Actor/Comedian Hal Sparks Speaks Out In Support of 9/11 Truth

Actor/Comedian Hal Sparks Speaks Out In Support of 9/11 Truth

www.bushstole04.com...

Watch the video all they way before commenting please.

I love what Sparks said about Glen Beck I just fell out laughing.

I agree with Sparks about the hijackings if five to seven of them are still walking around, then the OS has just been proven a lie.


[edit on 6-2-2010 by impressme]

Hopefully the stream of celebrities who speak out about against government's 9/11 conspiracy theory and in favor of finding out what actually happened will continue.

reply to post by truthquest

I agree, a love this guy he is a wonderful actor, but for him to come right out and give us his opinion, he risked his professional career.
I am glad that more and more people are waking up to the fact that our government lied to them about 911.
I liked his comment about Glen Beck; it pretty much summed it up about Beck.

I was glad to learn that Obama has 9-11 truthers in his administration. Ofcourse that doesn't mean they have any weight in opening a new investigation. Soon, though enough people will amass to the necessity of it, and demand closure. One would hope!

reply to post by impressme


Everything Hal said is the truth and and well done with humour!

I just wished that I could wake up from this nightmare!

Thank you for the link as I will be emailing this out to friends and family who have problems with my point of view over 911! These video clips are small enough to keep the none believers attention, who will not watch long videos, long enough to start a discussion on the topic. This could be the steps to get these people interested in seeing another longer video about 911 or at least to start questioning their own points of view.

Comparing Glen Beck to character "Jim" in Taxi got my hair dirty as it took me a while to recover from ROFLMAO!!!!!

I also like the pix used with the heading "The Glenn Beck Program"! I am sure Heath Ledger would be amused!

SnF to U!

Originally posted by impressme

Actor/Comedian Hal Sparks Speaks Out In Support of 9/11 Truth

www.bushstole04.com...

Watch the video all they way before commenting please.

I love what Sparks said about Glen Beck I just fell out laughing.

I agree with Sparks about the hijackings if five to seven of them are still walking around, then the OS has just been proven a lie.

Famous people repeating the stupid horse [censored] these damned foot conspiracy web sites are pushing out doesn't make the stupid horse [censored] they repeat the truth. The truth is, the Saudi gov't acknowledged that 15 of the 19 hijackers were in fact Saudi citizens.

15 of 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia

The "seven living hijackers" bit was from a mixup of identity with other people who had the same name. These damned fool conspiracy web sites know this, but they don't care: their goal is to sell you their books, DVDs, T-shirts, etc., not to tell anyone the truth.

Sheesh, Tom Cruise is a famous person, too, but you don't believe all the world's problems are caused by the ghosts of space aliens murdered by Xenu the galactic warlord like he does, do you?

reply to post by GoodOlDave

The truth is, the Saudi gov't acknowledged that 15 of the 19 hijackers were in fact Saudi citizens.

Another proven lie.

How is it, the Saudi government acknowledged that 15 of the 19 hijackers were in fact Saudi citizens when they were using stolen identities?
How is it, seven of the 19 hijackers are still walking around? In my opinion, Saudi governments were paid to tell those lies.

the video was great. we need more celebrities coming out against this 9/11 information suppression. you know those.... annoying questions that seem to go unanswered, or shoved to the side, or ignored entirely.

I saw this video when it first came out. i was thinking about posting it to ATS, but you kind of beat me to it. We Are change Ohio has been making noise lately. same thing with We Are Change NJ/NY. from what i know from knowing both WACNJ/NY that more of this stuff is supposed to be coming out soon.

The movement is gaining momentum, hence the Sunstien, and infiltration has been talked about recently. even glen beck who said that 911 truthers were going to kill the president.

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

The truth is, the Saudi gov't acknowledged that 15 of the 19 hijackers were in fact Saudi citizens.

Another proven lie.

I am quoting Saudi interior minister Prince Nayef who says the names they received confirm they were Saudi nationals and their families had been notified, which necessarily means they confirmed their identies on their end. Where is the lie in any of this? Please, point it out to me, if you can.

In my opinion, Saudi governments were paid to tell those lies.

I don't have to tell you that your making stuff up off the top of your head to explain the gaping holes in your conspiracy stories is not proof of anything. All you're doing is repeating the original conspiracy claim in different terms. That's the definition of "circular logic", in case you didn't know.

Besides, wasn't it YOU who demanded there had to be a chain of custody for all evidence or else it cannot be held valid? I gave you chain of custody evidence showing the Saudi gov't acknowledged the hijackers were Saudi nationals. What evidence do you have that Interior minister Nayef was "paid to tell those lies".

It's blatantly obvious you have an ulterior political agenda and you really don't care whose reputation you have to drag through the mud in order to pursue it. I'll wager you've never even heard of the man before now, and the only reason you're calling him a liar is becuase you he's saying somethign that you yourseldf don't want to be true. Your double standards in the defense of your pitiful conspiracy theories is intellectually dishonest and disgusting.

Originally posted by impressme


How is it, the Saudi government acknowledged that 15 of the 19 hijackers were in fact Saudi citizens when they were using stolen identities?
How is it, seven of the 19 hijackers are still walking around? In my opinion, Saudi governments were paid to tell those lies.

Um.... funny how none of the family members have some out and stated that they are alive....

Oh that's right, the US Government paid off all the hijackers family members to keep their mouths shut!

Originally posted by ugie1028
the video was great. we need more celebrities coming out against this 9/11 information suppression. ...................

Yeah, Rosie O'Donuts, Jessie Ventura, Charlie Sheen..... yeah, you need more of them alright.

Originally posted by ImAPepper
Um.... funny how none of the family members have some out and stated that they are alive....

We have other sources that state some are alive.

www.trackingthethreat.com...
Majed Moqed
Entity Type: Person
Entity Status: Alive
Start Date:
End Date:
Date Created: 22 Sep 2003
Date Modified: 06 Jun 2007

reply to post by impressme


The website is taking too long to load for some reason. Maybe because it is busy or something from all the ATS'ers trying to watch the video.

Could you go to youtube and post the youtube link for me please and thankyou?

IMHO 9/11 was done purposefully by the Corporate U.S. Government and other affiliates for absurd amounts of profit. Along with other insentives of course.

[edit on 8-2-2010 by Quickfix]

"These damned fool conspiracy web sites know this, but they don't care: their goal is to sell you their books, DVDs, T-shirts, etc., not to tell anyone the truth."

Of course...because we all know selling books, DVDs and T-shirts is a lot more lucrative than selling military aircraft, weapons, surveillance equipment and all the other toys used for this never ending War on Terror.

"Sheesh, Tom Cruise is a famous person, too, but you don't believe all the world's problems are caused by the ghosts of space aliens murdered by Xenu the galactic warlord like he does, do you?"

"Yeah, Rosie O'Donuts, Jessie Ventura, Charlie Sheen..... yeah, you need more of them alright."

Unlike others, I listen to what each person has to say and choose to evaluate their opinion individually, regardless if they are famous or not. I prefer not to be closed minded and pigeon hole groups of people together, be it actors, truthers or whatever. It is not surprising that some people cannot see the inherent flaw in this process of thinking (stereotyping).

Sparks seems to be a rather intelligent individual and brings up some valid points. Of course, he will be perceived as a threat to those who advocate the status quo, because he can reach a large group of people, whereas the non-famous individual does not have such reach. Thus, the motives by certain individuals to discredit him and others with similar views, who are in the public eye, become quite obvious.

[edit on 8-2-2010 by SphinxMontreal]

[edit on 8-2-2010 by SphinxMontreal]

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal


Sparks seems to be a rather intelligent individual and brings up some valid points.

Like him thinking that "5 or 7 of the hijackers are still alive" ?

Yeah...real valid point.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
Of course...because we all know selling books, DVDs and T-shirts is a lot more lucrative than selling military aircraft, weapons, surveillance equipment and all the other toys used for this never ending War on Terror.

If you're claiming surprise that military contractors make money off of war, then you're rather late to the party. During world war II everyone from Ford Motor corp. to Hershey's chocolate company made money from military contracts. The Armour hot dog company originally got its start from selling pork to the Federal armies during the Civil war. That's not the point.

The fact is, the scam of someone coming along and telling you that everything you know is wrong and they'll tell you "the truth" if you give them your money is as old as dirt. There is no difference that I can see between a bunch of college kids selling an internet flick they made in their dorm room that "exposes the secret sinister conspiracy" and some fancy dressed saleman selling some snake oil that supposedly cures everything from arthritis to obnoxious mothers-in-law. Their true motives has nothing to do with actually making anyone's lot in life any better and everything to do with finding gullible people to foist their wares onto.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Dave , Im really grateful your concerned about my wallet.

But don't be , I don't need a tee shirt to convince me of the truth.

WTC7 free falling for 21/2 secs convinces me of that.

[edit on 8-2-2010 by Sean48]

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Dave , Im really grateful your concerned about my wallet.

But don't be , I don't need a tee shirt to convince me of the truth.

WTC7 free falling for 21/2 secs convinces me of that.

Would you mind terribly elaborating how fast WTC 7 *should* have fallen, given the damage inflicted and the specific design of the building? You're all so eagar to shout, "it fell too fast", but it seems to me that if you don't know how fast it should have fallen, then there's no way you can say whether it fell "too fast", "too slow" or "just right". Is a top speed of a Lamborghini 20 MPH too slow? Is a pitcher throwing a baseball 100MPH too fast? You're not going to know unless you first know how fast a Lamborghini normally drives, or how fast a pitcher can normally throw a baseball.

Let's face it- you're getting this "WTC 7 fell too fast" bit entirely from those damned fool conspriacy web sites and you've spent zero time in actually analyzing the claim critically. For all you know, the towers fell exactly as they should have done, given the damage and the design. Unless you can explain otherwise, then your "too fast" claims are without merit.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Okay the building collapsing has everything to do with it, but the time in which it fell does not.

1) Highrise buildings are made to withstand fires, so workers may escape.

2) WTC 5 & 6 are great examples of buildings with fires, but no collapse.

3) China had a highrise fire, there was extreme damage, but no collapse, althought the steel was warped and the building was leaning to one side.

4) WTC 7 had no airplane hit it, so jet fuel is ruled out.

5) Jet fuel is used up when the initial explosion occurs, not much fuel left to burn. (for the twin towers)

6) Jet fuel does no burn hot enough to melt steel. (although Thermite does)

7) Steel highrise buildings built to withstand fires, were the first time in history to collapse to fire. - google

This whole debate is preposterous. The evidence is right infront of you, make a choice.

Originally posted by Quickfix
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Okay the building collapsing has everything to do with it, but the time in which it fell does not.

1) Highrise buildings are made to withstand fires, so workers may escape.

2) WTC 5 & 6 are great examples of buildings with fires, but no collapse.

3) China had a highrise fire, there was extreme damage, but no collapse, althought the steel was warped and the building was leaning to one side.

4) WTC 7 had no airplane hit it, so jet fuel is ruled out.

5) Jet fuel is used up when the initial explosion occurs, not much fuel left to burn. (for the twin towers)

6) Jet fuel does no burn hot enough to melt steel. (although Thermite does)

7) Steel highrise buildings built to withstand fires, were the first time in history to collapse to fire. - google

This whole debate is preposterous. The evidence is right infront of you, make a choice.

The choice is easy, actually, and it's the same choice I've been making all along- these damned fool conspiracy web sites are filling your head with complete rubbish. The buzzwords you're using are the exact same buzzwords they use, so I know full well this is where you're getting your information from.

1) highrises weren't designed to withstand aircraft impacts. The fact that the stairwells were destroyed and had trapped the tenants in the upper floors proves that right away.

2) WTC 6 was a hollow ring surrounding an open courtyard, and was crushed by debris when WTC 1 collapsed.

Aerial view of WTC 6

Claiming that a crushed building "didn't collapse" is a misrepresentation.

3) Apples and oranges. The building in China didn't have a passenger jet hit it.

4) WTC 7 fell for the same reason WTC 6 was crushed- critical damage from the immense amounts of falling debris from the collapsing north tower.

5) the fuel only partially burned off outside the building. Fuel from the passenger jets poured down the elevator shafts. We know this becuase eyewitness accounts throughout the building (including the main lobby) specifically saw sheets of flame coming from the elevator.

6) Yet another deliberate conspiracy web site misrepresentation. The fires never melted the steel. All investigations are in agreement that the fires heated the steel unevenly, causing uneven thermal expansion until it lost its structural integrity. The debate is over what part of the building failed and caused the initial collapse.

7)...and yet the fact this would likewise be the first time in history that some secret cabal was able to plant controlled demolitions in an occupied building without getting caught doesn't seem to deter you.

"The whole debate is preposterous" is absolutely right. If you don't believe anythign else I tell you, then at least believe this- the gov't isn't that good that it could ever pull off any such ridiculously conplex plot. These are the same nitwits who voted that ketchup shold be classified as a vegetable.