900 replies to this topic

[skyeagle409]

skyeagle409, on 04 October 2012 - 04:09 PM, said:

If the American people are dissatisfied with their representatives, their are power to have their representatives removed from office.

Meant to read:

If the American people are dissatisfied with their representatives, they have the power to have their representatives removed from office.

[Q24]

Liquid Gardens, on 04 October 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

But the Son of Sam didn't shoot every person he saw; the fact that there are bad people in the govt provides only the tiniest of evidentiary points to their proposed involvement in any specific crime.

Of course it is not enough to identify the ‘bad people’, but when they can be tied to the ‘bad actions’ we can start asking real questions.  It is under direction of Cofer Black, who I just mentioned, foreign policy advisor to Mitt Romney, that the CIA bin Laden unit prevented the FBI from going after two of the future hijackers in the United States pre-9/11.  How can we rule out that was not a deliberate attempt to facilitate the 9/11 attack?  If there was a deliberate attempt to facilitate the 9/11 attack, it could not have been performed any better.

Liquid Gardens, on 04 October 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

To your question on this topic, I think a lot more war coverage is in order; most of us are so insulated to what's going on, especially after a decade, that it hardly registers, it's background with all the other national issues.  Don't just show the servicemen we've tragically lost, show the accidental casualties, the families and god the poor kids, make sure no American is not reminded regularly of exactly what they themselves share responsibility for.  That's why maybe I have an instinctive reflexive objection anytime I hear talk about the big bad govt or establishment and how they are blame for our ills; I don't want people to think that in any way they are any less at fault, since they are the only way the situation can be changed.  If we're being lied to about specific points in a build up to Iran, bring more awareness to it and hold someone responsible, continually remind people that this is exactly how we got into Iraq that most people now don't agree with.  That's where I'd like to raise awareness in the short term, hell just keep reminding people of the cost of these wars, but it'll only happen if people want to know about it and I'm not really sure they do.  

Yes, I’d agree that is all worthwhile.

Liquid Gardens, on 04 October 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

How would you answer your question by the way?  Would you focus on getting awareness out that people like Black are involved in areas where they are a danger?

I do sometimes take your suggested approach in talking about some of the issues you mention above – in particular that the Iran propaganda is no different to that we saw on Iraq... or Al Qaeda... or the Soviet threat before that (all perpetrated by the same ideologists, and in the case of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, the very same individuals; they have a long history of it).  I have thought about putting more effort into this on the U.S. Politics and Middle East boards, though there are already a lot of people doing that.  I mainly focus on 9/11 issues and the connected Neocon/Zionist threat as there seems to be a lack of information here (I sometimes wonder if that's because my presence is holding others back) and because I believe that every ‘truther’ is an anti-war demonstrator.  And yes, if I can lead people to question voting Romney through connecting his advisors to a failure to prevent 9/11 or a spectre of the Bush administration, as one part of the approach, I think that is worthwhile.

Edited by Q24, 05 October 2012 - 12:07 PM.

[skyeagle409]

Q24, on 05 October 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

  How can we rule out that was not a deliberate attempt to facilitate the 9/11 attack?

It is very simple to rule out a deliberate attempt by the CIA to facilitate the 9/11 attack. First of all, there is no evidence! Secondly, the CIA has admitted its mistakes regarding the 9/11 attacks. Thirdly, intelligence failures and conflicts within our intelligence agencies, including those between the CIA and the FBI, have now been revealed.

Nothing there that supports 9/11 conspiracist claims implicating the United States in general, and the CIA in particular, in the 9/11 attack.

[flyingswan]

Q24, on 05 October 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

How can we rule out that was not a deliberate attempt to facilitate the 9/11 attack?

In the words of Goethe, subsequently much paraphrased: "...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent."

Quote

...I believe that every ‘truther’ is an anti-war demonstrator.

A fact which non-"truthers" who are anti-war regret.  It does nothing to promote confidence in the soundness of the anti-war position.

Edited by flyingswan, 05 October 2012 - 04:03 PM.

[Q24]

flyingswan, on 05 October 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

In the words of Goethe, subsequently much paraphrased: "...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent."

Oh he’s an engineer and a philosopher now.  Yeah, there is no “trickery” in the world, especially when it comes to war, politics and global affairs.  Better in such cases that we auto-appeal to “misunderstandings”, of course.  What a great point, Swanny – I can’t believe I never saw it.  I’ll keep that one safe... right in my scrap bin.

flyingswan, on 05 October 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

A fact which non-"truthers" who are anti-war regret.  It does nothing to promote confidence in the soundness of the anti-war position.

Which would only prove the foolish and petty nature of some official adherents is greater than their true anti-war sentiment.
  
  

[Czero 101]

Q24, on 05 October 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Oh he’s an engineer and a philosopher now.  Yeah, there is no “trickery” in the world, especially when it comes to war, politics and global affairs.  Better in such cases that we auto-appeal to “misunderstandings”, of course. What a great point, Swanny – I can’t believe I never saw it.  I’ll keep that one safe... right in my scrap bin.
  

Please quote specifically where Swanny posted that "there is no trickery in the world" in the post you have quoted, or if you prefer, please specify exactly where Goethe said that, since that's who Swanny is quoting.

Either that, or explain why you find it necessary to resort to strawman arguments...






Cz

[Liquid Gardens]

Q24, on 05 October 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

Of course it is not enough to identify the ‘bad people’, but when they can be tied to the ‘bad actions’ we can start asking real questions.  It is under direction of Cofer Black, who I just mentioned, foreign policy advisor to Mitt Romney, that the CIA bin Laden unit prevented the FBI from going after two of the future hijackers in the United States pre-9/11.  How can we rule out that was not a deliberate attempt to facilitate the 9/11 attack?

You can't, you never can, and likewise the idea of there being evidence to support the idea that it was a deliberate attempt is very unlikely also.  How can we rule out that it's not just another example of the issues and territorialism that existed in the intelligence communities prior to 9/11?  This isn't the first time something like that had happened, you agree?  If we can't rule that out either then it does raise the question, why does this merit a mention?  Not trying to be too snarky there, but the list of things that can't be ruled out is very long and contains lots of contradictory, mutually exclusive scenarios.  I'm itching to mention our good friend Sasquatch yet again, but I'll just leave it there.  If I were to guess, I'd guess this is another point in 'the big picture' which somehow lends more credence to these types of bits of I guess, 'suggestive evidence'.

Quote

If there was a deliberate attempt to facilitate the 9/11 attack, it could not have been performed any better.

Of course it could in many ways, and for the obvious reason that it would be 'better' if we didn't even know anything about it.

[flyingswan]

Czero 101, on 05 October 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

Please quote specifically where Swanny posted that "there is no trickery in the world" in the post you have quoted, or if you prefer, please specify exactly where Goethe said that, since that's who Swanny is quoting.

Either that, or explain why you find it necessary to resort to strawman arguments...

The obvious explanation is that he resorts to insult and strawman arguments because he hasn't got anything better.

Sad, really.

[bee]

.


I know that previous discussions in this thread about the WTC 'collapses' focus on natural collapse (from fires etc) or conventional demolition...

But my theory (cover up of some (3) key aspects but no inside job)...includes the use of some kind of directed energy weapon

to bring down the Towers (and WTC7)....for the purposes of protecting the area and bringing the buildings into their own footprint

and at the same time dramatically reducing the debris.....



I think this was done when the top section of the South Tower began to topple over threatening to cause devastation of the area.


I came across this article that was written in February 2002, that I haven't seen before and may be of interest to anyone who is prepared


to entertain  the third 'collapse' option.....laser technology....used for damage control....(on this occasion)


http://www.serendipi...wot/bollyn1.htm

Quote

Did a laser beam weapon cause the collapse of the World Trade Center? A physicist who worked on the original infrared beam weapon has reason to believe so.

part of my theory is that WTC7 was terminally weakened by the field effects of the energy weapon and so also brought down

using an energy weapon / lasers.. and there is even something in the article that could back that up...

Quote

Furthermore, the demolished buildings nearby [the 47-story Salomon Bros. Bldg.] are an indication that there was a plasmoid cloud involved, which probably affected the buildings nearby."

The article then goes a bit off base, as far as I'm concerned linking possible use of lasers and the potential 'plasma cloud'...with the planes that hit.

That isn't what my theory is about. It's about pre-planned demolition using lasers for the safety of the area.



In this short video of the South Tower collapse.....during the 3rd and 4th second you can see a bright light appear well below the ongoing

disintegration of the building.






Could this be a laser hitting ...? (maybe just one of a few laser hits that disintegrated the Tower)


.

Edited by bee, 06 October 2012 - 01:22 PM.

[booNyzarC]

I just spit coffee all over my keyboard.  Thanks bee.

[bee]

booNyzarC, on 06 October 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

I just spit coffee all over my keyboard.  Thanks bee.

you're welcome.....

[Babe Ruth]

Bee, thanks for that old article by Bollyn.  He is a very interesting fellow and has done a pile of work on this question.

"Half-baked farce" by Fire Engineering magazine is certainly the best description yet of the FEMA/NIST 'investigations'.

I never knew that many of the dead at WTC had been vaporized.  Jetfuel & gravity don't do that.

Never knew that infrared radiation was invisible.  I have always found the DEW theory advanced by Judy Wood to be plausible, but I always wondered how we did not see anything visible to support that.

And it is MOST interesting that TRW and industry sources acknowledge that certain weapons in that category, "requirements for the system driven by Israel.

[bee]

Babe Ruth, on 06 October 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

Bee, thanks for that old article by Bollyn.  He is a very interesting fellow and has done a pile of work on this question.

another quote from the article....


http://www.serendipi...wot/bollyn1.htm

Quote

The THEL is part of a joint program known as Nautilus, in which the US Army and the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMOD) have developed infrared laser weapon systems. The prime contractor, TRW Space and Electronics Group, has been involved in the development of high-energy laser systems since the early 1970s.

since the early 1970s !!!



no wonder Donald Rumsfeld and General Meyers looked so uncomfortable here...






.

[Babe Ruth]

We're in the same church Bee, just diffrent pews

[bee]

bee, on 06 October 2012 - 01:16 PM, said:

.In this short video of the South Tower collapse.....during the 3rd and 4th second you can see a bright light appear well below the ongoing

disintegration of the building.

Probably best to go to the YouTube site to see this.....

and search... 9/11 WTC South Tower Collapses, West Street ...

the uploader is... coolgamer1677


(don't ask.... )


.