PDA

View Full Version : The US government did it



Gadget (fmr Marine)
04-30-2007, 01:33 PM
I had an interesting conversation with a young man this weekend. A bunch of us motorcycle riding fools went to Leesburg, FL for a little motorcycle rally....rented a 6 BR house with pool and jacuzzi, and had a great time. Being that I am a night owl, I ended up being one of the last 3 people awake on Friday night, and got into an interesting conversation with a 22yr old young man, who, shall I say, is slightly confused.......

Over many beers the conversation turned to politics, and 9/11. He is absolutely convinced that the US government is the reason for the towers coming down....not that their weren't terrorists, but that the US government funded the whole operation, so that we could go after Muslims in the Middle East.

I asked him why, and he quoted Rosie O'Donnell, and claimed their are THOUSANDS of facts pointing to the culpability of our government. I asked him to give me 10......and he came up with some opinions, and guesses.....nothing more than hypothesis, and hyperbole......

I asked him how many in the US government were aware....how many would it take to coordinate such an endeavor, and he said the number had to be in the hundreds, if not 1000......at which point I asked why none of them were troubled by their deeds and have come forward to gain the fame that such a wild tale would lead to......again.....they were paid off, so highly that they don't need or want the notoriety that such an incredible tale would give.

Has anyone else ever encountered such an individual who so wholly believes the conspiracy that they are unable to fathom any other possibility?

It was an interesting conversation, to say the least.

Nukeman
04-30-2007, 01:40 PM
I had an interesting conversation with a young man this weekend. A bunch of us motorcycle riding fools went to Leesburg, FL for a little motorcycle rally....rented a 6 BR house with pool and jacuzzi, and had a great time. Being that I am a night owl, I ended up being one of the last 3 people awake on Friday night, and got into an interesting conversation with a 22yr old young man, who, shall I say, is slightly confused.......

Over many beers the conversation turned to politics, and 9/11. He is absolutely convinced that the US government is the reason for the towers coming down....not that their weren't terrorists, but that the US government funded the whole operation, so that we could go after Muslims in the Middle East.

I asked him why, and he quoted Rosie O'Donnell, and claimed their are THOUSANDS of facts pointing to the culpability of our government. I asked him to give me 10......and he came up with some opinions, and guesses.....nothing more than hypothesis, and hyperbole......

I asked him how many in the US government were aware....how many would it take to coordinate such an endeavor, and he said the number had to be in the hundreds, if not 1000......at which point I asked why none of them were troubled by their deeds and have come forward to gain the fame that such a wild tale would lead to......again.....they were paid off, so highly that they don't need or want the notoriety that such an incredible tale would give.

Has anyone else ever encountered such an individual who so wholly believes the conspiracy that they are unable to fathom any other possibility?
It was an interesting conversation, to say the least.

Hell just talk to Gabby for a little while she about as nuts as this person is..

manu1959
04-30-2007, 01:47 PM
my mom and brother spout the same stuff....

Lightning Waltz
04-30-2007, 01:51 PM
I'd agree that there are some problems with the offical 9/11 story. And I think there have been periods in the history of the US where we have let things happen in order to create a justification to go to war (Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin). But, I don't think they have near enough evidence to prove the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, though.

Hobbit
04-30-2007, 02:27 PM
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

I'd be more willing to believe that aliens were behind 9/11 than the U.S. government. The whole conspiracy angle makes absolutely no sense and is just the act of a poor, desperate mind trying to convince itself that the world isn't that random.

Lightning Waltz
04-30-2007, 02:32 PM
I'd almost be willing to believe that aliens are responsible over the Bush administration, too. If they were behind 9/11, I'd have to admit that they were competent enough to pull off something this big...:laugh2:

Mr. P
04-30-2007, 03:03 PM
I had an interesting conversation with a young man this weekend. A bunch of us motorcycle riding fools went to Leesburg, FL for a little motorcycle rally....rented a 6 BR house with pool and jacuzzi, and had a great time. Being that I am a night owl, I ended up being one of the last 3 people awake on Friday night, and got into an interesting conversation with a 22yr old young man, who, shall I say, is slightly confused.......

Over many beers the conversation turned to politics, and 9/11. He is absolutely convinced that the US government is the reason for the towers coming down....not that their weren't terrorists, but that the US government funded the whole operation, so that we could go after Muslims in the Middle East.

I asked him why, and he quoted Rosie O'Donnell, and claimed their are THOUSANDS of facts pointing to the culpability of our government. I asked him to give me 10......and he came up with some opinions, and guesses.....nothing more than hypothesis, and hyperbole......

I asked him how many in the US government were aware....how many would it take to coordinate such an endeavor, and he said the number had to be in the hundreds, if not 1000......at which point I asked why none of them were troubled by their deeds and have come forward to gain the fame that such a wild tale would lead to......again.....they were paid off, so highly that they don't need or want the notoriety that such an incredible tale would give.

Has anyone else ever encountered such an individual who so wholly believes the conspiracy that they are unable to fathom any other possibility?

It was an interesting conversation, to say the least.

Man Lauderdale to Leesburg is a long trip. Maybe the kid was overcome with exhaust fumes.

Hobbit
04-30-2007, 03:33 PM
I'd almost be willing to believe that aliens are responsible over the Bush administration, too. If they were behind 9/11, I'd have to admit that they were competent enough to pull off something this big...:laugh2:

At least you're consistant. I don't think Bush is a dolt, but I can't stand people who think Bush has an IQ of around 50, yet is capable of orchestrating massive cover-ups on a global scale involving thousands of people.

diuretic
04-30-2007, 03:53 PM
LIHOP/MIHOP is bullshit.

Hagbard Celine
04-30-2007, 04:08 PM
It was the Patriots duuude...Now pass the doob.

diuretic
04-30-2007, 06:18 PM
It was the Patriots duuude...Now pass the doob.

How about them Rams? :D

Kathianne
04-30-2007, 06:20 PM
How about them Rams? :D

As much as logical. No1 had a post on site we're all mostly familiar with that stated more or less 25k people would have needed to be involved. All would keep their mouths shut. :cool:

typomaniac
04-30-2007, 06:28 PM
At least you're consistant. I don't think Bush is a dolt, but I can't stand people who think Bush has an IQ of around 50, yet is capable of orchestrating massive cover-ups on a global scale involving thousands of people.I totally agree: it's Cheney who takes care of all the conspiracies. ;)

Hobbit
04-30-2007, 11:37 PM
It was the Patriots duuude...Now pass the doob.

No, it was the philosohpers.

Anybody who didn't get these jokes needs to play more video games.

avatar4321
05-01-2007, 12:27 AM
been checking out the 911 discussion on craigslist earlier today. There are some bonefide lunatics who think it was all a conpiracy. Tower 7 couldnt have collapsed... yeah like having the other two towers fall on top of it wouldnt have damaged the building..

And of course there was the conspiracy nuts who were arguing that there had to be explosives because jet fuel doesn't burn hot neough to weaken steel. Never mind the fact that it's obvious he cant figure out the difference between Tempature in Celsuis and Fahrenheit.

seriously these people are just nuts.

Hobbit
05-01-2007, 01:40 AM
been checking out the 911 discussion on craigslist earlier today. There are some bonefide lunatics who think it was all a conpiracy. Tower 7 couldnt have collapsed... yeah like having the other two towers fall on top of it wouldnt have damaged the building..

And of course there was the conspiracy nuts who were arguing that there had to be explosives because jet fuel doesn't burn hot neough to weaken steel. Never mind the fact that it's obvious he cant figure out the difference between Tempature in Celsuis and Fahrenheit.

seriously these people are just nuts.

I always use Kelvin just to confuse everybody.

diuretic
05-01-2007, 03:03 AM
No, it was the philosohpers.

Anybody who didn't get these jokes needs to play more video games.

What's a video game? :link:

diuretic
05-01-2007, 03:04 AM
I always use Kelvin just to confuse everybody.

Oh I get the philosopher references - Kelvin and Hobbes.

Hobbit
05-01-2007, 04:15 AM
What's a video game? :link:

MGS 2&3...

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/adventure/metalgearsolid2sonsol/index.html?q=metal%20gear%20solid&tag=result;title;4

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/metalgearsolid3/index.html?q=metal%20gear%20solid&tag=result;title;2

diuretic
05-01-2007, 04:40 AM
MGS 2&3...

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/adventure/metalgearsolid2sonsol/index.html?q=metal%20gear%20solid&tag=result;title;4

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/metalgearsolid3/index.html?q=metal%20gear%20solid&tag=result;title;2

Oh I have to buy stuff - thank you for the links. :cheers2:

Gadget (fmr Marine)
05-01-2007, 09:53 PM
been checking out the 911 discussion on craigslist earlier today. There are some bonefide lunatics who think it was all a conpiracy. Tower 7 couldnt have collapsed... yeah like having the other two towers fall on top of it wouldnt have damaged the building..

And of course there was the conspiracy nuts who were arguing that there had to be explosives because jet fuel doesn't burn hot neough to weaken steel. Never mind the fact that it's obvious he cant figure out the difference between Tempature in Celsuis and Fahrenheit.

seriously these people are just nuts.

I wonder if jet fuel burns at anywhere near the same temp as the fuel truck that made the BAY bridge COLLAPSE. Metal will melt when hot enough, huh? Or maybe the US government was behind the Bay Bridge collapse, too.

Monkeybone
05-04-2007, 11:33 AM
of course they were Gadget, the Gov loves to cost us millions and ppl's lives and stuff with these disasters. science be damned....cause we all know metal is heat resistant...that is why the space shuttle doesn't melt.

MtnBiker
05-04-2007, 08:50 PM
of course they were Gadget, the Gov loves to cost us millions and ppl's lives and stuff with these disasters. science be damned....cause we all know metal is heat resistant...that is why the space shuttle doesn't melt.

Is this a joke?

Kathianne
05-04-2007, 09:32 PM
Is this a joke?

Well it may be sarcasm, then again it may be tinfoil?

TheSage
05-13-2007, 11:05 AM
I had an interesting conversation with a young man this weekend. A bunch of us motorcycle riding fools went to Leesburg, FL for a little motorcycle rally....rented a 6 BR house with pool and jacuzzi, and had a great time. Being that I am a night owl, I ended up being one of the last 3 people awake on Friday night, and got into an interesting conversation with a 22yr old young man, who, shall I say, is slightly confused.......

Over many beers the conversation turned to politics, and 9/11. He is absolutely convinced that the US government is the reason for the towers coming down....not that their weren't terrorists, but that the US government funded the whole operation, so that we could go after Muslims in the Middle East.

I asked him why, and he quoted Rosie O'Donnell, and claimed their are THOUSANDS of facts pointing to the culpability of our government. I asked him to give me 10......and he came up with some opinions, and guesses.....nothing more than hypothesis, and hyperbole......

I asked him how many in the US government were aware....how many would it take to coordinate such an endeavor, and he said the number had to be in the hundreds, if not 1000......at which point I asked why none of them were troubled by their deeds and have come forward to gain the fame that such a wild tale would lead to......again.....they were paid off, so highly that they don't need or want the notoriety that such an incredible tale would give.

Has anyone else ever encountered such an individual who so wholly believes the conspiracy that they are unable to fathom any other possibility?

It was an interesting conversation, to say the least.


I believe it. Not that there aren't terrorists. Our government is not morally above a false flag attack. They've done it before. And military/government types are taught to follow orders, not think for themselves, be moral, or tell the truth.

Mr. P
05-13-2007, 11:52 AM
I believe it. Not that there aren't terrorists. Our government is not morally above a false flag attack. They've done it before. And military/government types are taught to follow orders, not think for themselves, be moral, or tell the truth.

Man, you've gone over the edge.:slap:

Dilloduck
05-13-2007, 11:52 AM
I believe it. Not that there aren't terrorists. Our government is not morally above a false flag attack. They've done it before. And military/government types are taught to follow orders, not think for themselves, be moral, or tell the truth.

Truth is that any group with power can create a false flag attack. It doesn't neccessarily have to be generated by the government.

TheSage
05-14-2007, 03:41 PM
Man, you've gone over the edge.:slap:

Does the government ever lie, Mr. P?

Doniston
05-17-2007, 10:27 AM
I'd agree that there are some problems with the offical 9/11 story. And I think there have been periods in the history of the US where we have let things happen in order to create a justification to go to war (Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin). But, I don't think they have near enough evidence to prove the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, though. Agree, there are holes so the official story dosen't quite make sense.

Monkeybone
05-17-2007, 10:36 AM
yes that was sarcasm/joke

and you say this young man siad this? i have noticed a tren among ppl my age...it is cool/mature/rep worthy to hate the government. if you are happy with life then you must be some closed minded boob. i've seen it with my own cousin. now i ain't saying that everything is perfect, but anything that they can grab onto that is against what has heppened these last few years is absolute truth

darin
05-17-2007, 10:37 AM
Agree, there are holes so the official story dosen't quite make sense.

There are no holes in the story. Are you serious?

Monkeybone
05-17-2007, 10:53 AM
i know i am just a little slow hick boy...but plz xplain holes in story

Mr. P
05-17-2007, 11:00 AM
Does the government ever lie, Mr. P?

I donno about lies. I'd say the Government bureaucracy is so large and convoluted, filled with incompetent employees, that they just don't know the truth in many cases. How about that? :poke:

chum43
05-18-2007, 01:19 AM
has anyone here red the northwoods documents? Now I agree with a lot of debunkers, there are 100s of really weak arguments about why and how it was all a cover up. But there are a few that for some reason are hardly ever mentioned that do it for me.

I have no proof obviously, but I do tend to lean towards the government did it for 3 reasons... one northwoods, a declassified government document that outlines different ways to start a war with cuba, including dozens of steps planning how to hijack our own commercial airplanes and crash them blaming it on castro supporters. You can read it online, i'll find the link, I have them saved to my computer. second is the patriot act and the fact that the tragedies of 9/11 have been exploited politically on a daily basis for the last 6 years. it's simple, terrorist attacks are good for government control, period, it's called motive. Third the buildings didn't tumble over, or break down slowly, it was a free fall demolition style, which while i'm not sure they were blown up, it doesn't really add up. Building technology of 50 years ago and days of fires and even an airplane flying into it and we have plenty of examples where buildings simply don't fall like that unless there is controlled demolition, it's unprecedented. then again so is commercial jets flying into skyscrapers so I don't know, but those are all reasonable suspicions to me.

Northwoods...
http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-i.htm page 10.

TheSage
05-18-2007, 02:08 PM
I donno about lies. I'd say the Government bureaucracy is so large and convoluted, filled with incompetent employees, that they just don't know the truth in many cases. How about that? :poke:


So there's not such thing as top secret projects with lies as cover stories? Is that just all in the movies?

chum43
05-18-2007, 03:22 PM
So there's not such thing as top secret projects with lies as cover stories? Is that just all in the movies?

I just posted a link to a declassified government document proving your point... there are top secret projects with lies as cover stories, not only that but one of them back in the 60's specifically included the fake hijacking and destruction of our own commercial jets

Dilloduck
05-18-2007, 04:25 PM
I just posted a link to a declassified government document proving your point... there are top secret projects with lies as cover stories, not only that but one of them back in the 60's specifically included the fake hijacking and destruction of our own commercial jets

"The government did it" is a humongously hollow statement. If you're going to make such fantastic claims at least try to narrow it down to a branch or department, for God sakes. If you really want a believability factor, you my even want to mention a name or two.

chum43
05-18-2007, 05:52 PM
I never said the government did it i was just responding to the thread... I have no names and I don't need any names, there it is, just follow the link, it's a declassified government document proving that somewhere in the US government at some time in the last 50 years pulling off a 9/11 type cover up was an option and was proposed... that is enough for me to say I'm suspicious.

as far as I can tell in this case, the northwoods documents, the reccomendation to the secretary of defense was made by the joint chief of staffs chairman at the time... it's not exactly small beans.

nevadamedic
05-18-2007, 05:56 PM
Hell just talk to Gabby for a little while she about as nuts as this person is..

In her defense, Ive seen here make a couple of good posts, but nothing political:laugh2:

nevadamedic
05-18-2007, 05:58 PM
So there's not such thing as top secret projects with lies as cover stories? Is that just all in the movies?

Sure there are top secret projects. Area 51(see my thread for links), Wright-Patterson AFB, Edwards AFB, the TTR and not to mention the CIA!

Dilloduck
05-18-2007, 07:09 PM
I never said the government did it i was just responding to the thread... I have no names and I don't need any names, there it is, just follow the link, it's a declassified government document proving that somewhere in the US government at some time in the last 50 years pulling off a 9/11 type cover up was an option and was proposed... that is enough for me to say I'm suspicious.

as far as I can tell in this case, the northwoods documents, the reccomendation to the secretary of defense was made by the joint chief of staffs chairman at the time... it's not exactly small beans.

Read the autobio of the guy who runs that site and then tell me who you think I should be suspicous of-----

http://emperors-clothes.com/editors.html

Mr. P
05-18-2007, 07:30 PM
So there's not such thing as top secret projects with lies as cover stories? Is that just all in the movies?

Hey I had one of those Top Secret thingys once, but I can't talk about it and I won't make stuff up, does that make a lie?

chum43
05-18-2007, 08:07 PM
Read the autobio of the guy who runs that site and then tell me who you think I should be suspicous of-----

http://emperors-clothes.com/editors.html

Are you F***ing serious?! Did you even look at the page, they are photocopies, I'm not reading this off of some story published there, no editing or writeup is needed just look at the documents.

ok well, here is an abc news story about operation northwoods in response to a book that mentions the documents written by a veteran journalist. http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=92662&page=1

You people are unbelievable, on both sides, all you do all day is look for ridiculous little tidbits that will discredit OBVIOUS arguments that have NOTHING to do with what you are discrediting. Like I said before the majority of the truth movement is full of shit, going on about missiles and video tapes and cell phones, it's all crap, but I'm here showing you a REAL document that shows the US government wanting to do to cuba what they did to iraq, justify involvement with a staged terrorist attack, with even more similarities.

this isn't something i just pulled off of some random website, that was just the easiest place to access the photos, i repeat photos, of the actual documents.

chum43
05-18-2007, 08:25 PM
here, you still think operation northwoods isn't credible?
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

there it is, george washington universities national security archives... go read them there. It's the exact same photo images of the original documents.

Dilloduck
05-18-2007, 10:01 PM
here, you still think operation northwoods isn't credible?
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

there it is, george washington universities national security archives... go read them there. It's the exact same photo images of the original documents.

Calm down chum---there is exactly NO evidence--NONE--NADA that these plans were used by our government against our own country. Get back to us when you have some. Do you realize how far it is from suspicion to fact ?

chum43
05-18-2007, 11:08 PM
no one said they ever used the plans, the point is they made the plans, which to me is enough to suspect that the us government directly carried out the attacks on 9/11 at the very least equally as much as I suspect it was some rogue terrorists.

I didn't mean to get so worked up but it just angers me how much people need to even consider it a possibility... and i don't just mean this specifically, but any government corruption, I almost think if the government came out tomorow and said they did it that most people would still consider it a stretch.

this is evidence however, undeniable evidence, that the US government does stage quasi-terrorist attacks against it's own civilians as mandate to do whatever it wants. whether they carry out the plans or not, they planned them and that is enough for me to not trust them at all, specially when it comes to things that enable them to go to war and pass things like the patriot act and the real id act.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 09:30 AM
no one said they ever used the plans, the point is they made the plans, which to me is enough to suspect that the us government directly carried out the attacks on 9/11 at the very least equally as much as I suspect it was some rogue terrorists.

I didn't mean to get so worked up but it just angers me how much people need to even consider it a possibility... and i don't just mean this specifically, but any government corruption, I almost think if the government came out tomorrow and said they did it that most people would still consider it a stretch.

this is evidence however, undeniable evidence, that the US government does stage quasi-terrorist attacks against it's own civilians as mandate to do whatever it wants. whether they carry out the plans or not, they planned them and that is enough for me to not trust them at all, specially when it comes to things that enable them to go to war and pass things like the patriot act and the real id act.


Again--what branch, department, people committee, etc in our "government" are you accusing to be in on these plots ? Anything is possible but if you expect your suspicions to be taken seriously and acted upon you better come up with something better than suspicion. I doubt anyone would live in this endless state of denial if someone were to prove that some rogue element of some vague group of shadowy figures announced that they had pulled of the 9/11 attacks but when say " the government", you're talking about a hell of a lot of people, some of which I'm POSITIVE had nothing to do with 9/11

Gaffer
05-19-2007, 10:03 AM
The government and especially the military makes plans of all sorts. Those plans can be used to estimate the posiblity of such plans being used and their success. There are plans for invasions of every country in the world, including allies. There are plans for defense against every concievable type of attack. This is standard in the government and whole departments are dedicated to just these sorts of things. You can bet its all been upgraded considerably since 9/11.

Northwoods is probaly a old such plan from the 60's. Makes me wonder why they would remove the classification from such a thing.

TheSage
05-19-2007, 10:09 AM
Again--what branch, department, people committee, etc in our "government" are you accusing to be in on these plots ? Anything is possible but if you expect your suspicions to be taken seriously and acted upon you better come up with something better than suspicion. I doubt anyone would live in this endless state of denial if someone were to prove that some rogue element of some vague group of shadowy figures announced that they had pulled of the 9/11 attacks but when say " the government", you're talking about a hell of a lot of people, some of which I'm POSITIVE had nothing to do with 9/11

But some of which probably did. There's no Department of False Flag Attacks. Sometimes even liberals are right, dillo.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 10:14 AM
But some of which probably did. There's no Department of False Flag Attacks. Sometimes even liberals are right, dillo.

Heck--may as well get straight to the "shadow government" and quit messing aroung with the little stuff.

http://www.illuminati-news.com/moriah.htm

TheSage
05-19-2007, 10:16 AM
Heck--may as well get straight to the "shadow government" and quit messing aroung with the little stuff.

http://www.illuminati-news.com/moriah.htm

Yeah. Might as well. The truth rocks.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 10:22 AM
Yeah. Might as well. The truth rocks.

Our "government" is so incompetant that it can't find it's ass with both hands but those that control it and have infiltrated it have a pretty successful thing going. Conservative-liberal bah. They LOVE to see the little people infighting. It helps them.

TheSage
05-19-2007, 10:28 AM
Our "government" is so incompetant that it can't find it's ass with both hands but those that control it and have infiltrated it have a pretty successful thing going. Conservative-liberal bah. They LOVE to see the little people infighting. It helps them.

It helps them when we fight over non-issues. I'm quite certain they don't appreciate the truth about themselves being discussed.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 10:34 AM
It helps them when we fight over non-issues. I'm quite certain they don't appreciate the truth about themselves being discussed.

No doubt they love to watch us duke it out over things that will be of no consequence when their plans are finalized. Smart of them to make us think that we might be on a "side" that has a chance to "win". Only chance we have is for enough people to see it all and even that might dangerous.

Mr. P
05-19-2007, 10:37 AM
The government and especially the military makes plans of all sorts. Those plans can be used to estimate the posiblity of such plans being used and their success. There are plans for invasions of every country in the world, including allies. There are plans for defense against every concievable type of attack. This is standard in the government and whole departments are dedicated to just these sorts of things. You can bet its all been upgraded considerably since 9/11.

Northwoods is probaly a old such plan from the 60's. Makes me wonder why they would remove the classification from such a thing.

I was suspect of that as well. Something just doesn't fit in this whole thing.

TheSage
05-19-2007, 10:39 AM
No doubt they love to watch us duke it out over things that will be of no consequence when their plans are finalized. Smart of them to make us think that we might be on a "side" that has a chance to "win". Only chance we have is for enough people to see it all and even that might dangerous.



Society will be locked down before people wake up. They will do it in the name of "Terra-ism". If fully believe islam is a threat to the entire civilized world, which is why I believe we should immediately ban all muslim immigration into the country. But they won't do that. They will allow jihadis to permeate the country, then they will be "justified" in locking down the entire nation in police state fashion.

Ban Muslim Immigration Now!

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 10:48 AM
Society will be locked down before people wake up. They will do it in the name of "Terra-ism". If fully believe islam is a threat to the entire civilized world, which is why I believe we should immediately ban all muslim immigration into the country. But they won't do that. They will allow jihadis to permeate the country, then they will be "justified" in locking down the entire nation in police state fashion.

Ban Muslim Immigration Now!

Agreed--for America to "win" it will have to admit that some basic premises were founded upon NO LONGER WORK. Evil has hoisted us on our own petard when we declare it to have "equal rights".

Doniston
05-19-2007, 12:10 PM
There are no holes in the story. Are you serious? I wouldn't have said it if I wasn't serious. If there weren't holes there wouldn't be ANY credibility to consipacy theories. And I am not about to go into them. My comment was generic.

Hobbit
05-19-2007, 12:50 PM
I wouldn't have said it if I wasn't serious. If there weren't holes there wouldn't be ANY credibility to consipacy theories. And I am not about to go into them. My comment was generic.

The so-called 'holes' have all been debunked by numerous sources, not the least of which is Popular Mechanics. Check out these links for more info.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

The truth is that the conspiracy theories have no credibility, whatsoever, and are only the product of a shocked mind attempting to ascribe order to what is, essentially a random and chaotic world.

Doniston
05-19-2007, 03:14 PM
The so-called 'holes' have all been debunked by numerous sources, not the least of which is Popular Mechanics. Check out these links for more info.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

The truth is that the conspiracy theories have no credibility, whatsoever, and are only the product of a shocked mind attempting to ascribe order to what is, essentially a random and chaotic world. "ALL" is a very big word, and some of the things I find dubious have never been addressed as least as far as I have heard. and your word "Truth" is only in what YOU opine to be true. It is by no means universal.

Hobbit
05-19-2007, 03:29 PM
"ALL" is a very big word, and some of the things I find dubious have never been addressed as least as far as I have heard. and your word "Truth" is only in what YOU opine to be true. It is by no means universal.

Ok, what holes to you want to see addressed? What doesn't add up for you? Please be specific.

loosecannon
05-19-2007, 03:37 PM
So our current admin secured it's 04 election, it's invasion of Iraq's oil, half of it's efforts to seize permenent control of the US political system, it's unitary executive agenda, It's "War President" powers on an event.....

And we know that the role of the federtal government falls within the range between negligent and more than too personally involved with the families of the attackers on the generous side...

to complicit or negligently standing down while the attacks occured as a moderate position...

to definitely planning the opps as a military strategy that is not unthinkable considering all the shit the US government has done in the past century....

I mean this is a military whose primary reasoning at one point in the cold war was that a pre emptive nuclear strike against the USSR could possibly be considered if the US would only suffered a 50% casualty rate amongst our own citizens in the aftermath.

They exposed our own soldiers to radiation and chemical weapons and LSD just to see what would happen.

They released radiation dust clouds over the US just to see what would happen.

I dunno how involved our own were in 9/11, but it isn't unthinkable that they planned it. And the most generous possibilities are still grim.

loosecannon
05-19-2007, 03:39 PM
Ok, what holes to you want to see addressed? What doesn't add up for you? Please be specific.

Start with tower 7

chum43
05-19-2007, 04:26 PM
I really don't know who to target specifically with my suspicion, like someone said there is no department of false flag terrorism...

it also seems very convenient to me to have an administration which the general public thinks is completely incompetent and headed by an idiot(not my words), they constantly come on tv with their pants down saying "we fucked up" on the most simple of tasks(stopping jet airliners hijacked with boxcutters, sending help to katrina survivors, and sending a swat team in after a guy with a twentytwo and 9mm), they then use these catastrophic blunders to create super agencies and pass acts and such which they carry out flawlessly and to the T. I hate to sound like a crazy fool but everytime the government really screws up and says "oops!" and then suggests these radical widespread solutions when they should have been able to stop the problem under the current laws, it makes me wonder if every big ridiculous mistake isn't just another way to get to what they want and get people to hand it over.

9/11 goes down, they balloon the department of homeland security, they pass the patriot act with no debate, they impliment it like a bat out of hell, they say everyone is a terrorist and act accordingly... Katrina happens, they do nothing, all hell breaks loose, their first action is to send the military down to confiscate all firearms, they give fema all this power, and start to build fema camps all over the country... the va tech shooting happens while cops and swat teams get the order to stand outside and watch it happen with armoured vehicles sitting in the parking lot, the dc gun ban just got shot down, they throw all this pro-gun control legislation at people and it's just being signed in.

the government, the shadow government, the new world order, world leaders, rich fucks, whoever it is, they hide behind the guise of a horribly incompetent administration when they want something changed, but when it comes to keeping us in the dark and having their way with us they are insanely efficient and work almost flawlessly.

loosecannon
05-19-2007, 05:38 PM
they hide behind the guise of a horribly incompetent administration when they want something changed, but when it comes to keeping us in the dark and having their way with us they are insanely efficient and work almost flawlessly.


crazy like foxes

Doniston
05-19-2007, 06:04 PM
Ok, what holes to you want to see addressed? What doesn't add up for you? Please be specific.O don't really wnt to do this as it is an exercise in futility, but you asked.

1. The original planes hit some twenty stories from the top. where the fires were. the fires would have weakened one side of the building, (not uniformely oon all sides. thus one side of the building would have collapsed and the upper stories would have fallen sideways, not pancaked, as has been descibed. further, the final pictures showed girders standing nearly straight up and down at ground level, which also could not have happened if it had collapsed because of weakened beams.

2. There has been a lot of fun poked at the idea that if the government had set the explosives, they couldn't have known precisely which floors to set them at. Now that's cute. since I never heard anyone suggesting that the explosives were placed on the floors where the planes hit. but rather at the base of the building in the manner that demolition is performed.

3. I do not beleive that the Government planned and carried out the destruction, However there is a possibility that they (or the Israelis)Knew about it, and could actually have helped out by setting explosives in various locations. this would have required a dozen explosive experts, not thousands. as is claimed.

Is that enough to start with???

Doniston
05-19-2007, 06:09 PM
Start with tower 7 tower 7 would not be the one to start with as it could have happend because of the collapse of the other two. That is a definite posibility.

chum43
05-19-2007, 06:28 PM
buildings simply never fall like that except by demolition.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 06:49 PM
buildings simply never fall like that except by demolition.

really?-----how many buildings constructed like those have you seen hit by big ass airliners loaded with fuel have you seen ?

chum43
05-19-2007, 07:29 PM
I said the very same thing in an earlier post, so I partly agree, it's hard to know because jet airliners have never crashed into skyscrapers, but it doesn't mean it's likely to be the way they'd fall.

although a ten ton b25 bomber did fly into the 79th floor of the empire state building at 300mph back in 1945, and even by those building standards 60 years ago it didn't fall at all... the fusalage exploded on impact causing fires on many of the upper floors and one of it's engines even fell down an elevator shaft and caused massive fires on the ground level. Fires which burned for quite a while and still no collapse, in fact apparently there wasn't even a concern of a collapse at the time. It was specifically designed so it could withold such an impact, as I would guess most important tall buildings are.

It is true however that buildings like this are designed to load-shift, which means that if it were to all fall down, it would happen symmetrically, but my point is that it shouldn't all come down, that design itself is there to make sure that the overall structure holds up, the most we should have seen is some upper floors simply tumbling over. But if it were to fall it would probably fall straight down. My contention is that this should have happened almost immediately, fires alone wouldn't cause a free fall, and if the free fall were to happen it would have to be a very serious blow to many of the upper floors and it wouldn't need the extra time for fires to do any extra damage, that simply isn't how it works. Buildings are designed not to fall, and using that as an argument for why they fell how they did when there wasn't anything causing them to do so is a little suspicious. The official story is fires, if it were the aircraft it should have happened a lot sooner.

initial impact is the only that could have caused structural damage to the building, fuel simply burning doesn't do that... it's just fuel.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 07:35 PM
I said the very same thing in an earlier post, so I partly agree, it's hard to know because jet airliners have never crashed into skyscrapers, but it doesn't mean it's likely to be the way they'd fall.

although a ten ton b25 bomber did fly into the 79th floor of the empire state building at 300mph back in 1945, and even by those building standards 60 years ago it didn't fall at all... the fusalage exploded on impact causing fires on many of the upper floors and one of it's engines even fell down an elevator shaft and caused massive fires on the ground level. Fires which burned for quite a while and still no collapse, in fact apparently there wasn't even a concern of a collapse at the time. It was specifically designed so it could withold such an impact, as I would guess most important tall buildings are.

It is true however that buildings like this are designed to load-shift, which means that if it were to all fall down, it would happen symmetrically, but my point is that it shouldn't all come down, that design itself is there to make sure that the overall structure holds up, the most we should have seen is some upper floors simply tumbling over. But if it were to fall it would probably fall straight down. My contention is that this should have happened almost immediately, fires alone wouldn't cause a free fall, and if the free fall were to happen it would have to be a very serious blow to many of the upper floors and it wouldn't need the extra time for fires to do any extra damage, that simply isn't how it works. Buildings are designed not to fall, and using that as an argument for why they fell how they did when there wasn't anything causing them to do so is a little suspicious. The official story is fires, if it were the aircraft it should have happened a lot sooner.

initial impact is the only that could have caused structural damage to the building, fuel simply burning doesn't do that... it's just fuel.

so---our "government" hires a bunch of Arabs to fly into building already loaded with explosives so we can start a war with Iraq ?

chum43
05-19-2007, 07:37 PM
The government and especially the military makes plans of all sorts. Those plans can be used to estimate the posiblity of such plans being used and their success. There are plans for invasions of every country in the world, including allies. There are plans for defense against every concievable type of attack. This is standard in the government and whole departments are dedicated to just these sorts of things. You can bet its all been upgraded considerably since 9/11.

Northwoods is probaly a old such plan from the 60's. Makes me wonder why they would remove the classification from such a thing.

So if you are convinced that the US government today could have made a plan very similar to what the 9/11 truth people claim happened then why can't how could you not consider it a possibility? that is my point, they are planning things like this, it's not only possible they did it, it's likely they at least had plans to do it or something very similar. Northwoods just proves that it's commonplace in the government to draw up such plans, which really scares me and makes me suspicious of the things the government currently has on the books... operation northwoods was never implimented because we never really went to war with cuba, what makes you think there couldn't be an iraq equivalent that was put into place, because we did decide to go to war with iraq?

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 07:40 PM
So if you are convinced that the US government today could have made a plan very similar to what the 9/11 truth people claim happened then why can't how could you not consider it a possibility? that is my point, they are planning things like this, it's not only possible they did it, it's likely they at least had plans to do it or something very similar. Northwoods just proves that it's commonplace in the government to draw up such plans, which really scares me and makes me suspicious of the things the government currently has on the books... operation northwoods was never implimented because we never really went to war with cuba, what makes you think there couldn't be an iraq equivalent that was put into place, because we did decide to go to war with iraq?

You're getting closer---you outta be afraid of people who tell you to trust and rely on the "government".

chum43
05-19-2007, 07:50 PM
so---our "government" hires a bunch of Arabs to fly into building already loaded with explosives so we can start a war with Iraq ?

no no no, people really need to go read at least page 10 and 11 of operation northwoods... and I'm not saying it definitely happened, i'm just saying it's a definite possibility... if the operation was anything like northwoods it would have happened like this...

1. a replica empty aircraft of the actual passenger flight is created, and traded off for the real aircraft at some rendezvous point. and don't say that would be impossible to shut up the passengers, in a situation like that they could easily be confused to think they were part of some non-involved flight that was brought down for security reasons.

1b. all important people are told to evacuate targeted buildings including building 7(giuliani) because of drills and vacation and such

2. aircraft is flown into buildings with the skill of the best pilots on earth.(and we have the technology to do this by remote devices, so no suicide pilots needed)

3. buildings are torn down demolition style

4. tapes altered to show enemy involvement of the plans and other constructed evidence to show it was our enemy that did it

5. victims and mock victims are mourned

6. we declare patriot day and unite against the damn terrorists

7. we pass the patriot act with no debate, which was drawn up long before 9/11 and would never have passed before hand, but after no resistance

8. we go to war with congress and the people behind us

seems plausible to me... and with documents showing the government willingly plans such catastrophic events with no remorse just shows me an open door, they could have easily done it if they wanted to, and they had all the reason in the world, why not?

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 07:55 PM
no no no, people really need to go read at least page 10 and 11 of operation northwoods... and I'm not saying it definitely happened, i'm just saying it's a definite possibility... if the operation was anything like northwoods it would have happened like this...

1. a replica empty aircraft of the actual passenger flight is created, and traded off for the real aircraft at some rendezvous point. and don't say that would be impossible to shut up the passengers, in a situation like that they could easily be confused to think they were part of some non-involved flight that was brought down for security reasons.

1b. all important people are told to evacuate targeted buildings including building 7(giuliani) because of drills and vacation and such

2. aircraft is flown into buildings with the skill of the best pilots on earth.(and we have the technology to do this by remote devices, so no suicide pilots needed)

3. buildings are torn down demolition style

4. tapes altered to show enemy involvement of the plans and other constructed evidence to show it was our enemy that did it

5. victims and mock victims are mourned

6. we declare patriot day and unite against the damn terrorists

7. we pass the patriot act with no debate, which was drawn up long before 9/11 and would never have passed before hand, but after no resistance

8. we go to war with congress and the people behind us

seems plausible to me... and with documents showing the government willingly plans such catastrophic events with no remorse just shows me an open door, they could have easily done it if they wanted to, and they had all the reason in the world, why not?

Why not just hand a bunch of crazy arabs the same plan ?

Kathianne
05-19-2007, 08:02 PM
no no no, people really need to go read at least page 10 and 11 of operation northwoods... and I'm not saying it definitely happened, i'm just saying it's a definite possibility... if the operation was anything like northwoods it would have happened like this...

1. a replica empty aircraft of the actual passenger flight is created, and traded off for the real aircraft at some rendezvous point. and don't say that would be impossible to shut up the passengers, in a situation like that they could easily be confused to think they were part of some non-involved flight that was brought down for security reasons.:tinfoil:

1b. all important people are told to evacuate targeted buildings including building 7(giuliani) because of drills and vacation and such Right and they all keep their mouths shut. :tinfoil: and somehow they get Osama to take credit. :cool:

2. aircraft is flown into buildings with the skill of the best pilots on earth.(and we have the technology to do this by remote devices, so no suicide pilots needed)

3. buildings are torn down demolition style :tinfoil: All those explosives brought into two towers and the Pentagon, no one sees a thing. :cool: Oh yeah, then explosives big enough to make that crater in PA.

4. tapes altered to show enemy involvement of the plans and other constructed evidence to show it was our enemy that did it Yep, wasn't good enough that Osama said they planned it. Told his followers to watch for the towers to come down.

5. victims and mock victims are mourned

6. we declare patriot day and unite against the damn terrorists

7. we pass the patriot act with no debate, which was drawn up long before 9/11 and would never have passed before hand, but after no resistance

8. we go to war with congress and the people behind us

seems plausible to me... and with documents showing the government willingly plans such catastrophic events with no remorse just shows me an open door, they could have easily done it if they wanted to, and they had all the reason in the world, why not?

For some reason, I have trouble following your thinking.

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:05 PM
Why not just hand a bunch of crazy arabs the same plan ?

because they couldn't possibly have taken over an airplane with the weapons they had and actually flown it well enough to do what the government says they did.

Kathianne
05-19-2007, 08:05 PM
because they couldn't possibly have taken over an airplane with the weapons they had and actually flown it well enough to do what the government says they did.

Yeah they could have. Much more plausible than your theory.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 08:07 PM
because they couldn't possibly have taken over an airplane with the weapons they had and actually flown it well enough to do what the government says they did.

Oh really? ----who told you that?

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:15 PM
For some reason, I have trouble following your thinking.

All the important people that were not present at the attacks either A. had an interest in it happening(giuliani, who's security headquarters inside building 7 were evacuated days before because of "drills"), or B. simply thought they got lucky, I'm talking important important, not your boss, like in on it important.

that area of the pentagon was closed off because of construction, and when was the last time you looked twice at construction going on in new york city, it's a constant thing, buildings are constantly being worked on and updated, it's not hard to believe that they could bring in explosives and set them up in places not normally seen by the everyday public. On top of that, there are people who have reported suspicious people doing suspicious things inside the buildings, the only problem with "witnesses" is that a lot of them were killed when the building came down, of the few that got out there are even fewer who saw things happening, or were holding off total shock enough to actually put two and two together.

oh and when was the last time you saw osama bin laden give a real interview, or talk publicly? oh right never, everything you've ever heard about or from osama is released by the US and is always video quality too crappy to invalidate the dubbed audio and is always subtitled from a language that maybe a few dozen people not in the military could actually translate. Right so we should take everything the US GOVERNMENT releases to us through mainstream media as undeniable FACT!? are you kidding me, take the osama tapes at face value. Not to mention he's CIA trained and equipped, he's owes us.

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:21 PM
Oh really? ----who told you that?

it's this thing called common sense... have you ever met a pilot? I know quite a few and most of them former military... they wouldn't allow a guy with boxcutters to take over their plane... do you even know how a plane is flown, i've trained to become a pilot, one swift move with the controls and anyone not strapped in is dead... anything less than automatic assault weapons and there is no way in hell that plane gets taken over. boxcutters have at maximum a one inch blade, you are telling me that a guy at the controls of a jet airliner would allow a guy with a terrorist with a one inch blade to take over the controls without any resistance?

and I and many other people have talked to pilots and looked closely at what those planes did, no guys who barely passed flight school a month earlier are doing that... in fact someone who can barely land a single engine cessna would have a hard time keeping a commercial jet in the air at all... and according to a guy who personally tested the "hijackers" he was at best below average on a single engine tiny aircraft.

Kathianne
05-19-2007, 08:23 PM
All the important people that were not present at the attacks either A. had an interest in it happening(giuliani, who's security headquarters inside building 7 were evacuated days before because of "drills"), or B. simply thought they got lucky, I'm talking important important, not your boss, like in on it important.

that area of the pentagon was closed off because of construction, and when was the last time you looked twice at construction going on in new york city, it's a constant thing, buildings are constantly being worked on and updated, it's not hard to believe that they could bring in explosives and set them up in places not normally seen by the everyday public. On top of that, there are people who have reported suspicious people doing suspicious things inside the buildings, the only problem with "witnesses" is that a lot of them were killed when the building came down, of the few that got out there are even fewer who saw things happening, or were holding off total shock enough to actually put two and two together.

oh and when was the last time you saw osama bin laden give a real interview, or talk publicly? oh right never, everything you've ever heard about or from osama is released by the US and is always video quality too crappy to invalidate the dubbed audio and is always subtitled from a language that maybe a few dozen people not in the military could actually translate. Right so we should take everything the US GOVERNMENT releases to us through mainstream media as undeniable FACT!? are you kidding me, take the osama tapes at face value. Not to mention he's CIA trained and equipped, he's owes us.

Okkaaayyyy:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:iMn_lTUPQTMJ:www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html+osama+admits+9/11&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a


October 29, 2004, 5:10pm EDT
BIN LADEN ADMITS 9/11 RESPONSIBILITY, WARNS OF MORE ATTACKS

A tape aired by Al-Jazeera television Friday showed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden admitting for the first time that he orchestrated the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and saying the United States could face more.
NewsHour Links

Online NewsHour Special Reports:
Domestic Security: The Homefront and the War on Terrorism


The Response to the Sept. 11 Attacks



It was the first footage of bin Laden to appear in more than a year and came just days before voters head to the polls Tuesday after an extremely tight president race.

In the 18-minute tape, bin Laden, who appeared to be sitting or standing at a table against a neutral background, said: "Despite entering the fourth year after Sept. 11, Bush is still deceiving you and hiding the truth from you and therefore the reasons are still there to repeat what happened."

Bin Laden said he thought of the method of attacking U.S. skyscrapers when he saw Israeli aircraft bombing tower blocks in Lebanon in 1982.

"We decided to destroy towers in America," he said. "God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind."

Although there was no way to authenticate the tape or say when it was made, it referenced the upcoming presidential election.

"Your security is not in the hands of (Democratic candidate John) Kerry or Bush or al-Qaida. Your security is in your own hands," bin Laden said, according to the Associated Press.

"To the U.S. people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another disaster. I tell you: Security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. It is known that those who hate freedom do not have dignified souls, like those of the 19 blessed ones," he said, referring to the 19 hijackers.

"We fought you because we are free ... and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security, we undermine yours."

An editor at Al-Jazeera said the network received the tape Friday but did not say how, Reuters reported.

In September 2003, Al-Jazeera aired a tape of bin Laden with his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri in which he mentions five Sept. 11 hijackers by name.

An audiotape, which CIA analysts said was likely bin Laden, surfaced in April and called for a truce with European nations if they pulled troops out of Muslim countries.

-- Compiled from wire reports and other media sources

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 08:33 PM
it's this thing called common sense... have you ever met a pilot? I know quite a few and most of them former military... they wouldn't allow a guy with boxcutters to take over their plane... do you even know how a plane is flown, i've trained to become a pilot, one swift move with the controls and anyone not strapped in is dead... anything less than automatic assault weapons and there is no way in hell that plane gets taken over. boxcutters have at maximum a one inch blade, you are telling me that a guy at the controls of a jet airliner would allow a guy with a terrorist with a one inch blade to take over the controls without any resistance?

and I and many other people have talked to pilots and looked closely at what those planes did, no guys who barely passed flight school a month earlier are doing that... in fact someone who can barely land a single engine cessna would have a hard time keeping a commercial jet in the air at all... and according to a guy who personally tested the "hijackers" he was at best below average on a single engine tiny aircraft.


I give up----when you find out who "really" did it, give them a swift kick in the shins for me. Good luck! :bang3:

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:33 PM
see this is exactly why I can't say for sure one way or the other, because that seems like a really genuine claim that he pulled off 9/11, I just can't be completely convinced either way, all i'm trying to say is be open to it and don't trust the government. But that is very interesting, I've never heard or read those specific claims by bin laden... he actively admits he carried out the attacks because we are over there attacking them, strange that ron paul got attacked for saying that... but that is another topic, i have to bring this up on that discussion.

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:37 PM
you do mention the joy and pride taken by many arabs about 9/11, isn't it also possible that it's a double edged sword, that bin laden benefits from taking credit for it the same way our government benefits from it happening... i'm not saying that is the case, but it's definitely a possibility... I mean if I were bin laden it would be tough for me not to take every step in taking complete credit for it.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 08:40 PM
Your theory that the US has it's shit sooooooo together that no one could possibly hurt us except our own government is unforunately held by way too many people.

Gaffer
05-19-2007, 08:44 PM
it's this thing called common sense... have you ever met a pilot? I know quite a few and most of them former military... they wouldn't allow a guy with boxcutters to take over their plane... do you even know how a plane is flown, i've trained to become a pilot, one swift move with the controls and anyone not strapped in is dead... anything less than automatic assault weapons and there is no way in hell that plane gets taken over. boxcutters have at maximum a one inch blade, you are telling me that a guy at the controls of a jet airliner would allow a guy with a terrorist with a one inch blade to take over the controls without any resistance?

and I and many other people have talked to pilots and looked closely at what those planes did, no guys who barely passed flight school a month earlier are doing that... in fact someone who can barely land a single engine cessna would have a hard time keeping a commercial jet in the air at all... and according to a guy who personally tested the "hijackers" he was at best below average on a single engine tiny aircraft.

I won't even go into the silliness of the buildings being blown up here.

As for the hijacking of the planes. It can easily be done with box cutters. I could kill you very quickly with a box cutter. All I have to do is prove it with one person then put the knife to the throat of another and tell you to get out of your seat. The assumption before 9/11 is that hijackers want to take over the plane for some purpose and land it somewhere. So pilots were trained to go along with the hijackers, no one expected suicidal muslims to take over the planes.

To say the government was behind it all is simply ignorant. 9/11 was brought about by bin laden and al queda.

Kathianne
05-19-2007, 08:46 PM
I won't even go into the silliness of the buildings being blown up here.

As for the hijacking of the planes. It can easily be done with box cutters. I could kill you very quickly with a box cutter. All I have to do is prove it with one person then put the knife to the throat of another and tell you to get out of your seat. The assumption before 9/11 is that hijackers want to take over the plane for some purpose and land it somewhere. So pilots were trained to go along with the hijackers, no one expected suicidal muslims to take over the planes.

To say the government was behind it all is simply ignorant. 9/11 was brought about by bin laden and al queda.

Not too mention that up to that day, the protocol was to go along with hijackers, for the safety of everyone. Those in PA crash knew more than the others.

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:46 PM
Your theory that the US has it's shit sooooooo together that no one could possibly hurt us except our own government is unforunately held by way too many people.

I didnt claim that... ever.

I'm not here saying they could have shot the planes down or stopped them at the border or even stopped them from getting on the plane, i'm just saying they couldn't(or at least it's very very very unlikely they did, which means 3 seperate occasions is a real stretch) have taken over the pilots of a jet airliner and all those passengers enough to fly huge commercial jets the way they did with the training they had.

all I ever cited was the fact that little things rarely happen, because we are an incredibly rich country, it's only the big things that end up benefitting the people who hold power in this country.

chum43
05-19-2007, 08:52 PM
Not too mention that up to that day, the protocol was to go along with hijackers, for the safety of everyone. Those in PA crash knew more than the others.

these are very good points... again I'd like to point out I'm not a "truther" and i'm not trying to convince you the government did it because i don't believe that myself, all I've ever said was I was suspicious, mostly because of operation northwoods.

As for the protocol, it does explain it pretty well and maybe my argument is misplaced, maybe it shouldn't be used to suggest the government pulled it off but that the protocol is dead wrong, it's the same protocol and training that allowed the va tech shootings... why are we all being trained to be cowards? why are we handing over everything, when did we start assuming people were going to land planes and just hold people hostage gunpoint... we need to assume the worst and take out the threat in these situations. if this is the case I wouldn't blame the government i'd blame the faa coward training and all the cowards on the plane and all the coward pilots, at the very least i can't feel any sympathy for them, handing things over to terrorists with boxcutters, what happened to real men and women who would fight back?

to play conspiracy nut... it is a government agency that trains everyone to do what hostage takers and terrorists say.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 08:53 PM
I didnt claim that... ever.

I'm not here saying they could have shot the planes down or stopped them at the border or even stopped them from getting on the plane, i'm just saying they couldn't(or at least it's very very very unlikely they did, which means 3 seperate occasions is a real stretch) have taken over the pilots of a jet airliner and all those passengers enough to fly huge commercial jets the way they did with the training they had.

all I ever cited was the fact that little things rarely happen, because we are an incredibly rich country, it's only the big things that end up benefitting the people who hold power in this country.

pppppsssssssssssssssssssttttt---bin ladens' cult really wants to kill us and they really do have the ability.

loosecannon
05-19-2007, 10:04 PM
pppppsssssssssssssssssssttttt---bin ladens' cult really wants to kill us and they really do have the ability.

Ability to kill how many of us DD?

During the cold war we were prepared to attack the USSR even tho studies showed that 120 million Americans might die as a result.

In a list of causes of death among Americans in the last 7 years terrorism might rank 40th.

And I do not expect that under ANY circumstances it will ever crest above tenth in a ten year period.

Whereas the civil war was THE leading cause of American deaths during it's term.

And Americans kill 30,000 Americans every year.

Lets get our priorities straight.

chum43
05-19-2007, 10:07 PM
thank you... terrorism is relatively a non-threat... and we could keep it that way by staying out of the middle east and stop giving everyone the means to attack to us, and stop supplying the world with nukes.

Dilloduck
05-19-2007, 11:41 PM
Ability to kill how many of us DD?

During the cold war we were prepared to attack the USSR even tho studies showed that 120 million Americans might die as a result.

In a list of causes of death among Americans in the last 7 years terrorism might rank 40th.

And I do not expect that under ANY circumstances it will ever crest above tenth in a ten year period.

Whereas the civil war was THE leading cause of American deaths during it's term.

And Americans kill 30,000 Americans every year.

Lets get our priorities straight.

They shoot us in the wallet. Bin Laden ain't stupid. How much do you think his 9/11 attack has cost us altogether so far ? I can think of at 10 good ways to send America into a spiral of fear. ( and no--- I ain't gonna announce em) Hint--we're dependent--I mean seriously dependent on far more than oil.

Kathianne
05-20-2007, 12:06 AM
Ability to kill how many of us DD?

During the cold war we were prepared to attack the USSR even tho studies showed that 120 million Americans might die as a result.

In a list of causes of death among Americans in the last 7 years terrorism might rank 40th.

And I do not expect that under ANY circumstances it will ever crest above tenth in a ten year period.

Whereas the civil war was THE leading cause of American deaths during it's term.

And Americans kill 30,000 Americans every year.

Lets get our priorities straight.

Ok, first we deal with cancer, auto accidents, heart disease, diabetes, etc. Then we get around to terrorism. Got it.

nevadamedic
05-20-2007, 01:01 AM
pppppsssssssssssssssssssttttt---bin ladens' cult really wants to kill us and they really do have the ability.

:clap:

loosecannon
05-20-2007, 10:59 AM
They shoot us in the wallet. Bin Laden ain't stupid. How much do you think his 9/11 attack has cost us altogether so far ? I can think of at 10 good ways to send America into a spiral of fear. ( and no--- I ain't gonna announce em) Hint--we're dependent--I mean seriously dependent on far more than oil.

At least half the damage done to the US by 9/11 was self inflicted. We ruined our standing in the world, wrecked our own military, spent half a trillion dollars on a war that was counterproductive and then got stuck with no solution.

We followed Bush straight into Bin Laden's trap.

loosecannon
05-20-2007, 11:02 AM
Ok, first we deal with cancer, auto accidents, heart disease, diabetes, etc. Then we get around to terrorism. Got it.

You always deal with the things that you have direct control over first.

Then you address threats in order of risks associated.

Even Bin Laden was a product of the US intervening in the ME, as was Saddam. It is called blowback. Mistakes of decades past come around again.

So in typical blunder fashion we respond by sowing the seeds for far larger problems and Bin Laden is still free.

Way ta go Georgie!

TheSage
05-20-2007, 11:08 AM
You always deal with the things that you have direct control over first.

Then you address threats in order of risks associated.

Even Bin Laden was a product of the US intervening in the ME, as was Saddam. It is called blowback. Mistakes of decades past come around again.

So in typical blunder fashion we respond by sowing the seeds for far larger problems and Bin Laden is still free.

Way ta go Georgie!


Your duty demarcation lines are on the wrong vector. The causes of cancer we can control are generally related to personal behavior, obesity, smoking etcetera, hence, they are best dealt with on a individual basis. Dealing with military threats to the society at large are righfully a function of government, hence, the government focuses it's actions in that realm.

diuretic
05-20-2007, 11:26 AM
Your duty demarcation lines are on the wrong vector. The causes of cancer we can control are generally related to personal behavior, obesity, smoking etcetera, hence, they are best dealt with on a individual basis.

How do we know that?



Dealing with military threats to the society at large are righfully a function of government, hence, the government focuses it's actions in that realm.

It rightfully focusses some of its resources and actions there, yes.

Dilloduck
05-20-2007, 11:27 AM
You always deal with the things that you have direct control over first.

Then you address threats in order of risks associated.

Even Bin Laden was a product of the US intervening in the ME, as was Saddam. It is called blowback. Mistakes of decades past come around again.

So in typical blunder fashion we respond by sowing the seeds for far larger problems and Bin Laden is still free.

Way ta go Georgie!

Bin Laden is/was the product of being a spoiled rich kid combined with his insane, radical, and barbaric theological beliefs.

TheSage
05-20-2007, 11:34 AM
How do we know that?


Know what? You need to refine your question.

Dilloduck
05-20-2007, 11:59 AM
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/12/12/051212fa_fact?currentPage=5

you read and educate yourself so you know what you're taknig about.

loosecannon
05-20-2007, 03:30 PM
Bin Laden is/was the product of being a spoiled rich kid combined with his insane, radical, and barbaric theological beliefs.

He was also the product of being our mercenary force in Afghanistan defeating the Soviets. We armed him, supported him and when the war was over abandoned the mujajidin to decay in a broken society that gave birth to the taliban's reign.

The Taliban consisted mostly of kids who were the only males left after the war. Kids who grew up in an environment of constant war.

They sell afghan rugs at a local shop. The rugs are decorated with machine guns and tanks and weapons weaved into the pattern.

Bin Laden is as much a product of being our tool as he is a spoiled rich kid. In fact most of his family has had three decades of business relationships with our president and his family.

Maybe GWB is/was the product of being a spoiled rich kid combined with his insane, radical, and barbaric theological beliefs.

typomaniac
05-21-2007, 12:14 PM
pppppsssssssssssssssssssttttt---bin ladens' cult really wants to kill us and they really do have the ability.
Then why HAVEN'T they already??? :uhoh:

God, you're an idiot.

Dilloduck
05-21-2007, 12:47 PM
Then why HAVEN'T they already??? :uhoh:

God, you're an idiot.

They have, dumbass.

diuretic
05-21-2007, 01:01 PM
Know what? You need to refine your question.

Why? Is it too difficult?

TheSage
05-21-2007, 01:33 PM
Why? Is it too difficult?


I don't know what your question is. My post mentioned a few things and your question was "how do we know that?" Be a stand up guy and be more specific.

Gaffer
05-21-2007, 08:28 PM
Then why HAVEN'T they already??? :uhoh:

God, you're an idiot.

Because we haven't let em. But I'll gladly step aside and let them have you anytime they want.