USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Calandra -> USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/15/2006 9:41:30 PM)

http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/12047/9_11_Staged_by_USA_Evidence
 
A dear friend sent me this link yesterday. I, like most americans spent days in front of my TV when 9/11 happened. I remember many of these reports and observations being broadcast, yet until I watched this, I either forgot, or figured I was mistaken.
 
Now I know the maker of this documentary does not specifically accuse anyone of anything, and I know that there could be many answers to each question raised, but I'll admit, I'm very unsettled since watching it.
 
I'm a fairly new participant in the elective process, and I want to really consider these questions (and others) way before I go into the voting booth in November.
 
Anyone who wishes to respond with your views, please do... I look forward to discussion.
 
Kathryn

Sorry, I apparently deleted the link the first time around LOL



MrMister -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/15/2006 9:47:30 PM)

What was the link?



MistressLove999 -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/15/2006 9:52:25 PM)

oopsie............[:(]



Pavel -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/15/2006 11:15:31 PM)

If you look hard enough, you'll find very unsettling details in how your groceries are bagged. 

I'm almost curious as to what brings on this kind of logic.  You find the same general lines of thinking around the sinking of the USS Maine, Pearl Harbor, and all kinds of historial events, that somehow, someway it was controled all along, and influenced by unseen forces.  I for one think these theories give mankind too much credit.  Have you ever sat on a committee, or been part of any organization with power?  Ever seen just how little gets done, or when stuff happens, how messed up it gets?  Just imagine trying to pull off a lasting vast effort to fool the entire populace of uh, the world, useing only people you can trust, without resorting to scifi, mind control, or the like.

If somthing happened, it'd be all over the Washington Post, or some newspaper that doesn't consider six legged cows legit human interest stories.



Gauge -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/15/2006 11:37:54 PM)

I really do not want to sound rude but I will most likely end up sounding like that.

This topic, such as it is, has been hashed out in a few other, very recent threads. To go back and restate all the conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated rhetoric that those that think the government has got massive mind control rays pointed directly into their home and insist on wearing tin foil hats (heavy duty name brand stuff, not dollar store shit) and that when they fart someone in Washington, DC actually records the volume and stench factors of the gas expelling from their ass... you get the picture.

I don't want to shoot you down, honestly I don't but maybe a bit of time spent on reading the other thread would be in order.

Here is a link: http://www.collarchat.com/Sept%_911_Rare_footage%_What_really_happened_at_the_Pentagon?/m_342526/tm.htm

Here is another one: http://www.collarchat.com/Documentary_on_9-11/m_350811/tm.htm

And another one: http://www.collarchat.com/9-11_conspiracy_documentary_"Loose_Change"/m_297396/tm.htm



ArtCatDom -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/16/2006 12:13:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Calandra

http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/12047/9_11_Staged_by_USA_Evidence
 
A dear friend sent me this link yesterday. I, like most americans spent days in front of my TV when 9/11 happened. I remember many of these reports and observations being broadcast, yet until I watched this, I either forgot, or figured I was mistaken.
 
Now I know the maker of this documentary does not specifically accuse anyone of anything, and I know that there could be many answers to each question raised, but I'll admit, I'm very unsettled since watching it.
 
I'm a fairly new participant in the elective process, and I want to really consider these questions (and others) way before I go into the voting booth in November.
 
Anyone who wishes to respond with your views, please do... I look forward to discussion.
 
Kathryn

Sorry, I apparently deleted the link the first time around LOL


This horse has been beaten so badly, we've had to replace the dead horse.

Please search the forums for "loose change". This "documentary" (I feel vile calling it that) has been discussed to death.

*meow*

P.S. Even other conspiracy sites, and people sympathetic to them, rip apart a large number of Loose Change Second Edition's inconsistancies, misstatements and half-truths, such as:
http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html
and
http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/12/1787340.php

Science and engineering heavy publications such as Popular Mechanics assembled experts who reviewed the various conspiracy theories:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Here's a blog that utterly tears that mockery of a documentary apart:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

Now that's not to say I don't think there are some things "off" about the whole thing. (Notably, in the frames of video supposedly from the plane impact into the Pentagon, there's an obviously missing shadow.) However, Loose Change is far away from reason and fact.



Rule -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/16/2006 2:18:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Calandra
I want to really consider these questions (and others) way before I go into the voting booth in November.

Yes, we have discussed this already and our positions are entrenched: some accept the official version as true, others assert that it is a Bush-conspiracy.
I am one of the conspiracy adherents. I am also convinced that members of both political parties are involved and that it does not matter one bit to them what party gets power, because they controll all parties.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
Ever seen just how little gets done, or when stuff happens, how messed up it gets?  Just imagine trying to pull off a lasting vast effort to fool the entire populace of uh, the world, useing only people you can trust

It's easy. Most average humans with intelligence quotient of 100 can fool an imbecile with intelligence quotient of 75. There are people out there with intelligence quotients of 190. If an average human considers an imbecile stupid and easy to fool, those 190-people must consider average humans as about three times as stupid and three times as easy to fool.



Calandra -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 1:50:45 PM)

Dead horse comments aside, I'd be interested in a deeper discussion of things, not just blame-throwing, and insults.
 
Quite frankly, I don't KNOW what I believe. I know our government has committed atrocities. I know other governments have. I know that private individuals and organizations have. What I don't know (but thought I did) is that four commercial flights of people have disappeared and it dosen't seem to have been under the circumstances that we've been told. Some of the questions raised by this video (and many others I have found since the other day) have not been answered. I value living in a free society. I value the ability to question these things because people were willing to fight and even die to give me that right. I think that the most important thing we can do in memory of those lost souls (and the ones lost on 9/11 and since) is to use that freedom to ask questions until we get reliable answers.
 
I'm not stupid, I KNOW the whole truth will NEVER come out. But just because an answer isn't forthcoming, dosen't mean we shouldn't ask the questions in the first place. If thos topic bores you, or if this topic reminds you of other topics on this website, please, exercise YOUR right... the right to pass this topic by and read others that are more interesting to you... That is, unless being rude and insulting is what interests you, in which case, I'll exercise my right to ignore you.
 
Does anyone have any wish to discuss the material I've offered?
 
 



Moloch -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:00:08 PM)

Loose change is full of shit, I dont see people bitching about "missing wreckage" at the WTC.
An aluminum can filled with kerosine smacking into a solid object at 500mph will disintegrate.



Gauge -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:07:46 PM)

quote:

Dead horse comments aside, I'd be interested in a deeper discussion of things, not just blame-throwing, and insults.


OK... what kind of deeper discussion do you want on the subject? One side will insist they are right and the other side will insist they are right also. The topic doesn't bore me, I found it quite interesting. But strong and well thought out points from both sides were presented in those threads and it is really tough to go deeper than that.

Perhaps you start us off on a good direction and we will take it up from there, but I don't know how this can get much deeper than it already has.

Oh, and please do not think me insulting because I am far from that. If I want to insult someone directly it will be very clear.



Calandra -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:21:52 PM)

Moloch,
 
Usually I'd agree with you. but I've watched the footage taken on interviews inside the pentagon wreckage site soon after the fire was extinguished... I noticed something, there's copper wiring hanging down, still covered in plastic. there is still wood and paper and many other materials that are flammable that didn't disintegrate. How in the world could a steel and titanium engine which burns at a much higher temperature possibly disintegrate? (I don't claim to have an answer - and I'm not arguing with you, but it raises questions)
 
And I don't know if you're aware, but plane wreckage WAS FOUND at the twin towers... at least three of the huge engines, and bits of landing gear were recovered. I find it interesting that a rotor to a fan blade matching a much smaller engine was found, when the larger equipment we'd expect to find is all unaccounted for.
 
I was completely unsatisfied with the film the pentagon just released. There are at least 11 other cameras trained on the approach to that side of the pentagon, and I wonder why they won't show us those tapes?
 
Yanno something really scary? I know that people are trying to blame our government, but there's another possibility: That someone (terrorist or not) was able to penetrate our military capabilities in order to perform this attack. I could imagine our governmet trying to "cover up" that information quickly to avoid outright panic. I think I'd almost agree with them covering it up in the beginning, let's face it, America WAS in a panic. But now that people are beginning to notice that things "don't fit", they should make us aware, so that we can be part of the solution, rather than in the dark about the problem.
 
God, I am the last person to want to believe 9/11 was conducted by Americans...
 
 



Pavel -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:27:11 PM)

By the way, did anyone catch the new security camera footage from the pentagon?  I think to some extent it at least makes it highly doubtful that it was anything but a plane hitting the building, and also brings up an interesting concept.

While the Pentagon has lots and lots of video cameras for security reasons, why in the hell should more than one or two be pointed, faceing inward, at an outside wall?  Wouldn't it just be more logical (as I'm sure the case is) to put the cameras faceing outwards, along points of entry, or in the secure parts of the building? 

And Rule, hop back on the short bus.  While, perhaps you can pull the wool over the eyes someone a bit easier if you've got a higher IQ (I hold IQ as a poor rateing for intelligence/general compotence.  I've met people with very high IQs totally and utterly unable to function outside of their corner of academics), you're basically assumeing everyone with braincells is in on the fact the 9-11 never happened or somthing along those lines.  I've worked for the government, trust me, they're not much brighter than I, or anyone else.  I'm tempted to toss in an insult at this point, but that'd be rude, and I'm sure those of us in the 60+ IQ point range already know what I was going to imply.



Calandra -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:40:32 PM)

Gauge,
 
I didn't feel that YOUR comments were insulting... I received a couple of very insulting posts in email that I was responding to as well as those posted here.
 
I  think that asking questions, debating them in a polite (even empassioned) way is still one of the greatest weapons we have in America. I'll admit, I don't buy everything that loose change is proposing. I think it's quite possible that there are other conclusions that can be drawn from some of these "inconsistencies". Will some people insist their opinion is "right"? Of course they will, and I'm listening! In my opinion, I need to listen to those on all "sides" before even attempting to make a decision about how I will proceed.
 
You see, I'm newly active politically. I was raised in a "political neutrality" religion and the last few years I have been slowly educating myself and beginning to vote and voice my opinions about the laws and the various candidates. WOW it is overwhelming to get current on things! I voted for the first time in the last presidential election. While I am proud of that fact, I feel that for me, it isn't enough... I want to be more active on the federal, state, and local level. I want to know what referendums are being proposed before, rather than after the fact. I want to understand why certain rights that I value are being curtailed or even removed in the name of national security. If national security really does rest on whether wire-taps or secret warrants are available, I say Yay, go get em! But if these liberties are being eroded under false pretenses???? I want to know so that I can stand firm against it.
 
Thats why I want to discuss some of the details now... because if we don't discuss it now, we might all pay dearly later...
 



pollux -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:54:48 PM)

Calandra,

You might consider re-watching the film with this Viewer's Guide handy.  If you have time, I'd be interested to hear your assessment of the film after considering the information in that guide.



Arpig -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 2:56:19 PM)

You basically have 2 choices. You can take Rule's tack, and believe it was some vast and incredibly complex conspiracy involving literally tens of thousands of conspirators who have all kept their silence. The hoax involves fictitious aircraft, non-existant casualties, and bogus families of those non-exostant casualties...oh yes don't forget all the people who supposedly knew and worked with the people who never existed.....
Or you can take the other tack...it was a conspiracy involving a few dozen religious fanatics funded by a very rich saudi who has an axe to grind with the US, and who had been launching progressively more damaging and daring attacks up until 9/11...the choice is yours.



Gauge -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 3:00:27 PM)

quote:

I  think that asking questions, debating them in a polite (even empassioned) way is still one of the greatest weapons we have in America. I'll admit, I don't buy everything that loose change is proposing. I think it's quite possible that there are other conclusions that can be drawn from some of these "inconsistencies". Will some people insist their opinion is "right"? Of course they will, and I'm listening! In my opinion, I need to listen to those on all "sides" before even attempting to make a decision about how I will proceed.


The best way to make up your own mind is to read as much as you can on the subject. There are inconsistencies in many catastrophic events mainly because (and this is tough for some people to swallow) the powers that we rely on to protect us are as fallible as we are. Mistakes are made and things either get mixed up or are totally overlooked. Regardless of how well trained some of these people are, they are human and make mistakes. Look at the hurricane Katrina fiasco... mistakes and gross negligence were all over the place from an agency that was designed to respond directly to things like that.

As far as conspiracy theories about 9/11 go there will always be those that will buy into that line of thinking and with some valid points but with little clear evidence to contradict what is already there. Impeachment of evidence is the only way to discredit everything that has been reported to the American public.

I stated in one of those threads that I pointed you to that there was an episode of the TV show Quantum Leap where the main character leapt into the body of Lee Harvey Oswald. The show ends up with a very powerful statement: "It is easier to believe in the conspiracies to kill JFK than it is to believe that one single man can kill the most powerful leader in the world." Just a little food for thought.



Calandra -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 3:13:48 PM)

Pavel,
 
I agree it was a plane. I've always believed it was a plane, but one that was much smaller and of different construction than a commercial airliner - hence the smaller sized rotor they DID find.
 
Video coverage of the pentagon shows several cameras mounted on that side of the building, some facing the approach that the plane took, rather than one from the side that only captured a fraction of a second. Also, the Sheraton and the Gas station photo contained the entire crash from start to finish as well, but the civilians who saw the tapes were ordered to be silent on the basis of national security. Thats one reason I tend to think it was a military plane. If it was a commercial airliner, there would be NO REASON to order the civilians to be silent.
 
It dosen't add up somehow...
 
And as for IQ... I don't really think IQ is an accurate indicator either. It only gauges one aspect of intelligence, rather than how someone uses what intelligence they do have. However, I think that some people don't want to ask questions about this, not from a lack of intelligence, but from not wanting to know the answers... This is a scary subject no matter what the ultimate truth is. A lot of people died, someone or quite a number of someones killed them. Wars are being fought, and laws are being passed. The ripple effect of September 11th will continue to hurt regardless of who perpetrated it, but HOW those ripples are focused and perceived from here on out will largely be determined by the information that is available.
 
Think about it, worst case scenario, A group of powerful Americans did this heinous crime against us - We're working to protect ourselves from foreign enemies, but the real people responsible are flying under the radar, completely free to attempt future attacks and free to rake in the benefits. (I don't necessarily think this is what happened, but if it IS what happened, I'd hope that they'd be caught and brought to justice.)  



Pavel -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 3:32:26 PM)

Rotor?  I wasn't aware turbines had rotors.  I tried to google, just so I could find the proper term, but I managed to dig up someone's attempts to built a mini-jet engine for their own entertainment, and I got distracted.  Needless to say though, I salute any man who's willing to build such a thing in their garage.

I don't think anything smaller would have done the damage that it did, without additional fuel being stored at the point of impact.  Also, as far as military airframes, I really can't think of any that would do similar damage.  I've seen what a jet fighter does when it hits a building, and while I'm not an expert in the field, it wouldn't leave the damage that the Pentagon suffered.  A bomber would have either been way more obvious (the B-52 having oh, I think it's 8ish engines, and being very large, and the B-1 being really obvious in shape alone), and a transport plane runs into similar issues.  Really, the only planes the US military has in it's inventory that would lead to such damage are militarized 767 and 737 varients (AWACs, JSTARS, and some VIP transports).  I'm pretty familure with airplanes (I blame living next door to Boeing), and there's just nothing militaryish that fits the profile.  At that, if you're going to claim it was a 767 or somthing like that, why not fire an actual one into the Pentagon?  If you're part of some branching huge plot, why not just "borrow" one from either the Air Force, or Navy (as stated earlier, both branches have at least a few of those), or even better, take one from the boneyards in Arizona, where they leave such things in storage, mostly unsecured, waiting to be scarped? 

I just can't find the logic for useing a military plane, or the profile for such a thing to be used.

Most security cameras only take a frame every second or two.  It's a waste of film to do otherwise.  A jet decending at a few hundred miles+ will likely cross the field of view of such a camera with such speed that it's unlikely to be captured on film, so it's not terribly surprising there's little footage of the plane impacting, or in the instant prior.

I have thought about it, as long as we bark at shadows, and chase fictional cigarette smokeing men, we do dishonor to those that died that day.  There's a difference between dissent, and denial, and in this life I've found there's precious little time to indulge the half cocked day dreams of elements of society.



NastyDaddy -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 4:38:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
By the way, did anyone catch the new security camera footage from the pentagon?  I think to some extent it at least makes it highly doubtful that it was anything but a plane hitting the building, and also brings up an interesting concept.

While the Pentagon has lots and lots of video cameras for security reasons, why in the hell should more than one or two be pointed, faceing inward, at an outside wall?  Wouldn't it just be more logical (as I'm sure the case is) to put the cameras faceing outwards, along points of entry, or in the secure parts of the building? 


It's called FOV (field of view) of the camera.  No cameras were pointed at the building alone, in the foreground of the FOV is what is being monitored... in this case vehicle entry points, or gates. The foreground view was to monitor vehicles such as the police car that drove through the gate/security checkpoint. In the background of the cameras FOV was the Pentagon wall where the airliner hit. What was recorded was a secondary aspect with both cameras, not the cameras primary observation point which were the vehicle entry points.

In general people will advocate conspiracy when something extremely unorthodox affects their lives and their innocence.

Are the conspiracy buffs advocating there was a US based conspiracy that went off coincidentally with the known 9/11 Al Quida hijackings and immediate attacks against the US using those same hijacked aircraft.... wow that would be one hell of a coincidence. My immediate question would be why bother, because the Al Quida attacks would themselves provide justification and citizen outroar.

Turbine engines do have rotors, but they are not called rotors... they are called turbine blades. They compress the air and fuel mixture prior to the ignition stage of the turbine.
     



Rule -> RE: USA's involvement in 9/11 and aftermath...? (5/17/2006 4:39:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Calandra
God, I am the last person to want to believe 9/11 was conducted by Americans...  

Often it is necessary to assume that the interpretation of some phenomenon is true or false. That may be called belief. Generally I prefer to distinguish between what I know from what I do not know, and have to do as little as possible with assumptions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
And Rule, hop back on the short bus.

I regret that I am unfamiliar with this idiom. I tried to google it, but that seems to indicate that it means to take a shorter route and I am not sure if that is the correct interpretation.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
I've met people with very high IQs totally and utterly unable to function outside of their corner of academics

Thank you for unintentionally seconding my point.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
you're basically assuming everyone with braincells is in on the fact the 9-11 never happened or something along those lines. 
That is a gross distortion of my statement. It does not help a discussion if one unjustly or inaccurately attributes statements to someone that he never made. I have never distorted anything you or anyone else have said. Please do me and others the same courtesy.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
The hoax involves fictitious aircraft, non-existant casualties, and bogus families of those non-existant casualties...oh yes don't forget all the people who supposedly knew and worked with the people who never existed.....

I have stated elsewhere that Flights 11 and 77 never left their airports and therefore didn't exist. Whatever therefore hit WTC1 and the Pentagon, it cannot have been those nonexistent commercial planes. It may have been two smaller planes or two missiles, or one of each. I have indeed said that all planes were unmanned and that therefore there were no airplane casualties. However, I never said that the presumed passengers and crew never existed; to the contrary, otherwise the scam would never be swallowed wholesale. They were names of real people on the passenger and crew lists, but those people were not aboard those empty planes. Neither did I say that the families of these presumed passengers and crew were bogus; instead I said that they were accomplices in the scam - and got well paid for it.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig
You can take Rule's tack
Or you can take the other tack

Indeed. So choose what strategy is more likely to succeed: one that requires up to thirty billion dollars - much of it paid by the taxpayers - or one that requires perhaps a few million dollars?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Calandra
And as for IQ... I don't really think IQ is an accurate indicator either. It only gauges one aspect of intelligence, rather than how someone uses what intelligence they do have.

Indeed. I quite agree. Thank you for unintentionally seconding me.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
or even better, take one from the boneyards in Arizona, where they leave such things in storage, mostly unsecured, waiting to be scarped? 

My thoughts exactly. At least two and perhaps four of such outdated planes may have come from a source like that, or from abroad. Unfortunately, this is an unproven supposition.
 
I have been trying to verify whether those four planes had their pantries supplied, but cannot find any evidence for that on the internet. Does anyone know about such evidence?



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875