9/11: Where the evidence has led me so far

I agree with the OP. It seems like the only rational explanation to me. Anyone who doesn't see this is either blinded by patriotism or a government troll.

I agree it's fake.Totally For a long time now. But sometimes I wonder if just giving the idea "9/11 isn't what we were told" instead of speaking about false flags by the NWO, Illuminati or any other possible megalomaniac's would have more effect.
That it would scare less people away. A lower threshold for the masses. . Just to get the ball rolling.

As you said, the official version is an insult..
Perhaps start with just that ?

Just an idea. Fed by frustration about the lack of progress.

reply to post by OGOldGreg


And you're still not contributing to the OP...no, I think I got it! Maybe once your ATS points are in the positive you'll understand the concept of being substantial.

All the people asking for evidence' know full well what evidence people are basing their claims on, and these kind of response are just obvious attempts to discredit the OP. Same thing happens in all 9/11 threads, and these derailers (fakers) have been in enough threads to know what evidence has been discovered to challenge the OS.

So please stop embarrassing yourselves and provide some evidence yourselves to prove the truth in the OS, because until you do people will believe the OS less, and less...

reply to post by petrus4


Thank you, petrus4. Truer words were never spoken.

A request for sources always, in my experience, translates to, "I don't agree with you, but I'm looking for ammunition that I can use for attacking you, while doing so in a superficially plausible/pseudo-rational way."

Oh, I'm sure someone will come along and say something akin to, "Well, THAT"S not 'denying ignorance'! But, it doesn't really matter if they say that. It'll only be reinforcement for your statement above.

reply to post by 4hero


I don't know, amigo. Skepticism should be welcome if it's genuine. Asking those types of questions leads to discovering real answers for those who know no better. I'll sure provide evidence of my view, as I believe I've done rather well so far. We shouldn't discourage an open mind just for lack of motivation to find hard evidence of the truth.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer

Simply asking for sources may not contribute to the thread...

That was my point. Thanks for agreeing!

I do agree with you folks on the fact that the title of the thread isn't "here's proof of my opinion." Rather, it is "here's where proof has led me." OP didn't promise to provide proof. However, I believe a mind of truly critical thought should be open to criticism for the sake of it's own growth and strengthening conclusion. If you're conclusion is faulty, it should be acknowledged.... otherwise, you could just as well be reflecting another's opinion blindly

Originally posted by whyamIhere

Originally posted by earthinhabitant
reply to post by whyamIhere

 

Insult to humanity and still you see all these idiots actually believe the official story presented by the mainstream media and government....mind control, brainwashing, is all that I can think of that can explain this and comments, from those that buy what they been sold, a big fat lie and farce..

edit on 22-4-2012 by earthinhabitant because: (no reason given)

Asking for sources....Means I do not question the official story?

The internet is full of garbage. I'm sure the truth is out there somewhere.

I would like to know what the OP bases his opinion on.

This is ATS. Asking for your source is the norm.

I would love to know the truth. I just need a little more than you say so.

Mind Control.....Sheesh....You mind posting your source?

Nevermind, I know.....It's on the internet.

Well... it's been over 10 years since 9/11 so I'm sure the OP is just assuming that MOST people here on ATS have already looked into this. But of course people are still waking up everyday. Here is a good place to start for you:

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The 9/11 Conspiracy Theory In Under 5 Minutes



And of course, here is a link to ALL of the sources for the above Video:

www.corbettreport.com...

One of the best video's I've seen in a long time to break it all down in under 5 minutes!

If you haven't, anyone contributing to this thread should read the 9/11 Commission. It might take some time to get through but it's well worth it.

We're here a decade later still on the topic! I'm not ranting about this, I find it fascinating that it's captured the attention of so many of us for so long.

Petrus, I wouldn't say you are in the minority in believing there was at least some deception as to what happened that day. At least a quarter of Americans believed we weren't told the truth about everything at one point.

I'm one of 'em to some degree ever since I saw the events unfold live on TV. The Bunkerbuster-like ground penetrating UAL93 in Shanksville has always been one of the big "Hey wait a minute..." aspects of 9/11 for me. From day one. Back then I took what our Government said as more truthful, but over time questions would accumulate.

I wonder if after Pearl Harbor, there were people debating every detail in regards to what actually happened ten years after the fact? Probably not. Much more cut and dry incident, that.

Whether it was al-Qaeda, Mossad, or our own Government (or some blend of all three parties), it's hard to make many certainties as to what really happened... It was one heck of a production though, that is for sure.

Lastly, it's funny that the OP Petrus is just stating their opinion and thoughts based on what they've seen all while not making any certain claims and not stating anything as fact - Yet sources, evidence and proof are still asked of them. Predictable much?

This is the crime that atheism is guilty of; and it is a high crime indeed. The majority of the population have been trained to view science as a closed, centralised priesthood, and to equate logic

...you mean religion. Logic calls the OS into question. It is no different regarding religion.

I think you are barking up the right tree for 95% of your findings.

The only thing I might disagree with is the lack of planes at the pentagon and Shanksville, although I have not been to Shanksville, I eyeballed the pentagon damage myself, in person, the day after the event, and it was much worse than you saw on TV - your sense of scale is skewed seeing it on TV and in pictures. I can definitely see a plane doing that damage.

For those who don't believe planes hit those locations, I have a question: Where did those planes go? The planes and all the people onboard those two flights are still missing.

reply to post by Sek82

We're here a decade later still on the topic! I'm not ranting about this, I find it fascinating that it's captured the attention of so many of us for so long.

It WILL "continue"......because the Internet allows this nonsense to remain.......each generation will come across and "see" for the "first" time (to them)....and, well.....this nonsense continues......ad infinitum.........

reply to post by ProudBird


I'm sorry you see human curiosity as "nonsense" and blame the internet... 9/11 was a tragic event and should be studied as a huge case of criminality, and seeing as the "perpetrators" were never proven beyond a doubt, the questions remain...

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Sek82

 

We're here a decade later still on the topic! I'm not ranting about this, I find it fascinating that it's captured the attention of so many of us for so long.

It WILL "continue"......because the Internet allows this nonsense to remain.......each generation will come across and "see" for the "first" time (to them)....and, well.....this nonsense continues......ad infinitum.........

Of course it will continue because we know we are being lied to! If the OS was as truthful as it's supposed to be then people would have stopped investigating by now, and the derailers (fakers) would have retired from their disinfo day jobs..

reply to post by 4hero


The ('so-called') "OS" is as truthful as has been presented......it's only the silly nonsense ever since, that has polluted the narrative.

Oh, and the actual basis for "doubting" the so-called 'OS'?? Comes from the covering of butts that occurred, in the Bush administration, AFTER the fact....to "cover" up the gross negligence and intelligence failures.

reply to post by jlm912


Again this is not correct:

.....and seeing as the "perpetrators" were never proven beyond a doubt, the questions remain...

Only persons who "think" that is true, have been "soiled" by the loads of crap dispensed on the Internet....since 2001.

THINK!!!!

In 2001......or 2000....or 1999, or 1998......how "big" was the Internet, then????

Originally posted by Sek82
We're here a decade later still on the topic! I'm not ranting about this, I find it fascinating that it's captured the attention of so many of us for so long.

The Laws of Physics are eternal as far as we can tell. We have mass, gravity, acceleration, velocity, momentum and kinetic energy. All of those are involved in 9/11.

If an airliner can totally destroy a skyscraper more than 2,000 times its own mass then the physics profession should be able to explain it in detail with very little room for uncertainty. There should be no uncertainty about things as simple as steel and concrete distributions so the buildings could hold themselves up and withstand the wind. Some experts have already made themselves look silly by letting this go no for ten years.

So as long as the engineering schools can order us to be stupid then everything is fine. Most people are not supposed to comprehend 300 year old Newtonian Physics. But they are supposed to worry about the Digital Divide.

psik

reply to post by psikeyhackr


Once again.......the silliness prevails:

If an airliner can totally destroy a skyscraper more than 2,000 times its own mass.....

To attempt to infer this, is nonsense.

It's equivalent to saying that a "tiny" bullet cannot kill a Human.

To edit.....if the concept of a "fatal blow" cannot be understood???

Oh, what a ridiculous "argument"......(as usual).