Who is the Joker on ATS radio now running their mouth?

Originally posted by Monkeygod333
I'm sorry but if you still believe the official story about 911 you simply have to be either very ill informed or just plan stupid. I really mean that.
Every Single Part of that day is dodgy to the bone. The exercises, how bush found out, shanksville, the pentagon, the covering of the lawn at the pentagon, Everything about Osama Bin Laden, Everything regarding the collapse of all three buildings, Everything about the 911 commission, EVERYTHING!

To be presented with not only all of these discrepancies but some very important facts and evidence, and still not to find anything fishy with any of them, thats just plain stupid. Not ignorant, stupid.

In my opinion of course.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

Certainly it is more than stupidity, with some, it is obviously some kind of operation to debunk the debunkers...discredit and deter thinking and questioning it...

Noticing way to much comments like these:

It is too difficult to understand...

We will never know what really happened...

Just stop trying to make sense of it and move along and forget about..

Stop asking questions about and pointing out the facts, you are just festering old wounds...

Can't we just all get a long, no need to think about it anymore, that was then, this is now...

Oh, my mind is made up and made up my mind before it even happen and not going to change it...

Stop discussing it, you really should not be on the internet and wasting your time...

Oh, the facts you don't understand and physics and laws of relativity and science, does not apply..

This is bigger than you, so just shut up and go find something else to do.

Let sherlock holmes figure it out, you are not qualified to ask questions or have the clearence to really know..

You are not in the loop to know and only those in the loop get to know what is going on....

Motive does not matter...

The truth does not matter...

You don't know, so shut up///

...

And lot of this, been going on, suggest we got some people here who are either covering someone else arse or their own...

reply to post by Niobis

I agree with what you are saying about who knew and knows what, as need to know basis, is not in question...in my mind at all..

However on suspects not pointing to the Bush family..either knowing and involved or not...
Like to present this to insure you have reviewed it and that the Bush family was involved:

As it not sure if Bush resigned before or there are any discrepancies with this story, that make it totally inadmissible or not...

Was lot of security red flags that suggest that some hanky panky was going on, from what have seen and would think since the bomb sniffing dogs were called off and security system was offline, just too much of coincidence and especially when we know what, we know happened in retrospect ...and leading it up to the day..

whatreallyhappened.com...

9/11 Security
Courtesy of Marvin Bush

Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also served. [Utne]

According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

As Black points out, "when you [a company] have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything." And if another company is linked with the security company, then "What's on your computer is on their computer." [American Reporter]

A heightened WTC security alert was lifted on 9/6/2001...

reply to post by Varemia


you are going to need to point out what facts, not getting straight, as I am all for getting the facts straight and admit, that yes, sources are many and seem to suggest the same thing and either we go with what the official story is in whole and discredit the rest...or we examine each detail and make a thorough analysis of the events and weed out the ones that are not true and those that are valid and verified that are in conflict with the official story, and coverup con job, that obviously we been fed...

Go with what we do know for starters, is 2 planes and 3 buildings fell at WTC, at a rate and way, that is clear, only happens one way, no need to know how many bodies or where they went, or how it was done, other than admit, it was done and had to have been in order for it to have happened...as buildings do not fall like that and that we do know...unless of course was a demolition implosion, that if you disagree with that, then clearly we can start there and show that is fact being shadow of a doubt and if you don't and others cannot accept that, believe it or aspire to the notion and find it totally absurd, then we need to go over the data and evidence with you and anyone else to make sure everyone has seen and knows the facts of the matter.

Helping each other understand the truth and discerning from lies and deceit should be welcome by everyone, and no problem is some of you want to just forget and not question or listen to opinions, facts, and evidence, however the motto here is "deny ignorance" so you see the dilemma?

Originally posted by earthinhabitant

Originally posted by Monkeygod333
I'm sorry but if you still believe the official story about 911 you simply have to be either very ill informed or just plan stupid. I really mean that.
Every Single Part of that day is dodgy to the bone. The exercises, how bush found out, shanksville, the pentagon, the covering of the lawn at the pentagon, Everything about Osama Bin Laden, Everything regarding the collapse of all three buildings, Everything about the 911 commission, EVERYTHING!

To be presented with not only all of these discrepancies but some very important facts and evidence, and still not to find anything fishy with any of them, thats just plain stupid. Not ignorant, stupid.

In my opinion of course.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

Certainly it is more than stupidity, with some, it is obviously some kind of operation to debunk the debunkers...discredit and deter thinking and questioning it...

Noticing way to much comments like these:

It is too difficult to understand...

We will never know what really happened...

Just stop trying to make sense of it and move along and forget about..

Stop asking questions about and pointing out the facts, you are just festering old wounds...

Can't we just all get a long, no need to think about it anymore, that was then, this is now...

Oh, my mind is made up and made up my mind before it even happen and not going to change it...

Stop discussing it, you really should not be on the internet and wasting your time...

Oh, the facts you don't understand and physics and laws of relativity and science, does not apply..

This is bigger than you, so just shut up and go find something else to do.

Let sherlock holmes figure it out, you are not qualified to ask questions or have the clearence to really know..

You are not in the loop to know and only those in the loop get to know what is going on....

Motive does not matter...

The truth does not matter...

You don't know, so shut up///

...

And lot of this, been going on, suggest we got some people here who are either covering someone else arse or their own...

edit on 14-5-2012 by earthinhabitant because: (no reason given)

You hit it on the head. Lots of vague comments, lots of "we will ner know what happened". I have no doubt that there is at least 400 people at any one time working to sway public opinion on forums like these. A good amount dedicated to ATS. And there is a lot of this.

Originally posted by Monkeygod333

You hit it on the head. Lots of vague comments, lots of "we will ner know what happened". I have no doubt that there is at least 400 people at any one time working to sway public opinion on forums like these. A good amount dedicated to ATS. And there is a lot of this.

I confess. I'm working right now...

Really!?! I don't doubt there some out there doing that. But just because the OP is saying "without a doubt"...blah blah blah, and I point out we don't have the evidence to answer all questions, does not mean I'm trying to sway opinions.

Originally posted by earthinhabitant
Go with what we do know for starters, is 2 planes and 3 buildings fell at WTC, at a rate and way, that is clear, only happens one way, no need to know how many bodies or where they went, or how it was done, other than admit, it was done and had to have been in order for it to have happened...as buildings do not fall like that and that we do know...unless of course was a demolition implosion, that if you disagree with that, then clearly we can start there and show that is fact being shadow of a doubt and if you don't and others cannot accept that, believe it or aspire to the notion and find it totally absurd, then we need to go over the data and evidence with you and anyone else to make sure everyone has seen and knows the facts of the matter.

This is where your logic breaks down. You seem like a reasonable, intelligent person until you mention the WTC complex.

"as buildings do not fall like that and we do know." How do you know? A building taller than another has never collapsed large chunks of debris onto another building, and no building in the civilized world has ever been allowed to burn uncontrolled for upwards of 7 hours. Those two factors by themselves make 9/11 a unique situation. Plus, no airplane has ever gone full throttle into a building before. That doesn't make it impossible. It makes it a first time.

You cannot use precedent on a unique occasion. It is unique. It has very big differences from the circumstances surrounding controlled demolitions and such. Even the French verinage technique doesn't quite cover the type of collapse that happened to the towers, but it is close. Only WTC 7 has similarities to a controlled demo, and those similarities evaporate when you factor in the damage to the building, the fire, and the opinions of the firefighters who were there and looked closely at the building, noticing leaning, creaking, and massive holes in it.

reply to post by Varemia


thanks for the compliment and same goes for you as well...

Show me the model you are referring to, that suggest anything other than a demolition so we can review it, as I have not seen anything that suggest it was anything other than implosion, unless it was by the ones who are implicated as being the ones who a suspected as being the ones responsible...

Have you ever seen an building fall before, fire or no fire, that even comes close, that was not an implosion demolition?

Also, what is your view on how the BBC announced it WTC 7 had fallen before it had fell...

Do you have any engineers reports who are experts on structures and support your claims and agree with you?

You can count anyone who is implicated, however love to know any one suggesting such non sense...
Also, if could review my signature link to a survey that I am conducting, if you have not, as there are a few questions, that help relate to the weight of your comments and opinions, if you are perhaps have conflict of interests, that would make your opinion biased and you would or could be implicated by association?

Who here believes in little red riding hood? Or 3 little pigs? Think should be some groups here, like groups fantasy land residents and club reality...should be simple to see who belongs in what one and don't forget "team shill" and the oh so popular, the "sock puppet club"

Originally posted by earthinhabitant
Show me the model you are referring to, that suggest anything other than a demolition so we can review it, as I have not seen anything that suggest it was anything other than implosion, unless it was by the ones who are implicated as being the ones who a suspected as being the ones responsible...

Here are a couple videos by NIST, simulations they did which accounted for the damage. Now, the main thing to keep in mind is that the granite facade was not simulated, so the deformation seen at the roofline would likely not be visible, though I can attest to there being a wobble on the South-Eastern corner at the start of the fall.



Here's a closer look at the model of what happened in the floor to initiate the internal collapse, visible from the videos as the penthouse falling in:



This was determined by it being basically the only support that really supported most of the upper floors. WTC 7 was built on a Consolidated Edison power plant, so the supports for the building were not in their optimum locations.

Here's a video I made pointing out the minute details of the popular collapse video:

Have you ever seen an building fall before, fire or no fire, that even comes close, that was not an implosion demolition?

I have not. However, I have also not seen a building be hit by an airliner or skyscraper debris and survive, unless you count all the other buildings around the trade center complex that managed to not fall, though some were suspected of possibly being a collapse hazard. Most of the surrounding buildings had to be demolished one floor at a time.

Also, what is your view on how the BBC announced it WTC 7 had fallen before it had fell...

I remember 9/11. It was a media catastrophe. Everyone was trying to get the correct news the fastest, and since the firefighters had been pulled from WTC 7 for a couple of hours beforehand, and people were being cordoned away as much as possible, it's not surprising that someone reported the building as already collapsed, and BBC went with it. I see false reporting all the time. They just happened to report it 20 minutes before the actual collapse. It happens.

Do you have any engineers reports who are experts on structures and support your claims and agree with you?

Several. The problem is that the fact that they support the OS makes them non-credible to the truther crowd. I know of a paper by an engineering university, maybe a couple others. Most academics tend to consider the subject to be wrapped up, so it's difficult to find sources that are not included in the often denied OS.

Here's the MIT paper:

www-math.mit.edu...

reply to post by Varemia


reviewing now and going into recess, so it may be tomorrow before responded back on the videos, thanks!

First thought would be malfeasance if buildings fell like that, as that would be a design flaw...same with the other 2 as well, as not safe to go into, as collapsing by the wind or a fart could cause them to fall down, not over...

Originally posted by earthinhabitant
reply to post by Varemia

 

reviewing now and going into recess, so it may be tomorrow before responded back on the videos, thanks!

First thought would be malfeasance if buildings fell like that, as that would be a design flaw...same with the other 2 as well, as not safe to go into, as collapsing by the wind or a fart could cause them to fall down, not over...

In my opinion, the designs were certainly flawed. WTC 7 was built on an Edison power plant, moving its supports to places that were unsafe in the event of a partial collapse, and the towers were entirely unsafe in the event of a partial collapse. I think that under almost any circumstance, if the floors start to move down and collapse on the floors below, it would lead to a global collapse. They were designed well against the force of wind, but vertically, the open floor trusses held very little resistance.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
reply to post by 4hero

 

At this moment, I can't be certain as to which one it is, but it must be one or the other...

Either...

You know dam well that your reply to me is total nonsense.
OR

You're an idiot, and you actually believe it is true.

Originally posted by 4hero

There was nothing confusing about what was written. Maybe a trip back to college would be useful to help you make sense of this simple paragraph?

Regardless of which of those is accurate, I can't think of any logical reason for you to reply directly to me. I assume that your post is no more than an ill-fated attempt at grabbing some useless stars? Good luck with that.


I was just providing a necessary tip, which was ignorantly ignored. It wasn't easy for me to be polite about it, but I did it anyways. The OP doesn't realize that he is doing more harm than good. When the goal is simply to prove that someone else is full of crap, one really should avoid creating a cluttered mess of nonsensical gibberish, whilst making the claim.



I already have a pretty good idea of what your next reply to me will be, so I'll just go ahead and say "No Thanx". Most likely, I won't even waste my time reading it, yet alone reply to it.

Farewell.....

Wow, uber troll alert! Keep breaking your circles....

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
reply to post by 4hero

 

At this moment, I can't be certain as to which one it is, but it must be one or the other...

Either...

You know dam well that your reply to me is total nonsense.
OR

You're an idiot, and you actually believe it is true.

Originally posted by 4hero

There was nothing confusing about what was written. Maybe a trip back to college would be useful to help you make sense of this simple paragraph?

Regardless of which of those is accurate, I can't think of any logical reason for you to reply directly to me. I assume that your post is no more than an ill-fated attempt at grabbing some useless stars? Good luck with that.


I was just providing a necessary tip, which was ignorantly ignored. It wasn't easy for me to be polite about it, but I did it anyways. The OP doesn't realize that he is doing more harm than good. When the goal is simply to prove that someone else is full of crap, one really should avoid creating a cluttered mess of nonsensical gibberish, whilst making the claim.



I already have a pretty good idea of what your next reply to me will be, so I'll just go ahead and say "No Thanx". Most likely, I won't even waste my time reading it, yet alone reply to it.

Farewell.....

Hahaha! Do you really think that I give a toss about stars?! You really are very shallow and cynical to think that! Please mods, do remove all my stars, I could not care less if I had minus 1billion stars!

I'm here to debate the BS OS, and people like you that come out with such utter trash like you do make my day. By writing the stuff you do you discredit the OS every time you post!

Why did i direct it at you? Because you were blatantly trolling, and blatantly being offensive to the OP for no reason. there was nothing wrong with the OP's paragraph, and your pedantic trolling is all part of the shill games you kind of people play! It's a forum, I can reply to who I want, get over it.

You know what, I'm going to break a rule of mine and we will discuss this thread in the first hour of ATS Live this coming Saturday.

Is that enough attention for you?

reply to post by neformore


Thanks, as there are other topics that are for more deserving about 9/11 than this thread, as a show on the entire facet would be great, those who are promoting the official story and under estimating the impact of the events and think letting people walk is okay, and of no significance is the truth and facts and for us to just forget about it and stop trying to understand it, suggesting we do not know and will not ever know and even if we did know or do...it does not matter...and let those who committed the crimes keep on committing them...nothing new here folks, keep on moving, just business as usual, turn the other cheek and moon someone or turn a blind eye and with lie of justifications and instructions...

reply to post by 4hero


personally don't care if anyone wants to poke at me on my posts, I ask for it and enjoy it, and sometimes fish for it, as the only game in town..

reply to post by Varemia


vertical resistance and flaws that would allow such, is not something engineering or construction would permit, from what I have seen in buildings design and engineering, as otherwise would not be safe to go inside if they all fell from the top down and pancaked like they did, as all buildings in the world would be recalled that fit the profile and design engineering and that would be around 100% of them being deemed flawed and subject to fallen, earthquake proof or not, as still would need columns to support and also chances of them all being the same pressure on each floor collapse and same resistance, on all 3 is impossible as well, unless the columns kept them all in line, then would have columns standing and for it not to tilt to onside or the other, is just unimaginable even with columns, is my opinion, would have to be some charges and thanks for pointing out, it would not take too many...

reply to post by earthinhabitant


No. You misunderstood me. We will be discussing this thread on ATS Live on Saturday.

Originally posted by earthinhabitant
reply to post by Varemia

 

vertical resistance and flaws that would allow such, is not something engineering or construction would permit, from what I have seen in buildings design and engineering, as otherwise would not be safe to go inside if they all fell from the top down and pancaked like they did, as all buildings in the world would be recalled that fit the profile and design engineering and that would be around 100% of them being deemed flawed and subject to fallen, earthquake proof or not, as still would need columns to support and also chances of them all being the same pressure on each floor collapse and same resistance, on all 3 is impossible as well, unless the columns kept them all in line, then would have columns standing and for it not to tilt to onside or the other, is just unimaginable even with columns, is my opinion, would have to be some charges and thanks for pointing out, it would not take too many...

edit on 16-5-2012 by earthinhabitant because: (no reason given)

Well, the towers were the only design of their type. It was an entirely unique idea created by a Japanese architect. WTC 7 was constructed on top of a Consolidated Edison power plant, moving its supports from where they would normally be.

I've tried explaining this a few times. They were not typical highrise buildings at the world trade center complex.

reply to post by neformore


correct, this thread, www.abovetopsecret.com..., some call him the gangster of love, space cowboy and Joker...same page, same bat station, is Travis, going to be a guest...?