Jim Corr is talking about the New World Order right now!

Pighead

Heres a couple of Pighead quotes:
"Kernel you're a fcuking crackpot."
"Pighead knows for a fact that Kernel is delusional. Last week he seen the fat fella stepping onto the weighing scales whilst sucking in his stomach"

bonkey

Kernel wrote: »

if one looks at the agendas of the Rockefellers, Kissinger, Brzezinski, Bush neocon administration, PNAC etc. through history, and looks at many of those objectives being met through the 9/11 event, as well as the ensuing wars to chase down a shadow boogeyman called Bin Laden and his 'terrorists' (ak-47 toting paupers roaming around third world countries), it all adds up to a likelihood that the people who benefitted from the event are those who are central to creating the new world order.

If we drop definitives from that and say that among those who benefited are those who would be central to concepts like PNAC, then sure...I agree that they are among the beneficiaries.

But here's the thing....when you're in the positions that these guys are in, you're perfectly placed to be able to opportunistically benefit from pretty-much anything. That they managed to turn the situation to their advantage isn't surprising. Rather, it would have been surprising if they couldn't eke an advantage out of it.

Indeed, one would argue that the event was a necessity for these people.

Only if one actually ignores the content of the PNAC document, which advocated a slow, steady progression and which basically concluded that the only thing which could upset the plan was an event which brought about rapid, unforseen change. You should be familiar with that conclusion...it contains the reference to Pearl Harbour thats so often taken completely out of context and construed to mean the exactly opposite of what the PNAC actually says.

You say, however, that they needed the very thing they said they couldn't plan for, which seems to suggest that you're also saying that PNAC is fundamentally wrong...despite using its very existence as a basis for your suspicion.

The US government was already bankrupted tbh.

Their debt levels and defecits have meant that it will be impossible (and was impossible before 9/11) for them to provide for their ageing population.

That's not entirely accurate. Their Social Security system required restructuring. It was the very people you are accusing of orchestrating the attacks (or allowing them to happen, if you've changed from a MIHOPer to a LIHOPer) who tried to argue that America couldn't afford the restructuring...but thats not true. The restructuring involved, over the timescales available was very achievable and affordable. However, with the amounts poured into war (which were vastly more than would have been needed for said restructuring), its entirely possible that it will soon become unaffordable. It would be funny if we end up following this point, with you fervently defending the position of the Bush Administration, while I endeavour to show that they were telling fibs when they said it wasn't affordable....

the US has control of oil and gas

The US has no such control.

Not to mention political control of the region.

Oh...please...mention political control of the region. The US went into Afghanistan, and its not in control there. It went into Iraq, and its not in control there. Where, exactly, has it gained political control?

I think Islam has been demonised as a result of the event. I wouldn't consider that a success.

Lets not confuse Islam and fundamentalist Islam. The fundies have won by the demonisation of Islam. The more that regular Muslims are demonised, the more likely it is that more and more of them will turn towards a more fundamentalist side, especially when it is the side of Islam saying that they should fight back against the demonisation.

Look at how Islamic fundamentalists are being targetted throughout the world, booted out of Britain etc.

Indeed. All of which helps create Angry Young Men [tm] of the Muslim faith, which fundamentalists capitalise on.

Iraq has gained them massive numbers of converts. Afghanistan also. And the more war-torn those nations are, the more poor and disposessed there will be, and historically they too are more likely to turn to fundamentalism.

Seriously...only the other day, Bush said in a record that he didn't care if going into Iraq had created more enemies, because there are no shortage of surveys that show this is exactly what has resulted. The US invasion of the Middle East and the farcical "war on terror" has created more Islamic Fundamentalists than, well, pretty-much anythng else in the 21st century.

Well, if I was Syria or Iran, I'd be pretty worried. Bush's axis of evil outlines clearly US intentions for these countries.

I guess we'll have to agree to differ on that one. Then again, I believe Conspiracy Theorists have predicted several dates for the US to start attacks on Iran...all of which have passed without event.

You don't think Bush and the administration have benefitted most from these phony invasions?

Have they benefited the most, personally? No.

so who has?

I've already said that this would depend on how you decide to compare financial, ideological, and other forms of gain. Your crass reference to the dead in Iraq aside, ignoring this point and simply asking the question again doesn't change my answer.

but it is possible to carry out these events with the complete absence of any solid evidence.

And we know this...how, exactly? By all the other unproveable events that we've proven occurred?

And if there is no solid evidence...what exactly are you basing your conclusions on? A successful cover-up is where something is covered up...where the cover-story hols up to scrutiny.

You argue that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny, but now claim that its a well-executed cover-up!

Not only that, but you don't see a problem that its predominantly the unqualified who can find these flaws...the more qualified someone is in a given topic, the less likely they are to find problems with the official explanation.

Compartmentalisation within the three letter agencies can mean that one hand doesn't know what the other hand is doing.

Indeed, but each hand knows what it itself is doing.

But we're heading into that territory that has already been shied away from on this thread...the notion of actually forming a theoretical explanation, detailing who would have to know what, and then managing to explain all the inconsistencies that you guys insist on. This falls apart, because depending on what topic is looked at, we're led to believe that firemen are keeping silent, scientists are keeping silent (both NIST and the external, independant companies that it contracted), coroners, air-traffic controllers, air-force, and, well, the list is virtually endless.

Its only when we ignore all the stuff you and others raise as "tell-tales" of a cover-up that we can come up with the notion that there need only be a handful of people.

The evidence is sufficient in my mind to form my opinion on what happened.

I've never questioned that its sufficient for you. I have questioned whether it is objectively sufficient.

tunaman

JJ6000 wrote: »

WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE QUOTES NOW???
YOU ACCUSE ME OF BURYING MY HEAD IN THE SAND WHEN YOU GUYS CAN NOT EVEN READ AN ENTIRE QUOTE??

Many of the people who were in the building at the time heard explosions, so how does that fit with your defence of the fire and damage theory?

So what about when people, like Mike Pecoraro, who was there in 93 when the building was bombed, says he was convinced that a bomb went off in the building?

http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.

"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.

The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.

They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. "They got us again," Mike told his co-worker, referring to the terrorist attack at the center in 1993. Having been through that bombing, Mike recalled seeing similar things happen to the building's structure. He was convinced a bomb had gone off in the building. Mike walked through the open doorway and found two people lying on the floor. One was a female Carpenter and the other an Elevator Operator. They were both badly burned and injured. Realizing he had to get help, Mike ascended to the Lobby Level where he met Arti DelBianco, a member of his work crew. People were now coming down the same stairway from above the lobby and Arti and Mike had to stay where they were to direct people out of the stairway door and into the building's lobby. If they didn't, people descending could walk past the lobby door and unwittingly keep descending into the sublevels of the building.

So how can you explain the destruction that he witnessed?

tunaman

KERPAL wrote: »

Ok, fair enough, i take the knob comment back, but theres nothing brave about it, nothing brave about claiming 9/11 was not carried by a muslim extremist organisation, no respect for the dead or their families.

No offence, but you are speaking from a position of ignorance.

http://www.911pressfortruth.com/

The 9/11 Commission and the Family Steering Committee

The first part of the film shows how the 9/11 family members took it upon themselves to pressure the government into eventually forming the 9/11 Commission. The families set up the 9/11 Family Steering Committee to monitor the Commission, providing them with hundreds of well-researched questions for which they expected answers.

The film shows how the government continued to obstruct the investigation, including:

* Henry Kissinger, the original Chairman of the Commission, was forced to resign due to a possible conflict of interest [1].
* The White House refused to release documents that the Commission requested.[2]
* George Bush and Dick Cheney refused to testify in public, and only agreed to meet with the commission together, behind closed doors and not under oath.

Lorie Van Auken, one of the Jersey Girls, estimates that only 30% of their questions had been touched upon in the 9/11 Commission Report. The film mentions the following omissions from the Report:

* The total collapse of Building 7 was not mentioned.
* The World Trade Center steel, which may have proved beyond doubt how the total collapses occurred, was destroyed before it could be forensically examined. [3]
* There was no mention of the money that was wired to lead hijacker Mohammad Atta on September 10th, allegedly by order of the Head of the Pakistani ISI (which is funded in part by the CIA). The Report stated that the issue of who funded the attacks is "of little practical significance." [4]

Mahatma coat

is it in the NIST Report Tunaman? didnt think so, just one of numerous omissions from that wonderful fabrication.

Seriously people here are arguing that Eyewitness reports should be disregarded because they are mistaken/misguided/untrained basicly flying in the face of most conventions.

tunaman

bonkey wrote: »

The original-quality video of the collapses, from before the start to after the end, with the original soundtrack, and no additional commentary....that would be worthwhile, if you could verify that it was just that.

Of course, without access to the original footage, you can't verify that...and if you had access to the original footage, you wouldn't need youTube.

So how about we just focus on some of the additional commentary for now?

Even as footage of the buildings coming down was being shown so called "experts" had already solved the crime...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GDa-L4hHHo

So were these well placed people simply psychic?

The transcripts are arguably preferable for research, because they remove the potential for bias from irrelevant factors (like what someone looks like, or how they speak).

Well I did post a link to an interview with a former air traffic controller, but you made no comment. Here are a few statements he made...

“This is exactly what’s written in our manuals. We alert our immediate supervisors, we get another set of eyes on the scope. We have, two feet away from us, a little button that says ADC, Air Defense Command [nowadays NEADS (Northeast Air Defense Sector)]. Bing, hit the button. ‘Hey, this is me at the Boston Center air space. I just lost a target or I have an erratic target. He is twenty-five miles west of Keene, last reported at such-and-such location.’”

“The pilots are in their ready rooms, the planes are in open-ended hangars. You have frontline players, pilots and controllers. I’m there, I’m watching. The pilot is there, he’s flying. We have direct air defense command communications. That’s the way it’s been for fifty years.”

“Military pilots would have their asses off the ground faster than you could imagine. I know how quickly our systems can respond. Why would you design a system that responds slowly to an emergency?”

“That aircraft is represented on their radar scope from the time it takes off to the time it lands. Even little puddle-jumpers out of our local airports. NORAD tracks all these aircraft. They have the world’s most sophisticated radar.”

What he has said flies in the face of the official story of the non-appearance of any fighter jets, which you have defended and yet you have nothing to say?

stink_fist

it doesn't matter if it was a false flag or not, the "911 truth" movement is distracting peoples attention away from the anti war movements. Take some soma and think about it :p

tunaman

Here is an outright lie from an "anti-conspiracy website".

Numerous unfounded conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks continue to circulate, especially on the Internet. Some of the most prevalent myths are:

1) The World Trade Center (WTC) twin towers were destroyed by controlled demolitions.

This is how the collapses may have appeared to non-experts, but demolition experts point out many differences:

* Demolition professionals always blow the bottom floors of a structure first, but the WTC tower collapses began at the upper levels, where the planes hit the buildings.

I already provided a link to a top-down demolition, which proves this blatant lie but it was unsurprisingly ignored...

Here is another possible top-down demolition, or is it a building collapsing due to structural failure?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d77E0E46c2k&feature=related

Notice the eerie similarity between what happened to that building and the south tower?

http://uk.images.search.yahoo.com/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fuk.images.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dwtc%2Bsouth%2Btower%26js%3D1%26ni%3D20%26ei%3Dutf-8%26y%3DSearch%26fr%3Dyfp-t-501%26xargs%3D0%26pstart%3D1%26b%3D41&w=300&h=270&imgurl=www.911truth.dk%2Ffirst%2Fimg%2Fwtc2TiltSmall.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.911truth.dk%2Ffirst%2Fen%2Fkp_towers.htm&size=27.7kB&name=wtc2TiltSmall.jpg&p=wtc%20south%20tower&type=JPG&oid=a141129c22f29934&no=45&tt=1,640

We know for a fact that the building in the video was demolished, so why does the south tower come down in virtually the exact same manner?

Pixel8

We know for a fact that the building in the video was demolished, so why does the south tower come down in virtually the exact same manner?

Like i already asked JJ6000 and Bonkers in a previous post ages ago now which they still havent answered yet???

curiousn

Mahatma coat wrote: »

is it in the NIST Report Tunaman? didnt think so, just one of numerous omissions from that wonderful fabrication.

Do you think that if NIST came across damning evidence during their research that the Bush administration would allow them to publish it? Please don't try and claim that nobody from the CIA would have been able to influence it in any way. It's not all that difficult to ignore something in a report or misrepresent something else to report the finding you want. How many times have pharmacteuticals been proven safe in "scientific double blind studies" only for them to be withdrawn from the market after a couple of years.
I'm not saying that the NIST investigation was definitely influenced (I don't have 100% proof), but I've no doubt that they could have been.
For this reason I don't necessarily trust the NIST findings

Big Tone

Enough of this conspiracy nonsense, a lot of people lost their lives that day the least Jim Corr and others who support false claims can do to show some respect for the dead and the grief for their familys on what was a massive terrorist attack on our democracy, think about how precious that is and life without it!

Mahatma coat

no one disputes the fact that a lot of people died that day, what we are trying to get at is who is ultimatley responsible for those deaths.

yes 19 terrorists, some of Saudi origin, hijacked 4 planes and flew them into stuff, but theres more to it than the official story lets on

JJ6000

Pixel8 wrote: »

Like i already asked JJ6000 and Bonkers in a previous post ages ago now which they still havent answered yet???

I will respond to your post soon. Tonight hopefully.

Too busy in work a the moment to make a lengthy reply.

Gegerty

LOL you guys are fcuking hilarious. Osama Bin Laden explained the physics of the attack in a tape shown in the news soon after and this was verified by structural engineers and can be demonstrated in computer models. However you do not need to be an engineer to understand the physics. I'll be happy to elaborate if any of you ignoramouses have trouble understanding.

If Iraq was about oil then why do we have an oil crisis? Iraq was stupid, yes. And it also had a hint of personal revenge as Saddam tried to kill George dubya's daddy.

The new world order Jim Corr is referring to is also known as friendly democratic countires co-operating with each other. Fu(king gob-sh!te should be deported for being an embarrasment to the nation. I hope this sh!t does not get seen outside of Ireland.

Gegerty

Mahatma coat wrote: »

no one disputes the fact that a lot of people died that day, what we are trying to get at is who is ultimatley responsible for those deaths.

yes 19 terrorists, some of Saudi origin, hijacked 4 planes and flew them into stuff, but theres more to it than the official story lets on

Why so? Just because you don't understand it does not mean there is more to it.

Edit: Below are general comments and not directed at Mahatma coat

"I don't understand the Lisbon Treaty, therefore it must all be lies"
"I don't understand physics, therefore the twin towers must have been blown up using explosives"
"I don't understand Global warming, therefore it must all be made up. And sure whats wrong with a bit of good weather"
"I don't understand democracy, therefore it must be a conspiracy theory to give the USA control of the planet"
"I don't understand what a tracker mortgage is, its a conspiracy by the banks to rip us off!"

*YAWN* How about summing it all up as "I don't understand anything therefore I am an ignoramous"

Mahatma coat

Gegerty wrote: »

Why so? Just because you don't understand it does not mean there is more to it.

actualy, fvckit not worth respondin

Edit: Below are general comments and not directed at Mahatma coat

"I don't understand the Lisbon Treaty, therefore it must all be lies"
"I don't understand physics, therefore the twin towers must have been blown up using explosives"
"I don't understand Global warming, therefore it must all be made up. And sure whats wrong with a bit of good weather"
"I don't understand democracy, therefore it must be a conspiracy theory to give the USA control of the planet"
"I don't understand what a tracker mortgage is, its a conspiracy by the banks to rip us off!"

*YAWN* How about summing it all up as "I don't understand anything therefore I am an ignoramous"

Gegerty

Mahatma coat wrote: »

actualy, fvckit not worth respondin

So why did you respond?

MooseJam

the buildings collapsed where the planes crashed into them, what are people saying ? that bombs were placed and then the hijackers were told to fly the planes into the bombs ? wouldn't this destroy the bombs ?

curiousn

Big Tone wrote: »

Enough of this conspiracy nonsense, a lot of people lost their lives that day the least Jim Corr and others who support false claims can do to show some respect for the dead and the grief for their familys on what was a massive terrorist attack on our democracy, think about how precious that is and life without it!

I agree, the familys left behind are way more affected by the events than us and we should have respect for their wishes as they continue to grieve. We should support them as they fight to get basic questions answered about why the attack could be perpetrated:

http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

Gegerty

NY Times Article Nov 11 2001 on why the towers cascaded

humanji

curiousn wrote: »

I agree, the familys left behind are way more affected by the events than us and we should have respect for their wishes as they continue to grieve. We should support them as they fight to get basic questions answered about why the attack could be perpetrated:

http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

Now that's kind of sickening that you're twisting peopels grief to your own agenda. You should be ashamed, but I'm sure you feel justified...

simonw

Until this thread i thought i knew the full story behind these attacks. now i realise i was wrong... There was definitely a cover up over the death star.

curiousn

humanji wrote: »

Now that's kind of sickening that you're twisting peopels grief to your own agenda. You should be ashamed, but I'm sure you feel justified...

I would consider it sickening and shameful to ignore their grieving questions, and to try brushing it all over as baseless "Conspiracy Theory".

humanji

So you're just going to push your agenda forward and assume they're all behind you? Ever talk to any of them, since you're so concerned for them?

MOH

Keano A Legend wrote: »

Page Error!

We're sorry! The page does not exist.

To find the page you are looking for, try the following:

I gave up trying to catch up on this about 4 pages ago, it was all getting a bit much for me.

But here's the correct version of the link that I posted incorrectly last Friday, to a Popular Mechanics article debunking the debunkers (presumably published by New World Order Publishers, Ltd).

suspectdevice

Big Tone wrote: »

Enough of this conspiracy nonsense,

don't call it a conspiracy, its a point of view, well supported by facts and events. just as well, if not better than the official story.

Big Tone wrote:

a lot of people lost their lives that day the least Jim Corr and others who support false claims can do to show some respect for the dead and the grief for their familys

agreed, lots of people were affected as a consequence of 911. the 3000 odd american children that have lost their lives in iraq as a consequence of this, and the 100s of 1000s of iraqis that have lost their lives and their homes as a consequence of this. they did nothing to deserve the situation they find themselves in. it was forced upon them for no reason relating to 911. we can't bury our head in the sand and hope it will go away, its not nice to think that the world around us is so controlled and that we have little or no influence on what happens to us. we are all just part of their silly games.

Big Tone wrote:

on what was a massive terrorist attack on our democracy,

and don't even think about calling it a democracy. 9 supreme court judges in florida is not a democracy. its a junta, a bush/cheney invoked junta.

Gegerty wrote:

LOL you guys are fcuking hilarious. Osama Bin Laden explained the physics of the attack in a tape shown in the news soon after and this was verified by structural engineers and can be demonstrated in computer models. However you do not need to be an engineer to understand the physics. I'll be happy to elaborate if any of you ignoramouses have trouble understanding.

don't bother, we'll take bin laden's word for it. and if we can't trust that then we'll ask that slime bag georgie bush to give us a run down.

Gegerty wrote:

If Iraq was about oil then why do we have an oil crisis? Iraq was stupid, yes. And it also had a hint of personal revenge as Saddam tried to kill George dubya's daddy.

israel reported the plot by saddam to kill george bush snr. "he tried to kill my pappy" has been disproven. iraq was all about oil, why else would anyone go in there? sand? death? trillions of dollars that would better support an already failing economy?

Gegerty wrote:

The new world order Jim Corr is referring to is also known as friendly democratic countires co-operating with each other. Fu(king gob-sh!te should be deported for being an embarrasment to the nation. I hope this sh!t does not get seen outside of Ireland.

you will have to explain further how you can call a single superpower forcing its will on other countries "friendly democratic countries". do you consider the partriot act and its impending globalisation to friendly countries to be democratic? do you consider ireland voting in the lisbon treaty democratic? again, do you consider 9 supreme court judges in florida democratic? do you consider the rights of the palestinians in israel democratic? do you think that deporting jim corr for expressing an opinion, one that is strongly held here and elsewhere, a function of a democracy? do you know what a democracy is?

Miguel_Sanchez

MOH wrote: »

I gave up trying to catch up on this about 4 pages ago, it was all getting a bit much for me.

But here's the correct version of the link that I posted incorrectly last Friday, to a Popular Mechanics article debunking the debunkers (presumably published by New World Order Publishers, Ltd).

Yes but the conspiracy theorists will just say that the editor of Popular Mechanics is a distant relative of George Bush and obviously also in on the whole thing. Or something.

And then they'll concentrate on the guy that said 'pull it' and ignore everything else that was refuted by the Popular Mechanics experts.

MOH

To be honest, if I was a member of this supposed New World Order and was trying to cover up the fact that I and my cronies had arranged the Twin Towers strike and was covering it up, the best way to do it would be to set up a load of websites posting about how the whole thing is a fake, using poorly constructed arguments, cherrypicking facts and opinions that agreed with the viewpoint I was espousing, and linking to similar "conspiracy" websites and youtube/google videos.

So maybe some of the "conspiracy theorists" on here are merely shills who are in fact trying to discredit the real conspiracy theorists. If indeed there is a conspiracy.

Of course, if there isn't a conspiracy, then they're all genuine conspiracy theorists, who are just talking nonsense.

suspectdevice

Jeff_Lebowski wrote: »

Yes but the conspiracy theorists will just say that the editor of Popular Mechanics is a distant relative of George Bush and obviously also in on the whole thing. Or something.

And then they'll concentrate on the guy that said 'pull it' and ignore everything else that was refuted by the Popular Mechanics experts.

i only have to read the language on the first page that talks about "extremists" and "poisonous" and "debunking conspiracy" to consider this not in any way independent or unbiased.

what the fu'ck is a "popular mechanics" magazine doing holding such opinions about me. i am not poisonous, i am not extremist and i am not a conspiracy theorist. i just have an opinion that is different to what the junta want me to believe

Miguel_Sanchez

suspectdevice wrote: »

i only have to read the language on the first page that talks about "extremists" and "poisonous" and "debunking conspiracy" to consider this not in any way independent or unbiased.

what the fu'ck is a "popular mechanics" magazine doing holding such opinions about me. i am not poisonous, i am not extremist and i am not a conspiracy theorist. i just have an opinion that is different to what the junta want me to believe

So you don't even have to read the article before you draw your conclusions about it? Brilliant. Well done.