Sept. 26, 2009 > 911 flyer hand out

Sept. 26, 2009 > 911 flyer hand out - results, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times

reply posted on 2-10-2009 @ 01:23 PM by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by bsbray11
Who do you think is legally responsible for the investigation done into 9/11, "GoodOlDave"?

Why is *legally* responsible? Noone, actually, To my knowledge, there was no legal requirement for the gov't or anyone else for that matter to explain to us how Al Qaida pulled off 9/11, and we have a little thing called the fifth amendment stating that Al Qaida wasn't legally required to explain how they pulled it off, either.

Rather, the gov't released a report that explained how the perps pulled off 9/11 becuase a) public pressure (plus a few Jersey Girls) needled congress into giving us at least some explanation for 9/11, and b) becuase it necessarily involved intelligence agencies, military officers, NYPA engineers, NIST, FEMA, the FAA, NORAD, etc, the gov't is the only entity who could bring together the resources to even conduct an interview.

If anything I said here is incorrect, by all means, enlighten me.

reply posted on 2-10-2009 @ 01:31 PM by bsbray11

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Why is *legally* responsible? Noone, actually

Congress actually authorized/charged NIST with handling the forensic evidence and producing a report. They may have done the same for FEMA but I'm not actually sure. However, as soon as you start reading the NIST report, they tell you themselves they were assigned this report by Congress.

So NIST was the one legally responsible for this report, and to find out what happened to the Twin Towers. Not me, not you. So the burden of proof is not legally upon you or I but upon NIST. NIST defends their work, we critique it. And if you already disagree with NIST, then you already support either further investigation or prolonged ignorance.

reply posted on 2-10-2009 @ 02:20 PM by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by bsbray11
Congress actually authorized/charged NIST with handling the forensic evidence and producing a report. They may have done the same for FEMA but I'm not actually sure. However, as soon as you start reading the NIST report, they tell you themselves they were assigned this report by Congress.

That's not what you asked. You asked who was legally responsible for the investigation of 9/11, which I take to mean researching the overall details of who committed the attack, how they did it, and the chain of events leading up to and during the attack. NIST OTOH was charged with documenting the physical mechanics of the collapse, which is a separate field of study from the 9/11 plot itself. They can still research how the fires reacted to the structural steel without knowing who Mohammed Atta was.

That said...

So NIST was the one legally responsible for this report, and to find out what happened to the Twin Towers. Not me, not you. So the burden of proof is not legally upon you or I but upon NIST. NIST defends their work, we critique it. And if you already disagree with NIST, then you already support either further investigation or prolonged ignorance.

I absolutely agree, if the NIST report contains details which don't make sense then, yes, the demands for a further investigation are perfectly valid. The problem is, are the demands for a new investigation REALLY due to any actual dissent over the findings, or is it merely becuase the people demanding the new investigation prefer to believe in some sinister gov't conspiracy and they will accept no findings which contradict it?

reply posted on 2-10-2009 @ 02:32 PM by bsbray11

reply to post by GoodOlDave

Ok, the Kean Commission was charged to investigate all the other angles you just mentioned. So that's a separate authority, but nonetheless THE legal authority to address with all of our grievances and unanswered questions. So I guess we can agree there is little to no point being at each other's throats to produce this evidence or that evidence, because it's just not our responsibility. If we can demonstrate inadequacies, and missing information, that's all we really have the responsibility to do.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The problem is, are the demands for a new investigation REALLY due to any actual dissent over the findings, or is it merely becuase the people demanding the new investigation prefer to believe in some sinister gov't conspiracy and they will accept no findings which contradict it?

Worry about that when the time comes. For now, why in the hell do you think so many people have reason to believe there was a "sinister gov't conspiracy"? Seriously?

reply posted on 5-10-2009 @ 12:39 PM by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by bsbray11

Ok, the Kean Commission was charged to investigate all the other angles you just mentioned. So that's a separate authority, but nonetheless THE legal authority to address with all of our grievances and unanswered questions. So I guess we can agree there is little to no point being at each other's throats to produce this evidence or that evidence, because it's just not our responsibility. If we can demonstrate inadequacies, and missing information, that's all we really have the responsibility to do.

But then that's the problem, isn't it? Are the inadequacies actually inadeqacies, or are they simply a deliberate manipulation of the facts to manufacture these supposed inadequacies to instigate false public unrest? When, for example, The Loose Change mockumentary shows a supposed photo of gov't agents carrying a mysterious covered object out of the wreckage of the Pentagon rubble, and then we later learn it's actually a photo of rescue workers bringing a triage tent in, we have to doubt the true motives of the truther movement, as there's no way this misidentification could have been done accidentally.

Worry about that when the time comes. For now, why in the hell do you think so many people have reason to believe there was a "sinister gov't conspiracy"? Seriously?

That's an easy question to answer- all these damned fool conspiracy web sites are churning out absolute rubbish to deliberately get people all paranoid in order to sell them useless junk. I know this is what's happening because the huge majority of 9/11 conspiracy people I've talked to also believe in *other* conspiracies as well (I.E. the CIA assassinated JFK, the moon landing is faked, UFOs are stored in area 51, etc), so they'd naturally be the ones who'd be browsing those types of web sites in the first place.

The truthers apparently think that behind these impressive looking conspiracy websites there's a headquarters building in Washington D.C. filled with investigators and lawyers, or something, when in the real world they're actually being run by a bunch of college kids out of their dorm room. How much secret, inside information would a bunch of college kids running a web site out of their dorm room actually have, anyway?

reply posted on 5-10-2009 @ 01:04 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

reply to post by Anti-Evil

Each and every time I see a new 9/11 thread, it amazes me what gets posted on it.

Rarely do I see people posting anything about these two books.

Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001

The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century

Even rarer, do I ever see anyone speaking about Operation Cyclone and all of the involvement the C.I.A. had with Osama bin Laden prior to September 11th.

Charlie Wilson's War, a hollywood adaption of it, without mention of the connection to Osama bin Laden is even out there.

I commend you for doing the poll/flyer Anti-Evil but with that small demographics, you need to reach out a lot bigger to get a general feeling of the community.

reply posted on 5-10-2009 @ 01:19 PM by Swampfox46_1999

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

There was no Bin Laden connection in the movie, because there was no CIA/Bin Laden connection. How many times does it have to be said that there were two groups of fighters fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. One, was the native Afghans who we trained and supplied through Pakistan, the other group were Arabs on Jihad, supported by Bin Laden and others.

There are interviews with Bin Laden from long before Sept 2001 in which he himself states that he had no assistance from the United States.

reply posted on 5-10-2009 @ 01:23 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

There was no Bin Laden connection in the movie, because there was no CIA/Bin Laden connection. How many times does it have to be said that there were two groups of fighters fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. One, was the native Afghans who we trained and supplied through Pakistan, the other group were Arabs on Jihad, supported by Bin Laden and others.

There are interviews with Bin Laden from long before Sept 2001 in which he himself states that he had no assistance from the United States.

Have you read either of these two books?

Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001

The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century

While there may not be a physical connection, like paperwork, there was definately a connection there, and deniability was evident through utilizing cut-outs and familial relationships with the Al Saud family.

I will take Steve Coll's word any day.

Osama bin Laden would deny his mother was a Government Agent, if she were, not that I am saying she is, in order to save face with the people of the Middle East.

This is called deniability, plain and simple, deniability is used in just the same way by our Government to disconnect the facts by various means through cut-outs, false papertrails, and as well destroying someone's credibility.

I wonder if you are old enough to remember Oliver North.

When it comes to getting caught in Government lies, it's deny, deny, deny.

[edit on 5-10-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply posted on 5-10-2009 @ 02:28 PM by Swampfox46_1999

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

Have you read this one as well..

"I can sell you the Brooklyn Bridge in five minutes" by P.T. Barnum??

Because if you believe every word in Mr. Coll's books..you will believe anything. Bin Laden didnt need any help (especially from the Great Satan) in what he did in Afghanistan. Nor did he represent his family or the Saudi government for that matter. His hatred of Westerners is deep and well-documented. Which to be honest doesnt really matter, IF the had been a connection, it would just be one more example of us helping someone who then turned on us.

Then you bring up Colonel North. I can only guess you are trying to make an Evel Kinevel sized leap in logic to show a connection between our selling a bunch of mostly broken/obsolete weapons to the Iranians and Osama Bin Laden. In which case, you have achieved the same result as Evel....crash and burn.

You do realize that Iranians and Arabians arent the same right?

reply posted on 6-10-2009 @ 03:29 PM by SpartanKingLeonidas

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

Have you read this one as well..

"I can sell you the Brooklyn Bridge in five minutes" by P.T. Barnum??

Because if you believe every word in Mr. Coll's books..you will believe anything. Bin Laden didnt need any help (especially from the Great Satan) in what he did in Afghanistan. Nor did he represent his family or the Saudi government for that matter. His hatred of Westerners is deep and well-documented. Which to be honest doesnt really matter, IF the had been a connection, it would just be one more example of us helping someone who then turned on us.

Then you bring up Colonel North. I can only guess you are trying to make an Evel Kinevel sized leap in logic to show a connection between our selling a bunch of mostly broken/obsolete weapons to the Iranians and Osama Bin Laden. In which case, you have achieved the same result as Evel....crash and burn.

You do realize that Iranians and Arabians arent the same right?

While I have never read P.T. Barnum's book I know bunk when I see it and I often wonder why the con-artist's, scam artist's, and sham operators ignore the fact that I can see right through them all the time but then again I tend to let them think they still have their charms I just politely turn them down and ignore their crap.

I never once stated Osama bin Laden loved us nor did I state he only asked for and was granted assistance by the C.I.A., so alluding to my saying that is ground for misconstruing the context and intent altogether totally and characterization of everything I had to say from start to finish in a totally false light.

That two separate operations could not act simultaneously, clandestinely, and autonomously of each other is completely possible, is it not?

The amount of back channel communication and cash flow was very secretive.

This would be akin to running two operations, one as the main, and the second as a contingency plan in order to assure that all their eggs were not in one basket.

Evil Knievel? You're really going to bring up a man who had no concept of family except of what to do to ruin it in order to compare my post to it doing what he most commonly did, wreck?

Oh Heaven forbid, you are trying to be allude to me being a racist or imply racism through ignorance about what I said about Oliver North and the Iran/Contra scandal in that I might not know the difference between Iran, Iraq, Israel, and the rest of the Middle East.

Oh no, what on Earth shall I do.

I have to wonder if you even know who Francis Marion was to begin with or if you just picked your name out of a hat in the first place because I sure as Hell did not learn his name through watching the Disney television show but by actually reading history books, knowing what staging grounds are through studying military tactics, and practicing thoroughly my knowledge of the Art of War.

If those were the only two books I had read, I would have said exactly that, but I was only utilizing those two as originating sources for an immense amount of research as a starting point for those who know little to nothing about the burning desert sands of the Middle East.

So, either contextually, you are not paying very close attention, or through intent you are trying to misdirect and or misinform people, or you truly believe you are the only one who can ever be right and now I remember why I had originally put you on ignore and I wonder why the Hell I had taken you off of it.

I have even read Oliver North's book, just so you know, and I know where he has told the truth and where he told little white lies, as well as where the elephants are being shoved up Congress's backsides.

I remember more about the 80's than Ronald Reagan did.

I know who Admiral John Poindexter is and where he was located and what he's currently doing.

I know that the Total Information Awareness program under the Information Awareness Office was shut down when it was found out we were being spied on illegally and was re-opened as the Terrorism Information Awareness program.