US fears Russian publication of satellite photos of 9/11

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

originally posted by: plube
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Yes...well one should only trust western media....because it never lies

Like BBC announcing the collapse of building 7 while it was still standing in the background.

Jesus H how many times. It's called a screw-up. It happens all the time. This is why the vast majority of "conspiracies" are nothing of the sort. The problem is the obsessive conspiracist seems to believe that everyone in certain positions behaves perfectly and therefore when something is not right it's a conspiracy....DUH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sarcasm?



I hope...

I'm sorry, but that idea that America would humiliate itself by orchestrating the 9/11 attacks is just ludicrous. Yeah, let's go to war and make money. How to do it? Allow yourself to be caught with your pants completely down around your ankles, allow yourself to be completely embarrassed and humiliated, and do so in the center of your largest city where you will have to hope and pray that none of the literally millions of witnesses notices anything amiss. Then hope that none of the THOUSANDS of people who would have had to be involved EVER open their mouth and that none of the MILLIONS of pieces of evidence EVER turn up. Whatever. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. --rolls eyes--

originally posted by: jaffo
I'm sorry, but that idea that America would humiliate itself by orchestrating the 9/11 attacks is just ludicrous. Yeah, let's go to war and make money. How to do it? Allow yourself to be caught with your pants completely down around your ankles, allow yourself to be completely embarrassed and humiliated, and do so in the center of your largest city where you will have to hope and pray that none of the literally millions of witnesses notices anything amiss. Then hope that none of the THOUSANDS of people who would have had to be involved EVER open their mouth and that none of the MILLIONS of pieces of evidence EVER turn up. Whatever. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. --rolls eyes--

If you study history you would learn that a very similar attack (Northwoods) was planned, and rejected by JFK, some 40 years prior to 9/11. You will also know that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen so we could be drawn into war. You would also know that the neocons desired a "new Pearl Harbor" to galvanize American resolve to go to war.

Before you roll your eyes you should study history a little more my friend.

Never mind!

a reply to: DJW001

you mean the same subversion the united states uses? its a problem that you view this situation in such a one sided manner.

people are inclined to distrust the United states government because they lie again and again. no Russian media outlet is saying anything that other independent american sources haven't been saying for years, even decades.

originally posted by: Jchristopher5

originally posted by: jaffo
I'm sorry, but that idea that America would humiliate itself by orchestrating the 9/11 attacks is just ludicrous. Yeah, let's go to war and make money. How to do it? Allow yourself to be caught with your pants completely down around your ankles, allow yourself to be completely embarrassed and humiliated, and do so in the center of your largest city where you will have to hope and pray that none of the literally millions of witnesses notices anything amiss. Then hope that none of the THOUSANDS of people who would have had to be involved EVER open their mouth and that none of the MILLIONS of pieces of evidence EVER turn up. Whatever. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. --rolls eyes--

If you study history you would learn that a very similar attack (Nortwoods) was planned, and rejected by JFK, some 40 years prior to 9/11. You will also know that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen so we could be drawn into war. You would also know that the neocons desired a "new Pearl Harbor" to galvanize American resolve to go to war.

Before you roll your eyes you should study history a little more my friend.

And you should stop using rumors and lies as "proof." No, Pearl Harbor was not allowed to happen. The ignorance you display in that comment subverts any other point you may wish to try and make. Proof or GTFO. And you and I both know there is no proof as to Pearl Harbor. Because it was not "allowed to happen."

a reply to: Jchristopher5

If you study history you would learn that a very similar attack (Nortwoods) was planned, and rejected by JFK, some 40 years prior to 9/11.

The operative word being rejected.

You will also know that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen so we could be drawn into war.

And you would also know that is a theory unsupported by any evidence.

You would also know that the neocons desired a "new Pearl Harbor" to galvanize American resolve to go to war.

You should know from your own experience that desire does not always lead to action.

Before you roll your eyes you should study history a little more my friend.

As should you. Now, what does any of that have to do with whether or not Russia actually has any satellite images that shed light on to the events of September 11, 2001?

The whole "Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen" lie disgusts me. Not even Japan makes that allegation. Sorry, but Japan wanted to destroy our Pacific fleet and work with the rest of the Axis power to literally take over the World by force. The one who needs to do some more reading is anyone making the ridiculous Pearl harbor claim. I mean really, even if that were true would it take away from what Japan was trying to do? The blinders worn around here to try and ALWAYS IN EVERY SINGLE THING BLAME AMERICA is sad, pathetic, and IS NOT denying ignorance. Yeesh...

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: DJW001

you mean the same subversion the united states uses? its a problem that you view this situation in such a one sided manner.

All nations attempt to influence the populace of other nations, it is the techniques they use and the ends they are after that differ. I am very clear sighted about that, which is why I evaluate all sources of news. Pravda, the source for the claim in the OP, pushes blatant lies. (I could document this at length, but it might take the thread off target.) It is a very big problem if you give them any credibility whatsoever.

people are inclined to distrust the United states government because they lie again and again. no Russian media outlet is saying anything that other independent american sources haven't been saying for years, even decades.

Russian media outlets are saying only what the Russian government orders them to. Any American source that repeats this propaganda may not be so independent after all.

originally posted by: DJW001
originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: DJW001

you mean the same subversion the united states uses? its a problem that you view this situation in such a one sided manner.

All nations attempt to influence the populace of other nations, it is the techniques they use and the ends they are after that differ. I am very clear sighted about that, which is why I evaluate all sources of news. Pravda, the source for the claim in the OP, pushes blatant lies. (I could document this at length, but it might take the thread off target.) It is a very big problem if you give them any credibility whatsoever.

people are inclined to distrust the United states government because they lie again and again. no Russian media outlet is saying anything that other independent american sources haven't been saying for years, even decades.

Russian media outlets are saying only what the Russian government orders them to. Any American source that repeats this propaganda may not be so independent after all.

We have state-run media here in Canada. It is much more reliable than any privately owned media sources that can not run at a loss like the CBC can.

Iv'e seen a debate between news anchor from the US and RT. The US style is to down-talk any objection to their reports. The RT style is seems to be quotes and a very long memory. US media memory is about 4 hours. RT and other state-run media outlets have memory going back decades and that really bothers privately owned media that profit from controlling it's readers or listeners memory.

a reply to: DJW001

which is why I evaluate all sources of news

unless its a Russian source, in which case its a lie, because everyone knows my people are all liars and have always lied and oppressed everyone around them(because the west says so).

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Canada is very fortunate in the CBC, I agree. It does not need to bow to corporate interests or woo viewers with sensationalism.

Hard to trust anything nowadays.Most people do not sit down and read this stuff like we all do on this kind of website.Always takes 2 sides to go to war and all nations are fighting for oil and wealth.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: DJW001

which is why I evaluate all sources of news

unless its a Russian source, in which case its a lie, because everyone knows my people are all liars and have always lied and oppressed everyone around them(because the west says so).

Oh stop it. Just knock it off. No one said anything like that, so stop using bad arguments and faulty logic. Pravda is quite frequently full of garbage. It always has been. AND YOU KNOW THIS. No one is saying or has said on here that because Pravda is a State run paper that generally is full of garbage all Russians are liars. So, again, knock it off will ya?

a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

unless its a Russian source, in which case its a lie, because everyone knows my people are all liars and have always lied and oppressed everyone around them(because the west says so).

I did not say that. Itar-TASS remains reliable. They, like legitimate western media, make it very clear whether they are reporting something directly, quoting someone who claims to have witnessed something, or are repeating an opinion. RT and Pravda, like Fox News, report opinion and rumor as though they are fact. The OP is a perfect example of that: "An unnamed informant says Russia has evidence...." You should not believe any statement attributed to an "unnamed informant," whether the alleged informant appears in Pravda or the New York Times. In either case, you can bet that the "unnamed informant" is transmitting something that an intelligence agency wants you to believe, whether it is true or not.

As for Russia oppressing people, there is a reason why my grandparents moved here from Odessa and Saint Petersburg.

Could these be satellite images of 'the' planes being grounded and the passengers unloaded?

As with 9/11, you could argue there is no evidence that the government didn't know. Nobody can actually prove the government did or did not know.

a reply to: jaffo

what are you talking about. ive seen at least 5 posts within the last 15 minutes where various members said things to the effect of all Russian sources being unreliable or that all Russian media is state controlled, which is a straight up fallacy.

a reply to: DJW001

never said i believed it. i don't believe things until i see them. and RT presents tons of facts, sure some content is guest opinion but they have to push a view point dont they, thats the point of having a news channel.

As for Russia oppressing people, there is a reason why my grandparents moved here from Odessa and Saint Petersburg.

yeah there was a reason me and my mom moved here too, it was the prospect of freedom, but now i cant even surf the internet without fearing that the government is monitoring me. Murica!

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: jaffo

what are you talking about. ive seen at least 5 posts within the last 15 minutes where various members said things to the effect of all Russian sources being unreliable or that all Russian media is state controlled, which is a straight up fallacy.

It is not a fallacy! All of the media in Russia are owned by intimates of Vladimir Putin. They collude to support him and his policies. О́зеро, "Lake," is a shadow government of oligarchs that control the Russian media. It is also subject to government censorship. Media owned by foreigners are now designated as "Foreign Agents."

Some Russian media is more reliable than others. Pravda, the source of the OP, is among the least reliable. As a Russian, you must be familiar with the old adage: В Правде нет известей, и в известях нет никакой правды!