http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF-Rp4W_ABE
wow...just wow.
OK, I'm gonna watch it, against my better judgement. This better not be another fucking Truther video!
its not really pushing any conspiracy theories, just tearing about the official government story and explaining why that particular story is impossible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFJa9WUy5QI
Evidently, someone regarded my latest personal attack on Truthers as a "personal attack" on Truthers, and deleted my last post -- imagine that! No problem; allow me to rephrase... I do not see how anyone out there can believe this nonsense that is put out about the 9/11 attacks. Questioning the official story is one thing, but fabricating evidence in order to refute what you think is someone else's fabricated evidence is not helping the situation. Yes, I know that some peoples' hatred of George Bush and Dick Cheney knows no bounds. George Bush is guilty of a lot of participation in a lot of government conspiracies, but 9/11 is not among them. Furthermore, he got away with them all and is going to retire to his ranch in Texas, and will be rich, fat and happy for the rest of his days. Yes, it sucks, but you all have to accept it and move on. The constant attacking and name calling and failed attempts at confrontation ten years later just make Truthers seem even crazier.
Evidently, someone regarded my latest personal attack on Truthers as a "personal attack" on Truthers, and deleted my last post -- imagine that! No problem; allow me to rephrase...
I do not see how anyone out there can believe this nonsense that is put out about the 9/11 attacks. Questioning the official story is one thing, but fabricating evidence in order to refute what you think is someone else's fabricated evidence is not helping the situation. Yes, I know that some peoples' hatred of George Bush and Dick Cheney knows no bounds. George Bush is guilty of a lot of participation in a lot of government conspiracies, but 9/11 is not among them. Furthermore, he got away with them all and is going to retire to his ranch in Texas, and will be rich, fat and happy for the rest of his days. Yes, it sucks, but you all have to accept it and move on. The constant attacking and name calling and failed attempts at confrontation ten years later just make Truthers seem even crazier.
FleetCenturion:someone regarded my latest personal attack on Truthers as a "personal attack" on Truthers
Yes, "imagine that" indeed.
I do not see how anyone out there can believe this nonsense that is put out about the 9/11 attacks. Questioning the official story is one thing, but fabricating evidence in order to refute what you think is someone else's fabricated evidence is not helping the situation.
Please demonstrate what "fabricated evidence" was presented in this thread.
FleetCenturion, perhaps if you could make your point as well as the British man in the video someone would listen to you and perhaps take you seriously. Right now though, it just sounds like unorganized babbling.
John James:Please demonstrate what "fabricated evidence" was presented in this thread.
For this particular thread (though not in others on this forum), I will say there was only a video posted with crackpot theories, instead people actively arguing those crackpot theories. For that, I thank you all!
The video, however, and all the others like it repeat the same tired and frankly, insane notions. In particular the often-repeated, "Those murder weapons... resembling passenger planes... took off, but from where?"
This is, I presume, implying that we really have no idea what they were or where they came from, that those supposed airplanes never really existed, and that the government-- since they're so smart-- was able to make cruise missiles look like airplanes and crash them into the WTC and Pentagon. All the while, erasing all evidence of the planes that are suddenly missing, and the people supposedly on board who are suddenly dead. I guess George Bush was so devious that he manages to pay off hundreds of people every year to pretend to be the grieving family members at the 9/11 memorials. Damn him! He's just so clever!
The long and short of Truther logic is thus: "Government is evil. 9/11 was evil. The resulting loss of civil liberties is evil. Therefore, the government must have caused 9/11 because they want Iraq's oil, and so Dick Cheney can drink Muslim children’s blood! It's so simple. Wake up America!"
Those who push this kind of garbage have an agenda all their own, and those who believe it are (without getting too personal) sad and pathetic souls looking for someone-- anyone-- to blame.
"that those supposed airplanes never really existed, and that the government-- since they're so smart-- was able to make cruise missiles look like airplanes "
Wow...you're the crackpot. Nowhere in this video is it saying there were no planes that hit the towers.
Here is some nice and serious video about building 7, I think some of you must watch it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFJa9WUy5QI&feature=feedu it
Especially from 2:05
Still not convinced? Watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saHs6J0OXVI
(english is not my native language, sorry for grammar.)
limitgov: Wow...you're the crackpot. Nowhere in this video is it saying there were no planes that hit the towers.
The video is re-hashing talking points from Loose Change, questioning where the wreckage was, as if there never was a plane at all.
As I refuse to watch either again, let's review their talking points here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEVOUinXpfs
Close. 9/11 was a superlatively convenient event for the US government in the waning decade of the Cold War after the collapse of its arch-nemesis, the USSR, whose existence had sustained a 25+% GDP Evil Giant Squid Military Industrial Complex for five or so decades. It's like the lottery commissioner's wife just randomly winning the mega-jackpot... it is mathematically possible that it "just happened" as they claim but it's still suspicious as hell. So, since 9/11 is automatically suspicious as hell, we might just want to poke around and see if we can find inconsistencies in the government's story that are consistent with deception, which they have foisted on the public so many times in the past (e.g. the faked Zapruder film).
Oh, shit, what's this? Building 7 collapsed on the very same day when it had not been hit by an airplane or severely damaged by falling debris with all its core columns intact? It had suffered severe office fires but these had been nearly put out two hours before the building's collapse supposedly due to "thermal expansion". The unevenly distributed office fires caused an event so improbable that evenly distributed office fires would not have been a sufficient explanation: sudden, symmetrical collapse of the entire building into its own footprint at free-fall speed (for the first several seconds, slowing ever-so-slightly near the bottom).
Say what? NORAD/FAA failed to intercept the civilian airliners for well over an hour (from first signs that Flight 11 had been hijacked until Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon)? Not only did the lottery commissioner's wife just win the mega-jackpot but the winning numbers happened to be her birthdate!
But you're right, the sheeple should just go back to bed:
Clayton -
"sudden, symmetrical collapse of the entire building into its own footprint at free-fall speed (for the first several seconds, slowing ever-so-slightly near the bottom)."
you are repeating your mantra again which has been DEBUNKED (it wasn't symetrical in any way) in your own eyes in the first video I posted above. It never ceases to amaze me seeing the true believer's behaviour. After you give step by step explanation they once again repeat their delusions from the beginning as if nothing happened. Same with creationists. Did you watch the video at all?
Oh well. At least you have some good ideas on anarchy.
FleetCenturion: For this particular thread (though not in others on this forum), I will say there was only a video posted with crackpot theories, instead people actively arguing those crackpot theories. For that, I thank you all! The video, however, and all the others like it repeat the same tired and frankly, insane notions. In particular the often-repeated, "Those murder weapons... resembling passenger planes... took off, but from where?" This is, I presume, implying that we really have no idea what they were or where they came from, that those supposed airplanes never really existed, and that the government-- since they're so smart-- was able to make cruise missiles look like airplanes and crash them into the WTC and Pentagon. All the while, erasing all evidence of the planes that are suddenly missing, and the people supposedly on board who are suddenly dead. I guess George Bush was so devious that he manages to pay off hundreds of people every year to pretend to be the grieving family members at the 9/11 memorials. Damn him! He's just so clever! The long and short of Truther logic is thus: "Government is evil. 9/11 was evil. The resulting loss of civil liberties is evil. Therefore, the government must have caused 9/11 because they want Iraq's oil, and so Dick Cheney can drink Muslim children’s blood! It's so simple. Wake up America!" Those who push this kind of garbage have an agenda all their own, and those who believe it are (without getting too personal) sad and pathetic souls looking for someone-- anyone-- to blame.
Thank you for babbling on with your crackpot theories about crackpot theories, but if you don't mind, you said "Questioning the official story is one thing, but fabricating evidence in order to refute what you think is someone else's fabricated evidence is not helping the situation."
Please demonstrate what "fabricated evidence" was presented.
MaikU: you are repeating your mantra again which has been DEBUNKED (it wasn't symetrical in any way) in your own eyes in the first video I posted above. It never ceases to amaze me seeing the true believer's behaviour. After you give step by step explanation they once again repeat their delusions from the beginning as if nothing happened. Same with creationists. Did you watch the video at all?
To further the analogy, I normally have no problem even with the hard-core creationists. I respect their opinions, no matter how silly I might think they are. Faith is believing in stuff that can't be proven. It's when they start insisting they can prove that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church, and shout it from the mountain tops, that they get on my nerves. It's as if you're supposed to disbelieve what you see with your own eyes, and adopt an implausible theory based on someone else's religious-- or political-- agenda
That video debunks nothing. The building came down at free-fall speed (even NIST was forced to admit this), into its own footprint, hours after the fires had burned out, in just as symmetrical a fashion as any other controlled demolition. His example of the highway overpass collapse doesn't fly; that came down in MINUTES, while the fire was still raging. The fire was far more intense, literally engulfing the entire structure that collapsed. And his assertion that WTC7 was the only high-rise building in history to burn uncontrolled for 7 hours is patently false (see here for several more).
Your painting people skeptical of the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) as being as bad as creationists applies with far greater accuracy to those still clinging to the official narrative.
FleetCenturion: Questioning the official story is one thing...
Questioning the official story is one thing...
What is that "thing" called? In other words, how are "conspiracy theorists" or "truthers" different from anyone who simply doesn't swallow the "official story" hook, line, and sinker? Are you saying that you consistently believe the "official story" each and every time, without fail? If so, based on what precedent? Who is the real "true believer" here?
"The video is re-hashing talking points from Loose Change, questioning where the wreckage was"
the video in no way, shape, or form says there were no planes that hit the towers. In fact it says the opposite. It says the obvious, that planes hit the towers. are you having trouble understanding the video?
limitgov: the video in no way, shape, or form says there were no planes that hit the towers. In fact it says the opposite. It says the obvious, that planes hit the towers. are you having trouble understanding the video?
More specifically, the video (and Loose Change) focus on implying that there was no plane that hit the Pentagon. Both still question the validity of those that hit the WTC: "Why was this piece of wreckage so close? Why was that one so far away? Why were certain pieces mutilated and others unharmed? What are they hiding by not releasing the black box tapes?" I'm sure this is all part of the big coverup, and as soon as Alex Jones and Charlie Sheen figure it out, they'll let us know. A better question would be: why does any of that matter and how does it in any way prove a government conspiracy?
Why was this piece of wreckage so close? Why was that one so far away? Why were certain pieces mutilated and others unharmed?
I don't think those concerns have got anything to do with pieces of the plane wreckage. It was pieces of the building which were ejected laterally for hundreds of metres with enough force to embed them in neighbouring structures. This occurred during the collapses, and not persuant directly to the force of the impacts. The inferrence is that these large, heavy pieces of debris were ejected during a demolition process facilitated by pre-set explosives. Not many people really know who did it, but cooperation from people high up in city and federal government seems very, very likely. "Government" isn't all on the same team, you know... If there was a false-flag operation, only those individuals who would have needed to know would have known. Obviously. If you know anything about how government really operates from day-to-day, especially the security apparatus, you would know that the old "someone would have leaked by now" excuse is nonsense. No one knows anything they don't need to know, and there wouldn't have been anything on paper to leak. Say something, and you're either dead or branded as a conspiracy theorist, depending on whether or not people are likely to believe you, and whether or not you've already become too high-profile to quietly get rid of.
There is very scant evidence either way concerning the missile that hit the Pentagon - there is a large body of circumstantial evidence which might indicate that it was an object far smaller and more maneuverable than a Boeing 767, but as I said, there is not enough evidence to draw a conclusion there. There should be a proper investigation.
That's the point. Stop implying that everyone with questions is trying to prove that the Martians or the Vatican or the Reptiles did it... The point is that there hasn't been anything remotely resembling a proper investigation. It's a farce. No one knows what happened, but the official story is clearly a white-wash.
z1235: What is that "thing" called? In other words, how are "conspiracy theorists" or "truthers" different from anyone who simply doesn't swallow the "official story" hook, line, and sinker? Are you saying that you consistently believe the "official story" each and every time, without fail? If so, based on what precedent? Who is the real "true believer" here?
I hate to break this to you, but when you have a plausible official version compared with a ridiculous conspiracy theory, most people are likely to believe the former, not because they are just sheep, but because the latter requires a greater suspension of disbelief. The burden of proof is on the conspiracy theorist to make a case, not those presenting the official version, which is backed up by physical evidence and live video.
The conspiracy theorist begins with a conclusion and shapes the available evidence to fit his hypothesis. This is the exact opposite of scientific investigation. So far, Truthers have yet to present a chain of events based on fact, a specific motive for the conspirators, or even who exactly those conspirators are. The "official version", questionable as it might seem in places, is on the side of logic and demonstrable evidence. Your version (whatever exactly that version is) is not.
So please, give me a reason why I am supposed to accept your propaganda and doublethink over theirs.
There hasn't been an investigation. The 9/11 Commission and the NIST report are jokes. The standards that would apply to any ordinary crime scene in New York were NOT even remotely applied to the WTC site after 9/11. The evidence had all been removed by the time law-enforcement investigators pitched up on the scene. I understand that NYPD and FBI couldn't treat the whole of lower Manhatten exactly like an ordinary crime scene, but be reasonable for God's sake. The debris was immediately shipped to China for recycling. It's a travesty.
THERE IS NO CONCLUSION. There hasn't been an investigation. There is only what is obviously not the correct conclusion. The concerns you raise about beginning with an official line and then trying to prove it are being projected onto people who question the official conspiracy story. It is not a simple thing to imagine that something as big as 9/11 is a ball of lies, and that the people who actually did it are more than likely living amongst you as adored and venerated paragons of your society, but there it is.
crashproof:That video debunks nothing. The building came down at free-fall speed (even NIST was forced to admit this), into its own footprint, hours after the fires had burned out, in just as symmetrical a fashion as any other controlled demolition.
Hmmm... interesting. Why am I supposed to care about building 7 again? Why is this the thesis of the conspiracy theorists? Talk to Alex Jones and get back to me on that. As for the pattern of the collapse, has anyone considered that just about every highrise building is built to do just that upon a massive structural failure? Has any Truther even bothered to look a building codes or study architecture?
crashproof:Your painting people skeptical of the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT)...
OCT? Cute. Is that like when you say "ZOG"? Thanks for the lesson in conspiracist lingo.
Hmmm.... interesting. I am not seeing an argument in your post. I am seeing an emotional response, consisting mostly of ad hominems.
Why are you supposed to care that your government has lied to you, about maybe the most important crime and mass-murder in US history, certainly our lifetimes? Maybe you could think about it and get back to me on that.
FleetCenturion: As for the pattern of the collapse, has anyone considered that just about every highrise building is built to do just that upon a massive structural failure?
No, they haven't. What are you even suggesting? That every tall building ever built was designed to just automatically fall in precisely that fashion if set on fire? That is, in the fashion of a controlled demolition? Why would we even bother having controlled demolitions at all then, if we only needed to set the building on fire and let it burn for while to achieve the same effect? Those things take up a lot of time and money after all. What you're suggesting is that the incredibly precise science involved in destroying a 47-story building in the most efficient manner possible is in fact not so precise at all but in fact inevitable. That to me is absurd.
Maybe watch this 3-minute video.
crashproof:Why are you supposed to care that your government has lied to you, about maybe the most important crime and mass-murder in US history, certainly our lifetimes?
Aaagh! Will you please explain just what they lied about? Who was involved? What did they do and how did they do it? Again, you start with your theory and adjust the facts accordingly. If you have an alternate theory, great. But you have to explain just what the hell it is. Phrases like, "They lied to us," and "Inside job," tell people nothing. You can start by first explaining what the significance of Building 7 is, and how its destruction-- whether fast, slow, or otherwise-- proves anything.
Again, against my better judgment, I watched your silly Truther video. It showed a single, small building fall over in what looked like a developing country, never saying what caused it. Why? Because that's all they could find. The WTC collapse resembled none of the numerous controlled demolitions. They looked like they burned from the top and then fell in on themselves.
Believe whatever you want, but the burden of proof is on you and Charlie Sheen to tell the "real" story, if indeed another version is true. You have lots of theories, but no evidence and no actual motive -- and, so far as I can tell, no suspects, other than George W. and those pesky Illuminati, Freemason, space aliens.
Motive?
Have you ever heard of Larry Silverstein? What about asbestos?
Look, speculating about motives is all fine and good and well, but you need to establish exactly what kind of crime happened before you can start looking for the perp, and speculating about why they did it. Where the real modus operandi differs drastically from the alleged one, it's likely that the motive differs violently too, and quite frankly you will have no idea until you know who committed the crime and how.
You think the inferred motive for the official perpetrators makes sense? They hate you for your freedom? Pull the other one, slave. Or do you think they wanted America to invade and pillage the Middle-East forevermore?
"A better question would be: why does any of that matter and how does it in any way prove a government conspiracy?"
First you have to understand the video. In no way, shape or form is it saying no planes hit the towers. They say the obvious opposite actually. It seems as though you are getting confused with another video.
James: You think the inferred motive for the official perpetrators makes sense? They hate you for your freedom? Pull the other one, slave. Or do you think they wanted America to invade and pillage the Middle-East forevermore?
LOL. What is really left to plunder? Nothing. The U.S. gets a very small market share of the oil, at least compared to the hundreds of billions we put into acquiring it. We can produce all the oil we could ever want domestically and then some. If this was a straight plundering operation, it's been a colossal failure, even by NWO standards. Even for a conspiracy theorist, you are thinking too narrowly.
What is significant is that all that oil is now valued in U.S. dollars. Google Rev. Lindsey Williams (an actual credible conspiracy theorist) for a slew of data on the subject. Any product that America might get out of it means nothing. All that matters is that that oil is valued in our worthless paper. The only significant holdouts are now Iran and Libya. There is no rush for a full-scale invasion of either anymore, since the euro is currently in even worse shape than the dollar (if that is possible).
There, now you have some real data. Now run with it!
FleetCenturion: LOL. What is really left to plunder? Nothing.
LOL. What is really left to plunder? Nothing.
You don't understand. Whether through supporting/fighting warfare or welfare basketcases, the truly plundered ones have always been the sheeple, the "us" in the "us vs. them" welfare (class) and warfare (nation, religion) dog and pony show. What's important to the government+banking elites is that there always exist basketcases as reasons for money to be created out of thin air and lent to them or to whomever is "fighting" them. Hitler, USSR, Tito's Yugoslavia, Saddam, Gadaffi, Greece, Bush, Jihadis, Obama, The Poor (Medicaid), The Sick (Medicare), and The Hungry (Africa) will be maintained wherever they pop-up and will be created if they don't. Then "money" will be created out of thin air and lent to them (and to governments funelling it to military-industrial cronies to fight them) without any concern whatsoever whether it would be ever paid back. The interest collected on this "free" money is pure profit (infinite ROE on $0 of own capital invested or at risk) flowing in one direction until it stops (Oh, no!) and the sheeple are asked to bailout "the system" lest ATM's stop giving out cash tomorrow morning.
The fact that someone always presents you with a sucker at the pocker table doesn't mean that you're not the largest one at it still.
All that matters is that that oil is valued in our worthless paper.
You're on the right track. Get Griffin's "The Creature From Jekyll Island" (in hardcover, cause you'll want it for keeps), and read it.
z1235:You don't understand. Whether through supporting/fighting warfare or welfare basketcases, the truly plundered ones have always been the sheeple, the "us" in the "us vs. them" welfare (class) and warfare (nation, religion) dog and pony show. ...
z1235:You're on the right track. Get Griffin's "The Creature From Jekyll Island" (in hardcover, cause you'll want it for keeps), and read it.
Well, thank you for the encouragement. I'm still unconvinced, however, that the same people who can't run Amtrak or the USPS (or even the Mustang Ranch-- true story!) would be capable of masterminding anything. Governments and central banks are good at throwing money at problems, not at solving them, or even at creating a problem when they try to. The conspiracist belief that government is all-powerful only encourages the beast, while providing a convenient excuse for their own unwillingness to try to fix the situation.
Another great Ed Griffin source is his Reality of Money seminar, apparently given in the late-80's, and re-hashed into yet another anti-W YouTube presentation by conspiracy nuts. Oh well, at least I was able to just convert it to MP3 to avoid the propaganda.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2sjyQGlAOs
FleetCenturion:Another great Ed Griffin source is his Reality of Money seminar, apparently given in the late-80's, and re-hashed into yet another anti-W YouTube presentation by conspiracy nuts. Oh well, at least I was able to just convert it to MP3 to avoid the propaganda.
Thanks for this.
However, you mean to tell me that you don't believe that the people who were able to bring about the creation of the Federal Reserve through manipulating Congress and engineer the following 100 years of siphoning the wealth from the poorest among us and redistributing it to the wealthiest class (ie, them), that these people who have the government and the military in their pockets basically kept anyone from noticing what theywe re doing for all that time, that these people wouldn't be able to say, off an uncooperative president here, or blow up a few buildings there without anybody noticing that either? Because they all buy into the same fundamental illusion? With all due respect that seems like a disconnect to me, that you could recognize the one aspect of the illusion but not another.
crashproof:... that these people who have the government and the military in their pockets basically kept anyone from noticing what theywe re doing for all that time...
There is constant reporting on what they're doing, from mainstream reporters and from conspiracy nuts of all stripes-- most of it false, since most people only look at it from the perspective of their agenda. That's why they can get away with what they do.
crashproof:... that these people wouldn't be able to say, off an uncooperative president here...
The Zapruder film was once hailed as undeniable proof of a conspiracy (one that involved everyone but Lee Harvey Oswald). Once it was analyzed by real ballistics experts, and became positive proof that the assassination had gone exactly as the investigators had theorized, not as Oliver Stone did, the same conspiracy buffs started accusations that the ancient camcorder footage-- seen over and over for more than 40 years-- must have been tampered with. The following gives a better account of the story than Jim Garrison:
http://www.amazon.com/Case-Closed-Gerald-Posner/dp/1400034620/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1317129561&sr=8-4
There's even an audio book and a documentary out there for the people out there who don't read (i.e. most of them).
crashproof:With all due respect that seems like a disconnect to me, that you could recognize the one aspect of the illusion but not another.
Because some aspects are provable and some aren't. An honest investigation must be based on facts and evidence, and right now, those do NOT favor the conspiracy theorists. Even people like the John Birch Society do not jump on this conspiracy bandwagon. I like Ed Griffin (a lifelong Bircher, by the way) because he sticks to what he can prove and offers actual evidence to back up his theories. I have yet to meet a Truther who does not subscribe to the "inside job" theory based on anything other than political bias. Again, you have yet to prove that I should accept your propaganda and doublethink over theirs.