The video that 9-11, OS movement cant handle and rather pretend it dosnt answer EVERYTHING!

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 04:16 AM
link   
hello, OS believers, id like you to take the time to watch this video.

it answers all of the subjects by the "official reports" as well as the eyewitness events and media.

subjects included but not limited to:
pancake theory
fire theory
floor sag theory
floor expansion theory
pile driver theory
building 7
Thermite
free fall rate
Explosive theory and the evidence there of
melting steel theory and evidence there of


Google Video Link



Seriously who do you think your kidding?

seeing is believing

edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I really hate misleading threads/videos like this. Who exactly is the "OS movement"? If you are talking about the NIST report, do you really not understand that up against it a silly YouTube video is like a gnat flying around making a nuisance of itself?

I for one (as a layman) have seen nothing that suggests anything happened at the WTC 1 and 2 other than a structural failure resulting from 2 large planes impacting the buildings at high speed. That has nothing to do with me being an "OS" (whatever that is) believer or anything else.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


The OS movement is those that blindly believe in the ORIGINAL STATEMENT, (hence OS abbreviation). meaning That the towers were really just a terrorist attack not involved with the government in any way.
NOTE* this is a Google video, not YouTube.


as for the layman view as you have said, this video has all of the answers to all of the questions that relate to 9-11, being solely the result of planes crashing and solely causing the destruction, of the world trade towers and building No:7, and why the OS is a lie

Please watch the video before posting. Failure to do so is just perpetuating the lie, that has brainwashed so many.
Also in the video, it explains that the building's were designed to cope with plane strikes.

Authority = Truth, is what they want.

TRUTH should ALWAYS!! trump Authority
edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)


+16 more 
posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 05:38 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


And I am saddened by post like yours, but I do understand. You do not want to face all the lies before you, NIST, government, media, war. You do not want to lose the trust and pride in everything you once believed in. You do not want to become lost and defeated in knowing you are a victim of this crime. The reality is clear, how we all confront and deal with it is not.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Do you know who you are talking too? I don't trust government or the media. Just because you guys have not made your case for any of the alternatives does not reflect on me, it reflects on you. I've watched the video record, listened to the eyewitness accounts. To me it looks just as I described. I don't see evidence of anything else.

Don't blame the audience when you fail to make your case.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


NOTE* these are discussion forums, not just. well I think, there fore it is. please raise a point of debate.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 05:55 AM
link   
reply to post by easybreezy
 


No sir, you launched an attack on anyone who does not believe as you do. If you don't care to discuss your attack, then what the heck are you launching it for?



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by 911files
reply to post by easybreezy
 


No sir, you launched an attack on anyone who does not believe as you do. If you don't care to discuss your attack, then what the heck are you launching it for?




The truth is not an attack, NOTE* you have just summed up what happened on 9-11 "launched an attack on anyone who does not believe as you do. If you don't care"

How America broke into the middle east



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by easybreezy

The truth is not an attack


"OS movement cant handle and rather pretend it dosnt answer EVERYTHING!" - but that is. And it is NOT the truth, and for someone who has not made their case, damned presumptuous.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


Another thread: WTC collapse videos exposes the lies of the 9/11 conspiracy theorist movement

I don't see you protesting that



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


we wish for you to STOP being a victim...
I'm a pilot, and I call foul.....



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by easybreezy
reply to post by 911files
 


Another thread: WTC collapse videos exposes the lies of the 9/11 conspiracy theorist movement

I don't see you protesting that


So, now I need to go protest every offensive posing on ATF? Sorry, but that is not the one that was at the top of the forum list this morning when I logged in.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


And yet again, I have to bring to your attention that this is a discussion forum. So please bring up something to debate relevant to the starting post... Unless you cannot.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by easybreezy
 


Then start a discussion, not an attack. You brought nothing to the table in this thread to discuss, just an attack. I thought you wanted to discuss how stupid everyone is who believes that WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed due to a structural weakening caused by the impact of 2 very large planes. Silly me.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


What is so hard about watching a video? Then discussing its fact's? Or if in fact it has any flaw's?

Or are you just helping in proving my point?
edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by easybreezy
reply to post by 911files
 


What is so hard about watching a video? Then discussing its fact's? Or if in fact it has any flaw's?

Or are you just helping in proving my point?
edit on 24-6-2012 by easybreezy because: (no reason given)


Videos are NOT evidence. They are someone's cherry-picked compilation designed to support their belief. I don't watch silly YouTube videos of such design because they are a waste of time. And what is your point? That is usually outlined in the thread title. I'm still trying to figure out who the "OS movement" is.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


I know I am talking to someone who only spends their time on the 9/11 conspiracy forum while on ATS. I see the evidence not just in the events of that day, but also in the history leading up to it and in the state of the world today. There are not just technical argument but political, social and economic ones as well all tied up in this mess. I know this is a very complex and confusing situation. One piece of the puzzle beyond any reasonable doubt is WTC7, fire cannot do this to a building, only explosives can. It is the exact same pattern as every other controlled demolition, but I am sure you are already familiar with the case.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


Then please, debate the video, I would really like to see what is false. I'm having a REALLY hard time to find anything fraudulent myself, maybe the eyes of someone who believes the Original Statement can help me.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by 911files


Videos are NOT evidence. They are someone's cherry-picked compilation designed to support their belief. I don't watch silly YouTube videos of such design because they are a waste of time.


Then why even come into a thread that clearly lists a video as its main point?



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


You are correct. I only post on two internet forums these days, and then only during times when I'm taking a break from other pursuits, or when I have new information I want feedback on. Why only 9/11 forums (ATS and JREF)? Because that is the subject of my research. I research for primary historical documentation, not people's spin on media accounts or secondary sources.

I've had my fill of thermite, directed energy weapons, holograms and other fantasies. I don't care to discuss them or watch YouTube videos advocating them. If someone ever presents evidence (not YouTube videos) to support an alternative, then I might reconsider my position on the structural collapse hypothesis. But, I am a layperson, not a structural engineer, and I state many times in many places that my opinion and 25 cents won't even get you a cup of coffee.

However, I do agree that the WTC7 collapse seems particularly odd. I would not agree that demolition is the ONLY viable explanation for the collapse, but it certainly seems to have about as much merit as the NIST explanation does (to me anyways). But, without direct evidence to support either, I reckon it is just a matter of which makes more sense to a particular individual.





new topics
top topics
 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join