Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
redhen

911 inside job - for what?

4,447 posts in this topic

the 14 families are the ones who own and control the central banks, the mass media, pharmaceuticals and the other main large corporations. I'm making the point here that words used to describe the same interlocking networks can be misleading but they amount to the same thing, you want names and addresses when you should be asking who rumsfeld, kissenger and brzezinski work for. you already admitted it isn't for the people.

Which 14 families are these? I'm not being snide, I just don't want to read through hundreds of pages of articles.

the only connection is a parallel in that the templars were the central bankers of their day, they enslaved nations and their peoples which eventually lead to their execution by king philip (?) but again I can see you cartoonising which is an appeal to ridicule fallacy. quiqley's book's expose the network, would you like me to read to you from them?

I don't want to commit you to writing an essay (although that would be interesting to read), but a quick and dirty summary would be helpful.

you are putting forward speculations that are not evidenced, that's as good as you "making a claim".

I'm just parroting what the mainstream media have reported. I know I'm a a sheep.

you are confusing evidence with proof. your opinion that it is weak is based on your belief that the US government would not do such a thing. it is belief based thinking.

Yup

if you think it is weak based on a reasoned argument, then where is your reasoned argument that takes account of all the facts?

I have repeatedly told you I am not here to debate. I wanted to see some reasoned arguments from truthers.

but you believe not against US citizens? and you need to define "government" because that term implies congress, the senate and the president to most people, and that's not what i'm talking about.

Ok then, it's a shadow government.

gladio has been active for decades and committed many atrocities against citizens NATO was meant to be defending. here's another book you can read written by an european MP:

http://www.amazon.co...keywords=gladio

I will check this out, resistance movements are interesting.

edit: just read an amazon summary of another book on Gladio. They claim that this right-wing anti-communist secret organization assassinated Aldo Moro. It is however an indisputable fact that he was killed by the Red Brigade, a Marxist-Lennist terror group. I have a feeling that gladio will be blamed for every terror bombing and murder in Europe. Let me dig some more.

it was approved up to the joint chiefs. only a president with integrity stopped it, but it demonstrates the top echelons of the US government are willing to kill their own citizens.

I concede this point. Northwoods was not in the same category as other whacky ideas. This one made it all the way to the top. That's scary.

define what you would accept as credible, because you have left the door open to dismiss anything because it upsets your belief system. do you want cheney or kissenger to break down in tears confessing?

Only if it was on Oprah. lol Seriously, you raise some valid points, but I have a hard time accepting that so many people were necessarily privy to this secret plot yet it remained undiscovered.

I also have difficulty swallowing that Al Qaeda was just a tool for powerful elites. It seems to me that radical Muslim leaders have their own agenda. That they would be intentionally aiding Zionists in the world banking system sounds contradictory.

cheers

Edited by redhen
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Babe Ruth,

By any chance, are you in ANY way a radical Islamic sympathiser? Please feel feel to opinion.

Just asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't had a chance to read all the posts, but I hope someone has mentioned what was in WTC 7, and how it just fell down.

Very interesting stuff.

And consider who held the insurance on those buildings.

WTC7 collapsed silently (absence of explosions) and suffered from serious impact damage as well, but there was no evidence that WTC7 collapsed because of explosives. Beware of that hoaxed video of WTC7 because some CT folks have used that hoaxed video as a reference in order to support their claim that WTC7 was brought down by explosives.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Babe Ruth,

By any chance, are you in ANY way a radical Islamic sympathiser? Please feel feel to opinion.

Just asking.

Why yes! How did you know? Actually I'm the reincarnation of Allah Himself. Quite perceptive on your part. :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi fish, not gonna buy Cottrell's book right now. But I found a

, 2 1/2 hr, haven't seen it all. Have one comment/question.

I know most of the historical context already, so I'll just ask now. It seems these mysterious movers and shakers have a long reach, (much like Sauron). They seem to control right-wing extremists, Muslim fanatics, and commie terror cells, all as tools. Are there no other possible factors involved? I'm thinking the inherent interests (self interests) of all these radical groups, plus the Nation states and alliances.

It's appears to me a continuation of old game of balance of power. Note that Cottrell's book cover only has a NATO emblem. If he thinks the cold war is over, he might be wrong.

update; a U.S. field manual is quoted in this doc allowing the utilization of left wing extremist groups if necessary. Yeah, you know, all the real terror groups that were causing mayhem during that time.

I will admit, Italy has been a basket case (mea culpa) for many decades, and I am willing to accept the plausibility of Italian fascists pulling off some false flag ops.

Edited by redhen
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why yes! How did you know? Actually I'm the reincarnation of Allah Himself. Quite perceptive on your part. :tu:

OK, Hahahahahaaa! So that's a no.

Great to hear!

You've had me worried a few times.... :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi fish, after watching the bbc doc, I'm not buying the evidence presented for the Moro kidnapping by gladio. Maybe I can find a translation of Moretti's book Brigate Rosse: una storia italiana where he states "that the murder of Moro was the ultimate expression of Marxist-Leninist revolutionary action."

Moretti did 15 years in prison for moro's murder.

But, but, the fact they found in a Red Brigade building a "printer owned by the Raggruppamento Unità Speciali dell'Esercito (part of SISMI, the office which trained Gladio agents) and, despite its relatively young age and its high value, had been sold out as a scrap." highly suspicious, if true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Aldo_Moro

Can anybody verify the credentials of this site? http://archivio900.g.../doc.aspx?id=84

Italiano anyone?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,. we know the Italian government refused to negotiate with the Red Brigades, but the rest?

Steve Pieczenik (Peace-nik?) has made other controversial and false statements

"On May 3, 2011, radio host Alex Jones aired an interview in which Pieczenik claimed that Osama Bin Laden had died of Marfan syndrome in 2001 shortly after the September 11 attacks, and that the attacks on the United States on 9/11 were part of a false flag operation by the American government."

"On October 20, 2011 in an interview with Alex Jones, Pieczenik claimed that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is alive and said "There’s no way they killed Muammar Gaddafi, that’s not our operating mode"

http://en.wikipedia....Steve_Pieczenik

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pieczenik's Wikipedia entry is suspiciously lacking in primary sources for his claims. In fact, the sources given appear to include a lot of newpaper reports based on interviews with the man himself. He has claimed to have fitted a lot of achievements into a relatively short time, and I wonder whether he's embroidering his CV. The "fiction writer" bit particularly reminded me of Lord Archer, another fiction writer with form in this area.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a "Pieczenik's syndrome" can be included in the upcoming DSM-5. :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new meaning for the "CT`s" Close THis !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new meaning for the "CT`s" Close THis !

Fine with me. As the OP, I think I got the answers I asked for. Well, I got two coherent, reasoned arguments, but I think the evidence is weak. Much seems to me to be circumstantial post hoc fallacies.

For anyone new to the thread; all I'm asking for is a reasoned argument that establishes that 911 was an inside job. This necessarily involves explanations of who, why and how. If possible, please lay out your argument in a logical syllogism, because ..

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

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Declare Victory, and go home dude. Make a movie about it, Bigelow is looking for work. :clap:

That won't change the truth or the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Declare Victory, and go home dude.... That won't change the truth or the facts.

That explains why after more than 11 years, there is not one shred of evidence that explosives were used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone new to the thread; all I'm asking for is a reasoned argument that establishes that 911 was an inside job. This necessarily involves explanations of who, why and how. If possible, please lay out your argument in a logical syllogism, because ..

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

Thanks

When the facts and evidence are closely examined, they proved beyond any doubt that the 911 attacks had nothing to do with a US government conspiracy. Let's do a recap on a few claims of 911 conspiracist that have been debunked with facts and evidence.

1. Claim: United 93 landed at Cleveland airport.

Fact: The aircraft 911 conspiracist confused as United 93, which was a B-757, was Delta 1989, which was a B-767.

2. Claim: Passengers of United 93 were seen boarding a bus at Cleveland airport.

Fact: 911 conspiracist confused scientist from a KC-135 as passengers from United 93.

3. Claim: A modified pod was seen attached beneath United 175.

Fact: 911 conspiracist confused main landing gear doors and aerodynamic fairings, which are standard on all B-767s, as a modified pod.

4. Claim: ACARS depicted airliners in-flight after the time of their reported crash times

Fact: ACARS depicted no such thing. Posters have presented undeniable facts and evidence depicting accurate ACARS information that debunked claims of 911 conspiracist. In addition, I've made phone calls to the ACARS experts, ARINC, whose experts told me the 911 conspiracist were incorrect.

5. Claim: Explosives were used

Fact: There is no evidence that explosives were used, not even on video, nor on audio nor depicted in seismic data. In fact, no detonation wires, blasting caps nor evidence of structural pre-weakening as found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

6. Claim: The WTC buildings collapsed at free fall speeds

Fact: The evidence depicted on videos and from seismic data as the WTC buildings collapsed proved beyond any doubt the WTC buildings did not collapse at free fall speeds

7. Claim: The molten metal seen flowing from WTC2, was molten steel

Fact: The silvery droplets should have been an indication to the 911 conspiracist that the silvery droplets were not molten steel.

8. Claim: Nukes were responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

Fact: Not much to respond to that comment because simple common sense should have told them why nukes were not used.

9. Claim: Explosives brought down the light poles leading to the Pentagon

Fact: Evidence of impact damage on the light poles were clearly evident, which had nothing to do with explosives

10. Claim: American 77 flew north of the gas station

Fact: Damaged light poles and generator and distribution of wreckage within the Pentagon proved beyond any doubt that American 77 did not pass north of the gas station

11. Claim: American 77 flew over the Pentagon and was able to sneak into the airspace and land at Reagan National airport

Fact: There was no way for American 77 to sneak into the airspace and land at the airport without permission nor under the watchful eyes of local radars and ATC personnel.

12. Claim: No Boeing aircraft crashed at the Pentagon nor near Shanksville.

Fact: The wreckage distributed inside and outside the Pentagon, and near Shanksville are consistent with wreckage from B-757s

13. Claim: No aircraft was flown into the WTC buildings because they were holograms

Fact: B-767 wreckage was recovered at the crash sites.

14. Claim: A missile struck the Pentagon

Fact: There is no evidence that a missile struck the Pentagon. Additionally, the wreckage is consistent with wreckage of a B-757.

15. Claim: Two aircraft were identified as United 175 at Boston airport.

Fact: Employees of United Airlines and airport officials would have immediately noticed a discrepancy had that been the case and there was no way that ATC would have clear two airliners with identical flight numbers to leave the the airport in that short period of time, primary for safety reasons.

16. Claim: The 911 airliners were switched in flight

Fact: There was no way to switch B-767s nor B-757s in flight and not attract serious attention from air traffic controllers

17. Claim: Turning off the transponder will make an aircraft invisible

Fact: Not even the stealth aircraft is totally invisible on radar. Turning off the transponder makes an aircraft difficult to track on radar, not make it invisible. As the facts have it, other surveillance assets were able to track the airliners after ATC lost contact, but again, losing track or contact does not mean the aircraft was invisible on radar. Even birds can be tracked on radar.

Makes a person wonder why 911 conspiracist expect their false claims to stick in the absence of clear-cut supporting evidence, when in fact, the real evidence debunks their claims.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes a person wonder why 911 conspiracist expect their false claims to stick in the absence of clear-cut supporting evidence, when in fact, the real evidence debunks their claims.

Sky, as you know, it's called "delusion"; whereby clear facts(such as from you and other's) are ignored, incredible as it might seem.

But it truly is a psychological disorder. I know this, because I have an acquaintance that is clinically "paranoid-schizophrenic"

When on his med's he seems "relatively" normal and coherent, but, off his med's is a whole different story, with him then thinking that the government and everyone else out to "get him" or otherwise disrupt society.

Unfortunately, some either do not seek treatment, or else self-medicate, making their delusion even worse.

Hard to say with the CT's here. I'm no doctor nor do I pretend to be. Nor am I offerring any medical advice.

But I know what it means to "suffer"

I have a severe anxiety disorder, but apparently no clinical delusions.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must be the only one, eh Pallidin, who knows what it means to suffer?

We are supposedly talking about facts and events here, not emotional baggage.

You guys are entitled to your opinions, as we all are, even if they are founded upon fantasy. :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are entitled to your opinions, as we all are, even if they are founded upon fantasy. :clap:

Apparently, the official story is based on facts, not fantasy. What is based on fantasy are your claims that nukes were used in the 911 attacks, an anti-ship missile used to strike the the Pentagon and no Boeings responsible for the crash sites near Shanksville and at the Pentagon, among other false claims of yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky, as you know, it's called "delusion"; whereby clear facts(such as from you and other's) are ignored, incredible as it might seem.

But it truly is a psychological disorder. I know this, because I have an acquaintance that is clinically "paranoid-schizophrenic"

When on his med's he seems "relatively" normal and coherent, but, off his med's is a whole different story, with him then thinking that the government and everyone else out to "get him" or otherwise disrupt society.

Unfortunately, some either do not seek treatment, or else self-medicate, making their delusion even worse.

Hard to say with the CT's here. I'm no doctor nor do I pretend to be. Nor am I offerring any medical advice.

But I know what it means to "suffer"

I have a severe anxiety disorder, but apparently no clinical delusions.

There are those who are in a habit of making things up as they go and when asked to provide evidence, they come up empty-handed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are those who are in a habit of making things up as they go and when asked to provide evidence, they come up empty-handed.

THAT is what bugs me the most. They do not even clearly(if at all) respond to direct evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, the official story is based on facts

Is that so, no holes in it. If all you want is the official story then that is all you will get ufo guy. There are holes and to say there is not well what ever, you can see the world changing as we can all since 9-11 its a mess.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THAT is what bugs me the most. They do not even clearly(if at all) respond to direct evidence.

You are correct and in many cases, they simply ignore the evidence. A case in point; they have said, the 911 airliners were switched yet they cannot account for the passengers and crew of those aircraft. Apparently, they have ignored the significance of reports from American Airlines and United Airlines confirming the loss of their aircraft during the 911 attacks.

They have said that American 77 passed north of the gas station yet damaged light poles and the distribution of wreckage proved that American 77 did not pass north of the gas station and in fact, it would have been impossible for American 77 to pass north of the gas station and strike the Pentagon at the location where it was struck at the altitude and airspeed that American 77 was flying at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that so, no holes in it.

There are some things (when taken out of context) that might look suspicious.

There are holes and to say there is not well what ever, you can see the world changing as we can all since 9-11 its a mess.

This is one of the factors that drives post-modern CT; the other being political indoctrination in schools that blames the West (esp. U.S.A.) as the source of all evil.

I agreed with your sentiment before, yes, the world seems to be going to hell in a handcart, but that doesn't mean Zionists/neo-cons/Italian facists/the Vatican/P2 etc are behind it.

Hmm, all those groups I named are conservatives; gee I wonder if commie professors in schools have a hand in advocating this warped view?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that so, no holes in it.

Apparently, there are more holes in 911 conspiracy claims than a kitchen strainer. That is why they found themselves in awkward positions whenever the laws of physics are used to prove them wrong.

If all you want is the official story then that is all you will get ufo guy.

I don't think you understand the full scope of the picture. :no:

I know what is wrong and what is right when it comes to 911, and that in regards to my own experience in the aerospace world, which is another reason why I have told 911 conspiracist that their claims are not based on facts nor evidence, or should I say, the way we do things in the real world of aviation.

There is so much disinformation, misinformation and outright lies flowing from those 911 conspiracy websites that it is obvious they have no idea what they are talking about.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.