logo Sign In

The Conspiracy Theories Thread(was: 911 Conspiracy theories) — Page 4

Author
Time
 (Edited)

A B C said:

 

The ABC's of 9-11:
What Really Happened: A Beginner's Guide to the 'Truth' Movement
by Jarrett Murphy

  • The ABC's of 9-11
    The birth and life of the '9-11 Truth movement'

  • The Usual Suspects
    What it takes to make a conspiracy theory

  • Your Turn: Ground Zero Stories?
    Experts want to interview the 2,000 who made it out of WTC 1 & 2
    Power Plays by Jarrett Murphy
  •  

    TV's Frink said:

    Link 3 no worky...

     

    I've seen.

    And now I just took some time to read it quietly. These two links should be enough for anyone asking serious leads to pursue the researches by himself.

     

     

     

    ... Perhaps hang on video games for a while !... hahem... ;)

     

    Author
    Time

    I must say, if I were ABC, I would have picked better sources for a Truth initiate.  (911revisited.com)

    (However, I have the misfortune of possessing curiosity sufficient to impel me to read books, which I know other people do not do, so I don't really bother recommending anything anymore.)

    AND I know I'm not bingowings, because I never could have created an avatar that awesome!

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    ... I told I had no links (same reasons).

    911revisited... Reminds me something.

    Author
    Time

     

    A last one for the road, as we use to say here.

     

     

     

     

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    Darth Id said:

    (However, I have the misfortune of possessing curiosity sufficient to impel me to read books, which I know other people do not do, so I don't really bother recommending anything anymore.)

    Yes, this is why millions of books are published every year, for Darth Id's pleasure. Because he is absolutely right, nobody but him does read books.

     

    Bingowings said:

    There were the Tube and Bus attacks in London but you don't have to pass your kiddies through the x-ray strip show machine to get onto the underground or pass the car through a scanning bridge...

    Glad I am not the only one disturbed by those machines. When they were first talked about by the media, it seemed most people were perfectly cool with them, because ultimately they would make them safer, and they felt suffering being in a free peep show was a fair trade off. It is okay I don't mind being sheered, so long as it somehow helps keeps the wolves away.

     

    The last thing I'd do though is put guns on planes.

    A stray bullet is more likely to bring a plane down than a nutter with a knife.

    Not really. We have armed air marshals flying around all the time in the US... I've never heard of one of them downing a plane. Plenty of arrests made on planes too. But nutters with knifes took down multiple planes on one day. Usually a gun works wonders without a shot even being fired. Just knowing there are multiple armed security personnel on each flight would make something like 9/11 that much more difficult to pull off. Far better solution than nearly strip searching every fifth individual to pass through the line, and taking away our bottled water and shaving cream.

     

    A B C said:

    5 lines to describe me as a preacher when you had all the elements to measure my involvement in the discussion were too much. That's WTF I dared calling so.

    The problem here is that every body sticks on his idea holding it like a shield either like a sword against each other. I told you it was not the good place to discuss such things. Only two persons here insisted to discuss these things. It was not Bingo, nor me. It was two people that made understand us very well that what is said through the medias shouldn't be questionned. Also two persons that never questionned geopolitical and money stakes and interweavings... Notably as causes, rather than consequences.

    I can't tell what you are trying to say here, but you seem to be getting a bit huffy. Is it really so impossible to have a friendly conversation?

    I suppose I am one of the ones (Ash being the other?) you are accusing of never questioning the media or geopolitical stakes? If so, your accusations are absolutely unfounded. You are basing that accusation on my lack of belief in a 9/11 conspiracy. I told you before, I looked into a lot of that stuff, read some books, watched documentaries, and failed to find anything that really convinced me. All of their finest arguments were easily countered. I am not holding anything up as a shield. I seriously looked into all this stuff and came out the other side unconvinced. You mentioned all this "bold" research into the subject, and made me think there was something new I should look at, which is the only reason I asked to discuss this.

    "Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

    Author
    Time

    but there are problems with Air marshals.  What if the terrorist infiltrate the air marshal problem?    What if they kidnap an air marshal, put the air marshal disguise and on one the terrorists?  Then the terrorist in on the plane, with gun.  What if a terrorist joins the air marshal program?  He pretends to be an ordinary citizen that wants to become a air marshal.  He goes through all the training and whatnot and becomes and air marshal.  Then you, again, have a terrorist on board the plane with a gun.

    btw, have they actually started to use the "strip xray" machines yet?   I thought they were just in consideration.  I do think they go a little too far.  But I do believe we need heavy security at the airports,  I never again wish to see another 911.

    Author
    Time

    Warbler said:

    but there are problems with Air marshals.  What if the terrorist infiltrate the air marshal problem?    What if they kidnap an air marshal, put the air marshal disguise and on one the terrorists?

    Arn't you a little short for an air marshal? ;) 

    He could be doing that right now, but it has never happened yet.

     

     

    btw, have they actually started to use the "strip xray" machines yet?

    They started using them years ago.

    "Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    Just this once, and only this once,  I am going to talk about why I do not believe that the government did 911.   Its impossible.   For the government to have done,  too many people would be involved in the cover up.    Multiple people would have talked by now, and regular media would be all over it.   I suppose media could be "in on it", but again the means a whole lot people would be "in on it"  - as in MILLIONS of people.    The idea that the government imploded the towers is absolutely ridiculous.   Do you realize how difficult it would have been to sneak in and set up enough explosives to blow up a building the size of one of those towers  or even building 7.    What are the odds that no one would realize "hey, someone's rigged this building with explosives!!!   Its too risky.   Too much of a chance that the plot would be discovered.   And why would they bother?    The whole supposed reason behind this was to justify the two wars, right?   Wouldn't the planes going into the towers have been enough for that?   Why would they risk the whole plot being discovered by trying to sneak explosives into the buildings.   The other ridiculous idea is that a missile and not a plane is what hit the Pentagon.    Why would the government bother sending a missile into the Pentagon?  They were able to send planes into the World trade center,  why would they be unable to send one into the Pentagon.   Again, why risk the plot being discovered?  Also multiple people have said they saw a plane and not a missile go into the Pentagon.  Also why would they attack the Pentagon?   The whole point of the attack was to justify two wars?  If you are planning two wars, would you attack your own military headquarters??   Again if the government really did do it, the mainstream media would be all over it.   They also did not like Bush,  you don't think they'd love to have something on him?  You don't think they would love to expose such a plot???  Watergate anyone?  Iran Contra anyone?   It would be the scope of the millennium!!!   Don't you think the the Democrats would have loved to expose that a republican president did 911? It would forever kill the republican party!!!   They is no doubt if it were true, the media and the dems would be all over it.

    finally everyone seems to forget that the supposed mastermind behind would have been the guy in charge of the government at the time.   This guy: 

    you really think he is smart enough to carry out such a plot?   I rest my case. 

    P.S. Bin Laden admitted he did it.

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    C3PX said:

    Glad I am not the only one disturbed by those machines. When they were first talked about by the media, it seemed most people were perfectly cool with them, because ultimately they would make them safer, and they felt suffering being in a free peep show was a fair trade off. It is okay I don't mind being sheered, so long as it somehow helps keeps the wolves away.

    I dunno.  I can't really say the thought of it bothers me.  Personally, I was under the impression they always used X-ray machines, even before 9/11.  Or is this some newer, high-tech version that really "shows off the goods" so to speak?  But it doesn't bother me because of the whole "trading liberty for a bit of temporary safety" shtick.  Maybe it's just because I don't really hold that kind of modesty in high regard, but I have to say it doesn't really bother me if a bunch of strangers want to use their machines to inadvertantly find out what undies I'm wearing or if I'm circumcised or not.  It's just not something that embarrasses me.  Maybe I should have been European. =P

    There is no lingerie in space…

    C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    CP3X, there is always something new to look at. You stick on your 911 ideas. The first links I posted when you asked the first time were not about that please note. Anyway, people used to post in the politics thread will always need some who are not agree to confront their ideas and also to show the complexity of their brain for a simple reason: to exist. Still I'm sure they have the best intentions in the world behind this.

    We have one exceptionnal exemple of that not far.

     

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    Warbler said:

    Just this once, and only this once,  I am going to talk about why I do not believe that the government did 911.   Its impossible.   For the government to have done,  too many people would be involved in the cover up.    Multiple people would have talked by now, and regular media would be all over it.   I suppose media could be "in on it", but again the means a whole lot people would be "in on it"  - as in MILLIONS of people.    The idea that the government imploded the towers is absolutely ridiculous.   Do you realize how difficult it would have been to sneak in and set up enough explosives to blow up a building the size of one of those towers  or even building 7.    What are the odds that no one would realize "hey, someone's rigged this building with explosives!!!   Its too risky.   Too much of a chance that the plot would be discovered.   And why would they bother?    The whole supposed reason behind this was to justify the two wars, right?   Wouldn't the planes going into the towers have been enough for that?   Why would they risk the whole plot being discovered by trying to sneak explosives into the buildings.   The other ridiculous idea is that a missile and not a plane is what hit the Pentagon.    Why would the government bother sending a missile into the Pentagon?  They were able to send planes into the World trade center,  why would they be unable to send one into the Pentagon.   Again, why risk the plot being discovered?  Also multiple people have said they saw a plane and not a missile go into the Pentagon.  Also why would they attack the Pentagon?   The whole point of the attack was to justify two wars?  If you are planning two wars, would you attack your own military headquarters??   Again if the government really did do it, the mainstream media would be all over it.   They also did not like Bush,  you don't think they'd love to have something on him?  You don't think they would love to expose such a plot???  Watergate anyone?  Iran Contra anyone?   It would be the scope of the millennium!!!   Don't you think the the Democrats would have loved to expose that a republican president did 911? It would forever kill the republican party!!!   They is no doubt if it were true, the media and the dems would be all over it.

    finally everyone seems to forget that the supposed mastermind behind would have been the guy in charge of the government at the time.   This guy: 

    you really think he is smart enough to carry out such a plot?   I rest my case. 

    P.S. Bin Laden admitted he did it.

     

    Oh and just for the go. I'm glad cause Warb this time exposed the average opinion with an unexpected accuracy.

    He just shout: I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE IT !

    ... And I understand him. Somehow.

     

    If you allow me now, I' m gonna take care of my vegetables.

     

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    A B C said:

    CP3X, there is always something new to look at. You stick on your 911 ideas. The first links I posted when you asked the first time were not about that please note. Anyway, people used to post in the politics thread will always need some who are not agree to confront their ideas and also to show the complexity of their brain for a simple reason: to exist. Still I'm sure they have the best intentions in the world behind this.

    We have one exceptionnal exemple of that not far.

    ... If you allow me now, I' m gonna take care of my vegetables.

     

    Sorry, but you are coming off as a condescending dick. Just because I post in the politics thread, I am obviously quite stupid and single minded, so I need guys like you to come along and challenge me so that I can see the complexity of my own brain, which I am too simple to see otherwise? Very nice A B C.

    How often must I look into 9/11 conspiracy theories before my brain can be as complex as yours? Is once every two years enough, or do I have to go at it again annually until I am convinced that the American government are the ones responsible? I looked into that stuff before, and you were offering me nothing new. There is not always something new, and there was nothing new in this case. Same old stuff I have already looked over, but since I did not arrive at the same conclusions as you, I must not be very intelligent or I must have looked at them with a closed mind, apparently.

    Regarding your documentary about the bank, and the page you link to, I know those were not about 9/11 because I looked at them. I commented on it and stated that the documentary you linked was actually a very disreputable TV show, and hardly something to take as solid truth. I also said I do agree with some of the things that are said about the banks. I just don't think they orchestrated 9/11.

     

    EDIT: In response to A B C's edit:

    I agree that part Warb's argument is pretty weak. It started strong with the idea that millions of people would have to be in on it, especially if we feel the need to claim the BBC was in on it too, which was, as ridiculous as it sounds, actually done in this very thread. It is extremely implausible. But as his argument turned to a less than flattering picture of Bush to drive home the claim that he was too dumb to have planned it, it kind of lost its way. You can make anyone look mentally handicapped by grabbing still frames from moving pictures. 

    First off, Bush is actually very smart, he simply isn't a very eloquent public speaker and his stupidity has been played up by the media and by variously forms of entertainment, including comedy sketches and youtube compilations only showing his blunders. You listen to a one on one interview with the guy, and you barely even recognize him as the guy who appeared in ever episode of Saturday Night Live for eight years, or the guy who does nothing but stutter and trip in youtube videos.

    Second, he wouldn't have to be smart to be part of a 9/11 conspiracy, he would simply have to be willing. There are plenty of other evil geniuses out there to come up with the ideas.

     

    Have fun watering your vegetables, A B C.

     

    "Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

    Author
    Time

    ^ I appreciate your sense of simplification.

    You won the thread.

    Author
    Time

    There is nothing to win.

    I just wish we could have friendly conversations around here again. Obviously we can't. Condescension seems to be a forum favorite these days.

    "Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

    Author
    Time

    Gaffer Tape said:

    but I have to say it doesn't really bother me if a bunch of strangers want to use their machines to inadvertantly find out what undies I'm wearing or if I'm circumcised or not.

    Or if your seven year old son is circumcised or not, how perky your fourteen year old daughter's titties are, whether or not your sixteen year old son is sporting a boner, and what shaped breasts your wife has. I see no reason why this should bother anyone...

    "Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    C3PX said:

    Gaffer Tape said:

    but I have to say it doesn't really bother me if a bunch of strangers want to use their machines to inadvertantly find out what undies I'm wearing or if I'm circumcised or not.

    Or if your seven year old son is circumcised or not, how perky your fourteen year old daughter's titties are, whether or not your sixteen year old son is sporting a boner, and what shaped breasts your wife has. I see no reason why this should bother anyone...

    Well... in all honesty I doubt anyone would need an X-ray machine to make out the shapes of breasts or spot a boner.  Oh, and I take exception to you referring to my non-existant daughter's breasts as titties.  Just seems rather rude. ^_~

    I just don't know.  I don't consider nudity to be a big deal.  I certainly understand that some people do.  But didn't you just say that airports have always been X-raying people?  As I asked, is this some new method of X-raying put into place now that JUST sees through people's clothes rather than showing bone?  And most importantly:  are they keeping these images as photographs?  See, I don't see a problem with someone getting a brief glimpse of me and then forgetting about it in the onslaught of thousands of other passengers.  If airport security has access to "nude" pictures of everyone, though, and could access them at any time, THEN I could definitely see that being an invasion of privacy.  I'd love it if you could throw some info my way on the subject.

    There is no lingerie in space…

    C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

    Author
    Time

    C3PX said:

    I agree that part Warb's argument is pretty weak. It started strong with the idea that millions of people would have to be in on it, especially if we feel the need to claim the BBC was in on it too, which was, as ridiculous as it sounds, actually done in this very thread. It is extremely implausible. But as his argument turned to a less than flattering picture of Bush to drive home the claim that he was too dumb to have planned it, it kind of lost its way. You can make anyone look mentally handicapped by grabbing still frames from moving pictures.

    ok maybe I shouldn't have made Bush look so stupid, but there was a lot I said between  when I said that millions were involved and what I said about Bush Jr.   Please don't ignore what I said between the two.   Please re-read my post if you have to.   It contained a lot more than Bush bashing.   I only Bush bashed at the end.  Take out the Bush Bash if you want.   The rest still stands just fine.

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    Gaffer Tape said:

    I just don't know.  I don't consider nudity to be a big deal. 

    I consider nudity to be a big deal.    I consider it to be a matter of privacy.  I'm sorry if I'm stuck in the mud, but that is just the way I feel.

    Gaffer Tape said:

    I just don't know.  I don't consider nudity to be a big deal. 

    I consider nudity to be a big deal.    I consider it to be a matter of privacy.  I'm sorry if I'm stuck in the mud, but that is just the way I feel.

    if you were a female 16-40 or whatever age, would you not be afraid that pics of your body were being used as jack off material? 

    You yourself may have no problem with nudity, but surely each person has the right the make up his/her mind about that, don't they?  Especially when the nudity involves his/her body itself. 

    Author
    Time

    Gaffer Tape said:

    ... See, I don't see a problem with someone getting a brief glimpse of me and then forgetting about it in the onslaught of thousands of other passengers.  If airport security has access to "nude" pictures of everyone, though, and could access them at any time, THEN I could definitely see that being an invasion of privacy...

    I imagine if they do keep an archive, just give it time and something's gonna end up on the internet.

    Author
    Time
     (Edited)

    So much of what we think is true is a myth.

    Take for example the myth that the Nazi Party was a well oiled super-efficient extension of Hitler's will.

    The reality of the situation was that there were many separate people or groups obsessed with being seen to be making Hitler's twisted dreams reality, both as a means of advancement and of self preservation. It was a mad competition to see who could do the most for the Reich, sometimes stumbling over each other in the rush.

    Adolf would let out a brain fart for the morning "Corned beef is un-Aryan!" (just an example of the sort of thing he could say, I don't recall him saying anything like that personally) and someone would overhear it and quietly come up with a scheme to remove corned beef from German society, claiming the leader's approval and trying to get it done faster than the guy putting top hats on Magpies.

    This is also true of these Islamist terror clubs.

    There is no Al-Qaeda terror network (the brand name itself didn't exist until the USA gave it to the world out of the mouth of a thief who ran off with some of Bin Laden's money). He referred to a 'base' where Bin Laden and his small gaggle of nutcases were becoming a bit of a marginalised embarrassment to the majority of other Islamist nutcases encamped there who just wanted to blow up people in their own countries.

    Bin Laden had noticed that blowing up Muslims wasn't winning any of them over to his cause and so his tiny group declared war on America (which basically meant anyone who was different from them).

    He'd hand out money and independent fan clubs would come up with their own hideous schemes and do the work.

    After 9-11 and after America had given publicity to the brand name lots of other groups tried the same thing. Some of them were self funding and had no link to Bin Laden himself but they wanted to get in on the act and some claimed to be part of this Al-Qaeda that they heard about in the media.

    They didn't have to because almost all of them would be identified as Al-Qaeda anyway.

    The same model can be placed over the various political cults and the secret services around the world.

    Take a small group of political idealists.

    They think people are being a bit too laid back, they aren't following predictable old fashioned models of behaviour. They believe that the forces that bind society together are out of balance.

    People need to get behind the flag again, get back into church, stop obsessing over personal freedom, unite over something and make the world more like themselves and get that oil out the hands of those crazy Arabs.

    Stuck with a reasonably content population and a non-interventionist and Kissingeresque President what they really needed was a catalyst, a special event, a new Pearl Harbor something to get the ball rolling.

    That way they could use this new specter to get changes made, turn that Conservative president into a revolutionary and build a brave new world with America on the rise again.

    If some poor guy sells you a story about a few people in a cave...sex up that story, turn that cave into a hidden fortress with computers and tanks and well if they have one they might has well have forty of them.

    To hit these fortresses will take some serious fire power.

    You can't do it remotely you need to send the troops in dig these guys out.

    If you can't find them it must be because they have dug themselves in so deep that blowing up every mountain is the only way or maybe they have moved over the border to another country which also needs seeing to.

    It's not just abroad either, those bombers came over here and despite being monitored pulled off these terror attacks.

    There must be hundreds and thousands of them hiding, waiting to go off do their thing at any minute.

    It's a new dark time and to stop these people requires fresh ideas. Forget the old rules, round up anyone who looks a bit different snatch them off the street wherever they are and torture the truth out of them. It's the only way to get the sort of information that fits the model that needs to be sold.

    The media love stories and the internet is just another medium.

    If channels A, B and C is selling you brand X, channels F,E and D will sell you brand Y.

    When you play a game of chance you come up with rituals.

    They give you the impression of control.

    At the roulette wheel you may have a pattern of numbers or colours which you stick to and refine over the years which occasionally seems to deliver results but it's an illusion.

    Some of the other players will be getting similar results with different models and others will have no model at all and might be losing less frequently.

    It's chaos and only the bank wins.

    Unless you work on the middle rung of the same bank the better half works at where the managers don't know how a spreadsheet works and gleefully refuse to learn or how to open or send an e-mail without a secretary to guide them through the process but somehow still earn more money than everyone else and this bank got bailed out with tax-payers money while public service providers are losing their jobs and getting their wages cut.

    C3PX the reason why you haven't heard of an air marshal bringing a plane down is because thankfully there haven't been many cases of one discharging his weapon while the cabin was compressed.

    Author
    Time

    Here's something appropriate for this crowd (which has probably been posted elsewhere at some point).  "Star Wars and False Flag Terrorism."

    Although the narrator has a voice only fit for silent films, he makes the correct parallel, and the general motivation for the attacks is explained pretty well.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0fDUoudO7w

    Anyway, both this and the other thread should be locked.  Discussing "9/11" without discussing "conspiracy theories" (or dignifying the pejorative connotation of the phrase) is like discussing WWII without mentioning the Axis Powers; or discussing Star Wars without mentioning George Lucas; or discussing the OOT without mentioning the SEs; or TPM without Jar-Jar; or C3PO without R2D2; or Obama without Soetoro; or Sega without Genesis; or Teddy without Chappaquiddic; or Nixon without brow sweat; or Palin without bikinis & AKs; or Paul without John; or break-ups without Yoko...

    And all I want is news on when that damn technicolor SW print will be scanned for a bootleg blu-ray.  Please.  9/11 upsets me, as it should any reasonable person.  Let's stick with the space operas, people.