Printable View
One other thing most people don't consider is that a main government tactic in coverups is to discredit everything that disagrees with them, and label them as "conspiracy theories" so that actual scientific evidence based on ordinary observation is also discounted (e.g., the many papers and accounts that do not follow the inadequate and insulting "official"/media explanation).
There was a conspiracy on 9/11. It was done by ISLAMIC TERRORIST.
Pple have ***** and pondered over this thing over and over and over and the majority do not have the expereince to put things in context. I can tell you form growing up as a military brat across the globe that terrorism is ALWAYS happening. The vast majority of it never gets reported. In Germany during the 80s I was witnessed to a bombing at RM AFB, I was on base. There was an attack on the USAEUR Commander in Heidleberg with an RPG. There were TWO bombs found in my neighborhood, one found right across from my house. In the 90s pple know about the bombing in Beruit, the Cole, the first the attack on the WTC. There were alot more attempted and threatened attacks that weren't reported. I can't speak for everywhere but I know bases get terrorist threats constantly. Its hard trying to seperate whats real and whats not.
Nobody said terrorists don't exist.
Nobody said they don't attack.
They just question whether it was really islamic terrorists or the homegrown kind.
They also question who is behind these terrorists. Certainly not Saddam Hussein.
You mention the first WTC attack. Who was their contact for explosives? As I recall it was an FBI undercover agent.
Oops.
Not to mention that the FBI says they have no proof, at all, that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. He is listed on the FBI's most wanted website as Public Enemy No. 1 for............(drumroll)...............the attack on the Cole. Not 9/11.
Quote:
MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH
Saying islamic terrorists exist does not prove they were involved in 9/11.
It's like the webite link MP posted. On it they present as evidence the fact that an unidentified passerby in a business suit turned over the passport to a uniformed cop to proove that the passport was indeed recoverd from the crash.
Unfortunately there's no proof the passerby actually picked it up from the wreckage.
The most reliable way to plant it (it one were inclined to do so) would be to turn it to a cop or fireman on the scene.
Actually its the Bombing of the embasies in Kenya and other places not the Cole.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterKiller
Quote:
USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.
Bin Laden was on video twice admiting he ordered the 9/11 attacks and on audiotape as well.Quote:
Saying islamic terrorists exist does not prove they were involved in 9/11.
Oh boy are you guys goofy. Please take all of "the facts" from the fringe and layout how this entire operation was co-ordinated and executed, and why the use of both planes and charges to bring down the buildings. If everything is so evident this should be very easy for you smart guys to do.Quote:
I've read that professor's paper. If you read through it and check out the basic Newtonian physics, you can see it's fairly evident they were taken down with charges.
Time to lay down the basic zen. :mad: :)
All is mind.
Yeah, and the "fat" Bin Laden was on tape calling for jihad in Iraq. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Asia
You would think a video-tape confession would be enough for the FBI to say Bin Laden was responsible; nevertheless, they conclude they have absolutely no evidence he was involved.
And if you don't think the U.S. government would lie about attacks to instigate war, check out "operation bingo":
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...61castro3.html
or maybe read up on the Gulf of Tonkin...
i still think its a conspiracy theory.
The problem with many of the "conspiricy theorists" is they come up with a conclusion then try to find evidence to support it rather than follow the evidence where it leads (much like Bush is accused of doing). Just the flip side of the same coin :p
Honestly, I think the buildings were pre-wired, probably years in advance, IN CASE of an attack. It would make sense that they might need to bring the building down safely since the WTC has been a target for so long. So, when it happened, they waited as long as they could, and then dropped them to avoid the buildings from falling and causing much, much more collateral damage.
The only 'conspiracy' I think is feasible is that the administration knew attacks were immenent and did not try to stop them because they wanted an excuse to install their mid-East plan ala Project for a New American Century.
They just simply lie about a lot of the details of 9/11 to bend the motives of the attacks to fit their political agenda.
ok, let's break and go watch V for Vendetta.
Then we'll meet back here and share our thoughts on that movie as it relates to this story here.
:p
mixing lies with truth is the oldest political ploy in the book.
of course people are lying. of course people are being truthful.
the problem is the suppression of facts in a so called "free" society.
where there is a void of information, people will fill that void with speculation and conjecture in an attempt to understand what happened.
no one here can argue that facts of the matter aren't being witheld.
Hence the birth of the conspiracy theory around this.
btw, wtc 7 is really fishy. no matter how you slice it, how does a building collapse into itself from a few small fires?
the pentagon is fishy, how can you not see a huge airliner in the released pictures, just some fuzzy little thing, remarkably few pieces of debris etc etc.
why would dozens of cops and firemen on the scene report multiple explosions in the towers before their collapse?
why would there be reports of explosions from the basement of the towers?
why were the port authority records and reports withheld so long and then release with heavy censoring?
If the facts aren't laid on the table in such a way as to absolutely convince us all, then the theories will continue and the distrust will continue and so on.
It is not beyond a government to create a reality to gain support through covert operations or psy ops. why even have those divisions in ones command if they weren't used?
some things can be held as self evident.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning authority. You give those people authority and you should demand accountability and clear, concise and succint explanations of what is going on.
It is clear, this is not occuring. No conspiracy there.
Yeah. It is.Quote:
The point being that no, two planes hitting high in the building are not enough to take them down. The building were designed to withstand similar destruction. Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough melt the steel. Your way too biased to pay attention enough to get it right.
It's not about MELTED steel, it's about softened steel. If you're going to shout conspiracy, this is a non-starter.
http://www.representativepress.org/B...xplosives.html
Check out the McCallister pdfs. Great stuff. You can see the inward bowing that occurred.
So much for explosives.:rolleyes:
Conspiracy theorists do a bunch of things I hate:
They build an internally consistent theory then place the burden on the skeptic to prove them wrong. If you can't prove them definitively wrong, then they must be right!
Evidence that refutes their idiocy just proves how deep the conspiracy goes.
They ask us to believe two mutually exclusive things:
1. The gubmint is so all-knowing and all powerful that it can pull stuff off like this without you knowing about it.
2. They can't keep a secret.
Pick one. You can't have both.
Bottom line, I can build an irrefutable theory that the Unions committed 9/11. I can provide motive, opportunity and intent. It is internally consistent and it cannot be proven wrong. I must therefore be right.
Eventually this is all going to go the way of the Kennedy Assassination. A small cadre of idiots will continue to pursue their lunacy, hold meaningless conferences and rage against their pet mastermind.
The rest of the world will get on with their lives and relegate the above sorts of absurdity to late-night discovery channel specials debunking their paranoid delusions.
Incidentally, did anybody see the special on the Kennedy Assassination? Turns out you can recreate the assassination - including the now experimentally verified fact that the "magic bullet" wounds were, in fact, created by a single round.
Of course, that's what they WANT you to think...they want you to BELIEVE it was a recreation....
After all, I might be a plant by THEM....