TOWARD a new world order" Is the birth? Seems silly at first, and than to say that it was 1 day and 1 year is just silly... Why does this remind me of the June 6th 2006 belivers? Just wow...

4. THIS SITE HAS HORRIBLE MASONRY. I HAVE FRIENDS WHO ARE MASONS AND THIS IS BS.


Obelisk.
The obelisk stands for the male sex and therefore symbolises the male creative principle.


no!!! Although it is a male statue, saying that is like saying "There are men in the white house so that means we are run by king."


Circle and point logo for Portugese paper.
The circle with a point in the middle is an important freemason and illuminati symbol representing fertility. The point symbolizes the male principle impregnating the female, symbolized by the circle. Here it can be found just before the name of the Portugese version of "The Independent".


Wow... So your saying some random portugese newspaper is illuminati/masons? Wowww.... you know what else is masonic than? Lets see... Peaches, Plums, Avacados, Boobs, Most water arts, my fan, my hairbrush when help upside down and looked down upon directly down....

~2 hours later~

..The fan on my computer, and my hardrive.. oh and the case too. My fiber gummies.. oh and how could i forget my doorknob!!!



The owl depicted by the streets and park around the Capitol of Washington DC.


So thats what an owl looks like on meth... BUT WAIT!! IF YOU FLIP IT UPSIDE DOWN IT LOOKS LIKE A TUSCAN CANTLEOPE WITH LEGS!! BOYCOTT MELONS!!


NATO swastika.
The resemblance between the NATO logo and the NAZI swastika should not be seen as a mere coincidence.


So your saying that all diamonds are swastikas.. What about ninja stars? Or those 4th of july pinwheels.. its a basic geometric shape...

And than we get to the 50 year old in moms basement "I wanted to be an engineer ;-;"
9/11 thoerys.....



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


More importantly if you knew anything about engineering,and construction,and the Pentagon,it's a simple equation,none of the facts add up,I wish I was a door to door salesman ,because your story is unlike a guy trying to sell me a broom and convince me it's a vacuum cleaner,Nothing adds up here but an agenda,next time do a little research instead of performing a version of social suicide,those who believe the official story believe it because they are afraid of the truth,0+ 0 still equals 0and as far as the Pentagon,they have survelliance that can tell if I person 20 miles away has shaved or not,you bore me



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
I'm starting to see, you are not person to discuss anything with, i answered your entire list, and you're not even defending yourself, stand up and fight!

But to show you something, here's another example of verinage demo.



Can you see how collapse is slowing down? Well, that's not what happen in ny. Besides, again, building is weakened around middle floors.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious

Originally posted by jazzguy
where are all the links to proof from OP?...until then...Inside Job for sure


Sorry, but what do you want links too?

All of those beliefs are common amongst truthers.

If you want evidence try googling something like (e.g.) Richard Gage debunked.

The number of Engineers is public record as is the number who've signed the petition.

If you REALLY care about this you don't need me to figure this out for you, use your brains and check my assertions. Easy.



No, sorry. When you post here, it is up to YOU to prove your point, not tell someone to dig the evidence out for you. No one is asking you to figure it out for them, we're saying prove your point with links and evidence. Which so far, you haven't.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
Dozens saw the plane hit the Pentagon. Dozens. The testimony is widely available.

Why can't we see it with our own eyes? Answer me.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Also.. How would the goverment keep all the firefighters, Police, FBI, CIA, Congress, Demolitionists,ect ect ect quiet? yeah...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Whoa whoa whoa! Are you saying NYC buildings & the WTC arent/werent designed to take damage from a planes impact? Ouch, you'd be dead wrong.

Nothing to see here folks. This is a trolls thread that will get many posts & unfortantly will make the Newest Posts page.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 

Nice handle.but you seem Oh so obvious.

This is ATS and 'deny ignorance' is the catch cry here.

Your OP, is nothing more than a series of bullet points others have raised concerns about 9/11
AND all you add to your argument is a tagline of "... NOT TRUE'.

Here is a thread which gives credibility to the discussion, with the posters detailed comment AND Links to back them up:

9/11: Blueprint for Truth. The Scientifically Disproven Official Story

I am afraid you need to explain the official story with proofs a bit better to get people 'back into the mainstream'

Repeating 'NOT TRUE" over and over may work in basic training for eager little recruits. Sorry, but the repeditiveness of this just reminds me of the over zealous Lt's we used to get in fresh from military college.

The Govt and Mil are not always acting in the best interests of its citizens, and 9/11 reeks of it.
U.S.S Liberty sound familiar to you?
source
wiki
It's a hell of a way to secure and protect the funding of a Military Budget.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Website posted earler, re-debunked


"Live" on TV:
do you believe?
If the USA government and its organisations could have pulled off such a thing, then why would they NOT be capable, and - most importantly - willing, to fool the world into believing 9-11 was a genuine "terrorist" attack by foreigners, in which the US government had no part...?


You cant spell organization,
or capitalize properly.

*Mistrust insues*



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Nice try, but you've resorted to the same old straw man claiming the truthers say something they don't.




1. No other building ever collapsed from fire


Who said that? you sir and only you. A fact, though, is that no STEEL FRAMED SKYSCRAPER HAS COLLAPSED DUE TO FIRE. I won't bother sourcing that fact as you didn't bother sourcing your propaganda.




No one saw or heard hundreds of timed explosions


no one except the first responder fire fighters and police which is recorded for posterity in plenty of videos as well as audio recordings of the dispact frequency, you can even go read the entire 911 transcripts that are time stamped that show all of these people reporting plenty of explosions. One fire fighter featured in almost every 911 docu reported a series of explosions rippling down the building like machine gun fire.




The French use a demo technique, that doesn't use explosives, but does use the weight of upper floors to crush the lower floors. And guess what, a building destroyed this way looks EXACTLY like the Twin Towers.


that's called a gravity fueled collapse. And guess what? It requires shape charges to destroy the core columns of a building to remove any resistance, timed in a fashion to allow gravity to pull the building down into itself. No demolition consists of "blowing up" a building, they are rely on gravity, but for this resistance must be removed, which is the core issue with the collapse of the twin towers and WTC7 specifically.




Building 7 only had a few fires


Sorry I'll believe the videos and the word of the fire fighters tasked with entering and securing the building over your un-sourced opinion. Many media reported the limited fires WTC7 endured and you can see various videos of this.




No one saw a plane at the Pentagon


Only idiot disinfo plants say that crap, plenty of people saw a plane hit the pentagon, a massive hole was visible before the facade collapsed, plenty of debris was around as well. Have to agree with you on this point.



Richard Gage is an honest guy


He doesn't have to be honest, the facts and physics speak for themselves. BUT, if it's character assassination time, well, almost everyone involved with the official story could be called into question. Hell, the very people that wrote the very report you take as truth say it's factually inaccurate and there was an effort within the government to withhold information from them relating to the attack. Their words.




The Pentagon had a missile defense system - NOT TRUE


Another claim I have yet to hear come from a "truther". Now plenty of people, rightfully so, ask how some of the most protected air space in north America was breached, but this doesn't insinuate missile defense arrays around the pentagon. And lets not forget Minettas testimony, too convenient to forget that I think.

So you wanna call truthers out? I wanna call people like you out. Putting words in our mouths then "debunking" them is one thing, and a pretty pathetic tactic if you ask me, but just flat out saying "not true" with nothing to back it up.

That, my friend, is the epitome of a troll. Well done.

I'm sure all the families who lost people on 911, you know, the families that STARTED THE TRUTHER MOVEMENT, appreciate your tact and candor.
edit on 12-9-2011 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by CitizenNum287119327
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


This is ATS and 'deny ignorance' is the catch cry here.



And if you knew even MORE about ATS, you would know that that is THE WORST POSSIBLE WAY TO DEBUNK SOMBODY. Gj.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:15 AM
link   


9. The Pentagon had a missile defense system - NOT TRUE
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Ok, think about that for a moment. Your claiming that the headquarters for the Department of Defense lacks any missile defense system. This is arguably the most secure building in the world. To think this building wouldn't have this protection when other less important sites have a defense system is being unrealistic. Good god man, open up your eyes and look past the end of your nose.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


Im not sure what your trying to say...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by spw184
 


I am not sure the point your trying to make on the issue of co-ordinates and the use of video analysis to study the way the structure is behaving but i am sure it is not helping the OP to make their point on this issue...

I will not get into some sort of name calling slinging match with you or use patronizing remarks in the way you have just done as it would show ignorance upon my part ....the OP showed a video in which he was basing his reasons for calling people dishonest....but i think it was immediately put to rest and was shown quite easily why the video does not represent what occur on that day ten years ago.

but i do appreciate your coments and hope that the line will come off my screen when i wipe it.
edit on 073030p://f23Monday by plube because: (no reason given)
edit on 073030p://f24Monday by plube because: typo here or there





new topics
top topics
 
60
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join