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.

 

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

page: 36
60
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Excuse me...just for one second....i would say on one thing could you refrain from the term jews....this is not a jewish thang as gets explained over and over.

It is a Zionist thang....and Zionists are of all ilk.

JEWS are a people......

ZIONISTS are a political movement created by one Theodore Herzl 1860-1904

i know it seems nitpicky....but it is a huge difference.......




posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Edgecrusher26
 


I have hardly been dominated. Just because a lot of Truthers hop on and repeatedly say ridiculous and in many cases repeatedly debunked things, doesn't mean I've been dominated.

I wasn't expecting you guys, who are acting on FAITH, to listen to logic, but I am expecting you to understand that your beliefs are unchallenagable, esp as most of them are ridiculous.

Trutherism will die a death, and that will be good for America, I wish it'd happen sooner, and I wish all you guys would be less delusional about the quality of your evidence, but... all I can do is wish and try and explain physics and structurral engineering to you all.

I Would also point out that I was asked a direct question, and as always, gave a direct answer, with a supporting link.

The Truther who asked for that information refused to acknowledge it.

That's Trutherism in a nutshell... if something challenges their faith, they just ignore it.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:42 AM
link   
I believe a broken fraction in the gov. knew about what happened and let it play in order to take advantage of it or that the CIA knew and twisted the story to get a war going.

But as far as explosive and missiles, it's way to far fetch to believe. The reason is because there is too many inconsistencies with the argument. There were no explosive in the twin towers because if u watch where the collapse started, it started on the floor where the plane impacted, not at the bottom. For there to be explosives, someone had to have planted the explosive right where the plane hit, that's just impossible.

Also, WTC 7 already had a large hole about 1/3 in the side of the building and was already leaning. The debris from the twin towers made the hole. The collapse of the twin towers and the layout of the surrounding buildings funnel the debris straight into WTC7. It would have collapse either way, there was no need for bombs.

The theory of explosive is ridiculous. Why would someone need it when just the fact of a terrorist attack alone is justifiable for war. Why overdue it with all the fireworks to blow your cover. Sometimes it's good to have a open mind, but u have just have to use logic too.

Also, there were plenty of plane debris at the pentagon. There were engines, seats, etc. found.

As for the plane that people claim never crash. I believe the gov. gave the order to shoot it down. That's why there were debris miles and miles away and no big impact on the ground. They just didn't want to say the shot it down, so they came up with a cover story.

Everything I said can be verifiable. There are many sources online if u search for it. Instead of looking at just the truth movement websites, which is bias to their agenda. I don't need to prove anything I said. U guys should be smart enough to research and find the truth yourself instead of just looking at videos on youtube.
edit on 15-9-2011 by amfirst because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious

I wasn't expecting you guys, who are acting on FAITH, to listen to logic, but I am expecting you to understand that your beliefs are unchallenagable...


my bolding and italics, his spelling
-----------------------------

Finally we agree! I am glad you have at last discarded your Truster blinders CaptianNSO and come over from the dark side into the light.


edit on 15-9-2011 by Elbereth because: add seperator



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Elbereth
 


yeah, I need to install spell check on my new laptop...

As for it being a FAITH, it is, of course a faith.

None of you even bother to try and answer my questions, most of you repeatedly post nonsensical crap, and a huge number of your theories contradict each other. Add that to the whole substrate of Trutherism that "believes" in secret technology, technology that there's no evidence for, and the ONLY way to describe Trutherism is as a Faith. Like a crazy cult.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
It's funny, I've been attacked by Truthers for my spelling and grammar twice today. A sign of desperation I suppose.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Elbereth
 


yeah, I need to install spell check on my new laptop...



Newsflash mon CaptianNSO! The ATS reply window has an embedded spell check feature. See those little squiggly red lines under misspelled words? Well, now you know what they are. I have no doubt you will express your appreciation.




Uploaded with ImageShack.us
edit on 15-9-2011 by Elbereth because: my own admitted imperfection



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
It's funny, I've been attacked by Truthers for my spelling and grammar twice today. A sign of desperation I suppose.


I assure you it's not due to the compelling nature of your arguments. Trusters display a very odd tunnel vision, and it is hardly the result of a laser-like focus on the truth. And above I was not pointing out your spelling so much as your humorous unintentional inversion of meaning (Freudian slip perhaps?)
edit on 15-9-2011 by Elbereth because: add



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Elbereth

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Elbereth
 


yeah, I need to install spell check on my new laptop...



Newsflash mon CaptianNSO! The ATS reply window has an embedded spell check feature. See those little squiggly red lines under misspelled words? Well, now you know what they are. I have no doubt you will express your appreciation.

Newsflash! No it doesn't. That's something in your browser.

klsdfhskdh sdlfkhsdfkjsd sfkjdshfksjdh vastry






Uploaded with ImageShack.us
edit on 15-9-2011 by Elbereth because: my own admitted imperfection



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Elbereth
 


Riiiight which is why NO Truthers will answer basic questions and why so many of their theories are contradictory and why most of them post debunked "facts".



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by plube
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Excuse me...just for one second....i would say on one thing could you refrain from the term jews....this is not a jewish thang as gets explained over and over.

It is a Zionist thang....and Zionists are of all ilk.

JEWS are a people......

ZIONISTS are a political movement created by one Theodore Herzl 1860-1904

i know it seems nitpicky....but it is a huge difference.......


I did not hear anyone say "4,000 Zionists were forewarned to not go to work". The term was not used by anyone. I know the movement. I know that Jews are a race of people. I know that Jews are also a religious group.

www.youtube.com...

Who does this child say should be killed?

www.youtube.com...

Who again?

www.youtube.com...

These children are taught that killing Jews is honorable. Do they know the difference between Zionism and Jews?



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Elbereth
 

Newsflash! No it doesn't. That's something in your browser....

Riiiight which is why NO Truthers will answer basic questions and why so many of their theories are contradictory and why most of them post debunked "facts".



Then maybe you should consider a different browser, however, I don't think spell check will help you with your inverted meanings, or your silly use of blanket statements such as "No Truthers" this, or "All Truthers" that. Have you somehow failed to notice the diversity of opinion within the 9/11 Truth Movement, a broad spectrum ranging from those who only want a new investigation, to the the Let it Happens through the Made it Happens?

You claim no Truther will answer your basic questions, but looking back through this thread I see that your issues have been convincingly addressed. You can't seriously contend that your OP has not been handsomely dispensed with at this point can you? But maybe I am wrong about that, as I was admittedly about the spell check in ATS. I recognize my own human fallibility, and therefore that of others as well, and this makes me more open to a variety of possibilities than you appear to be.

A stifling rigidity and absolutism has been the hallmark of your posts on this thread. Can you direct me to one instance in 36 pages where you have admitted error beyond "I need to get spell check installed," or that you have learned something new from a despised Truther? You claim that our skepticism regarding the OS is "faith-based," but it is clearly you who are acting dogmatically with your black and white, all or nothing, totally lacking in nuance approach to this complex and often elusive issue.

Even apart from the in your face reality of three steel-frame, high-rise buildings collapsing from fire on one day when none had done so before, it baffles me that anyone with a shred of objectivity can acquaint themselves with the 9/11 Commission's strange composition and approach, self-imposed limitations, bizarre omissions, inexplicable blind spots, and leaps of logic and not come away less than satisfied that the OS is unassailable.
edit on 15-9-2011 by Elbereth because: hyphens/add



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
In all seriousness, this just seems like a post made for the sheer fact to start arguments.

Not to throw in my own personal experiences, but I took many different Firefighter's courses for my Dept when I Volunteered, and even planned on getting a career job.

On Thermite (being that it was discussed earlier in the thread it doesn't necessarily explode, it combusts. It flames, it burns, but there's no notable bang, no notable outwards shockwave, no sense of normal explosive behavior. Not only that, but many of the firefighters who were IN AND AROUND THE BUILDING, reported hearing a series of explosions much like the firing from an automatic weapon.


Thermite reactions have many uses. Thermite is not an explosive; instead it operates by exposing a very small area of metal to extremely high temperatures. Intense heat focused on a small spot can be used to cut through metal or weld metal components together both by melting metal from the components, and by injecting molten metal from the thermite reaction itself.... Thermite can be used for quickly cutting or welding steel such as rail tracks, without requiring complex or heavy equipment. However, defects such as slag inclusions and voids (holes) are often present in such welded junctions and great care is needed to operate the process successfully..


Source (I know it's Wikipedia, but it had the most generalized definition of Thermite that I could find without doing the whole sourcing for a text book)

Here is another good source on Thermite as well: Textfiles: Thermite

There's many different theories on 9/11, but in my honest opinion, while yes, it's more than obvious that planes hit the towers, there was some form of a controlled demolition done, either planned, or done to protect the surrounding buildings and citizens in New York. I'm not going to engage in any mudslinging, because this is the exact behavior that's going to get these boards moved.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I read this post earlier and decided I had to get an account just to reply to this..."post". While everyone is entitled to their opinion, they aren't entitled to word vomit conjecture and state it as fact.
I apologize in advance if I repeat anything that's already been stated.
The posters arguments are not even the basis for real truthers. By using those choices and then making statements like,"noone heard blasts at the towers" (must be the first responders lied) and using shoddy pseudo-science and polls, it makes the poster seem somewhat knowledgeable to the lay person or the curious surfer that visits this site, however...we all here know better.
Poster...there is no one smoking gun pointing to any specific conspiracy or series of events. There is however, plenty of ammo...the most credible being facts you neglected to mention. I will help you out though...just follow the cash my friend.

Sept 10, 2001: Mr. Rumsfield tells us that the Pentagon has lost over two trillion dollars, but they'll find it. The next day a "plane" hits the exact spot where all that accounting paperwork for those lost trillions are. Burned...lost forever and never mentioned again. On a side note, the FBI released 5 frames of a missile hitting the Pentagon. Pictures don't lie.

Sept 9-10: A record number of "put" options are placed against AA...hundreds of percent more than usual. Then...the SEC doesn't investigate because oops...building 7 fell and all those records went down with it, huh.

I won't even get into the how the towers were bought and insured...that's been beat to death.

How about many of the hijackers being found alive in Saudi Arabia by news outlets?
How about Bush and Cheney testifying, not under oath, to the Commission? Then all of its classified lol?

How about Bush flying OBL's family out of the country the day after without so much as a question being asked?
All relevent people here could go on for hours, but noone could convince this poster of anything anyway.
I wonder what people like this poster would do if the Police bungled an investigation into a loved ones murder. If the courts didn't make the perps testify under oath and then didn't allow anyone to hear it. If the perps friends and family were flown out of the country before being questioned. If the people that bet on that loved ones demise were just let go. You see where this is going....

People that would allow that are the exact ones that will be culled from the herd when the time comes. They are the useless bottom feeders that are not able to think for themselves. I cannot wait for whatever is coming. It will be sheer joy watching tools like this poster beg for food and water. They will whine and cry about their rights and get lawyers to sue but it will be too late for that. Preparations should be on everyones mind right now. If people like this poster lack the common sense to see something is seriously wrong...send em' to the slaughter.

One last thing...gold is useless in any apocalypse situation people. Quit hoarding it for that. You cant eat, drink, or shoot gold and noone would trade those things for gold either. If society has broken down, gold has zero value.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
None of you even bother to try and answer my questions

Right now, you're being blatantly dishonest. I countered everything in your OP back on page 30. I also asked for a response. You never responded, just ignored. Too much fact for you.


After seeing your latest posts, I have come to the conclusion that you have an agenda because you're not being honest, and you're being very arrogant for absolutely no reason what-so-ever.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by obamasaliar
 


Funny, I keep looking for facts in your post that might lend some credence to the idea that 9/11 was an inside job, but I can't really seem to find any. Instead I just find them same old, long ago debunked, garbage.





Wait.... I did find one accurate thing, the Pres and the Vice Pres weren't under oath when they talked to the 9/11 Commission..... Well, I guess that's something


..

edit on 15-9-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

FALSE. The first use of the tube structure was the 43-story DeWitt-Chestnut Apartment Building in Chicago, Illinois which was completed in 1963:




The first building to apply the tube-frame construction was the DeWitt-Chestnut apartment building which Khan designed and which was completed in Chicago by 1963. This laid the foundations for the tube structural design of many later skyscrapers, including the John Hancock Center and Willis Tower, and the construction of the World Trade Center, Petronas Towers, Jin Mao Building, and most other supertall skyscrapers since the 1960s.
Source: Wiki

You read that right. Most supertall skyscrapers since the 1960s have a similar tube frame design as the WTC towers.



There is a difference between the DeWitt building and the WTC. For starters, it is a concrete framed tube. It was not "steel only" like the WTCs. The WTC had a "steel only tube-in-tube" design. It looked nothing like DeWitt. Tube is just the style, or design. But there are a whole bunch of sub-categories, so you are wrong in that aspect. Concrete framed vs steel only, big differences. WTC was still one and only unique with its design, and floor truss method of placing floors.



Actually, the collapses looked like demolitions, sounded like demolitions, and collapsed at a speed consistent with controlled demolitions.


Well, save a for few major issues there,they sure did "look like" demolitions. I mean, how else is a building that is collapsing suppose to look like? But uhhh one thing, where are the series of detonations that would have been heard on every recording device in Lower Manhattan, you know like in a real controlled demolition? And please, dont give me quotes from people hearing random "booms" and "thuds" or describing the sound of the collapse. I want to hear from the videos of the collapse, the distinct sound of detonating charges going off prior to collapse, you know, like in a real CD. If you cannot, then I must say this is the first time I have seen a building collapse before the charges went off. Hows that for strange?





FALSE. There are many first responders who testified to hearing timed explosions. You can read about them in the First Responder Oral Histories. There are also many survivors and by-standers that have publicly stated that they also heard the timed explosions as the towers were collapsing.

You can hear some of these many witnesses in my video here:

www.youtube.com...


Yeah, gee, hearing explosions going off in a building where 10-15 floors are engulfed in flames, each an acre in size, AND an airliner. Woah! Explosions can happen there??? What about when steel snaps and fails? Also, hearing explosions during the collapse, well gee, I dont know how else to describe thousands of tons of steel impacting each other and hitting the ground. Especially when you have acres of floors landing on top of each other. A boom is heard???





Ooohhh, guess what? That only works for concrete structures which is exactly what's in the videos. Yes, concrete structures will easily crumble and crush themselves. Steel structures do not. Therefore, your comparison is moot and not comparable at all in the least.


Well you know, the way the WTC floors were set up, its no wonder they progressivly collapsed the way they did. And yes, guess what, that pesky steel only tube in tube design is what helped. What held up each floor? Steel seats upon which floor truss ends sat on. The same design from top to bottom, save for the technical and mechanical floors. So, yes, Verange would have worked here.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_




There were plenty of visible and audible explosions. First responders testified to the explosions as reported in the First Responder Oral Histories. They also testified to low-level flashes coming from the lower floors in both towers as the towers were collapsing above.

You can also hear the pre-collapse and during-collapse explosions going off in this video here:

Part 1: video.google.com...
Part 2: video.google.com...
Part 3: video.google.com...

The explosions heard in the above video are corroborated by first responders, so no need to try to explain them away.



WoW! Powerful explosions heard clear across the waters, and............. yet not one of those was picked up on any of the videos that were right next to the WTC. And you claim that "OSers" twist reality and physics. How exactly did all those news cameras, people, eyewitnesses, all missed the sound of these powerful blasts, right next to the WTC, and yet that video has em real clear? Seems fishy to say the least. How do we know they werent added in later, like the infamous "WTC7 explosion" video with the firefighters at the pay phone?



Where are those loud kabooms here? I mean they are at the base. I hear a few random thuds, and pops, but if you expect me to believe that these are the same powerful blasts heard clear in Hoboken, well, you are sorely mistaken.



or here



Strange, you use long long long distance shots and video, and yet here I have shots less than a half mile away, and I cannot hear a darn thing exploding. How odd. Does sound only like to show up when it feels like it?





That's the audio explosions aspect of your claim. Now off to the visible aspect of explosions:



That's the WTC on the right, some apartment towers on the left. You can see the explosive ejections coming out of all of the buildings. Those ejections are the result of high-powered explosives being detonated.



You mean those jets of air that increase in speed and duration and actually gain more dust and debris ejecting it all out the window. yeah I have yet to see explosives actually drag on and on like a jet engine spewing out dust and debris and increasing the amount over time. Amazing!



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Also funny you use firefighter oral histories to back up your claim that they heard explosions. Ok, fine they heard explosions in one of the largest fires in an office building with two airliners inside. Does this mean you will also look to those same firefighters that commented on the condition of the WTC7 and their observations and decisions to let it burn, plus their correct prediction its going to collapse? Will you give them the same amount of consideration as your "hearing things go boom" in the WTC? This includes the mentions of the worsening conditions in WTC7, fires out of control over multiple floors, creaking, groaning, and other sounds of structural instability, as well as tilting, leaning, and the set up of surveyor transits to track the creep movement of the building prior to collapse. Will you also take them into account? Or are you picking and choosing what fits your preconceived notions and assumptions? I dont deny the sounds of explosions. just the sources.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek

Well you know, the way the WTC floors were set up, its no wonder they progressivly collapsed the way they did. And yes, guess what, that pesky steel only tube in tube design is what helped. What held up each floor? Steel seats upon which floor truss ends sat on. The same design from top to bottom, save for the technical and mechanical floors. So, yes, Verange would have worked here.
my bolding

The 76,000 member American Institute of Architects (AIA) would not agree with the above statement by the General.
-------------------------

From the American Institute of Architects written testimony for the House Science Committee's hearing on NIST's Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse:


The major finding of the NIST report is that the design and construction materials of the World Trade Center did not contribute to the disaster; they performed exceptionally well. Despite this fact, the report offers several recommendations that are not supported by the investigation, nor are they backed by substantive research. In fact, the premises of some of the statements appear to be in error.



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join