Concluding that 9/11 is a Government Conspiracy is Grotesque

reply to post by Orion7911


This is why people do not take you seriously...

MARVIN BUSH was in charge of SECURITY for the WTC.

Anyone with half a brain knows that Marvin Bush had nothing to do with security at the WTC on 9/11/2001 or at any time during 2001. I mean, thats only been proven on ATS a few hundred times in the last 8 years.

reply to post by Orion7911


I think thats the fourth or fifth time Impressme has ignored me...and he keeps coming back like that yappy little dog at your heels.

Of course, being iggied by him is nice, I dont have to worry about the moronic rantings that come from his fingertips for a few weeks.

Originally posted by Pathos
Serious: What would be gained from killing thousands upon thousands of people?

Maya432,
My words do not need translation.

[edit on 4-9-2009 by Pathos]

You are asking for a motive I believe

a cabinet filled with OIL Barons, Financeers and Defense Barons -

You see for me I did not suspect anything until the administration started posturing towards Iraq. Later it was learned that the administration manipulated intelligence and public opinion... "SADDAM WAS INVOLVED WITH THE 9/11 attacks..."

Which we now know is BS

Interesting about Iraq...

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), "Iraq holds more than 112 billion barrels of oil - the world's second largest proven reserves. Iraq also contains 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and is a focal point for regional and international security issues."

Then you look at Bush's inner circle.

The president, vice-president, commerce secretary and national security adviser all have strong ties to the oil industry.

Vice-President Dick Cheney amassed some £50m-$60m while he was chief executive of Haliburton oil company.

Commerce Secretary Donald Evans held stock valued between $5m and $25m in Tom Brown Inc, the oil and gas exploration company he headed.


National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice was a director of Chevron.

Condoleezza Rice: Was a director of Exxon
There are also questions about how energy policy decisions may be affected by the private financial interests of so many senior cabinet members.

The thing about IRAQ is that the ENTIRE IDEA and ABILITY to wage the war was dependent upon---9/11

What I have illustrated is not conspiracy as of yet, it is just connecting the dots.

So the Motive would be $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

As we know, we have spent $1,000,000,000,000.00+

Then we learn much of this money is contracted to holdings of the administration officials.

this is just a motive part - which opened my eyes to other ideas.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Orion7911

 

This is why people do not take you seriously...

MARVIN BUSH was in charge of SECURITY for the WTC.

Anyone with half a brain knows that Marvin Bush had nothing to do with security at the WTC on 9/11/2001 or at any time during 2001. I mean, thats only been proven on ATS a few hundred times in the last 8 years.

Hi Swamp,
Have a look at this link and read through, makes interesting reading never mind the Marvin Bush connection.

www.apfn.net...
another link for an Iraq discussion, it's all about connections.

samvak.tripod.com...

[edit on 5-9-2009 by smurfy]

Wow. What a read. I have just finished reading all 20 pages of this thread. I found iit very interesting and disturbing at the same time.

I wanted to take a moment and answer the OP's original question:

"I keep asking myself "What type of human being do you have to be in order to believe 9/11 is a conspiracy?"

Well here goes...

I am a 33 year old male who had been raised by a father hooked on the news. He was what you would have called a news hound or news junkie back in the day. We had a wall removed in our kitchen so that he could watch the news on the tv in the living room at 6:00 P.M. during our family dinner time. Let's just say we watched a lot of documentaries too and for the most part did not have cable tv growing up.

I always considered myself "well informed" because of this. I was always on top of what was going on in the news cycles. I went to university and studied "media" and its role in society. I was "oh so smart". I was media savvy...or so I thought.

My parents were early adopters of the internet. I began reading all of the interesting things I could about paranormal activities etc. This was my first exposure to gov't coverups. I never truly believed in it I was just fascinated by it. Hate to expose myself to ridicule due to this but it is true.

As time went on, I never really went further with gov't corruption, just was interested in it, but never took it serious.

Then September 11th.

I saw it. I read the magazine articles. I imagined myself in the tower with the jet fuel cascading down the elevator shafts and experienced the terror in my imagination. I too wanted to get those responsible.

Life moved on.

Then in around 2005, I really began to find different news sites. I began to follow links and find other sites. I found these sites presented news that I didn't hear in the Main Stream Media (MSM).

I kept on coming across info pertaining to weird things like "pods" underneath the planes and other such oddities. I would click on them out of curiosity but it never really "stuck". However, I eventually listened to some of them for a little bit. I saw a 9-11 documentary on CBC here in Canada called "Toxic Legacy", I believe, which detailed the EPA and the quality of air issue and how they said it was safe to breathe. This got me really interested.

I then began the phase we can call, "going down the rabbit hole". In this phase, I became dedicated to reading, watching, learning many things in rapid succession. Each new discovery only lead to more questions. I not only had to look at 9-11...far from it. Most research involved past political events that gave 9-11 a point of reference.

It was here that all my old days watching the news began to pay off. I could look at history the way I knew it as a child...and then re-look at some of these issues with my new knowledge. The issue and events were the same...it was my understanding of them in the "bigger picture".

To me it was like looking at a magic trick. The first time you see the canary disappear you are like, "Whoa, magic"! After you know that the canary has been squished under the table, you are like, "Whoa, animal cruelty"! The trick no longer works on you.

If you want to know what kind of person comes to these conclusions....I am.

I am an intelligent, understanding human being. I did not seek to create a "narrative" or shoe horn this info to meet my need for the world to make sense.

I think your time would be better spent trying to learn as much as you can about the TRUE findings of the truth movement. Rather than what makes us tick.

I am compassionate too. So if you need some help in talking about real questions regarding 9-11, then let's do it.

I feel that my story is not unique and while I do not speak for anyone else, I hope that this will help you understand what type of human being would question the official story.

reply to post by Pathos

Hahaha... Your making up words now. Good for you.

The truth does not need to be made up. I see you can’t even dispute AE911 Truth.
You laugh in their faces and now you say their information is “biased site,” you cry everyone is wrong except you! If you are so right that your 911 OS is right, then show us some proof. Show us this credible proof that has convinced you one hundred percent.
I do not want to hear you say no that is your job, I do not have to give you any proof and so on… If you don’t want to share any information with us and you just started this thread just so you can dismiss all the credible and scientific proof just to make fun of people who do not believe in you ridiculous OS conspiracies theories. Then we know you are full of BS.

Typical response’s of disinformationist is to ridicule and avoid answering questions as you have been doing. 21 pages of good people trying to reach you and you smugly ignore them. Why did you even start a thread to begin with, you certainly do not want to discuss anything about the OS or show any proof that it is true.

Pathos does the Truth a great service in this thread by displaying to the fencesitters the absurdity of people who still cling to the OS!

Thanks Pathos! Keep the blatant disinfo coming!

reply to post by Game_Over
"Wow. What a read. I have just finished reading all 20 pages of this thread. I found it very interesting and disturbing at the same time."
Good for you Game, reading the thread up-to-date is something we should all do before posting for obvious reasons to help avoid none duplication of posts, not always easy if you are anxious for something to say.

On one note i can completely see what the US would gain from 9/11 happening. I have not read in full the thread but most of the points have been made (Oil, Arms sales, an enemy that can never be defeated (terrorists)).

The thing that does interest me is WHY would the 9/11 truthers make stuff up if there wasnt a genuine case of it being an inside job. Why would millions of people believe this all around the world. Its not just Americans but its all nationalities think you guys have been duped.

Now i know there is A LOT of inconsistency's with the official report. Im sure people from ats have added it all up in a thread somewhere; we have physics abnormalities, eye witness testimony that just doesn't add up, we have thermite (debatable), we have an agenda, a small hole in the pentagon, no engines or tail found at the pentagon etcetc its all here. For me there are too many inconsistency's so i stay skeptical of the official story. I would just love it if the US released more than the 3 frames of film from the pentagon, im sure we would all feel a lot better.

(Wasnt there a bunch of terrorists that stood up after the attacks and said 'im still alive, how could it have been me'?)

[edit on 5-9-2009 by Sloppy]

Originally posted by fleabit
99% of those who believe there is a conspiracy are Googologists, nothing more. They visit all the conspiracy sites and that's where the bulk of their "expert" opinions come from. They do no independent research on their own.

The very small % that actually have done some research haven't proven a thing. Well, they have proven that apparently questioning less then 50% of eye-witnesses somehow "proves" something, and that it's ok if you don't question them all. Also, a small handful of eye-witnesses that only saw a plane flying in a different direction, are somehow more damning than dozens of eyewitnesses who actually saw the plane flying right at / into the Pentagon.

There has been thousands of hours of actual research done by experts. But clearly, the Googling powers of conspiracy theorists are much more reliable than those silly expert opinions.

you fail

witnesses that are police officers, tower guards and aviation experts are more credible witnesses for such an event. Witnesses that have signed their names, have shown their faces and are unbiased are also more credible. These are the sort of witnesses that have come forward for CIT. The other witnesses the government "rounded up" are worthless and anyone with epistemological knowledge knows this.

i also do my own independent research, i live in nyc and i have personaly interrogated over 100 people here; including people who worked in the trade centers.

I've noticed the OP never answers any questions, shifts goal posts and makes personal attacks.

At first i thought him naive or ignorant, but now more so that he is a disinformationist. He fails too.

[edit on 9/5/2009 by JPhish]

Originally posted by JPhish
i live in nyc and i have personaly interrogated over 100 people here;
[edit on 9/5/2009 by JPhish]

Did you waterboard any of them?

reply to post by waypastvne


i'm not on the government payroll, so no.

Really just semi-casual conversations, asking what they saw, where they worked, any intimate details they had of the buildings etc. I was surprised how much i learned.

Sometimes they became a bit wary, but for the most part, people were happy to share what they knew. Or what they thought they knew for that matter . . .

[edit on 9/5/2009 by JPhish]

Originally posted by Pathos
I ignored speculative garbage.

Like the fact the same scenario used in 9/11 was laid out in a plan by the CIA called Operation Northwoods to be used against Cuba?

I guess them terrorists must have had a copy eh?

Personally I suspect you work for 'them' and are here solely to stir the pot to gauge how strong the 'truther' support really is.

I also suspect the next time will involve a small nuke on one of our cities... after that everyone will be so made they will let the PTB do anything they want...

Just not sure which city would be sacrificed... that would still make a strong enough outcry



[edit on 5-9-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by Pathos


Oh brother.... Am I the only one who notices these kind of posts/threads are

all by members you joined early January of 2009? LOL it's getting

hilarious and kinda scary how one can notice how hard these guys are working.

Anyone else notice this?

Originally posted by JPhish
i'm not on the government payroll, so no.

Well the word 'interrogation' does bring certain thoughts to mind

Next time you are 'casually interrogating' can you ask them about this?

People say the fire was raging and hot enough from the burning jet fuel to melt steel girders in a building designed to stand after five or more such hits...

Yet the video shows the fire from the jet fuel itself going up in one big flash that lasts for mere seconds... so that would mean paper and office furniture would have done the steel melting...

What I want to know is this... How did this lady survive this inferno, and how come she is neither singed nor being consumed by the raging inferno that melted all this steel?

One office still burning... the hole of the 'plane'



Need a closer look?



How about a little closer?



Explain how this is possible when its supposed to be hot enough to melt steel?

reply to post by zorgon


i think it's safe to say that if the "inferno" (or realistically, lack there of) was hot enough to melt steel, she wouldn't have been able to stand any where near the vicinity.

are you sure that picture isn't photoshopped Zorgon? because honestly, when i first saw it a few months ago, it seemed so ridiculous that i've doubted its validity since.

[edit on 9/5/2009 by JPhish]

Originally posted by JPhish
are you sure that picture isn't photoshopped Zorgon? because honestly, when i first saw it a few months ago, it seemed so ridiculous that i've doubted its validity since.

Yes I am sure because her husband identified her from that picture... but I will have to hunt that down again... I haven't bothered much with these threads because there is little point arguing with someone like Pathos...

Time better spent showing people who will listen to reality one at a time

Also hard to explain is THIS

9/11 World Trade Center, 6 weeks later,still 1500 degrees!!



[edit on 5-9-2009 by zorgon]

Originally posted by JPhish
are you sure that picture isn't photoshopped Zorgon? because honestly, when i first saw it a few months ago, it seemed so ridiculous that i've doubted its validity since.

AH Found another shot... a screen capture from the video this came from... I will find the rest



Her name... Edna Cintron

Video one...
thewebfairy.com...

Many other angles from other reporters





[edit on 5-9-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


wow that first video is truly superb . . . something is definitely amiss!

i had no idea there was so much footage/pictures of her. I was under the impression there was only that one picture that had been circulating . . . WOW

thanks Zorgon!

[edit on 9/5/2009 by JPhish]

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by billybob
reply to post by pteridine

 

merely your opinion. thousands of experts disagree with you.
there is evidence of controlled demolition.

Thousands? All experts? Certainly.
Merely their opinions. Have any of the "thousands" provided any real evidence or is all they have some you-tube videos with arrows and circles superimposed?

yes. there has been plenty of real of evidence. however, the ability of professional debunkers and their hoodwinked followers to hand wave away anything that doesn't fit their world view is nothing short of amazing.

like steel beams with holes created by eutectic reactions.
like the demolition waves that are clearly seen at the onset of the demolitions.
like the explosions that are visible far below the collapse front. the "squibs".
like "paint primer" that has nano thermitic compounds as it's main component.
like a rubble pile that is hotter immediately after the collapse than the fires ever were, and how these underground fires in a compressed pile of steel and concrete dust managed to be impossible to put out without the help of pyrocool.
like the observation that there was "nothing bigger than a telephone keypad" in the debris pile.
like the presence of radio isotopes in the debris pile.
like a building that collapses at freefall acceleration for more than two seconds(the first two). that's wtc7, the building hardly ever mentioned in the media, not mentioned in the 911 commission's report, and the one that was reported by the BBC to have collapsed over 20 minutes BEFORE it fell. the law of conservation of energy demands that if the building is falling at the acceleration of gravity, than there is ZERO resistance from below.
like, the cores of the two buildings, remaining standing for moments after the perimeter and floors and the 'cap' of the core have fallen, and then descend vertically themselves. what was the crushing force that took out these, the strongest, thickest, most interwoven part of the building? the invisible hand?
like, the eyewitness reports from firemen that speak of 'low level flashes' and 'explosions'.
like all the live news reports that stated "there are secondary explosions".
like workers telling people to get back from wtc7 because it was about to "BLOW UP".
like, the fact that most of the debris from WTC1 and 2 was outside the footprint and there was very little left in the center, where it WOULD be if it had simply fallen.

ever seen the sand in an hourglass, and the way it makes a cone shaped pile? that is similiar to what a gravity collapse actually looks like. it should not be a radial debris pattern with more mass outside the footprint than inside.

however, you are here to demonize the "GROTESQUE 911 truth movement, and you are not interested in anything but painting mustaches on it with a wide brush.
you will say all the evidence has been 'debunked', when in fact, nothing is further from the truth. the NIST report HAS been debunked and even it admits that they have no actual physical evidence for their pet scenario.

are you suggesting there is no value in videos with circles and red arrows on them? do you always know what someone else is noticing in any given video frame, out of the hundreds or thousands of pixels on the screen?