Welcome to PatsFans.com

For 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Wildo7, May 19, 2008.

  1. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,852
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Sorry, but I HAD to post this. Sums up pretty much how I feel about the conspiracy theories. I strongly suggest you read the whole thing, it's a very entertaining read.

    http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/85723/

     
  2. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,852
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Another snippet:

     
  3. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    Look up Operation Northwood.

    It isn't a massive conspiracy as that writer mocks, someone really wanted to get into Iraq really bad and start reshaping the Middle East, for oil and for Israel.
     
  4. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Taibbi is a decent writer, and I've enjoyed his appearances on the Maher show. However, he displays a basic ignorance -- or willful distortion -- of 9/11 Truth, and never seems to dispute the specifics in his writings. "9/11 Truth" is a fractured movement, basically divided into two camps: 1) Made it happen on purpose, and 2) Let it happen on purpose. They are quite opposed to eachother, yet the former pollutes the movement as a whole.

    He's essentially saying "there couldn't possibly be a conspiracy because these neocons can't see past their own wallet" and "it would be too easy to conjure support for a war; murder wasn't necessary." Well, Matt. That's an incredible leap in logic for dismissal. A "gruesome mass murder that would whip the American population into a war frenzy" was EXACTLY what was needed. You don't get Congressional support for unilateral occupation of a nation of 30 million unless 9/11 and Anthrax and plane crashes of the only progressive Senator is fresh in the minds of voting lawmakers. Sorry. It's right there in the PNAC, it's right there in Brzezinski's "Chess Board," and the precedent has been set at Northwoods and Tonkin. So please don't insult our intelligence by pretending this cabal wasn't capable of destroying a $500 billion financial center for the acquisition of $ trillions in crude oil and corporate infrastructure.

    Taibbi never refutes NORAD's stand down, multiple war game simulations on both 9/11 and the London bombings, refusal to release Pentagon video, FBI/CIA suppression of specific warnings, Mike Vreeland's note, no wreckage at the Pentagon, the controlled and white-washed Kean Commission, and on and on and on and on and on... Instead, he relies on a "use common sense" ploy of ostricization and shame, such that we've seen time and time again, but does nothing to refute the facts of what happened that day and the weeks leading up.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2008
  5. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    I believe that 9-11 was an inside job....

    having said that....


    The greatest piece of evidence that I have ever heard on this subject comes from satire. Its the one thing that makes me say...Hmmmmm...maybe the Bush administration WASN'T behind 9-11:



    "Do you know how I know that the Bush administration is NOT behind 9-11?"

    "How?"

    "Because it WORKED!"

    -Bill Maher
     
  6. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,149
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,066 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey


    Good take PC ... well said.
     
  7. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,852
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    I don't think he disagrees with what you say. PNAC wanted to get into Iraq and control the world's energy resources to stem the rise of China, I certainly don't disagree with that.

    And yes PC, he does conflate the different conspiracy movements, but they have chosen to fly under one banner, so I think his generalizations are ok. The government did not CAUSE 9/11, and as you say, that is a far cry from the notion that they may have let it happen. BUT 9/11 Truth is riddled with nutbags who mostly think that it was an inside job IMO and they undermine legitimate dissent and the anti-war movement by trivializing the dialog.
     
  8. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    agreed....


    the piece that was suggested that I read the whole thing, contains no evidence or facts. Its opinion. Take my paragraph below as a point that is just as good, or better.

    The main reason I became a 9-11 skeptic, was because the #s and evidence DIDN'T match up. Because the explanation has so many holes and coincidneces. Buildings falling in their own footprint, and inept military response, flying the bin laden family and the saudis out of the country, steal buildings melting with low burning jet fuel for weeks. The BBC reporting building 7 going down while you can see building 7 still standing in the background. The lack of video evidence from the pentagon..........it really goes on and on. Could it be the questions, or just a rabbithole effect, man I don't know. But I mostly believe that this was orchestrated by our own government because of the aftermath.

    Jundullah!

    If the evidence that 19 hijackers working for Bin Laden and acting alone was so good.....why are there still so many questions? And why isn't Bin Laden wanted by the FBI for this crime?


    OH...and tossing around the term...."conspiracy theory" ....?????

    If you believe the official story, you believe in a CONSPIRACY THEORY....dummy!
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2008
  9. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    I don't believe they have chosen to fly under one banner at all. The Michael Rupperts of the world have gone to great lengths to distance themselves from the Loose Change crowd.
     
  10. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    And me out of popcorn. Oh well...carry on anyway, gents!

    Nice post, Wildo! :D
     
  11. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,852
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Then why is stuff like this linked from the 9/11 Truth homepage?

    http://www.journalof911studies.com/beginners.html

    I said before, I have no problem with the questions you put forward about the government not being forthcoming about it's intelligence leading up to and reaction to 9/11. It's when they start questioning whether the buildings were demolished and asserting that there were no planes that they lose me.

    Again, if there was a clear line drawn between those who just want accountability from the government and those who think it was an inside job I wouldn't have a problem with it at all. But to me, and maybe this is only my misperception, they seem to deliberately blend together into a large mass.
     
  12. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    "They" being the same, in your eyes? They are different people.

    A 9/11 Truth homepage somehow encompasses the entire movement as a whole and dictates that they fly under one banner? That is the perception of the Empire supporters who insist "there's nothing to see here."

    "9/11 Truth" isn't some copyrighted slogan that any dissentor to the government's official story adheres to. The MIHOPs and LIHOPs don't all subscribe to that web site.

    But you've just underscored my point. It's the dismissive morphing together of a very fractured movement as one unified, irrational entity that doesn't deserve examination -- that is the problem... Let it Happen on Purpose is NOT Made it Happen on Purpose.

    By rolling their eyes at LIHOPers like Loose Change and the Thermite theories, they're effectively able to dismiss the mainstream MIHOP movement ... A much more viable movement who now CAN'T receive any answers regarding NORAD's delay, the Joint Chiefs aversion to questions, the Phoenix Memo, Pakistan's ISI Chief wiring money to Atta, and on and on and on. How convenient.

    Surprising that you, of all people, are essentially joining ranks and grouping 9/11 Truth under one dismissable banner. Somewhat disappointing.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2008
  13. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,216
    Likes Received:
    196
    Ratings:
    +667 / 2 / -9

    I just told my wife we better sleep in the car tonight

    :bricks:
     
  14. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,852
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    When you use the term "9/11 Truth Movement" you have come up with a slogan and created a homogenous group that does fly under the same banner. If not then what exactly is the "9/11 Truth Movement?" The very fact that you say "9/11 Truth" and refer to it as some kind of cohesive movement lends itself to being generalized against.

    Like I said, I have no problem with the questions you raise. What I do have a problem with is the willingness of critical thinking Americans to accept Loose Change conspiracy theories. I know they aren't the same people, and there is a great interest in the MSM to dismiss them all as lunatics, but that's not what I'm talking about. It's the fact that they don't do enough to distinguish themselves, and adopt that name "9/11 Truth" that makes me think they shoot themselves in the foot.

    In any case, the article is bashing the Loose change conspiracy theorists. When you come in and act offended at the article, insisting you are part of "9/11 Truth," are you not asking to be lumped in with these people?

    There's also a question here of genuine misunderstanding. When I say that I can't stand the "inside job" crowd, and think they hurt the left and undermine dissent, who am I supposed to direct this criticism towards? They also refer to themselves as "9/11 Truthers" do they not?

    Excuse my analogy, but it's like the skinhead movement that is half neo-nazi and half anti-neo-nazi. It's asking too much of people to try to distinguish between two very different groups that intentionally blend together. Am I capable of making the distinction? Of course, but not at face value, and that's why I think that whatever "movement" you would say you are a part of has helped undermine itself.

    Also, why are the more prominent 9/11 Truthers Loose Change types? The famous ones I can think of, Jessie Ventura and Rosie O'Donnell, seem to espouse the most extreme versions (i.e. controlled demolitions v. planes).
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2008
  15. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,812
    Likes Received:
    182
    Ratings:
    +371 / 11 / -28

    Very intelligent and no mud slinging, I tend to be skeptical about a lot of the 9/11 stuff.. but have a hard time believing it could have been an inside job, cannot comprehend that a democratic gov't could let this happen. With that being said there are so many questions, and when I read an intelligent discussion as this there are only more.. unfortunately this type of stuff is not part of a national debate, on purpose??.. probably.. I think people are completely comfortable with the scenario offered.. and want to move on.
     
  16. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    That's the realization I came to after the "Commission Report". In the context of a nation of sheep, it works for me.
     
  17. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    I just think the 9/11 Commission Report did nothing more than throw more lighter fluid on the fire... Especially considering the vast, vast lenghts commission director Philip Zelikow -- a WH pre-emption policy writer -- went to control, redirect and thwart any legitimate questioning... and the lengths cowardly co-chairs Hamilton and Kean both went to placate Zelikow and avoid stepping on WH toes during an election year, when in fact they had the power to purge the beligerant Zelikow in an instant... a purging the 9/11 widows adamantly demanded.... I guess Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean both figured, "well, we managed to get Kissinger purged for this damned thing... We can't possibly do it again on this guy, or they'll think we're out to humiliate the White House."

    Regardless... when you consider that Kean and Hamilton, in fact, capitulated to the Zelikow directive that absolutely no subpeonas would be issued, then right off the bat you notice a serious problem in the "official investigation.".... Subpeonas are standard Washington fare... Exactly what was the problem here?... NORAD and the FAA, at the very least, needed to be under oath... PERIOD...

    What sealed it was Kean and Hamilton's spineless white flag moment when they agreed to cowtow to Boy King and Dark Lord's demands that they appear only TOGETHER before the commission, with no transcripts, no record, no witnesses, no nothing... Precisely what was the need for that? ... Can anyone explain why Tricky Dick needed to be there to hold the hand of George Bush when junior was called for his one lone testimony before the one commission that has ever been allowed regarding the greatest crime in U.S. history?

    The whole thing reaks like bad milk in the sun, and always has... Yet everyone just wants to "move on."

    That's precisely the problem with America. People figure that if enough time goes by, hopefully you can just forget everything.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2008
  18. scout

    scout Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,715
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0 / -2

    #15 Jersey

    That is very accurate. I am currently reading ' The Commission, An Uncensored History of 9/11'. I should be done with the book, but I get so mad that I put down the book and don't read it for days. Zelikow has the most power and influence on the commission. A guy who wrote the report for invading Iraq for the White House. Of course, his first witnesses on the commission were people who agreed with that position ( like it had anything to do with 9/11). Members here vent how Iraq was tied to 9/11, but the reality is that Saudi Arabia had more ties to the terrorist network including financial help, then Iraq. Of course that information was not available to the commission. I will have more to say on this, but I currently equate the 9/11 Commission to the Warren Report.
     
  19. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,150
    Likes Received:
    223
    Ratings:
    +537 / 6 / -2

    Iraq was a result of 9/11. It's common knowledge that SA is more involved with terrorist groups than Iraq ever was. One is a mixed, and secular state, the other is wahabiist. As for the 9/11 tinfoil crowd, they need help. Planted explosives, missles into the Pentagon, no planes, that "pull" poop, etc. That crowd needs to get a life. The only thing the government covered up, was anything that would have made it look bad after the fact. Hind sight is always 20/20, and when something happens, and you look back, it's always easier to connect the dots. So what the government probably did, was cover it's arse so that the hindsight crowd couldn't say "how could you possibly miss that". Remember, when you start to think something is a conpiracy, you convince yourself of meaning that isn't there. You so want something to be true, that you ignore logic, and simply move to reinforce a desired conclusion. I don't doubt for 5 seconds that the government wasn't truthfull about what it knows, but it I don't think for a nanosecond that 9/11 was an inside job. It's simply impossible.
     
  20. STFarmy

    STFarmy In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    You obviously haven't heard the sterling argument that the "bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe MAAAAAN!" I heard Jesse Ventura talk about this recently and he sounded like the true dope I always believed him to be.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>