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.

 

9/11 Actors re-visited

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by revolutionphase1
Actually...now that you mention it. I checked out some posts by the username "Waypastvne"

Him and Snowcrash911 seem identical. Check it out:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Sore loser. Petty prattle. False accusations and slander based on nothing but personal speculation and baseless conjecture.

Yes, I think I've just identified revolutionphase1.


Originally posted by revolutionphase1
Either way, your boy Stanley wasnt 20 ft from the wing. How can you explain him being that close, when he's on tape saying he was in the SW corner?


Even if this cannot be explained by collision dynamics, witness mistakes about color, distance, shape, object and person identification, time distortion, embellishment, deduction and even confabulation are extremely common. That does not make Mr. Praimnaith a liar. It makes you layman on the subject of witness testimony interpretation.

Why did you misrepresent Stanley's location in your video? Are you planning on apologizing for that? When will you be apologizing for lying in your video, and slandering Praimnaith, insinuating he's a liar and an actor?




posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by snowcrash911
 


I simply placed him where the documentary "scene" placed him. It may not be PERFECT, but its close. You be the judge


I dont have to apologize for anything. A young kid, if watching that video, would put that arrow in a similar location, based on the evidence givin in the previous scene. Basic human instincts say - 1. He'd be dead 2. He'd look way more messed up physically...being that he SURVIVED, or 3. Someones not telling the truth



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by revolutionphase1
reply to post by snowcrash911
 


I simply placed him where the documentary "scene" placed him. It may not be PERFECT, but its close. You be the judge



You should have done a minimum of additional research before opportunistically using a location of your choosing based on misinformation to artificially strengthen your case that he should have died on impact.


Originally posted by revolutionphase1
I dont have to apologize for anything.


Yes you do. You are still calling him a liar and an actor, based on nothing.



Originally posted by revolutionphase1
A young kid, if watching that video, would put that arrow in a similar location, based on the evidence givin in the previous scene.


Are you a young kid?


Originally posted by revolutionphase1
Basic human instincts say - 1. He'd be dead


Texas sharpshooter fallacy. All other people on that floor died, proving without a doubt that being close to a plane impact is very dangerous, not that Praimnath's miraculous survival story is a lie.



Originally posted by revolutionphase1
2. He'd look way more messed up physically...being that he SURVIVED,


And WHAT do you know about his injuries? You haven't done the least bit of research on this before making these claims, have you? His own family members didn't even recognize him when he got home. During his attempts to escape, he accidentally drove a nail into his hand. He was covered in blood and had bruises all over his body.



or 3. Someones not telling the truth


Gibberish. He worked in the building. He was there. He survived. Deal with it.
edit on 6-2-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911
I call your bluff. Complain to the moderators that I am "Waypastvne" and you want action taken.

They can verify you are making it up. I wait with baited breath.


No longer convinced? Will you apologize for this too? I'm still waiting.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
...unless the government breeds psychopaths for operations such as this?...
in a way they breed all types of people, military, doctors etc... what's so hard about believing they could intentionally create enough criminals for an op, to then come in and pretend to save the day.

none of this is new, they've planned stuff like this before. the government works exactly like anonymous.
it can be anyone.



So let me get this straight...to back up these "sinister secret plots to take over the world" accusations of yours, you people invent all these "secret controlled demolitions that nobody saw and which left no evidence" accusations, and to back THOSE up, you invent these "armies of paid actors pretending to be eyewitnesses" accusations. NOW, you're inventing "the gov't is specifically breeding psychopaths for operations like this" accusations to back those up. Secret plots gets thrown on top of conspiracies on top of coverups until you've built for yourself such a runaway train of circular logic based upon literally absolutely nothing but your own vivid imagination that there's absolutely nothing under the sun that will ever convince you that your accusations are hogwash. You'll simply make up whatever excuse you need to rationalize it to yourself.

You might as well just say the 9/11 attack was really caused by farting leprechauns, because EVERYONE knows just how powerful the farts of leprechauns are. Leprechauns only fart when people see then, which irrefutably explains why noone ever reported seeing leprechauns in the WTC- everyone who saw a leprechaun caused the leprechaun to fart and was subsequently killed. All these witnesses reporting fires aren't secret agents or even paid actors- they're simply going along with the OS because if they told the truth about the Leprechauns, the leprechauns would realize they were spotted, and they'd fart and the eyewitnesses would be killed. Go ahead, I DEFY any of you truthers to prove the towers weren't destroyed by farting leprechauns...but of course, I'll simply presume you yourselves are lying because you don't want to be killed by farting leprechauns either.

So please explain to me why my scenario is any less credible than yours. You apparently require no evidence or even rational thought for your argument, so neither do I.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You have a government that has lost all trust from most of its citizens. Mistrust breeds stories.

Stanley Praimnath is a 9/11 victim. We're supposed to stand up for 9/11 victims against their government who failed them, or worse.

To me, it's not that difficult.
edit on 6-2-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You have a government that has lost all trust from most of its citizens. Mistrust breeds stories.

Stanley Praimnath is a 9/11 victim. We're supposed to stand up for 9/11 victims against their government who failed them, or worse.


I absolutely agree...but that is NOT what the truthers are doing here. What they're actually doing is taking advantage of the vacuum of information by using it to insert their own scenarios based upon their own outlooks on life, making the events of 9/11 into one big Rorschach test. Simply look at this thread, where people are speculating that some of the critical eyewitness accounts are really coming from paid actors. There's no way that someone could watch what transpired on 9/11 and instinctively think some exhausted, filth caked fireman they saw on TV was a paid actor. They could only get that after one of those damned fool conspiracy web sites put the idea into their heads, and the only way they'd even swallow THAT is if they were hung up in this "the gov;t is out to murder us all" paranoia before 9/11 ever even occurred. When all you have is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail, and all that.

Now, to be intellecually honest, I'll admit I may be doing this myself, as I've seen so much gov't incompetence and people covering their butts after they've screwed up that I'm naturally going to see more gov't incompetence and people covering their butts after they've screwed up behind the 9/11 attack as well. The difference is that I can give you as many concrete examples of gov't incompetence and people covering their butts after they've screwed up as you'd like. Can any of you truthers give me even *one* example where anyone successfully snuck into an occupied building and planted secret controlled demolitions without anyone noticing?



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I'll give you this much: were I to look at 9/11 through the lens of government incompetence, nothing scares me more than the NORAD tapes.
edit on 6-2-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I'll give you this much: were I to look at 9/11 through the lens of government incompetence, nothing scares me more than the NORAD tapes.


Now you know why I'm frustrated at the truthers constantly trying to steer the analysis of the attack away from investigating the possibility there may be even more gov't incompetence and toward these "sinister secret gov't plots to take over the world" bit.

As for nothing else scaring you more, how about the fact that the Air Force lost an H-bomb off the coast of Georgia back in the 50's and they have yet to find it?

1958 Tybee Island collision
edit on 6-2-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Talk about trying to 'steer' the conversation? Amanda is right on target with her observations. I know this because of the volume of useless rhetoric you boys have posted. This is another example of the truth bubbling to the surface, and you guys are fighting it like dogs.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Talk about trying to 'steer' the conversation? Amanda is right on target with her observations.


Yeah, lots of insincere peace wishes, assumptions about what I know (recommending AE911Truth to me was, of course, hilarious) and the usual insinuations.


Originally posted by dillweed
I know this because of the volume of useless rhetoric you boys have posted.


What part of defending Stanley Praimnath would you characterize as 'useless rhetoric' exactly?


Originally posted by dillweed
This is another example of the truth bubbling to the surface, and you guys are fighting it like dogs.


I see something bubbling to the surface when you and the other 'VicSims'-crowd share your priceless 'facts', and it's sure as hell isn't 'truth'.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by snowcrash911
 


Why dont YOU create a video explaining where he REALLY was when the plane crashed? Since the 20 ft he stated is obviously false.

And yes i am young, younger than you.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
The natural alliance for the 9/11 Truth Movement is with the 9/11 victims families, the survivors and the first responders. Regardless of whether it's intentional, or whether or not you or anybody else is genuinely fooled or deliberately disrupting, I can see several clear characteristics emerge from this nonsense:

- Clever, catchy marketing terminology, e.g. 'VicSims'
- Proliferation of extremely offensive memes, driving a wedge between the 9/11 families and what is perceived by some as part of the 9/11 Truth Movement (you are not)
- Shrewd attempts to associate utterly insane material with justified, careful research
- Cultivation of paranoia and attempts to consume as much time, resources and energy as possible, which would otherwise have been spent on essential issues

Simplified, the effects are resource consumption, guilt by association, sowing confusion & division and finger pointing.

"The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments"

You are welcome to pander your little rants about others; we are the veterans of this cause and we know what you are, what your tactics are and how to expose you.
edit on 6-2-2012 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by revolutionphase1
reply to post by snowcrash911
 


Why dont YOU create a video explaining where he REALLY was when the plane crashed? Since the 20 ft he stated is obviously false.


Says who? Says you?


And yes i am young, younger than you.


Yeah, Stanley Praimnath was holding on for dear life in that building and you were still a snot nose when 9/11 happened... Now you say he's an actor. You are from the social media generation. Everything is about attention and everything is fake. Sincerity is an alien concept.

You have yet to explain:
- Why you lied about his location in your video, repeatedly, while you could have learned all about his account simply by doing a minimum of online research... You grew up with internet, didn't you?
- Why you lied about Praimnath not having injuries, repeatedly
- Why you lied about me being have a sock puppet called 'Waypastvne'

Usually, you thrive off of amnesia: people don't demand that you correct and apologize for the lies you told, and this provides you the leeway to continue your campaign of lies ad infinitum.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911
Yeah, Stanley Praimnath was holding on for dear life in that building and you were still a snot nose when 9/11 happened


Ouch you sound like my mother. Nevertheless, i have grown up since that day. Terrorist attacks effect the young mind very differently, thus ive never lost interest in 9/11. Now i'm old enought to join ATS, post a few threads and let the world know some of my theorys. I'm sorry you dont agree, but you've spammed about 4 pages without a single shred of your so called "justified/careful research". I think you quoted wikipedia once. If your going to challenge a conspiracy theory, better come fully loaded.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join