Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 26, 2014, 02:25:02 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: who believes 9/11 was as inside job  (Read 14384 times)
Nirvana
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4394


Maggot Filled Ass.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #125 on: November 26, 2011, 02:15:22 PM »

some ignorant close minded sheep in this thread afraid to think outside of what bill oreilly tells them
Report to moderator   Logged

Chew Tobacco.
dyslexic
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 7369


baddoggy


View Profile
« Reply #126 on: November 26, 2011, 02:30:13 PM »

One thing is for sure: It happened.


The details will always leave doubt and be sketchy. No doubt about that either.


Bring up Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge while you're at it. Maybe throw in a little Oklahoma....



Watch "Zeitgeist" again?
Report to moderator   Logged
The Abdominal Snoman
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16218


^^^SURVEILLANCE TRIBE APPROVED^^^


View Profile
« Reply #127 on: November 26, 2011, 04:29:14 PM »

Whats funny is the people who trust their government but have a wife that fucks around on them, kids on drugs who steal from them. A grandfather who may or may not of molested them as a child. Meaning, everyone close to them in their lives have betrayed them and lied to them but they still can't believe their government would do something to hurt them. lol
Report to moderator   Logged
Bob Bonham
Expert
Getbig IV
*****
Posts: 1011


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #128 on: November 26, 2011, 07:04:09 PM »

I never believed conspiracy either until a few months ago. Talking to my member who personally worked on reinforcing every floor with heavy steel ..between that and the original steel there is no way that building should have fell at all , never mind straight down. Some people might have applied some kind of chemical  or bombs to weaken it.
the jet fuel went outwards and could not effect the way they fell. Nor would it be enough

Even the 3rd building which they said fell from flying debre   fell straight down into it self like the others.
Bin Laden who claimed responsibility was an engineer was surprised they fell like that .   
Report to moderator   Logged
3Dkiller
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1508


Fuck The New World Order


View Profile
« Reply #129 on: November 26, 2011, 10:11:52 PM »

100% inside job
Report to moderator   Logged

TEAM WOLF
tommywishbone
Competitors II
Getbig V
******
Posts: 14587


Biscuit


View Profile
« Reply #130 on: November 26, 2011, 10:23:22 PM »

100% inside job

I agree it was an inside job- all the planes (weighing 200 tons, going 500 MPH, filled with 23,000 gallons of gasoline) exploded inside the buildings.

And I know those planes don't use gasoline- they use JET A1 aviation fuel. Let's just call it high octane gasoline.
Report to moderator   Logged

P
asbrus
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1174


View Profile
« Reply #131 on: November 26, 2011, 11:07:17 PM »

THE PR0BLEM WITH THE AVERAGE DAY AMERICAN IS THAT HE WAS GR00MED T0 BE BRAINWASHED FR0M THE DAY HE WAS B0RN THAT MASS MEDIA IS ALWAYS RIGHT. IT'S HARD T0 FIX S0ME0NE'S BRAIN AFTER THEY'VE BEEN PRE PR0GRAMMED F0R 20 YEARS PLUS T0 BELIEVE WHAT THE NEWS 0R THE P0LITICANS TELL THEM. HENCE WHY ANY 0NE WH0 THINKS 0UTSIDE 0F WHAT THE MEDIA TELLS US IS CALLED A C0NSPIRACY NUT.

AND IT WASN'T THE G0VERNMENT THAT DID THIS. IT WAS A R0GUE NETW0RK WHICH CUTS ACR0SS G0VERNMENT,INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES,AND THE C0RP0RATE W0RLD.
Report to moderator   Logged
dyslexic
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 7369


baddoggy


View Profile
« Reply #132 on: November 26, 2011, 11:26:05 PM »

Like who? The "Third World Order?" ~ or maybe the Masons?
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20501


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #133 on: November 29, 2011, 12:26:05 PM »

THE PR0BLEM WITH THE AVERAGE DAY AMERICAN IS THAT HE WAS GR00MED T0 BE BRAINWASHED FR0M THE DAY HE WAS B0RN THAT MASS MEDIA IS ALWAYS RIGHT. IT'S HARD T0 FIX S0ME0NE'S BRAIN AFTER THEY'VE BEEN PRE PR0GRAMMED F0R 20 YEARS PLUS T0 BELIEVE WHAT THE NEWS 0R THE P0LITICANS TELL THEM. HENCE WHY ANY 0NE WH0 THINKS 0UTSIDE 0F WHAT THE MEDIA TELLS US IS CALLED A C0NSPIRACY NUT.

AND IT WASN'T THE G0VERNMENT THAT DID THIS. IT WAS A R0GUE NETW0RK WHICH CUTS ACR0SS G0VERNMENT,INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES,AND THE C0RP0RATE W0RLD.

Asbrus......  is your caps lock button broke on your comp?   No need to cap everything plz. 


thanks.
Report to moderator   Logged
The Abdominal Snoman
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16218


^^^SURVEILLANCE TRIBE APPROVED^^^


View Profile
« Reply #134 on: November 29, 2011, 01:47:35 PM »

Like who? The "Third World Order?" ~ or maybe the Masons?


Maybe it was the Penn State sex ring which some people still don't think exists Undecided
Report to moderator   Logged
Purge_WTF
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5459


Constitution Party forever.


View Profile
« Reply #135 on: January 26, 2012, 08:37:37 AM »

  I had to bump the thread to say that I didn't really buy into the whole "Inside Job" thing, until I rented a movie called Loose Change from Netflix. It definitely made me think.
Report to moderator   Logged

Psalm 23.
E-Kul
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 9884


Space: The final frontier


View Profile
« Reply #136 on: January 27, 2012, 09:11:12 PM »

  I had to bump the thread to say that I didn't really buy into the whole "Inside Job" thing, until I rented a movie called Loose Change from Netflix. It definitely made me think.
Only an idiot would have believed the official line, it is lucky for the US Statesmen, that the population is 99% idiots!
Report to moderator   Logged

V
The Abdominal Snoman
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16218


^^^SURVEILLANCE TRIBE APPROVED^^^


View Profile
« Reply #137 on: January 27, 2012, 10:44:21 PM »

Believing 9/11 was exactly like how the American government says it was, it like believing that Bodybuilding is a heterosexually activity exactly like Gay Joe and Gay Ben Weider says it is...
Report to moderator   Logged
OzmO
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 20501


Take Money Out of Politics!


View Profile
« Reply #138 on: January 28, 2012, 08:31:27 AM »

Why?
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 7668


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #139 on: February 03, 2012, 09:09:48 PM »

Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Attorney Sanctions Upheld in 9/11 Conspiracy Case
New York Law Journal ^ | 02.03.12
Posted on February 3, 2012 11:10:03 PM EST by Behind Liberal Lines

Sanctions against two attorneys who insist that former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld caused the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks have been upheld by a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that refused to disqualify itself from the case.

Dennis Cunningham and co-counsel William W. Veale were ordered on Feb. 2 to pay a total of $15,000 in addition to double what the government spent defending against their lawsuit.

In addition, the judges in Gallop v. Cheney, 10-1241-cv, ordered Mr. Cunningham to notify federal courts in the circuit about the sanctions against him when appearing before them for the next year.

In 2011, Messrs. Cunningham and Veale were found liable for what the same judges—Ralph K. Winter (See Profile), John W. Walker Jr. (See Profile) and Jose Cabranes (See Profile)—ruled was a frivolous appeal after a decision by Southern District Judge Denny Chin (See Profile) dismissing April Gallop's complaint as "cynical delusion and fantasy" (NYLJ, April, 28, 2011).

Ms. Gallop was a member of the U.S. Army who was injured in the terrorist attack on the Pentagon.

She claimed that the Pentagon was not hit by a hijacked airliner but, rather, that she was injured by an explosion from within the building that was detonated at the behest of Messrs. Cheney and Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials who allegedly sought to use 9/11 to justify launching a war against radical Muslims.

The most recent Second Circuit decision arose from the lawyers' motion filed in November to disqualify the judges and for a rehearing of Ms. Gallop's case.

The lawyers argued that the judges had exhibited "severe bias" against them that was motivated by "active personal emotions," in part stemming from exposure to the terror attacks.

The judges rejected that argument, as it had a previous attempt to disqualify them.

"We conclude that Cunningham acted in bad faith in demanding the recusal of the three panel members and any like-minded colleagues," the circuit panel said in an unanimous, unsigned ruling.

The panel ruled that its sanctions against Messrs. Cunningham and Veale should stand. However, based on Mr. Cunningham's claim that he was the "decider" on the Gallop legal team, the circuit ruled that co-counsel Mustapha Ndanusa of Brooklyn should not face any penalties.

Mr. Cunningham, of Walnut Creek, Calif., did not respond to calls for comment.

Mr. Veale, a former chief assistant public defender for Contra Costa County, Calif., told Thomson Reuters, "We are not delusional by any means. We have the facts, and they cannot be explained."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Alicia Simmons defended Mr. Cheney and other Bush administration officials in the case. Jerika Richardson, a spokeswoman for the Southern District U.S. Attorney's Office, said the office would have no comment.

The Second Circuit panel appointed Eastern District Judge Brian M. Cogan (See Profile) to ensure the court-ordered sanctions are complied with.

The panel ordered Messrs. Cunningham and Veale to conform to the monetary penalties within 30 days.
Report to moderator   Logged
The Abdominal Snoman
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 16218


^^^SURVEILLANCE TRIBE APPROVED^^^


View Profile
« Reply #140 on: July 05, 2012, 02:42:09 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability



Plausible deniability is a term coined by the CIA during the Kennedy administration to describe the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities by the CIA became public knowledge.
The term most often refers to the denial of blame in (formal or informal) chains of command, where senior figures assign responsibility to the lower ranks, and records of instructions given do not exist or are inaccessible, meaning independent confirmation of responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such act or any connection to the agents used to carry out such acts. It typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions to plausibly avoid responsibility for one's (future) actions or knowledge.
In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a "powerful player" or intelligence agency to avoid "blowback" by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party ostensibly unconnected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay "clean" and denounce third-party advertisements that use unethical approaches or potentially libellous innuendo.
More generally, "plausible deniability" can also apply to any act that leaves little or no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse. Examples of this are the use of electric shock, waterboarding or pain-compliance holds as a means of torture or punishment, leaving few or no tangible signs that the abuse ever took place.
Plausible deniability is also a legal concept. It refers to lack of evidence proving an allegation. Standards of proof vary in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "preponderance of the evidence" whereas in a criminal matter, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." If your opponent lacks incontrovertible proof (evidence) of their allegation, you can "plausibly deny" the allegation even though it may be true.
Report to moderator   Logged
E-Kul
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 9884


Space: The final frontier


View Profile
« Reply #141 on: July 05, 2012, 09:06:29 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability



Plausible deniability is a term coined by the CIA during the Kennedy administration to describe the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities by the CIA became public knowledge.
The term most often refers to the denial of blame in (formal or informal) chains of command, where senior figures assign responsibility to the lower ranks, and records of instructions given do not exist or are inaccessible, meaning independent confirmation of responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such act or any connection to the agents used to carry out such acts. It typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions to plausibly avoid responsibility for one's (future) actions or knowledge.
In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a "powerful player" or intelligence agency to avoid "blowback" by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party ostensibly unconnected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay "clean" and denounce third-party advertisements that use unethical approaches or potentially libellous innuendo.
More generally, "plausible deniability" can also apply to any act that leaves little or no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse. Examples of this are the use of electric shock, waterboarding or pain-compliance holds as a means of torture or punishment, leaving few or no tangible signs that the abuse ever took place.
Plausible deniability is also a legal concept. It refers to lack of evidence proving an allegation. Standards of proof vary in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "preponderance of the evidence" whereas in a criminal matter, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." If your opponent lacks incontrovertible proof (evidence) of their allegation, you can "plausibly deny" the allegation even though it may be true.
Sociopathy is the NORM and LYING is well rewarded - The sophistication of 9/11 and the obvious planning that went into it would be hard to recreate by a team of the finest minds and engineers, yet somehow the people easily lap up the lie a bunch of barely intelligent muslims pulled it off with a few box cutters!
Report to moderator   Logged

V
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19031


Decepticons! Scramble!


View Profile
« Reply #142 on: July 06, 2012, 08:41:04 AM »

Clearly 9/11 didnt go down exactly as the feds said. But there isnt enough evidence for me to come to the conclusion it was our own government that did it.
Feds never tell the public the whole truth.

Many times the public does not NEED to know the whole truth (obviously not saying if 9/11 was executed by the feds we shouldnt know, Im just saying in many cases the general public cant handle the honest truth of what goes on behind closed doors to keep the world rolling). Others will disagree with me on that last statement, but it is true.
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3533


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


View Profile
« Reply #143 on: July 06, 2012, 12:45:39 PM »

Rather than lazily and/or dishonestly saying "the feds" or "the government" or "us", we should specifically refer to individuals.

By the way, if someone knows of an appropriate site to explore this topic, please PM me.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jack T. Cross
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3533


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


View Profile
« Reply #144 on: July 06, 2012, 01:08:03 PM »

By the way, if someone knows of an appropriate site to explore this topic, please PM me.

Forum or board, I mean.
Report to moderator   Logged

Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19031


Decepticons! Scramble!


View Profile
« Reply #145 on: July 06, 2012, 01:18:44 PM »

Rather than lazily and/or dishonestly saying "the feds" or "the government" or "us", we should specifically refer to individuals.

By the way, if someone knows of an appropriate site to explore this topic, please PM me.
Pretty sure it's fairly impossible for us to speculate on the "who's".
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3533


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


View Profile
« Reply #146 on: July 06, 2012, 02:28:16 PM »

Pretty sure it's fairly impossible for us to speculate on the "who's".

If not by focusing on the individuals, what other way can it be approached?
Report to moderator   Logged

Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19031


Decepticons! Scramble!


View Profile
« Reply #147 on: July 06, 2012, 03:02:09 PM »

If not by focusing on the individuals, what other way can it be approached?
How can we possibly pretend to know who was involved and who wasnt? You can make accusations, but really, the people more than likely directly involved are people who's names you've never heard of, people that dont have names, people who reside in offices in dark corners of buildings you've never heard of. People that dont have term limits, that have their own rules and procedures, people who the politicians don't question and don't pretend to want to know about, people that they (the politicians) don't want to have to even acknowledge their existance.

Its easy to blame the President, the SecDef, the VP, etc, but in reality they had very little, if anything, to do with a scheme like this. Really, militarily speaking, they're just yes men that sit in an office and say yes/no. Ever heard of plausible deniability?
Report to moderator   Logged
Jack T. Cross
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3533


Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)


View Profile
« Reply #148 on: July 06, 2012, 04:01:43 PM »

How can we possibly pretend to know who was involved and who wasnt? You can make accusations, but really, the people more than likely directly involved are people who's names you've never heard of, people that dont have names, people who reside in offices in dark corners of buildings you've never heard of. People that dont have term limits, that have their own rules and procedures, people who the politicians don't question and don't pretend to want to know about, people that they (the politicians) don't want to have to even acknowledge their existance.

Its easy to blame the President, the SecDef, the VP, etc, but in reality they had very little, if anything, to do with a scheme like this. Really, militarily speaking, they're just yes men that sit in an office and say yes/no. Ever heard of plausible deniability?

I'm sure you know that the President and the Secretary of Defense mutually hold the top of the command chain.

Hypothetically speaking, if you will, the holders of such power would be absolutely required as tools for such an undertaking to have its greatest chance of success.  So a person cannot possibly claim to have studied the situation without looking squarely at these two individuals.
Report to moderator   Logged

Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19031


Decepticons! Scramble!


View Profile
« Reply #149 on: July 06, 2012, 05:09:18 PM »

I'm sure you know that the President and the Secretary of Defense mutually hold the top of the command chain.

Hypothetically speaking, if you will, the holders of such power would be absolutely required as tools for such an undertaking to have its greatest chance of success.  So a person cannot possibly claim to have studied the situation without looking squarely at these two individuals.
As I said, its easy to level accusations against those at the top just because theyre at the top. But in this case, I would say youre solely mistaken to blindly make the assumption that these 2 were at the head of your CT, just because of who they were. Things go on all the time behind the backs of the top people in the WH, often so that they literally dont have to know whats going on, and there is no way that either of your assumed targets were capable of dreaming up something like this.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!