Home | Community | Message Board |
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
Shop: Buy Bali Kratom Powder Bulk Cannabis Seeds North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies Red Vein Kratom Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order |
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Oh yes. Every imaginative comment made by school children is immediately reported to Big Brother, who then accepts them as hard intel and immediately and unerringly acts on them. Yeah... sounds pretty likely to me. I don't know why so many people have such a hard time reading simple English. What part of "What no one seems to recognize is that there was never -- at ANY point -- enough ACTIONABLE intelligence to do anything to stop the plan once it got under way absent a massive and prolonged violation of civil liberties" are you having difficulty understanding? Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Annapurna1 seems also to be unable to understand the meaning of the word "actionable", as she brings up the vague-to-the-point-of-uselessness August 6 PDB.
There was an entire thread about this little beauty of a memo. Interested members can read the whole thing if they wish, or hop into it right about here when the discussion gets more detailed -- http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/2583209#Post2583209 Here's another thread detailing with a lot of the same subject matter -- http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/2551670#Post2551670 Phred
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: That can just as easily be argued as what made it so easy and convenient for our government, if not be partially behind it, to have at least allowed it to happen if it served other agendas. Had 9/11 not happened, do you believe congress would have voted unanimously in support of the Iraqi invasion and that the majority of Americans at the time would've supported it? The maneuvering to get in there happened to soon right after 9/11. How easy to gain public support for it when you can prey on the peoples fears that terrorists would next use Saddam's WPD on us in a future attack. I do understand that when you look at each isolated piece of "evidence" crying foul, none alone hold up to much proof or evidence of anything. When you add together all of the events (pieces) before, during and after the attack, over the span of the last eight years and look at them as one collective piece, a plausible story unfolds. Who would want to believe that the people we trust with our national security and safety and empower with billions of our tax dollars could be capable of, or pawns of, something so cold and destructive? This isn't the sort of thing that anyone wants to be true or wishes to be true. I wish it was as simple as you claim it to be. Occam's razor, if applied heavily enough can shave anything away. Gotta appreciate how it works when you want to reduce something down to a size you can manage and handle. While you have all of this whittled down to little meaningless pieces that add up to nothing, others are still looking at the big picture and I doubt posts like this are going to go away. Caskets full of American soldiers keep landing here to be buried every day and money that can be spent on education, medical and alternative energy research, is being used to destroy lives elsewhere. Why is this happening Phred and why are you still supporting it? -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Economist in training Registered: 10/11/05 Posts: 1,285 Last seen: 16 years, 6 months |
| ||||||
Quote: I don't understand this. Saying that an abscence of actionable intelligence *supports* the argument of a conspiracy is akin to saying that the abscence of proof of God supports the existence of God. In both cases there is noting logical about it, just belief. What you've done, in essence, is taken the "intelligent design" argument and applied it to a 9/11 conspiracy instead of the existence of God. You say "there might not be any one single piece of evidence that holds up to scrutiny, but surely everything must be part of a larger picture!" How is this any different from "there might not be any one proof of the existence of God that holds up to scientific inquirey, but given the total complexity of the universe, everything must be a part of a higher plan!" You say that when you look at all the events, all the pieces of 8 years a plausible story emerges. But that's just what it is, a plausible story. Well I have another plausible story: Each and every one of us has on one occasion or another, experienced or known someone who experienced, something miraculously beneficial, which could not be explained. We happened upon a $20 bill abandoned on the sidewalk. We've narrowly missed a car crash, when we easily could have been hit by another driver over whom we had no control. A doctor was able to detect our illness months early, and we were saved from being permanently lame, blind, or even dead. Sure, none of these events individually prove the existence of God. But if you add them all together a plausible story unfolds. Who wants to believe that none of us are truly in control of our own destiny, that there might not be such a thing as free choice, that each and every one of us might be unable to deviate from some "higher plan"? This is something that many find objectionable and would be unwilling to accept. Without Occam's Razor to shave away the bits and pieces, we're forced to take these events as a whole. Miracles, small and large, happen to us all, and because of many of them we are all lucky enough to be here today. And that's not all, they keep happening. Each and every day, these "unexplainable events" continue. Without being able to scrutinize the individual pieces and say "this doesn't prove anything by itself" the idea of God suddenly seems like a great explanation. I'm not trying to get anyone to believe/not believe in God, I'm simply demonstrating the logic behind the argument made by most of the 9/11 conspiracies. There's a reason that the euphemism "smoking gun" is in such common usage today; that being, without individual pieces of concrete evidence which stand up to scrutiny, any story seems plausible and nothing can be proven.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
I never said it was anything more then plausible.
And I don't see how you compared what I said to people debating the existence of God. So what if laws were in play that made it impossible for the Feds or CIA to arrest anyone. Thats irrelevant. If I were going to pull of the perfect crime, I would make sure I didn't break any laws leading up to it either. If I were going to employ someone to rob from or burn down my home or business to collect the insurance money, I would also devise a plan that would insure I could in no way be held accountable for not doing anything to have stopped or prevented it from happening. The comment of Phreds that I quoted is meaningless to counter the plausibility of a 9/11 conspiracy that involves our government or something else pulling it's strings. Why act like all conspiracies are bunk? Did you forget about Enron and the bogus "energy crisis in California" that they conspired to make appear to be something it wasn't for their personal gain? Had Enron not fallen, and someone leaked out information that those power outages were planned, they would be called a conspiracy theorists too. They would have been sharing the truth though. Of course all we have now is circumstantial evidence. Same with the governments version of the story. They have a bunch of slop as evidence for why they say they didn't have the Intel to know about the plan of attack, or couldn't coordinate what they did have in time to put the big picture together before hand. More slop related to the reasons we went into Iraq and the reasons for why we are still there. Why is their circumstantial evidence and sloppy bits and pieces to support their stories any more plausible then what the conspiracy theorists have? -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Gijith Daisy Chain Eate Registered: 12/04/03 Posts: 2,400 Loc: New York |
| ||||||
Official. I love conspiracy theories to no end, but I've yet to hear a 9/11 one that really stands up.
-------------------- what's with neocons and the word 'ilk'?
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 9 days |
| ||||||
Do you deny able danger Phred?
Quote: And this gem. Quote: Relevant information was giving to the 9/11 commission and IGNORED? How the hell could they ignore that if their true objective was to discover the truth behind 9/11? Congressman Curt Weldon issued a response to the 9/11 Commission statement. Quote: That proves without a doubt, that persons on a terrorist watch list, were known to be in florida going to a flight school. That also proves, that govt officials were going to move to arrest them, when they were stopped by higher ups and lawyers representing higher ups. But most disturbing, that proves the very people who were appointed to explain to the public what happened (9/11 commission) have been caught in a lie, changed their story and claim information coming from 2 different active military officers is suspect??? But why don't we just dig up the able danger files and see what's on them for ourselves so we know what's what? Oh wait, we can't do that can we? Quote: So Phred, what is your first response? Attack the congressman's credibility right? Try again. Quote: Hmm what happened to Shaffer for speaking out? Quote: Able Danger Well this is getting long, but Phred asked for some links then ignored my reply with a link. Anyone that is "on the fence" about what the govt knew prior to 9/11 you need to look into this. Once you start digging the shit just keeps getting deeper and deeper. Don't swallow the garbage that people like Phred spew. Look for yourselves. This is not the only incident of whistle blowing either. Others within the govt have also spoke out and have been retaliated against and threatened for doing so. They do NOT want information like this being repeated over and over on the news. They want it to be buried in time while we swallow their official story like good little school children. -------------------- "Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson "Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 13 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:No, I don't. You have a plain comprehension problem. If the info was all over Manhattan, surely FBI informants would have passed it on. I mean, if random schoolkids knew the details and passed them on randomly as was the case, and if rumours abounded in mosques as was the case, the intelligence was readily available to anyone extending out the smallest of antennae in Muslim circles, as the FBI routinely does. There was a strong convergent beam of info readily available, and several foreign intelligence services warned the US, but the FBI unfortunately failed to smell shit. Sure. Quote:Sure, all those news sources are full of shit. Only a small selection of Phred-approved blogs are worth considering as the one and only Truth. Quote:And the FBI has way to much respect for New York's Muslim community to keep itself informed of what goes around in said community. Moreover, before 9/11, no-one could have suspected any danger whatsoever coming from Muslims, so why would the FBI have bothered anyway. Right Phred? Quote:Can you point a link to "long ago"? I must have been unconscious at the time. Quote:Yes I do, but you have to admit they are very close friends, to say the least. Absent all other elements, it would be plausible to assume that the Mossad knew and decided to stay put and let it happen in order to further Israel's agenda. But there are many other elements pointing to US foreknowledge, exposed here and elsewhere. So I would rather think the Mossad knew and gave the US specific warnings which the US ignored. There were two possible rationales for the Mossad to cheer on the attacks: either "That'll teach those deaf Americans a lesson about terrorism!" or "Yes! They're going to reinforce their presence in the Middle East and kick Saddam!" Probably both, although I would think those Mossad people had understood they let the attacks happen on purpose, so a) is less likely.
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Quote: Exactly. There is SO much information out there that point towards government involvement. SO much. I bet that 90% of those who don't think there was government involvement didn't invest much personal time into investigating for themselves. Quote: Ya seriously, and people don't realize that the official story is itself a conspiracy theory, according to the actual definition of what a "conspiracy theory" is. --------------------
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Here's a list of a few ommisions, falsehoods, and contradictions contained within the 9/11 Comission Report, which, as you know, is the official version of the story. This list is not exhaustive. Quote: http://911research.wtc7.net/post --------------------
| |||||||
Silversoul Rhizome Registered: 01/01/05 Posts: 23,576 Loc: The Barricades |
| ||||||
Actually, I'm king of wondering which "official" version the poll is referring to: the Bush administration's version of it, or the 9/11 Commission's version of it. Because I think the latter supports the negligence theory.
--------------------
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
RosettaStoned writes:
Quote: Did you bother to read the very link you provided? Although I have followed the Able Danger story from the very beginning, I went to your link and read it all again anyway. I guess you missed this -- Quote: And this -- Quote: These are just two of the reasons I never joined in on the finger-pointing going on in the several threads in this forum regarding the Abl Danger project. It is -- at best -- thinly sourced, there is no documentation available for independent verification. Even if Weldon and Shaffer are 100% correct in everything they have stated (and not ALL their statements can be correct, since some of the statements directly contradict other of the statements) all it shows is that Military Intelligence knew that someone purported to be a member of Al Qaeda (Atta) had entered the US on a visa. They didn't know where he was and they didn't know what he was up to. It bores me to have to keep repeating this, but do you still not grasp the concept of ACTIONABLE intelligence? Do you still not comprehend the meaning of the phrase "massive and ongoing wholesale violation of civil liberties"? I suggest you click on the links to the previous PA&L threads dealing with this subject which I have provided and read through the discussion there. Then -- if you take exception to any of the points I presented in those threads -- call me on it. Phred
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: ah, but theres where you are mistaken. my key belief is that they are not idiots, but in fact so fucking smart, that they realize that playing idiots is the best way to justify their tradgic actions. -------------------- No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Aldous writes:
Quote: Assumes facts not in evidence. 1) The info was NOT all over Manhattan. It was claimed after the fact that a couple of schoolkids and a taxi driver made statements indicating they had some foreknowledge of some kind of impending attack. 2) What was there to pass on? Even if an "FBI informant" had passed it on to the FBI, what's he going to do with a statement like "something bad is going to happen"? Is he going to arrest a schoolkid and whap him upside the head with a rubber hose until the kid breaks and rats out the person who told him "something bad is going to happen"? Quote: I strongly suggest you read the two previous threads I linked. Do you not understand the concept of "massive and ongoing violations of civil liberties"? Quote: Actually, no there aren't. There were many hints and strong reasons to believe a major terrorist operation was in the works. I have never denied that. What I have always said is that with the information on hand prior to September 11 there was no realistic way -- absent a massive and ongoing violation of civil liberties -- to have foiled the plot in time. Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Aldous writes:
Quote: Sure. From http://web.archive.org/web/2002080219431...van_020621.html Quote: The five men were held in detention for more than two months. Some of them were placed in solitary confinement for 40 days, and some of them were given as many as seven lie-detector tests. Phred
| |||||||
Annapurna1 liberal pussy Registered: 05/21/02 Posts: 5,646 Loc: innsmouth..MA |
| ||||||
Quote: theres alot of evidence that stands up to scrutiny..but IMO..prolly not enough to win a case in court...it is worth repeating..however..that stanley hiltons' lawsuit was not thrown out on a lack of evidence..but rather because of the constitutional mandate that only congress can try the defendants named in the suit... i doubt that anyone will ever find the smoking gun..but that doesnt mean that the gun wasnt there...in this case..however..we have the next best thing ..a double motive...in addition to the "new pearl harbour" clause.. bush&co were also in deep shit from the enron scandal in 2001... -------------------- "anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
| |||||||
Economist in training Registered: 10/11/05 Posts: 1,285 Last seen: 16 years, 6 months |
| ||||||
Quote: A double motive is the "next best thing"? How about this "theory": Franklin Delano Roosevelt was related through blood or marriage to eleven former US Presidents ( http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/32_f_roosevelt ), including Teddy Roosevelt, a close friend of Senator La Folette. The two of them conspired to split the Republican party in the 1912 election in an attempt to enact a progressive agenda for the first time, this attempt failed. FDR's father, James Roosevelt was a manager of mining and railroad concerns, and was wealthy enough to conduct all of his business via a private railroad car, a major sign of wealth in the 1910s. As early as 1924 FDR was pushing for social welfare measures, both locally, through his own governorship, as well as nationally. However, Calvin Coolidge, who subsequently won the presidency in the 1920s, was the most anti-Progressive President that America may have ever seen. ( http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_1998_Dec/ai_53260547 ) Then, suddenly, a "catastrophe" happened, if you want to call it that: The Great Depression. As early as 1932, the depression was actually turning around, almost all economic indexes posted gains by the first month of 1933, BEFORE the first month that FDR took office. And yet, somehow, FDR managed to "stretch" the Depression out for about 8 years. Prior to the depression, there was absolutely no chance that the anti-progressive congress of the United States (which had eagerly passed all of Calvin Coolidge's tax cuts during the 1920s) would have ever passed anything resembling New Deal legislation, and yet after the depression they happily approved the same agenda that FDR had been trying to get approved since 1924. Not only that, but guess what was included in the FDR's "New Deal"? Railroad improvement grants and new mining licenses! Subsidies for the Roosevelt "family business" which had made James Roosevelt (FDR's father) his fortune. Put this all together and a "plausible story" develops: FDR and his political connections (remember, he was related to 11 former presidents) CAUSED AND PROLONGED THE GREAT DEPRESSION. This enabled him to pass the same social welfare agenda that he had been pushing since 1924, 5 years before the Stock Market crash! An agenda he never could have gotten through congress without the great Depression! Not only that, but what was included in the New Deal? Subsidies for the Roosevelt family businesses! Also, if all the indexes began recovery by the first month of 1933, why was additional New Deal legislation still necessary, as Roosevelt claimed, as late as 1937? Now, I don't think that Roosevelt actually caused the great depression. But I hope this illustrates my previous points more obviously. No individual part of the above mentioned "theory" about Roosevelt stands up to scrutiny. There is a total abscence of a "smoking gun," despite the existance of a motive (indeed, a double motive if you take the railroad/mining subsidies into account). The fact of the matter is that all the current conspiracy theories out there require a certain "leap of faith" to believe in them, and that is simply not good enough for me.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: You have taken a leap of faith to believe in the story the government keeps telling us. Don't you see, one way or the other, everyone has taken a leap of faith in what they have chosen to accept as a truth or evidence, including you? No matter what any of us choose to accept is the truth, small or large, one thing remains obviously clear and indisputable to all of us. The U.S. was attacked by terrorists on 9/11. The U.S. government and military has and still is attacking Iraq and causing terror on its civilians. Everyone in their own way has been asking why these things happened and still are. Everyone has been making sense of it in their own way. My family and I have to share this planet with you the rest of you. I just hope that nothing is going so gravely ignored by the masses that the nature of these events are bound to keep repeating themselves on this planet. I don't give a crap what the real reason was behind 9/11 or the real reason is behind this war in Iraq. NONE of them are acceptable, justifiable or rational to me. Bunch of Big Babies these men with power are. "Whiny Wah wah, you won't give our people back their holy land so we are going to fly your planes into your important buildings." "Whiny Wah wah, Saddam won't let us in his country to play with him so we are going to invade it to show him who's boss." The simple version is even ridiculous! Humankind needs to grow up already! No matter what version of the story anyone accepts, all of them senseless and ridiculous. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Economist in training Registered: 10/11/05 Posts: 1,285 Last seen: 16 years, 6 months |
| ||||||
Quote: No, I haven't. I lived in Northern New Jersey in September of 2001. I knew people who went to work on the 11th and never came home again. I watched on live television 2 planes crash into the towers. I have seen videos of Osama Bin Laden taking credit for 9/11 and threatening to do it again. These are all examples of smoking guns. There is an exceedingly large amount of news footage, private videos, and eye witness accounts of 2 planes hitting 2 towers, the towers catching on fire and collapsing. There have been numerous statements issued by Al Queda, video, audio, or otherwise taking credit for the attacks and even threatening more. NONE of the conspiracy theories even come close to this level of evidence, and that is something that the initial account has over all of them. Where is the concrete evidence, the taped confessions, the video footage of bombs being placed in the towers. What documents have been released containing (as Phred has repeatedly stated) ACTIONABLE intelligence that was not acted upon. Give me proof! The government has news footage and Bin Laden's own statements as proof of a certain chain of events. You're right about one aspect, it does take a certain leap of faith to believe that the intelligence community was incapable of stopping the attacks (either through gross negligence or a genuine lack of intelligence). But this is no more a leap of faith than the belief that they were capable and chose not to, or even more ridiculous, that they planned the whole thing. So, when we look at the parts of the story that do not require any leap of faith at all, i.e. planes hit towers, towers fell, al queda says they did it, this comes a heck of a lot closer to the government's story than ANY of the conspiracy theories out there right now.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Of course you, nor any of us have verifyable reason to believe that an arrangement was made for Bin Laden to take the credit and that our government would insure his freedom and safety in exchange for it.
Do you question why it is that we haven't found and caught him yet, though we have the technological capabilities to send rovers to explore microbes on the planet mars? Did you forget that the Bush's and the Bin Laden's are old family friends? All circumstantial indeed. I totally agree that it is and I know that it is. The government tells us that Bin Laden is the sole original conceiver, planner and organizer of the 9/11 attacks, because Bin Laden made claims and admissions to that on video tape and they have that evidence. That is the simple and plain WHOLE truth of the case and nothing else that the government presents. You choose to accept that and only that as the whole truth until someone else publicly admits to something else otherwise. That's fine. Some of us look at the vast body of circumstantial evidence which suggests to us that what the government has presented to us as the whole truth, is only a partial truth of the whole truth. I have reasonable doubts that what they have told us is the whole truth. It appears that I am not the only one. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
|
Shop: Buy Bali Kratom Powder Bulk Cannabis Seeds North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies Red Vein Kratom Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order |
|
Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
9/11 Conspiracy & JFK Conspiracy | DoctorJ | 1,033 | 12 | 09/18/03 05:11 AM by Jellric | ||
Conspiracy Theories: JFK vs. 9/11 ( 1 2 all ) |
Annapurna1 | 4,837 | 30 | 11/25/03 03:37 PM by luvdemshrooms | ||
Why the "tanks on the planes" 9--1 conspiracy theory is shit ( 1 2 all ) |
RandalFlagg | 4,968 | 35 | 09/13/04 12:45 AM by Zahid | ||
Why the media's conspiracy theory is better than yours ( 1 2 all ) |
ekomstop | 4,257 | 31 | 09/23/04 03:27 PM by ekomstop | ||
The No-Conspiracy Theory | ekomstop | 995 | 5 | 09/14/04 11:46 AM by Moonshoe | ||
Pentagon 9/11 conspiracy fiesta ( 1 2 all ) |
Dreamer987 | 3,821 | 26 | 09/06/04 12:34 PM by RandalFlagg | ||
Conspiracy theories ( 1 2 3 4 all ) |
Learyfan | 5,095 | 60 | 02/17/04 02:53 PM by TheOneYouKnow | ||
9/11 Conspiracy ( 1 2 all ) |
KingOftheThing | 1,753 | 20 | 09/17/04 08:17 PM by ekomstop |
Extra information | ||
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa 12,176 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||