Thread: For the 9/11 conspiracists

Originally Posted by Mystic7

O'nus whoever moves the king.

Yes brother.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS2BrxcWWZA

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

That was pathetic mystic7. Why do you delibarely dodge all attempts at resolution and then perpetuate conflict?

Look not at what is contrary to propriety; listen not to what is contrary to propriety; speak not what is contrary to propriety; make no movement which is contrary to propriety"

Shall I change my avatar, brother?

~

Consider it this way right now your avatar IS a dead flag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPnVAR2oHw0

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Consider it this way right now your avatar IS a dead flag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPnVAR2oHw0

Mystic this is for you.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=S8chKNa_tos

Maybe if you open your eyes; you can understand me.

This ones for you grod....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ck2ygpSUg8

Originally Posted by Bonsay

Apparently the airforce was having a drill, in which terrorists hijacked a plane. Nobody knew if it was going on for real

and London was having a drill for subway bombings the day their subways were bombed. go figure.

I've said it before, i suppose I'll say it again.. I don't see how people CAN'T throw up red flags at this whole thing. it's beyond fishy. it's a sushi buffet at the bottom of a lake. shit stinks.

that maddox guy is ridiculous. I blame the schools, critical thought is lacking severely currently.

I'm going to try to add some critical thinking here, to both sides of the whole 9/11 debate, just so I can be a sceptic. Remember, this is speculation, just my thoughts, not what I think

So... the reasoning for 9/11 being a false flag operation:
Okay, it's quite easy why this has been continually brought up. The US government, not only used the tragedy to spur on a whole set of conflicts, but couldn't even give out a decent explanation on why the main towers collapsed. Plus, a whole host of inconsistencies have long since been laid bare that somewhat question the current accepted explanations (of which have been mentioned already through whatever sources)

However, as the sceptic, I'm going to bring on my take on the problem with this conspiracy.

Logistics

Yes, that's right... Logistics. For a government to pull off such an amazing stunt, it would take the participation of a whole load of different organisations, with thousands of people working and knowing about what was going to happen. This is the critical flaw, because the more people you have working like that, the greater the chances there are of someone opening his/her mouth to the media (of course, we'd have to assume the media wasn't in it too, but if it was, well, wouldn't be surprising). Plus, considering the current administration at the time of 9/11, had only been in power for less than a year... well, either they had planned this long before, or they worked their absolute asses off in order to pull it off.

In my opinion, it is more likely they saw the attacks coming. Hell, they probably even gave a helping hand here and there. Cause some chaos in Norad, and "Woops! Silly me! I just let some planes crash into the WTC!". Why do I think this is more likely? Easier to cover up, less people involved, etc. Whether it is true or not... well, I'll just wait and see...

I don't red flag the whole thing because it led to other conflicts, I red flag the whole thing because what they say happened, is in fact scientifically impossible. the towers would not have collapsed the way they did given the circumstances. a plane did not hit the pentagon. its not conspiracy, this shit is science. other reasons too, like how they magically found the passport of a hijacker intacked in the rubble.... until that guy stepped forward a few days later and was in fact alive. and had not been in America. there's more. it leading to other conflicts is just the icing on the cake.

and why would thousands of different people in many different organizations have to be involved? what makes you think that?

Originally Posted by Mystic7

This ones for you grod....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ck2ygpSUg8

This one is good too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvIw5ZqC1ms&NR=1

Mystic, this one is for you...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2azYiKePS_g

Originally Posted by awoke

I don't red flag the whole thing because it led to other conflicts, I red flag the whole thing because what they say happened, is in fact scientifically impossible. the towers would not have collapsed the way they did given the circumstances. a plane did not hit the pentagon. its not conspiracy, this shit is science. other reasons too, like how they magically found the passport of a hijacker intacked in the rubble.... until that guy stepped forward a few days later and was in fact alive. and had not been in America. there's more. it leading to other conflicts is just the icing on the cake.

and why would thousands of different people in many different organizations have to be involved? what makes you think that?

Ahh, you bring in the whole debate of science into the collapse of the towers. Now, I am aware of the major discrepancies with the reasoning behind the explanations for the collapses, but even so, I still bring on the problem of logistics against the reasoning of 9/11 being an inside job. Why? Because it is the one thing I have a problem understanding with all these conspiracies. I myself would like to see a more comprehensive report on the 9/11 collapses, including that of WTC 7 (which has never been fully explained), but anybody reasoning that 9/11 was an inside job never seem to explain the problem of logistics well enough in order to make it convincing for me.

Of course, I'm not happy with how 9/11 was explained. The only reason I debate like this is because I feel by being the sceptic, I at least am able to see both sides of any debate, whilst being able to criticise on any inconsistency present in each argument. So, in this case, it is the question of logistics against the evident lack of proper explanations as with regards to the collapses (of which the government is responsible for). That is how I see things at the moment.

Originally Posted by awoke

that maddox guy is ridiculous. I blame the schools, critical thought is lacking severely currently.

Yes, you are the best critical thinker of our time. You're almost as good a thinker as a speller

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Ahh, you bring in the whole debate of science into the collapse of the towers. Now, I am aware of the major discrepancies with the reasoning behind the explanations for the collapses, but even so, I still bring on the problem of logistics against the reasoning of 9/11 being an inside job. Why? Because it is the one thing I have a problem understanding with all these conspiracies. I myself would like to see a more comprehensive report on the 9/11 collapses, including that of WTC 7 (which has never been fully explained), but anybody reasoning that 9/11 was an inside job never seem to explain the problem of logistics well enough in order to make it convincing for me.

Of course, I'm not happy with how 9/11 was explained. The only reason I debate like this is because I feel by being the sceptic, I at least am able to see both sides of any debate, whilst being able to criticise on any inconsistency present in each argument. So, in this case, it is the question of logistics against the evident lack of proper explanations as with regards to the collapses (of which the government is responsible for). That is how I see things at the moment.

This is the same argument used by UniversalMind, whose cognitive apparatuses forbid him access to the possibility that a small criminal element, dispersed throughout certain govt agencies, could have helped the 9/11 hijackers.

Btw, the FBI whistleblower who claimed to be able to prove this fact has had more gag orders placed on her than any other person in history, and has had her allegations substantiated by the Justice Department.

Originally Posted by memeticverb

This is the same argument used by UniversalMind, whose cognitive apparatuses forbid him access to the possibility that a small criminal element, dispersed throughout certain govt agencies, could have helped the 9/11 hijackers.

You must really love being exposed as a liar time and time again. Okay, here we go again.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

How about if the "conspiracy" didn't go as deep as the government planting bombs in the building, but purposefully provoking the attack, and allowing it to happen? And hard evidence or arguments for/against that?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That is a much more plausible idea. It does not defy the laws of reality like the idea that the government rounded up hundreds of trustworthy Dr. Evils and pulled off a wild megasuperstunt with mystery pilots, fake hijackings, and demolition reports so flawed yet so convincing that their flaws are blaringly obvious to regular Joes on the internet but not the masses of actual experts.

Lie exposed. What number are we on?

Mr. Verb, I would be interested in reading your commentary in my thread about a government conspiracy that can actually be proven. What I say in it illustrates how my cognitive apparatuses forbid me from conceiving of criminal elements in the government. Read about my denial here, and then go off about it since it really is government corruption that has you acting like you do about 9/11.

http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...ad.php?t=51059

Originally Posted by memeticverb

This is the same argument used by UniversalMind, whose cognitive apparatuses forbid him access to the possibility that a small criminal element, dispersed throughout certain govt agencies, could have helped the 9/11 hijackers.

Btw, the FBI whistleblower who claimed to be able to prove this fact has had more gag orders placed on her than any other person in history, and has had her allegations substantiated by the Justice Department.

Firstly, how would a 'small criminal element' benefit from 9/11? This is not a government, but a 'criminal element'. We aren't talking about corporate or political interests any more, but instead a 'criminal element'. What does such a group of people have to gain from 9/11 and the following conflicts that the government spurred following it? Unless they are Al Qaeda themselves, then they have no reason to do so.

It is much more logical to think that 9/11 was allowed to happen in order to initiate conflicts that have corporate and political backing. With enough corporate pressure, especially from central banks (as they profit the most from wars, etc), it would be likely for something like 9/11 to allowed to happen, or in the most extreme case (which the conspiracy theorists like to claim), to be done by the government itself. The whole 'small criminal element' crap just does not stick with the bigger picture.

M-Cat M-Cat M-Cat

Originally Posted by memeticverb

This is the same argument used by UniversalMind, whose cognitive apparatuses forbid him access to the possibility that a small criminal element, dispersed throughout certain govt agencies, could have helped the 9/11 hijackers.

Btw, the FBI whistleblower who claimed to be able to prove this fact has had more gag orders placed on her than any other person in history, and has had her allegations substantiated by the Justice Department.

Memeticverb, remind me again. The purpose of contacting these people? I'm bored and don't see any practical use, like watching grass grow. Maybe we are wiser to go somewhere else you know? Somewhere where people are a lot wiser. There is people out there that are wise. We should contact them instead.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Memeticverb, remind me again. The purpose of contacting these people? I'm bored and don't see any practical use, like watching grass grow. Maybe we are wiser to go somewhere else you know? Somewhere where people are a lot wiser. There is people out there that are wise. We should contact them instead.

I agree. Your brilliant retort via irrelevant music videos will be missed here, but you are better suited somewhere else. I found a nice new place for you...

http://www.sesameworkshop.org/

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I agree. Your brilliant retort via irrelevant music videos will be missed here, but you are better suited somewhere else. I found a nice new place for you...

http://www.sesameworkshop.org/

I will eloquently sum up my agreement with an appropriate colloquialism:

Word.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

M-Cat M-Cat M-Cat

A+

Originally Posted by M-Cat

Yes, you are the best critical thinker of our time. You're almost as good a thinker as a speller

yawn

^ I can't argue with that logic.

Originally Posted by UM

Your brilliant retort via irrelevant music videos will be missed

Music videos are entertaining and called art. They are also not completely irrelevant and contain messages. I'm not the one posting 'brilliant' retort troll pictures with the IQ of a 4 year old who claims it's the only relevant response. When you grow up. That source of amusement will also be missed.

M-cat is banned. how bout that.