Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on February 05, 2007, 10:11:25 AM
-
The problem with most conspiracy theories and the Conspiracy theorists that love them:
- Most of them are based solely on conjecture of partial or circumstancial facts stung together to form a CT......mostly (I'll send $10 to first person who can tell me the movie that used the words most and mostly and the comedy series where it was mocked on.)
- The vast majority of the conclusions from these partial or circumstancial facts are from people who have little or no expertese in the related fields.
- Many CT'ers and CT's omitt or change the details of the supporting facts with words like "all" "every", "some" "none" etc... to make their arguement stronger
- they often believe in multiple conspiracies (for instance the faked moon landing), which really detracts from their credibility.
- And finally, the CT'ers themsleves usually have a flair for the dramatic and used cheesy persuasive techniques to "sell" their theories.
Becuase of the complexity of 9/11 and the plethora of variables and anomilies involved it is a perfact canidate for a CT.
-
In addition, they often believe in multiple conspiracies (for instance the faked moon landing), which really detracts from their credibility.
-
Wow, you have probably started a dozen threads about how much you hate the 911 skeptics.
You've admitted it yourself, that you believe Bush probably knew and let it happen, so that we could start wars.
Why is it so hard to believe that some in govt would LET 3000 die by not alerting authorities... but you absolutely cannot believe that some in govt would LET 3000 die by turning a blind eye to things or stalling their reactions so that the bad guys could reach the targets? (The FAA/Norad folks who lied on the stands and destroyed evidence)
-
In addition, they often believe in multiple conspiracies (for instance the faked moon landing), which really detracts from their credibility.
very nice. i added it. ;D
-
In addition, they often believe in multiple conspiracies (for instance the faked moon landing), which really detracts from their credibility.
And YOU have admittited you would trust the nutjob alex jones to inform you of a terrorist attack, before you'd trust your own president. This puts you in the LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) crowd, since no one who believes Bush would even allow the possibiliy Bush wouldn't let them know.
It's so funny... the two of you don't have faith in your own Prez to warn you about a terror attack... but you have faith to defend his involvement - when even HE refuses to answer questions by reporters about what he knew beforehand.
Yes, you're defending a guy who won't defend himself on that. You noticed that? Bush and Cheney - neither man has ever denied knowing about 911. They always changed the subject when asked. You're defending them because "they wouldn't do that!", when they won't deny it. Wow.
-
very nice. i added it. ;D
;D
-
Wow, you have probably started a dozen threads about how much you hate the 911 skeptics.
You've admitted it yourself, that you believe Bush probably knew and let it happen, so that we could start wars.
Why is it so hard to believe that some in govt would LET 3000 die by not alerting authorities... but you absolutely cannot believe that some in govt would LET 3000 die by turning a blind eye to things or stalling their reactions so that the bad guys could reach the targets? (The FAA/Norad folks who lied on the stands and destroyed evidence)
First off, i don't hate 911 skeptics. Frankly, if we knew each other in real life i believe we'd get along great. You are good guy with good intentions. And i've only met 911 CT'ers on this forum and there isn't anyone i hate or don't like.
What don;t believe about 9/11 is:
- The WTC's where hit by holograms
- The WTC's were wried with bombs
- The pentagon was hit with something other then a plane
- Flight 93 was shot down by a american jet
- WTC7 was demolished
- The FAA purposely let it happen
- And all the theories associated with the above.
-
And YOU have admittited you would trust the nutjob alex jones to inform you of a terrorist attack, before you'd trust your own president. This puts you in the LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) crowd, since no one who believes Bush would even allow the possibiliy Bush wouldn't let them know.
It's so funny... the two of you don't have faith in your own Prez to warn you about a terror attack... but you have faith to defend his involvement - when even HE refuses to answer questions by reporters about what he knew beforehand.
Yes, you're defending a guy who won't defend himself on that. You noticed that? Bush and Cheney - neither man has ever denied knowing about 911. They always changed the subject when asked. You're defending them because "they wouldn't do that!", when they won't deny it. Wow.
::)
-
First off, i don't hate 911 skeptics. Frankly, if e knew each other in real life i believe we'd get along great. You are good guy with good intentions. And i've only met 911 CT'ers on this forum and there isn't anyone i hate or don't like.
What don;t believe about 9/11 is:
- The WTC's where hit by holograms
- The WTC's were wried with bombs
- The pentagon was hit with something othr then a plane
- Flight 93 was shot down by a american jet
- WTC7 was demolished
- The FAA purposely let it happen
- And all the theories associated with the above.
I know some of the CTers go overboard. Just like some neocons go over ("Rush is right! We need 5 simultaneous wars to deliver cruise missiles of freedom!")
Point is, everyone knows there's enough holes in the 911 story to justify a real investigation. Some want one cause they want justice. Some just don't like Bush or the war. Some people don't want one, cause it might show some in power slacked. Some people don't want one cause it might show domestic involvement.
If a person can honestly look at WTC7 falling, the weird Penn hole in the ground with zero debris, and the super organized way the towers both fell so quickly - and not suspect anything weird - they are not a CTer.
If a person looks at any of these and says "that's weird, I don't fully believe that", they are a CTer. They doubt the official story. And it's OKAY.
-
I know some of the CTers go overboard. Just like some neocons go over ("Rush is right! We need 5 simultaneous wars to deliver cruise missiles of freedom!")
Point is, everyone knows there's enough holes in the 911 story to justify a real investigation. Some want one cause they want justice. Some just don't like Bush or the war. Some people don't want one, cause it might show some in power slacked. Some people don't want one cause it might show domestic involvement.
I think it's prudent to have a second investigation as a matter of practice in things like this.
That being said. I belive even if there is solid evidence of prior knowledge that it willbe covered up for the sake of goverment credibility. What a second investigation will show in all likely hood is massive failures in intellence and security/disaster repsonse times.
If a person can honestly look at WTC7 falling, the weird Penn hole in the ground with zero debris, and the super organized way the towers both fell so quickly - and not suspect anything weird - they are not a CTer.
If a person looks at any of these and says "that's weird, I don't fully believe that", they are a CTer. They doubt the official story. And it's OKAY.
WTC7 doesn't seem to make sense, but so do alot of things and in the end there's a reasonable explaination. I'm not ruling out it was demolished, i just don't think it was. I am howver ruling out the other things on that list.
Aslo, the WTC's didn;t seesm like they fell very organized to me.
-
I wonder if a "second investigation" will tell us where Flights 77 and 93, and all of the passengers, are hiding?
-
I wonder if a "second investigation" will tell us where Flights 77 and 93, and all of the passengers, are hiding?
damn, that's insensitive.
Dude, suppose your wife and daughter were on flight 93.
Then you looked at that hole in the ground, for closure, and what did you see? A hole, shaped like a plane only much smaller, and zero debris?
I know when i've posted the pic, you don't spend one second looking. But what about the fmaily members? Do you think they're so damn flippant about it?
You're a liar and an insensitive prick. You're also a shitty american:
-You lied about your job as a "college professor".
-You disrespect the dead by mocking the 93 crash site
-You defend abuses of our constitution.
Seriously, you're an embarassment to this country.
-
damn, that's insensitive.
Dude, suppose your wife and daughter were on flight 93.
Then you looked at that hole in the ground, for closure, and what did you see? A hole, shaped like a plane only much smaller, and zero debris?
I know when i've posted the pic, you don't spend one second looking. But what about the fmaily members? Do you think they're so damn flippant about it?
You're a liar and an insensitive prick. You're also a shitty american:
-You lied about your job as a "college professor".
-You disrespect the dead by mocking the 93 crash site
-You defend abuses of our constitution.
Seriously, you're an embarassment to this country.
:-*
::)
240 when you are ready to march on Washington to demand an investigation into the faked moon landing, I am with you brother. Just say the word!
-
The problem with most conspiracy theories and the Conspiracy theorists that love them:
- Most of them are based solely on conjecture of partial or circumstancial facts stung together to form a CT......mostly (I'll send $10 to first person who can tell me the movie that used the words most and mostly and the comedy series where it was mocked on.)
- The vast majority of the conclusions from these partial or circumstancial facts are from people who have little or no expertese in the related fields.
- Many CT'ers and CT's omitt or change the details of the supporting facts with words like "all" "every", "some" "none" etc... to make their arguement stronger
- they often believe in multiple conspiracies (for instance the faked moon landing), which really detracts from their credibility.
- And finally, the CT'ers themsleves usually have a flair for the dramatic and used cheesy persuasive techniques to "sell" their theories.
Becuase of the complexity of 9/11 and the plethora of variables and anomilies involved it is a perfact canidate for a CT.
I've been around the conspiracy world for a long time. about 15 years solidly. As a longtime conspiracy theorist I can tell you, I've heard some real wild bullshit from some very unstable people. But it's important to realize that society takes everyone with a conspiracy theory and dumps them in the same pit. So right next to some clown arguing the validity of the Philadelphia experiment is someone with real valid theories that need examined and investigated with seriousness. I do not follow all theories... We did land on the moon and I can prove that shit. There was no fuggin Philadelphia experiment and I can prove that shit too. I do believe that there was a concerted effort by a faction of our government to at least turn a blind eye and allow 9/11. I do believe in government involvement in the USS Liberty. I do believe in some NWO conspiracies and as far as I'm concerned with that, we're entering into a time where events obviously make the NWO conspiracies a big no shit huh... I do my best to listen to both sides and weigh out the truth. In this time of doing my best to listen to both sides, it has not gone un-noted that there is just as much bias in some of the skeptics as some of the CT'ers. In fact it is not uncommon to have the skeptic absolutely out of his mind with anger and break down into mockery of the theorist rather than make any real attempt at debate. Even when they are debating some fact, it seems they can't resist ending their points by mocking the person they're addressing, well what good is that going to do? Sure isn't going to get the other side to see any points you're trying to make...
-
I've been around the conspiracy world for a long time. about 15 years solidly. As a longtime conspiracy theorist I can tell you, I've heard some real wild bullshit from some very unstable people. But it's important to realize that society takes everyone with a conspiracy theory and dumps them in the same pit. So right next to some clown arguing the validity of the Philadelphia experiment is someone with real valid theories that need examined and investigated with seriousness. I do not follow all theories... We did land on the moon and I can prove that shit. There was no fuggin Philadelphia experiment and I can prove that shit too. I do believe that there was a concerted effort by a faction of our government to at least turn a blind eye and allow 9/11. I do believe in government involvement in the USS Liberty. I do believe in some NWO conspiracies and as far as I'm concerned with that, we're entering into a time where events obviously make the NWO conspiracies a big no shit huh... I do my best to listen to both sides and weigh out the truth. In this time of doing my best to listen to both sides, it has not gone un-noted that there is just as much bias in some of the skeptics as some of the CT'ers. In fact it is not uncommon to have the skeptic absolutely out of his mind with anger and break down into mockery of the theorist rather than make any real attempt at debate. Even when they are debating some fact, it seems they can't resist ending their points by mocking the person they're addressing, well what good is that going to do? Sure isn't going to get the other side to see any points you're trying to make...
Well said Berserker. I think I had mistakenly lumped you in with the CT nuts. Sorry about that.
-
Well said Berserker. I think I had mistakenly lumped you in with the CT nuts. Sorry about that.
are you being sarcastic :o
-
are you being sarcastic :o
No. What, you cannot accept a compliment and an apology?
-
Well said Berserker. I think I had mistakenly lumped you in with the CT nuts. Sorry about that.
If a person believes Bush let 911 happen, does that make them a CTer?
-
If a person believes Bush let 911 happen, does that make them a CTer?
Let me get this straight. You just called me, among other things, a liar, unpatriotic, and an embarrassment to this country. And now you're asking me a question? 240, are you on drugs? :-\
Learn how to have a discussion like an adult and we can have plenty of debates (and avoid the eye roll).
-
Let me get this straight. You just called me, among other things, a liar, unpatriotic, and an embarrassment to this country. And now you're asking me a question? 240, are you on drugs? :-\
Learn how to have a discussion like an adult and we can have plenty of debates (and avoid the eye roll).
Ahhh - after mocking 911 CTers for months, suddenly you wanna talk like adults? lol..
Sounds like you don't wanna contradict yourself in front of berseker so now you're playing the grownup card. Plus seeing as you are a college professor in hawaii... who debates from 4 am til 9 am Hawaii time... who cannot identify what field his PhD is in...
sounds like you don't want to answer the question.
-
Ahhh - after mocking 911 CTers for months, suddenly you wanna talk like adults? lol..
Sounds like you don't wanna contradict yourself in front of berseker so now you're playing the grownup card. Plus seeing as you are a college professor in hawaii... who debates from 4 am til 9 am Hawaii time... who cannot identify what field his PhD is in...
sounds like you don't want to answer the question.
Precisely why I don't answer (most of) your dumb questions. You're too easy man. You are the comic relief on this board dude. :)
-
No. What, you cannot accept a compliment and an apology?
Of course accepted!!! ;D I just wasn't sure you were serious ;)
-
If a person believes Bush let 911 happen, does that make them a CTer?
I am a CTer, but I'm not a tox CTer. Tox believes everything someone put a video on the net over.
-
Of course accepted!!! ;D I just wasn't sure you were serious ;)
We're good. 8)
-
I've been around the conspiracy world for a long time. about 15 years solidly. As a longtime conspiracy theorist I can tell you, I've heard some real wild bullshit from some very unstable people. But it's important to realize that society takes everyone with a conspiracy theory and dumps them in the same pit. So right next to some clown arguing the validity of the Philadelphia experiment is someone with real valid theories that need examined and investigated with seriousness. I do not follow all theories... We did land on the moon and I can prove that shit. There was no fuggin Philadelphia experiment and I can prove that shit too. I do believe that there was a concerted effort by a faction of our government to at least turn a blind eye and allow 9/11. I do believe in government involvement in the USS Liberty. I do believe in some NWO conspiracies and as far as I'm concerned with that, we're entering into a time where events obviously make the NWO conspiracies a big no shit huh... I do my best to listen to both sides and weigh out the truth. In this time of doing my best to listen to both sides, it has not gone un-noted that there is just as much bias in some of the skeptics as some of the CT'ers. In fact it is not uncommon to have the skeptic absolutely out of his mind with anger and break down into mockery of the theorist rather than make any real attempt at debate. Even when they are debating some fact, it seems they can't resist ending their points by mocking the person they're addressing, well what good is that going to do? Sure isn't going to get the other side to see any points you're trying to make...
yep, that's why i was sure to include and highlight the word "most"
-
I am a CTer, but I'm not a tox CTer. Tox believes everything someone put a video on the net over.
yeah, you seem to stay with concrete stuff and shy away from conjecture, you also don;t overuse cheesy persuasive statements.
-
still no takers on the $10 , hmm perhaps i should go to 20? lol
-
The problem with most conspiracy theories and the conspiracy theorists that love them is that the contradictions confuse people because of what someone like Michael Shermer says in his magazine.
-
I equate conspiracy theorists with those people that follow religions with incredibly outlandish dogma's. They're looking for something to believe in. In some circumstances it's rather sad. The UFO abduction believers are especially sad.
-
There are legitimate CT's:
JFK for one.
Would that fall into the UFO types? I'm sure they wouldn't
-
There are legitimate CT's:
JFK for one.
So there's nothing wrong with believing a small group of people here would kill the most powerful man on the planet, then get the gov't to have the investigation be a farce?
But there's everything wrong with believing a small group of people here would kill 3000 relative "nobodies", then get the gov't to have the investigation be a farce?
-
So there's nothing wrong with believing a small group of people here would kill the most powerful man on the planet, then get the gov't to have the investigation be a farce?
But there's everything wrong with believing a small group of people here would kill 3000 relative "nobodies", then get the gov't to have the investigation be a farce?
I tip my hat to you once again for your use of "closing questions". ;D
There's nothing wrong with either of your assertions.
Unless in the case of the latter, you CT is based on 10 to 100 times the variables and incidents of the first one and your conclusions are based mostly on conjecture speculation and a severe lack of knowledge in the related fields.
;D
-
Your understanding of politics is very impressive 240.
However, this last go around with the "sure invasion of Afghanistan by the US in 10/2001 and how you used various news clippings to support your theory told me just how much you lacked knowledge-wise in the field of modern warfare.
This is a great example of why your theories on your 9/11 Conspiracy lack any weight.
-
Your understanding of politics is very impressive 240.
However, this last go around with the "sure invasion of Afghanistan by the US in 10/2001 and how you used various news clippings to support your theory told me just how much you lacked knowledge-wise in the field of modern warfare.
This is a great example of why your theories on your 9/11 Conspiracy lack any weight.
I don't see how my understanding of the war planning in afghanistan would affect the outright physics violations that occurred on 9/11.
It might remove my ability to prove motive. But since all I want is a second investigation, the physical evidence (and 4/10 of the 911 commissioners calling for a new investigation) should more than provide reasonable doubt on the official story.
-
I tip my hat to you once again for your use of "closing questions". ;D
There's nothing wrong with either of your assertions.
Unless in the case of the latter, you CT is based on 10 to 100 times the variables and incidents of the first one and your conclusions are based mostly on conjecture speculation and a severe lack of knowledge in the related fields.
OzmO,
Time will remove the emotional stigma on 9/11. Our kids and grandkids will look at 9/11 as we look at Pearl harbor, maybe catching movies about it and knowing answers for jeopardy. They were never SCARED on 9/11 like we were. They never felt SAFE when GWB promised to clear the world of bad guys. Honestly, neither you nor I will ever look at 911 with an objective viewpoint because I feel betrayed and you feel rescued (or some other emotion). We all lived thru it so we have eyeglasses on it.
If the exact events of 9/11 happened in another country, we would be more open minded. if WTC7 vaporized because of small fires in some weird eurpoean nation, we'd say "shit man, that was bombs, no plane hit it!" If NBC showed a hole in the ground where United 93 landed, and the country said a fully loaded 757 shredded there, we'd call bullshit.
Plus, dude... 911 is in its infancy. howard hunt admitted later he was the JFK shooter with details. It got him $1M, released from jail, and it was never brought up again. But 911? Lots more details than under 15 conspirators and less than 15 bullets. Five years after ANY major event, ten years, 20 years, MUCH more info comes out.
-
I don't see how my understanding of the war planning in afghanistan would affect the outright physics violations that occurred on 9/11.
Physics with that many objects and variables isn't absolute. This lack of understanding is similar in that sense of "lack" as your lack of understanding of war logistics/planning
It might remove my ability to prove motive. But since all I want is a second investigation, the physical evidence (and 4/10 of the 911 commissioners calling for a new investigation) should more than provide reasonable doubt on the official story.
As do i, but not for the same reasons as:
WTC's explosives, missile in pentagon... etc...
-
I don't see how my understanding of the war planning in afghanistan would affect the outright physics violations that occurred on 9/11.
It might remove my ability to prove motive. But since all I want is a second investigation, the physical evidence (and 4/10 of the 911 commissioners calling for a new investigation) should more than provide reasonable doubt on the official story.
Mainly your belief that 9-11 defied physics, yet every reputable person that understands structural and materials engineering are on side with an actual scientific peer reviewed document based on the physics of 9-11.
Plus you are relating 2 unrelated topics. That is an illogical way to argue.
-
OzmO,
Time will remove the emotional stigma on 9/11. Our kids and grandkids will look at 9/11 as we look at Pearl harbor, maybe catching movies about it and knowing answers for jeopardy. They were never SCARED on 9/11 like we were. They never felt SAFE when GWB promised to clear the world of bad guys. Honestly, neither you nor I will ever look at 911 with an objective viewpoint because I feel betrayed and you feel rescued (or some other emotion). We all lived thru it so we have eyeglasses on it.
If the exact events of 9/11 happened in another country, we would be more open minded. if WTC7 vaporized because of small fires in some weird eurpoean nation, we'd say "shit man, that was bombs, no plane hit it!" If NBC showed a hole in the ground where United 93 landed, and the country said a fully loaded 757 shredded there, we'd call bullshit.
Plus, dude... 911 is in its infancy. howard hunt admitted later he was the JFK shooter with details. It got him $1M, released from jail, and it was never brought up again. But 911? Lots more details than under 15 conspirators and less than 15 bullets. Five years after ANY major event, ten years, 20 years, MUCH more info comes out.
yeah, maybe, maybe not. But those 2 CT's are very different as i've outlined above and the reasons you use to point to a 9/11 CT are too weak and or invalid versus the reasons to point to a JFK CT
-
I maintain that one test of the metal from the twin towers will show whether explosives were used - specificlaly, very traceable nanothermate as civilian tests on samples supposedly shows.
I think every one of you should be f'king disgusted that the FBI won't test the metal for explosive residue. You look at the twin towers and WTC7 come down in precisely symmetrical manners, from very asymmetrical fires, in complete violation of all fire history... yet they don't do one test which would either disprove the bomb idea, or point out the nation and date of origin of the explosives.
It baffles me. Over a trillion on the war, and you can't argue there's enough evidence to spend $300 on a damn metal test.
-
I maintain that one test of the metal from the twin towers will show whether explosives were used - specificlaly, very traceable nanothermate as civilian tests on samples supposedly shows.
I think every one of you should be f'king disgusted that the FBI won't test the metal for explosive residue. You look at the twin towers and WTC7 come down in precisely symmetrical manners, from very asymmetrical fires, in complete violation of all fire history... yet they don't do one test which would either disprove the bomb idea, or point out the nation and date of origin of the explosives.
It baffles me. Over a trillion on the war, and you can't argue there's enough evidence to spend $300 on a damn metal test.
I take my advice from experts.
You don't.
The fact that you are making unsupported scientific claims shows this.
-
yeah, maybe, maybe not. But those 2 CT's are very different as i've outlined above and the reasons you use to point to a 9/11 CT are too weak and or invalid versus the reasons to point to a JFK CT
I don't understand a lot of the 911 evidence. Many in the 911 scholars for truth are pretty advanced scientists who have studied the collapses and believe physics show some thigns I couldn't dream of explaining.
I tell ya what tho... dozens of very brilliant people - of varying political and scientific background - join the 911 scholars list.
*something* in the evidence convinces then it' more important to investigate murders properly than to be labeled a nut.
Now, are there THAT many gullible scientists, engineers, former CIA and military men, etc?
Or is there something to it?
-
well sir...
many experts believe the official story is wrong. Same ilk you're rerferring to. Engineers and physicists.
The FBI won't test the metal. Ask any cop what he would do. he'd just run the damn test.
-
well sir...
many experts believe the official story is wrong. Same ilk you're rerferring to. Engineers and physicists.
The FBI won't test the metal. Ask any cop what he would do. he'd just run the damn test.
OK come forward with a peer reviewed paper.
None of your "experts" have yet.
It is not many you use the term too loosely it is 1 according to your "scholars for truth". 1 structural engineer and no structural organizations or Universities.
Joseph M. Phelps (FM)
-
And YOU have admittited you would trust the nutjob alex jones to inform you of a terrorist attack, before you'd trust your own president. This puts you in the LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) crowd, since no one who believes Bush would even allow the possibiliy Bush wouldn't let them know.
It's so funny... the two of you don't have faith in your own Prez to warn you about a terror attack... but you have faith to defend his involvement - when even HE refuses to answer questions by reporters about what he knew beforehand.
Yes, you're defending a guy who won't defend himself on that. You noticed that? Bush and Cheney - neither man has ever denied knowing about 911. They always changed the subject when asked. You're defending them because "they wouldn't do that!", when they won't deny it. Wow.
I wouldn't answer such asinine questions either, what is Bush supposed to say. I don't care, there is no way you believe Bush thought this all up in 9 months. So are you saying Clinton designed it?
-
OK come forward with a peer reviewed paper.
lol. Good point. I doubt we ever see the "911 scholars" publish anything a reputable journal.
-
I wouldn't answer such asinine questions either, what is Bush supposed to say. I don't care, there is no way you believe Bush thought this all up in 9 months. So are you saying Clinton designed it?
911 took 5 years to design, you asinine, uneducated prick.
911 would have happened with Cheney, or Lieberman at the wheel. 911 was about securing 50 years worth of resources for AMerican use. It is above the presidential level. Do you seriously think the groups in this nation worth hundreds of billions, would allow a new guy, every 4 years, to fck up the long term goals of the US?
No.
JFK tried. He vowed to disassemble the CIA and structure of longterm power behind the presidency. And he was killed quickly thereafter. Every president since has "played ball". If you look at events in history - they transcend presidencies - go above it. Longer term than 4-year political pandering stints. The middle east oil aggression took 15 years to get us where we are today. CLinton was getting BJs and dealing with small skirmishes in Africa while the bigger group was setting up the afghan pipeline.
Go fucking eat a sandwich and watch some TV. You don't get it.
-
911 took 5 years to design, you asinine, uneducated prick.
911 would have happened with Cheney, or Lieberman at the wheel. 911 was about securing 50 years worth of resources for AMerican use. It is above the presidential level. Do you seriously think the groups in this nation worth hundreds of billions, would allow a new guy, every 4 years, to fck up the long term goals of the US?
No.
JFK tried. He vowed to disassemble the CIA and structure of longterm power behind the presidency. And he was killed quickly thereafter. Every president since has "played ball". If you look at events in history - they transcend presidencies - go above it. Longer term than 4-year political pandering stints. The middle east oil aggression took 15 years to get us where we are today. CLinton was getting BJs and dealing with small skirmishes in Africa while the bigger group was setting up the afghan pipeline.
Go fucking eat a sandwich and watch some TV. You don't get it.
You just proved my point fuck stick, you said yesterday you blamed bush for 9/11, I said how can you balme him? well you just said it has been in the planning for 5 years, like every Lib you flip flop with the best of them.
-
You just proved my point f**k stick, you said yesterday you blamed bush for 9/11, I said how can you balme him? well you just said it has been in the planning for 5 years, like every Lib you flip flop with the best of them.
Bush sat and read "my pet goat" at 9:13 AM, after being told at 8:21 AM that plane #1 had been hijacked.
Bush fought an investigation tooth and nail. Bush impeded an investigation, dude. If 3000 troops died on day, and the general supervising REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE, what would you say?
He finally caved after 441 days of the 911 widows marching on the white house. He gave them no budget, chose 9 of his dad's oil buddies, and put on a sham of an investigation.
You haven't studied this, have you?
-
Bush sat and read "my pet goat" at 9:13 AM, after being told at 8:21 AM that plane #1 had been hijacked.
Bush fought an investigation tooth and nail. Bush impeded an investigation, dude. If 3000 troops died on day, and the general supervising REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE, what would you say?
He finally caved after 441 days of the 911 widows marching on the white house. He gave them no budget, chose 9 of his dad's oil buddies, and put on a sham of an investigation.
You haven't studied this, have you?
For the last time, there is nothing to study. It wasn't an inside job period
-
For the last time, there is nothing to study. It wasn't an inside job period
You enlisted because of 9/11, didn't ya?
-
You enlisted because of 9/11, didn't ya?
Joined in 97
-
Joined in 97
It's your life, dude.
If you found out some white guys here helped it happen, you'd feel like the last 10 years of your life were dedicated to risking and killing, for what? Aggression? Oil? How can you be there "in defense" now, if WE let/made 911 happen?
Do your job. Believe what you wish. While you're fighting, there are thousands of Americans here, studying every video clip of 9/11, analyzing the physics and logistics of the attacks/collapses. They are starting scientific conferences this year. Why? There are many attacks every year. WHy single out this one? WHy are so many people putting their reputations on the line about 9/11?
Physics shows explosives were used. COmmon sense tells you why the FBI wouldn't test for explosive residue. ANd time will reveal it, just like every other big event. We didn't know shit, 5 years after JFK was killed. But 10 years? 15? That's when peple started coming fwd - when those in power DURING the event were out of power or deceased. And it'll be the same way here. Watch and see.
-
It's your life, dude.
If you found out some white guys here helped it happen, you'd feel like the last 10 years of your life were dedicated to risking and killing, for what? Aggression? Oil? How can you be there "in defense" now, if WE let/made 911 happen?
Do your job. Believe what you wish. While you're fighting, there are thousands of Americans here, studying every video clip of 9/11, analyzing the physics and logistics of the attacks/collapses. They are starting scientific conferences this year. Why? There are many attacks every year. WHy single out this one? WHy are so many people putting their reputations on the line about 9/11?
Physics shows explosives were used. COmmon sense tells you why the FBI wouldn't test for explosive residue. ANd time will reveal it, just like every other big event. We didn't know shit, 5 years after JFK was killed. But 10 years? 15? That's when peple started coming fwd - when those in power DURING the event were out of power or deceased. And it'll be the same way here. Watch and see.
You never know, but the reason I continue to serve has nothing to do with proving a point in Iraq. Every day I put this uniform on is one more day we live as free people and get to have these conversations. As far as conspiricies go, I live life as an optimist. Life is short and I'm not going to live everyday wondering if the US government let this happen. Tell me, if you find out that it was a inside job, what will that change for you? WIll you leave the US? I doubt it and neither will I so why fret over it. I am going to enjoy life with my wife and kids and if my life ends early someday defending your right to try and turn things like freedom of speech, seperation of church and state etc.. into ways to benefit your beliefs then I will do it with pride.
-
You never know, but the reason I continue to serve has nothing to do with proving a point in Iraq. Every day I put this uniform on is one more day we live as free people and get to have these conversations. As far as conspiricies go, I live life as an optimist. Life is short and I'm not going to live everyday wondering if the US government let this happen. Tell me, if you find out that it was a inside job, what will that change for you? WIll you leave the US? I doubt it and neither will I so why fret over it. I am going to enjoy life with my wife and kids and if my life ends early someday defending your right to try and turn things like freedom of speech, seperation of church and state etc.. into ways to benefit your beliefs then I will do it with pride.
So you wouldn't care if it was an inside job?
-
I maintain that one test of the metal from the twin towers will show whether explosives were used - specificlaly, very traceable nanothermate as civilian tests on samples supposedly shows.
I think every one of you should be f'king disgusted that the FBI won't test the metal for explosive residue. You look at the twin towers and WTC7 come down in precisely symmetrical manners, from very asymmetrical fires, in complete violation of all fire history... yet they don't do one test which would either disprove the bomb idea, or point out the nation and date of origin of the explosives.
It baffles me. Over a trillion on the war, and you can't argue there's enough evidence to spend $300 on a damn metal test.
How can you say those things when:
- Scientists have explained why they can't make a conclusive test.
- The scientists you use as examples aren't letting their work be peer reviewed.
- And a scientist on this board completey agrees with these accessments
Also the WTC's, how do you think they should have fell over? How they were damged is consistent with the way they fell over.
-
So you wouldn't care if it was an inside job?
of course I would be like "what the fuck" but would it change my life much? no. I wouldn't pack up and move or anything. Look man I think the government is a joke. They tax us to much, ($.48 of every gallon of gas goes to the Gov.) they try to tell us how to raise our kids (can't spank), what to eat, watch on TV etc... so I won't say I trust the Govt 100%, but I don't think they could cover something like this up. Notice I didn't say would, I said could. Again I ask, how will it change your life it is was an inside job other than give you something to blog about
-
You never know, but the reason I continue to serve has nothing to do with proving a point in Iraq. Every day I put this uniform on is one more day we live as free people and get to have these conversations. As far as conspiricies go, I live life as an optimist. Life is short and I'm not going to live everyday wondering if the US government let this happen. Tell me, if you find out that it was a inside job, what will that change for you? WIll you leave the US? I doubt it and neither will I so why fret over it. I am going to enjoy life with my wife and kids and if my life ends early someday defending your right to try and turn things like freedom of speech, seperation of church and state etc.. into ways to benefit your beliefs then I will do it with pride.
well said MM69!! mucho applause.
AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THIS COUNTRY!!
I PRAY FOR YOU GUYS EVERYDAY!!
YOU GUYS ARE THE REAL HEROS.
despite what some people say on these boards.
-
well said MM69!! mucho applause.
AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THIS COUNTRY!!
I PRAY FOR YOU GUYS EVERYDAY!!
YOU GUYS ARE THE REAL HEROS.
despite what some people say on these boards.
ditto
-
well said MM69!! mucho applause.
AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THIS COUNTRY!!
I PRAY FOR YOU GUYS EVERYDAY!!
YOU GUYS ARE THE REAL HEROS.
despite what some people say on these boards.
Believe me I appreciate that. I am just doing a job though. I love the US and want it to remain the power it always has been
-
well said MM69!! mucho applause.
AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THIS COUNTRY!!
I PRAY FOR YOU GUYS EVERYDAY!!
YOU GUYS ARE THE REAL HEROS.
despite what some people say on these boards.
Well said. I agree.
-
mighty & military,
To say it wouldn't matter if if was an inside job is to condone treason and mass murder of American citizens.
Saddens me that you two have lost sight of what America stands for.
-
mighty & military,
To say it wouldn't matter if if was an inside job is to condone treason and mass murder of American citizens.
Saddens me that you two have lost sight of what America stands for.
Not what I said crack head, I would be dissapointed in our government, all I did was ask what would change for you if you find out it is true? would you leave the US? you never answer. I said I would not leave the US, even though alot of trust would be lost. Answer the question Lib
-
Not what I said crack head, I would be dissapointed in our government, all I did was ask what would change for you if you find out it is true? would you leave the US? you never answer. I said I would not leave the US, even though alot of trust would be lost. Answer the question Lib
hell no, I wouldn't leave. I would vote to elect people who would investigate it.
And I'm not a liberal. You're the liberal here bro. This neocon element wants nationbuilding and domestic controls - and true republicans/conservatives don't like that bullshit.
-
hell no, I wouldn't leave. I would vote to elect people who would investigate it.
And I'm not a liberal. You're the liberal here bro. This neocon element wants nationbuilding and domestic controls - and true republicans/conservatives don't like that bullshit.
So you think you could vote in "trustworthy" people if this in fact happened? like who Hillary, Obama? Edwards? 2 of those are probably involved in this 9/11 plot already. And you say I don't want nation building? Why do you think I want to stay in Iraq? so we can have a Democratic front in the middle east to help curtail syria and Iran
-
mighty & military,
To say it wouldn't matter if if was an inside job is to condone treason and mass murder of American citizens.
Saddens me that you two have lost sight of what America stands for.
don't feed me that BS. and don't accuse me of what YOU think i have lost sight of.
i read your crap day after day about your 9/11 theories. you're so full of s**t your eyes are brown.
for you to accuse our govt and it's agencies that they conspired to kill 3000 Americans to start a war makes you an out right dope.
you say you want this and that question answered. you know what, your questions will never be answered because you will never get the answer you want. none of this crap you believe will ever be proven. so your questions will go on and on.
you've been fed so much of this CT junk that i think you honestly WANT the govt to be guilty of this. you want chaos in our system. and for the only reason is so you can say you were right.
you sadden me. :'(
-
So you think you could vote in "trustworthy" people if this in fact happened? like who Hillary, Obama? Edwards? 2 of those are probably involved in this 9/11 plot already. And you say I don't want nation building? Why do you think I want to stay in Iraq? so we can have a Democratic front in the middle east to help curtail syria and Iran
I never said they were involved.
The f'king idiot at the FAA who intentionally shredded the tapes from that day, then threw them away in various trash cans, then admitted this on the stand - its he involved in a cover up?
-
don't feed me that BS. and don't accuse me of what YOU think i have lost sight of.
i read your crap day after day about your 9/11 theories. you're so full of s**t your eyes are brown.
for you to accuse our govt and it's agencies that they conspired to kill 3000 Americans to start a war makes you an out right dope.
you say you want this and that question answered. you know what, your questions will never be answered because you will never get the answer you want. none of this crap you believe will ever be proven. so your questions will go on and on.
you've been fed so much of this CT junk that i think you honestly WANT the govt to be guilty of this. you want chaos in our system. and for the only reason is so you can say you were right.
you sadden me. :'(
There won't be chaos. There will be everyone pointing fingers at silverstein, probably the day after he passes away (he's very old). Dems will call for an investigation of Bush, Repubs will call for an invasion of iran to redirect focus.
Shit man... would you skip a complete investigation just because a few traitors might be outed?
-
Sent to me by a friend, it seems appropriate for this subject:
"Want to come up with your own conspiracy theory about Bush? Don't let Al Franken, Michael Moore, and MoveOn.org have all the fun! Use this handy George W. Bush Conspiracy Theory Generator to come up with your own conspiracy theory!* http://www.buttafly.com/bush/
-
well said MM69!! mucho applause.
AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO FOR THIS COUNTRY!!
I PRAY FOR YOU GUYS EVERYDAY!!
YOU GUYS ARE THE REAL HEROS.
despite what some people say on these boards.
that is an extreme minority and even most people who don't agree with this war support the troops.
-
Americans loves their conspiracies.
Just watch the amount of movies that have some kind of conspiracy theme, some heist twist or über-secrecy to it.
Of course a number of Americans will refuse to accept that real life isn't as spectacular as movies make out it to be - they won't accept the fact that there ain't no Scully, there ain't no Mulder.
And so all these conspiracies will keep on going forever.
They will never stop, because how can you provide proof against something that never happened? ???
Sure, the killing of JFK was a conspiracy, that's pretty much accepted.
But everything else.. All this shyte about Illuminati, Free Masons.. et al...
Wake up and smell the coffee people.
-Hedge
-
Hedge,
I agree that some people don't believe anything they're told.
But JFK was the planned killing of the most powerful man in the world.
So the cajones to do crazy shit, and connections to cover it up, are obviously in place.
Not an unreasonable tradeoff to take out 3000 comparative nobodies in NYC in order to secure a century of global energy dominance. Plus, Rummy/Cheney/Bremer TOLD THE WORLD they were going to take over the middle east before they started in the PNAC document.
Finally, they don't even deny it. The only people denying Bush foreknowledge of 911 are kids on message boards. Bush won't answer the Q. And Gates just said the US will be a major presence in middle east for meany decades. They ain't exactly shy.
-
Americans loves their conspiracies.
Just watch the amount of movies that have some kind of conspiracy theme, some heist twist or über-secrecy to it.
Of course a number of Americans will refuse to accept that real life isn't as spectacular as movies make out it to be - they won't accept the fact that there ain't no Scully, there ain't no Mulder.
And so all these conspiracies will keep on going forever.
They will never stop, because how can you provide proof against something that never happened? ???
Sure, the killing of JFK was a conspiracy, that's pretty much accepted.
But everything else.. All this shyte about Illuminati, Free Masons.. et al...
Wake up and smell the coffee people.
-Hedge
All true. I agree.
-
Sure, the killing of JFK was a conspiracy, that's pretty much accepted.
All true. I agree.
I didn't know you believed JFK was killed in a conspiracy, Beach Bum. Really?
-
I didn't know you believed JFK was killed in a conspiracy, Beach Bum. Really?
LOL. Except that. :D
-
LOL. Except that. :D
Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
-
::)
-
Americans loves their conspiracies.
Just watch the amount of movies that have some kind of conspiracy theme, some heist twist or über-secrecy to it.
Of course a number of Americans will refuse to accept that real life isn't as spectacular as movies make out it to be - they won't accept the fact that there ain't no Scully, there ain't no Mulder.
And so all these conspiracies will keep on going forever.
They will never stop, because how can you provide proof against something that never happened? ???
Sure, the killing of JFK was a conspiracy, that's pretty much accepted.
But everything else.. All this shyte about Illuminati, Free Masons.. et al...
Wake up and smell the coffee people.
-Hedge
I'm drinking coffee now and can say, the freemason plan is moving forward as planned ;)