The state of 9/11 Truth: not pretty

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by gottago

 

I'd say winning the Cold War, and stopping the spread of Communism/Anti American regimes, was in the USA's interests. If we can't agree on this, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Well, keep moving those goalposts. You'd initially asked for some examples of the CIA working counter to US interests, and you got them.

Fall back on flag waving if you like, but don't pretend you didn't get some honest answers, even if you didn't like them.

reply to post by gottago


Au contraire- I was merely elaborating on the fact that what you cited as faults, were things that enabled what I pointed out. I'm not gonna say that everyone that the CIA ever dealt with was pure as the driven snow, but if your choice is a brutal left wing dictator, friendly with the Soviets, or a brutal right wing dictator, friendly to us, you go with the less distasteful choice. Additionally, in order to get good HUMINT, you might have to deal with unsavory types, as they're the ones in the know.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by gottago

 

Au contraire- I was merely elaborating on the fact that what you cited as faults, were things that enabled what I pointed out. I'm not gonna say that everyone that the CIA ever dealt with was pure as the driven snow, but if your choice is a brutal left wing dictator, friendly with the Soviets, or a brutal right wing dictator, friendly to us, you go with the less distasteful choice. Additionally, in order to get good HUMINT, you might have to deal with unsavory types, as they're the ones in the know.

Oh please. Don't fall back on those tired canards. Let's keep it on actual events, not broad-brush generalizations that have no validity.

The CIA overthrew Mossaddeq, a democratically elected PM, because he wanted to nationalize Iranian oil and the Brits and Ike didn't like the Iranians being uppity enough to dare to own and profit from their own sovereign resources. Here's Wiki on the '53 Iran coup.

The idea of overthrowing Mosaddeq was conceived by the British who asked U.S. President Harry S. Truman for assistance but he refused. The British raised the idea again to Dwight D. Eisenhower who became president in 1953. The new administration agreed to participate in overthrowing the elected government of Iran.

Mosaddeq decided that Iran ought to begin profiting from its own vast oil reserves and took steps to nationalize the oil industry which had previously been controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (later changed to the British Petroleum Company). Britain pointed out that Iran was violating the company's legal rights and spearheaded a worldwide boycott of Iran's oil that submerged the regime into financial crisis. The monarchy supported by the U.S. and Britain invited western oil companies back into Iran.

"The crushing of Iran's first democratic government ushered in more than two decades of dictatorship under the Shah, who relied heavily on US aid and arms," Dan De Luce wrote in The Guardian in a review of All the Shah's Men by Stephen Kinzer, a reporter for The New York Times, who for the first time revealed details of the coup.

It was oil, pure and simple. No flag waving, no Communist boogeymen. Sound familiar?

An objection about a point raised in an earlier post:

I don't believe that anyone in the entire agency at which I worked would feel comfortable attributing the 'winning' of the cold war to the CIA. They complicated issues more than resolved them. But I will tell you - if you expect elaboration on that statement you;ll be disappointed.

The CIA (and FBI for that matter) are highly vested in propaganda - even to the point of applying it within the administration to aggrandize their 'achievements' and minimize their blunders.

Its what happens when political appointees run the show - no long term commitments - no continuity - disregard for consequences, etc.

This thread is about the state of 9/11 conspiracies, or 9/11 truth...

It has been SIX and a half YEARS and what? Nothing , thats what.


I NOW consider 9/11 truth or whatever a silly side bar.. a non sequitor.

Who really cares what 9/11 truthers believe? It is redundant nothing..leading to ..well, if the last 7 years is any example.... NOTHING.
A time waster! a way to escape true, meaningful enveavors and care about something Sooooo important that..erm..well..NOTHING!

Same stuff , different *YEAR*.. Same 18 or so "9/11 conspiracy" regs either creating, or keeping threads alive... BORING!

Adios.. time wasters.



[edit on 17-3-2008 by Taxi-Driver]

Originally posted by Studenofhistory
reply to post by jthomas

 

You say you believe experts who support their case with evidence.

Correct.

Apparently experts who 'debunk' 911 Truth are believable but experts who support it are not. You're hypocracy is stunning!

I believe experts who support their case with evidence. So far, your experts have made claims, assertions, and proffered theories - nothing more.

Do you understand basic physics? Do you understand how absurd it is to contend that a building containing thousands of tons of structural steel can collapse just as fast as a billiard ball dropped off the roof falling thru thin air?

I understand that your claims are wrong. WTC 1 , 2, and 7 did NOT collapse at free fall speeds.

I haven't found ANY expert, who can give me a reasonable explanation of how EVERYTHING in those buildings was pulverized into dust including furniture, computers, and things made of metal (we know that due to chemical analysis of the white dust).

Several papers have addressed this to my satisfaction.

HOW GULLIBLE CAN YOU BE?

Not very. I do not accept your claims.


[edit on 18-3-2008 by jthomas]

[edit on 18-3-2008 by jthomas]

[edit on 18-3-2008 by jthomas]

Originally posted by coughymachine
reply to post by jthomas

 

First, I place no value whatsoever on anything you say once, let alone anything you might chose to repeat.

Yopu can confirm it for yourself.

Second, as I have shown here and countless others have shown elsewhere, the 9/11 Commission Report is flawed in a great many ways, as confirmed by the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Commission.

That's right, but my statement as to their conclusions is not one of them.

So any repetition of your baseless assertion that its conclusions are reliable is, I'm afraid, laughable.

You're welcome to demonstrate your claims that that the Commission's conclusions have either changed or are "not reliable."

I am curious what your evidence is.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
"fighting the question of access right up to the end"

Doesn't sound like the FAA and NORAD, as well as the White House, were very helpful with the 911 Commission. My question to you jthomas would be why?

This is a very easy question to answer.

They're all career gubmint employees and they doing the cover your azz shuffle in order to hide the failures in the intelligence community and the failure in the govt's general policy failure in the Middle East.

reply to post by Maxmars


I wasn't intending to mean that the CIA was responsible for winning the Cold War, but I don't think one can dismiss them as having any positive role in that achievement. Sure they had blunders, and I agree about the lack of continuity in having appointees in leadership roles, as the CIA and FBI(or any other agency of this sort) should never have a politicized leadership. Merit and experience should be the sole criteria.

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
It is redundant nothing..leading to ..well, if the last 7 years is any example.... NOTHING.
A time waster!

Well. Quit wasting your time then. C-ya.

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Adios.. time wasters.

Who was forcing you to stay?

This thread was on my list, but after reading the last few posts, I think it's time to relegate this thread to the dustbin.

All I have seen, in the last few posts, are....ONE-LINE posts!!

Guess this thread hasn't been looked at in a while.....

Shame, though....because it seems like a good idea, should be explored in a considered and mature way......

I think I'm wasting my time trying to convince Jthomas that the official version of 911 is fishy. He refuses to acknowledge that we 911 Truthers DON'T HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING! It's the official version that is full of holes and demands proof. Two planes brought down WTC 1 and 2? Prove it! The problem is, nobody can. Your experts' reports are opinions, not proof BUT the facts speak for themselves. I direct your attention to the 25 Intolerable Contradictions thread where the FACTS (are you listening Jthomas?) are inconsistent with the official explanation. FACTS are NOT theories, Jthomas. They can't be ignored just because you want them to be. I would also direct your attention to this site.
Patriotsquestion911.com
130+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
360+ Engineers and Architects
100+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
230+ Professors Question 9/11
200+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
130+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
ALL question the validity of the official explanation. Funny how I don't see a flood of websites with a groundswell of grassroots indignation in SUPPORT of the official explanation. Why is that, Jthomas? By ignoring or dismissing all these people's opinions, you are arrogantly saying that you're smarter than all of them.

I have come to two possible conclusions as to why you are so persistent in your support of the official explanation. EITHER you're being paid to do this or you're doing this to get some perverse thrill at pushing our buttons. In either case I don't see how this thread serves any useful purpose anymore. I suggest to those of use who do care about the TRUTH, that we leave Jthomas to play with himself on this thread and make better use of our time elsewhere.

reply to post by Studenofhistory


Studen(t)?of history.....

You put up a lot of stuff....it's now up to you to back it up.

Anyone can make a claim, and find a few hundred people to support that claim...even though a few hundred are saying something that THOUSANDS of others refute....

If you want to change minds, you must bring irrefutable proof to the table. Think of a poker game...your cards are the proof...show your cards!

Originally posted by weedwhacker
even though a few hundred are saying something that THOUSANDS of others refute....

I believe your signature explains it all.

We live in a society where being educated and thinking for yourself is put down.

Now do you understand where those "thousands" are comming from?

BTW, I have YET to hear from you debunkers what your education and/or employment is. Why is that?

Seems to me that the "truthers" here have more education and experience. But, we are "crazy" for that.

Well if there was nothing to hide and it all happened like the commission said, then why not video evidence being released. This is a big eye opener and explains much between the lines and creates even more questions. This could answer everything pretty quick and put the tin foil hat set out on their arses.

The 9/11 truth movement is not going to take a nosedive as they have dealt with far worse and more damning controversy than this.

For me, major airline pilots who are the best in their field have pointed out that even they could not manage such maneuvers without the assistance of air traffic controllers- and even with this support they had their doubts as to the ability to pull of such precision air moves. This has always been enough for me.

I don't care if we ever find out the truth about 9/11 because the evil schemers who did this would not ever be reliable or credible in any way.

In my opinion 9/11 was just another red-flag operation which was designed to bring the United States into war. We will see another and this time- they will not make the same mistakes they made on 9/11. They were incredibly arrogant to think that people are that stupid and that there are so many naive Americans as well as international idiots. The internet was another tool which was under-estimated.

These evil cabals have fully recovered and are about ready to take the next step. Its gonna be a doosey!

reply to post by Griff


Sorry, Griff...I wasn't 'debunking'. AND, I wasn't addressing you.

But, thanks for butting in.

I simply would like to point out that there are only a few hundred, OK, maybe a few thousand dissenters as pertains to the 'official' 9/11 story.

However, there are hundreds of thousands of equally 'qualified' observers and scientists who do not dissent. I ask..."WHY?"

I sit here, reading on my screen, and wish to be educated. So, educate me.....

Originally posted by dk3000
Well if there was nothing to hide and it all happened like the commission said, then why not video evidence being released. This is a big eye opener and explains much between the lines and creates even more questions. This could answer everything pretty quick and put the tin foil hat set out on their arses.

On the contrary. We all know that ALL of the evidence already demonstrates that AA77 hit the Pentagon. We no more need a video of the crash to know AA77 crashed into the Pentagon than a bald person needs a haircut.

Why would a video make any difference when the physical evidence means nothing to them?

This whole "we-need-a-video" nonsense is just another red herring the 9/11 Truth Movement holds onto so they can avoid dealing with ALL of the evidence. It always has been, it always will be. It's the nature of the beast.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I simply would like to point out that there are only a few hundred, OK, maybe a few thousand dissenters as pertains to the 'official' 9/11 story.

Nice way of putting it. "Dissenters".

However, there are hundreds of thousands of equally 'qualified' observers and scientists who do not dissent. I ask..."WHY?"

Because they haven't fully read and investigated it. I have seen people who thought the official story true change their mind when presented with the glaring inconsistencies.

I sit here, reading on my screen, and wish to be educated. So, educate me.....

1 + 1 = 2

There ya go.

reply to post by dk3000


dk3000, I had to respond to a portion of your post up above. I don't know what airline pilots you've talked to, but your comment that they couldn't have pulled off the 9/11 attacks WITHOUT help from ATC is ludicrous! Sorry for being blunt, but it is silly.

Background: ATC is sort of a misnomer. Now, before you start shooting arrows at me, allow me to explain. Air Traffic Control is an authority designed to have an overview of air traffic within the area of responsibility of a particular controller, and to provide guidance, and/or give instructions to the airplanes in his/her sector in order to maintain order, provide safe separation standards, and co-ordinate the flow of traffic.

A pilot is not a slave to ATC! We both know the rules of the road, so to speak. Pilots think of themselves as 'users' of the system, a 'customer' if you will. We know what is expected of us, and we respect what the controllers do in return. There are personality clashes, occasionally, but it isn't any different from any two professionals having a minor disagreement within their selected field.

My point is...ATC is like a traffic cop, and I apologize for that, not intended to demean the job, or the responsibilities, and there is much more that goes on, I know...but just to make it simple, that's it. By the same token, an airline pilot is just a glorified bus driver! Yes, we have to take a lot more tests, and our skill sets are different, but within the system, we h ave little leeway. We are pigeon-holed into the structure, and it is designed for safety first....

guess I strayed ... the ability to hit a tall building in CAVU conditions shouldn't be the question. It is dead simple to steer an airplane in flight.

Especially when you aren't worried about being smooth on the controls, when your only focus is a whacked-out mission of suicide/murder!