Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Spotting the liars post 9/11

page: 1
7

log in

join

posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
One of the main ways in spotting a liar is-

- The guilty person may speak more than natural, adding unnecessary details to convince you... they are not comfortable with silence or pauses in the conversation.

- See if they are telling you too much. An example might be, "My mom is living in France, isn't it nice there? Don't you like the Eiffel tower? It's so clean there." Too many details may tip you off to their desperation to get you to believe them.

Now let's watch Silverstein explain his whereabouts on 9/11-



Let's see Bush explain his whereabouts-



We can prove in this video he is lying because we have video evidence of where he was on 9/11, but notice the tell tale sign of explaining his point with too much detail- "I saw the plane hit the tower, er, er the TV was obviously on..." Tell tale sign of lying.

Now watch Silverstein explain where he was on 9/11 again, he talks with the same 'too much detail' tell tale lying signs.

- Where were you on 9/11?

'I was er, er, (looking down, no eye contact, thinking about the lie he's going tell)...I was home...(stutters)...the only reason I wasn't...my wife made an appointment for me...(thinks, big delays then to make sure he is telling his lie correctly)...at the doctor's..." He carries on, just blatant tell tale signs of a liar.

Here's Bush caught off guard about 9/11-



If this isn't the reaction of a guilty person then I don't know what is. Bush was the President of the USA, and he is a flat out lying war criminal!




posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I swear at 1:41 in the first video Mr. Silverstein comes so close to cracking into a blubbering wreck, almost as if he was about to slip up...
edit on 24-5-2012 by fairguy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Machine Mens, with Machine Minds..sad sad sad



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
So, this is your leader ? LOL
Where did you guys found him ?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   
I'm not so sure about the Bush one. That guy was generally a terrible public speaker. The Bush-isms are my favorite thing from his presidency.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Don't forget that 9/11 wasn’t the first attack on the World Trade Center. The first one occurred under Clinton's watch in 1993. I read this in another thread:


Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I ask "why is it that the only way the truthers can justify their conspiracy theories is by accusing everyone and their grandmother of lying"?

When I saw this in the persons sig I was speechless...


signature:
"Nine-eleven was NOT an inside job, it was an Osama Bin Laden job with 19 people from Saudi Arabia, they murdered 3000 Americans and others foreigners including Muslims and we look like idiots, to deny that the people who murdered our fellow citizens did it, when they are continuing to murder other people around the world." - Pres. William Jefferson Clinton


Bill Clinton is a confirmed liar who has proven he will say and do anything to win and to stay out of trouble. He lied to the nation and he lied under oath. I responded to the post asking WHY would anyone quote a known pathological liar to defend a bunch of other notorious pathological killers? NO response... If there were ever a man to be considered guilty of lying to coverup 911, Clinton would be THAT man. How anyone can trust anything this man has to say with such a history of deception is beyond me.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   
I think that Bush, as a recovering alcoholic, could not have been told in advance. He also could not bring any added value to the plan, so he was out. The whole presidential institution had to be totally separated from the incidents. He was not the only one separating, remember how "busy" Rummy was in the early hours?

Bush`s mannerisms however do tell of bad conscience throughout his presidency, delivering the lies.
edit on 25-5-2012 by YetSharkproof because: grammar



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by YetSharkproof
I think that Bush, as a recovering alcoholic, could not have been told in advance. He also could not bring any added value to the plan, so he was out. The whole presidential institution had to be totally separated from the incidents. He was not the only one separating, remember how "busy" Rummy was in the early hours?

Bush`s mannerisms however do tell of bad conscience throughout his presidency, delivering the lies.
edit on 25-5-2012 by YetSharkproof because: grammar


Don't be fooled by Bush, he isn't the best public speaker but he is far, far far from being a fool. In fact acting dumb can be an incredibly effective defense mechanism. Shrug your shoulders, crack a joke, look how silly I am, it's a good way of diverting attention.

The second video of Bush is a man that has been caught off guard by something he knows about, and he fails to think on his feet. We've all been caught telling a lie, if someone brings it up in the future when we aren't prepared for it, this is exactly how you react.

Bush might not have known all the details, but he would have known more than many people give him credit for IMO- his lies and reactions to questions about his foreknowledge of 9/11 tell us he knows more than he does officially.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Giuliani Claims WTC Building 7 Fell "In Stages"




posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Well thats all very subjective. Also at least in the case of Silverstein, being on national television might make him behave in an unnatural and nervous way.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Well thats all very subjective. Also at least in the case of Silverstein, being on national television might make him behave in an unnatural and nervous way.


What about Bush then, how can you justify the video of him flat out lying and then being completely put on the spot by the guy who asks whether he had foreknowledge of 9/11? In that video, where he is completely lost for words, can you put your hand on your heart and say he is innocent?



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012

Originally posted by Cassius666
Well thats all very subjective. Also at least in the case of Silverstein, being on national television might make him behave in an unnatural and nervous way.


What about Bush then, how can you justify the video of him flat out lying and then being completely put on the spot by the guy who asks whether he had foreknowledge of 9/11? In that video, where he is completely lost for words, can you put your hand on your heart and say he is innocent?


Wasn't Bush always a terrible public speaker? I recall him stuttering and pausing and getting confused all the time once he got on the public stand. It's not unusual behavior from him.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Actually no, Bush was an excellent public speaker before he became president.





5 years later he was a bumbling idiot? Nah it was all fake. Just like the whole political system is fake, all designed to prop up the capitalist system for the benefit of a minority privileged class.

Or maybe he was given a lobotomy, or maybe it's his clone lol.

edit on 5/29/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   
If Bush was "in it" beforehand, they surely would have made him look a lot better responding right on top on a historical event. You know, Churchill stuff. But that was not he plan. There had to be a black phase first 2 hours when primal fear was penetrated into minds of the public. That was also the time-slot when Bush had to decide against any personal maverick moves. His wife and children held away from him in possible jeopardy. His plane reported a target and no fighter jet defense. Communication from Air Force One was not working. So he got along with the program.

Lying comes with the job prescription of a president. Bush was also a bragger, like Norman Mailer wrote: "His every grin is a study in smugsmanship."



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   
I'm on the fence about Silverstein. If he's lying...he's not bad at it. He speaks pretty fluently, and doesn't leave the impression of making it up. He could be prepped for the interview though.

But Georgy boy. This man's picture should be in the dictionary under the term "flat out lying". I go by my ability to spot a lie. Knowing how I behave when I lie.

Bush was lying on numerous occasions...I'm dead sure of it. His face leaves no room for doubt. His facial muscles give him away. Some people are good liars....Bush is not one of them. Actually, when Clinton was denouncing publicly his relationship with Mony...he looked way more convincing than Bush.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
I'm on the fence about Silverstein. If he's lying...he's not bad at it. He speaks pretty fluently, and doesn't leave the impression of making it up. He could be prepped for the interview though.

But Georgy boy. This man's picture should be in the dictionary under the term "flat out lying". I go by my ability to spot a lie. Knowing how I behave when I lie.

Bush was lying on numerous occasions...I'm dead sure of it. His face leaves no room for doubt. His facial muscles give him away. Some people are good liars....Bush is not one of them. Actually, when Clinton was denouncing publicly his relationship with Mony...he looked way more convincing than Bush.



Exactly, we've all told lies and then been been put on the spot about it without being prepared, that is exactly what happens with Bush in the video I posted where the reporter asks him unexpectedly about any foreknowledge of 9/11.

If someone accuses you of something and you are innocent, you will get aggressive and defend yourself because you know it is lies.

Nobody can watch that and genuinely believe he didn't know. Casius66 won't even reply, same as Alfie never when I asked him how ridiculous it is that foreign policy makers for America in the middle east are Zionists like Paul Wolfowitz or Dov Zakheim, the very notion is just ludicrously biased and unfair!






top topics



 
7

log in

join