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.
|
| |||||||
Annapurna1 liberal pussy Registered: 05/21/02 Posts: 5,646 Loc: innsmouth..MA |
| ||||||
there are basically 4 different versions of 9/11..
1) the "official" version..which i need not explain further... 2) incompetence ..bush&co had advance warning of the attacks..which they failed to act on out of sheer negligence... 3) LIHOP ..bush&co had advance warning of the attacks..which they failed to act on deliberately..since tsuch an attack was in fact crucial to their policy agenda (re ..rebuilding americas' defenses)... 4) MIHOP ..bush&co had a direct hand in planning and executing the attacks... -------------------- "anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
| |||||||
Redstorm Prince of Bugs Registered: 10/08/02 Posts: 44,175 Last seen: 4 months, 30 days |
| ||||||
I believe and have always believed in the negligence option.
| |||||||
Ngalyod Stranger Registered: 09/29/05 Posts: 494 Loc: Australia Last seen: 12 years, 17 days |
| ||||||
3) LIHOP .. bush&co had advance warning of the attacks..which they failed to act on deliberately..since tsuch an attack was in fact crucial to their policy agenda (re ..rebuilding americas' defenses)...
Seems the most plausible as it gave them any excuse to do whatever they wanted ... war on Iraq, Patriot Act, murdering people for oil etc. etc. etc.
| |||||||
SirTripAlot Semper Fidelis Registered: 01/11/05 Posts: 7,625 Loc: Harmless (Mostly) Last seen: 31 minutes, 27 seconds |
| ||||||
Cant take one more theory........losing grip.......
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
I voted MIHOP, but I wouldn't bet on the fact that whoever planned this in the US also initiated it. It seems plausible to me that the initial plot came from Al-Qaeda (which is or is not infiltrated by the CIA, but I would think it is), and that instead of trying to prevent it from happening, the US did everything (plant bombs in the towers etc.) to make it succeed beyond Al-Qaeda's wildest dreams. But in my view there was a definite and very active helping hand from US authorities.
| |||||||
Silversoul Rhizome Registered: 01/01/05 Posts: 23,576 Loc: The Barricades |
| ||||||
"LIHOP." I certainly don't think Bin Laden needed any convincing or help from the Bush administration in order to attack the US, but I also think that the attacks fit perfectly into the neoconservative agenda. I'm still not entirely willing to dismiss either the ignorance theory or the "MIHOP" theory, but I don't definitely don't think Bush was acting in a way befitting of the leader of the free world.
--------------------
| |||||||
GabbaDj BTH Registered: 04/08/01 Posts: 19,681 Loc: By The Lake |
| ||||||
The US definetly had information that would make them believe that an attack would happen.
I believe right now that they have information that an attack will happen. But they dont know where, when or who. I wouldnt claim neglegence because I dont believe that we knew all that much. On the other hand the US most likely had a hand in planning this along with AlQueida leaders but those who did the attack hod no clue they were working for us.
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
I don't know weather they had an active hand or just left the door wide open on purpose hoping it would happen. Leaving the door wide open on purpose basically makes you an accomplice if you know the very persons planning something and prevent FBI agents from arresting them.
But alas it is speculation, all we can know for sure is it ranges somewhere between direct hand and purposeful negligence. So I chose LIHOP. -------------------- "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
| |||||||
Seuss Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 1 month, 9 days |
| ||||||
I picked incompetence, though I wish it had been called negligence. I suspect that the administration, at various levels, knew that something was going to happen in the near future. I don't think they knew exactly what was going to happen, or the magnitude of the attack. A "Custer's last stand" type of screw-up... "Heh, they are only a few indians... what can they possibly do to us?" The idea being that a little attack would drive the US public to support action in the middle east, thus raising oil prices, thus making lots of money for anybody with ties to the oil industry. The real question; were Bush & Co played, or are they all really that stupid.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
GabbaDj BTH Registered: 04/08/01 Posts: 19,681 Loc: By The Lake |
| ||||||
Quote: They were the players. Lets not forget that Bush Jr basically picked up where daddy failed. Daddy didnt have strong enough support and wasnt good enough at telling lies to get the job done so the powers that be rigged two elections, forced the hand of America with 9/11 and daddy Bush finally gave is son a hug.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Could it be called incompetence? Perhaps, but that's setting the bar pretty damned high. Intelligence isn't perfect. The fact of the matter remains that this operation was set up while Clinton was still in charge. In fact, it was begun before Bush was even selected as the Republican party candidate, much less elected. Does that mean I blame Clinton or the Clinton administration for "incompetence"? Much as I disliked Clinton, I cannot. This is one time (and not the first time by a long shot) where the bad guys did enough things right to pull it off. That does happen, you know. The US government is neither invincible nor omniscient. Everyone here seems to make much -- IN HINDSIGHT -- of various indications that ObL and his Merry Pranksters were up to something. 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. Could it have been PREVENTED? Possibly -- if Clinton had acted on the several opportunities presented to him to capture or kill bin Laden while he was still in office. But even then it's not a given the plan would have fallen through. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Atta and the rest of them might have carried on regardless. But could it have been STOPPED given the information available at the time, under the legal restrictions in place at the time, under the political climate which prevailed at the time? Nope. There was an entire fairly lengthy thread dealing with this a couple of years back. Let me see if I can find it and bump it. Phred
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
i only say made it happen.. because we essentially armed and trained the very people we consider terrorists.
whether it was intentional or not, we did, in fact Make It Happen. and i happen to believe it was intentional. -------------------- 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 |
| ||||||
Quote: Trained them to hijack airliners and fly them into buildings? Umm... nope. Some of the mujahadeen the CIA assisted in Afghanistan were taught how to handle sidearms and even rocket launchers, how to best to shoot down helicopters, etc. But none of the training handed out by the CIA had anything to do with how to get past US airport security or how to break into the cockpit of a civilian airliner or how to fly a 757. Try again. Phred
| |||||||
Redstorm Prince of Bugs Registered: 10/08/02 Posts: 44,175 Last seen: 4 months, 30 days |
| ||||||
Nope, of course we didn't train them to do that. They learned all those skills in the US. Of course, we had no idea they would be taking fight courses in the US at the time, though, right?
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: someone hasnt been paying attention to the news... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world how about you just search for the terms "florida terrorist training" on google. you can even just focus on AP outlets to get the idea. of course the CIA wouldnt have taught them anything about controlling the masses, right? you can't win them all, phred. -------------------- 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 |
| ||||||
Right.
The problem was that the US at that time believed they would act honorably -- that they would appreciate the assistance they received from the US in ousting the godless infidels who had invaded Afghanistan. Sadly, the US has learned that Muslims are even quicker at forgetting past assistance than they are at exploding into seething and ululating and rioting over "insults" to Allah. Phred
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: beat me to the punch. -------------------- 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 |
| ||||||
What's your point, kotik?
Are you saying the students enrolled in the various flight schools should have been expelled from those schools by the US government? Would you care to cite for us the relevant laws under which the US government could have taken that action? Phred
| |||||||
Redstorm Prince of Bugs Registered: 10/08/02 Posts: 44,175 Last seen: 4 months, 30 days |
| ||||||
Are you serious? Clearly various students should have been expelled. They were terrorists for Christ's sake. If we can detain suspected terrorists indefinitely, surely it's not asking too much to kick them our of flight classes.
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
FBI Knew Terrorists Were Using Flight Schools
By Steve Fainaru and James V. Grimaldi Washington Post Staff Writers Sunday, September 23, 2001; Page A24 Venice Flight School Linked to CIA February 25--Venice, Florida follow-up: http://www.madcowprod.com/02212006.html -------------------- 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 |
| ||||||
I AM serious.
And no, it was not CLEAR that those taking flight training were terrorists. The ones taking flight training were on no watch lists and had broken no laws. The ones taking flight training were in the country legally so couldn't even be kicked out on immigration violations. I ask again -- under which law(s) in place in 2001 could they have been expelled from the schools? Phred
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
here's a really good website with timelines leading up to the attacks. This is a HUGE amount of research and takes a while to go through, but check out a few of the sections. They look at the attack from every angle, going back 20/30 years. If you don't want to check everything else, look at the section called insider trading, and all the stuff on the day of.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project -------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:Now that's bullshit, and here's why. First off, the everyday air force protection should have been largely enough to stop the Pentagon plane at the very least. But that's not where I want to get. What I want to stress here, is that a significant portion of the Arab and Middle Eastern community in New York and elsewhere knew exactly what was going to happen (link , link 2, link 3, link 4, link 6, link 7, link 8), and that it is a positive fact that the Mossad knew exactly what was going to happen when and where. Are you arguing that with all this info around, the CIA and the FBI etc. were completely ignorant of the impending attacks and could not effectively protect American air space and airlines, and that you don't even label this incompetence, let alone worse? Hmm.
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Where's the smiley face that has his fingers in his ears while humming "nah nah na nah nah".
This is what true believers of the official story do, plug their ears. It's sad really. There is far too much evidence out there showing that the FBI was monitoring some of the hijackers every moves, then went to nab then and pentagon lawyers and top pentagon brass stepped in and prevented it. Why? The FBI was well within the laws to grab them and it would have been a very simple matter to do so. And last time I checked the CIA was not a watchdog agency to make sure the FBI followed the laws. That's what our courts were suppose to be for. Then you have some FBI agents having them and their families life threatened if they didn't back off. The pentagon didn't want the hijackers bothered, period. They wanted them to do whatever they had plans on doing here without interruption. And if you cannot see what is right in front of you, then your head is buried deep in the sand. Oh wait, do I get a tinfoil hat now? -------------------- "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
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: You really do have a reading comprehension problem, don't you? What is the common thread of links 1 through 8? Apart from the fact that half of them could be sheer bullshit, I mean. The commonality is that this information was not available to the US government. Re-read what I said about actionable intelligence. Maybe some of New York's Muslim community did have some advance warning. It's not an impossibility. But New York's Muslim community is not the US government. Do you not grasp that essential difference? Quote: That "Mossad" canard was debunked long ago. But let's pretend for the sake of argument that the Mossad did know all the details of the plan. The Mossad is not the US government. Do you not grasp that essential difference? Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Bullshit. I call you on that. Let's see some links to credible sources on that assertion. Quote: More bullshit. Links, please. Phred
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
-------------------- "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
| |||||||
niteowl GrandPaw Registered: 07/01/03 Posts: 16,291 Loc: |
| ||||||
Quote: Isn't it amazing how, credibility (like beauty) is in the eye of the beholder. Many times people have coughed up links, to back up their story, just to have you cry "That link has no credibility" --------------------
| |||||||
Clean the lense Registered: 05/11/03 Posts: 2,374 |
| ||||||
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Yes it is. The tinfoil hat brigade accept as credible anyone who knows how to make a post to the internet. As a prime example of this (I couldn't have arranged this more perfectly if I had set this up myself) -- look at Clean's post immediately above this one. Phred
| |||||||
niteowl GrandPaw Registered: 07/01/03 Posts: 16,291 Loc: |
| ||||||
So, please tell us, oh sifter of internet lies and deception, which sites are deemed worthy of your praise.
| |||||||
newuser1492 Registered: 06/12/03 Posts: 3,104 |
| ||||||
Quote: So why doesn't the government help reduce the likelihood of further aggressive actions against the US by ending its theft of my money?
| |||||||
SlapnutRob Toolhead Registered: 03/31/03 Posts: 520 Loc: Michigan Last seen: 14 years, 7 months |
| ||||||
I voted "other." I used to be more skeptical, but I now believe that the government was in fact behind it. I didn't vote the other option because I think saying "Bush and co." isn't accurate because Bush is a puppet. It should just be "and co."
Nobody should even be allowed to form an opinion on this until they either do some exhaustive research or watch either "9/11: In Plane Site" or "Loose Change." Google the latter and watch it now for free. It'll blow your mind. -------------------- Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
There has been plenty of debunking of both those pieces of claptrap in this forum.
Phred
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
i think its safe to say, whatever your view, the official explanation is less than adequate. i hope we can all agree on that.
-------------------- 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 |
| ||||||
What I find so amusing about all these "the government knew" soapboxers is the glaringly obvious contradiction of superiority complex on the one hand --
"Hey, the US government MUST have known, because let's face it -- we Americans are so all-knowing, so all-powerful, and just so invincible it's inconceivable some furriners could have punked us. There is no WAY they could have pulled that off without us being in on it." -- and the simultaneous derision of that same government on the other hand: "Those stumblebums and their puppetmasters couldn't pour piss out of a boot with the directions written on the sole." Sorry to burst your bubble, folks, but this time the black hats won. They did enough things right to pull off THE most spectacular piece of political theater in the history of mankind. The plan was brilliant in its conception, elegant in its simplicity, and virtually flawless in its execution. The psychological impact was devastating. It literally changed the course of history -- in a huge way. The only thing that could possibly have gone better for them was the timing. The original plan called for near-simultaneous impacts, but the delay in Flight 93's departure allowed the passengers on that flight to hear what was going on that day and throw a monkey wrench into things. Apart from that, however, the attack was flawless. Hard to imagine, really, how it could have been improved upon. This is why I have to shake my head at all the incredibly complex, elaborate, and convoluted conspiracy theories some people swallow whole -- the unnoticed planting of hundreds of explosive charges in two of the busiest buildings in the world, the spiriting away of an airliner and replacing it with a missile, then somehow sneaking in the flight recorders and bodies and engine parts and landing gear from that disappeared aircraft to make it look like it had actually hit the Pentagon -- the shooting down of flight 93 by military jets... Just why is it so hard to accept the fact that a bunch of fanatics pulled off something that is not particularly difficult to do -- the hijacking of a commercial airliner? There have been DOZENS of freaking hijackings over the years. The only difference is that this time they hijacked four at once rather than four in succession, and rather than force the pilots to fly them somewhere and land them, they flew them and "landed" them themselves. This isn't a particularly difficult feat, technically speaking. Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Afraid your hopes are dashed. We don't agree on that. What happened was pretty simple -- a gang of hijackers successfully hijacked some airliners. Certainly wasn't the first time. The official explanation is certainly perfectly adequate to explain what happened. The reason the hijackings weren't prevented is the same reason none of the other dozens of past hijackings were prevented either -- the perpetrators kept their plans secret enough long enough to pull it off. So the official explanation is adequate on that front, too. Phred
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
phred if you are going to keep argueing about the knowledge of the government beforehand, check out the link I posted on page 3 with timelines of information. Kids in newyork highschools knew that the towers were going to fall before they did but the gov. didnt? highly unlikely.
A student of a new york high school stood up in class, pointed out the window and told the teacher that building wont be standing next week. -------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
MushmanTheManic Stranger Registered: 04/21/05 Posts: 4,587 |
| ||||||
I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the IRA and FARC connection.
| |||||||
Annapurna1 liberal pussy Registered: 05/21/02 Posts: 5,646 Loc: innsmouth..MA |
| ||||||
i dont necessarily dispute the role of al-Q agents in the execution of the attacks..despite the fact that mohammed attas' passport appeared on nationwide TV.. in pristine condition.. a few minutes afterward...
the govt did..however..have at least a partial advance warning as the infamous PDB of 6 august 2001..nebulously entitled .."bin laden determined to strike in US"...a year earlier..the bush-administration-in-waiting published rebuilding americas' defenses..which contains the equally infamous "new pearl harbour" clause on p63 .. Quote: and no..phred..this doesnt come from any moonbat conspiracy theory sites..but straight from horses' mouth...it is also worth pointing out that the PDB lought above is the one released by bush&co and may or (prolly) may not be what bush actually received...in the latter case..the original was likely far more incriminating... so we know that by 6 august 2001..bush&co knew that an attack was coming..although not the specific details.. and we also know that they had a motive to LIHOP the attack.. they even said it themselves... i have been called a "moonbat" simply for voting LIHOP..and there are actually more MIHOP votes...but even though i voted LIHOP..i still believe that al-Q is simply an emmanuel goldstein front..in which case anything they do becomes a MIHOP...and even if al-Q isnt a front..any reasonable 9/11 investigation must first ask the qui bono? question...any jerkwater PD would do so..but when its the FBI..and their under the auspices of bush&co..and if bush&co did it..do the math... EDIT ..also of interest is stanley hiltons' lawsuit..which was dismissed not on lack of evidence..but because of the "sovereign immunity" of the defendants... -------------------- "anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"... Edited by Annapurna1 (06/20/06 11:35 PM)
| |||||||
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, 10 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, 17 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.
| |||||||
Annapurna1 liberal pussy Registered: 05/21/02 Posts: 5,646 Loc: innsmouth..MA |
| ||||||
Quote: i wouldnt put too much stock in a video purporting to be osama bin goldstein or whoever.. any fool with a camcorder could have made it...and that goes double for anything on faux news...and need i remind you that OBL used to work for the CIA too.. whose to say if hes' not still in the CIA??...so far..the only "smoking gun" ive seen behind bush&cos' open-and-shut version of 9/11 is the fact that it came out of their mouths..which IMAO is hardly a smoking gun... -------------------- "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 |
| ||||||
What none of you have shown yet is superior evidence of a conspiracy.
You say that there is a "massive body of circumstantial evidence" which supports a conspiracy. But isn't there just as massive a body of circumstantial evidence NOT supporting a conspiracy? If the Bush administration would actually sneak bombs INTO the WTC, or would willing cover up intelligence of the 9/11 attacks, or would manufacture the entire character of Osama Bin Laden... Why wouldn't they sneak WMD evidence into Iraq? A single warhead, missile plans, hell just a handful of fissile material. The US has TONS of the stuff, and we couldn't sneak just a tiny bit in post-invasion in order to support GWB's claims? Isn't the fact that we haven't caught Osama Bin Laden just as much circumstantial evidence of his existence as it is of the argument that he might not exist? If the President's approval rating is really as low as 30%, and we assume that Bin Laden is a fictional character, why don't they just say they've caught him in order to improve matters? And please don't claim that they're waiting until an election is closer, we had enough of those claims during the 2004 election, and they all turned out false. Given equal amounts of circumstantial evidence for and against all of the conspiracy theories, why believe in them? At the end of the day, they can no more be proven than the average religion. If we all believed in everything that could be proven using circumstantial evidence, why don't we all believe in most major religions? Why is the circumstantial evidence in favor of the conspiracy some how superior to the circumstantial evidence disproving the conspiracy? That question has never been answered. Show me how the conspiracy's circumstantial evidence is superior. PS - The analogy about being able to study microbes on mars and yet not find Bin Laden is a little silly. Mars is a huge planet and bacteria are everywhere, it would be very hard to miss. Furthermore, given that most of the conspiracy theories assume a certain amount of massive sophistication in our intelligence services (not in terms of technology, but in real terms, the ability to make contacts find sources of information, etc.) why is it wrong to assume that our enemies do not have similar levels of sophistication (i.e. the ability to find people who will hide them, cover their tracks, provide them with capital, et.c)
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Phred you are truly good at internet debate, I guess that's why you are a mod. You dig out something that has clearly been contradicted in my previous post and try to insinuate I didn't read my own link.
You point out. Quote: Did you read my link? What about this? Quote: So my link does state there is no electronic data or paper trail showing they knew of atta before 9/11. What it does show is the word of numerous active military personnel that worked on able danger that say they identified atta prior to 9/11. And I even showed you a reason why there is no data of able danger, did YOU even bother to read that? Well here it is again, why there is no electronic data left from able danger. Which showed they identified atta and other hijackers connections to terrorists before 9/11. Quote: And also Phred, you neglected to address my assertion based on facts, that the 9/11 commission lied and changed their story. Which makes anything else in their book suspect. I guess when the facts don't match your beliefs they are conveniently ignored. Oh yeah, and before you accuse me of ignoring your points. I will say I am not going by what Weldon said at a Heritage Foundation post 9/11 in 2002. I'm going by what members of the able danger team say, why don't you give that a try. Also don't try to claim they couldn't have done anything, because they were going to arrest them until they were blocked by bush administration and pentagon lawyers. Finding people with terrorist ties going to flight school is more than enough reason to arrest them prior to 9/11 and well within the laws of the time, had they not been obstructed. -------------------- "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
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
The reason you are not a good debater is you are unable to address the point being discussed.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that Shaffer and Weldon's claims are true -- that at one point Able Danger discovered that a suspected Al Qaeda operative (Atta) had entered the US on a visa. That doesn't change the fact that his whereabouts were unknown and that his reason for being in the US was also unknown. I strongly suggest you read the two links I included in a previous post to two previous threads on this subject from a couple years ago. Read through the threads, try to follow the arguments being made, and if you think you have come up with some "gotcha" you can spring on me, be my guest. Either post your gotcha here or reply directly to a post in the original thread(s), whichever is more convenient for you. Phred
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Amazing...simply amazing. I addressed both your points and countered them, and you claim I am not discussing the point? And when I refute the points you made, all you can do is tell me to read more links from long ago? You are the one who asked me to bring up a link to support my statement. I did, then you dig up something in my link that was clearly contradicted and try to pass it off as me not reading my own link. Then I point out specifically how it was contradicted and you ignore it and point me to older threads. No thanks. I addressed all points you made and all you can do is ignore them and point me elsewhere. I've been reading this forum for a long time and have done extensive research on this. They knew where atta was and what he was doing, his name was on list as student of the flight school in florida. It don't take a brain surgeon to see the govt was watching him and knew exactly where he was. And would have arrested him if not prevented by certain lawyers. I have made that perfectly clear here, now why don't you try reading some more links, but I forgot, you mind is already made up. And before you say my mind is made up also, I suggest you address the facts I posted instead of sidestepping them. -------------------- "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
| |||||||
Annapurna1 liberal pussy Registered: 05/21/02 Posts: 5,646 Loc: innsmouth..MA |
| ||||||
Quote: bush&co have been known to lie to us in the past (and this is well documented)...so naturally..ppl tend to be a bit skeptical..and this includes bush&cos' version of 9/11...even if theres no "real" evidence of a LIHOP/MIHOP conspiracy..bush&cos' own lack of credibility (let alone their stonewalling the investigation) necessarily lends the conspiracy theory more credence... Quote: the answer is a resounding no...and the fact that we havent caught OBL is more than just circumstantial evidence for him being an emmanuel goldstein ..if he did get caught..then bush&co would lose their bogeyman...its true that bush&co could have "captured" OBL in order to secure the 2004 election..but being as he could still do that for them without being caught.. and that they would still need him as bogeyman afterwards.. they didnt...what they did do was simply to procure another video of the bogeyman threatening to blow something up..3 days before the election.. and that was good enough... -------------------- "anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: I haven't shown any myself because I am not personally out to debate pieces of evidence. It seems that no matter what others have presented, it just gets brushed off anyway. Besides, I don't see two sides here. The poll is a gradient of possible truths. Does it end with the first option or stretch out somewhere up into the last option? I also see us all on the same side of being examiners of the 9/11 event. I also see us on the same side because we have all have had our lives effected and changed by it. Quote: Not really massive at all in support of option one. We have the ID on the hijackers and information about their affiliation with Al Queda, and Osama's position with that group. No one disputes this. We have evidence of what was destroyed here. No one disputes buildings, planes and lives were destroyed. After that, there is just a lot of information that anyone can take from and make of it what they will, our government included. Quote: Anna didn't say the character of Bin laden was manufactured, just that video tapes could have been, just like debunker's say most all UFO videotapes are hoaxes. It is easy to do. Anna reminded everyone who knew that Bin Laden use to be a member of the CIA. That is news to me and its quite disturbing at that. The controlled demolition of the buildings theory is something I only recently heard of. That one I am brushing off for now just because, it's to disgusting to accept on top of everything else. People were still in those buildings, alive and able to get out safely when they fell. I wonder myself why they didn't plant some evidence of WPDs in Iraq. It would be easy for them to do and who is to say, some may still not turn up. Even if it does in the future, at this point, who is going to believe what about where it came from anyway. The pro Bushers will see it as vindication and the down with Bushers will think he planted them for finding at a time when he needed such a trump card. Here is my current opinion on that. Its plausible he was cooking up WPDs. Looks even more suspicious that he was because he wouldn't let the inspectors come in. If he had nothing to hide, what was his problem with that? However, if he did have something of mass destruction capabilities, the U.S. gave him plenty of time to have them removed from his country and stored elsewhere. What was that? For years we warned him that we would come in and remove any WPD with or without his co-operation. Our military is so fucking dumb, pardon my french, the way we give advanced warnings of invasions. And I have yet to understand this rule that says we can't assassinate national leaders. What is that? We can kill tens of thousands of civilians and soldiers trying to apprehend them, but we can't assasinate their leader in one clean shot and spare the lives of others? That asinine rule alone should suggest to everyone that the powerful global leaders are all in cahoots. Quote: Looks like you mixed up part of my reply and Anna's. I never said Bin laden was a fictional character. He may be a bought and paid for human being though. And if he is, his freedom and safety is also being protected and his capture won't be used as trump card ever. Wouldn't matter if he was found at this point because I think few people would believe it was really him anyway. They'd claim, "look alike dupe" or "clone", or say that he was just making guest appearances in court and behind bars for the cameras to keep the kiddies happy and then was let free "in cognito" when the cameras were turned off. The majority of people have lost to much trust in our government at this point to fully believe anything they tell us anymore. Thats either because of how they change stories as it serves them too or just appear to be bumbling fumbling idiots or both. Quote: What I personally believe is that we have not been given the whole truth by our government. That declassified document that exclusive shared about our government conspiring to make up BS reasons to justify invading Cuba serves as enough evidence to know we are lied too. Have you seen "The Fog of War" the biography documentary interview of Robert S McNamara, former U.S. Defence Secretary? He confirmed government cover ups and the public being told lies by our government. Doesn't mean that is what has happened with 9/11. All it means, is that I have no reason to trust what they say is the truth. They have proven their ethics of withholding truth from us, often to cover their own asses, and they have proven that giving us the whole and full truth of all they do with our tax dollars is not their top priority, if its any priority at all. I am skeptical of what they present to us and open to considering information presented from other sources. I never said circumstantial evidence is proof enough. I have just said that it is suggestive of other possibilities to be considered. Quote: It wouldn't be if the government had a track record of being completely honest with us. It's not even that it is superior. It is just additional information dug up that the government didn't formally present and put on the table for our review. Quote: It's not wrong to assume that anymore then it is correct to assume. Our government has that capability as well. What is assumed either way is who "at what top" is protecting his whereabouts. I doubt the fact that we don't have him in custody yet, considering all of our resources and means, mostly because of how his family was ushered out of the country to their safety right after 9/11. What was that all about? If we knew it was Bin laden heading Al Queda and the Hi jackers were members, why did Bush fly his family out of here, when all air traffic was grounded to boot? Why were they not kept as prisoners of wars, hostages to be interrogated or bargained with? This man they claim to have orchestrated the National and Global Horror of 9/11 had immediate family members right here and we gave them safe passage out of the country while all other flights were grounded? Its not that the additional information is superior to the simple version of the story presented by the government. Its that the simple story they presented leaves a lot of room for skepticism and further critical questioning. Eco, for the governments simple story to be so simple minded, our government leaders would then also have to be truly simple minded. And if they are, how did they get into office? Some master mind must be pulling puppet strings on them then. If they aren't, then, the simple story must actually be more complex then it appears to be. Edited by gettinjiggywithit (06/21/06 07:57 PM)
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: You didn't address my points. It appears you still haven't even comprehended what my point is. It is thus no surprise you cannot counter it. Here it is -- one more time -- from what we know today there is no way the attacks could have been stopped (in the sense of foiling the plot) absent a massive and prolonged violation of civil liberties. The reason this is so is that there wasn't enough actionable intelligence to do so. Quote: Only in order to save myself typing them all up all over again. You may be new to the party, but those who have been here longer have covered this already. There is nothing anyone has brought up in this thread that hasn't been brought up and addressed before. I could continue repeating what I have said already, but there is no point wasting keystrokes because you seem honestly incapable of comprehending what you read. You have my sympathies on that, but there's nothing I can do to ameliorate your condition. The simple fact remains that even if everything Weldon and Shaffer and Philpott says is 100% true (and it CAN'T all be true because some of their statements contradict other of their statements) it still amounts to nothing more than the fact that some military intelligence types knew that a suspected Al Qaeda operative had entered the United States on a visa. They didn't know where he was, they didn't know what he was planning (if anything), they didn't know who else was involved. The most they could possibly have done under existing law at that time -- if they could have found him in the first place -- was to pick him up for questioning on some trumped up charge and then possibly deport him. Would that have stopped the attacks or just delayed them long enough for someone else to step into Atta's role? Or would the Jihadis have isntead gone ahead with three airplanes rather than four? Or would Atta have simply grabbed another set of identity papers and re-entered the US across the Mexican border and carried on? You weep and wail that I disregard your Wikipedia link. But at least I read it -- even though I am thoroughly familiar with the Able Danger story because I have been following it closely since it broke. There was exactly ZERO in the Wiki summary (and it's a pretty complete summary as far as I can tell) that I hadn't seen already. Yet you feel no need to check MY links because you just KNOW your version of things is right. Why don't you extend me the same courtesy I extend to you? The obvious answer is because you know you'll be left with your jaw hanging open, twisting in the breeze. That is of course your right. It's a free country and you are as free to remain ignorant as anyone else is. But don't try to say I'm dodging an issue while you yourself are dodging so fast and furious you're faking yourself out of your own Nikes. Phred
| |||||||
faslimy Dead Man Registered: 04/04/04 Posts: 3,436 Last seen: 8 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
the POINT is.. blah blah blah
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
You didn't address my points. It appears you still haven't even comprehended what my point is. It is thus no surprise you cannot counter it.
Bullshit, I addressed both your points. You can slither all you like I will repost it for you. You said this. 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: To which I clearly showed you, the main reason there is no data to be found is because Major Eric Kleinsmith was ordered to delete it. Now I ask you again oh mighty Phred who claims to not be a republican, if I have showed you why there is no data when you claimed "there is no data" how did I not address the point? Am I suppose to ignore the words of numerous career military officers because there is no govt approved data to back them up? Maybe that flys in your world, but not in mine. Then you quote my link again. 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. You even concede in your own words that you made TWO points or reasons. To which I replied to both. Then you come back and say I didn't reply to them? That is slimy debate tactics, but I expect nothing less from one such as yourself. 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. Total bullshit. I have showed you that 2 other employees of the govt, one military, one civilian have confirmed Shaffer's story. How is that contradictory? And Weldon giving a speech in 2002 in no way refutes the point made that they had clearly identified some of the hijackers prior to 9/11. While you can bury your head in the sand normal people can see that there doesn't have to be documents in our hands to know that this is a fact. You wont have active military officers coming forward making up stories...but who knows, if you buy the 9/11 commission's report word for word you are apt to believe anything. One amusing thing to note. You claim or use as reasoning that it would have been a violation of civil liberties to move in and arrest the terrorist cell prior to 9/11. News flash, but you have to be a citizen to have civil liberties in this country or that was the case in 2000 anyhow. They would not have violated one single law to detain anyone connected to terrorists here on a visa and deport them back to their own countries. That would have been the least they could do, but they were obstructed. And just because you "think" you know why they were obstructed does not mean shit. They could have any number of reasons why they didn't want atta detained, it only takes one with an open mind to realize something as simple as that. I have also read this entire interview http://www.gsnmagazine.com/sep_0 Quote: You may have read my link, but you sidestepped every point I made. Which is why I really don't feel like digging through your crap. But I took a look-see anyway. "Transcript: Bin Laden determined to strike in US" is not able danger. Therefore is not tied directly to my points. The basic assertion that pentagon lawyers obstructed the able danger team to work with the FBI to apprehend some of the 9/11 hijackers here on a visa and at the very least deport their asses. This lends credence to the idea that certain people had a vested interest in leaving foreigners with terrorist ties unfettered freedom in our country. They don't have to have a air tight court case to deport someone here on a visa, they can kick them out at a whim from what I understand. But whatever, I'm not going to beat the dead horse anymore. Feel free to pick me apart and spew some more public relation propaganda for the govt, I do hope you are being paid for your time -------------------- "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, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:If schoolkids go about telling their teachers, it means the info was all over the Middle-Eastern community in Manhattan, I'm willing to qualify that. Not Manhattan, but at least its Middle-Eastern community. From one of my previous links: Quote:Also, it was not "some foreknowledge of some kind of impending attack", it was very specific. If you had followed my links, you would know: Quote:That's slightly more specific than "something bad is going to happen". In early September, security was heightened in Manhattan and at the WTC specifically. In such a situation, rumours are taken seriously and acted upon, out of sheer precaution. With a rumour this widespread and this specific (WTC towers, next week), the least you can do is keep security heightened for a while and have jets ready for intervention. Hell, at the Genoa summit, just about six weeks earlier, US security services imported anti-aerial defense missiles to protect George W. against a bunch of antiglobalists. In New York, with specific info around on an impending Islamist attack, jets take ages to get on the spot. I wonder if they really take antiglobalists more seriously than Islamists. About the Mossad story: read this and this . Quote: Quote:Looks like some details got lost along the way. Looks like they were not browsing the web at the time of the first impact. Of course, admitting there was widespread prior knowledge would be a huge embarrasment to all intelligence and police services, and would raise even more suspicion. So "no evidence of any prior knowledge whatsoever" has become part of the official story. Too bad it's contradicted by so many facts and reports.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
RosettaStoned writes:
Quote: LOL. There is no point trying to have an intelligent discussion with someone who can't read. You still can't even comprehend what my point is. Your whole Able Danger sideshow does exactly nothing to address my point -- that there was not enough actionable intelligence available to the US government prior to 9/11 to have foiled the plot absent a massive and prolonged violation of civil liberties. Read you own damned Wikipedia post and you will see that even if -- through the Able Danger program -- Mohammed Atta had been identified as being connected to those who pulled off the 93 WTC bombing, and even if it was known that he had entered the United States, it didn't provide ANY information as to where he was or what he was up to. Here's your mission: go to your Wikipedia article (which I have already said is a VERY good one -- probably the most complete summary I have seen anywhere) and cut and paste here the part where it says Able Danger had discovered where he was. Then cut and paste the part where it says Able Danger had identified what he was up to. Carefully re-read the entire summary then carefully check out all the links in the summary and read them, too. You will find the mission I have assigned you is impossible to fulfill because of the simple fact that Able Danger produced exactly zero ACTIONABLE intelligence on Atta. All it did was tell the military intelligence guys running the program that a guy associated with the 93 WTC bombers was in the US. Quote: Again, you don't grasp my point. I am not saying the information was never deleted. What I AM saying is that since there IS no longer any documentary evidence, we are left to rely strictly on the memories of those who say they saw some charts with some names on them. For what it's worth, I personally believe they DID see some charts with some names on them. For all I know, they DID remember the names correctly. But the fact of the matter is that the FBI never got those charts because the DoD lawyers had read the FISA guidelines and recognized that Mohammed Atta (at least, and perhaps all the other names as well for all we know) met the definition of "US person" as defined by the Act. From your gsn link to Shaffer's interview -- Quote: And even if the FBI HAD received that information, what did it tell them? Nothing more than: 1) Atta and some others had visited enough of the same mosques close enough to the same times as some people suspected of being involved in Al Qaeda for data analysts working for the DoD to believe they were likely Al Qaeda members too, and 2) Atta had entered the US on a visa due to expire either September 8, 2001 or July 9, 2001, depending on which INS record is applicable. It is a VERY big stretch to go from those two bits of information to saying that the FBI would have located these people, arrested them all (on what charges? Attending mosques?) and deported them all once their visas ran out. Note that Atta (and perhaps all of them for all we know) couldn't have been deported prior to September 8 (or maybe July 9) anyway. And I am sure you realize that you can't detain someone for months while you wait for his visa to run out. If there is no charges filed against a US person, he must be released. And again -- to repeat myself, although I don't know why I bother, since you will ignore this just as you did the last time, even IF the FBI decided to illegally kick them out of the country before their visas had expired, it is no big trick to re-enter the US under a different identity. Tens of thousands of people cross the Mexican border on a daily basis. Or perhaps they don't bother to re-enter and the plan proceeds with three airplanes rather than four. Finally, you will note that even Shaffer didn't realize the significance of what they had discovered until a couple of weeks after 9/11 when a colleague who had held onto one of the charts noticed that Atta's name was on it. I refer you to your own link from gsn once again -- Quote: RosettaStoned writes: Quote: See above. If you are in the US on a valid visa (i.e., it cannot be shown that you provided false information on the application, such as concealing a criminal record or whatever) then you meet the definition of a "US person" as defined by FISA and other legislation, and cannot be deported without cause. The ONLY connection -- as Shaffer explains in the interview from the gsn link you provided us -- between Atta and terrorism is that he was purported to have attended some of the same mosques previously identified Al Qaeda members did. So what cause would be given to immigration authorities to support his deportation? Besides, as you would know if you ever got around to reading the links to past discussion on this forum, when I refer to the massive and ongoing violation of civl liberties, I refer not just to the violation of Atta's civil liberties, but of the US populace as a whole. I won't lay them all out here AGAIN since I have already done so in the links you ignore. Quote: The only assertion you have made so far is that if the Able Danger analysts had been able to set up a meeting with the FBI, the plot could have been foiled without a massive and continuing violation of civil liberties. Far from sidestepping your assertion I have addressed it exhaustively. Quote: Exactly my point. The laws in place at the time (and remember, this is all taking place before the passing of the Patriot Act) obstructed the sharing of this kind of information between intelligence agencies. Your unfounded supposition is that the DoD lawyers were instructed by their superiors to invent a reason to prevent the Able Danger team from passing on their discoveries to the FBI. It never occurs to you that the lawyers were correctly interpreting the legislation as it was written. Good grief, dude, look up some of the threads on the NSA surveillance program! Even today, almost five years past the attacks, there are politicians trying to argue the exact same interpretation of FISA and "US persons" and the illegitimacy of ever actually DOING anything with intel gathered from open source data mining. Quote: This has nothing to do with government propaganda and everything to do with looking at facts. As a dyed-in-the-wool Laissez-faire Capitalist I have no love of government in general, the US government in particular, and especially the US government under Clinton's control --which of course it was the time at which the DoD lawyers ruled the info couldn't be passed on to the FBI. That doesn't mean I give them shit without reason. The simple truth here is that the Jihadis outwitted the US government this time. There's nothing more sinister going on than that. The very freedom and openness of the US made it a not particularly difficult thing to pull off. It would have been a hundred times more difficult to accomplish this mission in most other countries. As an aside, I find it instructive you subscribe to the standard Leftie meme that anyone who shows their gibberish to be the claptrap it really is must be a government agent. I don't live in the US and never have. I'm not a US citizen and never was, nor ever will be. I am, however, capable of applying logic and reason to facts. You have my deepest sympathy on your inability to do the same. Phred
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
again Phred sidesteps the latest post with some very interesting information.
-------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
Economist in training Registered: 10/11/05 Posts: 1,285 Last seen: 16 years, 6 months |
| ||||||
What is he supposed to say to Aldous' post?
Clearly Aldous has unrealistic expectations of what "normal government behavior" should be, and he's determined to jump to the conclusion of "OMG conspiracy!" when his own unrealistic expectations are not met. Look at the quotes he posted: Someone, somewhere in the Arab community says "Those Towers won't be there next week," with no mention of the method of destruction. Then there are people found cheering in a park within view of the WTC, whose identity (yes I checked several news stories) becomes slightly muddled from that point forward. They are reported to be everything from Israeli spies to members of the 9/11 attack team. But does it matter? What could police do at the report of "People in a park were cheering when one of the towers was hit!" to stop the attack on the second tower? More concretely, what part of the statement "Those towers won't be there next week!" would cause anyone to think to scramble jets? Prior to 2001 there was no reason to expect any type of aerial assault. Al Queda doesn't have an aerial attack fleet, nor did they have a known launching site for such an attack. Furthermore, previous attacks on the WTC had all been based upon bombs put in the basement of the building, something that you DO NOT respond to with jets. But no, Aldous clearly expected US Law Enforcement to exercise what I can only describe as "clairvoyance" and demand that the Feds get military jets involved prior to any evidence of what the actual plot was beyond "The WTC might be targetted with something". And then, when it turned out that *surprise surprise* US Law Enforcement can't actually see the future, the only obvious answer? "OMG Conspiracy!" You will forgive me if I think the pro-conspiracy theorists in this thread have yet to prove anything.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Aldous writes:
Quote: It may have been. So what? What do you suggest the government should have done? Rounded up members of Manhattan's Middle Eastern community and beat them with phone books till they cracked? Quote: Why would they not be standing? You are one of the most passionate advocates of the theory that the planes didn't destroy the towers, but bombs did. Let's assume the authorities followed the same train of thought -- that there may be a terrorist plot underway to repeat the 93 WTC bombing, but to get it RIGHT this time. They would then have been on the lookout for bombers and bombs. They didn't find any because there weren't any to find. The plot had to do with airplanes instead. Quote: Lord give me strength. Look, I have already told you that even if these guys were all Mossad members, and even if the Mossad knew exactly what was going to happen ahead of time, that doesn't mean the US government knew it. It is not impossible that Israeli intelligence figured out what was going on and decided it would be helpful to Israel's interests to have the US get more actively involved in killing Islamic terrorists, so they kept their knowledge to themselves. Quote: I have covered this in the previous threads I linked in an earlier post. Of course in hindsight, with a GIGANTIC national effort focused on analyzing something which has already occurred, lots of things which at the time seemed either insignificant or no different from the usual vague white noise which constitutes quotidian intelligence work will suddenly snap into focus. I have never claimed there was no prior knowledge of rumors and reports that something was up, nor did the 9/11 Commission. What I am saying is that there was not enough ACTIONABLE intelligence to foil the plot absent massive and prolonged violation of civil liberties. Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
David_vs_Goliath whines:
Quote: Patience, grasshopper, patience. Though I am a pretty fast typist, I do actually compose my replies one at a time. I replied to the posts in the order in which I read them. My bad. Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
RosettaStoned complains:
Quote: Actually, Rosetta, no you haven't. Neither one of them. Instead you went off on a tangent about Able Danger, which has no relation whatsoever to the claims you made. I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it amusing that with all your weeping and wailing over my supposedly not responding to your irrelevant points, you STILL haven't gotten back to me on the very first things I called you on way back on the first page of the thread, specifically your claims that -- "There is far too much evidence out there showing that the FBI was monitoring some of the hijackers every moves, then went to nab then and pentagon lawyers and top pentagon brass stepped in and prevented it" When you get around to it, please try to find some time to provide us a link showing the FBI was monitoring "every move" of some of the hijackers. Then please provide us a link showing they had decided to arrest them. Then please provide us a link showing where the FBI falls under the jurisdiction of the military, hence would halt these planned arrests because some military personnel nixed it. While you're at it, you might as well also provide us the links supporting your assertion that some FBI agents had their lives and the lives of their families threatened (by whom?) if they didn't back off. Thanks. Phred
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
WOW
"Prior to 2001 there was no reason to expect any type of aerial assault. Al Queda doesn't have an aerial attack fleet, nor did they have a known launching site for such an attack. Furthermore, previous attacks on the WTC had all been based upon bombs put in the basement of the building, something that you DO NOT respond to with jets." Prior to 2001 there was no reason to expect any aerial assualt? I'm sorry but you are dead wrong. Clearly you didn't look at my link a few pages back about the timeline leading up to 9/11. Quote:1995...... Quote: Quote: Quote:Notice the dates on these, more than a year before the attack. and to say that there was no reason to expect an aerial attack is rediculous. Just wait it gets better. Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: no mention of aerial attack..... Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: -------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: There is so much more to be read this is just snips of what I thought was important for what is being discussed on the board right now. Quote: September 29, 2001: $2.5 Million in Airline Options Go Unclaimed $2.5 million in put options on American Airlines and United Airlines are reported unclaimed. This is likely the result of the suspension in trading on the New York Stock Exchange after the attacks which gave the SEC time to be waiting if the owners showed up to redeem their put options placed the week before the 9/11 attacks. [San Francisco Chronicle, 9/29/2001] An unbelievable wealth of information is available at the site and if you are really interested in discussing this subject I suggest reading more. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project -------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Nothing Phred???
-------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:Let's assume you pretend you misunderstood my point, so you don't come across as too stupid. Of course, my point concerning the "dancing Israelis" had nothing to do with preventing any attack, it had to do with showing the Mossad had advance knowledge of the precise details of the attacks. Quote:This has adequately been addressed by David_vs_Goliath. Congrats, we have a high quality recruit here (with lots of time!).
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:Ah, that urge for torture... So predictible. There are other, less violent and more effective means. No, I only suggest they should have done what any domestic intelligence service routinely does: monitoring sensitive communities using informants. If average mosque-goers and schoolkids knew the details, surely they were available to FBI informants. Quote:Yeah, well they surely expected Al-Qaeda airstrikes six weeks earlier in Genoa to kill Bush. But that was a plot they did not want to succeed, so they took their air defense missiles along from home.. If they knew a terrorist plot was underway and wanted to prevent it, they would logically have covered all options. They did in Genoa, they did not in New York. Maybe they had forgotten their missiles in Genoa? Quote:Granted! Quote:Like I said before, that would be perfectly plausible absent all those other pieces of evidence indicating the US stubbornly looked the other way. And in that case, I wonder why the Mossad would have warned the US at all, as they did.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Davie writes:
Quote: Whuh? "Nothing" what, Davie? I responded to Aldous. Isn't that what you were giving me shit for earlier? What more do you want? Phred
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Aldous writes:
Quote: See, that is the essential difference between the tinfoil hat brigade and people who take an unbiased look at actual facts without a particular agenda they need to prove. You ascribe godlike powers to the US government -- for no discernible reason and against pretty much all available historical evidence -- by assuming: 1) the FBI has informants everywhere 2) these informants were privy to actionable intelligence prior to the attack 3) these informants were just dying to come forward with this intelligence Quote: Once again we see the standard tinfoil hat brigade line of "argument". Throw out a bunch of chaff, then when each piece of chaff is shown to be worthless, claim the amount of worthless chaff they provide proves that the chaff isn't worthless at all. "Well... I admit that Point A turns out to be bogus, and Point B turns out to be fake, and Point C was found out after the attack, and Point D was too vague to do anything about and Point E was a misinterpretation by Alex Jones after all, and Point F could have turned out to be true, if only things were a little different... but hey! I came up with SIX different things! That's gotta count for something, man." Phred
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:I realize you're dying for this kind of admissions, but they are still to be made by your friends of the brigade. And, lacking sufficient grounds, I doubt they will be.
| |||||||
Clean the lense Registered: 05/11/03 Posts: 2,374 |
| ||||||
Quote:
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Well phred if you are going to make a statement like this mabey if you would have read my post from this morning you are totally contradicting everything I said. The government does have sources everywhere they were just to arrogant to listen to them. If you would just go to this site and read all this information (none of it written by the tin-hats, it is all collected from various news sources, magazines, and congresional meetings). You would then realize how much information the government had before the attacks on 9/11. There are 258 articles associated with warning signs of the attack dating years back before the attack. I don't want to fight I just want to hear what you have to say about this. -------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: That would be because everything you said was beside the point. Quote: Actually, no they don't. Quote: And once again I must point out to yet another newcomer that just because you are late to the party doesn't mean we all are. I've been to that site before, many times. It's quite extensive. It is an excellent resource as far as it goes. But a careful reading of what is listed there supports my point perfectly. There was not enough actionable intelligence available to the US government prior to September 11, 2001 to have foiled the plot absent a massive and prolonged violation of civil liberties. A "warning sign" is not actionable intelligence. You apparently have difficulty grasping what the world was like pre-9/11 -- what the political and cultural reality of the September 10 world was. That's okay -- you are young and cannot be expected to remember what things were like then. Fuck this. I'm tired of writing and re-writing the same stuff every few months to satisfy n00bs to lazy to look into past posts -- even when the links to those posts are handed to them on a silver platter. I'm going to bump the threads now. Phred
| |||||||
MasFina Snow Shredder Registered: 05/08/06 Posts: 788 Loc: Mountains |
| ||||||
http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/commission/report.html#omissions
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/binladinvideo.html http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/passport.html http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/routes.html http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/140605tenquestions.htm http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html Just some random stuff. I would suggest researching the 911 research site for several hours and then telling me that the gov had no part in 9/11. -------------------- A Good Substrate: Poo With Extras Good Liquid Culture, Step by Step Timer Modification PM me if you are interested in buying 140ml syringes. $6 each + $7 shipping Edited by MasFina (06/22/06 08:00 PM)
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
It's strange that no-one would react to Clean's posts. This is the second one about the physical evidence of thermate. For me, the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming, but it remains circumstantial and thus debatable for people like Phred, which is perfectly OK.
This one, however, is physical and material. So Phred, here's your mission. Explain away the presence of large quantities of molten iron underneath the rubble of the 3 WTC towers, up to six weeks after 9/11, not forgetting the traces of other metals and of sulfur are completely consistent with thermate, and that the presence of molten iron is completely inconsistent with a plain kerosene or office fire, or any building fire for that matter, no matter how hot. Also, where does the iron come from in a steel buidling? Next, show me a link to the official explanations, if any, for these pools of molten metal, and show me where the successive investigations analyzed the chemical composition of said metal, like they surely must have routinely done in the frame of their investigations. If you can't find any explanation or analysis, explain why. Next, absent any alternative explanation, maybe you can have a shot at a personal explanation of the incredible temperatures and the significant presence of iron on the premises. Next, absent a personal alternative explanation, explain how the presence of thermate fits into the official story. Explain where and when the thermate was set up by Atta and his crew, or how it got to an outer corner column if they carried it with them in the planes. Don't forget to explain how the thermate got into building 7. I'm looking forward to see your rigourous logic applied to this tricky question, I'm sure you'll clear things up. Remember, we even need more rigor here, this is about material, not circumstantial evidence. Thank you Edited by Aldous (06/24/06 05:09 AM)
| |||||||
Silversoul Rhizome Registered: 01/01/05 Posts: 23,576 Loc: The Barricades |
| ||||||
I know who's really behind 9/11.
--------------------
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Quote: There was enough intelligence that the able danger team was going to move with the fbi to attack the "body" of al queada in the us, until the pentagon lawyers moved in and prevented their efforts. If there was no actionable intelligence then the able danger team would have never tried to get the fbi involved. The reasons for the lawyers preventing that and who exactly was leading those lawyers is not known. And also the ultimate decision as to who called the halt to able danger moving with the fbi to break up these cells is not known. Most likely someone high up at the DoD. Neither you nor I know the exact reasoning, and since we don't you can speculate as to their high moral fiber being incapable of any such involvement with 9/11. While I can look around me, to the very war they are waging on innocents in my country for this sham they call a war on drugs, how they are hoarding wealth while fucking the middle class people and know they they have no moral fiber whatsoever and are capable of anything to further their own ends. Under that light, I find it quite within the realm of possibility, that they used lawyers to obstruct able danger from caring out it's mission so that the terrorists could carry out theirs. (Even if they didn't know exactly what the hijackers mission was) And mind you, I said with in the realm of possibility, which if you read things like PNAC, the realm of possibility is very large indeed. Phred you need to take a good look at the poll here. Quote: You are the minority. So no matter how superior you may feel in your ability to tote the party line so high and mighty for us all to see, most of the people here don't buy it. How does that make you feel? It brings a smile to my face -------------------- "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
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Oh, you mean you saw that one video where osama allegedly confesses to the attacks? Well, look closer. Who can guess which is the real osama, and which is the osama that showed up on that video? If that's not a smoking gun! http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html Quote: The real question is, if it really was the government that did it, would you want to know? If you want some very good video footage, all you needed to do was watch TV that morning. Go on google video and check out "9/11 Revisited", its free. I find this to be the best documentary out there concerning 9/11. Its basically a compilation of what the mainstream media reporters where filming and saying when they were on the spot at pre-ground zero. There's more than an hour of footage where you hear eyewitness reports of explosions in the towers, as well as the reporters saying they were hearing bombs themselves. Check it out. But the next day everyone forgot about all this, even about wtc7, all the mentions of explosions were never heard of again in the media. --------------------
| |||||||
Seuss Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 1 month, 9 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Yet another example of the tinfoil hat brigade falling for fallacious evidence. This is a non-scientific poll conducted across a very small, and very biased population. It is 100% meaningless in a scientific sense. Using this poll for anything other than entertainment is a gross error. -------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
I'm not a fan of polls, but if you think a poll conducted in a scientific way on a large sample of average population can be used for other purposes than entertainment, have a look at this one.
Quote: In my view, however, truth doesn't have anything to do with numbers or with people's beliefs. One can be right alone against a wrong majority. Polls mean nothing in this respect. The one in this thread is just an indication of the views of people on this forum. And I think Phred is used to feeling lonely. Maybe he even likes it.
| |||||||
Clean the lense Registered: 05/11/03 Posts: 2,374 |
| ||||||
It's quite convenient to just ignore evidence that doesn't fit with one's belief system...
The 9-11 commission report completely ignored the fact that WTC 1 and 2 had 47 core support columns running from bottom to top. They assert simply that "the interior core of the [Twin Towers] was a hollow steel shaft, in which the elevators and stairwells were grouped." The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) conceals the controlled demolition of the towers.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: I can't believe I only became aware of this in the last few months. Indeed, people in the sub levels said explosions went off down there and turned rooms in the sub levels to rubble and that there was lots of white smoke, disintigrated hydrolic equipment, collapsing walls and injuries from them. Interesting that the owner of WTC 7 is said to have said that he made the decision to pull (demolish) his building that day. Is it true that he received a little over 8 hundred million, from his insurance companay, when the cost to rebuild it was only around 300 million and that he profited 5 hundred million? That question aside, who placed and set the bombs in the WTC 1 and 2? Al Queda could've done that. I watched the interview of the project manager for the construction of the WTC taken years before 9/11, (he died in it). He said those buildings were designed to take multiple hits from even larger planes and not fall. So, I'm thinking, if one wanted them to fall, they would have to use a thermite demolition. Then I ask, why bother with the planes? Well, it seems they served as a HUGE distraction causing tremendous chaos and panic. Whatever was happening on the sub levels seems to have gotten next to no attention, people were just scrambling to get out and those going in to help were going in to put fires out at the plane impact levels and getting people down and out from the higher floors. The government becomes suspect because like you said exclusive, where are their investigations and statements about the sub level explosions? It does appear that they have been swept under the rug. Why? If they had no hand in at least allowing for any of this to happen, why wasn't the investigation into that being reported back to us by the administration? Maybe it was and I just never caught any of it. What is the official explanation for the sub level explosions by the administration? Anyone have links to those? I'd like to review them as well. On a final note, I am curious if this "tin foil hat" ad hominem works on anyone anymore to get them to shut up out of fear they won't be accepted as being "normal"? Last time I checked, the norm was the average. Polls here and elsewhere show that the average norm, doesn't by the official story. Calling everyone internationally wide, who doesn't buy the official story from the White House administration, a paranoid schizophrenic is highly speculative and a gross misjudgment without any scientific research done to determine this sweeping diagnosis of the majority of poll takers to be a fact. Aren't the people using that tin foil phrase against others making arm chair clinical psychological diagnosis without any medical evidence for them? In S&P, the best debaters say that only when people run out of arguments and good points and feel they are loosing a debate, do they resort to the ad hominem attack. If some of you feel so confident about the evidence supporting the official story from the administration, and your ability to counter all objections to it raised, you shouldn't have to resort to ad homonyms in the debates. The two people using them in here, where they are against the rules are a mod and an admin as well. It's okay. We understand it if you don't have legitimate counter arguments to explain all of the circumstatial evidence, agaisnt the official story away. We don't either and that's why we don't buy the offcial story from the White House Adminstration. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
RosettaStoned writes:
Quote: If you had read the interview with Shaffer you would know that all they had was a correlation between the visits to mosques members of Al Qaeda made and Atta and some others made. The Able Danger team interpreted (correctly, as it eventually turns out) this correlation as evidence that Atta was also an Al Qaeda member, and decided to pass this information on to the FBI so the FBI could investigate further. *** As a side note, observe that this cuts the feet out from under those tinfoil hat brigade members who insist to this day that it was not an Al Qaeda operation. But let's not go into that now. *** The problem was that at the time the Able Danger analysts wanted to pass the information on to other agencies, Atta (and perhaps all the others as well) definitely met the definition of a "US person" as described in FISA and other pieces of relevant legislation. The DoD lawyers ruled (perhaps correctly, perhaps incorrectly) that information developed through the Able Danger program could not be passed on to other investigatory bodies (i.e. the FBI) without violating the FISA protections applicable to "US persons". Your take on their decision is they made no reference to existing legislation -- they were told to nix the meeting no matter what. You have no evidence this was the case, you just assume this was so. Why do you assume this was so? Oh... never mind. I see you answered that later on -- it's because of "...the very war they are waging on innocents in my country for this sham they call a war on drugs, how they are hoarding wealth while fucking the middle class people and know they they have no moral fiber whatsoever and are capable of anything to further their own ends." Uh huh. Well, I guess if they are that reptilian they would have no qualms about letting Jihadis wipe out the stockbrokers in New York who managed their money and enabled them to hoard wealth and fuck the middle class. And they would certainly have no compunction about letting Jihadis wipe out ther colleagues in the Pentagon and the Capitol and the White House while they were at it. I mean hey... they are so deluded by their own sense of all-powerfulness they just figured they could continue fucking over people even after the government they manipulated from behind the scenes had been wiped out. So even though they believe they are evil geniuses, it turns out they are actually just evil morons. That's a relief. Just for the sake of argument, though, let's run with your assumption and see where we end up. Why would the higher-highers at the Pentagon (and possibly those at even higher levels of government who were giving the Pentagon crowd their marching orders) not want the FBI sicced on Atta and the others? If we go with either the LIHOP or MIHOP crowd, we would have to say it's because even at that early stage -- while Clinton was still president -- the higher-highers at the Pentagon already knew Atta and his buddies were planning a major attack, and they wanted the attack to go forward, presumably so they could get to play soldier by invading first Afghanistan, then a couple years later, Iraq. This necessarily means that even at such an early stage, there were already dozens of people in on the conspiracy. And all those people have managed to keep it a secret to this day. No leaks. Not even one. It also necessarily means that even at such an early stage, Al Qaeda's security had been compromised, and someone in the organization had leaked the plans to either the Americans or to American agents. It also necessarily means the Pentagon higher-highers knew for quite some time enough of the specifics of the plan to make sure they themselves were nowhere near the Pentagon on D-day. Or in Manhattan, or in the Capitol or in the White House. This necesarily means that very early on, Al Qaeda had decided on the date of the attack and the targets of the attack. Either that or it means the mole in Al Qaeda -- a VERY highly-placed mole at that -- was able to update the American government (even after the change in presidencies) on any changes in the plan as it developed. Now... is any of the above impossible? No, it is not impossible. In human affairs almost anything is possible. But it is improbable in the extreme. And I tend not to believe improbable things without compelling reasons to do so. In nearly five years of discussion of this event, no one has presented compelling reasons to believe that dozens (at the least) of career officers in the US military: a) -- are all inhuman enough to condemn thousands of their fellow Americans -- including colleagues they have known for their entire careers and the very politicians they manipulated to keep themselves in power -- to death just so they could fight a couple of real wars rather than boring old military exercises. b) -- are capable of keeping a conspiracy of this size, spanning a couple of years, completely silent for another five years after the fact with no leaks and no defectors and no slip-ups. Not even a single one of them babbling in drunken remorse, or converting to Born Again Christianity and making a tearful confession, or committing suicide after leaving note spilling the beans. Not one. c) -- have the guts to place themselves in such a precarious position in the first place. The consequences to them personally if their part is ever revealed are hideous beyond imagining. They would literally be ripped limb from limb by a lynch mob. And this also necessarily means that Al Qaeda didn't know (and do not know to this day) they were being played. As far as Al Qaeda was concerned, their security was airtight. Because anyone who thinks Al Qaeda wouldn't trumpet to the skies any foreknowledge of complicity by The Great Satan is clinically insane. It would be a propaganda coup an order of magnitude greater than the attack itself. This also of course means no inimical foreign intelligence services knew either. Quote: There in a nutshell is the difference between yourself and people who make the effort to think things through in a rational manner. It would be absolute insanity for those who had discovered Al Qaeda was operating inside America to let them carry out their plots without knowing pretty much to a certainty what those plots were, so they could be far away on the days those plots came to fruition. Jihadis are into dying to further their cause. Higher-highers in the US government are not. In closing, may I remind you that you STILL haven't gotten back to me on the very first nonsense I called you on way back on the first page of the thread, specifically your claims that -- "There is far too much evidence out there showing that the FBI was monitoring some of the hijackers every moves, then went to nab then and pentagon lawyers and top pentagon brass stepped in and prevented it" Would you please provide us a link showing the FBI was monitoring "every move" of some of the hijackers. Then please provide us a link showing they had decided to arrest them. Then please provide us a link showing where the FBI falls under the jurisdiction of the military, hence would halt these planned arrests because some military personnel nixed it. While you're at it, you might as well also provide us the links supporting your assertion that some FBI agents had their lives and the lives of their families threatened (by whom?) if they didn't back off. Thanks. Phred
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Here is an example of right wing loonies trying to attack someone's character as an effort to discredit what they are saying. I never claimed it was a scientific poll. All I said is you are the minority HERE. On THIS web site to the people reading what he is saying. Obvoiusly the people HERE don't buy the offical story. I never claimed he was the minority in the world, I clearly said the people here. It's amusing I get a tinfoil hat and I never even mentioned one thing about controled demolition or missle or anything. But thanks the tin foil hat, I shall wear it with pride -------------------- "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
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Suggesting I didn't read my own link again, please don't ever change Phred
-------------------- "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
| |||||||
Seuss Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 1 month, 9 days |
| ||||||
> Here is an example of right wing loonies t
Me, right wing? I'm about as middle of the road as one can get. -------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
Quote: There are many testimonies of explosions not only in sub-levels, but also in levels higher up in the towers. Many reports of multiple and synchronized explosions, of a huge explosion right before the collapse, of "pops" as the tower went down...The collapse of the twin towers and wtc7 actually fulfill all the characteristics of a controlled demolition. And for wtc7, there's no question of whether or not the collapse was planned, since the owner, Larry Silverstein, admitted on a PBS documentary that he decided to pull the building, which means to bring it down. And the government explained that the wtc7 collapse was due to small fires!!! Now the plannification of demolishing a building takes quite some time and is obviously complex, yet wtc7 came down just 7 hours after WTC1! The bombs were in there before the terrorist attack, it was planned long before the attacks. Quote: Silverstein made much huger profits than that! Just two months prior to 9/11, he acquired a 99-year lease on the entire World Trade Center complex for 3.2 billion dollars, this is the only time that the WTC ever changed hands.The insurance policy for the complex even included a clause that would prove extremely valuable in the event of a terrorist attack. He made a 500 million dollar profit just over WTC7. And he had been going to court for some time over the twin towers destruction, claiming he was entitled to twice the insurance policies' value, because the attacks were "separate occurences". Well he ended winning that legal battle in december 2004 and he gained two times 3.6 billion dollars...that's 7.2 billion. Its note-worthy to mention that on 9/11, when Silverstein was supposed to be working in the north tower, he was actually at a doctor's appointment. Two of his children who worked in a restaurant at the top of north tower managed to run late to work that morning. Plus, 54 of his 160 staff members working for his company were in the towers when the plane crashed on it, and 4 of them died. Quote: Well, guess who was in charge of the security of the WTC, American Airlines, and Dulles International Airport? Marvin Bush, the president's younger brother. Amazing is the fact that his security company called Securacom, had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center up to 9/11! On that particular day, his contract ended! Then you throw in there the facts that heightened WTC security alert had just been lifted, that bomb sniffing dogs had been removed from the buildings on 9/6, that power down of the entire tower 2 had been going on on 9/8 and 9/9, which means that security cameras and security locks weren't in function for about 36 hours, and you start getting the picture. Quote: Good point. --------------------
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Maybe you are not right wing, but that is a celebrated right wing tactic to attack a persons character to discredit what they are saying. My apologies if you do not fit this bill, but that particular post did.
-------------------- "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
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Bullshit. You offer nothing here except pointless nonsense and call it proof. Silverstein did not admit anything of the kind, only lunatics think it was a controlled demolition and the government never said it collapsed due to small fires Quote: Right, men in black hats were planting tons of explosives surreptitously for several weeks and nobody saw anything. Quote:Quote: This is untrue in several ways. First of all Silverstein already owned WTC 7. Second of all, signing a lease does not constitute a change of hands. The Port Authority still owned (and continues to own) the other buildings. Finally, Silverstein is obligated to rebuild. I don't know where you get the notion that WTC 7 can be built for less than half the money it was insured for. No insurance company has ever been that stupid and these are apparently not either. "Silverstein has applied for up to $400 million in tax-exempt bonds under the New York Liberty Bond Program to finance the shortfall in sources of funds for the project, a gap based on the estimated total project costs of $1.2 billion less $796 million in available insurance proceeds." http://www.newyorkbiz.com/About_ For the ignorant, bonds are not grants, they are loans. Where you ever got the notion that WTC 7 could be rebuilt for $300M is probably the same place you got the rest of your lies. Quote: No. These are flagrant lies. Number one, and this is really just the most obvious. He doesn't get the money. He has to rebuild and the money isn't enough. Number two, he didn't win the big case, he lost. He won a smaller jury trial for 2 separate events but lost the bigger one. This gives a summary of the insurance payouts. "As a private developer with a 99-year lease on the World Trade Center, Silverstein insured the property. Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, he sought payment for the destruction of the towers as two incidents. The two dozen insurers held that it was one incident. If it were considered to be a single incident, the payout would be $3.55 billion and if it were two incidents, it would be $7.1 billion. Silverstein sued the insurers. On December 6, 2004, a federal jury ruled in favor of Silverstein giving him an additional $1.1 billion from nine insurers, declaring it to be two "occurrences". [5] However, in a previous trial, a different federal jury delivered a mixed verdict which highly favored insurers on April 29, 2004 [6] At dispute in the trial were interpretation of standard forms used in the application for property insurance and when particular insurers saw which documents.[7] In total, Silverstein was awarded nearly $5 billion in insurance money following the destruction of the Twin Towers [8]. In April 2006, rebuilding cost was estimated to be $6.3 billion. [9]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lar Quote: Utterly meaningless innuendo. Quote:Quote: What picture? That enough explosives could be planted in 36 hrs (or 96 hrs.)to blow all of these buildings in a controlled demo? If the power was down in 2 how did they get the explosives into 1 and 7? Really? Unbelievable, in every way. That it could've been done and that anybody would think so. But wait, didn't you say this earlier Quote:Which is it? Did they plant the bombs in the last few days or did it take some time? Quote: S&P land of fruits and nuts. (ad homonyms? Get me a fucking stretcher, I wrenched my back when I fell out of my chair). Just to summarize the insurance facts I presented (as opposed to the insurance lies Mr 58 presented) For #7 Silverstein got $796M, estimated cost $1.2B. Loss to Silverstein $400M. For #1 & #2 Silverstein got $5B, estimated cost $6.3B. Loss to Silverstein $1.3B. Let's see, actual loss of $1.7B plus loss of revenue from 99 year $3.2B lease (which really was a total boondoggle), his losses are in the tens of billions of dollars. If you sign a 99 year lease for a piece of property that would cost twice as much as the total value of the lease to rebuild, in the first year, you sure as shit have no interest in seeing it brought down. Some people are just beyond reason. And I don't mean Silverstein. Edited by Phred (06/25/06 11:02 AM)
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Wow, zappa, I love it when you forget the insults and just argue your point with great accuracy. OK, you didn't really leave the insults aside this time (do you ever?), but at least your point about insurance money was accurate and supported by facts.
I am thus all the more saddened when there are only insults and no fact whatsoever: Quote: In fact, Silverstein did. Everyone knows the quote, so I won't repeat it here. The thing is, when he finally tried to explain his "pull it" comment, he gave himself away. This is from the communiqué he issued: (see http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Ar Quote:Hold it, something's wrong here. Several official sources contradict this. Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: So what we're told here is that, in the afternoon, Silverstein advised the firefighters' commander to pull [out] firefighters, that this was done later in the day, but that those firefighters weren't there in the first place, since there had been no firefighting, and the commander (the same one or another?) had ordered his men away from WTC7 at 11.30. So what the hell did Silverstein want the commander to "pull" then? Quote:Many commentators and reporters spontaneously compared the collapses of the WTC towers, and especially WTC7, to controlled demolitions. Several scholars, having studied the case, think controlled demo is the only explanation. None of these people are locked up in asylums or have otherwise been diagnosed with psychosis, schizophrenia or other mental illnesses. Do not resort so lightly to lunacy as an explanation. If you wish to do so, you have to substantiate it with facts. Quote:This is interesting. What then, according to you, was the official cause given by official institutions for the WTC7 collapse? Quote: Thank you for consistently keeping up high standards of debate and argument... in the future.
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Strangely, we find Phred sneaking out of the thread just as he gets sent on a mission.
Just to add some elements, watch this video interview of Steven Jones. In it, he explains he analyzed a piece of previously molten metal from the WTC towers, and that it contained iron oxyde and sulfur, among other things. According to him, this is consistent with the use of thermate (= thermite + sulfur). He also explains that he found a 1999 patent for a Linear Cutting Device allowing to use thermate or thermite to cut thick steel following very precise lines, like in the picture below (note the 45° angle of the cut in the middle of the pic, allowing the building to collapse once the steel is cut; also note the drippings of (previously) molten metal on the inside and outside of the column). After discussing with demolition specialists, he states that the Twin Towers would have taken only about 2,000 pounds of explosives to demolish, and that this would have taken a few weeks to plan, and a few days to materially prepare (plant the explosives). Strangely, the result of his chemical analysis had already been produced by official sources before, but those were at a loss for explanations: see http://cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a1201eutectic Quote: C'mon Phred, catch'em!
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
I do not construe what Silverstein said to be an admission that he ordered a controlled demolition to proceed. He either misspoke or he was misinterpreted. The explanation could be that he just told the people doing the work that, at whatever point it was at in the destruction, it didn't make any more sense to try and save it. Far too much lunacy hinges on the statement of a man under extreme stress. The man would have to be a blithering idiot to destroy the building on purpose. I also think it was impossible for him to do so anyway, the charges would have had to have been set well ahead of time and he would have had to have been able to trigger them at a moments notice. No fucking way.
Do you know what iron oxide is? It's rust. That's right, rust. And sulfur is a common element found....everywhere. I just find the desire to conspiricise (I know, I made the word up) this somewhat pathological. As in those who insist on doing it need help. Phred does not have an obligation to respond to every lunatic offering here. Or even to show up at all. I stayed out of this for a long time because I think it's stupid, but exclusive58's post was just such a flagrant (and fragrant) bunch of lies and bullshit that I had to step in. The JEW did not benefit from this. Nobody did.
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
nobody but the neo-conservative leaders of our nation who started a war because of it while in the process striking terror into the minds of all Americans which in turn made them vulnerable to drastic changes in our democracy....or haliburton
-------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
MasFina Snow Shredder Registered: 05/08/06 Posts: 788 Loc: Mountains |
| ||||||
Hell yeah Aldous. That video gives me hope that the truth will be out shortly.
-------------------- A Good Substrate: Poo With Extras Good Liquid Culture, Step by Step Timer Modification PM me if you are interested in buying 140ml syringes. $6 each + $7 shipping
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Quote:You must have read over all the well-sourced statements I quoted above. There were no "people doing the work". None. At all. And simply repeating what our friend Silverstein tried to explain won't make it make sense. Quote:He wasn't under any stress when he made the statement. It was months later, in a movie. Quote:OK, we agree again. Quote:Sure it's rust, I knew that. That doesn't change anything to the fact it's a basic ingredient of the thermite reaction. Do your homework before you get carried away. Quote:Great zappa, you should tell the scientists (or are they loonies, or moonbats?) at FEMA, they seemed to have no idea. Glad you could clear this up. Quote:Sure he doesn't. I just thought he would be interested, since he seems so eager to debunk anything coming from the tinfoil hat brigade, and since he sends people on missions himself. He has no obligation at all. Only, if he stays away from this, it would come across as conspicuous, and the moonbats would think they have a point. And he can't call it beating a dead horse either, since this thermate issue, with analysis results, has never even come up here. So I remain in hopeful expectation. Edited by Aldous (06/26/06 12:45 AM)
| |||||||
RosettaStoned Stranger Registered: 05/29/06 Posts: 540 Loc: North America Last seen: 16 years, 10 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Indeed, he sent me on a mission to read past threads about things not even directly related to my main point. And just to be clear, just because someone like Phred or Zappa thinks they have won a debate in a previous thread, does not in anyway, make that thread a work of factual evidence. From what I can tell the old threads I was pointed to, was just Phred debating in his usual manner: sidestepping his opponents points while rehashing the official story over and over again, tossing in the occasional moonbat or tinfoil hat insults. -------------------- "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
| |||||||
MasFina Snow Shredder Registered: 05/08/06 Posts: 788 Loc: Mountains |
| ||||||
Republican tactics
-------------------- A Good Substrate: Poo With Extras Good Liquid Culture, Step by Step Timer Modification PM me if you are interested in buying 140ml syringes. $6 each + $7 shipping
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
RosettaStoned writes:
Quote: Still haven't bothered to read the threads, I see. If you had, you would notice that far from sidestepping the points my opponents raised, I addressed each and every one, while my opponents dodged many of mine, just as you have done from the beginning of our exchange. Which reminds me... You STILL haven't gotten substantiated the very first nonsense I called you on way back on the first page of the thread, specifically your claims that -- Quote: Would you please provide us a link showing the FBI was monitoring "every move" of some of the hijackers. Then please provide us a link showing they had decided to arrest them. Then please provide us a link showing where the FBI falls under the jurisdiction of the military, hence would halt these planned arrests because some military personnel nixed it. While you're at it, please provide us the links supporting your assertion that some FBI agents had their lives and the lives of their families threatened (by whom?) if they didn't back off. Thanks. Phred
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
I think way too much is being made over this statement by Silverstein. Do you honestly think he intentionally admitted that there was a demolition plan in place to blow up his own underinsured building, which would have taken months of secret charge setting? It's so absurd on its face that you would have to fabricate some nonsense about the amount of the insurance payout and severely under report the cost of reconstruction to make even the least bit of sense out of this conspiracy. The guy lost BILLIONS. Lost, not made.
It's all well and good that rusty iron is a trigger for a thermite explosion. The presence of rusty iron does not however constitute evidence that there was a thermite explosion. It is far too common a substance. As is sulfur. And have you ever seen one of those shows about controlled demolitions? They fucking gut the building down to structural members first. They don't do it to salvage material. They do it so that the stuff they remove doesn't interfere with the drop. It is so utterly impossible to surreptitiously set explosives through a building of that size as to be laughable that anyone would believe it could be done. Charges would have had to have been strapped to columns in common areas, with wires dangling all over the place. Even a herd of retards would have been aroused. How about this. It would have taken dozens of workers months to do this. Don't you find it the least bit interesting that nobody has written a book about it yet? For huge money. We can't even shut the CIA up. So all of a sudden there is this tremendous black op for a private businessman. Fucking A, man, get a grip. Hat, foil, some assembly required. Although the Wiki says that the loss of WTC7 is unexplained, there is not a shred of evidence to support the notion that it was brought down by preset charges. Further, this has nothing at all to do with 1 and 2, the towers, which were quite clearly struck by airplanes
| |||||||
Seuss Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 1 month, 9 days |
| ||||||
Quote: But he said they were gonna pull the building. I wonder if he meant "pull out of" the building. I haven't seen the interview in a while. It isn't as if it were a confusing day or anything. Quote: But the guy is gonna make money from insurance! Really, he is! I saw this post on another forum, and somebody said the guy is gonna get rich from this. So there! Quote: Yep. Thermite did it. See, thermite gets really hot and can melt stuff and that is how they brought the buildings down. And explosives too... in case the thermite didn't work. The planes were just a smoke screen. They had giant space based lasers on the moon too, just in case the planes, explosives, and thermite failed. Quote: Nope, but I watched the towers get blowed up and learned all I need to know from the 9/11 footage. Quote: But I read this one company knocked down a building that had already half fallen in just three or four days! Explain that! Quote: They can't keep conspiracies from us! We know all about the fake moon landings and about the fake planes that crashed into the towers. Try again. Quote: Evidence!?!? Who said anything about facts or evidence? It is obvious! Open your eyes and look. Sheesh... quit trying to make sense, and accept that science and facts are often wrong and my gut feeling and what I see on TV is always correct. Here is my impression of debating against the TFH Brigade: http://www.shroomery.org/seuss/Ma_Pa_Math.wmv (4 meg, sorry about the format) -------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
That was beautiful. I miss those old movies very much. "Evidence? We don't need no steenking evidence."
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
Quote: I'm starting to get used to your useless vulgarity, but it'd be so much better if you could just drop it, plus it'd make you look a little more credible, since none of what I said there was BS. As Aldous pointed out, the FEMA report said the wtc7 was most probably caused by fires, and the report's conclusion goes as follows: Quote: They say they would have needed more investigation and research to resolve the issue...but what can you do when nearly all the evidence has been destroyed!?! Second, Silverstein DID talk about pulling the building down in the PBS documentary, let me quote him for you: Quote: What else do you want?? I'm interested to see how you're going to twist this quote into making it say that it wasn't demolished, just so you can go on and avoid seeing the awful truth. And don't give me any of that "he was under stressful conditions when he said that" nonsense. And apart from this very revealing quote, the collapse of WTC7 exhibited all the features of a controlled demolition, I suggest you watch 9/11 Revisited, at the end there's a scientific expert that does a review of all of them. In reality, to suppose that a cause other than controlled demolition was responsible for the collpase of wtc7 just defies logic. Concerning Silverstein's insurance money, it seems that I didn't get my facts straight, I checked your claims and they seem to be correct, my bad. --------------------
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: Yes, no steenking evidence or badges. We all saw the planes crash and buildings fall and heard the stories of lives devastated by personal losses. Either way, a lot was senselessly destroyed by someone and thats a fact we all agree on. What we need is more love and understanding in this world and less blame and judgment. Fuck the evidence either way. There are some sick puppies out there that'll pop a bullet in you just for looking at them funny. More keep being bred with the disease passed on to them. It seems to even be a contagious one if your immunity to it is low. No matter who they are, how do you heal that sort of sickness in others? Hey Zaps. I'm curious about something. Do you believe OJ is innocent? Just wondering since the evidence the courts felt they didn't need of his blood all over the murder scene, was deemed inadmissible due to incredibility of the officer who collected it. He had a racial bias so he could've extracted OJs blood from him some how and planted it to put a black man and American foot ball hero in jail just for shits and giggles. They didn't need that steenking evidence anyway because he was innocent, right? -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
Quote: You said "small fires'. You also said "there's no question." There's plenty. Some dipshit saying that an offhand comment to "pull the building" is tantamount to an admission of arson and insurance fraud is absurd. See below for alternate interpretation. Well, what can you do when the evidence has been destroyed? I know. Let's make up a bunch of ridiculous bullshit with no evidence and PUT ON A SHOW. Yeah, that's what we'll do kids. I am almost sorry that you find the word "bullshit" to be vulgar. I find it to be a useful descriptor of idiotic nonsense that is widely understood by almost all English speaking people. Maybe you should have a nice cucumber sandwich and ponder the decline of the English language and the gentility of those who use it so poorly. I, myself, intend to jerk off. You do know what that means, right. Quote: Unfuckingbelievable. It just isn't there. How about,just pull the firemen out and let it go before anybody else gets hurt? But no, it's a conspiracy..... THAT HE ADMITTED TO? Yep, the guy just committed arson and insurance fraud on a scale never before seen and ADMITTED IT. Sure he did. Not even annapurna would do that. Quote: I'm not going to watch that. Ever. I only have so many hours left and I don't intend to waste it on nonsense that is prima facie false. You can find an expert to testify to anything. I won't even bother checking his creds. I don't fucking care. Quote: No, what defies logic is that anybody thinks it was possible to set all those charges without anyone noticing anything weird. Get the hat off your head and let the sense rays in. Quote: So, where's the motivation? Or is he just a murderous Jew out to make Muslims look bad at the cost of billions of dollars to himself? Come on. I had no interest in this thread until you posted those flagrant lies about Silverstein, since there were no "facts" being bandied about, just idiocies. But you were so far off from what has really gone down that it needed intervention. As an addendum, I believe the whole thing has become so acrimonious between the government and LS that he has relinquished control of the site (1&2) back to the PA. WTC7 has been rebuilt and is open for business. 1&2 remain holes.
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
| |||||||
Seuss Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 1 month, 9 days |
| ||||||
Quote: Actually, it isn't your bad. I see this sort of thing over and over with the 9/11 conspiracy crowd. One person makes a claim. Somebody else repeats the claim and changes it a bit. Soon everybody is repeating various versions of the claim. Eventually, somebody comes along and points out a conspiracy exists because of one of the versions floating about. Somebody else comes along and claims a conspiracy because there are so many versions floating around. After a while the whole thing turns into a self-feeding beast that supports itself on a foundation of misunderstandings and outright lies. There was a segment on CNN a few weeks back with the reporter that was at the Pentagon immediately after the attack on the building. Somebody asked him a question and his answer was something along the lines of "No plane hit the building, it appears to have hit the ground first and then slid into the building." However, when you see him quoted on the conspiracy sites, the quote reads "There was no plane" or "It was not a plane" or "It was a missle that hit the building, not a plane." The actual question asked was close to "Did the plane hit the building or ground." The reporter was fairly ticked at the conspiracy sites for using his words out of context, or changing his words completely, to support something that he never implied, said, or meant. Even looking at the picture posted above with somebody talking about the "45 degree angle" of the cut beam in the background. Ok, prove to me that it is exactly a 45 degree cut and not a 15 degree or 60 degree cut. Not that it matters, but a 45 degree cut sounds staged or engineered while any other random angle does not... and it looks to be around 45 degrees, therefore it must be thermite! Second, notice the other ten to twelve beams in the picture that are not cut at an angle. Care to explain those? -------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
Quote: lol, I knew you would answer that, I knew you would change the word "it", which refers to the building, and make it mean "them", which would refer to the firefighters. Why can't you admit that he's talking about pulling down the building????? "They made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collpase"!!! Goddamn, open you eyes! And anyways, as Aldous pointed out, FEMA report says that there were no firefighting in WTC7. Quote: And there we have it folks, the problem hidden within the "coincidence theory" crew is that they are so brilliant that they already know that the government's story is true and all else is false without ever investigating for themselves and just by listening to what they've been hearing on TV. Really, how in the world could they be wrong? --------------------
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
You are getting your ass handed to you and all you have to go on is my refusal to watch a piece of lunatic fringe video. And you say my mind is closed. Unfuckingbelievable.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
I don't see you handing his ass to him. I see some more funny stuff though-
Zap says, "I am not close minded just because I refuse to open my mind to review and consider additional information, because my mind is made up and closed on the subject." That's as funny as the one about the thugs proving they aren't thugs, by kicking your ass, over being called a thug. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
Don't misquote me and don't paraphrase that which you don't understand. His ass has been fairly well handed to him
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: Is that better? And you somehow "magically" know what I do and do not understand without asking any investigative questions into my understanding of your having his ass on platter first? Interesting psychic powers you have. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 7 years, 9 months |
| ||||||
Your internet persona is an open book to me. As it is to all who view it. Anything other than that is irrelevant speculation. Accent irrelevant
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
I hope people are seeing the real and genuine me through my posts. That's the idea.
BTW way, since you are enforcing strict rules to not misquote anything presented here, I don't recall exclusive sharing a video link called "lunatic fringe". I looked all over for a video link called lunatic fringe and couldn't find it in this thread. I think you may have misquoted something he shared. He did share a link a few pages back called- 911research.wtc7.net/post911/com Yes, best to be completely accurate here indeed. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Redstorm Prince of Bugs Registered: 10/08/02 Posts: 44,175 Last seen: 4 months, 30 days |
| ||||||
I love how the government can never be trusted unless what they're saying helps back up your wacky conspiracy theory.
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
You gotta love it, it's a basic investigative attitude.
When the cops have a suspect for a crime, obviously the suspect will try to refute accusations, he takes a stance to only say things that are as favorable to himself as possible. (And if he's innocent, he just tells the truth and has nothing to worry about.) So whenever the suspect says anything that incriminates him to some extent, you can trust him with more certainty than if he says something that completely makes him look innocent. Of course, you have to check both as thoroughly as you can, but the rule is that if he says something that incriminates him, either he does so because he has to admit the undeniable, or the truth is even worse. So, for example, if even FEMA says they don't have a clue as to what caused WTC7 to collapse, of course they look a bit stupid, but less so than if they tried a totally unrealistic explanation. Maybe that's also what crossed Silverstein's mind when he made his "pull it" comment: we better admit that WTC7 was demolished, because it's too obvious; but let's say it was decided on the spot, because any other version would raise dangerous questions. Not a smart move, of course, but when you're guilty and the truth closes in on you, you tend to accumulate mistakes.
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Gee, with only Seuss and zappa as contradictors, I'm beginning to miss Phred here (never thought I would ever say that ).
I really wonder what bothers him about that thermate issue...
| |||||||
kotik fuckingsuperhero Registered: 06/29/04 Posts: 3,531 Last seen: 4 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: correct. politicians that ignore it, or are unaware do not deserve to be getting tax dollars. politicians that do know about it and do nothing are part of the conspiracy. why is that so wacky? If it's true, then it makes more sense than picking a side. -------------------- 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.
| |||||||
J4S0N human Registered: 07/29/04 Posts: 284 Last seen: 15 years, 8 months |
| ||||||
I'd still like to see some evidence to prove it was muslims that brought down the buildings. The FBI admits that none of the named 'hi-jackers' were actually on the flight records. No one can prove they were on the planes. Other then a grainy video of a guy who kinda looks like osama saying he did the whole thing, there really isn't much evidence. But its enough if your a racists republican i guess.
I knew from day one that only a very skilled team could pull that operation off. And if you read up on what the school teachers of these 'hi-jackers' had to say about there skills, you'll know that none of them were very skilled at anything (except being a patsie). -------------------- "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: You forget that the perpetrators were on a suicide mission. They all KNEW they would die. There is no shortage of Muslim 'splodeydopes. There is, on the other hand, a marked shortage of Mormon, Lutheran, Catholic, Taoist, Shinto, Animist, Wiccan, Buddhist, or Zoroastran 'splodeydopes. Who do you believe the hijackers were if not Jihadis? Throw out some rational alternatives for our inspection. Quote: Nonsense. How much skill does it take to buy airline tickets? How much skill does it take to cow passengers into behaving themselves -- especially if you kill one early on as a lesson to the rest, and claim you have a bomb you'll detonate if they get out of line? The only thing different "skillwise" about these hijackings compared to dozens of prior hijackings is that one of the hijackers on each plane had taken enough training to know how to maneuver and navigate a modern airliner. And even that doesn't require a particularly high degree of skill. The autopilot would handle most of it. Phred
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Phred, don't think I'm begging or anything, but if you don't address the material thermate issue, people are going to think you have nothing to oppose to the evidence presented. That would harm your credibility as a debunker, and would install the thermate story as an accepted fact on this forum. Urgent action is needed!
| |||||||
Viveka refutation bias Registered: 10/21/02 Posts: 4,061 Last seen: 7 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
I think WiccanSeeker did a pretty bang up job of spelling out a potential thermite scenario from the perspective of what you would call a "coincidence-theorist". It's over in the science forum: http://www.shroomery.org/forums/
And here it is again: "You can't escape the tin foil this time, because it is at the heart of my theory. Tin being aluminium, Al 7150-T651 alloy to be exact. And foil being the Boeing airplane skin made from it. I won't bore you all with the details, but here's the deal in a nutshell: Upon impact there was generated a lot of pulverized concrete. Since the fire took place in enclosed, insulated but well-ventilated spaces the burning jet fuel melted the aluminium at around 660'C which is well in the realm of jet fuel's capabilities. This molten aluminium alloy Al 7150-T651, consisting of 89.08% aluminium, 6.2% zinc, 2.3% copper, 2.3% magnesium, 0.12% zirconium seeped into the powdered concrete, forming a thermite mixture based on a CaCO3/SiO2/Al mixture. Heated aluminium rapidly oxidizes, increasing the temperature, until it finally ignites in open air at around 700'C. So what do we have? We have an oven-like enviroment, acting like a crude blast furnace, with a thermite mixture burning in it, feeding off itself, combustion gases of the jet fuel (CO2/CO/H2O) and the air. Some combustion products (Calcium, Silicon) themselves are highly combustible, leading to secondary thermite-like reactions. This drives the temperature considerably above the temperatures burning jet fuel is capable of, and most construction steel beams lie exposed due to the shattering blow. The steel heats up, perhaps some of it close to the thermite will melt, and the buildings collapse in on themselves. The rest is tragic history. Seuss, you're the pro, how's about us splitting that thar million for demonstrating how the steel could yield at locally generated temperatures. We got it published first So yes, we have thermite, but no conspiracy what-so-ever " Check out the thread for more on the scenario. A day or two after I saw Wiccan's thread, I was telling my friend who wrenches on Boeings for a living about the WTC thermite theory. Coincidentally( ), he tells me he brought home a huge chunk of magnesium, and in jest i told him he should whip up a batch of thermite since he could use the magnesium to ignite it. He showed it to me yesterday and it was an actual part made of magnesium, I figured he had a raw chunk that they had at work for some reason but no, it was the end of a flap support, a triangle about 12 inches on a side and 2 inches thick. So also realize that a boeing passenger jet has a lot of large pieces of magnesium all over the wings, used as supports for various flaps and stuff because it is a very light material. This could explain alot of the "mysterious" flashes seen in the footage and it can certainly explain this: [url=3]http://video.google.com/video Magnesium burns at 4000 degree Fahrenheit.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
I was reading that thread as it was happening. Those guys are smart about that stuff indeed. The science forum here is cool read. It gives a possible explanation for how the molten steal and thermite like residue was found on some of the steal from WTC1 and 2.
It still doesn't explain the explosions going on in the sub levels, how the thermite mixture got down into the the sub level maintenance room at the same time of the crash and disintegrated hydraulic equipment and turned the room into ruble. (this was witnessed by construction workers in the building at the time who thought bombs were planted in the sub levels like in the '93 attacks. They didn't even know about the planes until they got out of the sub levels which were immediately filling with white smoke they said. The plane aluminum creating the thermite also doesn't explain why Tower 7 fell as it wasn't hit with an airplane. It also doesn't match with why the Windsor Building in Spain, similar design to the towers yet, weaker steal beams were used, was hit by a plane, burned for 18 hours and didn't collapse. It should've under the other theories for what took the WTCs down. Seuss and WS know their chemicals. What they came up with doesn't address other unanswered questions however. Oh , and to back what Kotik said, any theory I have read also states that most all politicians have no knowledge of anything conspirators are up too. Most everyone in the government is a pastie and puppet of sorts. They are given different reasons for why they are told to execute orders, ussually having to do with it being in the publics best interest. Most think they are doing good and serving in the publics best interests when they are often, just helping to set stages for other scenarios and keep stuff hidden. Sometimes, the wrong person is let in on things and wants to expose something and its to easy to quiet them in one way or another. Its said by some JFK was assasinated because he was ready to blow the lid off of information he became privy too. It's said the Bush stealing the first election from Gore's orginal win over the "fiasco" in Florida was the result of Gore being not willing to go along with playing "the game". People say that talk sounds paranoid or such things only exist in fantasy land. Get real. We've all been a part of it or witness to it on smaller scales. Siblings bribe, blackmail or threaten siblings to keep "secret doings" from Mom and Dad. Street gangs, drug dealers, and the mob silence people ready to turn states witness against them, one way or another if they can. The top powers can silence anyone with a harsh enough threat, large enough bribe, shredding pappers, discrediting them as being crazy or ......accidental death. Black mail, bribery, threats, and murder are all a part of reality and the real worlds workings. Anyone who thinks such actions don't exist to keep "secret doings in the hush" is living in fantasy land. In reality sometimes, we come to suspect someone is screwing with us behind our backs and it turns out to be true. Not all people looking "paranoid" of such things are wrong. One guy was putting cyanide in his business partners coffee to collect the insurance money. The guy being poisoned eventually thought to ask a doctor to run a different set of blood test looking for chemical poisoning and to investigate his partner. He was getting really sick without explanation. Friends and family told him he was going nuts because his partner was such a "nice guy". He was right though and his partner is in jail for attempted murder. True, conspiracy theories related to 9/11 may sound paranoid, or coming from fantasy land, however, this is real world stuff and humans who want wealth, power and or control and to live above the law and to stay out of jail, at any cost, are capable of it. We see it on the small scale every day. Why is the large scale exempt? That's not evidence of anything related to 9/11. It is just obvious evidence of the reality we live in and what a portion of humans are capable of when they become consumed with greed and the need for power and control or in fear of being caught doing something wrong or illegal and being punished for it. If Wealthy Global Leaders fit into that portion of humans in reality, what's the big shocking "no way it can be" surprise in that? -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Phred Fred's son Registered: 10/18/00 Posts: 12,949 Loc: Dominican Republ Last seen: 9 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
Quote: There is no "evidence" to oppose. There is no need for me to add anything to the comments by Seuss and Zappa. The guy found traces of sulfur? Big whoop. I'm sure there are also traces of potassium, tungsten, copper, lead, zinc, phosphorus, antimony, arsenic, tin, silver, and lots more besides. That single photo of the beams is similarly meaningless. When was it taken? It certainly wasn't taken September 11. It's obvious from the look of the rubble that there had already been substantial clearing work done. That is NOT a photo of the untouched twisted pile of pickup sticks we all say just days after the attack. Did some of the clearup work involve cutting dangling beams precariously located? Of course it did. Phred
| |||||||
Viveka refutation bias Registered: 10/21/02 Posts: 4,061 Last seen: 7 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
Quote: What's your source for this? Quote: That would only be true if thermite was the only possible explanation for the collapse of 7WTC. Do you honestly believe this? Quote: The Windsor building wasn't hit with a plane. Are you thinking of a different building?
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
To answer your first question, here is some of what people have said. You can read more at this link. It's just what people there when it happened have reported. thats all it is to me, more information to consider.
http://www.willthomas.net/Conver Quote: I don't understand your second question or what you are asking I beleive. I am just asking questions because I don't have beliefs set. If you have concluded that it was thermite made form the aluminum from the planes, that cut the steal and caused the collapse, then what was it that caused WTC 7 to collapse, if there was no aluminum plane in it burning Jet fuel to create the thermite? Never in history has such a building collapsed due to a fire-NEVER. Makes one wonder and ask questions. That's all. Last question- My apologize about the Windsors fire being the result of a plane crash (hammered with to many stats lately reading dozens of links and watching movies). That buildings fire just raises questions to the governments version that the fire alone in WTC 1&2 took it down. The Windsor burnt for over 18 hours and didn't come down. That is irrelevant to the theory of the planes aluminum melting and making thermite in WTC 1 and 2. It was this C-130 plane crash into a ten story building in Tehran that did not collapse. If planes crashed into buildings can cut steal so quickly like in WTC 1&2, this one should've fell also. It didn't. Quote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world I'm not asking or telling you or anyone to believe anything. I am just asking questions and remain open to reviewing information and considering different answers. My questions aside, I was still impressed with what Seuss and WS came up with about how thermite could've been made in WTC towers 1 and 2. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
| |||||||
Viveka refutation bias Registered: 10/21/02 Posts: 4,061 Last seen: 7 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
Eyewitness accounts are the weakest possible form of evidence. They are subject to a series of filters, the first and most obfuscating of which is perception itself. What about all the people who swear they saw a missle drone fly into the towers or that they were there and no plane hit the pentagon? Do we just take all their accounts at face value? The next filter is how the eyewitness remembers it. Then you have to consider how the anecdote is recorded into the public record. Is it fully in context, is it a complete recollection, etc.? Then there are other people's interpretations of it of course. And the slimiest thing about it is the re-presentation of an anecdote in abridged form or out of context. Let's look at an example:
“It started exploding,” recalled Ross Milanytch. “It was about the 70th floor. And each second another floor exploded out for about eight floors, before the cloud obscured it all.” [NYT Sept 13/01] When I first started reading this, based on how it was presented in the article, the content of the quotes in front of it, I visualized this guy being in the building, hearing explosions in floors above him(flawed perception rearing its inept head). I googled the quote (LONG LIVE GOOGLE): Police officers warned people in the vicinity to move north, that the buildings could fall, but most people found that unthinkable. They stayed put or gravitated closer. Abruptly, there was an ear-splitting noise. The south tower shook, seemed to list in one direction and them began to come down, imploding upon itself. It looked like a demolition,” said Andy Pollock. It started exploding,” said Ross Milanytch, 57, who works at nearby Chase Manhattan Bank. “It was about the 70th floor. And each second another floor exploded out for about eight floors, before the cloud obscured it all...People started walking briskly north until the premonition became real — another horrifying eruption, as one floor after another seemed to detonate...Ross Milanytch: 'The dust was about an inch and a half thick on the ground.'" So now I have a new picture. This guy was standing on the ground and he is describing his experience of seeing the tower collapse and the ensuing phenomenon as explosions. So does this literally mean detonated explosives? And if you go by this guys account, the tower collapsed 1 floor per second so does that mean it took over a minute for the tower to collapse? "It looked like a demolition,” said Andy Pollock. Shit, Andy Pollock said it looked like a demolition. It must have been a demolition. "...one floor after another seemed to detonate...", one per second right, seemingly? Quote: I haven't concluded that it was thermite, just entertained the possibility. There is no way for me to be certain it was thermite probably ever. I was not asserting that thermite had anything to do with 7WTC, only that it could possibly explain the molten materials pouring from the building before it's collapse, and possibly the molten metal in the rubble and possibly the reason for collapse. However, I am also not certain that thermite was even necessary at all for collapse. Your response that thermite didn't explain building 7 was entirely extraneous. Quote: So are you implying that something can never happen because it's never happened before? Shit, how'd we get here? Quote: Questions based on what? Was there another 110 story tower that had a 747 loaded with fuel flown directly into it at top speed that didn't collapse that I'm not aware of? Quote: Study that story again. The plane crashed into the ground next to the tower, starting a fire. Even if it had flown directly into it so what? You're speculating far too much to think it would tell you anything about september 11th. Quote:Me too. I wonder why this guy never seriously considered the possibility.
| |||||||
gettinjiggywithit jiggy Registered: 07/20/04 Posts: 7,469 Loc: Heart of Laughte |
| ||||||
Quote: Thats all I have been doing, entertaining possibilities as new ones arise and asking questions. Quote:Quote: No, I am not asserting that In fact I speak out against that often in S&P. The Wright Brothers are a great example. The fact that other buildings built with similar construction never fell to date due to fires that burned much longer then they did in the WTC's just raises more questions is all. It was never explained by the administration what was so unique about the fires of towers 1, 2 and 7 that made all of them collapse demolition style, where no others in history ever did, not even another hit by a plane with full fuel tanks. I'm asking questions and open to reviewing all answers and possibilities. I use to have a sig quote that said, "A Conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking" Because 9/11 isn't something I need at least a temporary working conclusion to take action with, I have no personal need to come to any. I can't change what happened. All I can do is my best to understand it and learn from it. -------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna. Edited by gettinjiggywithit (06/28/06 07:43 PM)
| |||||||
Aldous enthusiast Registered: 10/19/99 Posts: 980 Loc: inside my skull Last seen: 7 days, 17 hours |
| ||||||
Keep up the good work jiggy!
Unfortunately, I've completely run out of real world time to follow this lovely discussion, let alone participate in it. Now I'm leaving on a holiday, but I hope it will still be up when I get back around July 10.
| |||||||
MushmanTheManic Stranger Registered: 04/21/05 Posts: 4,587 |
| ||||||
The coruscating agents of the Nerdle Wombanger Cabal, along with considerable support from other dexterous members of O.M., have uncovered yet another astoundingly crepuscular government cover-up. The United States government currently is waging its “Global War on Terror” against Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda in response to the September 11th attack on the World Trade Center. But! The real villains of this vile terrorism are not Osama Bin Laden and his maladroit band of merry Jihadists. The real antagonists of this novel are an ominously combined force of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)!
The Irish compose one of the major ethnic groups within Manhattan, yet only one Irish citizen was reported to have died in the attack on the World Trade Center.[1] Why did so many Irishmen fail to show up for work on 9/11? It seems the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center were not Arabs, but strangely, Irish nationalists. The Irish Voice reported that undocumented Irish “construction workers” had been working at the World Trade Center on the day it was attacked. “As the Irish Voice reported last week, another undocumented Irish worker using false identification who narrowly escaped with his life stated that he saw many other Irish undocumented construction workers going up to a higher floor on the morning that the blasts occurred.” Not only were these “construction workers” merely undocumented, but they also assumed false pseudonyms.[3] This “construction worker” façade would certainly be useful to anyone wishing to plant explosives. Coincidentally, as they would have us believe, Larry Silverstein, the owner of World Trade Center Seven, whimsically admitted on a PBS documentary that his building was brought down by demolitions. Could these “undocumented construction workers” be the demolition team that ultimately brought down the World Trade Center? All of the Irish “undocumented construction workers” escaped the attack alive, although sustained minor injuries. While hospitalized, those men contacted a representative of Parliament who was a member of Sinn Fein, the political arm of the IRA. Soon afterwards, all these men were quickly whisked back to Ireland without any investigation or questioning by the Immigration and Naturalization Service.[3] The Irish Republican Army had no reason to attack the United States unprovoked. Rather, they seem to have been working for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. The FARC supplies the IRA with much of its weaponry and training. Columbian Security Forces arrested three members of Sinn Fein after participating in a five-week training FARC terrorist training camp. “According to British security sources, it was at one of these camps that the three IRA men swapped expertise and tested new bomb-making equipment.”[6] At this point, it seems clear that the “undocumented construction workers” received their explosives training from a similar FARC camp. The FARC relies heavily on the drug trade in order to finance its ongoing revolution against the government of Columbia. Prior to 9/11, due to pressure from the United States and other countries, the Taliban had suppressed the once lucrative opium market in Afghanistan. The FARC gained considerable funds from the distribution of Afghani’s opium and the elimination of this trade undoubtedly hurt them. The FARC masterminded this set up against Al Queda in an attempt to have the Taliban overthrown. Since members of the FARC would have an incredibly hard time entering the United States, the attack appears to have been implemented mainly by members of the IRA. As expected by FARC, after the attack on the World Trade Center the United States entered Afghanistan and removed the Taliban from power. Once the Taliban had been removed, opium production steadily rose back to pre-Taliban standards. It must be assumed all the findings of the 9/11 Commission are false. The government of the United States of America appears to be utterly infiltrated by agents of the Irish Republican Army. On September 11, Richard Haass, a special United States envoy sent by president Bush to Dublin, heard of the attacks on the World Trade Center, but continued on with his meetings unaffected.[4] It is possible that only Richard Haass is subordinate to the IRA, but it is also possible that both Richard Haass and George W. Bush Jr. are affiliated with them! We know Richard Egan, the American ambassador to Dublin, is under the thumb of the IRA, for he was photographed meeting with Joe Cahill, the former murderer, weapons smuggler, and head of the IRA's financial network.[5] And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Just how much influence the IRA wields over the government of the United States is unknown, but it is certainly enough to cover-up their footprints. Our government has been duped, but thanks to the Nerdle Wombanger Cabal, light has been shed on this terrible travesty. 1. http://www.september11victims.co 2. http://www.irishabroad.com/news/ 3. http://web.archive.org/web/20041 4. http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/othelem/c 5. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ Edited by MushmanTheManic (07/02/06 10:26 PM)
| |||||||
Seuss Error: divide byzero Registered: 04/27/01 Posts: 23,480 Loc: Caribbean Last seen: 1 month, 9 days |
| ||||||
> I was still impressed with what Seuss and WS came up with about how thermite could've been made in WTC towers 1 and 2.
I don't want to take credit for something that W_S came up with. Actually, we kind of led each other to it, but he made the critical connection, not I. -------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
| |||||||
J4S0N human Registered: 07/29/04 Posts: 284 Last seen: 15 years, 8 months |
| ||||||
http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060629/OPINION02/606290310/1014
"The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, chief of investigative publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on the Bin Laden's Most Wanted Web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Surprised by the ease with which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How was this possible?” Tomb continued, “bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” I asked, “How does that work?” Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”" -------------------- "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
| |||||||
exclusive58 illegal alien Registered: 04/16/04 Posts: 2,146 Last seen: 6 years, 11 days |
| ||||||
"Who is it that is controlling the media message, and how is it that the U.S. media has indicted Osama bin Laden for the events of Sept. 11, 2001, but the U.S. government has not? How is it that the FBI has no “hard evidence” connecting Osama bin Laden to the events of September 11, 2001, while the U.S. media has played the bin Laden-9/11 connection story for five years now as if it has conclusive evidence that bin Laden is responsible for the collapse of the twin towers, the Pentagon attack, and the demise of United Flight 93?"
Important questions indeed. The list of questions is getting longer and longer. --------------------
| |||||||
David_vs_Goliath Informer Registered: 04/01/06 Posts: 208 Loc: Chicago Last seen: 14 years, 2 months |
| ||||||
This Is UNBELIEVABLE....How no one has ever talked about this on main-stream media is mind-blowing.
Straight from the FBI's Most wanted list. USAMA BIN LADEN _NO MENTION OF ANY ATTACKS ON 9/11 ***** http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm -------------------- "People living deeply have no fear of death." "Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love." "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."
| |||||||
|
|
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, 8 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||