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.
Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by NotPsyOpsed
So every one of these pictures is fake?
www.911conspiracy.tv...
What about the photos of the engine that made it through the towers and onto the street?
www.rense.com...
(I realize this is a conspiracy website too, but sometimes conspiracy sites are good at putting together great conglomerations of photos, however much they may want to interpret them in odd ways)
The evidence is overwhelming. In fact, the only way I can imagine someone can deny it is if he/she makes up everything and sticks to his/her imagination. After all, anything physical, photographed, or video-taped will be hand-waved away. Witnesses will be ignored, and the government will be considered evil beyond recognition.
Yup, that's logical, mhm.[/sarcasm]
Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by septic
Then how can you reasonably come to any sort of informed conclusion?
What you are basically telling me and others is that everything that would normally be used as evidence must be completely ignored or considered tampered with, all on the assumption that someone "could" have possibly tampered with it. We're to assume that all the people who saw the plane on 9/11 are lying, and that the government somehow devised a way to edit the live feed in real time from every news camera so that every person at home would be deceived. We're to assume that all the people seen jumping from the towers on that day, and all the people who died and/or were rescued from the rubble are simply fake. That it's all made up just to demolish some buildings and get back into war.
Originally posted by septic
than I can believe a jet can cut through a building like it wasn't there.
Originally posted by septic
the flash is real but the jet isn't.
Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Interesting. I have seen far greater threads closed for what is going on here.
There are multiple new users that are contributing now, some that have never posted before. The opposition to the truth in this case is being represented by people who know quite well how to inflame a conversation.
Classic disinformation tactics.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
www.whale.to...
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
Read the last couple of posts and try to identify some of these traits. Research this page 25 Rule of disinformation
I believe that this is on topic and should be mentioned before good users get banned for replying to these people.edit on 23-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by pshea38
!.5 Hours Of Proof Of 9/11 Video Fakery
Originally posted by pshea38
(There is no reason for this post to be removed, but I am well aware of the form here.)
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by pshea38
!.5 Hours Of Proof Of 9/11 Video Fakery
"September Clues" is debunked at multiple sources in my thread here:
DEW/Energy Weapons? Holograms? TV Fakery? No Planes at the WTC? -- A 9/11 Disinfo Campaign
Originally posted by pshea38
(There is no reason for this post to be removed, but I am well aware of the form here.)
Actually, there is: it violates ATS's Terms and Conditions of perpetuating a known hoax.
This thread needs to either be closed or moved to the HOAX bin.
This thread needs to either be closed or moved to the HOAX bin.
Originally posted by septic
reply to post by _BoneZ_
wow...you speak with such authority...
Are you an officer of this site or something?
I'm happy to do a live radio program. Will I need to clear my material with the censors first?
Originally posted by pshea38
I sincerely doubt that that is a genuine offer but I would love to hear such
an uncensored (Ha!) exchange. I don't believe for a second that ATS would
grant any airtime to 9/11 Media Fakery loons (sic.) like us.
Nothing to get hung up on though .
This thread needs to either be closed or moved to the HOAX bin.
Originally posted by septic
Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by NotPsyOpsed
So every one of these pictures is fake?
www.911conspiracy.tv...
What about the photos of the engine that made it through the towers and onto the street?
www.rense.com...
(I realize this is a conspiracy website too, but sometimes conspiracy sites are good at putting together great conglomerations of photos, however much they may want to interpret them in odd ways)
The evidence is overwhelming. In fact, the only way I can imagine someone can deny it is if he/she makes up everything and sticks to his/her imagination. After all, anything physical, photographed, or video-taped will be hand-waved away. Witnesses will be ignored, and the government will be considered evil beyond recognition.
Yup, that's logical, mhm.[/sarcasm]
Why would any of them be fake? Some are, some aren't...the ones with a jet are fake, but IMO the collapse sequences look genuine. The point is they should be taken with a grain of salt as evidence. If the government are the perpetrators, they would definitely have their cover story and operatives in place long before the operation. Therefore, what videos we have are the videos we were meant to have.
Originally posted by waypastvneIsn't Simon Shack from Norway too ? Must be something in the water.edit on 24-10-2011 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)