Originally posted by justamomma
reply to post by Amaterasu
Things that do not definitively prove that our government was involved
1. Assumptions and/or theories
How about deductions? Holmesian deductions? Are they ok or taboo, too?
2. Lack of Evidence
Ah, lack of evidence like the 100 or so videos (including those from private sector cameras that were martial-law-like rounded up in the brief hours after the attack) that won't be released by the FBI, although there is no rational reason? That lack of evidence cannot be used to calculate the involvement of our government?
3. And this last one is specific, as you cited it.. the patriot act. I agree that it was obviously written for quite some time and YES!! Anyone who knows what I stand for KNOWS that I do not agree with its being implemented.. but this does NOT prove that 9/11 was an inside job. It just does not!
Hmmm. The way I deduce this evidence, it does. Why waste money and time spending years putting such a document together, in such detail and so prepared to eviscerate the Bill of Rights as well as the Constitution, with NO oversight by the people? I mean, if you aren't even sure you need it, and (in the pre-9/11 era) there was a perception of only a very small probability that we would be attacked on our soil - at least that was the prevailing view.
Or is deduction out? Well, I'll know when you answer and we can keep or discard this deduction based on whether deductions are allowed by you.
Obviously there are corrupt people in our government and obviously there are corrupt things that are being implemented into our daily lives.. but this does not mean that all are corrupt and it certainly doesn't mean there are not corrupt GROUPS of ppl in other societies that have an agenda of some sort with the western world in general.
Sure. All of this is correct. But if there are corrupt segments - as you say here - why is it a difficult step to entertain the idea that a corrupt segment set out to take over the presidency, appoint people to the right positions, use family members in the right businesses, and then pull off 9/11? I mean, especially when you have Hitler's example of how the public can be manipulated with a Reichstag? And all the more especially when you know that Granddad Bush was a Nazi supporter? And lots of influence came in here with Project Paperclip?
Given all this I deduce that it is a good probability, even. But I guess this will have to be thrown out if deduction is not allowed.
I still am not subscribing completely and wholly either way on the 9/11 stories. I am actually being shown both sides by someone who has been on both sides of the fence and thus far, the evidence that is cited by the truthers (I don't understand this label) has been effectively debunked.
Great! Show it to us. Like I said, the main points are not debunked to my knowledge. Can you debunk GW & VP refusing to testify under oath? Demanding to be interviewed together? What can you debunk?
But you have made several assumptions just in your replies to me on this thread and therefore it shows that you are willing to jump to conclusions simply based on the distorted one sided view you hold to.
For a THIRD time, please, list the specifics of these "assumptions" I am making.
I can't do that. I want to see what is actually going on in this world and that means not subscribing to anything until I have facts that show that I can.
So do I, but I also make deductions. I can't just wait for every scrap of evidence to fill the puzzle in completely. When I have 75% I can usually tell what the whole of the puzzle is a picture of. I can't sit here saying, Yup. There's the face of an elephant, three of the four legs of the elephant, and most of the body, but until I see that rear end and tail, there is no way I will know that this is a picture of an elephant, really.
And the facts out there, when compiled, create a near perfect image of a NeocoNazi elephant.
I have had to admit I was wrong numerous times on this board and have done so because I am not looking to make everything fit into my view of the world. I am rather looking to get my view in line with what is actually THE truth.
Heh. Me too. I am actually quite dispassionate about my world view. Interesting thing... I really didn't want 9/11 to be anything but the OCT (Official Conspiracy Theory) when it first happened, yet the speed at which Bin Laden was not only suggested, but accused, tried and convicted in the MSM all on the same day suggested differently.
I still clung to the OCT, assuring myself that no (virtually) immediate move would be made to use this to rob us of the rights as set forth in the founding documents - which I knew would be the logical next step if we planned and executed it. Why else would we bother if not for that goal?
So I spent the next few weeks hoping that I would not see any such suggestions come down the pike.
What *I* was expecting was a speech by Bush, rallies to write up the documents NOW. Move forward. Git 'er done, and all that. So I got a bit complacent at the end of the first month, thinking maybe, just maybe, all that media trial was a fluke. Nothing really was brought up.
I never anticipated just how prepared they were, but in retrospect I should not have been surprised when the "Patriot" Act, all well honed, with EXACTLY what I expected to topple receiving its toppling orders, landed in Congress with all this "rush, rush, don't read, just sign! NOW" creppola.
And on that day I cried.
I wept for the love and the principles, the freedom and the honor, that died that day, joining in death all those who died to keep those ideals alive.
This one truth I know. The events of 9/11 occurred. People died in horrific ways. This is all relevent to the choices that we are now facing. This is something that we should remember despite who wants us to remember and for whatever their purpose is.
Fine. Watch youtube memorials. Visit memorial sites. Remember whenever and however you want. But don't get behind the misuse, to put more demons into office using those poor dead people like so many mules in a train.
See, I am not of a herd mentality. I can view this video and not be swayed by fear and/or anger toward or against anyone, but have my own solemn rememberance for the ppl that died on our soil that day and reflect on how far I have personally come since it occurred.... my own thoughts and my own experience.
You are welcome to take from it what you will in that respect, but most (well, duh) people ARE of that mentality and to say, I can take only these things I want to and discard the rest, so others who see issues have a personal problem, is absurd. It is very socially irresponsible to have a piece like that, know it is being used on most as a manipulation tool, and just because it doesn't work on you, not speak out against it for the edification of those herd mentality most.
It is not about politics to me and therefore, like I said, it could have been obama and/or ron paul's video and still, my thoughts would have been the same.
But it IS about politics to those who made it. Those who made it used the emotional leverage of 9/11 to inject fear-mongering, to suggest the Republican party candidate was the only solution, to rile the public once more in a very specific direction (against muslim "extremists"). That was its whole purpose.
And I too can take what little there was of true tribute to the 9/11 victims and immerse myself in that if I have a need, but that is irrelevant to the fact that this emotional crow-bar is being used to wedge political views into the herd of..heh. What can I use here, since you find the right term to mean I have some kind of herd mentality? Well... You know what I mean.
[edit on 9/6/2008 by Amaterasu]
