On April 06 2011 17:39 D_smart_S wrote:
This thread makes me sad. We are supposed to be the smartest species on earth, yet so many are brainwashed and retarded, unable to think critically, just repeating officials' statements. Just the way they like it.
LOL, has to be one of the biggest trolls. You are right that many people are brainwashed and retarded, however, you are actually describing yourself. The threads you start show a clear indication of below primate level intelligence. The elaborate scams and conspiracies you are able to believe are truly impressive. Your complete ignorance on so many topics also is laughable. I'm going to have to check how many threads I missed between this and your cancer one. Last time it was the conspiracy that all scientists/researchers (which is several million) in the life sciences are in on a ploy to prevent anticancer/antiviral drugs from reaching the population. Now this.
I also fail to understand why you care if the U.S. is going to kill their citizens since you aren't American. I'm guessing you're worried Bill Gates is harboring a grudge against Bulgaria and will show up with his advanced human destruction technology and wipe you and all of Africa off the map. That way he can "prevent" serious global warming for future generations of Americans that survive the mass killing planned by Obama.
On April 06 2011 20:16 blackjacki2 wrote:
Baal, I recall you saying that anyone that isn't at least open to the idea that 9/11 was an inside job is a moron. Does that mean you think James Randi is a moron? I thought you liked him.
No, im a huge fan of James Randi *deleted opinion on james randy, see next post**deleted opinion on james randy, see next post* ive argued with people open to the possibility that it was an inside job, those discussions are worth having, i am open to change my mind if i am presented with enough evidence.
For example in this thread i was shown that cut beam pic was post-clean up, in a previous thread i was shown a turbine in the pentagon rubble, first was a hard rebuttal to a claim (that i later posted additional pics) and the second one puzzles me tbh, but taking those into consideration i still believe the other side of the story has much more convincing evidence.
Palak and others wont consider its possible that it was a conspiracy, they dont believe governments would do something like that to them, despise history teaching them the opposite (Lusitana as mentioned before).
He even mentioned a "good intentioned government" which shows his level of naivety
Thats i link about James Randi and 911 and i agree totally with it, thinking back James Randi is a rationalist in the matters of spirituality and misticism, i havent seen a really logical well founded logic from him on the government/society issues, unlike other people i admire like Hicks, Molyneux, Carlin or even stanhope.
So im guessing my conclusion on this matter, considering how Randi instantly dismisses any theory without much thought into it is that James Randi like most people is just part of the Stockholm syndrome and is not as critical of his surroundings as much as he thinks he is.
I think people should really make an effort to break their paradigms in the way they see things, they so quickly toss me in the "conspiracy theorists" category, despise the fact that i was the first to disprove these FEMA coffins thing, unlike most of you, i am in the search for evidence to make a conclusions, i dont look for evidence to support my previous ideas.
I dont have a way to know this for sure, if you want my opinion is because it arises less questioning, many would be in stronger disbelief of explosives planed in the building with security staff watching over it, also i think its a much better way to spread panic, a calculated demolition isnt as good to spread fear than random flights being hijacked and used as missiles that can target anywhere, any time, people start to wonder where they could hit, and if their plane might be hijacked, just see at TSA and see how afraid people of flights that that they are tolerating having their kids strip searched and their boobs squeezed by strangers.
Well honestly this seems like the weakest links in the theory of controlled demolition. Capturing several airplanes is quite difficult and makes the whole operation twice the more dangerous. I mean there's so much that can go wrong in flying planes into the buildings: what if another one had missed (and hitting 30 meters wide building with a plane is ridiculously hard feat)? What if people on flight would have attacked the terrorists like they did on one flight? Then they couldn't have blown it up at all, and they would have had to gather the explosives away without anyone noticing.
WTC was almost bombed once already (90s that is), so it would have been perfectly credible that terrorists succeeded in something they failed once before. I mean airplanes hitting a tower has never been done and the first reaction of many experienced pilots was "that cannot be done, no way", whereas bombing down buildings seems way more credible.
I believe that you would yourself admit that airplanes are not so much better in spreading fear that it would be worth all the hassle? I mean bombs can hit anywhere anytime, airplanes can only hit tall towers. And planes have been hijacked by terrorists for at least 50 years, yet that has not caused any decline in the amount of flying customers. Also getting an excuse for stricter security at airports hardly seems a good reason either: I mean you can justify stricter search policys by any terrorist attack it would be perfectly legit to start super strict securities at airports because of a terrorist bomb attack in NY.
Last edit: 07/04/2011 07:35
1
palak United States. Apr 07 2011 02:32. Posts 4601
I mentioned "good intentioned government" as something that some people believe, not myself. I said in the very next sentence I didn't believe that.
randi on 9/11 http://www.myspace.com/prezbyter/blog/513485265 randi doesn't accept 9/11 conspiracy theories for the same reason as everyone else. The man power and time required to plant explosives throughout wtc 1,2,& 7 without anyone noticing or coming forward. Is so staggeringly impossible that an organization couldn't pull it off. How the hell do you plant explosives on the framing of at least 70 floors of an office building which has people in it 24/7 without anyone noticing or hearing or thinking anything suspicious. We consider the government could plot to kill US civilians, but this is conspiracy is so damned elaborate it's ridiculous. At least things like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories could be maintained to a small group of 10 or so people, 9/11 theories required multiple hundreds if not thousands over the course of multiple weeks.
Cameras catching an object flying at speeds roughly 545 mph, plane wreckage all around the pentagon crash site, dna from passengers of flight 77 in the pentagon crash site, people on flight 77 calling their families telling them that the plane had been hijacked by terrorists, no other conceivable object could hit the pentagon (even you admit this)...but noooo whatever hit pentagon was something other then flight 77 cuz that would make to much sense.
dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquarium
1
asdf2000 United States. Apr 07 2011 03:18. Posts 7693
On April 07 2011 01:32 palak wrote:
I mentioned "good intentioned government" as something that some people believe, not myself. I said in the very next sentence I didn't believe that.
randi on 9/11 http://www.myspace.com/prezbyter/blog/513485265 randi doesn't accept 9/11 conspiracy theories for the same reason as everyone else. The man power and time required to plant explosives throughout wtc 1,2,& 7 without anyone noticing or coming forward. Is so staggeringly impossible that an organization couldn't pull it off. How the hell do you plant explosives on the framing of at least 70 floors of an office building which has people in it 24/7 without anyone noticing or hearing or thinking anything suspicious.
umm, it's not staggeringly impossible at all. firstly, you wouldn't need to put explosives on all 70 floors, nor even close to all the floors.
secondly, it wouldn't require that much manpower. how can you claim it would take that much manpower, what's the basis for that? why couldn't it be done by a handful of individuals?
thirdly, there were multiple evacuations and complete shutdowns of the WTT in the weeks before they collapsed. if you won't research that yourself or just take my word for it maybe i'll prove it. actually here, besides evacuations, there was a 26 hour power down the week before the collapse of the towers
that's of course if this interview is legitimate. id assume it is, but i don't know that for sure and I can't prove it.
now i don't know if the towers collapsed because of demolition (though i definitely suspect at least WTC7 did). all I am replying to here is about "what is possible".
also to note in a random coincidence is that g.w. bush's younger brother was on the board of directors for a company that ran security in the WTTs during that time frame.
anyways for them to do it they would have to use very powerful explosives, but there seemed to be evidence of very powerful explosives after the collapse. then again i don't really know what kind of aftereffects the collapse of such a huge building has.
Grindin so hard, Im smashin pussies left and right.
So I'm not well versed on 9/11 conspiracy theory. But what I don't understand is all these theories about blowing up the towers. I'm not saying that it is completely impossible, but if the US was behind the attack why isn't the major conspiracy that they simply orchestrated the plane crashes. I mean planes obviously crashed into the building, and it appears that this planning is required in the tower blowing up theories as well. I find it much easier to believe simple theories like this, timing/orchestrating the planes would have been hard enough to plan and keep secret. I find it harder to believe all these additional steps (Note: I realize there are some conflicting views over whether the buildings would have collapsed from the planes).
1
asdf2000 United States. Apr 07 2011 03:37. Posts 7693
On April 07 2011 02:29 akevin87 wrote:
So I'm not well versed on 9/11 conspiracy theory. But what I don't understand is all these theories about blowing up the towers. I'm not saying that it is completely impossible, but if the US was behind the attack why isn't the major conspiracy that they simply orchestrated the plane crashes. I mean planes obviously crashed into the building, and it appears that this planning is required in the tower blowing up theories as well. I find it much easier to believe simple theories like this, timing/orchestrating the planes would have been hard enough to plan and keep secret. I find it harder to believe all these additional steps (Note: I realize there are some conflicting views over whether the buildings would have collapsed from the planes).
I think the reason the demolition theory is so prevalent is that there is evidence of demolition in videos/pictures/behavior of the structures. And also that jet fuel shouldn't melt through all that steel.
I think that this website sums up the demolition view pretty well:
Grindin so hard, Im smashin pussies left and right.
Last edit: 07/04/2011 03:39
1
palak United States. Apr 07 2011 03:42. Posts 4601
^ the buildings undeniably start their collapse from the point of impact from the airplanes, this was on the 77th and 93rd floors respectively, the buildings then cascade down with each floor collapsing as the previous floor hits it. Also some of the flashes 9/11 truthers claim came from explosives are occuring on floors just a level or two down from where the planes hit, so explosives had to be at least that high up.
How can you think that planting explosives on multiple levels of framing of a sky scraper doesn't could be done by only a handful of individuals. We are talking planning of the demolition, removing of dry wall/insulation, transporting and planting thousands of lbs of explosives, reinsulating and dry walling, and doing this all quickly so that no one in the buildings would have noticed and doing it on at least 70 floors. How the hell is that possible without hundreds of people. The king dome required " 4,450 pounds of dynamite placed in 5,905 carefully sited holes and 21.6 miles (34.8 km) of detonation cord inserted over a period of four months" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Demolition,_Inc. ) and volume wise it was much smaller then the world trade center towers.
The 36 hours black out is only of WTC 2 and only from the 50th floor up, the bottom 50 floors of WTC 2 and every floor of WTC 1 were 100% operational during that time period. So even if explosives were planted on floors 51-92 of WTC 2 during that 36 hr time period (a miraculously fast planting of explosives), it still doesn't explain how no one on the bottom 50 floors of WTC 2 or anyone on any floor of WTC 1 ever noticed walls being demolished, explosives being planted, and walls being rebuilt. Not a single security camera or security guard ever noticing anything suspicious. Keep in mind these buildings were often occupied nearly 24/7.
Question for Baal, what are these Mexican ship sinkings you keep referring to and what war were they during? I tried googling for them but I can't find any information on anything about them.
dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquarium
1
asdf2000 United States. Apr 07 2011 04:06. Posts 7693
i see you're right, he stopped being on board of directors in 2000. w/e, that doesn't really change anything, especially if it would require a much longer time frame like you say. either way it's a pretty weird coincidence.
I am sure there were plenty of rooms that were private.
if they blew up the WTT I doubt they were using dynamite. anyways i don't really know the logistics of it i suppose it might be extremely difficult. but that doesn't make me think it's that improbable anyways.
It's all speculation, I don't know. But it doesn't sound that infeasible to me, given the potential rewards for certain parties (and rewards were certainly had in the following years).
WTC7, though. Absolute joke. Completely ignored by the media.
The claims that WTC7 collapsed due to fires seems ridiculous to me. But what do I know, I am no expert. I can only go by what I read and what makes sense to me.
When I read that "pretty much no steel structure ever collapses due to fire" it seems like that's some heavy evidence to support the demolition theory. Then I read about a thousand coincidences and smoking guns. Some are bullshit, and some don't seem to be. I read about NORAD stand down, I read about repeated lies by the media. I read about warnings to top officials not to fly on 9/11. I read about insurance collected from the WTT collapses, I read about gold that comes up missing post collapse and no one questions it. I read about confiscated videos and tapes that are then never released. I read about revealing quotes from top officials. I read about the official list of hijackers and how UTTERLY FULL OF SHIT it is. I see how we go into the middle east but never catch osama bin laden, yet we can get plenty of interviews/videos from him right? I read about stock movements just prior to 9/11. The list goes on and on man
So yeah, it's just speculation. I admit what I don't know. But I also try to use my brain about who benefited from what and how many unanswered questions there are.
Grindin so hard, Im smashin pussies left and right.
On April 06 2011 14:28 Zep wrote:
Baal you purposefully avoid certain evidence regarding 9/11 to make the conclusions that you make. So glad the site debunking 9/11 exists. But you seriously look at 25% of the puzzle and you think you've solved it. Look at the entire scope of what you're saying. Don't just support evidence that concludes what you want to hear. Stop being an investigative journalist with a story to write and start being a scientist who uses evidence to draw up conclusion. You disagree with over 90% of mechanical engineers in the united states. I'm not saying that 10% shouldn't have been enough to start an investigation, but it does mean that you are probably wrong. Anyways here are 2 direct links to the debunking 9/11 site that have pages and pages and pages of info that crush your conspiracy theories, read and enjoy!
I watched a documentary about the magic bullet, and based on this documentary (if its not falsified) im well over 95% sure JFK was an inside job.
But a lot of people have probably not even heard about the magic bullet or let alone this documentary so in a poll a lot of people would probably vote "no" due to lack of information or desinformation from history books.
On April 07 2011 06:59 VanDerMeyde wrote:
I watched a documentary about the magic bullet, and based on this documentary (if its not falsified) im well over 95% sure JFK was an inside job.
But a lot of people have probably not even heard about the magic bullet or let alone this documentary so in a poll a lot of people would probably vote "no" due to lack of information or desinformation from history books.
yeah, the JFK official story is the most retarded of all. I think i saw somewhere that 60% of Americans think it's an inside job, but i'm not sure about it. The thing that people don't think about is why. Why would someone kill JFK? Go and find his last speeches. What did he try to talk about. Who wanted him dead? How is that connected to 9/11? You see, it's not like the Government is good for a whole decade and suddenly decides to kill some of its people. You don't go to the supermarket and just decide to kill someone on the way there. There is enormous planning going on, there is a reason and most importantly - there is an agenda that is followed for a lot of years. There is a final objective. Go find what it is, that's the important stuff. Who are the killers, who are pulling the strings. There is a root of all evil. Obama is just a god damn puppet, he would be the one to take the blame years later. Black guy takes the blame, you know. The Council on Foreign Relations is where you should be looking at.
P.S.: palak, when you are put in one of those camps, please know that you are there because of your small brain. Don't forget to take some pictures.
Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech
"The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed."
Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech
guys, he was talking about communism there? I mean yeah, only reference to communism is in the beginning of the speech, but I thought it was obvious by the context?
I kinda find it telling of the general credibility of whole conspiracy scene that the previous poster quoted a silly sensational youtubevideo instead of the actual speech, which anyone can find in minutes using google.
unfuckingbelievable
Communism? U gotta be shitting me! Now the speech is about Communism... my faith in human intellect is diminishing rapidly.
"And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations."
He is talking about a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that is not in sight. "covert means", "subvresion instead of elections", "infiltration instead of invasion". Conspiracy that has gone as far as having tremendous influence in "military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations". What he describes is nothing like Communism. He is saying "we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy". Not in America, around the world. Please don't make JFK ashamed in his grave. He was the last true President of the United States and he wanted warn his people, that's all. He said it himself - his words shouldn't be interpreted, they are as clear as they can get. Guys, this is the clearest evidence that something is wrong in the USA. JFK spoke and died. Please, don't be blind.
Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech
1
palak United States. Apr 07 2011 10:57. Posts 4601
On April 07 2011 03:15 VanDerMeyde wrote:
Im not sure i believe the official 9/11 story. I think its bullshit
I also believe JFK was an inside job... haha ! :D
i honestly believed that absolutely everyone knew the JFK assasination was an inside job, is there a poll on this?
between 75% (gallup 03) and 66 (fox 03) think oswald did not act alone. But here's the list of people who that conspirators think are responsible.
1. One other random gunman with no relation to anyone but oswald
2. Business man Clay Shaw
3. Federal reserve
4 3 hobos with some relation to someone
5 CIA
6. Military industrial complex
7. Secret service
8. Cuban exiles
9. The mafia
10. LBJ
11. Soviet Union
12. Israel
13 Fidel Castro
EDit: note, this question isn't for who was responsible, the question is simply did Oswald Act alone yes or no (gallup), was their a conspiracy to kill JFK yes or no (Fox). If you broke it up by something like "Who was responsible for the JFK assassination conspiracy" I'm pretty sure the largest plurality would be the CIA by a pretty wide margin, it might even be the majority.
dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquarium
