Conspiracy theorists combat this!

[jeskola]

do i believe it is both technically and (im)morally possible for multi-million and billionare power hungry tychoons to conspire some god awful tragedy in order to advance their cause/greed/power. absolutely.

That's good that you understand that this is the case. You know their name?

Its Al Qaeda and its leader is Bin Laden.

As far as weapons in Iraq is concerned, its not the only reason we had justification for going in. Read the congressional resolution that gave Bush authority to do so. Its all there - don't be afraid, read it.

Secondly, the reason to remove saddam hussein was so that he wouldn't aid those that would do us harm with WMD. He had a chance to prove he didn't have them and he blew it. Oh well for him.

rob.

[Rajah]

Hello everybody!

It seems you are all believing in the reality of some other people that think that their reality is the only real ONE.
I would say nobody knows what really ever happened anywhere as long as they look out of themselves for answers (me not excluded).
I think the importance of the "wild" things that are happening in this reality-frame is what is happening inside yourself. Then your/our response can be appropriate.
It takes a lot of courage to take this responsibility.
Have a beautiful day everybody!

But we must admit that there is a thumani of opposition to 'popular opinion' growing.. Seem like those who 'think' that they can sway popular opinion lost this rounds by submitting and releasing this Pentagon video.

[Machinesworking]

\Secondly, the reason to remove saddam hussein was so that he wouldn't aid those that would do us harm with WMD. He had a chance to prove he didn't have them and he blew it. Oh well for him.

OK, so that gosh darned evil UN flatly stated that Iraq had given sufficient access, and the organization was satisfied, yet WE weren't satisfied? After going in, and finding NO WEAPONS......
Oh, that's right SCREW THE UN!

Saddam Hussein is a vain man, when asked to comply to UN resolutions he did, but when told by the USA to take it further, that was it, he was done. Saving face is more important to some than saving their own ass. Personally I think it's obvious we knew what we were doing with that. The conversation after 911 wasn't about whether or not Iraq had WMD, but whether to go into Iraq before going into Afghanistan!

[Spikee]

right, because if you apply occam's razor to the conspiracy then it falls apart.

its too complicated to maintain - following the "logic" of your assertions.

This is why I straight laugh at all of you that think this is staged. Completely and utterly hilarious, IMO.

Here let me show you what I look like while I read this thread:



LOL.

rob.

Bottom line is, there's simply not enough empirical data to validate or invalidate whatever belief you carry. You say that the chances are remote that a cover-up would work; I say that there's only a remote chance that an inept pilot could fly a Boeing, of all things, 4 feet above the ground, missing cars and formidible landscape. Do I have proof of a small plane or missile hitting the Pentagon? No. But do you have proof of a Boeing full of innocent civs and terrorists hitting the Pentagon? No sir, you do not.

Can there be proof of a controlled demolition in NYC? No, the rubble's been disposed of (quite illegally and foolishly I must add). However, do you have proof that there was no explosion and jet fuel that burns that 1300 fahrenheit could cause a skyscraper to collapse and land on its own footprint, in only ~90 minutes? No, you do not.

Some of us choose to not start threads about these things and their validity. Some of us know that there will NEVER be sufficient evidence to prove either point. So why don't you just come sit back with the rest of us instead of crusading on points you'll never be able to definitively prove?

[robtronik]

spikee, you are on conspiracy crack.



rob.

[pulsoc]

spikee, you are on conspiracy crack.



rob.

Haha, it's good to dismiss people offhand without addressing their points.

Isn't that how the Repulicans got into office?

To everybody else on this thread - "why don't you check your underwear...is it pink? You fucking communist. Please. Everybody knows that Arabs attacked us because they hate freedom. They're "freedom haters" - and we are "freedom lovers". One more post like that and I'm reporting your ass."

[Spikee]

spikee, you are on conspiracy crack.



rob.

So I guess that means that I win? I mean, that's hardly a retort.

That's why I've bought into this conspiracy for 3 years now -- every time I argue with someone all that I do is pin them into a corner.

EDIT: I guess its better to blindly believe happy fairy tales and just take whatever's fed to you at face value than to become a champion of the notion that if you're not exhibiting all of the evidence, you are not doing enough to keep my spirit at ease. This country was built on asking questions, questioning authority and demanding that your government work harder tomorrow than what its designed to today. Buy hey, ignorance is bliss, right?

Tell Santa and the tooth fairy that I said hi, and don't forget to take your Soma!

[Meef Chaloin]

spikee, you are on conspiracy crack.



rob.

Haha, it's good to dismiss people offhand without addressing their points.

Isn't that how the Repulicans got into office?

To everybody else on this thread - "why don't you check your underwear...is it pink? You fucking communist. Please. Everybody knows that Arabs attacked us because they hate freedom. They're "freedom haters" - and we are "freedom lovers". One more post like that and I'm reporting your ass."

[robtronik]

spikee, you are on conspiracy crack.



rob.

So I guess that means that I win? I mean, that's hardly a retort.

That's why I've bought into this conspiracy for 3 years now -- every time I argue with someone all that I do is pin them into a corner.

EDIT: I guess its better to blindly believe happy fairy tales and just take whatever's fed to you at face value than to become a champion of the notion that if you're not exhibiting all of the evidence, you are not doing enough to keep my spirit at ease. This country was built on asking questions, questioning authority and demanding that your government work harder tomorrow than what its designed to today. Buy hey, ignorance is bliss, right?

Tell Santa and the tooth fairy that I said hi, and don't forget to take your Soma!

You really want to get into it? I'm just having fun with you right now. If want to debate, I'm up for it.

I'll start here with your retort:

Bottom Line

This is where you reveal your total bias into believing your viewpoint is right. Any time someone makes that statement at the beginning of their post, they have little to no room for an opposing viewpoints. Sigh. But I'll see what I can do.

I also chuckle at the "I won" point. What we in? Grade school? Let's do this:

there's simply not enough empirical data to validate or invalidate whatever belief you carry. You say that the chances are remote that a cover-up would work; I say that there's only a remote chance that an inept pilot could fly a Boeing, of all things, 4 feet above the ground, missing cars and formidible landscape. Do I have proof of a small plane or missile hitting the Pentagon? No. But do you have proof of a Boeing full of innocent civs and terrorists hitting the Pentagon? No sir, you do not.

Okay - do the calculation: which is more likely:

1- terrorist hijacks plane. Flies it into the pentagon. Other terrorists hijacks other planes, flies those into various buildings and one field. Osama and Al Qaeda also claim that they are behind it via released tapes and broadcasts on Al Jazerra. They are also a sworn enemy of the United States. They have attacked the U.S. before and there is precedence.

2 - all of the above occurs WITH the help of the U.S. government. We also blow up our own portion of the pentagon to make it look more "real". No leaks from any government agency or individual that might have been involved in said conspiracy have come forward. Only speculation by OUTSIDE analysis that would otherwise be conjecture, theory, and stretching of known facts and truth to fit their world view of a manipulative, fascist, and imperialist government.

Somehow all of the above happened according to scenario 2. RIIIGHT.

And I have some beachfront land in wichita that I'd love to sell to you too.

Can there be proof of a controlled demolition in NYC? No, the rubble's been disposed of (quite illegally and foolishly I must add). However, do you have proof that there was no explosion and jet fuel that burns that 1300 fahrenheit could cause a skyscraper to collapse and land on its own footprint, in only ~90 minutes? No, you do not.

Hey, I have a theory that you are a witch. Less test you to find out if it is true. I'll hold you underwater. If you drown, then you weren't a witch and I was wrong. At least you are going to heaven! If you don't drown, then you are a witch and we'll have to kill you.

You know what? Either way you die.

I use this as example of your logic. Can you disprove that it wasn't simply a terrorst flying a plane into the pentagon?

NO. In fact, there is more evidence that this is what occured than the conspiracy you are so inclined to uphold.

Go read the popular mechanics articles for a better understanding of the physics involved with the planes.

YOU KNOW else is totally remarkable about a controlled demolition?

You have to plant bombs. Lots of them. In both buildings. Since most of the people escaped out of the buidlings, you might have people that would wonder about the placement of these things beforehand and afterword when they blew up the building.

You might have to wonder how a plane hitting the building wouldn't cause a disruption in the ability to blow up said bombs in a coordinated fashion.

You might have to wonder how they BLEW THEM UP at the exact time the plane hit.

You might have to wonder where those people are that had to secure the explosives, place them, and then be aware of the plot, and then blow them up at the right time.

WOW. Lot's of depencies there. My money is on the planes freakin' blew up with tons of jet fuel, compromised the integrity of the building. What did you expect? For it to fall over sideways?

LOL.

Some of us choose to not start threads about these things and their validity. Some of us know that there will NEVER be sufficient evidence to prove either point. So why don't you just come sit back with the rest of us instead of crusading on points you'll never be able to definitively prove?

If you believe NEVER will validate either side, then you are resigned to saying that your theory of conspiracy can NEVER be disproven - even in the face of simple logic, probability and, most importantly, facts.

And then you wonder why people like me don't want to engage lunacy that you advocate w/o the ability to change your mind.

At this point, its comedy to me - and why I'd rather just rile you up rather than engage, because you guys are more dogmatic than any reasonable POV (like mine) could ever be.

rob.

[robtronik]

spikee, you are on conspiracy crack.



rob.

Haha, it's good to dismiss people offhand without addressing their points.

Isn't that how the Repulicans got into office?

To everybody else on this thread - "why don't you check your underwear...is it pink? You fucking communist. Please. Everybody knows that Arabs attacked us because they hate freedom. They're "freedom haters" - and we are "freedom lovers". One more post like that and I'm reporting your ass."

See, I addressed his points above. Now its your turn.

Secondly, Republicans are in office because the Democratic party is in shambles and has no clear vision. That's why. Remember, the majority of americans (in a wider margin of victory than Clinton ever had) elected Bush into office for his second term.



rob.

[Meef Chaloin]

Secondly, Republicans are in office because the Democratic party is in shambles and has no clear vision. That's why. Remember, the majority of americans (in a wider margin of victory than Clinton ever had) elected Bush into office for his second term.

shame thats not true of his first term isnt it!

[smutek]

Okay - do the calculation: which is more likely:......Somehow all of the above happened according to scenario 2. RIIIGHT.

You see, this logic is faulty. Who's to say you are right, as incredulous as you may believe theory 2 to be there are those who feel exactly the same about theory 2.

Can there be proof of a controlled demolition in NYC? No, the rubble's been disposed of (quite illegally and foolishly I must add). However, do you have proof that there was no explosion and jet fuel that burns that 1300 fahrenheit could cause a skyscraper to collapse and land on its own footprint, in only ~90 minutes? No, you do not.

Hey, I have a theory that you are a witch. Less test you to find out if it is true. I'll hold you underwater. If you drown, then you weren't a witch and I was wrong. At least you are going to heaven! If you don't drown, then you are a witch and we'll have to kill you.

You know what? Either way you die.

I use this as example of your logic. Can you disprove that it wasn't simply a terrorst flying a plane into the pentagon?

NO. In fact, there is more evidence that this is what occured than the conspiracy you are so inclined to uphold.

The analogy doesn't really seem appropriate to me. But regardless, you are arguing the same position as he is: In reality neither one of you can disprove the other.

Regarding the "evidence", again it depends which side you sit on. Without taking an actual position on the "conspiracy" I will say that I believe the official story is severely flawed. As much as you think the evidence disproves the "conspiracy" theories there are those that believe the exact opposite.

It just goes to reinforce his original point, which you seem to agree with, neither of you can disprove the other.

Go read the popular mechanics articles for a better understanding of the physics involved with the planes.

This has been debunked. And the du-bunking has been debunked, and the debunking of the debunking.... and so on.

You have to plant bombs. Lots of them. In both buildings. Since most of the people escaped out of the buildings', you might have people that would wonder about the placement of these things beforehand and afterward when they blew up the building.

There are witnesses that say in the days prior to the attacks bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the building, and unusual evacuation drills were performed leaving large sections of the buildings unoccupied for periods of time. This would enable the devices to be planted.

You might have to wonder how a plane hitting the building wouldn't cause a disruption in the ability to blow up said bombs in a coordinated fashion.

Why? Can you explain how it would cause a disruption? If the devices were positioned at numerous locations throughout the towers, on timers, or even controlled remotely, please explain (assuming for a moment that they were there) how the impact would have disrupted their operation?

You might have to wonder how they BLEW THEM UP at the exact time the plane hit.

Well, again, if it were a coordinated effort and the devices, assuming they were in fact there, were controlled remotely then why would this be so hard?

But, the theory is that the devices detonated in intervals occurring after the impact of the planes.

You might have to wonder where those people are that had to secure the explosives, place them, and then be aware of the plot, and then blow them up at the right time.

In my eyes this is the biggest blow to the conspiracy theories. intelligence operations depend on what is called compartmentalization, or "need to know". Only the people who must have knowledge of the operation are in the know, and even then very few have all of the details, they only know what is necessary for their part of the operation.

Regardless, this would have been a huge operation logistically as well as operationally. Or would it have? I tend to think it would have,

Point is, regardless of the level of compartmentalization there would have been a lot of people walking away from this with a lot of dangerous information. Even if a lot of the participants provided logistical support unwittingly, where are those who are in the know? What guarantee is there that they would keep their mouths shut? Even if we were to say that maybe certain elements of government, or even corporate america (a more likely suspect IMHO with support from small elements of very powerful people in government) organized and played a group of radicals without their knowledge that they were being manipulated by US interests (follow me?), even if this were the case, how many people are actually in the know?

On a side note, does anyone care to speculate how an operation of this scale could have been pulled off while maintaining the necessary compartmentalization and ensuring that all parties in the know would stay quiet?

I am not of the disposition that our government is evil as a whole. So I outright refuse to believe that, for example, 9/11 was organized and executed by the CIA, or the Defense Department as an institution. I am more of the opinion that there are rogue elements in government, ex government, or even corporate america that could come together to make things like this happen.

On another side note, if you don't believe corporate america can be sinister then tell me why commercial entities, such as the Baer group, hire interrogators, intelligence specialists, and special operations people on a private basis?

I think the real power in America is in the large corporations, military and energy contractors, communications, etc. Corporations have huge concentrations of wealth and power and as such exert an enormous amount of influence over the United States government.

Ask yourself, why would the US government, as an entity, want to create an "enslaved global market"? there does not seem to be much motivation. But when we look at the amount of influence big business has over the government the answer begins to look a little different and we do begin to see the motivation.

Are all of these conspiracy theories improbable? Depends which side of the fence you are on. Are they impossible? Of course not. Why do people place so much trust in government? I don't know. Don't discredit the conspiracy theories just because they are conspiracy theories, just because you think something like that "could never happen here"....... ask yourself "why couldn't it". Look at the barbarism of nazi Germany as an example. History is rife with them.

Uhh... sorry for the rambling.....

And my dispute with your retort to the other post is made with all due respect ofcourse Rob.

peace

[robtronik]

On a side note, does anyone care to speculate how an operation of this scale could have been pulled off while maintaining the necessary compartmentalization and ensuring that all parties in the know would stay quiet?

This is not the side note to me, this is the main point.

IMPOSSIBLE. That's why these conspiracy theories are just bunk. 5 years later and no leaks.

RIIGHT. But still, some people just want to believe. LOL.

rob.

[robtronik]

oop. Duplicate post.

rob.

[robtronik]

Look at the barbarism of nazi Germany as an example. History is rife with them.

Uhh... sorry for the rambling.....

And my dispute with your retort to the other post is made with all due respect ofcourse Rob.

Oh damn. The nazi comparison came up. The debate is now officially over.

w/ regard to the respect thing - of course. Likewise as well. This is just a friendly, albeit, snarky debate that will fade into history eventually.

rob.