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 Solved!

page: 9
3
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Hey guys, don't be too upset. This is the search for truth, which means you have to consider some pretty outlandish and incredible ideas. And every now and then, you have to go...

...out on a limb? XD
edit on 12-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by OutonaLimb
 


I have to point out one flaw in logic here. If this dates all the way back to ww2, why not let the soviet union destroy us? Would've been quick and easy if this runs as deep as you claim.

Why would it run all the way back to ww2 anyways? Western civilization took off right after ww2, not before. We entered into ww2 as a humble and still new country.

Why would western civilization be a problem anyways? We've been aiding the world for years in many ways. We've been there for our allies whenever they've needed us, and we kept the soviet union in check as well as communist China for a long time. How would the fall of western civilization benefit anyone?

Money as a motivator? Western civilization has been up until recently very productive at making money. Why would anyone looking for money sign on to destroy the biggest cash cow in the world?

I'm not denying the existance of hidden information or agendas, but if you're going to look for one try to be logical.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by OutonaLimb
 



(2) What is the significance of the photo with WTC 7 highlighted in blue? Is there a message contained within? I can't see it - can you explain it?


I'm not sure the OP is referring to WTC7, I think that was painted blue already. I could be wrong but I think thew the OP is on about the road to the left, West St, and where it says West St, if you turn the image clockwise it looks a bit like 'The Eye of Horus'. Just speculating because I cannot see anything else in that image.

BTW, why is this in the hoax section? I thought all conspiracies theories were just that, regardless if any of the evidence for the theory can be verified as true?



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by OutonaLimb
 


I like to think I'm a tolerant guy, but this thread should just be deleted. The hoax bin is too good for this piece of trash.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TraitorKiller
reply to post by Finishthis
 




Watch the guy fall at 09:12.

Come back and tell me this is according to the laws of physics.


Interesting video, the cameraman didn't seem too shocked when the person was falling?

You'd have thought there would be some kind of reaction from him?



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by OutonaLimb
 


Originally posted by OutonaLimb
9/11 as an event was fake. There were no terrorists, no plane crashes, no real victims.
Just a special effects movie/storyboard acted out, and distributed and sold to the public
by co-conspirators, along with the (behind the scenes) conventional demolition of
pre-emptied buildings

That, is utter BS nonsense! People died when those buildings were demolished with explosives, and that they were destroyed in this manner cannot really be denied by any thinking person who's the least bit acquainted with the basic laws of physics, in so far as the buildings basically exploded from the top down without encountering any forces of resistence, all the way to the ground, falling to within two or three seconds of absolute free fall for any freely dropped object falling through nothing but air alone. And you can see them blowing up, with explosive squibs jettisoning outwardly well below the debris field, speaking of which, large steel girders from the perimeter walls were blown as far as the Winter Garden Atrium, many 100's of feet away, with some firing like javelins into adjacent buildings like the American Express Building, and tiny fragments of human bone left on TOP of adjacent buildings as a result.

It was a grisly black-op, psy-op of the farthest reachings proportions, and people were killed, needlessly.






edit on 12-7-2012 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TraitorKiller
reply to post by Finishthis
 


Please, this is just common sense, go to your roof and drop a dummy, see how far it travels in that distance, I don't mean forward travel but sideways travel from the the point you threw it.

Have you ever seen shadows, they don't just fly off all of sudden when the background doesn't change and the camera perspective and the sun's position doesn't change(noticably).



Welcome to ATS, where the OS sheeple lack common sense!

Baaaaa



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Evolutionsend
 

Well the CIA was founded in WWII. And they started out as demolitions experts, ironically. They were also led by people who, to a one were SMOM (Sovereign Military Order of Malta) which is the military order of the Vatican in Rome.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
And all this is a true fact because you say it is?



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by OutonaLimb
 


Originally posted by OutonaLimb

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
The song goes: "Living is easy with eyes closed", not "eyes shut". "Eyes shut" sounds lame. John Lennon didn't write lame stuff. Have some respect.

The rest of your post sounds lame also.


I think, er, no, I mean, er, yes, but its all wrong
That is, I think I disagree

Eyes shut sounds OK to me when i play it.
And John Lennon wrote plenty of lame stuff.

Unfortunately John Lennon and the Beatles were products of the Tavistock
institute, They were insiders.
Not just McCartney, but all four beatles were replaced by lookalikes at least
once before 1970.
edit on 12-7-2012 by OutonaLimb because: (no reason given)

You're still not getting it. The lyric is not: "I think, er, no, I mean, er, yes, but its all wrong". That sounds just as lame as "eyes shut".

The lyric is,
"Always, no sometimes, think it's me, but you know I know when it's a dream.
I think I know I mean, 'ah yes', but it's all wrong, that is, I think I disagree."

He says "Always", then corrects himself with "sometimes". He says, "I know when it's a dream", then corrects himself with, "I think I know", then again with, "but it's all wrong, that is, I think I disagree."

"I think, er, no, I mean, er, yes" sounds, er, lame. And Lennon didn't write lame stuff (I'm generalizing when I make that statement).

Here's why you're wrong about "eyes shut" sounding "OK":
The line "Living is easy with eyes closed" slides off the tongue, it's mellifluous because of the Z sound the words share--iz eazy with eyez clozed. Eyez shuT breaks the phonetic continuity, continuity you want for a melodic lyric. "Eyes shut" would suck, and Lennon would have never written it.

As for the Tavistock Institute, you're also wrong, but not too far off. The Beatles were a unique hybrid experiment orchestrated by extraterrestrials. Their mothers were impregnated with the sperm of alien musicians/composers. The offspring were cloned several times, and the aliens conducting the experiment kept replacing Beatle members with clones to see how it would affect their music. The music got better, but the replacement clones didn't get along as well as the original members, probably because the final clones weren't all from the same clone generation. That's why they broke up.
edit on 12-7-2012 by lunarasparagus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   
I don't know what all the free fall theories about jumpers are here on about but there are several in here between 6:35 and 8:10. Do your own morose study of it. And if you think all that is faked... shame on you.



edit on 12-7-2012 by intrptr because: time



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ColoradoJens
 


I understand where you are coming from.

I was on vacation in New York on 9/11. Actually from the previous Friday to the following Friday. I stayed at 200w 52st, The Manhattan Club.

When the attack took place I was able to take quite a few photos, but not thousands, because I was using a disposable camera, instead of a large memory digital camera.

It turns my stomach to see the ignorance fly out of the minds of people who weren't there, but insist on thinking they can answer every aspect of that day.

While I have no problem with people speculating in order to see things from a different angle and possibly uncover truth that had remained hidden by the MSM and other media outlets, it is truly disgusting to see these people who have no respect for those effected by the attacks.

Many people buy in to such ludicrous theories and work to convince others of what they have 'discovered' about 9/11. It shows exactly how healthy their train of thought is when they do not show compassion and give the benefit of doubt to those who lost their lives or lost their loved ones.

Even though they may believe no one was there and it was all fabricated, it is simply disgusting that their instinct for compassion doesn't kick in and drive them to show respect. I think respect should always be given, until there is absolute material proof that supports the claims of 'no plane/no victims'

I tend to avoid 9/11 threads because of this very reason. I can't imagine the nerve it takes to have a conversation on here with someone who's lost a member of their immediate family and call them a liar in no round-about way.

I tried to help some of the 9/11 consp theorists understand that there were real planes, there were real victims and they always ask for proof of how I know.

To me, the photos I have taken of 9/11 are not entertainment material or evidence for 9/11 truthers. They have never been published and I have only ever shown 4 people. Some of the photos are graphic and would leave no doubt of the presence of victims on that day.

I will not show the photos in the future either, they are locked in a photo album as a part of the history of my family and my country.

Didn't plan to make such a long post, just wanted to let you know I do understand your desire to keep the images private. I know how tempting the desire can be to display them as a way to shut up some of the people who spout ignorance like Old Faithful.

I hope you keep them private and share them with your family in the future, when you tell your version of that day, what really happened.

Ea







edit on 13-7-2012 by esteay812 because: tyops



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 





To me, the photos I have taken of 9/11 are not entertainment material or evidence for 9/11 truthers. They have never been published and I have only ever shown 4 people. Some of the photos are graphic and would leave no doubt of the presence of victims on that day. I will not show the photos in the future either, they are locked in a photo album as a part of the history of my family and my country. Didn't plan to make such a long post, just wanted to let you know I do understand your desire to keep the images private. I know how tempting the desire can be to display them as a way to shut up some of the people who spout ignorance like Old Faithful. I hope you keep them private and share them with your family in the future, when you tell your version of that day, what really happened.


Blabla, pics or it didn´t happen.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
I don't know what all the free fall theories about jumpers are here on about but there are several in here between 6:35 and 8:10. Do your own morose study of it. And if you think all that is faked... shame on you.



edit on 12-7-2012 by intrptr because: time


Ok, besides that one jumper in this vid being an obvious fake I´ll debunk the entire vid once and for all.

This is the place the guy is filming from,



From the building on the left across the building on the right.

This is the map, you can see in the vid that his position is at a 90degree angle towards the wtc noth tower.



Now look at the building at W. Broadway and Murray st. The building with the sharp edge on the rightside, that ends at the yellow line, it covers half the north tower from this perspective.

Now look at the vid, it is to the left of the north tower,

www.youtube.com...=35s

Pause it at 35 sec.

The white building in the middle with blueish stripes. It is too far to the left.

Then look at this pic,



This is completely different again, from the same kind of angle. Where is the white blueish building that covers half the WTC7 from the left, in the vid? And where is the white building that covers almost half the WTC7 from the right in the pic, in the vid? It should be barely visible from that angle.

Fake fake fake.

Try to debunk this with factual arguments.

PS, if someone can make a screenshot of that vid at the 35 sec mark it would be appreciated.
edit on 13-7-2012 by TraitorKiller because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


You mean you saw footage of the collapse.

Footage like this,



You see how those three beams in the upper right corner of the debree are magically repaired as it falls down on the Mariott hotel?

Amazing huh?

Debunk....
edit on 13-7-2012 by TraitorKiller because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
I have to admit, some of your information in this thread is insightful. And will make one think about this event again. However, you go and throw a turd in the punch bowl. Repeat, we have a turd in the punch bowl.

911 was the end to a long history of lies and treason, and how they where able to cover up, and lose critical information that could have exposed those with their hands in the cookie jar.
But all of this was destroyed, buried, and lost. and shipped to China to be melted down.
At least I was able to take something out of this thread. This is one of those hoax threads that you have to read between the lines, and sort out the misinformation from the small grain of truth you offer OP.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by ColoradoJens

Originally posted by Finishthis
No one was tossing dummies, these people jumped...You seem to lack a key understanding of the event itself.
Also shadows WOW, Do you know how sunlight works now, explain to me the angle of which the sun was pointing that day. Explain how the shadow should be the way you want it to be, maybe in your own understanding you'll reflect upon your stupidity.


I almost feel bad here.

CJ


The shadow should stay with the person, which it did the whole fall, except for the last few visible ft. In that section it suddenly seperated and took off, and there was no change in background, trajectory, camera perspective or sun angle.

So you explain to me smartmouth, what mechanism is causing this? Both of you smartmouths?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup VIDEO posted above HERE - www.abovetopsecret.com...
Watch the guy fall at 09:12. Come back and tell me this is according to the laws of physics Interesting video, the cameraman didn't seem too shocked when the person was falling? You'd have thought there would be some kind of reaction from him?


There are several anomalies in the video allegedly shot by Jim Huibregtse. Included here are at least two of them. The left shot of the ‘gash’ extends all the way to the right edge of the building.I checked the video extensively (a frame at a time) and was assured that its NOT smoke. The frame also seems to be from a different video altogether. Notice how different they are in color and quality.

The shot of the supposed JUMPER (on the right) has lost his shadow. This is not possible in reality.
BTW - credit for this observation goes to Simon Shack in a recent posting over at his "CluesForum.com site"
But the image analysis of it here is from this OP.

Now while watching this video on youtube I read several responses by Jim Huibregtse in defense of his work and so he seems somewhat genuine enough, but his well formed remarks cause me to wonder if the video might not have been manipulated by the FBI before it was posted? With or without his knowledge? One wonders! Otherwise Jim Huibregtse might just be working for the other side.



Please read the Jim Huibregtse comments here - they are quite enlightening and rather informative, particularly if one reads 'between the lines' so to speak.
www.youtube.com... -

I am including a comment from that 'comments' section (Pg 3) on the video by the well known video expert on things 9/11 SIMON SHACK : "Well - give it time, my friend, give it time...Consider that this is a recently released video forgery : just an umpteenth, freshly rendered animation (late 2010) purposely manufactured by the 9/11 video-fakers for damage control. And they keep churning'em out, year after year !This particular one was seemingly produced in an attempt to counter ("debunk") my observation made at the end of this short analysis (regarding the static smoke): "THE PLANE FACTS" watch?v=wkZKOqYMbXo"
simonshack in reply to texas224 (Show the comment) 1 year ago

edit on 13-7-2012 by Vitruvian because: edit



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitruvian
 


Bam!

Good job. How are people going to explain the gash away hah. The funny thing is, that gash also magically appears in the Naudet footage, from 2 mins on in this vid, it is not very clear though.

www.youtube.com...

edit on 13-7-2012 by TraitorKiller because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitruvian
 


Btw, could you make a screenshot for me?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join