Attention all sinister secret agents we have a problem !

page: 13
15
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The problem with this is that, exactly like the 9/11 attack, there were loads of bad information being reported becuase the news agencies were chomping at the bit to throw whatever update they could find on the air. I can understand how false information can be reported in the panic because reporters are human too. It has nothing to do with any coordinated effort to put out disinformation and everythign to do with humans being capable of makign mistakes under pressure...but what I object to are the conspiracy theorists using these incorrect reports to base their accusations on even though they've been retracted...especially when they conceal from us that it's been retracted. The "flight 93 landed in Ohio" stunt that Dylan Avery pulled in Loose Change is a sterling case in point.


As usual, the disinfo crap that you post is diametrically opposite the truth:

www.rumormillnews.com...


THE DELETED REPORTS
FROM THE HISTORIOGRAPHY
OF 9/11

By Christopher Bollyn

As any journalist or historian knows, when a major catastrophe occurs it is extremely important to monitor the first news reports because they often describe a very different version of events than those produced after government spin doctors have gotten their fingers in the story. The earliest reports, which are often more candid and honest than those that follow, need to be preserved for history.

The complete journalistic record and the eyewitness testimony of the events of 9/11 form a body of historical writing, known as the "historiography," of the terror attacks that have changed the course of American history. To remove or delete articles or reports from this body is a crime against history.

There are, however, at least two very important stories from September 11, 2001, which have been effectively deleted from the historiography of 9/11.

The two stories, one from Cleveland and one from Albuquerque, are essential to understanding what happened on that awful day, but both have been excised from the publicly accessible body of historical writing about 9/11.

FLIGHT 93 LANDED IN CLEVELAND ......
edit on 4-7-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SimontheMagus
 


And you continue to bite on the biggest lies. Flight 93 never landed in Cleveland.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SimontheMagus
 


Then what shot it down? Because there is NOTHING in the US arsenal would shoot down an airliner, and let it come down in one piece as Flight 93 did.

You can believe all the goofy theories that it was taken out over the ocean, but, in the end, the ONLY evidence shows Flight 93 impacted the ground at high speed outside Shanksville, PA.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1


Information was intentionally withheld by somebody to help the terrorists carry out what they were planning.


You haven't proved that at all.


Debunkers are always saying that it was not intentional failure to share intelligence but it was simply the policy that they were following.


No, they are not. And even if they were this doesn't change what you have tried to prove in this thread.


So now it turns out that the debunkers are wrong, it was not the policy. So now I'm saying you don't have an excuse for them anymore........... Seriously I am done with you . Have a good day!


I know that's what you are saying now. It's not what you said at the start.

And you are still,unsurprisingly, avoiding the question I've put to you three times. Seriously, this is not going to win anybody over. Especially when having lost one argument you just invent another 'fact' and run with that.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup


Trickoftheshade even admits in this thread that they have not read the NIST report, how can they be an expert on 9/11 without even looking at what they are defending?


Oh man. Another person who just makes stuff up.

Just what the Truth Movement needs.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 





You seem awfully focused on trying to prove the 'debunkers are wrong' rather than anything else. Perhaps you should focus on researching the issues of 911 you seem confused about. Nobody cares who's right or wrong here, just what can be supported by the facts. You've not supported 'someone intentionally helped the terrorists' or similar.


Sure I'm focused on proving the debunkers are wrong. You are part of a problem!

I provided a document which proves that there were no good excuse for not sharing info. Now you gonna have to come up with some other reason why no one should be held accountable.
edit on 5-7-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1
Sure I'm focused on proving the debunkers are wrong. You are part of a problem!

How dare you. You believe yourself to have the moral authority to declare who is part of the problem, yet your total contribution to the truth movement so far has been to make wild accusations and fail to back them up substantively. To claim you have no dog in the race then start a vendetta against 'debunkers'.

Clearly the problem here is that the world does not fit your fantasies, and you're angry at those who are pointing it out.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




You just contradicted yourself. You'e claiming they "lied about 95%" of what happened and then turn around and say terrorosts were probably involved. The other 95% is what confirms it was a terrorist attack, from the trail linking Atta from Al Qaida to taking flight instruction to boarding to the plane being hijacked. Plus,


Are you telling me that since terrorists were involved it somehow disproves an inside job? If so then I totally disagree.




The problem with this is that, exactly like the 9/11 attack, there were loads of bad information being reported becuase the news agencies were chomping at the bit to throw whatever update they could find on the air. I can understand how false information can be reported in the panic because reporters are human too. It has nothing to do with any coordinated effort to put out disinformation and everythign to do with humans being capable of makign mistakes under pressure...but what I object to are the conspiracy theorists using these incorrect reports to base their accusations on even though they've been retracted...especially when they conceal from us that it's been retracted. The "flight 93 landed in Ohio" stunt that Dylan Avery pulled in Loose Change is a sterling case in point.


This is a completely different topic for another thread. But I would love to see you explain who made those mistakes and why they realized that they were mistaken.

Also can you provide any similar "mistakes" for the other terrorist attacks that you say conspiracy theorists don't care about?




I'm thinking you need to update your information. The FBI traced the anthrax strain to a mentally disturbed lab technician who committed suicide when he found out he was going to be arrested.


This mentally disturbed lab technitian didn't kill himself before we were told that Iraq was responsible..




I'm thinking you're only hearing what you want to hear. Emad Salem specifically said he tried to warn the FBI abou the plot and hsi handlers were even goign to supply them with a fake bomb, but their own supervisors were idiot who didn't take the threat seriously. SO how does that show my point twrong when I say the attack succeeded becuase of human failure?


Sure there's nothing suspicious when the FBI don't take their own imformant seriously..





Not when you say ominous things like "I started researching 9/11"? Whre do you go to for your nformation, precisely?


Well this information you can easily find in my threads.


I gave you possible reasons for conspiracy theories. Now you give me similar events about the attacks you posted for which you say there are no conspiracy theories....



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1
I provided a document which proves that there were good excuse for not sharing info.


That's weird. Because here's what you wrote about it before I corrected you.

"now it turns out that they also shared intelligence"

So which was it?



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 





You haven't proved that at all.


It's up to you now to prove that there is a good reason for not holding them accountable for not telling eachother what they knew about the hijackers.

As far as everything else in your reply .... I think you now understand what I'm talking about so I don't care if you think that I changed my position as long as you know what my position is. And it's that there should be accountability for failure to share information which would have prevented the attacks.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by thegameisup


Trickoftheshade even admits in this thread that they have not read the NIST report, how can they be an expert on 9/11 without even looking at what they are defending?


Oh man. Another person who just makes stuff up.

Just what the Truth Movement needs.


Yeah, I'm just 'making it up' you obviously have a short memory!

Hereis the thread link again that proves you have said you have not read the NIST report.

Trickoftheshade states they have not read the NIST report.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now who is making stuff up?!



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by maxella1
Sure I'm focused on proving the debunkers are wrong. You are part of a problem!

How dare you. You believe yourself to have the moral authority to declare who is part of the problem, yet your total contribution to the truth movement so far has been to make wild accusations and fail to back them up substantively. To claim you have no dog in the race then start a vendetta against 'debunkers'.

Clearly the problem here is that the world does not fit your fantasies, and you're angry at those who are pointing it out.


It's quite obvious that people who claim to be debunkers here are part of the problem.

It's no vendetta at all, people are just stating the obvious. It's been noticed by a lot of members from what I can read. It seems that the debunkers are hellbent of presenting the OS as the only possible explanation for 9/11.

If the OS stands up, then why are there so many people all over the world questioning it? If anyone is party to supporting the OS in an act to cover up the possibility of an inside job then those people are part of the problem for sure. People are entitled to their opinions.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 





You haven't proved that at all.


It's up to you now to prove that there is a good reason for not holding them accountable for not telling eachother what they knew about the hijackers.

As far as everything else in your reply .... I think you now understand what I'm talking about so I don't care if you think that I changed my position as long as you know what my position is. And it's that there should be accountability for failure to share information which would have prevented the attacks.


You might find this interesting.
www.fromthewilderness.com...



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
It's quite obvious that people who claim to be debunkers here are part of the problem.

What problem? You're destroying your own point here by trying to scapegoat. Normally I'd report a post like this but it's just nonsense enough to make yourself look bad:


It's no vendetta at all, people are just stating the obvious. It's been noticed by a lot of members from what I can read. It seems that the debunkers are hellbent of presenting the OS as the only possible explanation for 9/11.

And truthers present anything but the OS as being the only possible explanation, despite the fact they all disagree with each other. You've yet to show anyone is part of any problem.


If the OS stands up, then why are there so many people all over the world questioning it? If anyone is party to supporting the OS in an act to cover up the possibility of an inside job then those people are part of the problem for sure. People are entitled to their opinions.

Why are people questioning it? Because people question everything. If Gravity stands up to experiment then why are there so many people claiming to have unique understandings of it?

Because they're morons.

The world is filled with people who cannot understand simple factual scenarios. There are millions of religious people who claim the earth is less than 4 billion years old. So, using the logic you've espoused above, because millions of them disagree, we know the earth isn't 4 billion years old.

Do you agree? Or are you about to change your logic now it's supporting something you disagree with? If you have to change the logical argument you use then that disproves your original point.

So, either endorse your own logic and admit this means you believe in a 'young earth', or deny your own logic and realise what a fool you are trying to blame debunkers for being part of a problem.

I leave the choice to you.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by maxella1
Sure I'm focused on proving the debunkers are wrong. You are part of a problem!

How dare you. You believe yourself to have the moral authority to declare who is part of the problem, yet your total contribution to the truth movement so far has been to make wild accusations and fail to back them up substantively. To claim you have no dog in the race then start a vendetta against 'debunkers'.

Clearly the problem here is that the world does not fit your fantasies, and you're angry at those who are pointing it out.


It's quite obvious that people who claim to be debunkers here are part of the problem.

It's no vendetta at all, people are just stating the obvious. It's been noticed by a lot of members from what I can read. It seems that the debunkers are hellbent of presenting the OS as the only possible explanation for 9/11.

If the OS stands up, then why are there so many people all over the world questioning it? If anyone is party to supporting the OS in an act to cover up the possibility of an inside job then those people are part of the problem for sure. People are entitled to their opinions.


The position, it seems to me, is that there are pretty much as many theories as there are truthers. The remote controlled planers say the no planers are disinfo and the thermite crew say the dew weapon/ nuclear devices are disinfo and the Bush/Cheney people don't like the Israel?mossad bunch and so on and so on and so on.

People who think 19 Al Qaeda linked terrorists hi-jacked 4 planes are actually pretty consistent and have hard facts to back them up. So why you label them as part of the problem when it is the truther world that is all over the place eludes me.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

What problem? You're destroying your own point here by trying to scapegoat. Normally I'd report a post like this but it's just nonsense enough to make yourself look bad:


That sentence makes no sense, why is it nonsense to make myself look bad? That just isn't coherent.

Why would you report someone for having an opinion? If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to report right?


And truthers present anything but the OS as being the only possible explanation, despite the fact they all disagree with each other. You've yet to show anyone is part of any problem.


What is a truther? I don't have to show that anyone is part of the problem, that is just my opinion, which I can state without having to show anything. If I and others feel that there is a cover up going on, then we can say that right? This is a website where we can discuss anything and everything to do with 9/11 is it not? If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to get worked up over right?


Why are people questioning it? Because people question everything. If Gravity stands up to experiment then why are there so many people claiming to have unique understandings of it?


What has this remark got to do with anything? No one was discussing gravity, and I cannot see how this remotely connects with anything you are replying to?

So people that question things are morons as you put it. So you don't like being called part of the problem but you don't mind calling people morons? OK!
Listen, people have questioned things from year dot, this is how man works, and because people do not believe all of the OS, due to many holes in it, we are naturally going to ask a lot of questions. That is our right, we do, after all pay the wages of the governments, and if we feel we are being lied to, then we have the right to ask plenty of questions.



The world is filled with people who cannot understand simple factual scenarios. There are millions of religious people who claim the earth is less than 4 billion years old. So, using the logic you've espoused above, because millions of them disagree, we know the earth isn't 4 billion years old.

Do you agree? Or are you about to change your logic now it's supporting something you disagree with? If you have to change the logical argument you use then that disproves your original point.

So, either endorse your own logic and admit this means you believe in a 'young earth', or deny your own logic and realise what a fool you are trying to blame debunkers for being part of a problem.

I leave the choice to you.


There may be people in the world that do not understand factual scenarios, but this has nothing to do with 9/11. There are untold well educated people that just do not think they are being told the whole truth about 9/11. It is their right to challenge the OS if they think it stinks. Many do, if they didn't this forum and all the other 9/11 forums would not exist would they.

I don't see how the earth being 4 billion years old, and religions have anything to do with 9/11, it's just not remotely relevant. So I shall ignore that because it's just too way out there and off topic. No I don't agree because it's not something to do with 9/11 and so I have no interest in discussing religion or how old the earth is. Perhaps if you have an interest in religion and the earth's age, then there are other sections within ATS where you can go and discuss those things with likeminded members.

Again, more ad hominem, calling me a fool for having an opinion. I do believe there are many people who like to masquerade as debunkers are part of the problem. As stated, that is my opinion, and again, if those that I feel are part of the problem have nothing to hide, then there is no need to be bothered by anything is there?

Cheerio



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
The position, it seems to me, is that there are pretty much as many theories as there are truthers. The remote controlled planers say the no planers are disinfo and the thermite crew say the dew weapon/ nuclear devices are disinfo and the Bush/Cheney people don't like the Israel?mossad bunch and so on and so on and so on.

People who think 19 Al Qaeda linked terrorists hi-jacked 4 planes are actually pretty consistent and have hard facts to back them up. So why you label them as part of the problem when it is the truther world that is all over the place eludes me.


As I said to the previous member, I'm not sure what a truther is, so this is not a term I am familiar with.

There will be a lot of different theories, because there are many people that do not believe the OS, who all have their own view on what really happened. It makes sense that there are differing opinions on 9/11, everyone is unique.

It's good to have lots of views and ideas as to what really happened, throw them all into the mix, so we can share ideas and piece together the real story.

From what I have read there is plenty of deliberate false information in circulation to mask the real truth, sending people off on different tracks, making people question each other. This is nothing new, governments are historically notorious for spreading propaganda, anyone can look back into history and see this.

But within all the differing theories lies the answers to what really happened, so people just have to sift through it all carefully and eventually it will all be pieced together, and all the false information will be disgarded.

In any government propaganda event they always provide what they call consistent hard facts to back up their OS, but these facts are designed to back up their OS, they have years of experience in covering their tracks, and with something on the scale of 9/11 you would expect them to have every little detail covered, so that they can make their OS seem as believable as possible. But they make mistakes, they leave answers, and that is what people are looking for, and are finding. They can never have a 100% water-tight OS, and this is why so many people are on 9/11 forums all over the world, otherwise these forums would not exist.

Like I have said already on this page, if people that call themselves debunkers are not part of the problem, then they will not be bothered by people saying some people masquerading as debunkers are part of the problem. Nothing to hide, nothing to worry about, right?



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


If truthers are carefully exploring the evidence then there shouldn't " be a lot of different theories ".

The fact that there are proves that, even if there was an inside job of some sort, most truthers are dead wrong.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
That sentence makes no sense, why is it nonsense to make myself look bad? That just isn't coherent.

Why would you report someone for having an opinion? If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to report right?

When you type complete nonsense, it makes yourself look bad. That's pretty coherent. I report posts that accuse others of being complicit or 'part of the problem' as that breaks rules here.


What is a truther? I don't have to show that anyone is part of the problem, that is just my opinion, which I can state without having to show anything. If I and others feel that there is a cover up going on, then we can say that right? This is a website where we can discuss anything and everything to do with 9/11 is it not? If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to get worked up over right?

A truther is someone who presents the idea of an alternate or hidden truth to 911. This is what you're doing, if you are now saying that you have no desire or need to back up your statements, then we can dismiss your opinions without evidence. You clearly want your opinions taken seriously, and so you need to back them up.

Simple.


What has this remark got to do with anything? No one was discussing gravity, and I cannot see how this remotely connects with anything you are replying to?

You claim that the existence of questions proves that there's something wrong. I point out that people question the age of the earth, the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution. These are not wrong, but yet the questions exist. Therefore your assertion that questions = issues is defeated.


So people that question things are morons as you put it. So you don't like being called part of the problem but you don't mind calling people morons? OK!

Sure, young earth creationists are morons.


Listen, people have questioned things from year dot, this is how man works, and because people do not believe all of the OS, due to many holes in it, we are naturally going to ask a lot of questions. That is our right, we do, after all pay the wages of the governments, and if we feel we are being lied to, then we have the right to ask plenty of questions.

Just because you're asking these questions does not mean that you've got any proof though. As I said before, people question the age of the earth. Do you think they have an actual evidence of a young earth? Of course not.


There may be people in the world that do not understand factual scenarios, but this has nothing to do with 9/11. There are untold well educated people that just do not think they are being told the whole truth about 9/11.

I've yet to see evidence of this. Every authoritative source presented with the counter 911 theory is associated with outlandish or completely illogical claims. I can't think of a single truther source that is well educated and coherent at all times.


It is their right to challenge the OS if they think it stinks. Many do, if they didn't this forum and all the other 9/11 forums would not exist would they.

They can challenge it if they like, but you made claims about questions being evidence of flaws, which is not accurate.


I don't see how the earth being 4 billion years old, and religions have anything to do with 9/11, it's just not remotely relevant. So I shall ignore that because it's just too way out there and off topic. No I don't agree because it's not something to do with 9/11 and so I have no interest in discussing religion or how old the earth is. Perhaps if you have an interest in religion and the earth's age, then there are other sections within ATS where you can go and discuss those things with likeminded members.

What they have to do with 911 is the belief structure. The belief in an alternate truth is exactly the same as a belief in a religion. It's supported the same way (pseudofacts with personal relevance) and argued the same way (personal assertion).

The point of my post is to draw a parallel between the two, so you can see that just having questions does not equate in any way to flaws in a theory. Millions of people question the age of the earth, yet it remains an undeniable fact.


Again, more ad hominem, calling me a fool for having an opinion. I do believe there are many people who like to masquerade as debunkers are part of the problem. As stated, that is my opinion, and again, if those that I feel are part of the problem have nothing to hide, then there is no need to be bothered by anything is there?

You don't know what an ad hominem is, so perhaps look that up. What I am bothered by is the straight up assertions that someone like me, who is only interested in the truth, is somehow perpetuating some vast undefined conspiracy.

That is wrong, it's immoral to claim so, it's against the rules of this site, and it shows you up as a 'believer'. QED.






top topics



 
15
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join