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

#1666    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,763 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 15 April 2013 - 04:19 PM

View PostStundie, on 15 April 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

You keep deluding yourself you have, but you do not understand what constitutes as evidence.

Any eyewitnesses that you post are evidence and 100% proof.

Well, I have provided testimony of those who were at ground zero who admitted that the sounds they heard were not the result of explosives. The fact no bomb explosives were heard nor bomb evidence recovered at ground zero underlines that point as well.


View PostStundie, on 15 April 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

That is where you are evidently and clearly wrong, plenty of people at GZ said they saw/heard/felt explosions.


Evidence of explosions from eyewitnesses,...

Testimony of those who heard such sounds but later attributed those sounds other than to explosives. Since it seems that you have forgotten, do a review here.

Explosions

"When we got to about 50 ft from the South Tower, we heard the most eerie sound that you would ever hear. A high-pitched noise and a popping noise made everyone stop. We all looked up. At the point, it all let go.The way I see it, it had to be the rivets. The building let go, there was an explosion and the whole top leaned toward us and started coming down."

He also says he thinks the rivets caused the building to fall and not bombs. Interestingly, the NIST said most of the failures were at the bolts and connections.

http://www.debunking.../explosions.htm


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem

Originally, on September 12, 2001, People Magazine ran a few short paragraphs about the 20-year veteran New York fireman hearing what sounded like bombs exploding in the north tower.

Short and sweet, that was it. A few short words about bombs exploding, but words that were repeated over and over again in story after story by writers and broadcasters who never even bothered to talk to him in the first place.

Furthermore, Cacchioli was upset that People Magazine misquoted him, saying "there were bombs" in the building when all he said was he heard "what sounded like bombs" without having definitive proof bombs were actually detonated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------


Jay Swithers

An ambulance pulled up which was very clean, S0 I assumed that the vehicle had not been in the what I thought was an explosion at the time, but was the first collapse.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dominick Derubbio

t was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion, but I guess it was just the floors starting to pancake one on top of the other.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FDNY Batallion Chief Brian Dixon

I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out. Then I guess in some sense of time we looked at it and realized, no, actually it just collapsed. That ís what blew out the windows, not that there was an explosion there but that windows blew out.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Craig Carlsen said that he and other firefighters “heard explosions coming from . . . the south tower

...there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.

http://www.911myths....uote_abuse.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------


So once again, just because someone heard the sound of explosions, is not evidence that bombs were involved.
And just because someone heard...
  • Rivets popping.
  • Floors Collapsing.
  • An explosion that blew out the floors which wasn't an explosions.
Nothing there indicating the use of explosives. There is no video of bomb explosions and no audio of bomb explosions and no evidence of bombs within the rubble of the WTC buildings and no seismic data of bomb explosions.

Verdict!! No bombs.

Quote


...audio and visual recordings = the possibility of BOMB explosions.


Do you mean this video recording of bomb explosions?



Edited by skyeagle409, 15 April 2013 - 04:42 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1667    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,763 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 15 April 2013 - 04:31 PM

View PostStundie, on 15 April 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

No, the verdict is you lack the intelligence to disseminate information based on your blind belief and pure faith...lol

Considering you've failed to provide a shred of evidence of explosives underlines the point that  no explosives were used.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1668    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,028 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 16 April 2013 - 01:14 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 15 April 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

Damn Psyche, you need to thank me too for saving your butt in Vietnam!  Heck, I never even knew I saved your butt there until you just posted it.

I thought the Australian troops saved your butt?  I knew a few of them.

I never knew the Australian People were even threatened by those little yellow people in the northern hemisphere.  Man alive, even 40 years later, one can learn so much on the internet.

I guess they were organizing a flotilla of sampans to sail to Oz and invade the place, eh?

You're welcome, BTW. :gun:

We had about 8,000 troops in Vietnam, did you serve there, may I ask what capacity? In the wake of the Viet Minh victory over France in 1954, concern at communism’s growing influence in Asia was widespread and Australia got involved. You did not know that? Have you heard of The Battle of Long Khanh? How do you think Australia's standing was after that?

That's all you have to say about our ANZACS?

Sky went water skiing with Aussie troops. We were allies and remain so. He seems to know us a little better?

Edited by psyche101, 16 April 2013 - 01:15 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#1669    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,614 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 16 April 2013 - 01:48 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 15 April 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

Considering you've failed to provide a shred of evidence of explosives underlines the point that  no explosives were used.

I don´t know why you want to get down into the mud with the 9/11 troothers and actually debate all their idiotic imaginary "proofs" for this and that. They believe in their fiction like religionists believe in their holy books.

I thought the topic of this thread was trying to get one of them to answer the simple question: Why?
Why would anybody concoct a massive and elaborate conspiracy, simply to add another jihadist terrorist attack to thousands of jihadist terrorist attacks that are carried out all the time?

The whole premise of the 9/11 troother idea is sheer lunacy.

Edited by Zaphod222, 16 April 2013 - 01:49 AM.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#1670    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,028 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 16 April 2013 - 03:31 AM

View PostScorpius, on 22 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

I've shared lots of opinions throughout the years and have been on this site since 2003.  Anyway...

Not where you quoted me though, did you?

View PostScorpius, on 22 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

One of the sites had architects and engineers travel across Canada and was presenting their information to anyone willing to listen. I believe it was ae911truth.org. They visited the University of Winnipeg, here in Manitoba, last year. I stumbled across them finding a different show taking place in the University.  I  was unable to go review their presentation, as I had another event to go to that was happening at the same time in the University.  They presented their information and donations were accepted to help them continue their journey across Canada.

Yet all of this  so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers and by the 9/11 Commission Report.

View PostScorpius, on 22 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

In my opinion if these architects and engineers are willing to travel, waste time, one would have to think to themselves that there is more to their presentation and "tall-tales".  Why educated people would waste time spewing tall-tales is beyond me.  If it is all a bunch of crap then they officially need to get a life.  I wouldn't do that unless I believe and have fully reviewed facts with reference to current knowledge in my field of expertise to make a counter-claim.  Again, it is unfortunate that I wasn't able to attend their presentation to review their information.





Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) is a fast-growing non-profit organization of more than 1,400 architectural and engineering professionals who have re-examined the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11


1,400 is a large number of professionals believing in tall-tales.  Or is that one too many professionals with loose screws in their heads...  It would then make you wonder who to believe.


According to peer review, they are tall tales. That is the point of peer review, to keep such an investigation honest. The plural of hearsay is not data.

View PostScorpius, on 22 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

One thing that strikes me is that witnesses at the site heard explosions prior to the plane hitting the tower...  As far as sound travels witnesses should have heard the sound after the plane had hit and not before hand, which begs to question what did they hear to begin with.

http://georgewashing...win-towers.html




With all the confusion I am surprised people had their wits about them at all.

How many of these people were actual witnesses in the vicinity at the time, not some blocks away? How many of these people have recanted? How many inferred their conclusion? What are the names of these people? What of the witnesses that contradict and outnumber these claims?

View PostScorpius, on 22 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Also why would other buildings collapse when they were in no way near the collapsing radius of the towers who were actually hit by the planes.

http://www.serendipi...t/wtc_other.htm


If WTC was controlled demolition, why did they wait 7 hours to fell it? That does not add up, it went down due to a single point critical failure. LINK

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#1671    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,028 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 16 April 2013 - 07:01 AM

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

Ok, I’m going to try to avoid the unevidenced rhetoric/delusions throughout your post – Al Jazeera reporters have “personal involvement” with bin Laden?? – and make this into something informative and hopefully interesting.

Facts are 23 reporters dead. Facts are these reporters are in the middle of a war zone, facts are these people have to live alongside these terrorists, and I doubt anyone would deny these terrorists are sub human creatures with no morals that would indeed control local press. You may not find that terribly informative, nor interesting, but it seems pretty blatant to me that all of the above adds up to a controlled situation. Ignoring such just tells me you prefer to keep your head in the sand.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

So let’s assume you are correct that a network who releases bin Laden messages has personal involvement with bin Laden, and let’s talk about the February 2003 audiotape.  Who was first to release existence of that tape and details of the transcript to the world?  It wasn’t Al Jazeera.  It was the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in the U.S. Senate!

This means, according to your logic, that top tier of the Bush administration had “personal involvement” with bin Laden.  Though I’m sure you will change your own rules and adopt the delusion to make the fact fit your worldview any which way.  Al Jazeera were initially unaware of the audiotape and dismissed the claim as rumour, but later that day came into possession of the message which they broadcast in full.

Personally I think this shows only that U.S. intel were uncomfortably close to ‘Al Qaeda’ and bin Laden to get hold of that transcript so fast and beat Al Jazeera to the punch.

All this so what? Washington can show evidence of an alliance between al-Qaida and Baghdad? What about other sections of the recording that say "all socialist regimes are run by unbelievers, including that of Iraq."? Sounds very Jihad does it not?

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

I could say the same to you, and it would be all the more true.  You see, whist I would like to have seen bin Laden on trial and face punishment for crimes he is found guilty of, in addition to thorough investigation and understanding of the hijackers and their support network, along with a full enquiry into actions of the Bush administration and intelligence agencies... you defend involvement of those latter players to the hilt.  I don’t defend anyone – I’ll throw the whole lot in a pot and apportion guilt where it’s due – you are the one who is selective and heavily biased about where we point the finger.

Indeed, I think your convoluted path leads to enough time for people to evade Justice. We have people admitting responsibility, we have the organisation responsible, we even have people rejoicing this slaughter. For most people, that is pretty satisfactory. Outright confession that is.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

It’s not a cheap shot to point out that intelligent readers will hold more credence in sources such as the FBIS, BBC and Al Jazeera than in Annanova, the world’s first ‘cyberbabe’ newscaster, as you do.

All I did was show an obvious progression. You said source was irrelevant, well not in this case is it? You are promoting notable bias to support your version of events when the evolution of the sentence is quite plain and simple to see. So you arfe lying about not having bias toward source, here you clearly do, and use it to attempt to overshadow relevant information.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

That is a problem – understanding of crimes requires that we get in the mind of the killer(s).  And you don’t even seek to understand those you accuse, much less those latter players I mentioned involved.  It’s a wilful ignorance on your part – never a good thing.

Small minds Q. That assist with expediting the conclusion. You over-think this. We have dead people, we have proud murderers rejoicing the slaughter that follow an ancient barbaric religion that condones and promotes honor killing.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

I can find some agreement with you here.  Now all you have to realise is that agents of the CIA are not stupid or crazy, and find that section of the command where individuals did benefit.  Once you realise that it makes a whole lot of sense and you won’t have to wonder anymore.

No, I fail how you come to that conclusion considering the number of plainly idiotic programs run through that place. It is not just the unethical and morally reprehensible violence this group has carried out, it's also the men who stare at Goats, millions poured into crazy crap like remote viewing. It's a bigger picture than some terrorist blunder.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

You constructed that question from me talking about a CIA/‘Al Qaeda’ double-agent?  Oh dear, I’ll have to spell it out.  I’m saying that the CIA support ‘Al Qaeda’.  No, more than that, I’m saying that in instances the CIA are ‘Al Qaeda’.

Yes, you will have to spell it out, or just be up front to begin with. That would suffice nicely.

Because Ali Mohhamed was a double agent? It worked both ways,  Pete Blaber indicates he met Ali Mohamed who gave him information on how to infiltrate Afghanistan.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

Please note nuance of the apostrophes around a name, meant to indicate that I’m not being sincere when I reference ahem... ‘bin Laden’.  When I say, “it’s a good job that ‘bin Laden’ came riding to the rescue”, I’m actually saying it’s bull****, the tape appears coerced/edited/fabricated to suit U.S. needs.
  • That is why the 2003 audiotape was revealed to the world by Colin Powell in the U.S. Senate, with ‘bin Laden’ conveniently declaring his allegiance with Iraq one month before the U.S. invasion.
  • That is why the 2004 ‘first confession’ was released shortly before Bush’s re-election, the ‘October Surprise’ which boosted his ratings, with the CIA director stating, “bin Laden certainly did a nice favour today for the President” and CIA consensus that the tape was “designed strategically to help President Bush win re-election”.
  • That is why the 2006 audiotape absolved the U.S. of failure to prosecute Moussaoui on 9/11 related charges (despite his obvious involvement in the plot, which I agree) whilst having no benefit to bin Laden.
There is more, much more, but do you see the pattern?  It all plays right into U.S. hands.

The reason being... ?  Ah, you will never figure it out.  The reason being, that releases are not coming from bin Laden.  The tapes are coerced/edited/fabricated by those holding bin Laden in confinement – elements of the CIA/ISI in Pakistan.

Ohh, these are clearly edited, but the Annova article is not, I see.

What a crock of BS.

The February 11 2003 audiotape calling on Iraqis to carry out suicide attacks against US forces. In the October 29 2004 videotape of Bin Laden admitting responsibility for the September 11 attacks, he also said: "Despite entering the fourth year after September 11, Bush is still deceiving you and hiding the truth from you, and therefore the reasons are still there to repeat what happened," which is not very Pro America, nor reason for America to benefit, and the 2006 tape just claims Moussaoui was not involved with the plot, it says nothing however of the operation. To consider the 2004 and 2006 tapes are contrived to supprt the US in blaming Bin Laden is pure speculation, and Bin Laden died without his name on the FBI poster. So even if you were right, it seems it was all for nothing.

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

I went to college with many trainee architects - not always the brightest of fellows when it comes to problem solving and logic it must be said.  Even with those fully qualified architects, it was often about aesthetics (external appearance) and very little practicality (sense).  I’d be more impressed if you were an engineer... even more, an unbiased person with no qualification at all...

It so happens I am an engineer, and electrical engineer. It has given me a very good grounding in major construction projects over the last 25 years. My worj is industrial/commercial major electrical installions, everything from high rises to correctional centres to theme parks to waste treatment plants.

I am sure you would be happy if I had no qualifications, it would be so much easier to convince me then wouldn't it.

I suppose that is why Architects have to attend workshops on any major construction, so they have the feedback from other specialist trades.


View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

The features are ideal fit for a prison, that is blatant.  You could make the counter-argument that a prison design forms a good ‘strong house’ but that does not remove that the building design and features fit a prison.

The example you have provided of the Swiss ambassador building...

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Is a terrible fit to bin Laden’s prison...

Posted Image


Please try again.

Go jump, why should I try again? Because the basic principal in design that I pointed blatantly out to you is being ignored by you? Get over yourself! Both have ten foot walls, both have empty grounds beside them, both have one entry/exit, what is does illustrate is Bin Laden was in a bloody house, not a prison. The entry gate I showed you is a prison. What Bin Laden lived in would be more than common in say South Africa. It, like Pakistan, has serious law issues.


Your picture of a strong house where Bin Laden hid out is not in any way shape or form, a prison. I have built 3 correctional centres. That is not a prison.  

View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

Hey, why do you think the ISI were so aggrieved with the man who helped the CIA find bin Laden?  He should have been a hero, but instead the ISI tortured him and put him away for 33 years.  Clearly the answer is that he disrupted their operation.  There are even reports that the building was designed by an architect who worked for the ISI and that the compound was initially used by the ISI (I won’t bother you with link to those particular reports - coming from a Gulf news source I know you’d dismiss it out of hand).  I’ll stick with this one for now: -

http://www.nytimes.c...-says.html?_r=0


Yeah, he angered Pakistani officials, who had not been informed ahead of time and viewed it as a violation of the country’s sovereignty. Japan is pretty touchy about sovereignty too. They were p***ed that the US did as they pleased, do you really find this a surprise? Would you expect any better from Pakistan?

Designed by an architect? Good gravy. Of course it was designed by an architect, it was not designed by a fisherman was it now? That too does not make a house a prison.


View PostQ24, on 08 March 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

There’s another particular story you can lookup online which highlights the prison nature of the compound.  When a child’s ball would be lost in the courtyard over the compound wall, the guards would never hand it back, but rather pay the child 2-3 times the money the ball was worth.  Why?  Did the guards like balls that much?  Or is that a standard procedure to ensure no message can leave confines of the compound walls?

You know, I know... but can you accept it?  I think not – a decade of bin Laden propaganda runs deep and I’m quite sure you have no will to overcome it.  Fortunately others prefer to be enlightened.


Can I accept what? That the guards who were keeping the location a secret did not allow people in? The neighbours also say they never saw people in there as well, are all the neighbours on the US payroll as well? I think Bin Laden privacy was probably worth 2-3 times that of a child's ball.

You are in the deep end, and I doubt you could get out if you wanted to.

Edited by psyche101, 16 April 2013 - 07:03 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#1672    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,717 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 16 April 2013 - 01:41 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 15 April 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

I was stationed along side the Australian Air Force in Vietnam. They are great people to social with.

I agree.  We had Aussie troops stationed nearby, and they were very friendly.  Indeed, I took my R&R in Sydney.

I was responding to Psyche's delusion that you and I were protecting him and Australia from those dangerous little yellow people.  I wanted him to thank me too, for protecting his butt, as he put it.

Alas, Psyche is silent on the matter today. :no:


#1673    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,090 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 16 April 2013 - 10:15 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 16 April 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:



Go jump, why should I try again? Because the basic principal in design that I pointed blatantly out to you is being ignored by you? Get over yourself! Both have ten foot walls, both have empty grounds beside them, both have one entry/exit, what is does illustrate is Bin Laden was in a bloody house, not a prison. The entry gate I showed you is a prison. What Bin Laden lived in would be more than common in say South Africa. It, like Pakistan, has serious law issues.


Your picture of a strong house where Bin Laden hid out is not in any way shape or form, a prison. I have built 3 correctional centres. That is not a prison.  



Bin Laden's final house looks a lot like the houses in the more affluent areas of Doha, Qatar that I've seen.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#1674    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,028 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 17 April 2013 - 08:06 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 16 April 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

I agree.  We had Aussie troops stationed nearby, and they were very friendly.  Indeed, I took my R&R in Sydney.

Well nice to know you have a good opinion of our ANZACS. They deserve it.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 16 April 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

I was responding to Psyche's delusion that you and I were protecting him and Australia from those dangerous little yellow people.  I wanted him to thank me too, for protecting his butt, as he put it.

I am afraid the delusion be yours alone. I pointed out to you that we were there to stem the spread of communism in Europe and Asia. That is why Australia got involved - as an ally to protect our way of life. I appreciate what the people did in Nam, and understand it was a difficult situation to be in politically and physically. Do you know who Sergeant William Hacking is? I do not suppose you fought alongside any people with the last name Drabsch?

If you were there fighting alongside allies, then I do offer you a salute, and I will indeed say thank you very much for putting your life on the line to protect all of us, and our way of life. We got hit in WWII without warning, not all that often, but it shows that in conflict we are a target. You probably should have shown up sooner, I will trey to remember this, and offer you more respect than I would the average CT'er if you find that satisfactory. I do not think I have ever been outwardly rude to yourself, but have had strong objections to the notions you have put forth. If I have, then may I take this opportunity to apologise, as I do respect all Vetrans for putting their lives on the line. Battle of Long Tan, Chopper drop offs at Nui Dat, I have read and heard the recollections, and I am not afraid to say that I humbled by them. If that was you, then you are indeed twice the man I thought you were.

If you worked with military, how did you turn out a truther? That is pretty hard to understand.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 16 April 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

Alas, Psyche is silent on the matter today. :no:

I am in Australia remember? Different time zones.

Edited by psyche101, 17 April 2013 - 08:17 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#1675    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 33,028 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 17 April 2013 - 08:20 AM

View Postfrenat, on 16 April 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:

Bin Laden's final house looks a lot like the houses in the more affluent areas of Doha, Qatar that I've seen.

Exactly. trying to say that is a prison is plain nonsense.

This
Posted ImagePosted Image

Is a prison in Pakistan. Quite a difference.

Posted ImagePosted Image

Edited by psyche101, 17 April 2013 - 08:24 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#1676    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,717 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 17 April 2013 - 01:58 PM

Psyche

I was a medic, not an infantryman.

It was in the Army in Vietnam that I discovered how deceptive the government is.  I learned there first hand that the CIA was in the dope business, and I learned that the practice that drove almost everything else was CYA.  Cover Your A==.  I learned that is how the government works.

Thus, discovering years later that the events of 11 September were events staged by the military was not difficult to understand.  Bitter, for sure, and very sad and disgusting, but not difficult to understand.  In a perverse sense, very much in character.

Because I also learned very quickly, along with most other young troops, that all the stories I had been brainwashed with--stopping the advance of Yellow Communism, primarily--was pure hogwash.  I learned that Vietnam was no threat to my country whatsoever, and I learned what it feels like to be an invader of a peaceful country.  No, not a good feeling.

That you are still replaying that "stop communism" loop in your head all these years later makes perfect sense, considering that you believe the loop playing today regarding the events of 11 September.


#1677    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,763 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:04 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 17 April 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

Thus, discovering years later that the events of 11 September were events staged by the military was not difficult to understand.

What is difficult to understand is why do 911 Truthers think the government could have carried out the 911 attacks and not get caught? It has been over 11 years and yet no evidence has surfaced implicating the U.S. government. How long did it take to reveal the inside story surrounding the Watergate scandal? How long did it take reveal the scandal involving Vice President Spiro Agnew?

Since the mid-1990s to a month before the 911 attacks, countries were warning the U.S. that muslim terrorist were planning to attack America, which they did on September 11, 2001. Nothing to do with the a U.S. government conspiracy.

Edited by skyeagle409, 17 April 2013 - 06:06 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1678    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,717 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:47 PM

They have been caught Sky, but you are so deeply in denial that you are unaware of it in your mind.

No, they certainly have not been arrested or prosecuted, but they have been caught.

Our current President and his AG are too busy looking forward to look behind and enforce the law.


#1679    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,763 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:27 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 17 April 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

They have been caught Sky, but you are so deeply in denial that you are unaware of it in your mind.

You seem to forget that facts and evidence support the official story, not the fantasies of 911 Truthers. That explains why after more than 11 years since the 911 attacks, 911 Truthers have failed to produce evidence that implicates the U.S. government in the 911 attacks.

Quote

No, they certainly have not been arrested or prosecuted, but they have been caught.

No they haven't, which explains why no U.S. government employee has been arrested for the 911 attacks.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1680    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 17 April 2013 - 09:25 PM

View PostZaphod222, on 16 April 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:

I don´t know why you want to get down into the mud with the 9/11 troothers and actually debate all their idiotic imaginary "proofs" for this and that. They believe in their fiction like religionists believe in their holy books.

I thought the topic of this thread was trying to get one of them to answer the simple question: Why?
Why would anybody concoct a massive and elaborate conspiracy, simply to add another jihadist terrorist attack to thousands of jihadist terrorist attacks that are carried out all the time?

The whole premise of the 9/11 troother idea is sheer lunacy.

Already answered: -
http://www.unexplain...35#entry4731887

The line you took and repetition of the question indicate denial (or perhaps lunacy) on your part.

I already appealed for you to reconsider your argument to continue any form of rationale discussion.  I’ll give one more chance.  Please list scale of destruction and casualties of the attacks you mentioned, including 9/11, and note the closest match to Pearl Harbor.  Failure to accept the obvious fact - that 9/11 is the closest match to Pearl Harbor - will only show you up further.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users