The Undebunkable Video: Eliminate The Impossible

Originally posted by AusiAnarchist

It was also a nice way to destroy evidence of crimes committed by the wealthy elite while simultaneously making them an enormous profit through insurance claims.

This is a line of thinking that I've never understood. Are the elites that run the big insurance companies just not "in on it"?

And if they have an inkling that there was foul play then why did they pay out?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


This is a great question. I would think that some clarity could be found in discovering exactly what the process is to have money go from Fed to Insurance Co. to claimant. Its not outside the realm of possibility for the Fed to just give a large sum of money to anyone or any company and then not have their enforcement dept. (IRS) investigate it. I think its more than likely that this very thing happens quite often, but I'm just speculating about this particular instance. Regardless, without any "authority" to require that the Fed tell us who it loans or gives money to, this possiblity can never be dismissed regarding any crime.

BTW if you don't believe that the IRS takes its orders from the Fed, then explain to me how Tim Geithner could possibly owe $200k in income taxes and even be considered for a position like Sec. of Treasury, much less be appointed as such and pay $0 in penalties....hell, he probably didn't pay it at all. There are so many more Fed "employees" that just coincedentally have similar issues with similar outcomes that could be discussed, he is just the most blatant example of "F--- YOU AMERICA" I can think of.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
here's a novel idea. truthers, lay out your official story so we can riducule it and rip it to pieces

explaining an event that previously seemed unthinkable is likely to have holes in it, as the hijakers intended on hiding their actions prior to take off, and all the investigators had to go with is the rubble

this does not mean aliens sent holograms from the dark side of the moon

Way to paint the whole body of People who see the evidence and the science and know We are being lied to with the weirdest brush in the lot.

Although I don't discount completely the "aliens sent holograms from the dark side of the moon," I give this description of things a VERY low probability, and most who know that whole thing was engineered to shock Us and awe Us into war and giving up rights actually discount that out of hand.

Maybe You should join Hooper and G.O. Dave...?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


So you are saying that 9/11 thruthers are all convinced that the government did it because of TV and movies? Is that what your trying to say?

Because if that is so, I can't stop laughing.

Originally posted by budaruskie
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

This is a great question. I would think that some clarity could be found in discovering exactly what the process is to have money go from Fed to Insurance Co. to claimant. Its not outside the realm of possibility for the Fed to just give a large sum of money to anyone or any company and then not have their enforcement dept. (IRS) investigate it. I think its more than likely that this very thing happens quite often, but I'm just speculating about this particular instance. Regardless, without any "authority" to require that the Fed tell us who it loans or gives money to, this possiblity can never be dismissed regarding any crime.

That seems highly improbable to me, simply becuase it expands the number of people who would have to know about the conspiracy by a large margin. Everybody involved with the accountancy process of the insurance companies would know about this and have yto keep quiet.

You're effectively saying that the big insurance companies - whose accounts are a matter of public record - are somehow acting as a laundering machine to get government money top wrongdoers. And nobody has ever found any evidence of it, and no one involved has ever come forward. this isn't impossible, but it's extremely unlikely.

Originally posted by Jo Jo
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

So you are saying that 9/11 thruthers are all convinced that the government did it because of TV and movies? Is that what your trying to say?

Because if that is so, I can't stop laughing.

No. I obviously didn't say that. But I think that the dominance of the US's visual culture led a lot of people to think they know what a building collapse ought to look like, or what an explosion should sound like or resemble. In fact they just see stuff in films.

I also think that the way that films simplify and glamourise certain forms of expertise is also at the core of this. The impossibly powerful special agents exist in the movies so they must be there in real life too.

A lot of Truthers started questioning - I think - when they saw the buildings collapse like a CD. This is why CD is such an article of faith. It's what most truthers' began with, the foundation of their thinking. Never mind that it's never been proven, would be pointless, and in practical terms is all but impossible. And never mind that, in fact, a conspiracy doesn't require it. It's the entry point, so it's vital that it be proved.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


I appreciate your response, however I disagree with your logic. Why couldn't the Fed make "private" contributions to individuals who work at insurance companies? I understand that this is pure speculation (which by the way is how all investigation begins) but what would you do if some "official" offered you a large sum of money with a guarantee of no investigation for a particular decision to be made at your own personal job...and possibly a threat if you failed to comply? After all, the insurance companies are intimately related to gov't already. Who is it that subsidizes insurance companies, who forces an entire population to purchase insurance, who investigates (or doesn't) crimes committed by insurance companies.

In reality the only leap in logic I'm asking of you is to imagine that it is possible that a small force inside the executive branch that is routinely caught lying, stealing, and cheating would be willing to lie, cheat, and steal in this particular instance.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Excellent post! Star and flag from me. The best and most convincing ATS post I've seen about 9/11 yet.

Originally posted by budaruskie
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

I appreciate your response, however I disagree with your logic. Why couldn't the Fed make "private" contributions to individuals who work at insurance companies? I understand that this is pure speculation (which by the way is how all investigation begins) but what would you do if some "official" offered you a large sum of money with a guarantee of no investigation for a particular decision to be made at your own personal job...and possibly a threat if you failed to comply? After all, the insurance companies are already intimately related to gov't already. Who is it that subsidizes insurance companies, who forces an entire population to purchase insurance, who investigates (or doesn't) crimes committed by insurance companies.

But that isn't all it would take. Insurance companies run books that are a matter of internal and public record. You can see their accounts, but also internally a large number of people are party to individual risks and liabilities.

You're asking me to believe that enormous sums - millions and millions of dollars - could pass unnoticed through an insurers hands, that they could pay out these extravagant sums with only a few key people knowing. That's impossible.

Think about it for a minute. How would it actually happen? Would they intimidate a broker or someone in the back office? What account would the federal money be paid into? And how? How would it be paid in without someone other than the immediate contact knowing? How would it be expressed on the balance sheet? The shareholders would see that, say 100 million has gone out - that's a liability. It would take all of five seconds for someone to ask where that money came from. How would that question be answered?

I'm sorry, it's ludicrous.

In reality the only leap in logic I'm asking of you is to imagine that it is possible that a small force inside the executive branch that is routinely caught lying, stealing, and cheating would be willing to lie, cheat, and steal in this particular instance.

But you're not. You're asking me to believe that this small force - which I admit is a possibility - is able to silence thousands of people with money and threats. Including entire insurance companies. I find that very, very unlikely.

Most governments around the world are morally corrupt and therefore it's so easy to cover up the truth. Money talks! Politicians are easily bought off and are only too eager to lie. Look at the stinking, rotten EU, UK & US. Why is there always so much money that can't be accounted for and there's never an investigation as to why this is.

9 TRILLION Dollars Missing from Federal Reserve,Fed Inspector General Can’t Explain.
http://(nolink)/2011/06/14/9-trillion-dollar-missing-federal-reservefed-inspector-general-explain-27461/

Millions of euros of lobby spending are missing from the lobby register
www.corporateeurope.org...
www.ukipmeps.org...

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

I'm saying that television takes huge liberties with what really happens in order to be more exciting. You can't watch a police procedural on TV and assume that it depicts what really happens.

Of course they take liberties. My statement was a generalization that they demonstrate utilizing the scientific method to solve mysteries with empirical evidence.

That's a big problem with 9/11 Truth. Significant numbers of truthers are not satisfied with what happens purely because it doesn't look like what they think it should based on what they see in films. It's a fairly basic error.

Respectfully, I disagree with this comment. A significant number of "Truthers" are skeptical, critical thinkers. This is a good quality.The movies are used as an example to support using the scientific method to investigate evidence, observations, and statements from eye witnesses to better understand "what happened".

reply to post by ontarff


Okay. I don't share your optimism about Truthers' general standard of enquiry, but I suppose it is just about reasonable to suggest that careful scientific investigation has been popularised by TV. Unfortunately so has a lot of other stuff that seems to turn people into instant experts.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by AusiAnarchist

It was also a nice way to destroy evidence of crimes committed by the wealthy elite while simultaneously making them an enormous profit through insurance claims.

This is a line of thinking that I've never understood. Are the elites that run the big insurance companies just not "in on it"?

And if they have an inkling that there was foul play then why did they pay out?

Interesting, your title is that of "Scholar", I would guess the second definition is applicable. If the first or third is applicable please identify your expertise. Allow me to point out a few facts for your consideration,

schol-ar
1. a learned or erudite person, especially one who has profound knowledge of a particular subject.
2. a student; pupil.
3. a student who has been awarded a scholarship.

Fact: Insurance companies LOSE money (unless compensated) when they have to pay on a claim.
Fact: Conducting an extensive investigation with private funding to determine the cause for an event of this magnitude would be very costly (adding to losses), and not very prudent when a concurrent government investigation is being conducted.

Now, considering the evidence presented in this thread, the question should be; will an insurance company be bold enough to conduct a new investigation to support a civil lawsuit to recover losses paid out to Silverstein? I don't know. That would be a corporate decision.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Screw your pointless tv theory ... Do you believe 23,000 gallons of jet fuel brought down ,not two, but three massive steel/concrete towers.

You're constantly debating stuff only to stall the purpose of this debate. No one here cares about the TV/movie influence on us. That's another thread another day.


Right now , you need to answer a the simple question. And it should be easy answer . Doesn't involve videos or eyewitness accounts.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

A lot of Truthers started questioning - I think - when they saw the buildings collapse like a CD. This is why CD is such an article of faith. It's what most truthers' began with, the foundation of their thinking. Never mind that it's never been proven, would be pointless, and in practical terms is all but impossible. And never mind that, in fact, a conspiracy doesn't require it. It's the entry point, so it's vital that it be proved.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck? This is a good entry point...and has been proven by the physics identified in this thread.

Originally posted by ontarff


Interesting, your title is that of "Scholar", I would guess the second definition is applicable. If the first or third is applicable please identify your expertise. Allow me to point out a few facts for your consideration,

schol-ar
1. a learned or erudite person, especially one who has profound knowledge of a particular subject.
2. a student; pupil.
3. a student who has been awarded a scholarship.

I've no idea how to change the setting. The site just seemed to give me that appellation.

Fact: Insurance companies LOSE money (unless compensated) when they have to pay on a claim.
Fact: Conducting an extensive investigation with private funding to determine the cause for an event of this magnitude would be very costly (adding to losses), and not very prudent when a concurrent government investigation is being conducted.

Now, considering the evidence presented in this thread, the question should be; will an insurance company be bold enough to conduct a new investigation to support a civil lawsuit to recover losses paid out to Silverstein? I don't know. That would be a corporate decision.

But the evidence, according to the Truth Movement, is obvious and readily available. Collating it and adding ones own could run to, what, a million dollars, absolute maximum? There are apparently enough smoking guns on this website alone to shatter the "OS", so all they would need would be a few researchers. And having made this apparently simple case they would not have to pay out hundreds and hundreds of millions. They would definitely do it if they thought it was plausible.

And you haven't addressed my other question. Why are the big bosses in charge of the world's largest insurers not in on the conspiracy? When the fat cats get together, the bankers and the governments and the arms dealers, do they purposely leave the insurers out? And are the insurers unaware of the other profiteers existence? You would think that working on the front line of big money capitalism they would come across evidence of the conspirators every day. And maybe want to join in.

Originally posted by SpookyFox
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

Nope, they will be looked on as conspiracy nuts, if not totally forgotten. It sucks but it's true. Now can we finally all just accept that TPTB won this one and move along?


I hear there is lots of oil in canada, maybe if anyone from the masons, illminati or just anyone who is jewish and reading this could instigate a canadian terrorist attack against some other random american buildings, how about that stupid statue? I'd really like to get to work every day for $5 less. Thanks.

edit on 20-7-2011 by SpookyFox because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-7-2011 by SpookyFox because: (no reason given)

You are spot on mr.fox.
Don't forget NewZealand and its vast mineral deposits. We saw what happened their,
for the first time in an age. Sit back and watch the miners taking over.

Even funnier is that we are the financiers of our own ruination.
We buy into and work hard for the system,
not realising that the system is twisted and rotten to the core.

One thing though. Why have a real 'terrorist' attack, when you can fake it
with C.G.I. and actors?
When you own the broadcasting media, bobs your uncle and anything goes!
9/11 and 7/7 are just examples of somethings that went.
The public lap it up, as always. They do love a good movie.
Only we remain stuck in suspended disbelief long after the movie has ended.

And still nothing continues to get done.
We, the very many, offer little to no resistance to They, the very few.
Too funny

Will we do it now, or will we leave it a while?-
Stick our heads between our legs and kiss our arses goodbye.