all 9/11 and related american political threads, merged here

[rogue]

Thanks Merry, I didn't think it did.

Does that mess up Kymus' question?
I suppose it's just a coincidence that the Pentagon was undefended on 9/11 just like it's a coincidence that NORAD was having drills of hijacked jets flying into buildings on 9/11?

[Merryprankster]

Incidentally, Unions committed 9/11. Here is a debate chain I had with another fellow elsewhere.

From: Merryprankster
Date: 06/27/06 12:49 PM
Member Since: 01/01/2001
3754 Total Posts Ignore User
Edit

Unions.
Only Unions have the requisite skill sets across the wide range of activities needed to pull this off.

Unions have the access - they are ubiquitous across an array of organizations and industry.

Unions have motive - 9/11 sparked a massive amount of spending on security, not to mention the direct construction/demolition/clean-up costs.

You can't prove me wrong. My theory is self-consistent.

From: ilikefighting2
Date: 06/27/06 01:58 PM
Member Since: 01/31/2006
935 Total Posts Ignore User


"Unions have motive - 9/11 sparked a massive amount of spending on security, not to mention the direct construction/demolition/clean-up costs.
You can't prove me wrong. My theory is self-consistent."

Some questions regarding this theory.

1) How did unions set up the numerous war games that day which distracted our air defense?

2) Does your theory suggest they(unions) were responsible for the insider trading? If so, was the SEC in collusion?

3) Are the secret service included in the "union" category? Seeing as they failed to remove Bush from danger the moment it became apparent we were under attack.

4) You mention profit motive as a result of the attacks. Do you see anyone else benefiting from the 9/11 aftermath? Because it's certainly not Al Qeada or the Islamic world in general, is it?

5) How did unions fool our government into believing 19 arabs did it?

From: Merryprankster
Date: 06/27/06 07:43 PM
Member Since: 01/01/2001
3758 Total Posts Ignore User
Edit Last edited:27-Jun-06 07:44 PM

"1) How did unions set up the numerous war games that day which distracted our air defense?"
A good chunk of the civil service is unionized. In addition many of the contractors employ unionized workers. This includes analysts, logistics personnel, etc. If you don't think this vast source of manpower has an impact on policy and operations, then you're kidding yourself. Unions controlled the date of the war games by ensuring funding, procurement, materials etc for said war games were only available when they chose.

"2) Does your theory suggest they(unions) were responsible for the insider trading? If so, was the SEC in collusion?"

The SEC would not need to be in collusion. Unions include a significant number of people in supervisory position in the private sector who would be well placed to release corporate secrets, not to mention tech workers who would be quite able to access corporate secret files and disseminate that information, while covering their tracks expertly. It's called "Industrial Espionage," and it is quite common throughout the corporate world.

"3) Are the secret service included in the "union" category? Seeing as they failed to remove Bush from danger the moment it became apparent we were under attack."

The secret service is a Department of the Treasure agency with Law Enforcement powers. As such, its members can join the AFGE, the NTEU and the FCIA. Incidentally FBI agents can also join unions. The Secret Service agents, or at least enough of them, were most assuredly unionized.

They would not have been caught during the screening processes because background investigations, the processing of those papers, and the lie detector tests are also handled by a workforce that is largely unionized.

"4) You mention profit motive as a result of the attacks. Do you see anyone else benefiting from the 9/11 aftermath? Because it's certainly not Al Qeada or the Islamic world in general, is it?"

Anybody else benefiting is an incidental effect. Unions didn't care about anything but potential for increased revenue and membership. Nobody else's benefit or loss was considered. Why would it matter? Besides which, have you been paying attention to the news lately? A large number of port workers are non-unionized immigrant labor. The transportation workers' ID program is just another Union attempt to increase membership and dues - a manipulation of corrupt politicians and administrators playing on public fears.

"5) How did unions fool our government into believing 19 arabs did it?"

I have cited the highly trained, well placed workforce throughout elements of the United States government. Unions delayed, garbled, intercepted or confused communications - who maintains the equipment, after all? (hint - unionized contractors or AFGE members) Appropriate air traffic controllers (famously unioned if you'll recall Reagan firing all of them - prescient, don't you think?) were part of the plan so that radio reports from the flights would not be questioned as fanatical airline union pilots crashed their planes into the Pentagon, and the WTC. "Volunteers," who were members of unions and unionized emergency response personnel ensured that "black boxes," were found and destroyed before everybody else. The flight that crashed in Pennsylvania was merely pilot error, which the radar and comms records would reflect, except that unionized communications workers, air traffic controllers and emergency responders all ensured the information was kept under wraps.

In the meantime, unionized commercial artists forged videotapes, documentation, etc, to implicate UBL and Al Qaida - a conveniently shadowy organization with little public or government attention, but with a well documented. Unionized financial workers planted false bank and monetary transfer records. Unionized labor, FAA and LE officials planted residence addresses, pilot training, and other pertinent information. Unionized communications workers spoofed phone and e-mail records.

My theory is self-consistent. You cannot prove me wrong.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My theory is elegant in its simplicity, internally consistent, and non-falsifiable.

Therefore, I must be correct.

[Merryprankster]

I suppose it's just a coincidence that the Pentagon was undefended on 9/11 just like it's a coincidence that NORAD was having drills of hijacked jets flying into buildings on 9/11?

Of course it doesn't! Kymus will come back and ask if we "really expect him to believe that the nation's largest military office building doesn't have super secret defense capabilities that we know nothing about."

I mean, how gullible do we think he is? HONESTLY.

With regard to NORAD and hijacked jets, I've always been curious as to what, exactly, this was supposed to demonstrate. That the government runs drills? Even better - that the government agency that at the time was responsible for what we now cringingly term "homeland defense" (HD) was running drills related to responses for HD emergencies?

Imagine this: During the Cold War, NORAD runs a Nuclear Missile attack scenario (that was its primary mission at the time). The next day, the Soviets launch. Would anybody seriously suggest that there was something afoot in our government? (Except the sorts who are 9/11 conspiracists?)

I mean - it's so SUSPICIOUS when an agency runs a drill designed to address a mission area for which they are responsible...

[Merryprankster]

Incidentally, re: the Magic Bullet - this little Gem from Wikipedia

Discovery Channel's reenactment of bullet CE399's path
A Discovery Channel special Unsolved History: JFK - Beyond the Magic Bullet atempted to replicate, as well as possible, the conditions of that day. The participants set up blocks of ballistics gel with a substance similar to human bone inside. These studies showed that largely undeformed bullets were possible to produce, if they were slowed by a passage though a tissue-like substance before striking bone. Next, two mannequin figures made of ballistic anatomical substances (animal skin, gelatin, and interior bone-like cast) were set up in the exact relative position of JFK and Connally. A marksman, from a distance equal to that of the sixth floor of the book depository building, fired the same rifle model found in the Book Depository, using a round from the same batch of the same "Western Case Cartridge Company" 6.5x52 mm ammunition purchased with the surplus Carcano weapon in early 1963 (and three expended brass from which was found with the weapon, in the book depository Nov. 22, 1963). The path of their single bullet (followed by high speed photography) duplicated, almost exactly, the wounds suffered by the victims that day, the only difference being that the bullet did not quite have enough energy to penetrate the "thigh" substance in front of the Connally figure, due to striking an extra bone in the "rib" model (i.e., it fractured 2 ribs in the model vs. one rib in Connally). It was also slightly more deformed than CE 399, possibly for the same reason. However, this bullet came close enough to duplicating all wounds in both men with a single shot, with a bullet having little deformation, that the theory, while technically improbable, is much more plausible than previously thought [14].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_...CE399.27s_path

I saw the whole thing (the re-enactment). One of the keys is that Connally was sitting 3 inches lower than the president, which is conveniently ignored by conspiracy nuts. This had quite an impact on the whole thing (chaos theory gentlemen).

It was really quite interesting. Incidentally, the ballistics expert who saw the results of the experiment concluded that the wounds must have come from two rounds, not one. He was quite shocked to find out that he was wrong in his initial assessment.

Of course, that's what they WANT you to think. NORAD was actually running an "anti-presidential assassination drill" the day before the Discovery Channel re-enactment, and took control over the whole operation to ensure that the "truth" never got out....

Because hey! God forbid empirical experiments be used to model what actually happened.

[rogue]

My theory is elegant in its simplicity, internally consistent, and non-falsifiable.

Therefore, I must be correct.

Oh my, you are!

I'm amazed that the 9/11 conspiracy crowd is going with such a complicated and convoluted scenerio involving thousands of people and having all pull off their tasks with utmost secrecy and timing. Personally I would have just said that Silverstein was running the hijackers to recoup his money. It's simple and even has a bit of a Zionist angle to it. Now if I can tie Sivlerstein to the Bilderberg Group I'll really have something.

With regard to NORAD and hijacked jets, I've always been curious as to what, exactly, this was supposed to demonstrate.

I don't know either, but from what I understand accepted doctrine for a hijacking was to escort the plane down safely and let the group that doesn't exist take the plane down. If NORAD was drilling a 9/11 type hijacking attack I doubt that it was in the "what to do book" for the guys at the scopes and in the air.

[Merryprankster]

Well, everybody knows that the Zionists were intimately linked to unions and worker's parties.

[canglong]

Arms for drugs, unauthorized activities, dealing with the enemy, hiding from Congress, flying drugs into the country to raise money for an illegal war... All of this happened in the Iran-Contra scandal.
Many like to brush off notions of vast conspiracies, saying how could so many people keep a secret? This affair was ongoing for five years without a peep from any participants! The Kennedy assassination was, after all, in the end, a one day event. But this went on for five years before story started coming out, and it involved thousands of participants. When people want to keep something secret, they can. It was a freak accident that brought this story into the mainstream, the downing of Eugene Hasenfus.
http://www.oilempire.us/iran-contra.html

http://nwcitizen.us/wic/Quickly/Wher...ugeneHase.html

[rogue]

Darn Merry, you are good!

Check this out


Wilson states in his article(?) about the Vanity Fair article about NORAD...

It is clear that the exercises revolving around hijacked airliners scheduled for that morning created so much noise in the system that controllers could not pinpoint the positions of any of the real airliners to orchestrate any kind of intercept.

but then quotes Maj. Nasypany,

"When they told me there was a hijack, my first reaction was 'Somebody started the exercise early,'" said mission-crew commander Major Kevin Nasypany.

So the excercise created noise even though it didn't start?

This just in!
Liquid Bomb Pakistan Link Is False Flag Smoking Gun

The Pakistani ISI is a CIA front and controls terror cells at the discretion of the highest levels of the US military-industrial complex. This means that the potential mastermind of the liquid bomb plot, Rashid Rauf (pictured), was operating under the oversight and direction of Pakistani and by proxy American intelligence agencies.

Wow, now that's really something! Do these guys do any research into the kinds of relationships that they are saying exist?

[Merryprankster]

When people want to keep something secret, they can.

Actually, it's very difficult to keep a secret.

Or are you forgetting that the Iran Contra affair unravelled...precisely because it's hard to keep secrets?


Oops. "Hoist by your own petard," as the saying goes.

The difference between 9/11 conspiracies and the Iran-Contra conspiracy is that the Iran Contra affair is loaded with verifiable facts. Or Watergate, for instance. Or the Pentagon Papers. Or the Holocaust, about which Hitler famously quoted "who any longer remembers the Armenians?"

The actual, substantive evidence for the above is overwhelming. In contrast, 9/11 substitutes innuendo "NORAD was holding hijacking drills...." etc, for evidence. Conspiracy whackadoos cite "inconsistencies" as "proof." 1000 people say a plane hit the Pentagon, and one says he thinks it was a missile....

Rubbish of an argument.

A professor of law once remarked:

"When the facts are in your favor, pound on the facts. When the law is in your favor, pound on the law. When neither are in your favor, pound on the table."

Passion is no substitute for evidence. The conspiracies you cite have factual, irrefutable evidence. They actually happened and can be verified. Unless, of course, you're a Oliver North fan who insists he was framed, a Nixon apologist, or in the case of the last two, a moron. I'd rather think somebody was stupid than anti-Semitic.

In contrast, the various 9/11 conspiracy theories do not have such factual evidence.

This reminds me.... somebody once said "Don't you find it suspicious that stuff like 9/11 only happens after an intelligence failure..."

Uhhhh.... "Gee...don't you think it's odd that death follows after your head is blown off?"

[Merryprankster]

Wow, now that's really something! Do these guys do any research into the kinds of relationships that they are saying exist?

The relationship between the CIA and the ISI is well documented. However, it was allowed to lapse after the Soviets left Afghanistan. We simply didn't need them any more. That relationship was renewed after 9/11. It's quite public, and not at all a secret.

However, to call the ISI a "front" for the CIA is simply over the top. Pakistan has a particular set of national interests that do not necessarily coincide with those of the United States. In many cases, according to both Stephen Coll (Ghost Wars) and Rohan Gunaratna (Too many to list), the ISI and the Pakistani government often pursued quite different agendas than the CIA would have liked them to.

Here's a question: What motive does Pakistan have to behave as a co-conspirator?


Of note, they did a poll not too long ago and discovered that a significant majority of French Muslims believe that Bin Laden and Co committed 9/11. Any takers on why that is?

[rogue]

Right, there is a relationship but I've never heard from anybody that the ISI was a front for the CIA. Even within Pakistan the ISI has it's own agenda. I just finished reading "Charlie Wilson's War" and that made clear the relationship the CIA had with the ISI wasn't one of the CIA calling all of the shots.

[Merryprankster]

Exactly.

A couple of things to keep in mind...

A 30 year veteran of the foreign service once taught a class I took and he said something I will NEVER forget:

"There is only one thing worse than believing that everybody is meddling in your affairs...realizing that nobody thinks about you at all."

The second thing was about the limits of power. People around the world view the United States in a godlike way. They don't understand that U.S. power has limitations.

Couple the first remark with the second, and it's a short leap to "The United States runs (or tries to run) everything."

Speaking of power, I'm going to play Civilization IV.

Cheers!

[Royal Dragon]

Incidentally, Unions committed 9/11. Here is a debate chain I had with another fellow elsewhere.

Reply]
ALL Unions are controlled by either the Italian's NY Mob, or the Chicago Mob.

So basically ur saying the Mob did it.

Now, i do remember Mob owned trucking companies taking debris away to thier scrap yards when they weren't supposed to right after the towers collapsed..... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm......................

[Merryprankster]

See Royal Dragon! People need to think this through, and they will realize that I am correct.

[Royal Dragon]

I buy "the Mob did it" way before the Government. If you think about it, they have the most to gain. All that debris went to mob owned scrap yards, and was hauled by Mob owned trucks driven by Mob controlled Union workers.

Also, the Mob controlled Union workers will be the ones to rebuild whatever structure goes in that spot, so they win on the take down by getting an enormous amount of free scrap thay can sell off, AND they win because they get the contract to clean it up and haul it away, *ANNNND* they win on the rebuild side as the construction industry as a whole is pretty much Mob controlled through the Unions.


DAMMMM! how come no one has seen this before!!