Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Documentary on 9-11


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Documentary on 9-11 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/1/2006 10:44:28 PM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

...so I guess the official story is not correct. I have yet to have anyone tell me the BBC is a known source of "conspiracy-mongering."

You guys focus too much on the bullshit details and not enough on the longer range more interesting stuff. I guess you didn't "get" my Burroughs refs above. This is the point in the information/disinformation game:

"So the real scandal of Watergate that has not come out yet is not that bed rooms were bugged and the offices of psychiatrists ransacked but the precise use that was and is made of this sexual material."

In other words, when betting on the political shell game, keep your eye not on the pea but on the hands of the man moving the shells around. You must spot his tell or you're just another dumbfuck mark ripe for the con.

So let me make my point clearer: These 9-11 conspiracy films are both information and disinformation. One set of films and websites is intended to discredit other such sets with more robust information via information fatigue, and this while some of us are trying to keep our minds open enough to figure shit out. If you think you already know the answers to all of the 9-11 questions then I know you are almost certainly wrong - because that's not how information works. The best answer right now is: "I don't know." Certainty at this early stage is like a religion, it could easily prove out to be wrong.

Think of it this way: what if you had acted this way about the existence of Santa Claus at the age of three? You are just dead certain he exists, all the facts point to the existence of Santa Claus. But guess what...?!

More:
http://911research.wtc7.net/

< Message edited by Chaingang -- 5/1/2006 10:51:42 PM >


_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to pollux)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 1:40:15 AM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

It's not my fault that the 9/11 conspiracy world seems to attract lunatic nutjobs who are willing to blame 9/11 on everything from interdimensional beings to the Illuminati to an evil right-wing neoconservative cabal to Microsoft to the Mossad to space aliens to...everything except who and what actually caused it.


Yanno.... I've always liked and admired most of your posts in various other threads. But you have a serious problem when it comes to making derogatory comments about those of us who've expressed opinions/view-points which are contrary to yours.

If the collarme message board had a party, and we all sat around with a few beers and this subject came up, you know good-and-damn-well you wouldn't make some of these derogatory comments when responding to those of us who disagree! So, I ask you as a gentleman, to please refrain from doing so in the future.

Now..... the only thing I have to say about the matter is this : I work in a job where I deal with a hellva lot of people, and sometimes 9-11 comes up. Whenever I engage in a conversation about this, I always ask this question first : If you were in charge of the government, months after the ensuing attack, what would be the first five things you would do to make this country and its people safer? Do you know that out of the fifty or so people I've looked in the eye and asked that question, probably only three of them {and they just got out of bed} haven't included closing the border as one of the first five things they would have done to make the country safer and more secure{Especially in light of all the government innuendo regards '' Dirty bombs'' and ''suitcase nukes'' smuggled into the country}

Now you might say '' It's just not that easy to close the border'' or '' Its a much bigger issue than that'' - The hell if it isn't! There's no bigger issue in this country than preventing another catastrophic terrorist attack! So, just the simple fact that this crapy government has done absolutely nothing to protect our borders since 9-11 , makes me highly suspect  regards their complicity.



  - R

< Message edited by UtopianRanger -- 5/2/2006 1:44:04 AM >


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to pollux)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 1:59:20 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger
Now..... the only thing I have to say about the matter is this : I work in a job where I deal with a hellva lot of people, and sometimes 9-11 comes up. Whenever I engage in a conversation about this, I always ask this question first : If you were in charge of the government, months after the ensuing attack, what would be the first five things you would do to make this country and its people safer? Do you know that out of the fifty or so people I've looked in the eye and asked that question, probably only three of them haven't included closing the border as one of the first five things they would have done to make the country safer and more secure{Especially in light of all the government innuendo regards '' Dirty bombs'' and ''suitcase nukes'' smuggled into the country}


I'd give you an honest and not well liked answer:
I'd make our country more *dangerous*.

Why? I'd undo a vast portion of government authority. (Cops would have FAR less power to stop, question and search people under my vision, for example.)

Making security measures that further restrict freedom is the very definition of letting terrorism win. It's giving up our essential and defining freedom under pressure of fear.

That being said, I would:

1) Reduce the layers of beauracracy involved in the immigration process and provide the vital information for all immigration applicants to the intelligence community. This would speed up the process, ensure fewer people fall through the "forgotten" cracks and verify those applicants are not known (by our intelligence community) to be terrorists or people of similar poor standing.

2) Secure the southern border. The vast majority of illicit immigrants cross into the United States using that border. The northern border is significantly more difficult to secure but far less of a concern. Finding a way to share immigration information with Canada and coordinating enforcement with our northern neighbor is the more realistic tack for that border.

3) Consolodate the existing plethora of spy agencies. Do not do this by adding a 2000 employee layer of additional beauracracy over them (as we have done), but rather literally consolodate them into as few agencies as feasible merging them with existing bodies as appropriate.

4) *Require* full and free sharing of information between all intelligence and military organizations. Allow full but restricted(1) sharing of information between all federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

5) Ensure full and fair enforcement of anti-terrorism laws, particularly those targeting the money trails. (Saudi Arabia's royal family would be a prime example of those who would suffer under such an even handed approach, being the prime funding source of the Salafist terror camps and terrorist-associated mosques.)

*meow*

(1) Restricted by security clearances. Broaden the number of FBI agents given appropriate clearance if necessary (without compromising clearance standards).

< Message edited by ArtCatDom -- 5/2/2006 2:00:29 AM >

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 2:49:02 AM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:





1) Reduce the layers of beauracracy involved in the immigration process and provide the vital information for all immigration applicants to the intelligence community. This would speed up the process, ensure fewer people fall through the "forgotten" cracks and verify those applicants are not known (by our intelligence community) to be terrorists or people of similar poor standing.

2) Secure the southern border. The vast majority of illicit immigrants cross into the United States using that border. The northern border is significantly more difficult to secure but far less of a concern. Finding a way to share immigration information with Canada and coordinating enforcement with our northern neighbor is the more realistic tack for that border.

3) Consolodate the existing plethora of spy agencies. Do not do this by adding a 2000 employee layer of additional beauracracy over them (as we have done), but rather literally consolodate them into as few agencies as feasible merging them with existing bodies as appropriate.

4) *Require* full and free sharing of information between all intelligence and military organizations. Allow full but restricted(1) sharing of information between all federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

5) Ensure full and fair enforcement of anti-terrorism laws, particularly those targeting the money trails. (Saudi Arabia's royal family would be a prime example of those who would suffer under such an even handed approach, being the prime funding source of the Salafist terror camps and terrorist-associated mosques.)

*meow*

(1) Restricted by security clearances. Broaden the number of FBI agents given appropriate clearance if necessary (without compromising clearance standards).


You've kinda hit the nail on the head, brother. And you've also made securing at least one of our borders one of the five things. But let me remind you, that even though the Canadians are my favorite people/country outside of the US, it was our northern border {British Columbia}in which Ahmed Ressam, the Algerian from Montreal, tried to smuggle explosives and bomb-making material in to blow up Los Angeles, International airport. So while the southern border is much more pourous, Canada is full of muslims, who supposedly represent the main facet of terrorismn.

quote:


Making security measures that further restrict freedom is the very definition of letting terrorism win. It's giving up our essential and defining freedom under pressure of fear.


Amen~! Instead of closing and/or protecting our borders, we get the Patriot Act instead. Now... to any logical thinking person, why would you first try to impose more internal security measures without imposing ANY external ones, first? I mean, after all, we all know the supposed terrorists who hit the trade centers wern't from this country to begin with.  That makes no fucking sense!!  And again.... it should leave the whole citizenry with the thought that there is no external threat and all the terrorists are actually already in the country ready to strike again. But how did they get in? And who keeps opening door for them with a welcome mat, while the rest of us {the good guys} have to put up with intrusive nonsense from the Patriot Act? Doesn't that just make you wonder ‘’what-the-fucks’’ really going on?



- R

< Message edited by UtopianRanger -- 5/2/2006 3:10:28 AM >


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 2:53:28 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Pollux, here's a Snopes (a favorite site of mine also, BTW) versus CBS News comparison for you:

"Put Paid"
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp

"Profiting From Disaster?"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/19/eveningnews/main311834.shtml

Is that a settled issue then? We are saying Snopes is vastly more credible than is the long-standing paragon of TV journalism that is CBS News? Why or why not?

BTW, I realize this calls into question the findings of the 9-11 Commission. Let's just say that considering other inaccuracies like the precise number and names of hijackers I think its fair to question their authority on the matter. Just for the record, I don't believe in magic bullets either (the findings of the Warren Commission), but I do still think John Kennedy was a shit president. But that's all a little before my time anyway...

More here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html

< Message edited by Chaingang -- 5/2/2006 3:15:04 AM >


_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 3:27:18 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Here's some links debunking the debunkings:

Nova:
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/articles/eagar_nova/nova_eagar1.html

Scientific American:
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/articles/sciam01/sci_am1.html

My favorite timeline aka My Pet Goat:
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/alibis/bush.html

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 3:28:00 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

Pollux, here's a Snopes (a favorite site of mine also, BTW) versus CBS News comparison for you:

"Put Paid"
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp

"Profiting From Disaster?"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/19/eveningnews/main311834.shtml

Is that a settled issue then? We are saying Snopes is vastly more credible than is the long-standing paragon of TV journalism that is CBS News? Why or why not?

BTW, I realize this calls into question the findings of the 9-11 Commission. Let's just say that considering other inaccuracies like the precise number and names of hijackers I think its fair to question their authority on the matter. Just for the record, I don't believe in magic bullets either (the findings of the Warren Commission), but I do still think John Kennedy was a shit president. But that's all a little before my time anyway...

More here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html


I would note that the news article occured shortly after 9-11, long before the results of the 9-11 Commission's investigation. I would accept the assertion as more credible if there was a credible news reference contradicting the 9-11 Commission's findings. The links you provide simply show that suspicious behavior was noticed and later investigated (and determined to be nothing conspiratorial).

Not to say that I blindly trust a government commission on the matter. However, there is no conflict between the two links you provided.

*meow*

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 3:36:55 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

You've kinda hit the nail on the head, brother. And you've also made securing at least one of our borders one of the five things. But let me remind you, that even though the Canadians are my favorite people/country outside of the US, it was our northern border {British Columbia}in which Ahmed Ressam, the Algerian from Montreal, tried to smuggle explosives and bomb-making material in to blow up Los Angeles, International airport. So while the southern border is much more pourous, Canada is full of muslims, who supposedly represent the main facet of terrorismn.


I understand that we cannot ignore the northern border. However, it is a border that I do not believe it would be pragmatic (or economically wise, for a variety of reasons) to secure the north in a "traditional" manner. Canada and America are both heavily dependent on the freely flowing border arrangement that we have. I do believe that greater communication and cooperation between American and Canadian authorities is the best route. If we had a similarly useful partner on our southern border I would advocate a likewise approach modestly complimented by traditional border security. However, we do not, so I feel we need to strictly control the southern border unilaterally.

I do disagree that the Mexican border is "more porous". I simply think it's the main source of our illegal immigration. I firmly believe the Canadian border is far less secured and provides a significantly greater number of passable remote entry points.

Bear in mind, this is just my opinion.

quote:

Amen~! Instead of closing and/or protecting our borders, we get the Patriot Act instead. Now... to any logical thinking person, why would you first try to impose more internal security measures without imposing ANY external ones, first? I mean, after all, we all know the supposed terrorists who hit the trade centers wern't from this country to begin with. That makes no fucking sense!! And again.... it should leave the whole citizenry with the thought that there is no external threat and all the terrorists are actually already in the country ready to strike again. But how did they get in? And who keeps opening door for them with a welcome mat, while the rest of us {the good guys} have to put up with intrusive nonsense from the Patriot Act? Doesn't that just make you wonder ‘’what-the-fucks’’ really going on?


It certainly does. That wondering makes me think that we have a bunch of schmucks who are far more concerned with expanding the pork payroll and centralizing power in their hands than about defending America and her values.

*meow*

P.S. By the by, nice to find this common ground.

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 3:46:34 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
Not to say that I blindly trust a government commission on the matter. However, there is no conflict between the two links you provided.


Yes, that's true - it's not a flat out contradiction as such. It is however a difference in interpretation perhaps. To agree with the findings of the Commission you also have to agree that the number of Put Options and the person(s) placing them are not suspicious. That's a very subjective call. "60 Minutes" found it suspicious and so do I.

BTW, my point is not to answer questions but to raise questions only. I am just saying I don't necessarily consider the matter settled.

...

Oh, I also agree on the secured borders issue. And I am Latino, if it matters...

It's just so clear that we have a bunch of looting bastards in charge at this point. I have no proof of anything more nefarious than their naked greed. But see, the minute you accept that Neocons are basically a kind of organized political crime thing you have to ask yourself: what wouldn't they do for money and/or power?


< Message edited by Chaingang -- 5/2/2006 3:50:53 AM >


_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 3:55:54 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom

I'd give you an honest and not well liked answer:
I'd make our country more *dangerous*.

Why? I'd undo a vast portion of government authority. (Cops would have FAR less power to stop, question and search people under my vision, for example.)

Making security measures that further restrict freedom is the very definition of letting terrorism win. It's giving up our essential and defining freedom under pressure of fear.

Quite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
1) Reduce the layers of beauracracy involved in the immigration process

Quite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
provide the vital information for all immigration applicants to the intelligence community.

Huh? Are you confused?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
2) Secure the southern border.

Still confused, I see. Better do the opposite: open all borders. Provide unrestricted, free access.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
3) Consolodate the existing plethora of spy agencies.

You want to reward them for failure and treason? Close them all down, I say.

(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 10:50:37 AM   
pollux


Posts: 657
Joined: 7/26/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

It's not my fault that the 9/11 conspiracy world seems to attract lunatic nutjobs who are willing to blame 9/11 on everything from interdimensional beings to the Illuminati to an evil right-wing neoconservative cabal to Microsoft to the Mossad to space aliens to...everything except who and what actually caused it.


Yanno.... I've always liked and admired most of your posts in various other threads. But you have a serious problem when it comes to making derogatory comments about those of us who've expressed opinions/view-points which are contrary to yours.


Ranger, the feeling is mutual.  I admire your posts too, and I'm frankly disappointed this conspiracy nonsense has claimed you, too.  I understand not trusting the government, and questioning authority and not liking George W. Bush.  But I don't see how any of those things are incompatible with the basic outline of what happened on 9/11.

I am very respectful of differing opinions, and you will notice that I have not criticized you personally, and I have not accused you of believing in space aliens (you haven't exactly said what you *do* believe, either, apart from saying the government is behind it).  Having said that, there are some problems with what you're saying here.

#1 is that your fellow conspiracy theorists have made this bed -- if you follow the links that have been posted here lately to the conspiracy websites, you will see all manner of foolishness.  Again, I am not making any of this up.  *I'm* not the one making these claims -- the conspiracy theorists are!  You can visit the websites and see for yourself.  And what is even more comical/sad is this line of thinking that looks like it's captured Chain -- this is the idea that when someone debunks a conspiracy theory, the original theory must've been disinformation!  Planted by the government to discredit the conspiracy theorists!  This is paranoia in its purest form.

#2 is that the question of what happened on Sept. 11 is not a matter of opinion -- it is a matter of fact.  Either 19 Islamic jihadists hijacked some airplanes and flew them into buildings (or a field in PA, in one case), or they did not.  And either the US government was behind it, or it wasn't.  There are mountains of evidence that support the official version of events, and not a shred of evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories.

If someone claims that 1+1 = 3, am I obligated to respect their opinion?  We're not discussing whether the Iraq war was justified (something about which reasonable people can disagree) or whether Bush should have been re-elected (likewise)...we're discussing a basic matter of fact.  You've said you don't trust the government.  Fine.  I don't trust it either.  Why are having an untrustworthy government and having 19 jihadist hijackers fly some planes into buildings on 9/11 mutually exclusive ideas?

quote:

If the collarme message board had a party, and we all sat around with a few beers and this subject came up, you know good-and-damn-well you wouldn't make some of these derogatory comments when responding to those of us who disagree! So, I ask you as a gentleman, to please refrain from doing so in the future.


Where have I used a derogatory comment, let alone one that refers to you personally?  If this came up at a party, you're damn right I would challenge it.  Sept. 11 is something I feel very strongly about, and I'm very concerned that these conspiracy theories are taking root in people.  I'm not sure if everyone has all of a sudden just abandoned their critical thinking skills, or this is the chickens coming home to roost after Vietnam/Watergate and everything that followed to erode people's trust in their leaders.  Whatever the cause, it is tragic, because we've got real political problems in this country, and we have real external enemies who would like to inflict great harm on us, and this conspiracy nonsense is a distraction from reality.

quote:

Now..... the only thing I have to say about the matter is this : I work in a job where I deal with a hellva lot of people, and sometimes 9-11 comes up. Whenever I engage in a conversation about this, I always ask this question first : If you were in charge of the government, months after the ensuing attack, what would be the first five things you would do to make this country and its people safer? Do you know that out of the fifty or so people I've looked in the eye and asked that question, probably only three of them {and they just got out of bed} haven't included closing the border as one of the first five things they would have done to make the country safer and more secure{Especially in light of all the government innuendo regards '' Dirty bombs'' and ''suitcase nukes'' smuggled into the country}

Now you might say '' It's just not that easy to close the border'' or '' Its a much bigger issue than that'' - The hell if it isn't! There's no bigger issue in this country than preventing another catastrophic terrorist attack! So, just the simple fact that this crapy government has done absolutely nothing to protect our borders since 9-11 , makes me highly suspect  regards their complicity.



  - R


Ranger -- with all due respect, failing to secure the borders is not evidence that the government is behind 9/11.  It is a good question that you ask.  But, equally plausible explanations are simple mismanagement, incompetence, negligence, misplaced priorities, or plain and simple bad politics.  I'm a believer in Occam's Razor, and until someone shows me a fact supported by evidence that the government is behind 9/11, I'm reluctant to attribute to malice what is more likely attributable to stupidity.

Read the thread that Alumbrado linked to on page 1.  Towards the end (pg. 57 or so), one of the JREF guys named "Gravy" posted a 285-page PDF file (bless his skeptical heart) that addresses every single line of dialog and frame of imagey in "Loose Change".  It is absolutely devastating.

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 2:54:11 PM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Pollux:

I just read some of that document. It proves nothing. It also makes dozens if not hundreds of unsupported statements. It also relies heavily on ridicule. ::yawn::

You know, it's very clear to me that you have made up your mind about this subject. I don't actually have a problem with that. Personally, I think certainty is almost always foolhardy. You say you believe in Occam's Razor but what you should believe in is the scientific process where nothing is really a fact but instead just the best going theory RIGHT NOW and that things can and do change as information is added to the overall model of what happened.

Anyway, if this subject bores you I suggest you stay away from it. But being tedious to others who wish to discuss it is just annoying on your part. You don't have proof, you don't have facts - you have contrary conclusions and your own probably erroneous sense of certainty, but that is all.

Hell, I don't even have conclusions. I think "Loose Change" might be disinformation because some of what's in it *IS* highly speculative and overreaching - but I can't see why that should be a trouble to the bigger project of digging deeper into the events of 9-11 in a more open-minded manner. There are many other resources out there that are not as speculative and overreaching, but I also know that you do not care about that.

Can you accept that not all questions have been answered or will necessarily ever be answered? Can you accept that science and forensics do not answer all questions? Can you accept a non-CSI worldview? Can you accept a world without pat answers?

This isn't a TV show. I personally find your certainty somewhat ridiculous.

< Message edited by Chaingang -- 5/2/2006 2:56:16 PM >


_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to pollux)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 3:24:01 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
Does anyone have a contact at one of the airports from which those planes departed (93 & 175) or supposedly departed (11 & 77)?

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 5:37:12 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

I just read some of that document. It proves nothing. It also makes dozens if not hundreds of unsupported statements. It also relies heavily on ridicule. ::yawn::



More specifically it relies on ridiculing anyone who makes extreme claims and cannot back them up, therefor claiming the Randi million dollar prize  (or as some would have it, million dollar bullshit filter).


< Message edited by Alumbrado -- 5/2/2006 5:45:07 PM >

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 8:22:28 PM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

Ranger, the feeling is mutual.  I admire your posts too, and I'm frankly disappointed this conspiracy nonsense has claimed you, too.  I understand not trusting the government, and questioning authority and not liking George W. Bush.  But I don't see how any of those things are incompatible with the basic outline of what happened on 9/11.

I am very respectful of differing opinions, and you will notice that I have not criticized you personally, and I have not accused you of believing in space aliens (you haven't exactly said what you *do* believe, either, apart from saying the government is behind it).  Having said that, there are some problems with what you're saying here.
 

Thanks for being a gentleman. And I have read some fairly outlandish comments that even I don’t agree with. But a few outlandish comments from certain folks do not warrant placing all of us who disagree with the government’s accounting of 9-11 into the same box.  

I’ll tell ya….When I watch John McCain and a few other Senators, constantly come before the American people and in more less condensed speech, tell the whole country that if we kick fifteen million people out and enforce the laws already on the books, the whole country is going to fall apart –- And then I see folks parroting that same message onto discussion boards, I could think or say : What a bunch dumb-ass, naïve suckers who’ve succumbed to social engineering. But I wouldn’t because I think we need to be respectful of others. After all, we can challenge and disagree with their opinions without referring to them as dumb asses, whackos and nutjobs.  

Personally…. After watching and being a part of this for the last six years, I think anyone who doesn’t thoroughly question the actions/motives of this government is an absolute fool. Every Smart dude throughout history, from Plato to Jefferson, has told us to keep a watchful eye over government and ‘’Trust not blindly’’ – But I take it a step further – I don’t trust them at all. Their actions speak much louder than words.  

quote:

1 is that your fellow conspiracy theorists have made this bed -- if you follow the links that have been posted here lately to the conspiracy websites, you will see all manner of foolishness.  Again, I am not making any of this up.  *I'm* not the one making these claims -- the conspiracy theorists are!  You can visit the websites and see for yourself.  And what is even more comical/sad is this line of thinking that looks like it's captured Chain -- this is the idea that when someone debunks a conspiracy theory, the original theory must've been disinformation!  Planted by the government to discredit the conspiracy theorists! 
 

First of all, I’m on dial-up, so I can’t even fathom trying to download one of these films. And to be totally honest, outside of reading from the web site ‘’Scholars for 9-11 truth’’ I have never watched one of these videos.  

As far as the Conspiracy theories and the debunking part? – Its completely subjective. There’s all sorts peculiarities and questions ; There is no absolute truth.  

quote:

#2 is that the question of what happened on Sept. 11 is not a matter of opinion -- it is a matter of fact.  Either 19 Islamic jihadists hijacked some airplanes and flew them into buildings (or a field in PA, in one case), or they did not.  And either the US government was behind it, or it wasn't.  There are mountains of evidence that support the official version of events, and not a shred of evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories.
 

Sorry brother. I actually hold an opinion which is completely contrary to that of Ward Churchill’s :  I Absolutely do not believe for a second, that a bunch of fanatical, scrawny bums, dressed in filthy pajamas and sandals, could come over to the United States and mastermind a plan that could kill three thousand people and take those two towers and building number seven down, without help from insiders or some kind of rogue element of the government.  

As far as there not being a shred of evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories?  That’s complete conjecture on your part. Again….. There’s many questions and peculiarities that just don’t make enough sense for me to ‘’jump on the bandwagon’’. I rely on my analytical nature and my gut instincts before I get on the carpet and kneel to big brother – I’ve got a stomach ache.

quote:

 If someone claims that 1+1 = 3, am I obligated to respect their opinion?  We're not discussing whether the Iraq war was justified (something about which reasonable people can disagree) or whether Bush should have been re-elected (likewise)...we're discussing a basic matter of fact.  You've said you don't trust the government.  Fine.  I don't trust it either.  Why are having an untrustworthy government and having 19 jihadist hijackers fly some planes into buildings on 9/11 mutually exclusive ideas?  



Trying to compare the absoluteness of simple mathematics with conjecture is ridiculous and doesn’t serve you well.  

This is the biggest problem I have with the Keane-Hamilton sycophants/fans. If you were to ask many of these people if they trust Bush with the Budget, Iraq, Yellow-cake Niger, Haiti, or National security wire taps, many would be upset and say hell no, but the minute you move to 9-11, you leave the arena of respectability and enter one of which is considered, paranoia, conspiracy, Tin foil hats, or better yet ‘’ Kook Land’’  HAR!!  That makes no logical sense!!  Why and how can anyone believe they would lie about all those things and not lie about 9-11?  

It’s a generational compoudedness, that’s been engrained if the everyday, honest, hard-working American citizen. ‘’Trust your Government’’  They look from within, and can not and will not see such utter diabolic ness in themselves, so therefore are truly incapable of self-projecting such pure evil on to anyone else. The methodology just isn’t there for them to understand; and there’s no database for them to study and conquer.  

quote:

 Where have I used a derogatory comment, let alone one that refers to you personally?  If this came up at a party, you're damn right I would challenge it.  Sept. 11 is something I feel very strongly about, and I'm very concerned that these conspiracy theories are taking root in people.  I'm not sure if everyone has all of a sudden just abandoned their critical thinking skills, or this is the chickens coming home to roost after Vietnam/Watergate and everything that followed to erode people's trust in their leaders.  Whatever the cause, it is tragic, because we've got real political problems in this country, and we have real external enemies who would like to inflict great harm on us, and this conspiracy nonsense is a distraction from reality.


You can challenge it. You are challenging it. I just ask that when you read something in which you believe to be totally outlandish, address that person directly and don’t make passive aggressive, negative comments to another poster that insuiates and lumps us all together in one box.  

After all….If you can compare and differentiate extrapolating the kind of lie about Yellow–Cake in Niger as opposed to mean the government is lying about 9-11 , then you are quite capable of doing the same with regard to those of us who are clearly making outlandish statements vs. those of us who bring up peculiarities and deviations from conventional logic.  

quote:

Ranger -- with all due respect, failing to secure the borders is not evidence that the government is behind 9/11.  It is a good question that you ask.  But, equally plausible explanations are simple mismanagement, incompetence, negligence, misplaced priorities, or plain and simple bad politics.  I'm a believer in Occam's Razor, and until someone shows me a fact supported by evidence that the government is behind 9/11, I'm reluctant to attribute to malice what is more likely attributable to stupidity.
 
You’re making us both look stupid here. You mean to tell me that shortly after 9-11, the government produced this historical, sophisticated, quasi-fascist legislation known as Patriot Acts I and II {Yes, they’ve even taken the time to make more ambiguous, intrusive modifications} for purposes of greater internal security, yet you attribute mismanagement, misplaced priorities and bad politics {Just to name a few} for not protecting our borders or making any decisive, external modifications that would make this country any safer?  Man… talk about over simplification, you’ve just given one of the best of most complete examples I’ve ever seen. But for me, I just can't reduce it to that level, theres much more to it than that.



 - R




 

< Message edited by UtopianRanger -- 5/2/2006 8:41:10 PM >


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to pollux)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 10:02:38 PM   
subtlesubie


Posts: 138
Joined: 1/5/2006
Status: offline
Even the dumbest of the dumb of the conspiracy theorists - those that don't believe in the moon landing - believe the official line on 9/11.  Many of the inconsistencies this documentary ellucidates have long been convinvingly debunked.  It would serve many here to remember that critical thinking is not the same as questioning authority.

(in reply to pollux)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/2/2006 10:26:32 PM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
subtlesubie:

Did you even look at the BBC link? That shoots down at least part of the official story. No, it doesn't obliterate it, but the official story is almost certainly incorrect at least in part. Now seriously, what part of that do you fail to understand?

You can believe whatever you want, but I think parts of the official story don't add up and I have more than one possibly disinformation based film to back up my claims. I mean, that's the BBC we are talking about - perhaps the single most respected news source in the entire world.

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to subtlesubie)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/3/2006 12:04:01 PM   
pollux


Posts: 657
Joined: 7/26/2005
Status: offline
Ya know Ranger, I was just gonna let this go, and maybe I should.  But dammit...  You are too smart for this.

quote:

As far as the Conspiracy theories and the debunking part? - Its completely subjective. There’s all sorts peculiarities and questions ; There is no absolute truth. 


I couldn't disagree more.  I don't see this as an issue of peculiarities and questions.  I see a bunch of amateur photo interpreters and neophyte airplane crash investigators and armchair "structural engineers" and people with political axes to grind spouting off about things they know absolutely nothing about.

If I want to know why a couple of buildings collapsed, killing 2500 people, I wouldn't ask a 21-year old rejected film school student with a political axe to grind who really gets off on the fact that David Lynch has seen his work.  I'd ask a structural engineer.  Actually, I'd ask hundreds of them, along with civil engineers, metallurgists, fire experts, building materials and contruction experts, etc. from all over the country to take three years and do an exhaustive analysis of all the physical evidence, and then report their findings.

(and yes...  I know you've said you don't believe Loose Change...  I'm using that example to prove a point)

With all due respect, what happened on 9/11 is not a subjective matter.  It is completely objective.  What happened to the WTC towers?  Did they catch fire and collapse after being struck by hijacked airliners?  Or were they brought down by a controlled demolition using thermite planted by secret agents?  That is an objective question and can be answered objectively.

What hit the Pentagon on September 11?  Was it a hijacked 757?  Or was it a cruise missile upon which the holographic image of a 757 was projected?  That is an objective question and can be answered objectively.  

Who hijacked the planes?  Was it a group of 19 fanatical Islamic jihadists associated with Bin Laden?  Or was it a group of secret agents from the Mossad or the CIA? That is an objective question and can be answered objectively.

Now, we can have subjective opinions about WHY the jihadists did what they did, whether US policies toward the Middle East are to blame, and what to do about it all...but as to the factual matter of what happened that day -- the who, what, when, and where... That is all completely objective.

quote:

As far as there not being a shred of evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories?  That’s complete conjecture on your part.


With respect, I am not making a conjecture.  There is no evidence for any of these theories.  Not a shred or a scrap anywhere to be found.   I'm sorry, but questions are not evidence.  Lack of faith in the government is not evidence.  John McCain saying stupid things about immigration is not evidence.  Despite what Chain says, I'm very open-minded.  If there's evidence of a conspiracy, I'd love to see it.  And when I see some evidence, I'll change my mind.

quote:

This is the biggest problem I have with the Keane-Hamilton sycophants/fans. If you were to ask many of these people if they trust Bush with the Budget, Iraq, Yellow-cake Niger, Haiti, or National security wire taps, many would be upset and say hell no, but the minute you move to 9-11, you leave the arena of respectability and enter one of which is considered, paranoia, conspiracy, Tin foil hats, or better yet ‘’ Kook Land’’  HAR!!  That makes no logical sense!!  Why and how can anyone believe they would lie about all those things and not lie about 9-11? 


Oy vey.  Not the Nigerian yellowcake again.

None of what you've said there constitutes evidence that the government was involved in 9/11.  It's a complete non-sequitur.

Is it possible the government lied about 9/11?  Sure it's possible!!  Of course.  Anything is possible.  It's possible that due to quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle that I'll spontaneously rematerialize on the other side of the room.  The question isn't whether it's possible the government lied about 9/11.   The question is whether it actually did.

quote:

I just ask that when you read something in which you believe to be totally outlandish, address that person directly and don’t make passive aggressive, negative comments to another poster that insuiates and lumps us all together in one box.


My friend, I don't do passive aggressive.  If I disagree with you, you'll know it.  Are you talking about the post I made about the guy who believes that the 12 Jewish families and the Cassiopeians were behind 9/11?  That was a true story dude.  Until you posted afterwards, I didn't know you were a conspiracy theorist, and I didn't know you and I were debating the subject.  

I stand by what I said.  There is exactly as much evidence to support the theory that Richard Perle or Paul Wolfowitz or PNAC or the Carlyle Group or Halliburton or the Office of Special Plans or the ghost of George Bush's Nazi grandpappy was behind 9/11 as there is that interdimensional beings from the planet Ra were behind it.  Which is to say, none.

quote:

After all….If you can compare and differentiate extrapolating the kind of lie about Yellow-Cake in Niger as opposed to mean the government is lying about 9-11 , then you are quite capable of doing the same with regard to those of us who are clearly making outlandish statements vs. those of us who bring up peculiarities and deviations from conventional logic.


Man, you've really got to find a new lie.  I'm happy to discuss that, but let's keep this thread OT.  Let's start a new thread if you want to talk Nigerian yellowcake or immigration or John McCain or whatever.

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/3/2006 4:17:27 PM   
NeedToUseYou


Posts: 2297
Joined: 12/24/2005
From: None of your business
Status: offline
The only thing that keeps any of this going is my mind is the fact that the government did some amazingly uncalled for actions.

The number one would be why did they hall off all the material fromt the 9/11 site and not let anyone inspect it? I mean what was the point of that?  So, that's a huge question to me anyway. You only get in a hurry to clear out evidence if you think it might reveal something.

The second thing is why they aren't releasing the names of those who put in all those put options on the airlines. It just doesn't make sense not to reveal that.

The third is how come they won't release the video tapes from the buildings adjacent to the pentagon.

Those are just the first anomalies I thought of, but their are dozens really.

Am I convinced the government did it, no, but if the government didn't do it, they are trying really hard not to clear the air. I see it being obsurd from both sides, it seems obsurd that the government would do it. But the things the government did and is doing regarding 9/11 is obsurd as well.  It would have been easy enough to definitively settle this just by releasing the video tapes of the businesses around the Pentagon, and if they didn't rush the metal away from the WTC and melt it down. I just can't think of a rational answer for these actions among others.

It  just doesn't make sense, why they do what they do.

(in reply to MasterRenegade77)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Documentary on 9-11 - 5/3/2006 4:44:02 PM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom

I'd give you an honest and not well liked answer:
I'd make our country more *dangerous*.

Why? I'd undo a vast portion of government authority. (Cops would have FAR less power to stop, question and search people under my vision, for example.)

Making security measures that further restrict freedom is the very definition of letting terrorism win. It's giving up our essential and defining freedom under pressure of fear.

Quite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
1) Reduce the layers of beauracracy involved in the immigration process

Quite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
provide the vital information for all immigration applicants to the intelligence community.

Huh? Are you confused?


No. Are you?

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
2) Secure the southern border.

Still confused, I see. Better do the opposite: open all borders. Provide unrestricted, free access.


What makes you think that will improve anything?

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
3) Consolodate the existing plethora of spy agencies.

You want to reward them for failure and treason? Close them all down, I say.


How is forcing mergers and the accompanying layoffs and budget constriction a reward? I think you might be the one who's confused.

*meow*

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Documentary on 9-11 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109