ATS: Levee Breaks, 9-11 Part of Government Plot, Farrakhan Implies

I'm pretty sure I saw that video on the news. I believe that the guy heard a very loud noise, but I'm pretty sure that was the levee bursting. Someone will have to come up with some hard evidence for me to believe that the levees were purposely blown up.

As I sad before, when you know even the slightest bit about the demographics of New Orleans and the pattern of flooding, you can plainly see that there was nothing racial about the flooding. St. Bernard Parish is completely wiped out and no one is claiming any conspiracies against this mostly white suburb.

One might also note that I know people there and have heard what they have lost. The media has focused almost completely on the black population to the near total exclusion of the white populations in Louisiana and Mississippi. And, of course, then there's Rita. Where's the conspiracy theory for Cameron Parish and Southeast Texas.

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
fair enough, but I hardly think a poll on a conspiracy website asking if something is a conspiracy is an unbiased and objective 'fact' to point to when making your point. There are other sources you could have cited, but I'll go back to my stopped clock statement.

If you want to deal in absolutes and unequivocal facts then what exactly are your motivations for being a member on a conspiracy theory website? Are you here to debunk the theories?

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
I'd say that when one demonstrates oneself to be unreliable and untrustworthy on more occasions than not, then the anti-ignorant thing to do is to assume as a starting point that they continue to be unreliable and untrustworthy.

No, that would be ignorant. A person's previous behaviour does not flick a switch that automatically makes everything that springs from their mouth a lie. I don't have a problem with people not trusting Farrakhan, I too believe he is a racist with an agenda to discredit "white people" based on these conspiracy theories. My point, however, is that these theories (which arent entirely his own) are not automatically "crackpot" along with him.

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
Because the mainstream media lends Farrakhan a forum for making statements that otherwise would never make it into print because there isn't any substance to them (though in the case of Katrina, the media was just as incompetent as the govt, imho).

Again, why is your answer to suppress his theories? Are people not capable of choosing what they believe themselves? If that logic was to pervade society I would say that the mainstream news shouldn't report a damn thing governments say. They are probably more biased and agenda driven than Farrakhan would even dream to be. But would the truth be served by blanket-banning the likes of Farrakhan and the government from the mainstream news media? Of course not!

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
This distracts from the real story, confuses an already weary public, and degrades the public discourse on an important subject.

Ahh so who gets to dictate what the "real story" is? Those implicated in the conspiracy? i.e. the government? Well that's going to see us all get the unadulterated truth isn't it!

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
What about Farrakhan's theory that the white race was created by a black scientist named Yakub some 6,600 years ago? The mothership one sounds pretty fruity to me, too... and ridiculousness has a certain convective property, whereby a person with numerous obscenely silly ideas can be expected to think thusly in most other cases.

What about it? Did I say that everything Farrakhan says is the truth? I am just on record as calling Farrakhan a racist, so I dont see the point in going down that route. These ideas are not Farrakhan's alone, so calling them "obscenely silly ideas" is taking your opinion of Farrakhan and applying them to other peoples ideas. That is not a wise thing to do IMHO and certainly does not serve the truth in the slightest.

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
The American government may well have had a hand in the September 11th attacks. I do not profess to be able to answer this question, upon which four years and some of the world's best and brightest minds have failed to produce a definitive consensus.

A great position to take IMHO. I tend to believe that they did have a hand in the attacks and its a position I have tried to back up with evidence. But not dismissing the idea out of hand because you think its "silly" is a much healthier approach to take to conspiracy theories.

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
However, just because Farrakhan happens to think that there was, in fact, collusion between our government and the perpetrators of the attacks does not mean that he deserves the attention of the national media.

No more so than the American government who say it was Al-Qaida

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
The theory that the 9/11 attacks were committed or abetted by American officials is one deserving of investigation, but Farrakhan's opinion on the matter should no more be the subject of nationwide news coverage than should mine or yours... in fact, I don't think anything he has to say ought to be considered in any objective search for truth.

Thats your opinion, and its an opinion that shouldn't be rammed down other peoples throats. You are more than welcome to not believe him, that is your inalienable right to choose what you believe. But trying to discredit him and stop other people from believing him based on a factless platform is not conducive to the truth.

Originally posted by subz
If you want to deal in absolutes and unequivocal facts then what exactly are your motivations for being a member on a conspiracy theory website? Are you here to debunk the theories?

I am a member because:
a) it is free
b) it is entertaining
c) I think I have something to contribute

Are you suggesting that if I am not conspiracy-minded that I am unwelcome or shouldn't be interested in ATS? To be honest, I think that this is a common bias here, and that is just plain sad.

I want to deal in absolutes and unequivocal facts because that is what I do. I am a scientist. My training relied heavily on the premise / statement "That can't possibly be right". It has served me quite well.

It seems to me that most conspiracy minded folks hear a story from the govt., or mainstream media and assume that "that can't possibly be right" (or some variation thereof) and will accept whatever "alternative" story comes along. Why can't I do the same when it comes to the "alternative" explanations?

I could care less about Farrakhan's conspiracy theories, except for one thing: he is an extreme racist and is constantly stirring up and creating more racism in our society. That's the last thing we need!

The truly sad part is, as I stated in another thread just a few minutes ago, I will defend his right to do so to my dying day...that's what the U.S. is about. But it sure doesn't mean that I have to like what he's doing! I see him as the same as the neo-nazis and KKK, just with a different point of view.

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
I am a member because:
a) it is free
b) it is entertaining
c) I think I have something to contribute

Are you suggesting that if I am not conspiracy-minded that I am unwelcome or shouldn't be interested in ATS? To be honest, I think that this is a common bias here, and that is just plain sad.

Of course thats not what I am suggesting. Your as welcome here as I am. But it just looks like some one who doesnt want to get wet is jumping into the swimming pool. You can if you want I just dont see the point.

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
I want to deal in absolutes and unequivocal facts because that is what I do. I am a scientist. My training relied heavily on the premise / statement "That can't possibly be right". It has served me quite well.

So you're here to pick up on theories that mutate into fact? Thats fine by me also. I just want to show that denying theories out of hand because they come from a certain source is not going to get us anywhere near the truth. You should know that from being a scientist. If some one told you something was not true, would you instantly believe them and not look into it yourself? Of course you wouldnt, that is unless they show you evidence to support their position. It works both ways.

Originally posted by ChemicalLaser
It seems to me that most conspiracy minded folks hear a story from the govt., or mainstream media and assume that "that can't possibly be right" (or some variation thereof) and will accept whatever "alternative" story comes along. Why can't I do the same when it comes to the "alternative" explanations?

Because I do not automatically think anything and neither should you? Im not denying that there are people who think that way, but you are not doing the World a favour by acting the opposite in spite of them.

[edit on 13/10/05 by subz]

While I too think Farrankhan is a very dangerous kook, those links that were posted concerning the explosions in NOLA certainly pique my interest.

Grady, unlike you I know next to nothing about the subdivisions within NOLA or the topography of the city. Could there be any truth behind the allegations in those links? Mayor Nagin has already been proven to be a liar concerning some of the alleged shootings & violence in NOLA, so I don't trust what he has to say on this subject and I can see him unintentionally misleading Farrankhan about them. If the explosions did, in fact, happen, why would anyone want to keep them secret if they were done for sound reasons? A number of people reported hearing explosions and I think explosions sound sufficiently different from physical barrier breaches that people wouldn't have used that word for that kind of process.

I really like how there are no direct quotes from the Minister but only implications of what he said. As far as 9/11, he called the hijackers 'wild beasts' in a very public statement denouncing the attacks.

He's no more racist than Bill Bennet or Barbara Bush. People just can't stand a black man who says anything controversial. Big surprise.

Originally posted by Astronomer68
If the explosions did, in fact, happen, why would anyone want to keep them secret if they were done for sound reasons? A number of people reported hearing explosions and I think explosions sound sufficiently different from physical barrier breaches that people wouldn't have used that word for that kind of process.

Blowing up the levees would have benefited no one. The high ground would have been just as high and the low ground would be just as low. As I have said before, St. Bernard Parish was completely wiped out and no one is suggesting that this virtually all white community was the target of a racist agenda.

The links below should give you some idea of what happened to the "forgotten parish":

The racial makeup of the parish is 88.29% White, 7.62% Black or African American, 0.49% Native American, 1.32% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.73% from other races, and 1.52% from two or more races. 5.09% of the population are Hispanic or Latino of any race.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.st-bernard.la.us...

www.st-bernard.la.us...

news.bbc.co.uk...

www.wwltv.com...

www.sanluisobispo.com...

Spanish explorers from the Canary Islands settled in St. Bernard and until the late 1920s ran one of the richest, most productive fur trapping enterprises in the world, said Craig Colten, a geography professor at Louisiana State University. A separate sphere of oyster fishermen with strong commercial ties to New Orleans also inhabited the area.

In 1927, with a flood bearing down on New Orleans, the city's "commercial elite" appealed to the federal government "to blow a hole in the levee" to save New Orleans, and the government agreed, Colten said.

The Corps of Engineers created a temporary mouth that accelerated the flow of water past New Orleans but flooded St. Bernard.

"All the marsh was destroyed; muskrats by the million drowned," Colten said. "The value of furs trapped just plummeted."

New Orleans officials had promised to pay restitution to the trappers in St. Bernard, Colten said, but "the business elite reneged on their promises."

"There has been resentment from St. Bernard to New Orleans ever since."

www.sanluisobispo.com...

www.cnn.com...

www.cnn.com...

www.2theadvocate.com...

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2005/09/15/MNGF3ENTE71.DTL

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2005/09/15/MNGF3ENTE71.DTL

www.cbsnews.com...

www.cbn.com...

Google Search



[edit on 2005/10/14 by GradyPhilpott]

I don't know very much at all about this Farrakhan guy, from the article it sounds like he's a fringe conspiracy nut.

But if you know a lot about 9/11, the facts point to a government job.

Perhaps this guy and others like him are part of a government disinformation effort. By associating claims of 9/11 conspiracy theories with obviously crazy and easily discredited sources, the government is trying to associate 9/11 conspiracies with lunatics. So that anyone who might think there's a 9/11 conspiracy is also associated with crazy people making the same claim.

Just a thought.

Originally posted by Jeremiah_John
He's no more racist than Bill Bennet or Barbara Bush. People just can't stand a black man who says anything controversial. Big surprise.

I am not a racist and as they are the only people in this world that I hate, I don't care for the implication that I am one.

I hereby withdraw my previous comments regarding Mr. Farrakhan and will leave the topic to others to discuss. If a moderator would be so kind as to delete both my posts from this thread, I would appreciate it greatly.

Thank you.

Originally posted by Jaryn
I am not a racist and as they are the only people in this world that I hate, I don't care for the implication that I am one.

I hereby withdraw my previous comments regarding Mr. Farrakhan and will leave the topic to others to discuss. If a moderator would be so kind as to delete both my posts from this thread, I would appreciate it greatly.

Thank you.

Dont worry about it Jaryn, he is obviously trolling for a racial debate where none exists. Farrakhan's race plays no part in his credibility or what his subscribed theories are. Ignore it