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

The Jahar Tsarnaev 9/11 Paradox

2»

Comments

  • #32
    Colgem
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 67 ✭✭Colgem


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Thinking and saying are two different things. What you think and what you say as a condition of your plea deal - one that stops your own mother from going to prison certainly can be.

    Do you have any evidence to support this notion?
    Have you any idea at all why the government would want him to state his motivation for the attacks as 911 being a false-flag attack?

    I have no idea, it's your hairbrain theory that the government want to him say 9/11 was a inside job for whatever reason.

    You come up with the reason.

    I do like this though, whenever anyone says anything that doesn't support your assertion, you just claim the government put them up to it.


  • #33
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Colgem wrote: »
    Do you have any evidence to support this notion?

    You really need someone to provide evidence for you to understand that thinking and saying are two different things.

    [QUOTE=Colgem;84872636]I have no idea,.[/QUOTE]
    I agree. What you need to understand is that the only acceptable motivation from the official standpoint for terrorism against the US is the ridiculous notion "they hate us for our freedom". The actual motivation is the US's brutal Foreign Policy and the ideals within Islam of all Muslims belong to the same family.

    Now see if you can fill in the gaps as to why the would-be terrorist would have blurted out the absurdity that he was motivated by the US government attacking itself on 911.- that is only AFTER that he had flipped, become an informant and made a plea deal which kept his own mother out of prison.


  • #34
    Colgem
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 67 ✭✭Colgem


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    You really need someone to provide evidence for you to understand that thinking and saying are two different things.

    Yeah, but here's your problem.

    You demand other posters provide evidence of another jihadist who thinks 9/11 was a inside job. You are provided with such evidence. You now say that "I think perhaps the US government made him say this, because.... um I dunno lets open this to the floor"

    So you've no idea why the US government would do this other than it's unhelpful to your original hypothesis. Do you understand what the words "tenuous" and "spurious" mean?
    I agree. What you need to understand is that the only acceptable motivation from the official standpoint for terrorism against the US is the ridiculous notion "they hate us for our freedom". The actual motivation is the US's brutal Foreign Policy and the ideals within Islam of all Muslims belong to the same family.

    Now see if you can fill in the gaps as to why the would-be terrorist would have blurted out the absurdity that he was motivated by the US government attacking itself on 911.-
    No you see. It's your hair brained notion.

    You demanded that others provide evidence of another jihadist who thinks 9/11 is a inside job. Once provided with this evidence you engage in not so much goalpost shifting as trying to convince everyone that when you started this thread you meant polo not football.


  • #35
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    I've already made it clear why I reject your supposed example. Find one (or more) that are actually worth considering and I would gladly concede the point.

    Next time try to at least think them through. For example, in this case consider why someone who by default is committed to establishing the Islamic Caliphate and prepared to sacrifice their own life in an attack against America to achieve this goal

    would go and take a turn on the monkey bars in an Al Qaeda camp if:
    a) Bin Laden is the head of Al Qaeda
    b) The US carried out the 911 attacks
    c) Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the 911 attacks and thereby becoming the US's patsie.

    Why would he trust Al Qaeda?


  • #36
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    would go and take a turn on the monkey bars in an Al Qaeda camp if:
    a) Bin Laden is the head of Al Qaeda
    b) The US carried out the 911 attacks
    c) Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the 911 attacks and thereby becoming the US's patsie.

    Why would he trust Al Qaeda?
    As I have pointed out:
    1) he could not believe that Bin Laden is the real leader of Al Qaeda or has any connection to Al Qaeda, or a connection the parts of it the organisation he agrees with.
    2) that Bin Laden was duped by US agents into doing the attack
    3) That Bin Laden's claim of responsibility was faked or manipulated to say something he didn't.
    4) Doesn't believe in Al Qaeda but supports disparate groups and individuals which (in his world) the US is lumping together in a fake oranisation.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    As I have pointed out:
    1) he could not believe that Bin Laden is the real leader of Al Qaeda or has any connection to Al Qaeda, or a connection the parts of it the organisation he agrees with.
    2) that Bin Laden was duped by US agents into doing the attack
    3) That Bin Laden's claim of responsibility was faked or manipulated to say something he didn't.
    4) Doesn't believe in Al Qaeda but supports disparate groups and individuals which (in his world) the US is lumping together in a fake oranisation.

    No offense intented but this is so incredibly juvenile and beyond the pale I can't bring myself to respond to it.

    Just remember: He went and trained with Al Qaeda. He could have done the same with any other non-affiliated international Jihadi group. He didn't. He went and joined with others who worshipped Bin Laden BECAUSE he carried out 911.


  • #38
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No offense intented but this is so incredibly juvenile and beyond the pale I can't bring myself to respond to it.

    Just remember: He went and trained with Al Qaeda. He could have done the same with any other non-affiliated international Jihadi group. He didn't. He went and joined with others who worshipped Bin Laden BECAUSE he carried out 911.
    This seems to be more like the stereotype of terrorists you would accuse the media of forming rather than the reality of the situation.
    Do you really think this is what every member of every insurgency group in Afghanistan holds?

    Even if it was, it does not address or refute any of the possibilities I have presented. Nor does calling them juvenile without explaining why.

    For example:
    He could believe that Bin Laden is not the leader of Al Qaeda, but all of the other people in the organisation do. He believes they are misguided, but agrees with their goals and actions none-the-less.
    Or:
    He could believe that all of Bin Laden's other actions where on the up and up, but was tricked by the US on one occasion into attacking on 9/11 which they then facilitated by lowering defenses, financing things from the shadows and not acting on information when they could.
    Or:
    He could believe that Al Qaeda is tainted and untrustworthy and then traveled to join what he thought was a "real" group which unknown to him, due to bad research or overly complex and tangential relationships, is actually part of Al Qaeda.

    Or any number of other explanations that you are rejecting without considering.


  • #39
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    ... or the most obvious and simple explanation.

    He does not and did not think 911 was a false flag attack. He only said so after copping a plea with government prosecutors who agreed to drop criminal charges against his mother.

    Why? The prosecutor's employers i.e. the government don't want a public debate on a motivation for terrorism against the US being US Foreign Policy.


  • #40
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Britain's wars fuel terror. Denying it only feeds Islamophobia

    Those who send British troops to shed blood in the Muslim world must share the blame for atrocities like Woolwich
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/29/britain-wars-terror-islamophobia


  • #41
    Colgem
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 67 ✭✭Colgem


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    ... or the most obvious and simple explanation.

    He does not and did not think 911 was a false flag attack. He only said so after copping a plea with government prosecutors who agreed to drop criminal charges against his mother.

    Why? The prosecutor's employers i.e. the government don't want a public debate on a motivation for terrorism against the US being US Foreign Policy.

    That is neither obvious or simple, it a piece of twisted logic you are using because you've been caught out badly.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Colgem wrote: »
    That is neither obvious or simple

    Perhaps not to you but would I be right in saying that you also think that Jahar Tsarnaev - the Obama supporting, drug taking, gambling, alcohol drinking, rap listening, X-Box playing student who worked as a lifeguard with that exposed lady flesh on show is an Islamic fundamentalist?


  • #43
    Colgem
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 67 ✭✭Colgem


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Perhaps not to you but would I be right in saying that you also think that Jahar Tsarnaev - the Obama supporting, drug taking, gambling, alcohol drinking, rap listening, X-Box playing student who worked as a lifeguard with that exposed lady flesh on show is an Islamic fundamentalist?

    Wow you just enjoy shifting the goalposts don't you.

    You asked for another Jihadist who thinks 911 was a inside job, you were given one. You're now engaging in contorted thinking in trying to explain away that your entire premise is completely bogus.


  • #44
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    ... or the most obvious and simple explanation.

    He does not and did not think 911 was a false flag attack. He only said so after copping a plea with government prosecutors who agreed to drop criminal charges against his mother.

    Why? The prosecutor's employers i.e. the government don't want a public debate on a motivation for terrorism against the US being US Foreign Policy.
    But this isn't the most obvious or simple explanation.
    It requires you to assume a conspiracy which you cannot provide any evidence for. Can you show for instance that his mother was ever charged with anything an then had the charges mysteriously drop?
    And you have been unable to provide a explanation for the rather large flaw in the explanation: That you think it is very obvious and see through.
    If it is so obviously ridiculous that a jihadi would ever believe in the conspiracy theories, why would the government pick it to use and give away their involvement?

    And then you have the fact that your reason why the government would do this doesn't make a whole bunch of sense either.
    There have been plenty of terrorist attacks of various natures, at least some motivated by US foreign policy. Why would this one cause debate more than the others? Why if they wanted to deflect away from this debate (which I don't see why they would be concerned about in the first place) did they not deflect it into some more useful and less obvious, like further vilifying jihadi terrorists?

    Now notice how I have been able to address and point out the flaws and problems with your explanation and explain why it is less likely.
    You are not able to do it with the ones I provided, hence why I believe they are far more likely than the conspiracy you are presenting.


Advertisement