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.

 

WTC Hard Drives Show $100 Million In Criminal Credit Transfers Before Towers Fell

page: 5
65
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiliconJon

How is this post not a violation of the site rules? Does that red box around you give you special rules?



Actually, my point is that for some reason, Truthers will attach themselves to anyone or anything that even remotely confirms or supports their beliefs, without even questioning it or even giving it much thought. Never any critical thinking is done, never any back up research of it done, and never any study is done to see if it is true, or not. As long as it sounds like something they believe, its good enough. But at the same time, they will question and nit-pick down to the comma placement, context, one word, or millisecond, anything that goes against their belief, or counters their argument. How is this healthy and good for the discussion?




9/11 Conspiracies: This forum is dedicated to the discussion and speculation of cover-ups, scandals, and other conspiracies surrounding the events of 9/11/2001. Participants should be aware that this forum is under close staff scrutiny due to general rudeness by some. Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals.


That aside, it's a massive buffet of fallacy. While the general does make a valid point in that some of the theories brought into discussion in the search for truth on that day's events are extreme one cannot generalize "truthers" for the analysis and speculation vary widly if you spend enough time searching for variations. As mentioned to you general, your behavior would imply it to be equal to then put you into that same group for seeking the truth and ad hominem you and your stance for daring to seek the truth.


I agree wholeheartedly that this is a conspiracy site and many topics that are "taboo" or scandals, and so on and it is important to discuss and learn and even correct certain flawed ideas or theories. However, it also vitally important to scrutinize evidence and question ideas that are brought up that do not make sense, or have no basis on facts. Also, sources. Sources are very important. Back up what you are going to say if you are bringing something questionable to the table. Just like this video from YT. Sure does say a lot of damning ideas and thoughts, but whats the sources? If I cannot find anything to support this video's accusations, well then, how can I take it seriously? Don't believe everything you read or see or hear online. That includes YT. This video made some outlandish claims, yet I find nothing anywhere to back it up. So I have to take the word of this YT video creator,who could have just as well pulled it all out of his backside. And what happens when one accepts it word for word, without questioning its sources or claims? Now that person is poisoned by garbage. What am I seeing here on this thread? People swallowing it hook, line, and sinker, without question. Again, they dont question it because it stimulates their preconceived notions and beliefs, and anything that sounds like it, it must be true. I'm trying to prevent "embracing ignorance". ATS's motto is to deny ignorance.

I'm all for searching the truth. But not in the manner so many are doing in the "Truther" movement. My stance is that in order to find the truth, one must be open to both sides of the argument and listen to answers from both sides. You then research and go over what was said, and see who is telling the truth and in what manner it is being presented. Not this nonsense of automatically agreeing with something, without so much as cracking it open and looking in to see if it is true or not. And then when shown to not true, to not ignore and ridicule the person that burst the bubble.




See also: guilt by association, red herring, straw man (and more I'm sure, when being so fallacious as the general was the fallacies tend to overlap due to the monstrous puddle of logic that spills upon the floor)


Hey, I did have a crazy bum yelling things about how someone stole my soul. Just because he said it, does it make it true? Same as those that blindly accept what this video says, without so much as doing any research to see if it is even true. Sorry you cannot see it chief. I've been in this game for a long time to see when someone is swallowing BS and spewing ignorance. I sure do hope you learn to do the same, and then catch them on it.




posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiliconJon

So what airplanes did you see hit the towers? Where they greyish blue, or UA & AA? Even if you had seen commercial craft, identifiable by markings and design, would that give you any insight beyond what you immediately saw, such as knowing who was on the plane / in control of the plane? How would seeing planes hit the tower negate the possibility of explosives planted within the building as an additional component of that day's terrorism?


The first was an AA 767. Its silver. The second was a UA 767, Blue and grey paint job. The people on board were all killed in the impact. The passengers existed. Ask their families, friends, coworkers. Where are they now? Don't start this game of casting doubt on what happened to those people. There is ample evidence of what happened. Not my fault you do not wish to understand or believe.

I have been in this game far longer than you have. I first started on YT, debunking the same nonsense that I see here. How I came to understand what happened on 9/11 with regards to the direct attack is based on the actual evidence and a lot of critical thinking and reading comprehension. I am not going to sit here and retype why there weren't any explosives in the Towers, or why it would have been impossible to do without a soul noticing, unless you are ready to explain the thousands that must have "been in on it". To me, the Truth Movement is turning the entire 9/11 terrorist attack, into a super-complicated Rube Goldberg machine with thousands upon thousands of complicit individuals that helped murder 3000 fellow Americans. it gets more and more complicated every day.



You do know there's a great deal of (likely majority) support that planes hit the buildings AND explosives where the Coup de grâce that brought them down, no?


Nope. First off, you have to give me a rational, believable method of rigging the WTC Towers without a soul noticing. This includes police, fire, Port Authority, building engineers, bomb squads, office workers, maintenance workers, elevator workers, window washers. Unless you are implying they are all in on it. Now we almost have a thousand already alone that would be in on it. I have yet to hear a believable method of doing this. And I've been doing this since 2007.




Are you able to tell what the debris at the Pentagon belonged to? Would you be able to tell the difference between debris from: a passenger jet, a reaper drone, a Boeing 757-223, a B-52, etc?
edit on 14-10-2011 by SiliconJon because: (no reason given)


Well for starters, I believe the many eyewitnesses that actually SAW the plane hit the Pentagon. Then I look at the wreckage and see that the engines were from a 757 and there was debris that actually had 757 AA paint scheme on it. Landing gear is from a 757. And oh yeah, the multitudes of eyewitnesses that saw a 757 AA fly over them and into the Pentagon. Oh yes and the fact that those passengers are all dead. Ask their families, friends, coworkers. They have ceased to be.

Have you been by the Pentagon, especially around the morning hour when the events took place? I recommend you go there and take a good look around. You will see just how ridiculous the notion is to claim no planes hit the Pentagon, or that so many would have been fooled by a missile or tiny plane. Or even the "fly over" nonsense pushed by CIT. To fake a plane crash in the midst of literally thousands of eyewitnesses? No way. that would be like trying to fake a plane crash in the middle of the Super Bowl.
edit on 10/14/2011 by GenRadek because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
reply to post by ThePublicEnemyNo1
 


Careful Now! if you have something on tape that the government doesn't want the
public to see, you could be in danger. All those tapes from cameras trained in the direction
of the pentagon were not confiscated for no reason. Interesting.
Strange that in 10 years you haven't been curious enough to find out what was or was not recorded.


I don't know what's on the tape...but I guess it's time to find out. My obvious reply is "I hope nothing of importance"


I find it strange too. I have had it put away/stored somewhere safe. I don't really have a reason why I haven't viewed it by now...I just haven't. Although I have been a member of ATS since 2005 with another screen name "hathorschild", I haven't been active around here until now. 9/11 was one of the reasons I came to this site...I think I found ATS on accident, can't remember. But as life went on, I kind of faded away from ATS back then until recently. Now that I'm more active here and have been reading the many posts, I have given quite some thought to seeing what's on that tape. But, like I said I hope it's nothing.

I can see whey anyone would be doubtful about what I have said, but it's the truth. I got quite shaken up by all that happened on 9/11 considering I was scheduled for flight 77 that day and didn't board. Having that tape was the furthest thing from my mind at the time. We had to drive from D.C. all the way back to California, and let me tell you that was not a fun adventure whatsoever. We got stopped in almost every freakin state and taken out of our vehicle at gun point twice while going thru Oklahoma and Tenneessee. I guess since we looked suspicious driving a vehicle that had D.C. tags and being light skinned...that's what did it. At least that's what one officer told me. We even got interviewed on the side of the road one by one and asked questions like, where we worked, where were we coming from, going to etc.... So although that may seem like an odd excuse...it's the truth. I just wanted to get back home and forget any of it ever "almost" happened to me.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ThePublicEnemyNo1
 


I didn't say that I didn't believe you. It is curious is all. You could be sitting on a time bomb or
nothing at all. If it is a time-bomb, just be very careful. Imagine you had clear pictures of
a missile (or nothing at all) hitting the pentagon. Someone is going to want very badly
for that footage or information to not get out.
You seemingly dodged a bullet on 9/11 although me myself, I am quite convinced that
no passenger airlines crashed that day, there were no terrorists and there were few,
if any real victims, most being computer generated entities with no real existences.
We were, I fear, subjected to one of the largest hoaxes in history. And there have been
some fairly big'uns (e.g. Apollo Moon Hoax).



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ChesterJohn
 





If you took a ten pound sledge hammer and smacked a hard drive you would destroy the drive completely and the force of which those servers were hit with was into trillions of time stronger force than a ten pound sledge hammer. But to prove your stance we would need to find a demolition site of a building of comparable size and structure of the WTC and put a server of working drives in it and then afterwords lets see if those drives are recoverable? the computer hard drives on the planes and their almost indestructible black boxes were completely destroyed. The force of those buildings coming down was many times stronger than that of the plane hitting the building


I am not arguing the almost total destruction of the contents of the buildings. The computer systems that were on the exit walls of the debris that went through the towers were literally pushed out of the offices and sustained the least amount of fragmentation damage. I would suspect that the drives in those systems were the ones that were recoverable since they fell to to the ground outside of the major collapse. In any case, they did find some that were recoverable, so some kind of scenario allowed these drives to survive being totally ripped apart.



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
maybe they put the drives in fireproof safes everyday. Maybe the recovered some of those safes. I cannot find any info on safe recovery. There were many things recovered that were only slightly melted.



posted on Oct, 20 2011 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by ChesterJohn
 





If you took a ten pound sledge hammer and smacked a hard drive you would destroy the drive completely and the force of which those servers were hit with was into trillions of time stronger force than a ten pound sledge hammer. But to prove your stance we would need to find a demolition site of a building of comparable size and structure of the WTC and put a server of working drives in it and then afterwords lets see if those drives are recoverable? the computer hard drives on the planes and their almost indestructible black boxes were completely destroyed. The force of those buildings coming down was many times stronger than that of the plane hitting the building


I am not arguing the almost total destruction of the contents of the buildings. The computer systems that were on the exit walls of the debris that went through the towers were literally pushed out of the offices and sustained the least amount of fragmentation damage. I would suspect that the drives in those systems were the ones that were recoverable since they fell to to the ground outside of the major collapse. In any case, they did find some that were recoverable, so some kind of scenario allowed these drives to survive being totally ripped apart.


Well that is a possibility but very few would have made it out and like most said 1 million is nothing. Maybe on person made a transaction for himself. Maybe he was one who knew what was up.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join