The Anomalies

page: 6
6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   

JuniorDisco

Sremmos80


Yes they were looking for factories.. that was the entire point.. Would need more then just a missile or some parts to push a war on a country.


Um, dude. The war actually happened. You do know that? So they obviously didn't require it. You said yourself earlier that they only needed 9/11.

Once in Iraq they wanted any kind of WMD. A few old bits of biological warfare supplies would have done it. Literally a couple of dozen gas canisters would have been seized upon. It might not have been the ideal result but it would have been something. And how hard would that have been to fake?

If you think about it, your position amounts to some guys faking 9/11, then saying they attacked a country because of WMD, getting there and finding none, and not even bothering to stick some tins of cyanide in a shed, which would at least have been something. It's not persuasive.

"Hey Bob, I found a nuke, that's a WMD, surely?"
"Nope, you know the rules Stan, unless it's a factory we are just going back to the American people and pretending to have found nothing."


They needed to scare the masses and just a couple pictures or odd ball parts would not do the trick.


Although it would presumably be an improvement on 'nothing at all'?



I have no problem putting the cia behind these attacks, with help form the fbi and DHS and other gov agencies.


So that's who did it?


Where did I say i didn't know who was behind it? You put those words in my mouth when you used your ridiculous conspiracy breakdown.


Why is it ridiculous? Point to a bit that isn't required for your belief to be correct. If you don't believe an element I've included then fine, feel free to mention it.

Or - radically - you could just tell me what happened and how. Just a precis is fine.



And the difference between a nuke and a regular missile is that it is a NUKE... and there is more going on then just some extra parts in a NUKE.


Like what?


You think you can just take a sidewinder and turn it into a nuke?? And you think any factory can just add those extra parts willy nilly? Our gov needs to get you to make there nukes if you figured out a way to just add some parts to a regular missile to make it a nuke.


A nuclear missile is a missile with a warhead attached. That's all. It's really not particularly complicated. And getting one wouldn't be that hard for the US government and the alphabet boys, would it?

Or would it? You tell me. I'm looking forward to the logical hoops you make yourself jump through with this one.


Ya i know the war happened.... You love putting words in peoples mouth.... Show me where i said it didn't happen.
I am stating it wouldn't be as easy as you are making it out to fake WMDS in another country...
Can you show me where one person found a nuke but then had it disregarded like "bob" did in your example?
Cause I never said that happened either......
Your crazy example again...
You said all they need to do is drive a missile out into the desert and take a picture and say it is a nuke and that would have proved that the country has and is producing WMDS
The factories would be the producing part... And that was the big no no... Producing is worse then having some on hand. That is what they were looking for, the production and what do you need to produce wmds??
And yes i think the US had either foreknowledge of the attacks and did nothing to stop it which makes them just as involved according to our justice system.
Even more i think the US gov help plan the attack and paved the way up to the morning for the attackers.
Operation Northwoods, yes it was never carried out but just goes to show you that it can be thought of at the highest level.
I can't 100% proof they are of course, but they haven't 100% convinced me they haven't

And can any ole factory make that simple warhead to attach to any missile to make it a nuke? Where are the nuclear warheads made?
Is it just in any ole weapons factory? Last time i checked we have highly specialized factories to add those "extra bits and pieces" Since nuclear energy is very unstable and if it isn't stored correctly it is kinda no bueno.

Is any missile considered an ICBM? Can you fake a ICBM as easily as you have stated? Another thing that we needed to find to prove a nuke threat. Would that be part of the easy fake that US could have done?

And to be honest IDK why they didn't fake something, probably means they tried and failed. Because they absolutely should have since it made the Bush admin look retarded when they had to admit Iraq never had WMDs
But just because they didn't fake WMDS in iraq doesn't mean they didn't fake the reason to get over there.
Once we got there the WMD thing was just a reason to stay longer and keep snooping around more

You logic that since they didn't fake WMDs in Iraq then there is no way they fake 911 is jumping through logical hoop at its finest btw.

LOL and my position is that they faked 911 to use the WMD excuse? Are we in the same thread? My position is they faked 911 to get the war started... And that the wmds was bologna...and used to just occupy for longer and raid anything they wanted in the "search" for WMDs... no need to fake what you only have to "assume based off intel" they have. Your stating it would have been easier to fake the discovery of the WMDs to spark the war then the false flag of 911.

edit on thThu, 30 Jan 2014 13:35:58 -0600America/Chicago120145880 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by neformore
 





The USA got caught with its pants down and received a very square kick in the backside, and people have been trying to invent reasons for that not to be the case ever since.


I think that in the most simplistic terms that is the rout of all 9/11 conspiracies, prior to 9/11 there was (or still is) a belief steaming form WWII that America was untouchable, that they were top of the food chain. I think this was a arrogant view that was woven into American society with a "we are the best" mentality that said nobody can best us.

9/11 changed all of that.

9/11 showed America to be weak, so weak that a bunch of guys crawling about caves on the other side of the planet where able to strike at the heart of American economic and military strength. Many Americans quite rightly find this a hard concept to swallow so invent these other reasons to explain the "hidden truth" that it was the Jews, it was their own government or it was a secret cabal of individuals who secretly rule the world and even that it was aliens. This attitude is in my mind one of the biggest drivers behind 9/11 conspiracies some people cannot accept that their beloved nation got hit so hard and so easily because they were weak


America has been hit twice.... Pearl Harbor and 9-11....
Both days involve pretty serious questions on just how much the admins of the respected offices knew of the attacks before hand. Then getting a report on one of the events that just rewrites fundamental physics and engineering and won't show how they come to the solution they get.
That is what drives the conspiracies... and that is why we are not willing to believe we got caught with our pants down, rather that dropping of the pants was the distraction to the open back door.

And in all the planning they did to expose our weakness they failed to cause the most damage to our strength, our unbridled military...
The pentagon was hit by a commercial airliner just like the wtc, pentagon is a much smaller building but it took just one little section of damage. And it was in the financial dept... Not where any high ranking military officials would be.
Complete opposite side actually. So did they just miss massively? Maybe bad intel, guess it all can't be perfect like the rest of the day. Or i guess cause that was the section that was under renovation, just like the sections of the towers that were just recently renovated.

Now I am sure they thought of the fact the US would retaliate, so in the planning meetings did they go out of there way to figure out how to cause such little damage to the pentagon in comparison to what the planes did to towers?
Why do the death defying ground skim preceded by that amazing turn when you could come down on top of the pentagon and cause more damage to the command center of the three headed beast that is our military?



posted on Jan, 31 2014 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Sremmos80

Ya i know the war happened.... You love putting words in peoples mouth.... Show me where i said it didn't happen.
I am stating it wouldn't be as easy as you are making it out to fake WMDS in another country...
Can you show me where one person found a nuke but then had it disregarded like "bob" did in your example?
Cause I never said that happened either......


You said they would need a bigger pretext than just a missile equipped with WMD to go to war:

Yes they were looking for factories.. that was the entire point.. Would need more then just a missile or some parts to push a war on a country

I was just pointing out that they didn't apparently need that, because they did go to war.

And I wasn't saying that you were suggesting that they had found a nuke. But rather that your idea that if they had found one they wouldn't have announced it because it "wasn't a factory" is ridiculous.





Your crazy example again...
You said all they need to do is drive a missile out into the desert and take a picture and say it is a nuke and that would have proved that the country has and is producing WMDS


They didn't need to prove they were producing them. Just that they had them.




The factories would be the producing part... And that was the big no no... Producing is worse then having some on hand. That is what they were looking for, the production and what do you need to produce wmds??


Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true. Yes, production capability would have been worse. But possession of WMD would still have been a huge win.

As I say, do you think they would have simply discarded any evidence of WMDs they found just because it wasn't a complete factory? Would Bob have been told to simply kick sand over the nuke he found?




And yes i think the US had either foreknowledge of the attacks and did nothing to stop it which makes them just as involved according to our justice system.
Even more i think the US gov help plan the attack and paved the way up to the morning for the attackers.
Operation Northwoods, yes it was never carried out but just goes to show you that it can be thought of at the highest level.
I can't 100% proof they are of course, but they haven't 100% convinced me they haven't

And can any ole factory make that simple warhead to attach to any missile to make it a nuke? Where are the nuclear warheads made?
Is it just in any ole weapons factory? Last time i checked we have highly specialized factories to add those "extra bits and pieces" Since nuclear energy is very unstable and if it isn't stored correctly it is kinda no bueno.

Is any missile considered an ICBM? Can you fake a ICBM as easily as you have stated? Another thing that we needed to find to prove a nuke threat. Would that be part of the easy fake that US could have done?


So let me get this straight. The US government - which owns a lot of nuclear missiles and ICBMs - can't put one in a desert because "they are hard to make"?




And to be honest IDK why they didn't fake something, probably means they tried and failed. Because they absolutely should have since it made the Bush admin look retarded when they had to admit Iraq never had WMDs


It did. Which if you're not automatically reaching for a conspiracy theory to explain everything, probably means they don't have the near-magical powers required to pull off 9/11.



Once we got there the WMD thing was just a reason to stay longer and keep snooping around more


Nope. You've simply made that up. It was the reason - or one of them - that they went to war.


You logic that since they didn't fake WMDs in Iraq then there is no way they fake 911 is jumping through logical hoop at its finest btw.


It's really not. If the US government is evil enough and capable of conducting an operation like 9/11 then it is absurd to think they would balk at faking WMDs in Iraq. Your explanation for this - that it would be difficult - is pure nonsense.



LOL and my position is that they faked 911 to use the WMD excuse? Are we in the same thread?


I have no idea what you are talking about.


My position is they faked 911 to get the war started... And that the wmds was bologna...and used to just occupy for longer and raid anything they wanted in the "search" for WMDs... no need to fake what you only have to "assume based off intel" they have. Your stating it would have been easier to fake the discovery of the WMDs to spark the war then the false flag of 911.

edit on thThu, 30 Jan 2014 13:35:58 -0600America/Chicago120145880 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)


Yes, I am saying that it is harder for the US government to pull of 9/11 than to fake WMDs in Iraq. You seem to disagree because it is apparently difficult for a government that owns WMDs to transport one to Iraq in secret. Why you think this is a mystery, but I note you haven't attempted to answer my questions so I'll ask again:

- why would it be difficult for the US government to procure a nuclear weapon and place it in Iraq?

- which bits of my summary of what needs to be true for 9/11 to be a false flag are incorrect?

- can you provide a brief precis of what actually happened on and in the run-up to 9/11?



posted on Jan, 31 2014 @ 07:29 AM
link   

NewAgeMan
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


What your offering is an assumption and not a real argument or refutation of the evidence in relation to the 9/11 event. It's a supposition.

You don't know the reasoning, and it has nothing to do with 9/11 based on what you think certain people should and should not have done.

Neither is incredulity an argument.

Give it up, and stop guarding and protecting the crime of the century, for the sake of the victims one and all.


You're a hero.

Happy now?



posted on Jan, 31 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Me stating they needed more then missile to go to war isn't saying it didn't happen... not sure why that was the quote you chose..

And I never said if they found a nuke that they wouldn't have reported it... Again you made that scenario and it doesn't hold any weight to the conversation

I will say it again, they were looking for factories... I don't care if you don't believe me and I'll say 5 more times. Yes them having one or two would be win like you said but that would be a subsequent find while they were looking for the factories..
That is what the UN guys that went over were looking at, all the factories and buildings that could have been used.
Also pokes a hole in your comparison, WMD was a third party investigation, the states didn't have compete control over the findings or the situation like the US would of had complete control on 911.

No but an nuclear ICBM isn't just hanging out in a desert somewhere, they don't just forget about those. And guess what, depending on the uranium you can trace where it was enriched.. So not only would they have to fake a nuke but also fake enrichment from somewhere other then america.. Who is going to let us use their uranium enrichment factory?

The reason america went to war was 911..... plain and simple. The WMD thing was just fodder they used to get joe public on their side. They didn't NEED their to bee WMDS.. they were already there doing what they wanted. They NEEDED 911, that is what sparked the mass to support the war.
That is why one is a conspiracy and the other is just the admin looking dumb.
Finding or no finding WMDs didn't change a thing for Iraq, 911 did. If you need your motivation it is right there.




If you think about it, your position amounts to some guys faking 9/11, then saying they attacked a country because of WMD, getting there and finding none, and not even bothering to stick some tins of cyanide in a shed, which would at least have been something. It's not persuasive.

Right there you are saying that my position is they staged 911 to use the WMD excuse.... How does that make sense and where have I said that?

1 Conspirators buy missile and launcher of some kind (Never said it was used, not sure why your brought it up)
But it wouldn't be hard at all for CIA,FBI,DHS to get a missile and launcher
2 Conspirators find safe, secret place for launcher and keep it there ( see 1)
What are these missiles in regards too? 93,77 the towers, can you be specific?

3 Conspirators gain access to WTC and plant hundreds of explosives
Look up turner construction, good ole bush family tires there, just so happen to do some work on the exacty floors hit. Also some very extensive elevator work before the attacks

4 Conspirators infiltrate jihadi groups and over the course of presumably years encourage them to consider 9/11, train jihadis
We funded AQ not that long ago... Think we still have some connections there?

5 Conspirators infiltrate army to organise exercises on the same day as false flag
In no way was that conspirators... There was war games that day... Planned by OUR military and not suspended until 93 hits the ground....
6 Conspirators infiltrate fire service to persuade fire chiefs to lie about Building Seven
That is another crazy claim... That they persuaded the fire cheif? When did I say that happened?

7 Conspirators set in motion hijackings and fire missile at Pentagon
Seems like this is just a catch all step... And the pentagon wasn't hit till much later that day after they started, where does that fire missile relate to the set in motion of hijackings?

8 Conspirators arrange for faked cell phone calls, either via voice morphing or by landing planes and forcing passengers to fake 'calls' - the latter of which obviously creates another huge raft of practical problems
Calls can't be made over 8000 feet, especially going 500 mph, they just recently got the specialized antennas for planes to allow phone calls.

9 Conspirators dispose of Flight 77 and passengers/crew in unspecified manner. Perhaps evading all air traffic control to blow it up over the sea (obviously involving operatives somehow planting a bomb on the plane), or force landing it, killing everyone and disposing of the plane
What was the video of the Cleveland airport from that day of a plane landing and unloading all its passengers..
Why would a bomb be needed? Is that the ONLY way, or just the craziest you could think of then.


10 Conspirators dismantle missile launch site in secret
You know ships can launch missiles right? Do you need to dismantle a ship?

11 Conspirators plant plane debris at Pentagon
Show me the video of the plane hitting or a picture of it, and I won't think this happened. And ill say the pentagon placed the debris there, makes it easier then "conspirators"

12 Conspirators recruit journalists and editors at news outlets to report 'story'. Most toe the line but BBC accidentally report Bldg 7 early. Oops!
Why would they need to recruit journalist and editors? The investigators are the ones that tie and un tie the medias hands on what can be reported... Would have nothing to conspirators. And did bbc not report 7 to early?? I never made mention to that either but it is a little weird, seeing as how the building was in the shot when they reported it

13 Conspirators infiltrate NIST and other authorities so that reports ignore or cover up the conspiracy
NIST did a FINE job of covering everything up, I in no way ever said NIST was infiltrated.

14 Conspirators ensure that nobody involved in any of these events (at the absolute minimum 100+ people, probably more like 1000+) ever says anything
Why does there have to be over 1000 involved? Just because a department was around that day doesn't mean they knew about it...
It would have been a very need to know project, you think 1000 people needed to know everything?
The only part that would require a good number of people is the rigging of explosives. Turner Construction company with massive ties to bush, makes that a whole lot easier.
That is just throwing out a ridiculous number to try an boost your weak argument.
The gov was in on it, held the terrorist hands the whole way, let them clear customs, blocked investigations as to what they were doing in out country. Ignored warnings form multiple sources of an incoming attack.
The insider trading alone shows some one on US soil had plenty of knowledge that something was going down.
Look at the insider trading going on in realation to 911.... the put options with the airlines.... the asbestos problem the towers had... that was a billion + dollar renovation and the city would not allow for it to be brought down in a CD.
So you have the guy owning all three towers that wants to build new ones but can't because he can't tare down the old ones... And he bought the towers 2 months before the attack... laying on a hospital bed after an accident. He had to be taken off his pain killers so he could legally sign the contract. Why the rush? Why couldn't they have waited till after he recovered?



In no way did I ever say it was absurd to say they didn't try an fake WMD's in iraq, I think they did. Obviously they failed or didn't try it. The WMD's was just the cherry on top, they didn't need them.

The US gov had FAR more reasons to fake 911 then the WMDS in iraq and that is why there is no conspiracy surrounding the WMDs, it was a wild goose chase from day one and they didn't care about catching it.

Precis of what happened that day?
2 planes got flown into towers and then those towers were bought down by explosives
A third tower that did not get hit by a plane is brought down with explosives
A cruise missile,fired form a ship, of some sorts, hits the pentagon and random plane parts placed inside the pentagon are scattered in the lawn. We are led to believe that a novice pilot made a high speed corkscrew turn that he has to come out of a low alt and relocate the target that is the pentagon and not hit the ground before he hits the building
Do a fly over shanksville with a UAV that crashes at the "site" which already had the marks that are suppose to be the wings and tail there and we get told a 757 was buried in an old mine shaft after hitting the ground inverted at a 40 degree angle. Scrap yard right down the street from site. Nothing over the size of a phone book released for 5 years.
And in all the chaos and destruction that day, key pieces of evidence needed to convict some one of a crime, or place a said plane where it is said to have been, when just about everything else is destroyed is found. Massive steel parts of planes are gone and almost 600 tons of aluminum and steel are brought to less then phone book size pieces of debris but the investigation finds what it needs to make this all fit oh so nicely.
Dumb luck i guess



posted on Jan, 31 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


Don't forget the anthrax attacks which the admin tried to tie to Iraq and Saddam Hussein's alleged WMD program..

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Sremmos80
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Me stating they needed more then missile to go to war isn't saying it didn't happen... not sure why that was the quote you chose..

And I never said if they found a nuke that they wouldn't have reported it... Again you made that scenario and it doesn't hold any weight to the conversation


You said that a planted nuke was worthless to them so they wouldn't bother. So why would a real one be of any use?

I was simply showing you how ridiculous your stance is.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


According to you my stance is that they faked 911 to use the stupid WMD as an excuse to go over there... That is not my stance at all... 911 was the sole reason we were able to spark the war in Iraq. WMD's had nothing to do with it, just cannon fodder to the joe public for reasons we were there. Good ole fear mongering
I never said finding just one nuke would have been worthless, what I said was they were not just looking for 1 missile because that isn't what they were telling the public Iraq had.
So staging a scene with just 1 weapon doesn't make to much sense when you are telling everyone you are looking for much larger scale things.
We were hearing how they were creating all these chemical and nuclear weapons in there unsanctioned factories..
So that is what the UN weapons inspectors were looking for. And it would have had to been the UN to find that one nuke, it wasn't america doing all the searching, a point i made before and you have chosen to ignore.
In your conspiracy breakdown didn't even involve them.... They would be the ones that did the "discovery" so US would have to fool two people, the public( not hard) and the UN weapons inspectors ( not sure how hard that would be)
And the end of the day though, we still went to war in Iraq, we still over threw Sadam and we took the oil we wanted.
They didn't NEED to find those weapons they said they were looking for after 911.... That is why there is no consiparcy to fake the WMD's
If you can accept they gov will frame another country to start a war and kill thousands of innocent people why can't you believe they would just skip the whole international aspect of it and do in on home ground where no one is looking.

And a BUNCH of people made lots of money off of 911.... Not sure the same money could have been made while faking WMD's



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


Okay. I'm sure we can agree to disagree. But I wouldn't be surprised that yours remains a somewhat fringe view, put it that way.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   

JuniorDisco
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


Okay. I'm sure we can agree to disagree. But I wouldn't be surprised that yours remains a somewhat fringe view, put it that way.


Just leave everything past the 'but' out and you are correct, not sure what you the second part means.
I think you are trying to state that i have a fringe point of view on things in general, in which I will simply respond that I wouldn't be surprised if you believed everything you were told...If we are going to just used generalized statements here.

I still don't get though how you have no problem with the idea of the US faking WMD's inside another country that a 3rd party would have to find/be involved in that would no doubt lead to a war but it is absolutely impossible for the same people to carry out an attack on US soil, where it is only US agencies involved and just the tops of those, where no one thought it would ever happen and blame the same people and get the same results.... O and make a bunch of money in the process hide the fact we haven't been keeping track of what the military has been spending this 2.3 T dollars we can't account for. And but a real punch in the gut to a good chunk of insider trading investigations that went down in WTC 7... The first high rise sky scrapper to go down by fire.

Also IDK if you checked out that anthrax thread, but there is a conspiracy against sadaam and framing him for weapons that he didn't have that you oh so wanted to see



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Sremmos80
where it is only US agencies involved and just the tops of those


Yeah, because you can get a warship to fire a missile at the Pentagon with just the "top people" doing it. Easiest thing in the world.

Christ.



posted on Feb, 1 2014 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 

Yes there would be "top people" on said ship. Captains of the ship and commander of the fleet... Again already under US orders to do what they are told. Plenty of war games going on that day with just as much confusion as to what was really going on. Tell a ship it is all part of the game and a missile can easily be launched with only key personal knowing where that final destination will be. Or tell them they are just using the real cords for the pentagon for "show"...
Hypothetical situation at that.
You didn't really address though how you have no problem with the idea of our government framing another country with WMDs and actually think it wouldn't be that difficult, 5 easy steps actually.
But the idea of the same people shooting a missile that they already have at a building eludes you?
Both scenarios end up with innocent deaths, so the morality of the orders aren't that far apart.



I can't wait for you to quote one line of this post and have a one liner response with a second line phrase of disbelieve



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Sremmos80

Yes there would be "top people" on said ship. Captains of the ship and commander of the fleet... Again already under US orders to do what they are told. Plenty of war games going on that day with just as much confusion as to what was really going on. Tell a ship it is all part of the game and a missile can easily be launched with only key personal knowing where that final destination will be. Or tell them they are just using the real cords for the pentagon for "show"...


And then the Pentagon gets hit that day. Yep, they'd definitely not say anything. They are "under orders" after all.




Hypothetical situation at that.
You didn't really address though how you have no problem with the idea of our government framing another country with WMDs and actually think it wouldn't be that difficult, 5 easy steps actually.
But the idea of the same people shooting a missile that they already have at a building eludes you?


Because I understand that this isn't a movie, and firing a missile from a ship takes a bit more than just some admiral telling a deckhand to push in some coordinates. And then to keep super quiet.

But anyway you don't just need the missile. You need passengers of two planes to be disappeared. You need faked cellphone calls, fake hijackers, foreign news agencies involved, Pentagon staff complcit in the murder of colleagues, planted evidence, DNA scientists and fire chiefs happy to lie to cover up murder.

I just need some tins of chemicals in a desert.







I can't wait for you to quote one line of this post and have a one liner response with a second line phrase of disbelieve


I can't help that your argument is a botched together rube goldberg of factoids and contradictory assumptions. And that at a granular level it therefore falls apart completely.
edit on 2-2-2014 by JuniorDisco because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:18 AM
link   

UxoriousMagnus
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


NAM,
I am glad we still have some friends....especially to the north.

I think I can speak for many many Americans that your love and friendship does not go unnoticed.

As you clearly see....we are in a hogs mess down here and God is not on the forefront of many Americans concerns....when we need him the most.

Thanks again for all the great posts today.....

ok....brown nosing is over...but no less from the heart

I would like to add to this that it is not only Americans in this mess now. The reach of the agenda being played out is global. People here in Europe are just as brainwashed as Americans seem to be, and giving up similar rights and freedom. The NSA "revelations" and how they are (not) being dealt with certainly make that clear.

And hey, it's nice to see people who care! No need to call it brown nosing.

NAM's perseverance, insight, and morals are impressive, to say the least. He really is a true christian (and i mean that in a moral sense, not a religious one). It is people like him who often keep me from posting in 9/11 threads, because I feel like I am just adding crumbs and wasting space. NAM, you have a very respectable way of saying exactly what needs to be said. So thank you!

soulwaxer



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Controled demolition in Frankfurt




posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 08:27 AM
link   

neformore
9/11 is the rule. Not the exception to the rule.

The USA got caught with its pants down and received a very square kick in the backside, and people have been trying to invent reasons for that not to be the case ever since.

Why do I say that? Because people have/had a belief about the USA that it was untouchable and it is actually easier for them to believe it was an inside job than to accept that the real world bites sometimes and maybe they're not as popular and/or safe as they've been led to believe they are.

That's the biggest 9/11 anomaly to me.

You are assuming that people are more fearful of a group of terrorists in a foreign land than they are of their own government being the terrorists.

Which would you prefer?

(Remember to take into account that your own government -if you are American- has endlessly more resources, money, and power than this "evasive" group of terrorists who "hate our freedom". Think of the power of the NSA and the like, to which Al Qaida is obviously no match.)

It should be obvious which of the 2 is more terrifying. It should also be obvious that the public has been brainwashed into fearing the invincible Bin Laden in his cave. That's why they "kept him alive" for so long. While "conspiracy theories" have been gagged and ridiculed to the extreme.

soulwaxer



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 01:01 PM
link   

JuniorDisco

Sremmos80

Yes there would be "top people" on said ship. Captains of the ship and commander of the fleet... Again already under US orders to do what they are told. Plenty of war games going on that day with just as much confusion as to what was really going on. Tell a ship it is all part of the game and a missile can easily be launched with only key personal knowing where that final destination will be. Or tell them they are just using the real cords for the pentagon for "show"...


And then the Pentagon gets hit that day. Yep, they'd definitely not say anything. They are "under orders" after all.





Hypothetical situation at that.
You didn't really address though how you have no problem with the idea of our government framing another country with WMDs and actually think it wouldn't be that difficult, 5 easy steps actually.
But the idea of the same people shooting a missile that they already have at a building eludes you?


Because I understand that this isn't a movie, and firing a missile from a ship takes a bit more than just some admiral telling a deckhand to push in some coordinates. And then to keep super quiet.

But anyway you don't just need the missile. You need passengers of two planes to be disappeared. You need faked cellphone calls, fake hijackers, foreign news agencies involved, Pentagon staff complcit in the murder of colleagues, planted evidence, DNA scientists and fire chiefs happy to lie to cover up murder.

I just need some tins of chemicals in a desert.







I can't wait for you to quote one line of this post and have a one liner response with a second line phrase of disbelieve


I can't help that your argument is a botched together rube goldberg of factoids and contradictory assumptions. And that at a granular level it therefore falls apart completely.
edit on 2-2-2014 by JuniorDisco because: (no reason given)


I would really like to see how just some canastiers would be proving that iraq has and is producing WMDs....I thought they just needed a missile with extra parts?
You five step WMD discovery sounds like it was straight out of a movie but I guess it doesn't matter when it is you saying it.

Loose lips sink ships, they all have heard that a thousand times, they were already trying to gear up for war running plenty of exercises in that time period, militray is very good at making sure you don't talk about things you are not suppose too.
I am not sure how familiar you are with UCMJ, worse then our penal system. More catch all articles in there that they can apply to just about anything that carry heavy penalties
You can be charged with going to wiki leaks.... You think if someone figured out that the gov had any part of 911 that was part of the military would say anything? At that point they would be realized they had a hand in the deaths of almost 3000 people, good incentive to keep your mouth shut.... 911 doesn't have a good track record of whistle blowers you know, so not sure how "happy" every one in your sweet break down. combine the two half filled planes that were majority gov workers already and it is only 1 plane of passengers... CIA trained hijackers, don't need fake ones...
Also can you prove 100% hijackers even made into the cockpits?
If they were cell calls then they are fake, it was not possible then to make those calls in an airplane...
Never said BBC was in on it, even though it is quite strange that they announce that 7 is down when it is in the picture behind them.
Why would the pentagon staff need to be in on it? No one was really in the section that was hit...
The ones that saw something come in don't 100% identify the object as a boeing 757.. Outside of someone with a trained why, how would be able to tell what a nose is that is coming at you at 400+ mph?? They hit the accounting side, you the most crucial part of the pentagon...not the brass that is walking around all over that building in all the other sections. Why would a terrorist plan to hit the least crucial part of the pentagon.... The building that is going to lead the retaliation against you and you hit the least crucial part.... Ok able to fool our entire national defense system to get the opportunity to do some real damage to the control center of our military and they totally botch that?? All he had to do was fly over the section he hit and hit the other side of the building and he would have got commanding generals. But nope, he pinpointed that tiny section of the accounting dept with a boeing going 400+ MPH..
Just need to plant the dna/evidence, why would the doc have to be in on it?
What fire chief was in on it? I don't think any PD or FD was "in" on it...
A



posted on Feb, 4 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Sremmos80

I would really like to see how just some canastiers would be proving that iraq has and is producing WMDs....I thought they just needed a missile with extra parts?


Either would do. And once again, you keep pretending that they had to be "producing" them. That's not the case.


You five step WMD discovery sounds like it was straight out of a movie but I guess it doesn't matter when it is you saying it.


True. But it only has five steps.

And they didn't actually do it. That's kind of the point.


Loose lips sink ships, they all have heard that a thousand times, they were already trying to gear up for war running plenty of exercises in that time period, militray is very good at making sure you don't talk about things you are not suppose too.
I am not sure how familiar you are with UCMJ, worse then our penal system. More catch all articles in there that they can apply to just about anything that carry heavy penalties. You can be charged with going to wiki leaks.... You think if someone figured out that the gov had any part of 911 that was part of the military would say anything?


It's possible you could keep it secret. I think in practice it's amazingly unlikely that nobody would talk. And wikileaks/Snowden are good examples. They talked. And not even about something as extraordinary as 9/11.

I'm glad you now accept that it doesn't just take a couple of generals to launch a missile though.


At that point they would be realized they had a hand in the deaths of almost 3000 people, good incentive to keep your mouth shut....


Or to talk.


911 doesn't have a good track record of whistle blowers you know, so not sure how "happy" every one in your sweet break down. combine the two half filled planes that were majority gov workers already and it is only 1 plane of passengers... CIA trained hijackers, don't need fake ones...


Where would they get guys prepared to kill themselves so that America can steal some oil?
And two half full planes still have to be made to disappear, and all their passengers killed or rehomed. Just take a moment to think how many people would be required to handle that. And the sheer logistics involved.



If they were cell calls then they are fake, it was not possible then to make those calls in an airplane...


Which would be very difficult. And require yet more people.


Never said BBC was in on it, even though it is quite strange that they announce that 7 is down when it is in the picture behind them.


If it's strange in the sense that they know it's going to fall they must be in on it. Add another dozen (minimum) to the list.


Why would the pentagon staff need to be in on it? No one was really in the section that was hit...


Tell that to the families of the 125 people who died.

You suggested that they helped plant plane parts. In broad daylight in front of one of the world's busiest roads.



Just need to plant the dna/evidence, why would the doc have to be in on it?


How would you do that? Chop the arm of someone you're implicating and leave it in the rubble? Would that fool seasoned crash investigators and DNA gathering scientists?

You would need the crash investigation team in on it at least as they would obviously recognise that no plane hit the building.


What fire chief was in on it? I don't think any PD or FD was "in" on it...
A


They must be, because they support the OS with regard to Building Seven and explicitly say they feared it would collapse beforehand. For your story to be true they would have to be lying. And thus complicit.



posted on Feb, 4 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   

JuniorDisco

Sremmos80

I would really like to see how just some canastiers would be proving that iraq has and is producing WMDs....I thought they just needed a missile with extra parts?


Either would do. And once again, you keep pretending that they had to be "producing" them. That's not the case.


You five step WMD discovery sounds like it was straight out of a movie but I guess it doesn't matter when it is you saying it.


True. But it only has five steps.

And they didn't actually do it. That's kind of the point.


Loose lips sink ships, they all have heard that a thousand times, they were already trying to gear up for war running plenty of exercises in that time period, militray is very good at making sure you don't talk about things you are not suppose too.
I am not sure how familiar you are with UCMJ, worse then our penal system. More catch all articles in there that they can apply to just about anything that carry heavy penalties. You can be charged with going to wiki leaks.... You think if someone figured out that the gov had any part of 911 that was part of the military would say anything?


It's possible you could keep it secret. I think in practice it's amazingly unlikely that nobody would talk. And wikileaks/Snowden are good examples. They talked. And not even about something as extraordinary as 9/11.

I'm glad you now accept that it doesn't just take a couple of generals to launch a missile though.


At that point they would be realized they had a hand in the deaths of almost 3000 people, good incentive to keep your mouth shut....


Or to talk.


911 doesn't have a good track record of whistle blowers you know, so not sure how "happy" every one in your sweet break down. combine the two half filled planes that were majority gov workers already and it is only 1 plane of passengers... CIA trained hijackers, don't need fake ones...


Where would they get guys prepared to kill themselves so that America can steal some oil?
And two half full planes still have to be made to disappear, and all their passengers killed or rehomed. Just take a moment to think how many people would be required to handle that. And the sheer logistics involved.



If they were cell calls then they are fake, it was not possible then to make those calls in an airplane...


Which would be very difficult. And require yet more people.


Never said BBC was in on it, even though it is quite strange that they announce that 7 is down when it is in the picture behind them.


If it's strange in the sense that they know it's going to fall they must be in on it. Add another dozen (minimum) to the list.


Why would the pentagon staff need to be in on it? No one was really in the section that was hit...


Tell that to the families of the 125 people who died.

You suggested that they helped plant plane parts. In broad daylight in front of one of the world's busiest roads.



Just need to plant the dna/evidence, why would the doc have to be in on it?


How would you do that? Chop the arm of someone you're implicating and leave it in the rubble? Would that fool seasoned crash investigators and DNA gathering scientists?

You would need the crash investigation team in on it at least as they would obviously recognise that no plane hit the building.


What fire chief was in on it? I don't think any PD or FD was "in" on it...
A


They must be, because they support the OS with regard to Building Seven and explicitly say they feared it would collapse beforehand. For your story to be true they would have to be lying. And thus complicit.


Ok they were looking for the production, why else were un inspectors called in to look at all his factories? It is you sir who are refusing to accept that. That is also what we were being told sadaam was doing PRODUCING WMD's..

Wikileaks and snowden are not good examples, as stated before any one in the miltary can be charged under the UCMJ for even going on wiki leaks and snowden is a controlled leak... that hasn't really released anything earth shattering. Outside of the NSA is doing more then we know.
And yes if 2 generals had the ok and wanted to launch a missile, i am sure it would happen. Yes it takes more to load the missile but not to get the auth to fire the missile

I can't tell you who was piloting those planes or their reasoning behind flying it into a tower full of people. I know it wasn't an american pilot but I haven't seen 100% proof that the cockpit doors were ever breached. Can you show me they were?
Cell calls are proven not possible up there, not that hard to pull off though. Make them call from the ground....

I Said BBC wasn't in on it, and it was just strange they announced the fall before. You don't want to see that though because you just want to keep adding people to your list.

Did the confirm 125 dead bodies with DNA? I will not tell a family member that they didn't lose some one that day. Never said that before. Why would you need to chop off an arm? Does that make sense? Did you see how many passengers with gov employees? Think they don't have that dna on file already? I get that you are trying to use ridiculous numbers and situations to try and disprove me. A trick weak salesmen use

The FD and PD were told the building was coming down, probably why they thought that. Also they had been hearing explosions all day around that tower, and while they were in it. And it wasn't gas tanks or diesel tanks.
What crash investigation team? The FBI?? Hardly a independent source willing to be transparent. Thanks for the tip though



posted on Feb, 4 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Sremmos80


1 Conspirators buy missile and launcher of some kind (Never said it was used, not sure why your brought it up)
But it wouldn't be hard at all for CIA,FBI,DHS to get a missile and launcher
2 Conspirators find safe, secret place for launcher and keep it there ( see 1)
What are these missiles in regards too? 93,77 the towers, can you be specific?


To shoot at the Pentagon.


3 Conspirators gain access to WTC and plant hundreds of explosives
Look up turner construction, good ole bush family tires there, just so happen to do some work on the exacty floors hit. Also some very extensive elevator work before the attacks


I'm not sure you appreciate quite how difficult it is to wire a building. Thousands of explosives packed into the substructure, requiring thousands of man-hours of work. With the building security implicated.

Add another few to the number who are in on it.


4 Conspirators infiltrate jihadi groups and over the course of presumably years encourage them to consider 9/11, train jihadis
We funded AQ not that long ago... Think we still have some connections there?


Possibly. But just money wouldn't be enough. You'd need to suggest the plan and find people willing to die for you.

Again this would require lots of dedicated workers and funding. The latter of which would need people with access to cash to be in on it.


5 Conspirators infiltrate army to organise exercises on the same day as false flag
In no way was that conspirators... There was war games that day... Planned by OUR military and not suspended until 93 hits the ground....


You're confused. I mean that the people who carried out 9/11 made the army practice certain exercises. They had control over the army, requiring infiltration into it.

More people in the know.


6 Conspirators infiltrate fire service to persuade fire chiefs to lie about Building Seven
That is another crazy claim... That they persuaded the fire cheif? When did I say that happened?


According to you the fire chiefs are lying about Building Seven. So they must be in on it too.


7 Conspirators set in motion hijackings and fire missile at Pentagon
Seems like this is just a catch all step... And the pentagon wasn't hit till much later that day after they started, where does that fire missile relate to the set in motion of hijackings?


What? They fired a missile at the Pentagon, that's your claim.


8 Conspirators arrange for faked cell phone calls, either via voice morphing or by landing planes and forcing passengers to fake 'calls' - the latter of which obviously creates another huge raft of practical problems
Calls can't be made over 8000 feet, especially going 500 mph, they just recently got the specialized antennas for planes to allow phone calls.


Possibly. In which case they somehow either created voice morphed recordings or forced the passengers to act. Either requires yet more people in on it.


9 Conspirators dispose of Flight 77 and passengers/crew in unspecified manner. Perhaps evading all air traffic control to blow it up over the sea (obviously involving operatives somehow planting a bomb on the plane), or force landing it, killing everyone and disposing of the plane
What was the video of the Cleveland airport from that day of a plane landing and unloading all its passengers..
Why would a bomb be needed? Is that the ONLY way, or just the craziest you could think of then.


Have a think about this for a moment. You are saying that the conspirators contacted Cleveland airport and asked them to let a plane land, and never discuss it? They then landed the plane in a place it could get filmed (therefore a place where lots of airport employees must have known about it) and disembarked the passengers. What then? They got on buses and were taken somewhere to be killed? Who drove the buses? Who killed them and where? And why did none of the ATCs or airport staff who were in on it ever mention it?



10 Conspirators dismantle missile launch site in secret
You know ships can launch missiles right? Do you need to dismantle a ship?


A ship full of naval personnel who have remained oddly quiet.

Still add them to your list of a handful of conspirators. It's now the biggest handful I've ever seen.


11 Conspirators plant plane debris at Pentagon
Show me the video of the plane hitting or a picture of it, and I won't think this happened. And ill say the pentagon placed the debris there, makes it easier then "conspirators"


Okay. So now there are people at the Pentagon willing to plant debris to cover up their colleagues' deaths. Someone created the debris as well, in a workshop somewhere, and then agents planted it in front of a busy road while waiting for the missile. Right.


12 Conspirators recruit journalists and editors at news outlets to report 'story'. Most toe the line but BBC accidentally report Bldg 7 early. Oops!
Why would they need to recruit journalist and editors? The investigators are the ones that tie and un tie the medias hands on what can be reported... Would have nothing to conspirators. And did bbc not report 7 to early?? I never made mention to that either but it is a little weird, seeing as how the building was in the shot when they reported it


It's either weird because the BBC were in on it, or not weird. You can't have it both ways. And if it's the former you have to explain why the conspirators would let a foreign news service in on something completely unnecessary. And add another dozen at least to your list of people who know the secret.


13 Conspirators infiltrate NIST and other authorities so that reports ignore or cover up the conspiracy
NIST did a FINE job of covering everything up, I in no way ever said NIST was infiltrated.


Why would they have covered it up if they weren't in on it? They would at least have to be complicit.

I don't think you've really considered the implications of any of your ideas.



Why does there have to be over 1000 involved? Just because a department was around that day doesn't mean they knew about it...
It would have been a very need to know project, you think 1000 people needed to know everything?


So far you have

Core, heavily funded team of (perhaps) CIA black ops guys. They have money enough to buy missiles etc so someone else is funding them. At minimum to secure this cash and do the work you would need several dozen people.

Naval personnel to launch missile. And people in a position to 'disappear' that missile from official records.

Air traffic control in general, but especially at Cleveland, and other employees at Cleveland airport.

Agents who will dispose of passengers and planes. Again you would need a good few to transport them, a location that has been bought, food, weaponry and someone to dig graves or otherwise organise disposal.

Agents to create fake plane parts and DNA. And then people to plant them.

Explosives riggers. Contacts at the construction company. Contacts in the building security firm

Air cleanup crew at Shanksville and the Pentagon and the people tasked with reporting on and documenting those events. probably some locals as well at the latter

Fire chiefs

Engineers at NIST

The 9/11 commission

Actors to play the passengers and voice morphing experts

People in the army who will arrange exercises to coincide

Journalists

Insider trading team

A general team of killers to threaten people who may talk (who stops them talking btw?)




In no way did I ever say it was absurd to say they didn't try an fake WMD's in iraq, I think they did. Obviously they failed or didn't try it. The WMD's was just the cherry on top, they didn't need them.

The US gov had FAR more reasons to fake 911 then the WMDS in iraq and that is why there is no conspiracy surrounding the WMDs, it was a wild goose chase from day one and they didn't care about catching it.


That's nonsense. Read in detail any independent examination of the US authorities' attitude to WMDs in Iraq. They cared deeply about finding them and they employed huge resources to doing so.

The notion that they could fake something like 9/11, something so huge, involving somany people, and that they could not then put some WMDs in a desert... it's completely crazy.


Precis of what happened that day?
2 planes got flown into towers and then those towers were bought down by explosives
A third tower that did not get hit by a plane is brought down with explosives
A cruise missile,fired form a ship, of some sorts, hits the pentagon and random plane parts placed inside the pentagon are scattered in the lawn. We are led to believe that a novice pilot made a high speed corkscrew turn that he has to come out of a low alt and relocate the target that is the pentagon and not hit the ground before he hits the building
Do a fly over shanksville with a UAV that crashes at the "site" which already had the marks that are suppose to be the wings and tail there and we get told a 757 was buried in an old mine shaft after hitting the ground inverted at a 40 degree angle. Scrap yard right down the street from site. Nothing over the size of a phone book released for 5 years.
And in all the chaos and destruction that day, key pieces of evidence needed to convict some one of a crime, or place a said plane where it is said to have been, when just about everything else is destroyed is found. Massive steel parts of planes are gone and almost 600 tons of aluminum and steel are brought to less then phone book size pieces of debris but the investigation finds what it needs to make this all fit oh so nicely.
Dumb luck i guess



Well at least you had a stab.

But why on earth did they fake the Pentagon and Shanksville crashes? We already know they control the army defences and ATC, why not just crash the planes?





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join