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.

 

If 911 is viewed as a crime instead of a terrorist attack, it becomes clear...

page: 8
102
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
911 is a crime,no need to worry about viewing it that way or not,as far as im concerned anyways,anyone that cant see has rocks in their head.

You americans are a real piece of work you know,i hope a army comes to your country and rapes your motherland.




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
You are quite correct: motive, opportunity and ability are the basic pieces that every investigator must use to put together a list of suspects, and ultimately, to solve the crime itself.

But in addition to the elements of motive, opportunity and ability, there were a couple of other very telling indicators that developed from the 911 crimes which narrows the list of suspects even more.

One is to notice that despite the many necessary people needed to support any military style operation, not one mechanic has been brought to trial, and not one mechanic has come forward to tell the tail. That's pretty tight confidence, experience, and discipline.

Another is to notice the total complicity of the Main Stream Media, not just at the time but 10 years later, and to seriously ask who controls the media in America? That's an easy question to answer as well.

Answering these questions narrows the suspects down to one, and it's interesting as well, that in all the World, Americans are the only group unable to figure out "who dun it" and apparently don't seem to care either.




edit on 30-12-2011 by Brown Bear because: add content



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
There are way too many coincidences to be coincidental.

A lot of truth in this thread.

What really sickens me,is the name fresh kills landfill!Because if you think about it,fresh kills is what went there.They used people as land fill..that's disgusting.

And why were they allowed to get rid of 80% of the steel without examination?It's a crime no matter who did it!So why was the evidence allowed to be destroyed?I never understood that!

What about all the witnesses that said they saw,heard and felt explosions going off?Barry Jennings said an explosion took the landing away from underneath him and he was trapped for several hours.And in all that time he was hearing explosions going off...and he was in BUILDING 7!!!Why didn't they investigate that?Or when they had the police,firemen and people who actually worked in the building report it?What kind of investigator(NIST)doesn't investigate?Because those explosions could have been the real reason the buildings came down!They acted like there was no explosions,like.."Explosions?What explosions?"...Um the explosions the witnesses reported..."Explosions?What explosions?

Not too mention Lucky Larry Silverstein and his daughter just so happen to not be there that day.Or how Larry
just so happen to put an insurance policy that specifically covered terrorist attacks,just months before 9/11.Or how the buildings were full of asbestos and would have had to of been taken down piece by piece because it was illegal to demolish asbestos ridden buildings....hey investigators...THAT'S PLENTY MOTIVE!!

There are way too many coincidences to be coincidental!



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GodIsPissed
 


"Kill" is Dutch for "creek"

Fresh Body of Water

en.wikipedia.org...


As a body of water, a kill is a creek. The word comes from the Middle Dutch kille, meaning "riverbed" or "water channel." The modern Dutch term is kil.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Brown Bear
 


I agree with you.

And why hasn't anybody been fired?The government act like "oops" like it was just a simple mistake.

I've been fired for having too many lates before.3000 people died because of their mistake and no one's gotten fired for it?



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by comprehension
 


Fresh kills also means...fresh kills.

I mean,you can put nice little bow on crap..but it's still crap!



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptChaos

Originally posted by beanandginger
You can apply the exact same logic to the assasination of both JF & Bobby Kennedy....and you'll find that the same groups are responsible - the military industrial complex who profits from foreign wars, the bankers who bankroll them and the Congress who facilitate it all.


Even more, you find the SAME PEOPLE involved, and the same fingerprints all over. For example, George HW Bush was in Dallas on November 23, 1963. Just happened to be there.


Well after many years of reading but never posting. I have been a chicken because of my views, which fall in line with these two quotes. Because I feel people like me will not be missed if I were to have an "accident". So I keep my mouth shut.

I will say this though. I wonder how much of a coincidence it was that one of the Bush brothers was in charge of security of the towers for a time prior to the event. And how strange is it that one of the Bush brothers had a lunch with Hinckley's brother before the attempted cou on Regan.

And I too find it strange that Mr.CIA Bush Sr has so many connections with the JFK REGAN and WTC events. Its strange how when Bush was put in charge of the CIA by Ford in the 70s it was right at the time they were getting investigagted for things like "MIND CONTROL" and I'm refering to RFK murder.


en.wikipedia.org...

whatreallyhappened.com...

josophist.blogspot.com...

How can debunkers debunk these connections. How am I wrong for seeing one ? In reality I would like to be proven wrong, I would feel a lot more safe. If I am right I am scared to death. Not so much to die by their handy work ( just for my children) but that there are so many people who just refuse to consider this possibility.

Not much of a first post but I feel that these are the people and the reasons. This is why I started reading this site to begin with while searching for info on this very subject.




edit on 30-12-2011 by WhereAreTheGoodguys because: because I type to fast to care about spelling

edit on 30-12-2011 by WhereAreTheGoodguys because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by GodIsPissed
reply to post by comprehension
 


Fresh kills also means...fresh kills.

I mean,you can put nice little bow on crap..but it's still crap!


The area has "this kill" and "that kill" and kill means channel, or creek in Dutch, not crap. Irony aside, there is supposedly nothing nefarious about it. The landfill-cum-park is called Freshkills Park, but some would prefer "Phoenix Park", although I'm not sure that name is any better.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
I think it's not viewed as a crime because it's obviously a terrorist attack.

The media knew who was responsible, unequivocably within hours. So why ever question it?



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by GodIsPissed
 


Lot of towns (Sparkill, Fishkill, Peekskill) and place names (Kill Van Kull, Arthur Kill - channel between NJ and
Staten Island) have "KILL" in name

This area was settled first by Dutch who named many of the places!

KILL is old Dutch name for river or creek

Fresh Kills was named for fresh (aka drinkable, not brackish) creek that flowed in area

And wonder why many think truthers are loons.....



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by GodIsPissed
 



And why were they allowed to get rid of 80% of the steel without examination?It's a crime no matter who did it!So why was the evidence allowed to be destroyed?I never understood that!


Because not all the steel was relevant to their investigation . Besides where do you store steel from 2 110
floor buildings

Were looking for steel from particular places - the impact floors where plane(s) struck the towers and where the
collapse began

Here is chapter from FEMA report outlining procedures for indentifing steel from areas of interest and the
collection and examination of the steel beams

www.fema.gov...

As for Silverstein being "lucky" enough not to be in building that day ....

Well can blame his wife for that - she insisted make appointment with doctor that day


Larry Silverstein, the wealthy property owner and developer who held the lease on the World Trade Center properties, was due to work that morning of September 11, 2001, in the temporary offices of his company, Silverstein Properties, on the 88th floor of the North Tower. But he had a problem; he had a dermatologist appointment that morning, too. According to Silverstein, his wife “laid down the law” and told him he could not miss the doctors appointment. Therefore, Silverstein was not at the World Trade Center when the planes hit. Two of Silverstein’s children, his son, Roger, and daughter, Lisa, would regularly attend meetings with important clients at Windows on the World. That morning, they too were running late and were not at Windows when the planes hit. All three Silverstein’s survived, leading conspiracy theorists to assume that they had advance knowledge of the attacks and deliberately stayed away from the WTC buildings that day. Silverstein did lose four employees in the attack; two of them had just been hired.


I suppose she was "in" on the conspiracy

Also Silverstein was run down and almost killed by drunk driver several months before 9/11 - so much for luck



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
I think it's not viewed as a crime because it's obviously a terrorist attack.

The media knew who was responsible, unequivocably within hours. So why ever question it?



It was a crime made to look like a terrorist attack. What, you only think plots like that happen in movies? No wait, bad example...


edit on 31-12-2011 by comprehension because: comma



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by comprehension

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
I think it's not viewed as a crime because it's obviously a terrorist attack.

The media knew who was responsible, unequivocably within hours. So why ever question it?



It was a crime made to look like a terrorist attack. What, you only think plots like that happen in movies? No wait, bad example...


edit on 31-12-2011 by comprehension because: comma






Sometimes crazy things just happen. You got to just accept it and move on.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 02:08 AM
link   
Slightly OT, but IMO still worth pointing out. It has been said that large secret operations like a hypothetical conspiracy working towards a false flag event on 9/11 could never be kept secret.

So far I have only heard about the Manhattan project (Development of the first atomic bomb) cited as an argument against this notion.

Well, recently another secret op involving lots of people for many years has been declassified:

Yahoo! News article

Wikipedia article on KH-9 Hexagon

Seems like they can keep a secret after all. And these two were declassified.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Don't forget they were testifying before the legislature. Their testimony was voluntary, not compelled. Testifying under oath would give the impression that they had been compelled to testify. That would place the legislature in a superior position. There was also the matter of executive privilege wherein advisers to the President should not be compelled to answer questions regarding non-criminal matters that were discussed with the Chief Executive.


Why hide behind all the verbage and legislative smoke and mirrors if what you are saying is the truth?

The truth is truth, its easy to remember and repeat.

If they can't tell the truth, then something is hidden.

Sorry to make it 3rd grade mentality Hooper but it seems its needed.

It's very apparent you are either working for the very people ats is trying to uncover or you're a blithering idiot.

So which is it?



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
Why is it that only a few people on a conspiracy site see the proof? Are you better than the other 99.9% of the population?

This poll from 2006 indicates over 40% of the US population believed there was a coverup, and that Bush exploited 9/11. Here's your paddle, the Nile currents are strong.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by snowcrash911
 


Sorry, but those are the facts. The Executive Branch should not be compelled to testify. Separation of powers. Its pretty plain and simple.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0

Originally posted by comprehension

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
I think it's not viewed as a crime because it's obviously a terrorist attack.

The media knew who was responsible, unequivocably within hours. So why ever question it?



It was a crime made to look like a terrorist attack. What, you only think plots like that happen in movies? No wait, bad example...


edit on 31-12-2011 by comprehension because: comma






Sometimes crazy things just happen. You got to just accept it and move on.


And there's the rub.

The government will not allow us to move on. Every year in September, we have to "remember" and are told to "never forget". This is a psychological tactic being used. They are systematically reminding us of how they're continuing to ramp up measures that are keeping us "safe".

I don't know if I'm alone in this or not, but I don't fear death. If I happen to get blown up in an airplane, it was just my time to go. Besides, I take my life into my hands every day when I get into my car. Yet, we're being brainwashed to believe that boogiemen are out ot get us and are hiding in every shadow. I refuse to believe this and I feel bad for those who are convinced that we need a nanny state and that every bottle of shampoo is a bomb. Oops. I said the "B" word.

So, I'm with you. Let us move on. Stop trying to keep us all "safe". I'd rather take my chances instead of having to get molested and unnecessarily detained because someone might be "out to get" (Americans).



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


Excuse me......but when is a Terrorist attack not a crime?

Just because the Government and media say it is a terrorist attack, is that really enough reason not to undergo a full investigation, looking at who has motive and who benefits from these atrocities?

What of the Bush family connections to the towers? What of the Bush family cleaner getting run over by her own car? What of tower 7? What of eye witness reports? What of Witnesses that were found suspiciously hanged? What of the plane that hit into the pentagon circling over the white house and pentagon a number of times before deciding to crash into the only part under construction which only had one office in, the office that happened to be investigating huge money laundering by members of Military and Government? What of the offices in both the WTC, that contained huge amounts of information on the laundering and fraud, that were under investigation by the same office? What of the bomb scare on the bridge that was suddenly blacked out by media? What of the random and irregular diseases contracted by firemen not caused by Asbestos? What of the huge funds put aside for the families of the victims which has dissapeared? What of the Steel melting when according to the official story it was only subjected to 1250 degrees when the steels melting point is 2500 degrees? Now im sure you can think of some decent excuses for most of these, but I know that you cannot think up viable excuses for every single one, and when looked at as a whole picture, you have to be blind to not see what the picture depicts.

I hate to use the word sheeple, but come on.
edit on 31-12-2011 by Dionisius because: because I can

edit on 31-12-2011 by Dionisius because: same reason

edit on 31-12-2011 by Dionisius because: typo



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Dionisius
 






Excuse me......but when is a Terrorist attack not a crime?


When the government does it.



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join