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.
becuase you don't want to accept that your conspiracy claims are rubbish= opinion.
-Your accusing NYFD deputy chief Peter Hayden of lying to cover up some some conspiracy that killed 343 of his brother firefighters entirely because
A shadow? Really? A straight down the middle shadow that can somehow be seen through the smoke but not on the smoke. That is some magic shadow. Strange how we dont see the shadow appearing on the smoke covering the wall, but somehow a shadow is cast as a straight line on the wall directly. Are you starting to drift into an alternate reality impressme?
Originally posted by thedman
We all know the IMPRESSME lives in a truther fantasy world where anything that conflicts with his fantasy
is automatically dismissed as fakes or lies.....
We all know the IMPRESSME lives in a truther fantasy world where anything that conflicts with his fantasy
is automatically dismissed as fakes or lies.....
I heard Chief Hayden along with several other FDNY chiefs at a seminar shortly after 9/11 describe their actions
that date
Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by DIDtm
Facts ?????
Seen lots of half baked opinions, but little hard evidence
Care to provide some ......?
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave
becuase you don't want to accept that your conspiracy claims are rubbish= opinion.
Because?
How about proving me wrong with some real evidence, instead of posting OS, hogwash claims?
Yes, a shadow, you see what you want to see. A straight line yes, that’s why we know it couldn’t be a gash with a perfect straight line, “priceless.”
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave
Interesting rant, to bad most of it is not true Dave. *Fact* Dave you have been on these 911 boards for some time, spewing nothing but your loathing against all truthers, and always rejecting every piece of credible evidence including all the science. You have demonstrated repeatedly that there is no conspiracy to 911; in fact, you have proven yourself to be “pseudo skeptic.”
I agree with the “faked crash” at Shanksville, and yes I am a stanch supporter of that particular conspiracy. You and some of the OS defenders have never been able to prove the government OS of Shanksville was true, and yes I am convince a missile hit the Pentagon and you and your friends here have “never” been able to disprove it much less prove a Boeing crashed in the Pentagon.
As far as your ridiculous”10,000 secret disinformation agents everywhere, etc” You show one post anywhere on ATS were I made that claim? This is what separates you and I Dave when it comes to presenting the truth, I do not have to make up lies as you have just demonstrated against his opponent into trying to prove your case, the truth stands on its own merit and that’s something you cannot ignore.
You're the one who has this unrepentently dishonest double standard, not me. I accept the testimony of people like Barry Jennings and William Rodriguez as credible, while YOU accuse people like deputy NYFD chief Hayden of being secret disinformation agents entirely becuase they're saying things that contradict your conspiracy stories.
All you're doing is making up childish excuses off the top of your head for why you don't have to accept what they're saying.
Even more repulsive, you've become so hypnotized by your preposterous conspiracy stories that you don't even realize you're accusing Hayden of being involved in the murder of 343 of his brother firefighters.
How about backing up your claim that Deputy Chief Peter Hayden's eyewitness account is, "OS, hogwash claims"? He was physically there and you weren't. Neither, I should add, were your friends Dylan Avery or Alex Jones.
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave
I am well aware that the information I post here will be met with resistance amongst the more zealous of Dylan Avery's and Alex Jones' followers, but for *you* to be discounted by your fellow conspiracy theorists here, well, that takes you to a whole other sublevel of [censored] poor credibility, doesn't it?
I would like to clear up a myth that you have invented again Dave, I am no followers of Dylan Avery's and Alex Jones' never have been and never will. I can think for myself, I do not need to be a cheerleader for someone else, especially when I do not agree with many of their theories.
I do *not* spew loathing against you trusters.
I reserve my loathing against the unrepentent con artists manufacturing this bovine scatology and passing it off on those damned fool conspiracy web sites.
I have shown many times how Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin, et al are lying through their teeth for personal financial gain and I will show it to you again if you so desire.
You yourselves are simply the victims in their con and I'm simply trying to point out that your trust in these con artists is unfounded.
Come on now, seriously, doesn't is seem a little odd that the self styled Paul Reveres giving you all your information on these preposterous conspiracy stories have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING concrete in the past nine years except sell baseball caps and t-shirts?
This is a false statement. We have shown many times it was a Boeing that hit the Pentagon, from photographic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony.
The problem for you isn't that there isn't any evidence.
The problem is that you don't want to believe the evidence that a Boeing hit the Pentagon so you'll play all sorts of desperate denial games like accusing everyone of being a disinformation agent, demanding to know the exact name of the photographer who took a particular photo and ridiculous arguments over the definition of airplane vs. aircraft.
Do you remember those exchanges with me? I certainly do.
Who the heck are you trying to fool? Impressme, there is no flipping way you can deny you've accused everyone from fire fighters to military officials to eyewitnesses out by the Pentagon of lying to promote some massive coverup.
Not this morrning you've accused Deputy NYFD chief Peter Hayden out by WTC 7 of lying to promote a coverup.
In case this is all some game to you
and it hasn't dawned on you...and apparently it hasn't...you are necessarily accusing them all of being involved in the conspiracy, and the more people you accuse of lying, the larger the tally of co-conspirators adds up.
Let's settle this once and for all- after 9/11 we gave our intelligence showing that 9/11 was an Al Qaida attack to our NATO allies, and after comparing it with what their own intelligence services were finding out, NATO invoked article 5 in the first time in history. Either our NATO allies...thousands and thousands and thousands of people... are certifying it was genuinely a terrorist attack, or, they're lying to promote the coverup too. Which is it?
It's one thing to want answers to questions you legitimately may have, but it's another thing entirely to be such a near-religious zealot that you want to mold reality to your liking in order to accomodate your conspiracy stories.
Originally posted by impressme
you were shown photos of airplane parts with no chain of evidence to who, what, where, when, how, all these photos were taken, all it proves they are photos.
As far as I am concern, they are photos of bone yard debris from different airplanes and different parts, these photos are meaningless and would never hold up in any court of law as evidence.
Pentagon with the window not broken on each side and above of the impact area?
How do you explain the earlier photos taken of no airplane debris on the front lawn of the Pentagon, and then in later photos same angles, there are airplane debris?
None of you OS defenders can answer these questions,
there are no serial numbers to be match to said aircraft.
Originally posted by backinblack
Don't suppose you have a better theory of where the engines got to ?
Originally posted by dereks
Originally posted by backinblack
Don't suppose you have a better theory of where the engines got to ?
Pictures of them have been shown here before - once again truthers refuse to look at facts that destroy their silly conspiracy theories!
How do you explain the earlier photos taken of no airplane debris on the front lawn of the Pentagon, and then in later photos same angles, there are airplane debris?
Originally posted by backinblack
So, have you got pics of both engines or not??
And where did the engines end up after impact??
Originally posted by dereks
Originally posted by backinblack
So, have you got pics of both engines or not??
And where did the engines end up after impact??
Why should I post them again here, just so you can ignore them once again?> Do some research