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.

 

I Was A Deluded 9/11 OS'er

page: 8
73
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Yeah I saw plane parts, and I saw Secret Service either removing them, placing them, in an ACTIVE CRIME SCENE. Totally normal.
debris.0catch.com...

It's been stated many times that those plane parts do not match that of a full size passenger plane though, especially this part...
img161.imageshack.us...
I mean the thing goes from ankle to knee, and that was an engine part? I remember someone saying Roles Royce part not of a full size plane.

Pepsi machine?
911review.org...

Anyway, the size of the hole makes no sense, and there's no way in Hell an amateur pilot could pull that maneuver and have the plane cruise that low without scuffing the grass and hit the building below the roof level so precise, absolute far fetched, wanting to believe the OS theory kind of mentality, a forcing yourself to believe thing.
edit on 17-9-2011 by JibbyJedi because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


From what I understand, that engine found on Murray street was in fact the wrong type of engine for either plane.

All it takes is one piece of evidence to be false for the OS to be suspect. Also, how is it that most of the evidence from the Twin Towers was completely obliterated...yet a hijackers passport made it out untouched?

I'm not saying that you are wrong, or that the OS is wrong, but so far the evidence does not add up.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by Varemia
 


From what I understand, that engine found on Murray street was in fact the wrong type of engine for either plane.

All it takes is one piece of evidence to be false for the OS to be suspect. Also, how is it that most of the evidence from the Twin Towers was completely obliterated...yet a hijackers passport made it out untouched?

I'm not saying that you are wrong, or that the OS is wrong, but so far the evidence does not add up.


Perhaps you've never seen paper, but it tends to float somewhat on air.

So, am I correct in the statement that you believe all the evidence of plane parts is fake? If so, we can move on, and I can stop arguing with someone who denies everything and accepts only his personal views on the matter.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





So, am I correct in the statement that you believe all the evidence of plane parts is fake?


Don't scramble what was said, they said ONE part was false evidence, and all it takes is ONE piece of evidence being false to be skeptical of the OS. I agree 100%.

And what about the passport, exp driver's license, and bandana found in Shanksville, but little to no airplane parts or bodies?? It's quite laughable. How come the pilot's driver's license wasn't found, or any other passports, ID's?
Convenient the perpetrators managed to have their items salvaged at the scenes.
edit on 17-9-2011 by JibbyJedi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by Varemia
 





So, am I correct in the statement that you believe all the evidence of plane parts is fake?


Don't scramble what was said, they said ONE part was false evidence, and all it takes is ONE piece of evidence being false to be skeptical of the OS. I agree 100%.

And what about the passport, exp driver's license, and bandana found in Shanksville, but little to no airplane parts or bodies?? It's quite laughable. How come the pilot's driver's license wasn't found, or any other passports, ID's?
Convenient the perpetrators managed to have their items salvaged at the scenes.
edit on 17-9-2011 by JibbyJedi because: (no reason given)


Um, you are mistaken. There were airplane parts and parts of bodies found at Shanksville. Your source must be wrong. Only some items are found intact because that's what happens in an explosion/impact. Some gets destroyed and some survives, either from being blown away by the shockwave, or getting lodged somewhere fireproof.

Also, one part of the OS being wrong does not invalidate the whole thing. The OS is a conglomeration of tons of evidence in order to come to an informed conclusion on the matter. It is almost guaranteed to have some evidence here and there be faulty when referring to hundreds of collected things.

The government, NIST, and the 9/11 Commission are not made up of infallible, magical individuals. This is also why a massive conspiracy of government people is improbable. It is nearly impossible to pull something off as perfectly as is supposed by many here. I'm not saying there isn't a slim chance, but in my opinion, the official story is far more likely to be true.
edit on 17-9-2011 by Varemia because: typo



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


So your sources are perfect and all others are false? Just the sheer ridiculousness of some "coincidental" pieces of evidence is hysterically comical in a bad movie sense of it all.




It is nearly impossible to pull something off as perfectly as is supposed by many here.


Perfectly?? If it was pulled off perfectly, there would be no 9/11 truthers or conspiracy theorists on the matter.
And compartmentalization, ever heard of it? It's when the top people know what's going on, and all their subordinates are in individual compartments of information and therefor do not know the whole story, just their parts, which on the surface seem genuine and innocent enough, but when combined, form a bigger picture.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


No, my sources can be challenged. I am completely willing to change my stance if anyone can prove to me that something else happened. Unfortunately, the only thing the Truth Movement is able to do is use faith-based rhetoric to convince people that it had to be a conspiracy. There are no scientific tests, and no background data to support their claims. It is all just "look, it looks like this, and the other people are wrong because they're wrong."

I'm not as susceptible to rhetoric, I guess, so I refuse to become a member of the Truth Movement until they show me some real truth.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


To show you the "real truth", average people would need access to it, and they still aren't showing us any substantial footage from the Pentagon as far as surveillance video.
I believe I saw a chopper circling the Pentagon when the whatever hit it, but have heard of no video footage from it.

I'd love to believe the OS, it's not fun having gut feelings and a sense of humor at absurdity, but I do and I follow my gut, it's never let me down. They also treated the whole Osama thing like they did with the wreckage of the WTC towers, get rid of the evidence quickly, the signs of a guilty party.

You guys are looking for hard evidence against the OS, and we present "lack of evidence" and "false evidence" which we feel warrant deeper skepticism. If it all made sense, there wouldn't be so many people speaking out against the OS, period. These people aren't the UFO gang primarily, they are accredited people in their fields of study that aren't on the gov't payroll/members only club.

I always say follow the money, because that leads you to evidence of conspiracy. Who really funds ALL the organizations who concur with the OS? Popular Mechanics in not connected to corporate funding?
I can pay scientists millions and they'll say whatever I want them to on camera, or if threatened to be out of work if they didn't play ball. That kind of whistle blower stuff happens all the time, gov't isn't immune.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by Varemia
 


So your sources are perfect and all others are false? Just the sheer ridiculousness of some "coincidental" pieces of evidence is hysterically comical in a bad movie sense of it all.




It is nearly impossible to pull something off as perfectly as is supposed by many here.


Perfectly?? If it was pulled off perfectly, there would be no 9/11 truthers or conspiracy theorists on the matter.
And compartmentalization, ever heard of it? It's when the top people know what's going on, and all their subordinates are in individual compartments of information and therefor do not know the whole story, just their parts, which on the surface seem genuine and innocent enough, but when combined, form a bigger picture.


If this supposed massive conspiracy was "compartmentalized" with subordinates carrying out functions which they thought at the time were legitimate; hauling plane parts to Shanksville or the Pentagon for example, they would have wised up quickly on 9/11 itself and wouldn't they be just the people to leak like a sieve ?

But not a peep.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


There's a lot of people speaking out about many variations in the OS, and the impossibility of plane maneuvers by amateurs, and on scene reports saying no evidence of a plane crashing anywhere, etc, etc.

A "peep" to you guys is something on the nightly news, which isn't how that goes. Wikileaks for example gets tons of media attention, which immediately discredits the validity of true "leaks" to me. Really damaging Leaks would NEVER be reported on the MSM, not while these people are still in those positions of power.

A true "peep" is immediately discredited as a whack job, fringe lunatic conspiracy theorist... power words that happen to alter the public's perception of such people. Real whistle blowers are taken care of quietly, strange death or suicide usually. No evidence of that happening with 9/11? I posted links of such "coincidences" in this thread.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


I think you took my words out of context. All it takes is one piece of evidence to be false and it blows open the possibility that other evidence is shady.

Also, I am not going to believe the OS simply because the government did the investigation. They lied before.......they will lie again.

As far as how it could be done without many people knowing; compartmentalization!

The Manhattan project employed 100000's to develop the atomic bomb and not even the president knew about it.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by Varemia
 


I think you took my words out of context. All it takes is one piece of evidence to be false and it blows open the possibility that other evidence is shady.

Also, I am not going to believe the OS simply because the government did the investigation. They lied before.......they will lie again.

As far as how it could be done without many people knowing; compartmentalization!

The Manhattan project employed 100000's to develop the atomic bomb and not even the president knew about it.


Actually, the Manhattan project was being leaked the entire time it went along, only the people doing the leaking were leaking it to another government's secret agency. (edit: just fact-checked that, and it's not entirely true, but the truth does lie in that the project was leaked when it became huge. The Russians were the ones who did it, and it wasn't found out until after WWII ended, leading to the prosecution of a few people for giving classified information out) www.fas.org...

I guess the point I'm making is that the evidence which is discredited is the evidence which was not considered in the Commission report or NIST's report. They fact-checked as much as they possibly could, and I applaud anyone who is able to discredit their efforts, because it means we can get a more accurate picture.

Still, it's fairly obvious that planes hit the towers. I don't see any way that you can disprove them with hundreds of angles and distances showing them being there, and airplane parts lying around, and jet fuel (the smell of kerosene) in the towers, and tracking of the airplanes, and phone calls from the airplanes, and recordings, and flight data, etc.

But, I suppose if it's what you want to believe, I can't stop you. We all have the right to manipulate our own beliefs however we like.
edit on 17-9-2011 by Varemia because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


As the saying goes: "We can agree to disagree".

What I think is the most important part of all this is that whether we agree with the OS or not, millions of people are asking for a new investigation that looks into all aspects of the events. Why can't we have a new investigation and put some sort of finality on it?

All of us, no matter what we believe, should support a new investigation. We should start there.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by Varemia
 


As the saying goes: "We can agree to disagree".

What I think is the most important part of all this is that whether we agree with the OS or not, millions of people are asking for a new investigation that looks into all aspects of the events. Why can't we have a new investigation and put some sort of finality on it?

All of us, no matter what we believe, should support a new investigation. We should start there.


Well, I don't know if it's millions, but if someone can satisfactorily do a new investigation which satisfies all sides, then I have nothing against it.

Personally, I've only met a single 9/11 conspiracy theorist in real life. Can say I know far more gay people than members of the Truth Movement.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


If we only took America as an example, 1,000,000 out of 300,000,000 is only .0033% of the population. Just by looking at the polls regarding 9/11, we could easily say millions would go for a new investigation.

Also, just because someone disagrees with the OS does not mean they are part of the Truth Movement. I am not part of it, but I want a new investigation and enjoy discussing the issue.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 



As the saying goes: "We can agree to disagree".

This isn't about the new fall fashions - your "disagreement" constitutes an accusation of murder.

What I think is the most important part of all this is that whether we agree with the OS or not, millions of people are asking for a new investigation that looks into all aspects of the events.

Really? Millions? You think there are millions out there that want to investigate every whacky conspiracy theory?

Why can't we have a new investigation and put some sort of finality on it?

Well, I have posted the perfect model for starting the new investigation. It starts with NGO citizens groups conducting public hearings and compiling data and testimony.

All of us, no matter what we believe, should support a new investigation. We should start there.

So start the investigation. Hold hearings. Ask anyone who has an alternative idea to come forward and testify. That's where it starts. But let me guess - you want government funding, subpeona power and a big audience. And most importantly you want someone else to do the work.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 





This isn't about the new fall fashions - your "disagreement" constitutes an accusation of murder.


Perhaps....but everyone is innocent until proven guilty, no matter what I think.




Really? Millions? You think there are millions out there that want to investigate every whacky conspiracy theory?


No, not every whacky theory, just 9/11. I think it would be quite easy to find a million people that would support such an action.

Good job in labeling 9/11 as just another "whacky conspiracy theory"! That's almost word for word with what the Popular Mechanics people said about 9/11.




So start the investigation. Hold hearings. Ask anyone who has an alternative idea to come forward and testify. That's where it starts. But let me guess - you want government funding, subpeona power and a big audience. And most importantly you want someone else to do the work.


This is actually a very good point. It is hard for a single person or organization to coordinate such actions without money and outside help. I would do what I could with the resources I have, but anyone would need help. You have shown the exact problem that is killing the Truth movement.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 



Perhaps....but everyone is innocent until proven guilty, no matter what I think.

No, everyone is ASSUMED innocent until proven guilty.

No, not every whacky theory, just 9/11. I think it would be quite easy to find a million people that would support such an action.

I was talking solely about 9/11. You realize that there is more than one conspiracy fantasy regarding 9/11, right?

Good job in labeling 9/11 as just another "whacky conspiracy theory"! That's almost word for word with what the Popular Mechanics people said about 9/11.

And they were right!

This is actually a very good point. It is hard for a single person or organization to coordinate such actions without money and outside help. I would do what I could with the resources I have, but anyone would need help. You have shown the exact problem that is killing the Truth movement.

Like I said, I posted a perfect model for the process. Funding comes from NGO's. Hearing are held, for free, in public where anyone is free to post their two cents.



new topics

top topics



 
73
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join