Thread: Conspiracy theories.

<3

Why do you keep posting videos that have nothing to do with conspiracies? You are taking these speeches, imbuing them with sensational effects, then taking them entirely out of context. Either you do it on purpose to knowingly mislead anyone who doesn't know any better, or the meaning of the speech just went entirely over your head.

first of all, not my videos. Secondly, they fit perfectly to the 'globalist order' conspiracy. The first video has some outtakes from Kennedy's speech in 61 where he talks about the relations between media and the administration.. and also touches on the issues of cold war secrecy.. of course you won't find him saying directly he knows about the 'real' guys.. he couldn't just blow the whistle making a big public speech saying america is fucked from the inside.. would be unseen chaos.. smarter move would be to fight it, starting with the fed.. that obv got him killed.
the second video goes with the global conspiracy also..



bottom line... "WE'RE ALL GOING TO FUCKING DIE!!!"

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

first of all, not my videos. Secondly, they fit perfectly to the 'globalist order' conspiracy. The first video has some outtakes from Kennedy's speech in 61 where he talks about the relations between media and the administration.. and also touches on the issues of cold war secrecy.. of course you won't find him saying directly he knows about the 'real' guys.. he couldn't just blow the whistle making a big public speech saying america is fucked from the inside.. would be unseen chaos.. smarter move would be to fight it, starting with the fed.. that obv got him killed.
the second video goes with the global conspiracy also..



bottom line... "WE'RE ALL GOING TO FUCKING DIE!!!"

I know they aren't your videos, but you have to realize that by posting them here you are endorsing their messages. The point I am trying to make is that the speeches weren't arguing against the same things as the conspiracy theorists. They edit these videos and emphasize lines that seem to fit with their agenda, when actually they were meant by the speaker to have a entirely separate meaning. They have therefore been taken out of context. If either of those two men were still alive, I'm sure they would be apalled because they aren't speaking about some kind of "global conspiracy."

Saw this on TV ealier today and liked it better than the National Geographic one:



I liked the part were the structural engineer basically called the conspiracy theorists retarded (part 5,) also on part 2 when you find out the movement was started by an eighteen year old high school student.

Lol I dislike that first skeptic so much... saw him on TED and he basically bashed any conspiracy theory by making a random joke..

What's to point out his age? If he had been like 15 at that time it would worth a mention.. and he didn't start the movement.. These 'alternative' theories exploded around the world after 9/11
And the structual engineer lol..."they never have an engineering basis for their conlusions" . What about 1,300 architects from AE911Truth.org ?
hahahahhahaahha this is good. This woman Sofia director of "9/11 Mysteris" basically hints the 110 story building would come down in 3 minutes using explosives haahhaahha : D this is unreal lol... what the fuck seriously... I think I misunderstood something here..

They did very good job explaining hundreds of eye witness claims about explosions... some guy from NBC picked on one guy's use of vocabulary.. "What he didn't say is that he heard BOMBS". Lol. And not for the "Expert explonation" to come too short another guy says "I think people are trying to find out what happened on one of the most dramatic days in US history" or smth like that. And then they're all like "DEBUNKED. Next conspiracy please!"

About 9/11 being an inside job: To put the explosives in place, to take down the building, it would take hundreds of men and months, calling this all thing absurd. Right. This is uber bollocks. You could very well to that in a day, ever seen a show on discovery channel where they take down buildings? There's not much needed to help a building collapse which has been hit by a plane. Again, superb "expert explonation" and they skip off to next one..

and so on... very superb expert opinions... "I find it disgusting" and to the next one..

NORAD standdown.. seriously, worlds greatest nation air defence fails so miserably? Experts explonation for this was: "people were confused, they didn't know where planes were" - lol? confused? for HOURS? in the military? are you serious? what kind of an excuse is that?

Hahaha. Again 1 sentence expert resoponse.. opinion.. nothing else..

It seems like we need to ship in loads of meds since these crazy conspiracy theory people's numbers are growing in rapid speed... Mass delusion? People with brains? who can tell.. I don't. What I can tell, it's sure more good having more people asking questions about certain events, than having obidient sheep like citizens.

World has it's balance... I enjoy watching how this cosmic dance plays out..

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

About 9/11 being an inside job: To put the explosives in place, to take down the building, it would take hundreds of men and months, calling this all thing absurd. Right. This is uber bollocks. You could very well to that in a day, ever seen a show on discovery channel where they take down buildings?

Try doing it in a building as large as the WTC (twice for two buildings) which is generally always occupied by thousands of people. If you have seen professionals at work, you should know they gut the interior of the building and weaken the structure as much as possible before imploding it.

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

Lol I dislike that first skeptic so much... saw him on TED and he basically bashed any conspiracy theory by making a random joke..

What's to point out his age? If he had been like 15 at that time it would worth a mention.. and he didn't start the movement.. These 'alternative' theories exploded around the world after 9/11
And the structual engineer lol..."they never have an engineering basis for their conlusions" . What about 1,300 architects from AE911Truth.org ?
hahahahhahaahha this is good. This woman Sofia director of "9/11 Mysteris" basically hints the 110 story building would come down in 3 minutes using explosives haahhaahha : D this is unreal lol... what the fuck seriously... I think I misunderstood something here..

They did very good job explaining hundreds of eye witness claims about explosions... some guy from NBC picked on one guy's use of vocabulary.. "What he didn't say is that he heard BOMBS". Lol. And not for the "Expert explonation" to come too short another guy says "I think people are trying to find out what happened on one of the most dramatic days in US history" or smth like that. And then they're all like "DEBUNKED. Next conspiracy please!"

About 9/11 being an inside job: To put the explosives in place, to take down the building, it would take hundreds of men and months, calling this all thing absurd. Right. This is uber bollocks. You could very well to that in a day, ever seen a show on discovery channel where they take down buildings? There's not much needed to help a building collapse which has been hit by a plane. Again, superb "expert explonation" and they skip off to next one..

and so on... very superb expert opinions... "I find it disgusting" and to the next one..

NORAD standdown.. seriously, worlds greatest nation air defence fails so miserably? Experts explonation for this was: "people were confused, they didn't know where planes were" - lol? confused? for HOURS? in the military? are you serious? what kind of an excuse is that?

Hahaha. Again 1 sentence expert resoponse.. opinion.. nothing else..

It seems like we need to ship in loads of meds since these crazy conspiracy theory people's numbers are growing in rapid speed... Mass delusion? People with brains? who can tell.. I don't. What I can tell, it's sure more good having more people asking questions about certain events, than having obidient sheep like citizens.

World has it's balance... I enjoy watching how this cosmic dance plays out..

Did you write this on a cellphone while speeding down the highway? Seriously. Why don't you address actual points made in the video and then I'll discuss it with you.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Try doing it in a building as large as the WTC (twice for two buildings) which is generally always occupied by thousands of people. If you have seen professionals at work, you should know they gut the interior of the building and weaken the structure as much as possible before imploding it.

Did wtc7 run 24/7 or it was empty at the nights?



full fox news clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t372emhXa60

lol seriously.

----

SpringerLink - Political Behavior, Volume 32, Number 2

This is why arguing with people tends to be so difficult : )

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

full fox news clip

Not even gonna fucking bother.

Lol seriously indeed...

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

Did wtc7 run 24/7 or it was empty at the nights?

You don't think employees would notice all of the wires and explosives hanging on the walls? You don't think the demolition team would be curious as to why they are working at night? I doubt any demolition teams would be willing to work at night. The walls would actually be gone because they would have to knock the walls down to get to the interior structure. You can't work in a building that is being set for demolition. Quit grasping at straws.

Are you dodging my question? The documentary I posted provided a compelling explanation for why world trade center bulding 7 couldn't possibly have been demolished, among many other things which you are ignoring.

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

SpringerLink - Political Behavior, Volume 32, Number 2

This is why arguing with people tends to be so difficult : )

Did you read that study? It is equally a revelation of the psychology of conspiracy theorists as it is of the average citizen. It says that if a person reads an unsubstantiated claim and believes said claim, they will continue to believe the claim even after it is proven to be false or retracted all together as long as it is in line with their personal ideology. Is that not a perfect characterization of the typical conspiracy theorist? People will look to validate their own beliefs, that is nothing new.

They obviously wouldn't put the explosives on the office walls yo? Perhaps inside the walls on some of the beams? They wouldn't have to cut a hole in a office wall to get to the beams, perhaps use some non-personel area to get into the interior? Lol at being curious at working at night.. you are putting explosives at W T C ... get it? You still think there isn't people who do evil things for money? I think not much was needed to initiate the collapse, since the structure was already weakened by the plane hit.. so there was no full scale detonation needed for this. My guess is that the most of the explosives were at the place where the plane hit..

Dodging your question? I watched the documentary and gave my opinion on that. One sentence bullshit answers for most of the questions. That's what I think of it..

And about the study.. maybe it's nothing new for you.. Just posted the link for everyone to read.. I found that such strong backfire effect on some cases was surprising for me..

---
Human radiation experiments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
# injecting radioactive substances into babies and pregnant women[1]
# feeding radioactive material to mentally disabled children[1]
This is just sick...

Conspiracy documentary of the day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3y8u...eature=related

found a funny comment also
"40.700 views??? And charlie the unicorn gets like over a million..fucking lil wayne gests like 50 to 30 million??? The poisoning has obviously occured..."

wiki article: Water fluoridation controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your views on this? Go fluoride! ?

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

They obviously wouldn't put the explosives on the office walls yo? Perhaps inside the walls on some of the beams? They wouldn't have to cut a hole in a office wall to get to the beams, perhaps use some non-personel area to get into the interior? Lol at being curious at working at night.. you are putting explosives at W T C ... get it? You still think there isn't people who do evil things for money? I think not much was needed to initiate the collapse, since the structure was already weakened by the plane hit.. so there was no full scale detonation needed for this. My guess is that the most of the explosives were at the place where the plane hit..

Dodging your question? I watched the documentary and gave my opinion on that. One sentence bullshit answers for most of the questions. That's what I think of it..

Think about what you are saying. People do evil things for money? Is that the only convincing you need? Are you saying that a demolition team would rig a building filled with people to explode.......for money? They are demolition experts, not hitmen. Don't assume that people could be so easily persuaded to commit mass murder for money. What about their reputation? What if the truth comes out? Are demolition experts that desperate for money? Is forfeiting your humanity a prerequisite for demolition school? Who in the right mind would agree to that? You are so busy jumping through hoops, trying to make your theory plausible, that you don't realize how ridiculous and unrealistic it all is. You are right about one thing though, they wouldn't need to cut a hole in the wall to get to any steel beams, they would need to knock the entire wall down.

Here is what a building looks like after it has been prepped for demolition, since you apparently have no idea what it looks like:



I don't think I could continue business as usual if my office looked like that, could you?

As for dodging my question, you haven't brought up any specific points made in the video. Only that you are "annoyed by the first guy" and their "answers are only one sentence." The length of a response is completely irrelevant in regard to it's validity. If fact, the shorter and more concise a statement is, the better it usually is. So until you bring up a specific point and refute it, I will consider you to be dodging my question. Personally I was completely satisfied by the explanations offered in the video, so I would like to know why you aren't.

Even the Enterprise crew knew 911 was an inside job :p

lol dude you win... 9/11 was in fact osama n the boyz.. seriously you are dumb enough to think that they hired a regular demolition team for that? Your rant is totally based on this .. "no demolition team would work at nights, no team would do it for the money".. ofc your regular Joe the explosion expert won't come and join in for the fun.. My Try it this way... How would you do it yourself? I bet you could come up with a solid plan how to blow these buildings up..


Anyways. Everything I need to know to label 9/11 official story a bollocks lies on this page

AE911Truth.org



Now seriously.. if you still believe that wtc7 was brought down by office fires- have a nice life

you win. gratz.

Originally Posted by Dreamsun

lol dude you win... 9/11 was in fact osama n the boyz.. seriously you are dumb enough to think that they hired a regular demolition team for that? Your rant is totally based on this .. "no demolition team would work at nights, no team would do it for the money".. ofc your regular Joe the explosion expert won't come and join in for the fun.. My Try it this way... How would you do it yourself? I bet you could come up with a solid plan how to blow these buildings up..


Anyways. Everything I need to know to label 9/11 official story a bollocks lies on this page

AE911Truth.org



Now seriously.. if you still believe that wtc7 was brought down by office fires- have a nice life

you win. gratz.

(Did you really just call me dumb?) If not an official, qualified demolition team, then who? Would you trust a person who is not qualified with explosives to do such a high risk job? Is an unprofessional person not more likely to leave a trace? Or screw it up? Do you have a single shred of evidence that says a demoliton team of any kind was ever in any of these buildings? How come there were zero traces of explosives of any type in the rubble of all three buildings? All explosives leave a definite trace. Did you know that? I bet not, huh? If you think you can slap some c4 onto a few steel beams and take a skyscraper down, you need to take a break from this and come back when you know what you're talking about. Controlled demolition takes a shit load of powerful explosives and an extremely high amount of coordination. In your elaborate version of the story, the odds of something going wrong are much higher than the odds in which this hair-brained idea might actually work (if it's even possible at all.) Honestly, this isn't a Hollywood movie. Who is capable of pulling something like this off witout leaving a single trace, and not a single loose end? Nixon couldn't even break into Watergate, yet Bush, who is constantly mocked as being "slow," pulled off the largest and most elaborate hit job in the history of mankind without so much as a single trace left behind. Why would the Republican party risk their reputation and kill thousands of Americans for the sake of possibly creating a political climate which could slightly favor their party and their agenda? When such a plan has an equal or greater chance of back firing? Do you not understand that it would be the end of the Republican party? If you have a one in a million chance of winning the lottery, and if you don't win, you have to pay the amount of the pot, would you take those odds? You have a 999,999/1,000,000 chance of owing a billion dollars and a 1/1,000,000 chance of winning a billion dollars. Tell me what sane person would consider that a good idea? Here's one that doesn't get brought up often. Why demolish the buildings at all? Is flying planes into the buildings not enough to get people mad at Al Qaeda? Was it really necessary to go through the trouble and the risk of demolishing the buildings? Give me some answers. I demand answers.

Do me a favor and stop posting these stupid god damn videos. You give me the impression that you don't have a clue what you are talking about, yet you are so staunch in your resolve (to the point of calling me dumb for raising some more than reasonble criticisms.) This is a conversation between two human beings, not me vs. the internet. You can use what ever 9/11 truth websites you want, as long as you bring the relevant information yourself. You can't just tell me to refute the website. For one, I could just direct you to several other websites which have already done that, and two, the original conflict was that you didn't agree with the documentary I posted, which you said you watched. So I wanted you to refute whatever points from the documentary that you had a problem with. Until that happens, you are still dodging. Understand? It is time for you to take responsiblity for your words and back yourself up. Really you haven't brought anything useful to the conversation whatsoever. If you can't defend your point of view with your own words then you don't deserve to represent your side of the conflict.

We can argue and argue about this but NOBODY KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED BUT THE PEOPLE WHO DID IT.

You see, that's the real issue, many of there conspiracy theorists cling to the farthest out ideas while there are much more realistic issues that need to be adressed...are you more worried that aliens might be running our country (quite unlikely), or that our political system is degrading as more and more people move towards the extremes of the political spectrum and towards further gridlock, impeding the compromise and change we need so much right now (hapening)?

Or that the FDA has for some time been attacking natural food and supplement suppliers, conducting raids and searches in an illegitamate manner including making illegal seisures, all in order to scare away anyone involved in protecting our right to have acess to natural health supplements, all because it hurts the profits of the pharmecuticals?

It's ok to be mad when your government slips up, but you've got to keep your priorities in order.

Conspiracy theorists don't care about improving their country or seeing justice. They just like the idea of being part of a small clique that "knows" more than everybody else, that's why they persist despite the mountains of logical information that oppose them. It's classic human psychology. We can only hope that they will eventually grow out of it.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

We can only hope that they will eventually grow out of it.

There may be hope for the young college students, but Im afraid the old men are a lost cause.

I actually just wanted to make a quick comment/question, but I just noticed I had left Caprisun hanging for a reply, and figured it would be bad form to continue on, without going back to it. Heh.

Originally Posted by Caprisun

Why are you assuming that because I oppose a ridiculous conspiracy theory that I am overly nationalistic? That because I'm not naive enough to to be sucked into such an emotionally charged premise, that I am automatically a champion of the government, censoring all free thinking challengers and enabling the corrupt politicians to do their worst to the defenseless people of America. That's what I live for! Do you think that as a "free thinking American," I should have to lend credence to every nutjob who creates a fantastic conspiracy to fill that gaping void in his life? Should I aquiesce with his overpowering need to feel important and tolerate his polluting the minds of the impressionable young children who watch public television? Or as a "free thinking American," should I have the capacity to recognize a senseless, unjustified, and utterly baseless act of slander against the government and feel compelled to speak out against such acts? As a free thinking American with a truly objective philosophy on such matters, that would be the conscionable think to do.

Actually, my opinion of your being a nationalist has much less to do with your feelings toward Sheen than it does your regular post content around the forum. Of course, it is only my opinion. I suppose our main difference of opinion is just in how "ridiculous" we feel the notions that A) 9/11 was allowed to happen by the U.S. government and B) That any such conspiracy would be allowed to happen by the U.S. government.

Originally Posted by Caprisun

I never said that 9/11 conspiracy theorists should be censored, but you can be damn sure that when they go on talk shows and spout their bullshit, I will forward all due criticism in their direction. Do you not realize the implications of their claims?

Of course I do. The difference between us is that I'm not the least bit shocked by those implications - mainly because such atrocities have been planned and/or committed by the U.S. government, in the past.

Originally Posted by Caprisun

If they were really free thinking, they would be open to all perspectives, they would be open and accepting of the fact that they could be wrong. They wouldn't go to fanatical ends to justify their own perspective while ignoring all evidence to the contrary, no matter how damning. That is undeniably the case with 99% of the "truther" population. Undeniably. That includes the movement's leaders and there is video proof of that. Any person with a semi-objective conscience can see that none of their claims stand up in the face of scientific scrutiny, not one. And they have been publicly subjected to intense and thorough scientific scrutiny on at least one occasion that I have witnessed from a credible source (and there are more that I have not looked at.) Unsurprisingly they failed miserably, many times and in all cases. A movement like that doesn't deserve the light of day. They aren't innocently "asking you to investigate for yourself." They are putting on the guise of an honest, truth seeking movement while covertly infecting you with a disease that they aren't even aware they possess themselves. The main reason these things gain momentum is because when they encourage young people to "investigate," they will be inevitably led to the multitude of factually deficient, factually dishonest, and intentionally misleading websites that exist on the internet. Not that Charlie Sheen is aware of this, infectious memes go about spreading themselves without the conscious awareness of their host, just like a real virus. They would otherwise die out quickly.

I cannot say, with any degree of certainty (and I'm not sure how you can) that "not one" of their claims stand up in the face of scientific scrutiny. I, for one, have not had the chance to asses every claim ever made by the "conspiracy theorists." I have, though, seen many legitimate questions asked by theorists, which have not been answered (so far as I can remember, from when I was into reading into this whole thing). I do remember Pop Sci doing an expansive "debunking" of many "truther" claims (many of the more fringe ones, if I remember correctly), but have seen very little that was actually conclusive, or eliminated all possible alternatives. While I do agree with you that there are many components of the "truther" movement that are just as you say (though I would say that 99% is a bit ridiculous), I believe that there are also many components which are composed of people with legitimate questions, who are simply unconvinced of the "official story"; as many people have been proven correct in having, throughout history. I guess I am I just more likely to at least take those people into consideration than you are. Again, not that I don't understand why you would be so, but I don't agree with it.

Originally Posted by Caprisun

The most irritating aspect was that he did it on the Jimmy Kimmel show. It would be much less irritating if he did it in a private forum, or on the internet, or even on the street. Just not on public television where unsuspecting viewers are unwillingly subjected to such travesties of scientific integrity.

Why? Since when is freedom of speech a crime? Again, I suppose your disdain is just because of your feeling of closure on the whole subject - as being unequivocally ridiculous. But I don't believe that sending a message of "I just don't think things add up. Take a look at it for yourself" (which is all he did, during the interview) should be censored. It is his opinion. It doesn't matter how famous he is, or how public the forum. He does have a right to express his opinion. If nothing else, history has shown us that the people have an obligation to be critical of their government. The C.I.A. has been documented as having performed operations against the (more immediate) interests of the American population. It is fact. It is widely-known. What I often find insane is that the idea that "the government wouldn't do it" is even a factor, in any conspiracy theory debate.

However, it all kind of ties in to what I actually wanted to reply with:

What are your (and Spartiate's) thoughts toward plots such as Operation Northwoods (which I see someone has hit on, earlier) and the MK Ultra Project?
(More on the possibility of "Mind Control": Vid 1 - click through for rest of series.)

How about any of these experiments? Pick your favorites.

But really, is the idea of "the government wouldn't do that" still even submittable, in whether or not any given conspiracy theory is possible? Really?

Also, what do you think about the theory of HAARP and weather warfare? (Vid 2) ((Vid 3) Think the U.S. is really dipping into it, or is the notion absurd?

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Conspiracy theorists don't care about improving their country or seeing justice. They just like the idea of being part of a small clique that "knows" more than everybody else, that's why they persist despite the mountains of logical information that oppose them. It's classic human psychology. We can only hope that they will eventually grow out of it.

Is that really your blanket sentiment about anyone who believes in a given conspiracy theory? Or are you just using "Conspiracy Theorist" as a tag for someone who basically makes a career out of it? I can't quite tell.

It seems to me that there are just too many unknown (and known) factors to determine what is the truth and what is really going on, you would have to cover a lot of areas to find the probability of such events. A few of these areas would be personality traits, how good the spies are and if they're being watched, how are people recruited for these classified assignments, is the government mostly telling the truth, how exactly could these events be carried out, are the organizations carrying out these jobs completely unified, do we know enough or are we being tricked. There's a ton more of those too, and then even to reach conclusions you would need people who were experts on this stuff and people who knew what happened, and just because of how populated the world is a handful (or possibly more (or less)) would want to stop you from finding the truth and even then if you found the truth you come to the matter of am I for this or against this? Would you even be able to stop these actions? I'm sorry if that was an obvious post or off topic.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Is that really your blanket sentiment about anyone who believes in a given conspiracy theory? Or are you just using "Conspiracy Theorist" as a tag for someone who basically makes a career out of it? I can't quite tell.

It really depends on a case by case basis, but usually those who believe in multiple conspiracies (or that tend to stick to the conspiracy explanations for everything) are as I described. Also the really popular "movement" conspiracies (9/11, NWO, aliens, chemtrails, etc.) People believe in the conspiracy theories because they like being caught up in the movement.

What are your (and Spartiate's) thoughts toward plots such as Operation Northwoods (which I see someone has hit on, earlier) and the MK Ultra Project?
(More on the possibility of "Mind Control": Vid 1 - click through for rest of series.)

How about any of these experiments? Pick your favorites.

But really, is the idea of "the government wouldn't do that" still even submittable, in whether or not any given conspiracy theory is possible? Really?

Also, what do you think about the theory of HAARP and weather warfare? (Vid 2) ((Vid 3) Think the U.S. is really dipping into it, or is the notion absurd?

All there is to be said about Operation Northwoods: "Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Project anti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted and the proposals included in the plan were never executed."

I don't see what's so bad about MKULTRA, makes sense that spies would look for truth serums and the like.

A lot of funky stuff would happen during the Cold War, they didn't even have any international biological/chemical/nuclear weapons treaties back then. We've evolved since.

I've never seen any evidence of HAARP being some kind of weapon. It's an atmospheric research project, why does it get so much bad press? How many people even know what HAARP does? It's not classified...

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Actually, my opinion of your being a nationalist has much less to do with your feelings toward Sheen than it does your regular post content around the forum. Of course, it is only my opinion. I suppose our main difference of opinion is just in how "ridiculous" we feel the notions that A) 9/11 was allowed to happen by the U.S. government and B) That any such conspiracy would be allowed to happen by the U.S. government.

My stance only seems to be overly nationalistic because I feel compelled to balance the hysteria. I try to be the voice of reason when I see a lack of reasonable arguments, though it usually falls on deaf ears. My political views are actually very moderate, but when thrown over the backdrop of this site, I come across as remarkably conservative. I am apalled by the ignorance and stupidity of our politicians on a daily basis. Either they are stupid or they are terrible actors, either way they get on my nerves and I think they are terrible leaders. That is the extent of my inherent discontent with the government. It all comes back to them in the end and it isn't wrong to hold them responsible. What I don't condone, is the general slandering of government officials with nothing to back it up. Politicians make up a very small portion of the government, yet people don't hesitate to call all government employees evil. As if the majority of government workers aren't genuine people who try to make a positive influence on the world. Like they couldn't be your neighbors who are just trying to make a living for themselves. That's when I come to the rescue, because I take that very personally. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the collective sentiments of this website are markedly anti-government. These sentiments are usually hate-filled and devoid of any real substance. They just come across as paranoid in most cases. Examples are TSA employees being referred to as "scum bags," "FBI and CIA agents are all corrupt and they want to ruin your life," and my personal favorite, "FUCK THE TROOPS!" There are many more but I won't list them all. One person even considered postal workers to be contributing to the collective evil of the world. They do the governments bidding, therefore they are evil. That's what I'm up against. I won't stand for that kind of bullshit. I try to take an objective stance on everything, so if I see any unwarranted criticism of the government, I'll say something. I can't in good conscience keep my mouth shut if I know the truth to be otherwise. Likewise, I don't defend the government when it doesn't deserve to be defended.


I don't believe there is any conclusive evidence that suggests the government "allowed 9/11 to happen," knowing full well how catastrophic it would be. You have to understand that threats to national security are made on nearly a daily basis. It is difficult to judge the legitimacy of such threats. It is even more difficult to anticipate, intercept, and subsequently prevent such attacks. America isn't an impenetrable fortress.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Of course I do. The difference between us is that I'm not the least bit shocked by those implications - mainly because such atrocities have been planned and/or committed by the U.S. government, in the past.

Erroneous! Erroneous on all accounts! (I'm quoting Wedding Crashers here.)

What attacks could measure up to 9/11, not only in terms of scale and complexity, but in terms of secrecy? The dagger through the heart is the fact that not a single trace was left. No physical evidence. No smoking gun. Not a single loose end with a guilty conscience. Not a single ambitious individual looking for some fame and a book deal. Not a single individual with any idea who was involved or how they carried it out. Nothing. That's more than a little remarkable.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

I cannot say, with any degree of certainty (and I'm not sure how you can) that "not one" of their claims stand up in the face of scientific scrutiny. I, for one, have not had the chance to asses every claim ever made by the "conspiracy theorists." I have, though, seen many legitimate questions asked by theorists, which have not been answered (so far as I can remember, from when I was into reading into this whole thing). I do remember Pop Sci doing an expansive "debunking" of many "truther" claims (many of the more fringe ones, if I remember correctly), but have seen very little that was actually conclusive, or eliminated all possible alternatives. While I do agree with you that there are many components of the "truther" movement that are just as you say (though I would say that 99% is a bit ridiculous), I believe that there are also many components which are composed of people with legitimate questions, who are simply unconvinced of the "official story"; as many people have been proven correct in having, throughout history. I guess I am I just more likely to at least take those people into consideration than you are. Again, not that I don't understand why you would be so, but I don't agree with it.

Their evidence, if you want to call it that, is 100% anecdotal and 0% empirical. The truther argument consists of stressed interviewees being taken out of context and amateur analyses of shaky amateur videos. They'll play a video and say something like "See! See how fast it fell?" or "Look how it fell straight down!" So? What is that? Am I supposed to take that seriously? Real evidence would be a det cord in the rubble, some trace of explosives, maybe an e-mail or a letter which suggests a secret plan. Anything! What they have though, is nothing. Quite literally nothing. I could honestly go all day about how ridiculous the whole situation is. There is just so much to ridicule.

The debunking effort is multi-faceted because the theories are wrong on so many levels. Not just in technical terms of whether the collapses indicated controlled demolition or whatever else they claim, but in terms of planning, the sheer scale of the operation, in terms of secrecy as I already mentioned, in terms of personal credibility, in terms of risk compared to potential reward, in general the logic of even attempting to carry out such a ridiculous plan in the first place. You can read my response to dreamsun if you want to know how I feel about the last one.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Why? Since when is freedom of speech a crime? Again, I suppose your disdain is just because of your feeling of closure on the whole subject - as being unequivocally ridiculous. But I don't believe that sending a message of "I just don't think things add up. Take a look at it for yourself" (which is all he did, during the interview) should be censored. It is his opinion. It doesn't matter how famous he is, or how public the forum. He does have a right to express his opinion. If nothing else, history has shown us that the people have an obligation to be critical of their government. The C.I.A. has been documented as having performed operations against the (more immediate) interests of the American population. It is fact. It is widely-known. What I often find insane is that the idea that "the government wouldn't do it" is even a factor, in any conspiracy theory debate.

I don't believe I ever said it was a crime to speak your mind and I didn't say anybody should be censored. I stated that explicity. My original statement was that it irritated me, and it still does.

This conspiracy is completely unfounded. Anybody who goes on TV and advertises such a conspiracy is doing a disservice to every individual who plays witness. Any evidence you think exists of the CIA acting against the interests of the American population is completely irrelevant, especially since no recorded crime could ever compare to 9/11 on any level. You are only validating the contentions of many psychologists when they say these conspiracies must stem from a general discontent with the government. Your true feelings on the matter, whether they be conscious or unconscious, are betrayed when you say the question of whether the government would do such a thing shouldn't even be considered. That's hardly an objective stance. It's unfair to say the least and it doesn't indicate the attitude of someone who really wants to find the truth.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

However, it all kind of ties in to what I actually wanted to reply with:

What are your (and Spartiate's) thoughts toward plots such as Operation Northwoods (which I see someone has hit on, earlier) and the MK Ultra Project?
(More on the possibility of "Mind Control": Vid 1 - click through for rest of series.)

How about any of these experiments? Pick your favorites.

But really, is the idea of "the government wouldn't do that" still even submittable, in whether or not any given conspiracy theory is possible? Really?

Also, what do you think about the theory of HAARP and weather warfare? (Vid 2) ((Vid 3) Think the U.S. is really dipping into it, or is the notion absurd?

As I said ealier, none of these things are at all relevant to the feasibility of the 9/11 attack. None of those things even come close.