Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 4 votes

911 inside job - for what?


  • Please log in to reply
4446 replies to this topic

#481    SurgeTechnologies

SurgeTechnologies

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,369 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Not disclosed

  • "Why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction"

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:16 PM

View Postredhen, on 14 January 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

Every harm? That's a sweeping generalization.

Well my native language isn't english and i often dont use google to correct the words... sorry grammar police..

Quote

Truthers need to show a causal relationship between "who" and the attacks. Some kind of connection, which is falsifiable. If truthers keep repeating their mantra of "world banking system" or "neo-cons" or "unknown, unnamed, shadowy figures working in secret", well, there is no way to refute that, because it is unfalsifiable.  It's the same situation as if you were asked "prove there is no God".

So, what we have is not an argument, just a personal belief or simple (humble) opinion.

Well then it is no longer a personal belief but a collective belief of those who see event fishy. But 90% of global population belives in God yet they have no proof... but they still believe..

Now we have somewhat of religion of people who believe that 9/11 was pure inside job. :clap:

RSOE EDIS - Emergency and Disaster Information Service App is available on site!

   SHTFPlan Source for all sorts of news and updates!

#482    joc

joc

    Adminstrator of Cosmic Blues

  • Member
  • 14,419 posts
  • Joined:12 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milky Way Galaxy 3rd planet

  • They're wearing steel that's bright and true
    They carry news that must get through
    They choose the path where no-one goes

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:17 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 14 January 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

Once again, you are confusing as to whom the CIA supported. The CIA supported the Afghan mujahideen, not the Arab mujahideen, which were two different groups with the latter composed of foreign fighters.
You believe what they told you.  You believe what The Media reported.  There was no strategic need for Russia to control Afghanistan.

Posted Image
once i believed that starlight could guide me home
now i know that light is old and stars are cold

ReverbNation

#483    green_dude777

green_dude777

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,052 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • When you look back in life, you don't regret what you did, you regret what you never attempted.

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:21 PM

View Postredhen, on 14 January 2013 - 06:37 PM, said:

Hmm, was anyone in the federal government fired for this colossal intelligence/security failure?

Did anyone get fired over the Pearl Harbor attack?

Did anyone get fired over the Beirut Marine base bombing?

Did anyone get fired over the attack on the U.S.S. Cole or embassies?

Did anyone get fired over the first WTC attack?

Did anyone get fired over the Benghazi attack?

I could spend all day making such a list.

My problem with this statement is that you are implying that somebody not being fired for these instances is not only the norm, but completely acceptable to you and that we should be ok with it as well.


#484    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,463 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:24 PM

View Postjoc, on 14 January 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

You believe what they told you.

I know what I am talking about because I have done my homework. Studying and understanding military history puts me at an advantage over those who  don't.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#485    SurgeTechnologies

SurgeTechnologies

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,369 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Not disclosed

  • "Why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction"

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:26 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 14 January 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

He didn' have to show a picture of Osama bin Laden. After all, al-Qaeda later confirmed that the United States was responsible for the death of Osama bin Laden.

Yes i just red about it, but the question stays.. Why not show the notorius public enemy no.1s picture to public which afterall paid for that chase and waited 10years...

RSOE EDIS - Emergency and Disaster Information Service App is available on site!

   SHTFPlan Source for all sorts of news and updates!

#486    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:30 PM

View Postredhen, on 14 January 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

It's called the burden of proof principle. Truthers claim to know who and why, so I asked for a coherent, reasoned argument.

Still waiting ...... day 2 .....

Day 2?  How about Year 11?

After 11 years the government is still not able to prove its story.  Neither can you or anybody else.  Burden of proof cannot be met by those supporting the official story.


#487    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,463 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:30 PM

View PostNuke_em, on 14 January 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

Yes i just red about it, but the question stays.. Why not show the notorius public enemy no.1s picture to public which afterall paid for that chase and waited 10years...

Perhaps one day, an image or two might be revealed.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#488    joc

joc

    Adminstrator of Cosmic Blues

  • Member
  • 14,419 posts
  • Joined:12 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milky Way Galaxy 3rd planet

  • They're wearing steel that's bright and true
    They carry news that must get through
    They choose the path where no-one goes

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:31 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 14 January 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

I know what I am talking about because I have done my homework. Studying and understanding military history puts me at an advantage over those who  don't.
I will defer to your expertise then and ask this question:  Why would Russia want to Occupy Afghanistan to begin with?

Posted Image
once i believed that starlight could guide me home
now i know that light is old and stars are cold

ReverbNation

#489    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:34 PM

View Postredhen, on 14 January 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

Funny, whenever I ask for "who planned and controlled the 911 attacks", I get very similar answers; unnamed, unknown, shadowy figures working in secrecy. When pressed, i get replies such as; "world banking system", "new world order", or more plainly,  "Zionists"



That wasn't the question. Sure, post-modern society is going to hell in a hand basket. But the question was "who planned and controlled the 911 attacks?"



Duuude! I didn't ask for that. The question was "who planned and controlled the 911 attacks?"

Ideally, I wold like to see something like;

The Bush clan are greedy mofos p1
The Bush clan contracted Mr X and his international conglomerate to secretly hire Muslim fanatics to execute the 911 attacks. p2
Thus, 911 was an inside job (main conclusion)


“Fallacious and misleading arguments are most easily detected if set out in correct syllogistic form”

  - Immanuel Kant

Please be honest and practice the same standards of proof that you demand of others.  Honesty is always the best policy.

You cannot prove that Osama planned and executed it.  However the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that the same parties who have covered up so much are the same parties who planned and executed the events.


#490    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:47 PM

View Postredhen, on 14 January 2013 - 04:27 PM, said:

do tell.

p1

p2

p3

That's all very interesting and stuff, but how does that establish that Bush or some other nefarious characters inside the U.S. government planned and controlled the 911 attacks? Same response to your FAA changes proposition.



I will restate my original question again; "Who planned and controlled the 911 attacks, and why?"

Once I see a coherent, reasoned argument, then we can go through the warrants for you premises.
Thanks
I already did tell.
bush's behaviour in staying in the classroom whilst the attacks were ongoing suggests whoever made the decision to stay in the classroom knew that bush and his party were not in danger, something that could not have been known unless the events were under the control of whoever gave that order.
rumsfeld changing the defence response procedure shortly before 911 facilitated the attacks. all he had to do was be unavailable to give the scramble orders for the critical time period.

you aksed why, i already said - for empire.

Edited by Little Fish, 14 January 2013 - 07:47 PM.


#491    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,812 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:48 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 14 January 2013 - 07:15 PM, said:

The United States had much to lose over the 911 attacks, and it did, but  al-Qaeda had much to gain. After all, al-Qaeda didn't commit the 911 attacks for no reason at all.

I see. Thats why president Bush is dead and Osama lives a life of luxury. Oh wait....


#492    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,463 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:55 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 14 January 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

Day 2?  How about Year 11?

After 11 years the government is still not able to prove its story.  Neither can you or anybody else.  Burden of proof cannot be met by those supporting the official story.

Actually, it has already been proven that al-Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#493    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,463 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:56 PM

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 14 January 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

I see. Thats why president Bush is dead and Osama lives a life of luxury. Oh wait....

Considering the attacks cost the United States billions of dollars and the lost of thousands of lives, what did it cost al-Qaeda?

Edited by skyeagle409, 14 January 2013 - 07:57 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#494    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,812 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:57 PM

View Postredhen, on 14 January 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:


Truthers need to show a causal relationship between "who" and the attacks. Some kind of connection, which is falsifiable. If truthers keep repeating their mantra of "world banking system" or "neo-cons" or "unknown, unnamed, shadowy figures working in secret", well, there is no way to refute that, because it is unfalsifiable.  It's the same situation as if you were asked "prove there is no God".

So, what we have is not an argument, just a personal belief or simple (humble) opinion.

I see that the only part of my post you quoted was "shadowy figures meeting in secret" which i used deliberately because; 1. i cannot provide evidence other than circumstantial. 2. it could refer to both al qaeda or numerous other groups often labeled conspiracies.

What i don't understand is why you ignore the FACT that the US CIA is showing false Osamas (i.e. deliberate properganda aimed at the US public) and claiming that these people are honest and you accept their story beyond question.


#495    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:01 PM

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 14 January 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

I see that the only part of my post you quoted was "shadowy figures meeting in secret" which i used deliberately because; 1. i cannot provide evidence other than circumstantial. 2. it could refer to both al qaeda or numerous other groups often labeled conspiracies.

What i don't understand is why you ignore the FACT that the US CIA is showing false Osamas (i.e. deliberate properganda aimed at the US public) and claiming that these people are honest and you accept their story beyond question.

View PostProfessor Buzzkill, on 14 January 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

I see that the only part of my post you quoted was "shadowy figures meeting in secret" which i used deliberately because; 1. i cannot provide evidence other than circumstantial. 2. it could refer to both al qaeda or numerous other groups often labeled conspiracies.

What i don't understand is why you ignore the FACT that the US CIA is showing false Osamas (i.e. deliberate properganda aimed at the US public) and claiming that these people are honest and you accept their story beyond question.

The simple answer to your question is that many humans ignore certain, selective facts because cognitive dissonance comes into play, and that's what cognitive dissonance actually IS--disregarding or ignoring facts that upset one's worldview.  It is not a voluntary action IMO, but subconscious action.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users