Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

250+ 9/11 Smoking Guns

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Offalycool
    Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭Offalycool


    Idle speculation, true. But its not sound to just dismiss something as coincidence just because you will never have absolute concrete proof. If humanity demanded absolute proof there would never be theory, we would not have the benefits of theoretical speculation. Benefits everyone enjoys more or less.

    Sometimes you have to look at a complex situation and ask yourself what dots can I join. The supposed fact that a plain made it through the best defences, hijackers were not overpowered, struck the relatively low pentagon on the one face recently redesigned to withstand such force and vanished into thin air as soon as the authorities showed up; never mind the fact it was subsequently used by the same authorities to push for a war that had no credible link with any of this. The dots tells me a lot about a situation I will never get to the bottom off.

    I know what my good sense tells me, and I don't need conclusive (nor will we ever get it) proof of the theory of gravity, it just fits the bill and explains more or less how this force affects my life.


  • Options
    #33
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Offalycool wrote: »
    Idle speculation, true. But its not sound to just dismiss something as coincidence just because you will never have absolute concrete proof. If humanity demanded absolute proof there would never be theory, we would not have the benefits of theoretical speculation. Benefits everyone enjoys more or less.
    bonkey, Diogenes and I have repeatedly made the point that theoretical speculation is useful only insofar as it conforms to the scientific method: a theory is utterly useless unless it's falsifiable, and explains all the observed facts.
    Offalycool wrote: »
    Sometimes you have to look at a complex situation and ask yourself what dots can I join.
    The problem with most conspiracy theories is that they blithely ignore dots that don't fit, preferring to pretend that they're not there.
    Offalycool wrote: »
    The supposed fact that a plain made it through the best defences...
    What defences?
    Offalycool wrote: »
    ...hijackers were not overpowered...
    Why would they be? Up until 9/11, it was never the intention of hijackers to crash the plane. The passengers' (and crew's) best chance of survival lay in co-operation.
    Offalycool wrote: »
    ...struck the relatively low pentagon on the one face recently redesigned to withstand such force...
    It didn't exactly "withstand" the impact; it was rather badly damaged.
    Offalycool wrote: »
    ...and vanished into thin air as soon as the authorities showed up;
    What vanished? The plane certainly didn't.
    Offalycool wrote: »
    ...never mind the fact it was subsequently used by the same authorities to push for a war that had no credible link with any of this. The dots tells me a lot about a situation I will never get to the bottom off.
    The last "dot" I won't argue with, but it's easier to believe a tragedy was used as an excuse than that it was engineered as one.
    Offalycool wrote: »
    I know what my good sense tells me, and I don't need conclusive (nor will we ever get it) proof of the theory of gravity, it just fits the bill and explains more or less how this force affects my life.
    The nice thing about the theory of gravity is that it's testable, falsifiable, and explains the observed facts.


  • Options
    #34
    Offalycool
    Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭Offalycool


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    The last "dot" I won't argue with, but it's easier to believe a tragedy was used as an excuse than that it was engineered as one.

    Ok.. the points I used are not watertight. I find it funny that it would be easier to believe terrorist were responsible for the attacks though. I mean who would have thought it before 9/11 such a bold plot could be so successful. I find it easer to believe such an plan would have a much higher degree of success if the administration were behind it.

    Only the administration could cut funding in the most vulnerable places and focus the defences of the country away at just the precise moments. Furthermore it was the administration who used this as an opportunity to change all kinds of laws that threaten there grip on power; who pushed for a war that pulled Americas economy out of recession and land foreign policy squarely in the middle east.. home to vast energy and drug supply's. Are we really to believe if no terrorist attack occurred Bush and co. would sit on there hands and twiddle there thumbs while most Americans couldn't stand the sight of him and didn't understand how he swindled the election in the first place.

    Givin the situation before 9/11 and the events that have occurred I find it hard to believe it was anybody else but the administration and corporate entities. What did terrorists have to gain. What did Al-Qaeda have to gain by bringing the wrath of America on them?


  • Options
    #35
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Offalycool wrote: »
    Ok.. the points I used are not watertight. I find it funny that it would be easier to believe terrorist were responsible for the attacks though. I mean who would have thought it before 9/11 such a bold plot could be so successful. I find it easer to believe such an plan would have a much higher degree of success if the administration were behind it.

    Only the administration could cut funding in the most vulnerable places and focus the defences of the country away at just the precise moments. Furthermore it was the administration who used this as an opportunity to change all kinds of laws that threaten there grip on power; who pushed for a war that pulled Americas economy out of recession and land foreign policy squarely in the middle east.. home to vast energy and drug supply's. Are we really to believe if no terrorist attack occurred Bush and co. would sit on there hands and twiddle there thumbs while most Americans couldn't stand the sight of him and didn't understand how he swindled the election in the first place.

    Givin the situation before 9/11 and the events that have occurred I find it hard to believe it was anybody else but the administration and corporate entities. What did terrorists have to gain. What did Al-Qaeda have to gain by bringing the wrath of America on them?

    I have no problem with any of your opinions on what happened on 911, you're fully entitled to any opinion you want to express. But it all boils down to the fact you have a feeling that something happened in a particular way on 911 which there is no real evidence to support. The provable facts support the official version of events. No one has all the answers, there are plenty of questions about the whole day but as has been repeatedly said, lack of evidence isn't evidence of anything.

    Don't kid yourself here, the republican party had a firm grip on power around 911. Bush was popular with high approval ratings in the polls at the time. It was the war that made him unpopular. And really they didn't need to go half this far to start a war. It just doesn't make sense.


  • Options
    #36
    jessop1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 414 ✭✭jessop1


    meglome wrote: »
    And really they didn't need to go half this far to start a war.

    yeah but starting a war was far from the only benefit they reaped from 911. draconian legislation, international laws and surveillance of society in general/securocracy were all progressed massively as a result of 911


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    jessop1 wrote: »
    yeah but starting a war was far from the only benefit they reaped from 911. draconian legislation, international laws and surveillance of society in general/securocracy were all progressed massively as a result of 911

    I agree many people gained from the event and draconian laws were passed. I just think that they jumped on the bandwagon, not that they planned the whole thing.


  • Options
    #38
    jessop1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 414 ✭✭jessop1


    how convenient it all was.


  • Options
    #39
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    jessop1 wrote: »
    how convenient it all was.

    Yup it was reasonably convenient alright. Does that prove something or just raise some suspicion?


  • Options
    #40
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    jessop1 wrote: »
    how convenient it all was.
    I don't think the thousands of people who died on the day found it particularly convenient. Leaving that aside, I refer you to bonkey's "puddle" analogy above.


  • Options
    #41
    Kernel
    Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I don't think the thousands of people who died on the day found it particularly convenient. Leaving that aside, I refer you to bonkey's "puddle" analogy above.

    Mere thousands of people are inconsequential to the NWO or the US government (if you don't believe in a NWO). Millions have died to forge the world as they want it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Kernel wrote: »
    Mere thousands of people are inconsequential to the NWO or the US government (if you don't believe in a NWO). Millions have died to forge the world as they want it.

    And yet you live and get to expose them on the internet, and Alex Jones has his radio show.


    Not doing a very good job are they?


  • Options
    #43
    Kernel
    Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    Diogenes wrote: »
    And yet you live and get to expose them on the internet, and Alex Jones has his radio show.


    Not doing a very good job are they?

    Why would they bother to kill myself and Alex Jones? Sure we're untrustworthy quacks aren't we?


  • Options
    #44
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Kernel wrote: »
    Why would they bother to kill myself and Alex Jones? Sure we're untrustworthy quacks aren't we?

    True but you might convince others to believe so you'd be dangerous and would need to be silenced.


  • Options
    #45
    Kernel
    Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    meglome wrote: »
    True but you might convince others to believe so you'd be dangerous and would need to be silenced.

    It's already out there, and I'm a poor proponent of most of the theories. I merely share the knowledge that others have uncovered.

    I'm just a smalltown girl, living in a lonely world.


  • Options
    #46
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Kernel wrote: »
    It's already out there, and I'm a poor proponent of most of the theories. I merely share the knowledge that others have uncovered.

    Or others have made up.
    Kernel wrote: »
    I'm just a smalltown girl, living in a lonely world.

    you go sister.

    Seriously Kernel do you ever consider that maybe since you're so willing to believe these conspiracies that maybe you need to have a look at you? You ask why don't us sceptics believe but we ask why do you believe so much. Some of these conspiracies are very patchy indeed yet you still seem to believe them.


  • Options
    #47
    Kernel
    Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    meglome wrote: »
    Or others have made up.

    Well, I like to think of myself as fairly discerning with a functioning bull**** detector built in.
    meglome wrote: »
    Seriously Kernel do you ever consider that maybe since you're so willing to believe these conspiracies that maybe you need to have a look at you? You ask why don't us sceptics believe but we ask why do you believe so much. Some of these conspiracies are very patchy indeed yet you still seem to believe them.

    I have considered it, of course. But I digest a lot of material on such things (it's a hobby, always has been), I don't believe everything (I disbelieve more than I believe - by a good margin), but what I do believe satisfies my criteria for belief. There are other conspiracy theories on which I am undecided, but I often present the arguments for them, since they are there are cannot be ignored. Doesn't mean I've made my mind up 100%, just means I present the idea in this forum.


  • Options
    #48
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Kernel wrote: »
    Well, I like to think of myself as fairly discerning with a functioning bull**** detector built in.

    I have considered it, of course. But I digest a lot of material on such things (it's a hobby, always has been), I don't believe everything (I disbelieve more than I believe - by a good margin), but what I do believe satisfies my criteria for belief. There are other conspiracy theories on which I am undecided, but I often present the arguments for them, since they are there are cannot be ignored. Doesn't mean I've made my mind up 100%, just means I present the idea in this forum.

    Okay but what major conspiracy don't you believe?


  • Options
    #49
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    For instance I was talking to a friend the other night and he was saying that he reckons the Americans might have looked the other way when it came to 911. I'd like to think they didn't but there's no evidence either way so both our opinions are equally valid. What concerns me is that time and time again we go through stuff in here which is more often than not shown to not be based in fact. But no matter how many ways it's shown to be incorrect or not add up none of the CT's will accept it.


  • Options
    #50
    tunaman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 463 ✭✭tunaman


    meglome wrote: »
    For instance I was talking to a friend the other night and he was saying that he reckons the Americans might have looked the other way when it came to 911. I'd like to think they didn't but there's no evidence either way so both our opinions are equally valid. What concerns me is that time and time again we go through stuff in here which is more often than not shown to not be based in fact. But no matter how many ways it's shown to be incorrect or not add up none of the CT's will accept it.

    So what about these multiple warnings they received in the months before 9/11?

    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&complete_911_timeline_key_events=complete_911_timeline_key_warnings

    What about the secret military program codenamed "able danger"?

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

    According to statements by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and those of four others, Able Danger had identified the September 11, 2001, attacks leader Mohamed Atta, and three of the 9/11 plot's other 19 hijackers, as possible members of an al Qaeda cell linked to the '93 World Trade Center bombing.

    This theory was heavily promoted by Republican Representative Curt Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services and House Homeland Security committees. In December 2006, an investigation by the US Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that those assertions were unfounded. It rejected as untrue "one of the most disturbing claims about the Sept. 11 terrorist strikes."[3] The committee has published a letter to its members as a result of these hearings, dated December 22, 2006. However, witness testimony from these hearings is not publicly available.

    So the story is that a US senate committee which was set up concluded that these claims were unfounded. What a surprise, just makes the cover-up that little bit bigger.

    Here is a very short video, which shows footage of the Lt. Col. testifying and a congressman getting incredibly angry about the cover-up.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsM3oCsEJOE

    Whistleblowers...

    Who needs them?


  • Options
    #51
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    "Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity."


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    rigormortis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    "it takes pennies to make pounds"


  • Options
    #53
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    rigormortis wrote: »
    "it takes pennies to make pounds"

    Eh?

    "misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice".

    or how about...

    "Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of government. I do assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory".


  • Options
    #54
    rigormortis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    meglome wrote: »
    Eh?

    "misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice".

    or how about...

    "Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of government. I do assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory".

    Yeah, point made. Quotes can be traded all day long, having no effect whatsoever on the facts.


  • Options
    #55
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    rigormortis wrote: »
    Yeah, point made. Quotes can be traded all day long, having no effect whatsoever on the facts.

    Very true but you're short on facts.


  • Options
    #56
    rigormortis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    meglome wrote: »
    Very true but you're short on facts.

    I don't really get involved in the whole 911 thing. An event on this scale was planned, it happened and now in the last 7 years we have seen the outcome, a police state in the U.S. the U.K and increasing more so throughout the rest of the world.


  • Options
    #57
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    You should probably go see a real police state before you start claiming the US and UK are ones. True, they're going overboard on security, but it's a hell of a lot better than it could be. Exaggerating things isn't going to prove anything.


  • Options
    #58
    rigormortis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    humanji wrote: »
    You should probably go see a real police state before you start claiming the US and UK are ones. True, they're going overboard on security, but it's a hell of a lot better than it could be. Exaggerating things isn't going to prove anything.

    Things are not even started yet. I believe a ring of steel in about to be introduced to London, every car entering and leaving the city will be automatically checked against a database. Mandatory ID, biometric passports, cashless society, rfid, cctv, security guards/police at every turn.......


  • Options
    #59
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    rigormortis wrote: »
    Things are not even started yet. I believe a ring of steel in about to be introduced to London,

    Really? Where? Cause I live in North London, and work in Soho, so if it's going to mess with my commute, I'd like to know.
    every car entering and leaving the city will be automatically checked against a database.

    Yeah er, we call it the congestion charge.
    Mandatory ID,

    Yeah, but no but yeah

    Brown rethinks ID cards.
    biometric passports, cashless society, rfid, cctv, security guards/police at every turn.......

    It must be awful living in your live in baseless fear and paranoia.


  • Options
    #60
    rigormortis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    Diogenes wrote: »
    Really? Where? Cause I live in North London, and work in Soho, so if it's going to mess with my commute, I'd like to know.
    Yeah er, we call it the congestion charge.

    Not London city center, the greater London area.
    Diogenes wrote: »
    Yeah, but no but yeah

    Brown rethinks ID cards

    This will happen shortly. Dont even debate this.
    Diogenes wrote: »
    It must be awful living in your live in baseless fear and paranoia.

    But you have nothing to hide, therefore you will be alright.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    rigormortis wrote: »
    Not London city center, the greater London area.

    How greater is greater. True it's being extended West. But hey that's Chelsea and Notting Hill they can afford it.
    This will happen shortly. Dont even debate this.

    I will the cards are an abject failure combined with recent high profile instances of the government losing personal data, I think the scheme is dead in the water.
    But you have nothing to hide, therefore you will be alright.

    I also don't have to fear police on every street corner. In some parts of London at night that would make a welcome change.


Advertisement