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

#991    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:51 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

Now you are catching on, I too believe, it never existed, It was in planning for years before the event, and with OBL's high profile, he is not ever going to do anything but help their mission fail. False signatures, representatives, smart people and cash deals got this as far as it did get. Hell, I built half my house on cash, on paper it does not exist, but I live in it.
I;m not catching on at all, I do not believe there is a paper trail because OBL was clever or smart or high profile. I believe there was a lack of paper trail because I do not think that OBL was behind the attacks, he might have funded them or even support them but I do not think he planned them.

There is no way that OBL could have planned an operation on this scale without help and that help I believe came from within the intelligence agencies within the US and mahybe other countries.

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

I think people want to believe he was given safe passage so they can justify their crusade against the Government. However if he was given safe passage, and that can be proven, I would not like to be living in Pakistan.
I do not want to believe he was given a safe passage at all but there is plenty of evidence for it.

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

The same BS people are playing here, no hard evidence, I doubt any person would insist the legal system is perfect, not to mention with people ready to kill themselves for religion, what act is too desperate? He is a liability because of his position within Al Qaeda. I do not think the US allows preconceptions since Kamikaze pilots.
I'm at a loss here?? You said that if OBL was captured, that there would be people trying to free him. I do not see how this would be the case when no one has made an attempt on his No2.

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

I know Sky, and I believe he feels has has answered your questions. I do not see what continually repeating both achieves, you know what you know, Sky knows what he knows. Lets lay down the guns and put it all on the table and discuss it like grown ups.
No, lets not let Sky off the hook. lol

If you believe he has answered the question, then all you have to do is provide the post where he supposedly answered it but you can't, if he answered it then we wouldn't be having this conversation would we?? But he chooses to ignore it and that is not acceptable behaviour.

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

Fair enough, but we can see that is not going to happen. Goading Sky is only going to fill the thread quickly with non productive responses because as far as Sky is concerned, he has answered the question.
I'm not goading him, I'm asking him to respond to a question and if it appears like Im goading him, then all he has to do is answer it and I'll shut up about it.

Sky posts are non productive responses and if he as answered the question, then post it but pretending he has when he clearly hasn't is just strange behaviour.

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

To move on, you need to examine his response and then guide it if it is in a different vein. After all, you are asking the question, it is your responsibility to make it as clear is is possible.
How can I make it more clearer...

Why was OBL not indicted for the 9/11 charges?

What is so challenging about that question which requires me to guide in a different vein? How clearer can it be?

It is bizzare that you feel the need to defend Skyeagle, you answered it in your last post and that is all it took, am I asking you again the same question? No, I moved on.

I find it both hilarious and strange that you challenge my behaviour when it is only a response to Skyeagole refusal to address a simple question which you answered in a single post.

View Postpsyche101, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

Or, he believes that with what he knows, this is an adequate reply. As you say, OBL is responsible, that might to some mean enough evidence wether it be on paper or not. Many of us old school guys are used to making a thing happen and worrying about paperwork later. Sometimes we have to remember we are talking across Oceans, and it is not always as easy as one might imagine, it certainly has it's drawbacks, I have had many such misunderstandings myself. I do not think Sky would deliberately annoy you with this, I have a feeling he is as frustrated as you are.
Well I'm sorry but looking at Skyeagle posting history, I believe he would deliberately annoy me and many other posters. I have had run ins with him in the past and know his style which is to deny/ignore anything he is wrong about.

All he has to do is answer a simple question, which yourself answered in a single post.

I always address whatever questions are put in front of me and I expect the person I debate to be honest and do the same, Skyeagle is not honest and ignores anything which challenges his position and continues on with the self deception. If you think it is acceptable behaviour to allow a poster to continuosluy ignore questions posed by the other side, then you are going to be further disappointed.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#992    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:56 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 February 2013 - 02:30 AM, said:

The United States told the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden unconditionally. Now, why would the United States demand that the Taliban hand over Osama bin Laden unconditionally?



As I have asserted time and again, there was no US government 911 conspiracy.
All they had to do was hand show the taliban the evidence of his involvement.....which makes you wonder he was never indicted by the FBI?

Have you worked it out yet and are you ready to tell the lurkers. lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#993    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,434 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:23 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 18 February 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

I did answer it BR. This is beyond seeking the truth.
The truth exists not in stories, but in engineering reports and analyses that confirm that planes hit the towers. I do not bother with CT until this thread, actual facts are all that really matter. Now, I am finding opinions are mattering because young people are beginning to consider CT's a reason to consider Jihad.



Great, with this confidence I take it you have concrete proof that this is the case here, and not some Evil Government CT thing.

Can I see it please.



No, I am placing faith in the fact that this was not a prank call. I would hope you are not either because that would not make much sense.
Prove the calls connected with the incident were faked please. Or are you just running with an ideal of "The Government is involved, it must be a lie"? And if so, then what would you call that?
Indiscriminate belief? Just because I understand construction, and know the planned demolitions stories are so full of it you could not pop one more turd in there, is anything but belief BR. That much is genuine knowledge that I worked for thanks very much. You lot are the ones bandying around papers, after saying one cannot trust the papers!!

Thank you for being honest enough to admit you are placing faith in the official story, and thereby in the US Government press releases.  Blind Faith was the name of a band several decades ago, and the driver of most of the public perception--faith that the government does not deceive them, and has their best interests at heart.

If you actually listen to the tapes, or read the transcripts, you will see what I mean.  Without actually listening to the tapes or reading the transcripts, your blind faith does not qualify you as having any sort of informed opinion on the subject.  Indeed, it qualifies you has have an UNinformed opinion on the matter.

More important that the script-like quality of the calls is the fact that cell phones do not work at altitude and airspeed.  That is, the cell phone calls as described in the story were physically impossible to make.  Yes, as you implied, science frequently trumps blind faith.

In the American literature, Huck Finn observed that "faith is when you believe something you know ain't true."  That's where so many people become hypnotized by the constant repetition of a story.


#994    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 407 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 19 February 2013 - 03:15 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 19 February 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

Thank you for being honest enough to admit you are placing faith in the official story, and thereby in the US Government press releases.  Blind Faith was the name of a band several decades ago, and the driver of most of the public perception--faith that the government does not deceive them, and has their best interests at heart.

If you actually listen to the tapes, or read the transcripts, you will see what I mean.  Without actually listening to the tapes or reading the transcripts, your blind faith does not qualify you as having any sort of informed opinion on the subject.  Indeed, it qualifies you has have an UNinformed opinion on the matter.

More important that the script-like quality of the calls is the fact that cell phones do not work at altitude and airspeed.  That is, the cell phone calls as described in the story were physically impossible to make.  Yes, as you implied, science frequently trumps blind faith.

In the American literature, Huck Finn observed that "faith is when you believe something you know ain't true."  That's where so many people become hypnotized by the constant repetition of a story.

While I agree with you, all we generally know is decided on faith. Whether or not you believe in "the science" is itself based upon faith, faith that you are not being lied to by your scientific sources. And the same for any supposed transcripts. Everything you do not experience first-hand is believed almost entirely on faith.

Posted Image


#995    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,671 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 19 February 2013 - 03:33 PM

View PostXetan, on 19 February 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

While I agree with you, all we generally know is decided on faith. Whether or not you believe in "the science" is itself based upon faith, faith that you are not being lied to by your scientific sources. And the same for any supposed transcripts. Everything you do not experience first-hand is believed almost entirely on faith.

I disagree.  Is it on faith that I accept that a meteor fell in Russia last week?  I didn't experience it first-hand.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#996    Coffey

Coffey

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norwich UK

  • "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." - Winston Churchill

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:20 PM

View Postredhen, on 12 January 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:

For those who hold that 911 was an inside job, I would like to discover why you believe those responsible would have executed this plan.

I can only think of one possible reason that might make sense; to launch a war, to give the armed forces combat experience.

You go.

Thanks


It's simple you jsut need to look at the facts.

The US is building a pipeline across afghanistan to pump gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan. (so they can use the docks at Pakistan to pump the gas into ships) Al Qeada attacked the Pipeline a few times.
http://en.wikipedia....nistan_Pipeline

Afghanistan's central bank is now owned by the Rothcilds etc.

Iraq's central bank is now owned by the Rothcilds.

Iraqs oil fields are now controlled by the US/UK etc. (Which means Iraq can't sell the oil to anyone else for other currencies)

Put it this way, 11 of the 15 terrorists who where involved in 9/11 where from Saudi Arabia NOT Afghanistan or Iraq. Do you know why we didn't attack Saudi Arabia? Becuase Saudi Arabia sells it's oil for the dollar ONLY in exchange for US military protection.....

As for more evidence towards the central banks being handed over to the rothcilds etc control.... Libya had a debt free goverment run central bank. It is now owned by the Rothcilds etc as well. Now their country will be in debt just like all the others.


Now for the last piece of the puzzle.... Iran..

Iran does not have a Rothcilds controlled central bank, oil and gas reservoirs. (A lot of oild and gas reservoirs) They sell their oil and gas to China and Russia.. Not for the dollar.


That is why there will be a war with Iran eventually and whyt he western media is really hammering the agenda home. Just like they pushed for war with Iraq and Afghanistan.

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

#997    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,737 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:49 PM

View PostStundie, on 19 February 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

I;m not catching on at all, I do not believe there is a paper trail because OBL was clever or smart or high profile.

Osama bin Laden had declared war on the United States and has admitted to his responsibility in the 911 attacks so there is nothing for you to debate upon in that respect.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#998    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,737 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:01 PM

View PostCoffey, on 19 February 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

It's simple you jsut need to look at the facts.

The US is building a pipeline across afghanistan to pump gas from Turkmenistan to Pakistan. (so they can use the docks at Pakistan to pump the gas into ships) Al Qeada attacked the Pipeline a few times.
http://en.wikipedia....nistan_Pipeline

We didn't need to go to war to build a pipeline in Afghanistan.

Quote

Afghanistan's central bank is now owned by the Rothcilds etc.

Iraq's central bank is now owned by the Rothcilds.

Iraqs oil fields are now controlled by the US/UK etc. (Which means Iraq can't sell the oil to anyone else for other currencies)

Put it this way, 11 of the 15 terrorists who where involved in 9/11 where from Saudi Arabia NOT Afghanistan or Iraq. Do you know why we didn't attack Saudi Arabia? Becuase Saudi Arabia sells it's oil for the dollar ONLY in exchange for US military protection.....

As for more evidence towards the central banks being handed over to the rothcilds etc control.... Libya had a debt free goverment run central bank. It is now owned by the Rothcilds etc as well. Now their country will be in debt just like all the others.

Now for the last piece of the puzzle.... Iran..

None of which was an excuse to go to war. Did we go to war when the USS Cole was bombed? No!  Did we go to war when WTC1 was bombed in 1993? No! Did we go to war when our embassies were bombed in Kenya and Tanzania? No! How much oil did Libya produced when it downed Pan Am 103? Did the United States go to war with Libya afterward? No!

How much oil did the United States import from Iraq before the Gulf War? Iraq was warned to get out of Kuwait or else. Iraq refused and the rest became history after many nations participated with the United States that drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. Saddam continued to remain a threat to the Gulf region and once again, attacked. Remember, Iraq warned its Gulf neighbors to forgive its debts or else. You should have seen Iraq's huge super gun and I am very sure that it wasn't to be used for duck hunting.

Edited by skyeagle409, 19 February 2013 - 05:01 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#999    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,737 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:05 PM

View PostStundie, on 19 February 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

All they had to do was hand show the taliban the evidence of his involvement.....which makes you wonder he was never indicted by the FBI?

I am very sure the Taliban already knew that Osama bin Laden was guilty. After all, then, President Clinton, didn't send cruise missiles into bin Laden's trainin camp in Afghanistan for a celebration.

Quote

Have you worked it out yet and are you ready to tell the lurkers. lol

I have already been working out.

Edited by skyeagle409, 19 February 2013 - 05:05 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1000    Coffey

Coffey

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,671 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norwich UK

  • "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." - Winston Churchill

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:30 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 February 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

We didn't need to go to war to build a pipeline in Afghanistan.

No but they needed to protect the pipeline being built. It was attacked by Al Qeada numerous times along witht he embassy.

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 February 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

None of which was an excuse to go to war. Did we go to war when the USS Cole was bombed? No!  Did we go to war when WTC1 was bombed in 1993? No! Did we go to war when our embassies were bombed in Kenya and Tanzania? No! How much oil did Libya produced when it downed Pan Am 103? Did the United States go to war with Libya afterward? No!

How much oil did the United States import from Iraq before the Gulf War? Iraq was warned to get out of Kuwait or else. Iraq refused and the rest became history after many nations participated with the United States that drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. Saddam continued to remain a threat to the Gulf region and once again, attacked. Remember, Iraq warned its Gulf neighbors to forgive its debts or else. You should have seen Iraq's huge super gun and I am very sure that it wasn't to be used for duck hunting.

Iraq had no WMD's and Saddam was used by the US, thye helped him ge tinto power. They made him attack iran. He was the US's puppet, then he stopped doing as they said and thye wanted him out.

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

#1001    shrooma

shrooma

    doesn't have one screw fully tightened.....

  • Member
  • 3,562 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:35 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 February 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

You should have seen Iraq's huge super gun and I am very sure that it wasn't to be used for duck hunting.
_
I used to work for the company that cold-rolled the steel to make the collet joints they used to seal the different sections of the iraqi 'pipeline/supergun' at the same time as we were making shrapnel grenades for the isreali army, proving that death is indeed an equal opportunities employer.
when we started the contract, we all had to sign waivers to the effect that we didn't mind that the products we were making would be used in warfare.

- - - - -disclaimer- - - - -
all posts- without exception- are humourous.
if you fail to grasp the sublety, then don't whine on due to your lack of understanding.

#1002    shrooma

shrooma

    doesn't have one screw fully tightened.....

  • Member
  • 3,562 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:41 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 19 February 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

.


Edited by shrooma, 19 February 2013 - 05:44 PM.

- - - - -disclaimer- - - - -
all posts- without exception- are humourous.
if you fail to grasp the sublety, then don't whine on due to your lack of understanding.

#1003    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,671 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:47 PM

View PostStundie, on 19 February 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

But he chooses to ignore it and that is not acceptable behaviour.

Nor is carpet-bombing the thread with the same question over and over.  We have a word to describe that kind of behavior:  'trolling'.

Quote

I'm not goading him, I'm asking him to respond to a question and if it appears like Im goading him, then all he has to do is answer it and I'll shut up about it.

What exactly would have been accomplished by indicting Osama?  For better or worse, this is all happening under the 'war on terror'.  Do you also demand that we prove that every enemy soldier that we've killed actually had shot a soldier on our side, or it's unjust in some way?  

Quote

If you think it is acceptable behaviour to allow a poster to continuosluy ignore questions posed by the other side, then you are going to be further disappointed.

It is acceptable behavior to ignore questions that you present if you fail to provide any explanation as to what the relevance of the question is.  

And lest I forget since you find it so compelling in its repetition:  "lol".

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#1004    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,737 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:55 PM

View PostCoffey, on 19 February 2013 - 05:30 PM, said:

No but they needed to protect the pipeline being built. It was attacked by Al Qeada numerous times along witht he embassy.

Who is going to provide security protection after U.S. troops are removed from Afghanistan next year?

Quote

Iraq had no WMD's and Saddam was used by the US, thye helped him ge tinto power.

Do you remember Halabja?

Quote

Halabja


The Halabja poison gas attack was a genocidal massacre against the Kurdish people that took place on March 16, 1988, during the closing days of the Iran–Iraq War, when chemical weapons were used by the Iraqi government forces in the Kurdish town of Halabja inSouthern Kurdistan.
The attack killed between 3,200 and 5,000 people, and injured around 7,000 to 10,000 more, most of them civilians; thousands more died of complications, diseases, and birth defects in the years after the attack. The incident, which has been officially defined as an act of genocide against the Kurdish people in Iraq, was and still remains the largest chemical weapons attack directed against a civilian-populated area in history.
http://en.wikipedia....ison_gas_attack

Question is, what happened to Iraqi's chemical weapons?  When Iraq saw bombers dismantling its air forces on the ground, what did Iraq do? It flew what aircraft could fly into Iran for protection. What were those trucks transporting into Syria before the second Gulf War began?

Quote

On October 3, 2003, the world digests David Kay's Iraq Survey Group report that finds no stockpiles of WMD in Iraq, although it states the government intended to develop more weapons with additional capabilities. Weapons inspectors in Iraq do find some "biological laboratories" and a collection of "reference strains", including a strain of botulinum bacteria, "ought to have been declared to the UN." Kay testifies that Iraq had not fully complied with UN inspections. In some cases, equipment and materials subject to UN monitoring had been kept hidden from UN inspectors. "So there was a WMD program.

It was going ahead. It was rudimentary in many areas", Kay would say in a later interview. In other cases, Iraq had simply lied to the UN in its weapons programs. The U.S.-sponsored search for WMD had at this point cost $300 million and was projected to cost around $600 million more.

Quote

They made him attack iran. He was the US's puppet, then he stopped doing as they said and thye wanted him out.

If that was the case, why didn't the United States attack Iran and grab its oil?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1005    Nathan DiYorio

Nathan DiYorio

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 407 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • Bitter words with sweet flavor are poison just the same.

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:56 PM

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 19 February 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

I disagree.  Is it on faith that I accept that a meteor fell in Russia last week?  I didn't experience it first-hand.

Yes. All you know about that meteor is what you've been told. That makes the belief in that event one of faith.

Posted Image





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users