It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Win 250,000 Points: What Are The Top-5 9/11 Conspiracies?

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 04:13 PM
link   
I think the winner should get points and jokers like this guy above me should get banned.
As if this isnt a serious matter. You fools playing around like your freaking country isnt going down the toilet.




posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
1. The Twin Towers were Corroding away and it was recommended they be eventually rebuilt at a massive cost back in an official report in the mid 80's.

2. The CIA trained and supplied the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan which created a terrorist organisation eventually called Al Qaeda in the late 80's.

3. Saddam Hussein was sucked into thinking invading Kuwait would be ok by Madalaine Albright in 90 and hence fell out of favour with the US who backed it during the Iraq-Iran War.

4. Israel Lobby groups and representation in Clinton's Term is disproportionate and leans the US toward conflict in the Middle East.

5. A failed Oil Baron steals the Presidency in 2000 with vote fraud.

It doesn't take much to link the above conspiracies together and all are pretty well verifiable facts that are direct influences in the precusory events to 911.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Administration and moderators, I am sorry for being off-topic but I wanted to briefly reply to a reply made to my post.


Originally posted by 11Bravo
I think the winner should get points and jokers like this guy above me should get banned.
As if this isnt a serious matter. You fools playing around like your freaking country isnt going down the toilet.


11Bravo, I was just posting a few theories on what may have happened on 9/11 and am not suggesting that the USA is truly corrupt. I was devastated by the event as were millions if not billions of others. As you probably do, I like to search for the truth through questions and answers.

God Bless the USA!!!

God Bless ATS!!!

God Bless All!!!



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Relax, he was talking about the post above yours, calm down.

You had very .......interesting points in your list.

I should have read it first......





[edit on 14-2-2007 by Tiloke]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreatTech
These are not my beliefs, but 5 of my theories are:

1) The planes were never hijacked; the "regular" American pilots formed a suicidal/murderous cabal because of psychiatric problems and they could have had links to a secret part of the U.S. government, al-qaeda, Afghanistan, Iraq, or other parts of the world.

2) The video of planes crashing were made-up; no planes crashed and there were no deaths on 9/11: the twin towers were partly or wholly detonated to reorganize systems and boost the economy.

3) U.S.A. military pilots flew the 4 aircraft that crashed and did so to blame the middle east for the event in order to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and prevent nuclear war.

4) Russia threatened nuclear war with the U.S.A. if the U.S.A. did not at least slightly self-destruct.

5) George Walker Bush implemented one of many plans to defend a war in the Middle East in order to deter the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear war.



[edit on 14-2-2007 by GreatTech]

I was indeed talking about him, and the guy above him, and a few others that have hijacked this thread or tried to make funny statements or 'debunk'.

His 'theories' appear to be little more than a jab at those of us who are really concerned about what exactly happened on 9/11.
There are times to play and have fun, but when it comes to 9/11, a day in which 3000 Americans died, there is no room for silly behavior.

Edit to ask......What are his good points?


[edit on 14-2-2007 by 11Bravo]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11Bravo

Originally posted by GreatTech
These are not my beliefs, but 5 of my theories are:

1) The planes were never hijacked; the "regular" American pilots formed a suicidal/murderous cabal because of psychiatric problems and they could have had links to a secret part of the U.S. government, al-qaeda, Afghanistan, Iraq, or other parts of the world.

2) The video of planes crashing were made-up; no planes crashed and there were no deaths on 9/11: the twin towers were partly or wholly detonated to reorganize systems and boost the economy.

3) U.S.A. military pilots flew the 4 aircraft that crashed and did so to blame the middle east for the event in order to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and prevent nuclear war.

4) Russia threatened nuclear war with the U.S.A. if the U.S.A. did not at least slightly self-destruct.

5) George Walker Bush implemented one of many plans to defend a war in the Middle East in order to deter the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear war.



[edit on 14-2-2007 by GreatTech]

I was indeed talking about him, and the guy above him, and a few others that have hijacked this thread or tried to make funny statements or 'debunk'.

His 'theories' appear to be little more than a jab at those of us who are really concerned about what exactly happened on 9/11.
There are times to play and have fun, but when it comes to 9/11, a day in which 3000 Americans died, there is no room for silly behavior.

Edit to ask......What are his good points?


[edit on 14-2-2007 by 11Bravo]


11Bravo, no humor ever intended. In fact, I work in medical research, where life/death issues are treated extremely seriously.

The power of theoretical thinking: "if we had the theory that we would die if we walked into a fire, we would not walk into a fire." A quote from me.

We all should get back on-topic. All of us should be interested in other people's 5 theories.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Ok, I'll have a go at this.

1. Common structural steel has a melting point of 1510 degrees Celsius. As you can see here (and should check out because it's just plain cool) Even under optimum conditions with the perfect fuel to air ratio jet fuel in the combustion cycle of the engine burns at up to 2000 degrees Celsius but as the animation shows commonly at 1390 degrees C. My point being that even in the heart of the engine under optimum compression and mixture it's burning at roughly 1400 degrees C. I would like to believe the folks @ rolls Royce are pretty accurate at their temperature analysis. When black smoke is generated by jet fuel burning it comes from incomplete combustion. We saw a great deal of black smoke at the towers which clearly shows this was not a efficient combustion. Lets be charitable and say that even given the things the fire had going against it(a lack of enough oxygen to burn the quantity available, It was not under compression, and did not have a rapid flow delivering more oxygen), the jet fuel made it up to 1000 degrees C. ,Half of the max temp of jet fuel as cited by Rolls Royce. That is still not enough to reach melting point, marginally enough to cause complete failure. Which moves us on to....

2. Molten Steel


Need I say more? Which moves us on to

3. Even in the remote chance that a fire burning that inefficiently that it reached a point hot enough to fatigue the steel to point of failure. It was not the entire building that was effected. In the case of building 1 or 2 there was still at least 50% of the structure on the particular levels that the fire was burning on that was unscathed and still intact. Jenga anyone? Like in jenga (the game if you never heard of it your not missing much but frustration) even if fifty percent has complete failure, the other fifty having full load bearing capacity results in an un-even fall. which moves us on to....

4. Even if none of this is enough to consider facts are not as they seem consider building seven, No plane hit it, it was ignited by "falling debris" no jet fuel, maybe diesel at best for a backup generator and the fire was to say the least not "widespread" as the others. This building fell with the same if not better symmetry as the others. If you can point out another steel frame high rise building that fell because of fire, please retort even if you can find another instace of it happening period I can assure you it had a fire worse than 7. Here is a video to illustrate my point.




So moving on to number five

5. Can it be considered just a mere coincidence that on the very day of the event there was a drill practicing the response to the exact same thing? Source


If I had to try to make a point to the average joe on the street these would be my points (even if there are a lot more). The only thing I feel it proves is that there are alot of un-answered questions and if there is nothing to hide lets have some more people investigate areas where the 9/11 commission report left un-answered questions the cost of the investigations is not a reasonable excuse if we can drop billions upon billions in Iraq, there is much much more as a lot of people here know but I believe this was the point of the thread.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 01:19 AM
link   
1. The South Tower Tilt

See these pics

The top of the tower should have continued its motion, as in Newtons 1st Laws of Motion (Inertia) and the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum.


Objects executing motion around a point possess a quantity called angular momentum. This is an important physical quantity because all experimental evidence indicates that angular momentum is rigorously conserved in our Universe: it can be transferred, but it cannot be created or destroyed.


What caused the angular momentum to stop and transfer it too vertical momentum?



A body at rest remains at rest, and a body in motion continues to move in a straight line with a constant speed unless and until an external unbalanced force acts upon it...An object that is in motion will not change velocity (accelerate) until a net force acts upon it.


What was that external unbalanced force? Gravity isn't the answer. I think we can all agree that the lower undamaged floors had the energy to hold the mass of the top, as it had been doing for years. From what I've read the WTC was designed to take 2.5 times its own mass. So what force caused the top, which was in motion, to change its velocity?

IMO the only conclusion is there must have been another energy force acting on the building, other than the damage it had already suffered. What was that energy?

This btw has not been covered in any of the governments official research and is rarely addressed by ATS members who are still in denial.
See my thread here… www.abovetopsecret.com...'

2. WTC 7

As we all know, no plane impact, no jet fuel fires. No evidence of major fires, no evidence of major structural damage.
Silversteins ‘Pull it” comment, that took him 3 years to make up an excuse as to what he ‘really meant’.
The building collapsed vertically, into its own footprint, with no discernable resistance from undamaged structural elements, or columns. It displayed the classic ‘kink’, a sign that central columns were compromised to allow the outer walls to fall inward.

The 'Kink'

WTC 7 In its own Footprint

Then there is Danny Jowenko, a controlled demolition expert…

www.youtube.com...

3. The Pentagon

Flight 77 Flight discrepancies

According to data obtained from the Flight Data Recorder (Black Box), flight 77 could not have hit the light poles. So why the charade with the light poles? Or did something else hit them? The plane, according to the data, flew to the left of the chitgo station, not to the right.

Flight 77 flight path

Read More Here

Also coming soon eye witness accounts that support the black box data…

See this thread

Damage to the pentagon is inconsistent with a 757.



For the aircraft to have hit that low the engine shrouds would be hitting the ground. A little simple maths, it’s 10 feet from the bottom of the engine shrouds to the center of the wing spar. How did the plane clear the fence and cable spools but still manage to hit so low? Where is the wreckage, and where is the damage to the lawn from the engine shrouds impacting the ground?

4. Prior Knowledge

Profiting From a Loss
Unknown investors made more than $2.5 million trading options in the stock of United Airlines before Sept. 11th.

Read Story Here

And Here

www.sfgate.com..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

They don't talk about it on TV anymore, but someone tried to make money with unusual stock trades right before the terrorist attacks of September 11. Who knew to bet that United Airlines would lose money?

Surge In Credit Card Transactions

Investigators say, "There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million. They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed."


German computer experts are working around the clock to unlock the truth behind an unexplained surge in financial transactions made just before two hijacked planes crashed into New York's World Trade Center Sept. 11.

Source



(IDG) -- A new data-recovery technique could help trace suspicious financial transactions made shortly before the terrorist attacks in the U.S. on September 11.

Source

Pre-Warned?


For Mayor Willie Brown, the first signs that something was amiss came late Monday when he got a call from what he described as his airport security - - a full eight hours before yesterday's string of terrorist attacks -- advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel. The mayor, who was booked to fly to New York yesterday morning from San Francisco International Airport, said the call "didn't come in any alarming fashion, which is why I'm hesitant to make an alarming statement."

Source


US officials were given the first name and telephone number of an 11 September hijacker more than two years before the attacks, the New York Times has said.

Source


An aide to the former Taleban foreign minister, Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil, has revealed that he was sent to warn American diplomats and the United Nations that Osama bin Laden was due to launch a huge attack on American soil.

Neither organisation heeded the warning, which was given just weeks before the 11 September attacks.

Source


In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

Source

5. This one is personal. From my experience I know government was/is capable, and more than willing to have caried out the attacks on 9-11…


[edit on 15/2/2007 by ANOK]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 01:55 AM
link   
Dble post sry...

[edit on 15/2/2007 by ANOK]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 02:22 AM
link   
The towers were built to be destroyed, as a worldwide distress signal.

That emergency, is peak oil production and the imminant decline of civilization, on this planet, as we know it.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 04:16 AM
link   
This better not be closed yet, I just burst a membrane putting this together:

Top five clusters of evidence:

Cluster One: The context of the alleged attackers
- Bin Laden is of course a onetime US servant – after Afghanistan, al Qaeda operatives and training camps have aided US globalization efforts in places like Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya, etc. by direct action in these areas. And by launching attack after attack against the US, culminating with 9/11, al Qaeda has aided US globalization efforts by providing a conveniently diffuse global threat requiring direct American action in… well, break out the old geostrategy maps and let’s see where…
Chossudovsky, early piece (9/12/01)
circumstantial illustration: Newsweek: “USA let Osama slip away in Afghanistan”]
Many others...
- Many warnings from mid-2001 of the impending al Qaeda attack were “ignored.” The supposition here being if our defenders had paid attention, they’d’ve stopped it. This supposition is not provable by any means, and so we can’t rule out that they did pay attention and did something other than move to stop the attack.
Center for Cooperative Research: Foreign Intel Warnings
Prison Planet foreknowledge archive

Cluster Two: Post-9/11 path set in the year before –
Striking parallels to 1941, which opened with Henry Luce’s coining the phrase “American century” amid the worsening War in Europe, was marked by the first peacetime military draft, plans for war, provocations against Japan, construction beginning on the Pentagon (9/11/41) and finally the Pearl Harbor attack in December. [www.geocities.com...]
[12-7-9-11.blogspot.com...]
- Likewise the Project for the New American Century (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al.) called in Sept. 2000 for military “process of transformation” perhaps requiring a “new Pearl Harbor, just before the 2000 “election” gave them a chance and a perch to protect the nation – or fail to - against such “catastrophic and catalyzing events.”
- May 2001 passage of Bush’s No Child Left Behind policy with its clause to allow military recruiters better access to gullible teenagers in the future, perhaps in case we enter any kind of extended warfare era. [www.govtrack.us...]
- Iraq war plans start emerging on Bush/Cheney coming to office in January
[www.boston.com...]
- Afghanistan war threatened against Taliban in mid-2001, set to begin by mid-October, and was decided on by Sept. 9, awaiting Bush’s signature after returning from Vacation on the 11th.
[Threats against Taliban: they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...]
[ 9/9 war plan: MSNBC, May 16, 2002: billstclair.com...]
- Essentially the creation of the Department of Homeland Security was tasked to Cheney in May 2001:
[they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...]
- Someone had the USA PATRIOT Act written up before 9/11 as well, as it was first introduced on September 19, just eight days after the attacks and before the body count was even done.
[www.cooperativeresearch.org.../11_world=liberties&timeline=complete_911_timeline]
[Also mentioned at: www.oilempire.us...]
- Cheney’s top secret energy meetings also seem extremely relevant to this direction-setting. If 9/11 hadn’t happened, none of these lines of action would have yielded anything, all would have had to be started over.

continued...



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 04:17 AM
link   
...the other three

Cluster Three: Failed defense on 9/11
- A defense so bad people have guessed it must’ve been a stand-down. Air defenses on the east coast during the attack consisted of four (actually five) fighter jets scrambled late from bases far from the crime scenes, sent slowly in the wrong direction, given no actionable intelligence and no authority to fire.
they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...
- The role of War Games in the air, like Vigilant Guardian, in hampering and confusing the vigilance of the nation’s airspace guardians. they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...
- Odd shakeups and inexplicable inaction in the National Defense Chain of Command, notably at the White House (Cheney filling in for Bush), Joint Chiefs of Staff (Myers filling in for Shelton), FAA (first-day rookie) and the pivotal National Military Command Center (Leidig asked on 9/10 to stand in for Winfield for what would prove to be 90 of the 11 minutes of the 9/11 attack).
they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...
they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...

Cluster Four: Evidence of WTC demolition
While no such skyscraper has ever before or since collapsed from fire, the oddity that on that one day WTC Tower 7 would collapse in a fashion just like a traditional controlled implosion, while towers 1 and/or 2 have fell after what seems to be molten thermate was seen pouring out, and displayed “squibs” of exploding concrete dust shooting out well beneath the collapse wave, which may help explain the towers’ normally impossible collapse at free-fall speed. Personally I’m still skeptical, and also haven’t looked into it a lot myself, but I have to admit the collapses are anomalous and the evidence for intentional destruction is compelling if not conclusive:
[Jim Hoffman: 911research.wtc7.net...]
[David Ray Griffin/Steven Jones: 911review.com...]
[critical analysis by Implosion World (PDF file): www.implosionworld.com/ Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf]
[mixed review at Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...]


Cluster Five: Cover-up and disinfo
- The administration caught “unaware” by the attack blocked all initial efforts at any kind of investigation, not the actions of someone with nothing to hide. Initial Intelligence committee was headed by (soon CIA director) Goss and Graham, and steered behind the scenes by L. Britt Snider, who had been CIA Inspector General (98-early 2001), overseeing the “flawed intel” and so was tasked with investigating his own failures. The “Independent” 9/11 Commission had its chairman hand-picked by Bush – first pick: Henry Kissinger.
- The administration may also have launched a campaign to obscure the truth with false claims – a string of former Repub. functionaries suddenly becoming 9/11 Truthers is noteworthy and suspicious (Morgan Reynolds esp., having served directly under Bush and then citing holographic 767’s hitting the WTC) The disinfo charges are most believable regarding the Pentagon attack; withholding video evidence, Rumsfeld’s “missile admission,” etc. the alleged (and possibly real) government conspiracy to create the cartoonish 9/11 conspiracy theory template is one of concealment and misdirection, which in turn is evidence of the government’s heavy-as-lead original 9/11 conspiracy – it was at best allowed and at worst staged. [frustratingfraud.blogspot.com...]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   
I have to tell you, when I first started learning of the facts of 9/11, I was amazed, and almost ashamed that I wasn’t more educated on the subject. But now, I realize the average person isn’t educated on the subject, or even aware of the simple and most basic facts of 9/11, and that is the true shame.

For instance, the majority of general public is not aware of the extensive planning, and the amounts of explosives required to demolish a building successfully. Successfully meaning the building collapses and implodes into itself falling strategically vertically until it is leveled onto it’s own base, the way the two World Trade Center Towers did simply by being hit by an airplane apparently. The point being, a building hit by a plane, an earthquake, or a fire, cannot imitate the well orchestrated demolition of explosives and planning, perfectly exhibited by the falling of the WTC towers.

The second fact I learned, was that found in the aftermath, was melted metal. I didn’t know what exactly that meant, but I learned the only explanation for molten metal is the high degree of fires which come from a few certain substances, such as the use of explosive charges. Buildings, even doused in jet fuel, cannot burn at the temperatures necessary to melt metal-but explosives can cause fires hot enough to, and in the event of the WTC on 9/11…they did. Metal wasn’t tested by the government, and was actually quickly shipped off before investigation into them could ensue, but residue from debris was gathered by independent and reputable sources and tested and evidence of explosives was indeed found.

Then I learned more! I learned that even though the crash proved to start fires high up in the building, was blamed for destroying buildings which fell demolition style, and melted metal…through it all, the fire did not destroy the passports of the terrorists! Imagine that?! It killed thousands, demolished buildings, melted metal…but on a twist of good luck the passports of the terrorists were along for the ride on their suicide mission, and then recovered in tact by the authorities. That’s just too convenient if you ask me.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I am not one to believe in coincidence of that extreme nature or the illogical probability of it all: the orchestrated style falls, the molten metal, the explosive residue, the death destruction and mayhem still leaving the terrorists to be identified in the lucky twist of fate of their preserved passports.

So then, looking further into the facts not publicized by the media or known by the general public, I find more disturbing facts. Beyond the fact that those in office disregarded the intel that warned of imminent attacks on American soil, there were actually war games being played on 9/11, in New York coincidentally, which exercises included scenarios coincidentally duplicating the reality of the hijacking of planes and suicide missions of such planes being crashes into buildings etc. When the actual attacks were happening then, it was near impossible for those who should have been responding to the actual crisis, to know if it was war game exercise or real life scenarios requiring real action. Apparently not knowing the actual crisis at hand, they were ordered to stand down and not engage in trying to thwart the hijackers. Boy, just one convenient coincidence after another.

Also, besides other areas of 9/11 interest such as the Pentagon, flight 93, there is the fact that terrorism’s goal is power. It may use threats, destruction, fear and death, but its goal is power. However, who has gained the most power from 9/11? Who has claimed responsibility? Al Qaeda, has been all but shut down, Bin Laden denied his involvement instead of boasting of his success like a typical terrorist, however America remains as powerful as ever, and even more powerful since 9/11 flexing it’s arms in war. Not to mention the fact that some people in government may have gained financially by insider trading in the airline industry, oil interests, etc.

There are just so many facts the public is unaware of. I found the greatest way to deny ignorance of 9/11 is to gain knowledge of the facts, and I found the best place to do it is on ATS. It is found by going to WWW.Abovetopsecret.com. There, I have found facts about 9/11, research on the subject, links to some of the best, most reliable research on the subject of 9/11 from all over the Web, intelligent conspiracy theories along with skeptics on both sides, either debunking the “official” story of 9/11 given to the public, or debunking the conspiracy theories. It is the most knowledgeable, reputable, and user-friendly site of it’s kind on the Web and it’s wealth of resources extends beyond 9/11.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by 2l82sk8]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Dear Sir,

When does this contest end and can we enter more than once?

I could make the above more "list like" if necessary for structure, or include links if more proof is desired... but as far as "what to tell and how" ...like a conversation in an elevator with an Average Joe, "concise issues and details" to "shed doubt on the official story " and spark curiousity without sounding like a conspiracy nutcase ...well thats what I've got for you for now SO.

I don't know if it reads as well as it sounds when I'm saying it near ver batim to the above to the Average Joe, but I can say I've had good response in person with total strangers and friends and family alike.


2l8

[edit on 15-2-2007 by 2l82sk8]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Most of the points here have been hashed out over and over throughout this site and many others. No matter how solid the evidence is supporting the fact that it was an inside job there will always be skeptics that will refute it. It was 'swamp gas' after all or 'ball lightning'.

Anyway, here is my biggest question for everyone to consider and one that is very important yet often overlooked in the debates.

Why hasn't there been another attack since that fateful day?

Oklahoma city introduced us to domestic terrorism. The initial bombing at the trade center set us up for an even bigger event. We can point fingers all we want at other religions and countries and state that these people are capable of this. However, one must only look at the history of our own country. Not the one that is taught in the education systems but the 'true' history. The history of the Federal Reserve and all of the other central banking systems throughout the world.

As one poster said. Follow the money. War creates debt and debt creates free money for the lenders (the Federal Reserve that just happens to be able to create money out of thin air on demand) via interest. Every war has benefitted the money lenders and this war against a foe that no one can truly pin down is exactly one that would create an endless need for military financing.

Just follow the money. It was perpetrated by some in power within the visible government but ultimately put into play by the so-called 'elite' behind the scenes.

I'm glad this topic was created and I hope that people can bring forth some solid evidence other than what has been hashed over many times.

For now, because of the media and 'official story' manipulation of the events, the facts stand as reported. This is simply because 'they' say so.

Remember, our president said it himself, "If you are not with us then you ARE with them!" Talk about typical psychological manipulation. There is no middle ground according to the authorities on this. So, they attack those that question the events by labeling them terrorists.

Just too many questionable events and disinformation to conclusively state that it was actually pulled off by a made up terrorist organization called Al Qaida.

To the CIA: That's what happens when you keep supplying people with money and weapons to fight for what they believe in. One day they decide to do what is right and then you are forced to contrive a BS story in order to label them a terrorist.

Just my two cents.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Wow guys. I have to say ive seen some great points made.

In my opinion however, this contest has exposed some serious flaws with our strategy...


What are the top five arguments to cast doubt on the official story, and how can it be stated succinctly?

Doesn't sound to hard, but once you get into it...

I think we all need to use this as an opportunity to come to some sort of consensus as to what the strongest points are and how best to argue them.

I dont think we can make it too terse tho. I mean, it takes you a whole semester to learn calculus or biology, why should you expect to be able to uncover decades of government psyops and blatant brainwashing?

America is a cult!

How do you get your average idiot interested in learning about 9.11 when it involves hours of rigorous study? And its especially difficult when they;re more interested in obsessing over what junk was found in Anna Nicole's fridge!!!



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg

Anyway, here is my biggest question for everyone to consider and one that is very important yet often overlooked in the debates.

Why hasn't there been another attack since that fateful day?

As one poster said. Follow the money. War creates debt and debt creates free money for the lenders (the Federal Reserve that just happens to be able to create money out of thin air on demand) via interest. Every war has benefitted the money lenders and this war against a foe that no one can truly pin down is exactly one that would create an endless need for military financing.

Just follow the money. It was perpetrated by some in power within the visible government but ultimately put into play by the so-called 'elite' behind the scenes.
Just too many questionable events and disinformation to conclusively state that it was actually pulled off by a made up terrorist organization called Al Qaida.
Just my two cents.


I think you have a whole seperate thread in that question waiting to happen.
Good post.
***************************************************

My entry Skeptic

1. Lack of accountability by members of the US Government
and military for incompetence before, during and after 9/11.
2. The initial government response: Why was Cheney running the country on 9/11? Where was Donald Rumsfeld, commander of the US armed forces? Why didn't American Airlines immediately alert the FAA headquarters and the military at 8:20 when the airline first learned from flight attendants onboard that a hijack was underway?
2. The ignorance of the FBI and CIA: With Al-Qaeda firmly on the radar for years, why were they unable to see this coming? The failings of the FBI's translation department: Why wasn't the Bureau set up to decipher the transmissions within its grasp?
4. The role of Pakistani secret intelligence: As the attacks were planned in Afghanistan, who was watching and who was invested?
5. The 9/11 Commission's investigation: Why weren't even the most obvious questions addressed?



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by sp00n1
What are the top five arguments to cast doubt on the official story, and how can it be stated succinctly?


Well... To me, anyway, the ultimate conspiracy is the effort to create these conspiracy theories. As I attempted to point out earlier, there is nothing new about Americans blaming "The Government" for every tragedy — natural or manmade — that befalls this country. Blaming the government seems like our national passtime, stretching back to the Lincoln assassination and probably before that. To me, the greater mystery is why we are so motivated to concoct these elaborate theories.

I understand that it may be simply part of our national heritage — Americans don't trust the government, and we never have. The Founders of this country didn't trust the very government they were establishing, and tried to build-in certain failsafes to the Constitution that would allow the American people to overthrow the central government should it became corrupt or oppressive.

Thanks to socialist infiltration of our great halls of learning, we're not proudly taught about our American heritage of rebellion anymore, and I seriously doubt that we've been in control of our government since the days of "The Great Socialist" FDR. But I know, or feel very certain, that we're still a nation of anti-government rebels, as is evidenced by our long history of dreaming up conspiracy theories.

I don't know and wouldn't try to guess how many of you out there have ever actually worked with a government agency, but I can tell you, in my experience, that our government simply isn't smart enough to pull off the Rube Goldberg conspiracies that fill this forum. The ingenuity required just doesn't exist among our combined branches of government and intelligence-gathering agencies. The people that populate our government couldn't come up with an original idea, much less an epic conspiracy, if you held their toes to the fire. If anything, members of the government elite are more adept at fighting lateral thought and innovative thinking, preferring the status quo of governmental mediocrity.

So... I'm not quite clear on the value of constructing a Top Five list of conspiracy theories attributed to the government. To me, it seems like giving them credit for a high level of creativity that they just do not possess.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
So... I'm not quite clear on the value of constructing a Top Five list of conspiracy theories attributed to the government. To me, it seems like giving them credit for a high level of creativity that they just do not possess.


I agree with you for the most part.

Fortunately, SO never said anything about blaming the government or figuring out "how THEY did it." This contest is about paring down the...


..top-5 concise issues that shed doubt on the official story of 9/11


Big difference, wouldn't you agree?



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essedarius
This contest is about paring down the...top-5 concise issues that shed doubt on the official story of 9/11
Big difference, wouldn't you agree?

Well, no. Who are the officials behind the "official story"? That would be the government, would it not? To shed doubt on the official story is to suggest that the government is not telling the truth regarding the events of 9/11, presumably to cover-up government complicity in the attacks.

Therefore, to shed doubt on the "official story" is to indict (blame) the government. I mean, who else is being blamed in the vast majority of conspiracy theories? (Not including the fringe theories that may point to malevolent aliens, demonic possessions, evil stockbrokers, et cetera.)

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/16/2007 by Doc Velocity]



new topics




 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join