Coudn't agree more.Being a New Jerseyan I think it's terrible we have not built something bigger and better there yet.We need to get over it, stop the memorials already,its 6 years now, start being the greatest city in the world again and build a skyscraper.
was 911 an inside job?
- Thread starter MASTERWES311
- Start date
Coudn't agree more.Being a New Jerseyan I think it's terrible we have not built something bigger and better there yet.We need to get over it, stop the memorials already,its 6 years now, start being the greatest city in the world again and build a skyscraper.
And every toilet and urinal should have the face of bin Laden painted on the inside of the bowls so that you could deficate/urinate on his likeness thousands of times a day.
Something tells me he would not like that very much.
Good revenge. No one gets hurt and the bad guys get pissed off - and on (sort of).
Maybe this is part of the problem with you. You're just going off what you wanted to believe from the beginning instead of what reality tells you. Do you ever put your preconceived notions aside and think without them? If you really want to change people's minds, like you state, you would do a lot better job going that route. You probably wouldn't even think of some of the sillier things you do in the first place.
********** said:
Actually most of what happened CAN and HAS been proven.
Not to mention we are not the same as our enemies. You want to know what's really funny. The only large groups of people in the Islamic world that aren't pussies and have the balls to stand up to their leaders are..........the terrorists. That doesn't speak well for everybody else. Sorry, it's not just their deceitful leaders. When you can show us the masses protesting in the street against both terrorism and their leaders I will believe you. Somehow when a group of people gathers in the street to cheer something it's always to cheer the leaders or the terrorist. It makes you wonder. Maybe you should turn you energies to where they will teach people something real. What you try to do would be the equivalent of me going out and trying to teach people the sun sets in the East. Than again keep on doing it. Even a lie if told enough will convince some nonsensical people out there it's true. Just look at the people that think 9/11 was a conspiracy.
********** said:
Most of them are garbage and relay on lack of explanation to explain things like how a certain building fell. No matter that non conspiracy theorist have better explanations for even the things that are still not 100% conclusive. It's probably because their version is infantry closer to the truth.
********** said:
I have a crazy idea. How about you not believe in things....untill they are proven.
********** said:
Ah yes, the old conspiracy theorist fallacy. Everything that has ever came up and been proven must have been made by the bad guys or the people working for them, even if the chance of something like that occurring is slim to the point of nonexistence. So the mountains of evidence that completely disproves my theory I will just put along with my conspiracy theory to allow myself to CONVIENYETLY dismiss whatever doesn't suit me. That way I can ignore anything that proves me wrong.
********** said:
:rofl: I think I will have to save that quote for posterity. I don't know what this says more about and is more damning to, all your hair-brained imaginings, or you and your "sense". :rofl2:
In fact I can think of several reasons why terrorist might want to do that. Maybe they miscalculated the impact it would cause and thought it would be worse. Maybe they thought that if they attacked us in a significant way and could keep on doing it over time the American people would just give up in the Middle East and go away. Maybe they just wanted a chance to take out as many American targets at once as reasonalby possible. Maybe they wanted to show us they could potentially attack us at any time. Even if they thought we might go over there maybe they thought it would give them a chance to more easily attack American targets that are stationed overseas (and it has). It isn't like terrorist are that concerned about dying or even about the people in their countries dying if they think they can reach a certain objective by doing it. I find it amusing for all the talk about how you try to understand both sides and how they both think and how you think we are just the same you in fact don't know much about either of them.
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
I havn't read so much bullshit on a thread yet.( not from everyone).
A bunch of men hijacked some planes and crashed them into pre designated targets. One plane didnt hit the target intended.Thousands were killed, tens of thousands of lives were destroyed, and millions of lives were changed.
And the fact that nothing has been erected there to this day doesn't mean jack......When someone decides theres money to be made by building something there they will. Its called capitalism.
A bunch of men hijacked some planes and crashed them into pre designated targets. One plane didnt hit the target intended.Thousands were killed, tens of thousands of lives were destroyed, and millions of lives were changed.
And the fact that nothing has been erected there to this day doesn't mean jack......When someone decides theres money to be made by building something there they will. Its called capitalism.
I totally agree.
Ronald Reagan
George Wallace
Gerald Ford
George Bush (may 10, 2005)
None of them died at the time, but not for lack of effort on the part of their attackers.
No, they sure as hell aren't stupid, which is exactly why they would do it.
Having correctly judged the nature & psychology of their adversary (Bush et al) they have succeeded immensely while suffering little on balance. Matter of fact, one could argue that rather than suffering they've flourished in terms of recruits, stature and achieving a number of their primary goals. Bush's major counterstrike has been a misguided cluster fuck - an extremely divisive human and financial bloodletting - or in other words the actualization of some of Bin Laden's most fervent hopes. Bin Laden was plenty smart enough to know he could never destroy America from without; his best hope was to promulgate an incident that, coupled with a perfect foil like Bush, might lead to just the sort of self-destruction we've witnessed. As far as ruining their homelands - as d-rock said, "it isn't like terrorists are that concerned about dying or even about the people in their countries dying if they think they can reach a certain objective by doing it." Plus, for you (fox) to propose that al quaeda requires a homeland to operate or acquire resources sounds like buying the bushco rationale for preemptive intervention.
+1:yinyang:
the attack was also brilliant from an economic standpoint. hey look! a tipping point!
I have to agree with you and anyone thinking that 9/11 was an inside job is either completely void of any sense of realism and sense of analysis or is either f*cking brainwashed and eventually way out of his mind. Seriously, how many nutcases think that 9/11 was an inside job? Perhaps many, but they are all worthless pathetic individuals kinda like Michael "the fat pig" Moore with "Fahrenheit" a movie full of lies and halftruths. Anyone thinking that "Fahrenheit" is depicting the reality of what happened during 9/11 is stupid.
it could have been an inside job, i mean there are alot of american and british al qaeda, there are also alot of corrupt govenors. They could have been used by al qaeda to get information about the planes, and security issues. But as far as the attack itself, it was done by al qaeda. In my opinion of course
Please explain.
just because you believe something that isn't true doesn't make you crazy. But refusing to disbelive in something that you know is true, does.
so what is the sanity of someone that believes the words of someone that has repeatedly been exposed as a liar?
By that I mean of course the Bush administarion and the government as a whole. So really the question I have, forget about 9/11 for a minute, what good reason do we have for why we should trust anything that they say?
back on the subject: Agree or disagree with the theories, that's up to you, but it makes no sense to me at all why people should be dissuaded and thought of as negative for trying to do thier own research and come up with different point of views about how and why it happened. As long as that theory is based on documented evidence and a logical conclusion calculated from it. Again, you may not agree with the examination, but the fact is that there IS an examination there for indisputable factors, just with disputable results.
There's a case of a retired CIA agent who changed his moral and political values later in his life and wrote an expose book about the secret things that he saw and knew about during his career. He was asked "if all the things you say are true, why are you still alive?" and he responded "Because they're winning."
If it really changed things or at least threatened to, if enough people were taking this guy seriously to undermine the authority of the media and the governmenet powers, than they would. Ever since the feds got busted for COINTELPRO, they realized they have to be more careful with thier conspiracies. The very best way for a government critic to be taken seriously is to have him mysteriously vanish in the middle of the night. Overt totalitarian oppression will get people riled up, but small blows to our freedoms, taken over time, will go unnoticed because it's not a crucial factor where people realize they have no alternative. Hitler knew that well. So long as all one does is talk, you can get "experts" to testify that he's just a harmless nut-case, and diffuse the situation, even if (or especiaily if) he's 100% right.
The point about all conspiracies is that you've got too many ways they can go wrong.People need to be recruited (and do you really believe the FBI wouldn't be aware of this ?) and then after the event need to keep silent.The scale of what happened is another factor-how did the planners guarantee that none of their own friends or loved ones would be in the WTC? And lastly-who benefited?You aren't going to get trusted reliable people to kill thousands of fellow citizens unless there's an overwhelming higher purpose.If the government wanted a pretext for the Patriot Act for example there would have been much less costly and horrendous ways.
Conspiracy theorists lean heavily on unexplained factors but these exist in every major event.People behave strangely, they sometimes do the wrong thing or forget to do the right one.This isn't evidence of conspiracy but of reality.And we've very little experience of how buildings behave under the conditions suffered by the WTC so no conclusions can be drawn from the building collapse.
Conspiracy theorists lean heavily on unexplained factors but these exist in every major event.People behave strangely, they sometimes do the wrong thing or forget to do the right one.This isn't evidence of conspiracy but of reality.And we've very little experience of how buildings behave under the conditions suffered by the WTC so no conclusions can be drawn from the building collapse.
GabberMan
Closed Account
In my opinion, they let it happen. And I know there are 1000s of reasons why they wouldn't and shouldn't have, but it has been singularly the greatest convenience that the US war machine, international arms industry, multinational oil companies and Western governments could use to empower and enrich themselves, as well as removing civil liberties.
They let it happen. Rather than looking to the cinema or youtube for some propagandist individuals' moments of fame - just have a good browse through Wiki for some well documented evidence as to how the events of the day were portrayed, how intelligence failed, and other factors that just don't add up. Also have a look at how the British government has been behaving: try WMDs, Dr. Kelly, Boeing and Saudi Arabia, and the "inquiries" regarding neither Iraq nor the 7th July 2005 tube bombings.
They let it happen. Rather than looking to the cinema or youtube for some propagandist individuals' moments of fame - just have a good browse through Wiki for some well documented evidence as to how the events of the day were portrayed, how intelligence failed, and other factors that just don't add up. Also have a look at how the British government has been behaving: try WMDs, Dr. Kelly, Boeing and Saudi Arabia, and the "inquiries" regarding neither Iraq nor the 7th July 2005 tube bombings.
the neocons were waiting for "the next pearl harbor". they got it. they milked it. if any buttons were pushed to help along the way, it was totally passive; diligent negligence on the part of an fbi admin, perhaps.
but i think the suggestion of planted explosives is absurd, and the whole "truther" :conehead:mentality is insulting to the people who lost their lives that day (minus the 19 hijackers).
but i think the suggestion of planted explosives is absurd, and the whole "truther" :conehead:mentality is insulting to the people who lost their lives that day (minus the 19 hijackers).
