Firefighters For 9/11 Truth Debunk Assange: Irrefutable Evidence of Cover-Up (VIDEO)

reply to post by SLAYER69


Gee you are right, there is no plane or bodies there either, good for you.

I guess you believe Iran's government as much as your own as to the whereabouts of said plane...

Wow i guess the bulldozer's were taken away before the pictures were taken...or do you think that something can push that much dirt around and then just vanish into nothingness (plane).

I guess its that tremendous kinetic energy thing again.

reply to post by GrinchNoMore


Not that it matters but I uploaded this video to our media section 10th of March 2009
Anything is possible eh...

reply to post by airspoon


Pointing out to you that you were flat wrong about the recovery of AA 77's flight data recorder ( with readable data ) is hardly arguing " semantics ".

Frankly I am amazed that someone who has so much to say about 9/11 could have been in ignorance of it's existence. The data from that recorder is of considerable importance because it places AA 77 squarely at the Pentagon. And yet it would seem you are quite happy to argue your truther points unaware of this major evidence. Doesn't instil much confidence in your views.

Originally posted by airspoon
With all of that being said, this has nothing to do with the OP. The OP is about Assange's unfounded claim regarding his own "leaked" evidence and 9/11 conspiracies, which is a huge red-flag as to Assange's intent, imo.
--airspoon

Well then don't bring it up or elaborate on off topic replies. Unless of course it only furthers your Agenda.

From page "1"

Apparently, the only flight data recorder recovered, according to authorities, was flight 93, while they claim that the other flight recorders were either never recovered or too damaged to read. So yes, one box was recovered and admitted too. I also don't believe that these flight data recorders were never recovered.

I find it odd how "evidence" of the hijackers just happen to be recovered from the pile almost completely unscathed, yet the one thing that is supposed to survive such an incident, didn't. I'm not buying that one bit.


--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon


Hard to know whats happening on ATS lately..
I've always found your threads to be very good but this one is the most missleading disinfo I have seen in quite a while..

Your whole thread depicts Julian Assange as relentlessly attacking 9/11 truth and firefighters.
There's even a dodgy, obviously photoshoped pic of Julian holding that newspaper...

And yet I read the whole link and watch all the Vids and the only evidence you have is Julian saying
9/11 conspiracy theorists annoy him.........

No relentless attack as you suggest....
No calling firefighters liars..I guess you are just assuming that bit..

My take is that he gets so many wacky theories of nukes,holograms,lasers and intervension from god,
that he is annoyed with 9/11 theorists.
I could only imagine how many fools send him silly theories daily...

So, your entire thread is based on ONE sentence from Julian...
An old, already mentioned many times one at that..

reply to post by mayabong


I gotta say, some people seem to be me to be very easly convienced or quick to denounce someone. They look at one or two things in isolation and make a decision on that. Assange and Wikileaks are like everyone else, from time to time they will get things wrong. They are not pefect.

It's fine to dissagree with what someone has said (unless its the goverment these days) as this brings out different opinions which can illuminating and good for the seach of the truth. For example someone can take exception to something and this may cause them to come out of the closet and reveal important information.

To say a big red flag goes up when someone says something you dont agree ought not cause us to be susoicious to the point that we go against them but as a reminder that we need to be open to the fact in some respects they are incorrect.

cheers

Thank you Airspoon. In regards to Assange; I am rather baffled by the information available concerning Assange, and his attitude towards 9/11 does seem to damper the mood of his revolution. Perhaps this is what they wanted to do, make people come to a crossroads of what to believe, the information that someone who believes in the OS, and miraculously received leaked classified documents, or the real truth. Because surely, we cannot believe in both. Its a hard reality.

I only wish I knew where to start to get any action by the authorities to conduct what by now seems to be innevitable, a new investigation. A new investigation into 9/11 will soon be the new , "they gonna legalize it anyday now," routine.

I wish those we vote for would give us what we want, before we decide to take it.

9/11 truth?

What truth? We have the OS. It is the only Offical story out there. the rest is speculation.

These people are ridiculous to the nth degree.

And firefighters are no better or more dedicated than say a school headmaster or a defense lawyer.

Just because someone puts on a damn uniform does not make them dedicated.

Originally posted by weedwhacker

And THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is Exhibit "A" as to why the so-called "truth movement" people are just spinning their wheels. IN every case, when they think they have a grip on a "fact", it is wrong on some level...either because it is just parroted from somewhere else (without fully checking,and digging the details), or is just "off-the-cuff" toss away...guess they're pretty much the same thing, really....

Yea but most of us dont live in your 'black and white' little world weedwhacker (or the one you like to paint a picture of..)

There are a lot of things in the real world that simply arent what they seem. And thats a fact you can safely hang your hat on.

In reply to the OP, thanks for posting this thread. Personally Ive never been convinced by Assange from day one. Theres just something about him and wikileaks thats made me feel uneasy. Maybe this is it. Time will tell.

Let the words of Assange be heard:

The best party is but a kind of conspiracy against the rest
of the nation. (Lord Halifax) (As quoted by Julian Assange)

Conspiracies are cognitive devices. They are able to out
think the same group of individuals acting alone

Conspiracies take information about the world in which they operate (the conspiratorial
environment), pass it around the conspirators and then act on the
result. We can see conspiracies as a type of device that has inputs (information
about the environment) and outputs (actions intending to change or maintain
the environment).

What does a conspiracy compute?
It computes the next action of the conspiracy
Now I we ask the question: how effective is this device? Can we compare it to
itself at different times? Is the conspiracy growing stronger or weakening? This
is a question that asks us to compare two values.

Can we find a value that describes the power of a conspiracy?
We could count the number of conspirators, but that would not capture the
difference between a conspiracy and the individuals which comprise it. How do
they differ? Individuals in a conspiracy conspire. Isolated individuals do not.
We can capture that difference by adding up all the important communication

cryptome.org...

"I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”

Is Assange saying in the above statement that 9/11 WAS NOT a conspiracy for war? Wow! Either the guy isn't too bright or he can't keep his pre-scripted lines straight. Where was he during the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, all as a result of 9/11 and the polyester War on Terror?

In any event, Assange is a pretty lousy salesman and an even worse actor who needs to put more time into studying his lines.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”

Is Assange saying in the above statement that 9/11 WAS NOT a conspiracy for war? Wow! Either the guy isn't too bright or he can't keep his pre-scripted lines straight. Where was he during the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, all as a result of 9/11 and the polyester War on Terror?

In any event, Assange is a pretty lousy salesman and an even worse actor who needs to put more time into studying his lines.

edit on 10-12-2010 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)

Or it could be just context..
He doesn't say he agrees with the OS..
He may be simply annoyed by all the really BS truther theories and doesn't want to be associated with truthers until SOLID proof is found..

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


I found the original article where Assange makes this statement about 9/11.

The entire paragraph:

"I believe in facts about conspiracies," he says, choosing his words slowly. "Any time people with power plan in secret, they are conducting a conspiracy. So there are conspiracies everywhere. There are also crazed conspiracy theories. It's important not to confuse these two. Generally, when there's enough facts about a conspiracy we simply call this news." What about 9/11? "I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud." What about the Bilderberg conference? "That is vaguely conspiratorial, in a networking sense. We have published their meeting notes."

Read more: www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk...

It is clear, Assange is saying that 9/11 is a "false conspiracy".

False, as in not true, not real.

In other words, the original story is true.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Yes, a NY firefighter said the boxes were recovered. However officially, the FBI claims they were not found. I suspect they are in the same place as all the tapes from the cameras around the Pentagon.

The terrorists are inside the Beltway.

Originally posted by airspoon

Firefighters For 9/11 Truth Debunk Assange: Irrefutable Evidence of Cover-Up (VIDEO)

“118 FIRST RESPONDERS HEARD EXPLOSIONS…..”

This is some pretty good information and will hopefully make people think twice about Assange and WL. Don't fall for this obvious trap that is WL. It is becomming more and more obvious to me that WL is not what it seems. Why is the media following Assange?

Then, why would Assange care about 9/11? After all, It is becoming more and more clear to me that WL and Assange has an agenda and that agenda doesn't seem to force tranparency into government, but rather to shape public opinion, such as what Israel seems to be so good at. In order to believe Assange on 9/11, you would have to throw out common-sense and plenty of eye-witness testimony, along with expert analysis (and foresic evidence). However, one has to ask why Assange would be so adamant on 9/11, unless of course he was forwarding some ulterior agenda.

Good eye!
I'll admit that I in a minimal form felt like supporting WL and their cause. I've campaigned and advocated for them on various sites. It's kept me pretty busy.

You've brought up some points worth considering further. I'm aware that Assange was not a 9-11 truth advocate, and I guess I brushed that fact aside. Shame on me...
As with the MSM and their failure to report realities pertaining to vested interests of the people, how Assange is getting so much "media play" reeks of truth as I understand how the MSM spins and delivers opinionated reports.

Thanks for your efforts in continuing to bring the ignorantly blissful masses out of their slumber. You are appreciated.

Assange is not Wikileaks and never was and never will be .
This thread is noncence and analogy presented is false.
For example : I strongly believe in aliens visited the earth and if Assange make a statement that this is false conspiracy should i be thinking of him or Wikileaks like a dis- info agent and all operation Wikileaks like some hidden cover up agenda? .Not.
Is this video in Iraq released by Wikileaks is part of hidden agenda?
www.youtube.com...
I have to much respect for you contributing in 9/11 truth but lately your attacks on Assange and Wikleaks is clearly becaming suspicios.Did you have personally hidden agenda or you are frustrated because Wikileaks doesn't cover your favourit conspiracy story?

2+2=4

Wikileaks release + extreme MSM coverage = NWO agenda

Simple.

reply to post by airspoon


Oh, so now all the truth about 9/11 comes out and supported by firefighters - but only in the sense to destroy and attack Wikileaks - WHAT A JOKE!

Everyone knows about building seven - thanks to Jones and Ventura - we don't need an ATS post dedicated to discredit Assange. So they are going to give us 9/11 and building seven - they must be really scared about the next truths to be exposed!

Moon - the Ark - JFK!

"Barf"

WL has recently released information about a high level Australian Polititian, (born in Australia, but with Arabic parents). The report accuses him of spying on the Australian government and reporting the information back to the United States. There has been an uproar here, with many people saying deport Muslims, and even Arabs born and bred here cannot be trusted. I too have become very sceptical of WL. It appears to be - divide and conquer. Saudi Arabia - Iran. China - North Korea. Australia - United States and so on. We have a small defence force, but quickly rush into any fight the USA picks. These leaks have divided Australians and people worldwide. Sadly I no longer believe WL is "Truth for the People", it is "Truth for the Zionists".

Originally posted by PsykoOps
* * * * As it stands there is no evidence for 911 being inside job.

How pithy of you. And how wrong.

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming all by itself.