Yea, so that obv wasn't the same kind of controlled demo as Building 7.
What are you mad about?
We're all ignorant to an extent. Do you disagree?
You can call me delusional all you like, since it's quite the task to recognize your own delusions, but calling me ignorant about 9/11 is pretty retarded.
Shaggyduck seems like he should be friends with Brokendoll and Suffacated. I'm putting this twat and his big-ass signature on ignore, I recommend you all do too.
And if you actually want to watch a decent documentary about these questions, fuck TerrorStorm. 911revisted.org
Fuck TerrorStorm? Haha
Oh and I have seen TerrorStorm and the video off 911revisted.org and another one I don't know the name of, while it's plausible I find it unlikely. Either way you'll be the only person I've ever put on ignore cause your annoying and probably stink of patchouli.
Yeah, he stinks!
Oh, noz! Don't ignore me!
Funny how all you can say is that it's unlikely. Is that because TerrorStorm is basically 100% backed up with facts?
And I was insinuating that you got your info from wiki and farenheit simply because you have only regurgitated the ideas put forth there. You have provided no literature or theory to base your arguments on. I actually am a historian (my area of research is post-WWII American cultural history, particularly the areas of culture industry [tv, movies, radio, music, interwebs, etc.] and consumer culture) and am well aware that anyone can make any claim they like, hence my reference to academic journals, which are still the premier platform for the elucidation and dissemination of new ideas and theories in every field, not just history. I'm accustomed to a proper argument that at least attempts to prove a point through the use of documented facts and examples, not wild conjecture.
Clearly, 9/11, conspiracy or not, is a highly complex issues that has its roots in the history of global expansion, imperialism, and advances of consumer capitalism, aided by neoliberal governmental and fiscal policies. People have spent their entire academic and professional careers studying these histories and social trends they produce. With conspiracy theories we start adding physics, engineering, construction/demolition science, and many other fields and disciplines to this already diverse and highly specialized mix. For you to be properly labeled an "expert", you would need to either completely familiarize and immerse yourself within at least one or more of these areas (hence, PhD), which would be no simple task. So I'm sorry if I'm a little snobby about who and what I believe, but I come from an academic background, and that predisposes me to more readily believe something that comes out of the academy (the result of hard work, months/years of research, and a grueling gauntlet of peer reviews), as opposed to the 9/11 conspiracy tape we can all rent at Blockbuster. I'm not saying that's where you got your info, I'm just making a point.
Either way, the towers fell and those people are dead. Nothing will change that.
And I certainly do not trust our government.
You're awesome. I respect your point of view, since it constitutes more than net flames. Like I already said, I don't claim to be an "expert." I'm just well informed.
Also, in regards to what actually happened on 9/11, I can't stress hard enough that my BELIEFS are different from what I KNOW TO BE TRUE.
I do believe that the buildings were demolished using more than just the planes that hit them. That being said, I know for a FACT that the gov't has actively tried to withhold information and distort the truth. That is the whole purpose of this thread. Sure, it's possible that they didn't have anything to do with the attacks... I just find that incredibly unlikely for a multitude of reasons. One of them being something you just mentioned. Al-Qaeda is a product of western intelligence agencies. Most terrorist groups are funded and propagated by western intelligence. That's just the fact of the matter.
Also, the reason for demolishing the buildings was multifaceted. They wanted to get rid of the Towers which were old and outdated on prime real estate, they wanted to cover up a lot of Wall Street and Corporate corruption (WTC7), they got rid of Paul O'Neil, excuse for the War on Terror, etc. The global elite don't make a move this big without making sure they get the most bang for their buck. (No pun intended)
The problem people have when discussing conspiracy is the tendency to over simplify and generalize scenarios and concepts. I have no doubt there were real terrorists. In fact, I'm sure those terrorists, at least most of them, were unaware of the scope of which the 9/11 attacks would be. There are a thousand different scenarios I could go through in which CIA opertative terrorists, double agents, naive jihadists, and the like were duped into participating in this kind of event.
Bottom line, the gov't had foreknowledge of the attacks. Where you decide to speculate from that point is everyone's favorite thing to do. I just like to focus on the fact that gov't has the same priority that gov't has always had... maintain power and push for ever more control.
Again, I'm not an expert, but I know that it wasn't just some crazy kooks in a cave that made the attacks on 9/11/2001 happen. At the very least the back door was left open, on purpose... but I think we all know I believe it was a bit more that.
(...and, to tell you the truth, I bet George Bush had little knowledge of what was going to happen. I'm sure he knew something was going to happen and the general time frame.)
COMPARTMENTALIZATION. This is how the pyramid system works. It's how you control these kinds of events. Know what you need to know.
Last edited by shaggyduck; 05-06-2008 at 06:46 PM.
I definitely agree with your sentiment that terrorist groups are essentially creations of international intelligence agencies. Some of the "most wanted" are marginal groups with little or no power and hardly exist as a serious threat, but the boys in Langley and the Pentagon use the media to disseminate the IMAGES they desire. I cap. image because that is all we see. We see images that were specifically chosen to represent and communicate certain ideas through non-verbal and subconscious communication. I definitely buy into the military-industrial complex (shit, who knew better about it than Ike Eisenhower, the general/president/ceo that warned us about it?) and I definitely think there are supranational forces influencing/guiding world fiscal policies. Once again, I agree that there are a lot of things being covered up, and a lot of dirty shit that our government is not telling us about. But I do not think that the WTC was wired with explosives. Convincing jihadists to fly airliners into buildings is much easier and cheaper than 200 stories worth of hidden wiring, blasting caps, and explosives. Especially when the jihadists are already trained and filled with hate, and extra-especially (I know, improper grammar) when they are unaware they are acting as puppets/human missiles for the same rich white men they are attempting to destroy. I think this is much more plausible than secretly wiring two 100+ story buildings with explosives, not to mention perfectly planning and executing such a plan w/o being found out.
But we'll never know. The guys that do know are most likely either dead or named Dick Cheney
Regardless, how the buildings came down is less important than the culpability of the gov't either through foreknowledge or actual participation.
Also, as with the JFK assassination, which you can basically get the full story now, I think we'll know the basic truth of 9/11 in another 40 years.
See, I don't think we will know in 40 years. If these people are smart enough to orchestrate such a massive attack, and good enough to pull it off, why would they leave any loose ends? It's like Stalin said, "Death is the solution to all problems: no man - no problem." Like I said above, anyone who knows is most likely dead. I mean, people were turning up dead in 86/87 when it turned out that Bush the Elder and Ollie North were selling weapons to the Iranians. If 9/11 is the result of a far-reaching conspiracy, we will never know about it. The gov't (ANY gov't) is smart enough to withhold that kind of info. For Americans, that has been the defining moment of the 21st century, you show it to be a fraud and we have social and economic pandemonium. Even if someone came out tomorrow with unequivocal proof of a conspiracy, I think most Americans would dismiss it as being false. We're trained not to challenge the dominant social narrative, especially when it comes to America and American civil religion (which 9/11 has become a part of)
We'll never get the full JFK info, Oswald and Ruby never spilled the beans. Was Oswald a patsy? Most likely. Will he be condemned by history for murdering the 20th century's most beloved American President? Yes. But that is the sad irony of it all. To me, the JFK assassination is a much more likely candidate (given the social, political, and economic climate from 61-64) for a conspiracy planned and carried out by the CIA/FBI/whatever-alphabet-you-want, than is 9/11.
40 Years from now, people will still not want to believe it, and it will likely wind out coming out in some form like Rolling Stone or whatever.
Did you not see the death bed confession of E. Howard Hunt? He basically spilled all the beans. Alex Jones has a film coming out this year about JFK that will have footage provided from Hunt's son of his confession and the like.
Basically he admitted that Oswald was a patsy and they he managed a team of 2 French mercs from the Grassy Knoll. He was controlled by compartmentalization and a little jerking at his patriotism (anti-communism).
You're right that we'll never get the FULL story, but you can basically put it all together. Considering how much you can gleen today about 9/11 with a little digging, I'm confident that in 40 years you'll basically be able to see the entire picture.
From a historian's perspective, I certainly hope so. I don't know how much faith I have in the Howard Hunt confession; I've heard some rumblings, but I have not seen or read anything myself, so I can't accurately comment. But death-bed confessions are kind of interesting. Half are full of shit, half are piled on shit, and the other half (I know, three halves) are shit. Somewhere in all that shit is a kernel of truth, but it can just easily turn out to be corn, you know?
I think with both JFK and 9/11, the official story is taken as literal truth, and no one bothers to search any deeper, I mean, why should they, why would their own government lie to them? Greater access to info and technology has meant better tools in the search for truth, but "they" have tools for concealing that are equal, if not superior, to our own. It's a tricky mess.
And I'm heading out. Good talk. I don't buy it yet, but I like that you are at least thinking.
Haha... that is the funniest sig I've seen yet.
Greg, I thought you were smart there for a minute.
"Why wouldn't our government hire some terrorists to do it?"
Well, first of all, why would they leave anything up to chance with those incompetants? Do you not realize how completely out of the realm of experience this attack was for Islamic terrorists? They've never pulled off anything even fucking close to this. Not 1/1000th as successful. Also, there's no way to bring those towers down with fire, or airplanes.
Well, I believe the planes were controlled remotely. So, the terrorists didn't really have to do anything but show up...
As mentioned earlier, if the government is indeed responsible for 9/11, then (I believe) they have secured almost all loose ends to some extent. I don't think they would have even thought about doing it if it came with flaws.
People may say "well we have evidence that proves otherwise, we have evidence that shows their flaws". Ok, so you do. But, as seen in this thread, there are ways to debunk the conspiracy theories, and as long as these theories exist, so will the methods of proving them wrong.
People may also say "well with time we'll figure it out, look at the JFK murder, we've got it figured out now because someone apparently confessed". Now, I may get some flak for this, but a president being assassinated (IMO) is quite different than murdering 3,000 people. It's just not at the same magnitude. Like, if people were saying "oh the government secretly killed the president", I don't think that'd sound as bad "oh the government faked a terrorist attack and murdered 3,000 innocent citizens". Again, that is just my opinion.
I think the only way we will ever know for sure who did this, is if the criminals themselves come clean and admit, which will almost definitely never happen. If the gov't did 9/11, they will take it to the grave with them. And because of that fact, I've always had this kind of mentality about the situation: "We will probably never know the real truth, so why argue about it". I just don't think that these conspiracy theories will actually make an impact on the government if they did 9/11, because they will always have a way to counter them and they will never admit that they did it. The government has their plan figured out perfectly.
And that is why I continue to argue this point...
THEY LIED ABOUT IT.
Obviously I think they were involved and responsible for the attacks, but the fact that they have since lied about it and covered up evidence and been all around shady... that should be the focus of attention.