"I'm ready to lose control, but they're not"
-
@unknownuser said:
Excellent! Don't forget to provide rock solid proof of that 'no debris in the vicinity of the Pentagon' thing while you're at it.
@unknownuser said:
no debris of an airliner
Will do this, but I will concentrate on the topic of the thread and won't draw much attention to 911.
-
@unknownuser said:
@unknownuser said:
Excellent! Don't forget to provide rock solid proof of that 'no debris in the vicinity of the Pentagon' thing while you're at it.
@unknownuser said:
no debris of an airliner
Will do this, but I will concentrate on the topic of the thread and won't draw much attention to 911.
Please, concentrate on backing the claims you made. After all, those are what this little 'debate in the debate' are about.
Edit: just saw that Marian posted a link to that Zeitgeist flick. Which reminded of a question I wanted to ask earlier. How does the average conspiracy theorist distinguish a trustworthy source from a non-trustworthy one?
Edit two: from the Wiki on Peter Joseph, the director of Zeitgeist:
"Part II, entitled "All the World's a Stage," uses integral footage of several 9/11 conspiracy theory films like Loose Change to portray the September 11 attacks as either orchestrated or allowed to happen by elements within the United States government in order to generate mass fear, initiate and justify the War on Terror, provide a pretext for the curtailment of civil liberties, and produce economic gain. These claims include that the U.S. government had advance knowledge about the attacks, the response of the military deliberately let the planes reach their targets, and the World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 underwent a controlled demolition. The film claims that six of the named hijackers are still alive, that Hani Hanjour could not have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon, that no substantial plane wreckage was found at two of the three crash sites, that the Bush administration covered up the truth in the 9/11 Commission Report, and that the mainstream media have failed to ask important questions about the official account.
However, in a March 17, 2009 article the New York Times after noting that the first Zeitgeist film "may be most famous for alleging that the attacks of Sept. 11 were an 'inside job' perpetrated by a power-hungry government on its witless population," goes on to say that this is a point of view that Mr. Joseph said he has recently "moved away from."Where's that "I just pissed myself with laughter" smiley?
-
just to help a bit to Tomasz and try to convince you remus about the story not yet resolved about the 9/11 start of the actual changes in the earth we live in.
You ask :
###...how does that prove the involvement of the US government?...###
it proves it since the same time that it does not prove it.
I mean, if you have 645 architects and engineers asking for a test because they discuss the said that the towers dropped because and JUST BECAUSE of the fire, well, it is not that clear then.
Why they do not take even a minute to to re_think their satatements were done in too much hurry.eh?hup, it was for stinkie,
sorry remus -
Juan, you're a really nice bloke, but I haven't got the faintest of ideas what you're talking about.
-
look here stinkie, http://www.ae911truth.org/
-
@unknownuser said:
However, in a March 17, 2009 article the New York Times
I am surprised that you base your conclusions on what the author of the Zeitgeist told to NYT.
You have asked about evidence showing no debris of an airliner. Please check this site which seems to be reasonably objective. It is a page with pictures of the building after impact.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/index.html
Especially interesting are the photographs showing the facade before the collapse.
For me it is very evident that the building was hit by something smaller than an airliner and definitely has no passengers on board. There is no sign of two giant engines, wings whose span is very large in comparison to the width of the building affected.There is no sight of big amount of debris you would expect if it would be an aeroplane carrying passengers. The plane was not intercepted, but there was a plenty of time.
As I have written it is my opinion.
On the site you will find also an analysis of almost free-fall speed of collapsing building No.7.I recommend watching 'In Plane Site' and 'Loose change' on Google Video\Youtube. If you will find the info on the website intriguing. If it doesn't light a new light in your head do not bother.
Now bigger picture...
The films mentioned above, many of other short movies and websites convinced me that US officials let someone demolish all three buildings and were not saying true in case of the Pentagon. They have allowed to happen. There was one thing that was distracting me and forcing me to reject this terrible scenario.
I could not believe that they would do such a thing 'to extend the Empire' or to prepare 'New Order'. I knew that, if all this could be true, there must be something WAY more scary. Something that forced them to make such a decision. I thought that it was a shortage of oil, that without it America would collapse very fast. This motive wasn't good enough for me. Then what? I have given up my searches and forgotten about the topic.
Recently I have decided to explore more what Native American say about they spirituality. I am genuinely interested in learning more about their respect for 'Mother Earth', spiritual abilities and so on. In my search I have found a description of a 'Great Vision' experienced by the Red Elk. I have included the link to his story in my first post.
The vision relates to the future of the Northern America. He experienced it back in 1974. What he saw in it was so terrible that he could not stand it. Draught, war, earthquakes, volcano eruptions. Reshaping of the continent in general, great natural disaster. He mentions also 'chip implants' to humans that convert them to slaves.
A man of such a loving heart wouldn't made it up to scare people. He is genuinely concerned about future of the States and the humanity in general. He talks about 'Our Grandfather' and the necessity of Love in our societies. He encourages people not to take what he says as granted, but to verify it.
Those who believe that we are a spiritual beings can be greatly touched by his simple way of thinking.
That is all folks.
-
@unknownuser said:
I am surprised that you base your conclusions on what the author of the Zeitgeist told to NYT.
Point me to those conclusions, Tomasz. Where are they? What are they?
@unknownuser said:
You have asked about evidence showing no debris of an airliner.
To be precise, I asked for rock solid proof. A link to a site that seems reasonably objective - are you pulling my leg? When's the meaning of the concept 'proof' going to sink in?
-
Man! You guys don't know anything, I'm the guy behind the 911 attacks, Osama is my cousin 10 times removed and I used Microsoft Flight Simulator and a GPS link with the planes to pilot them. Ironically the goal was just to fly by the targets, but windows 98 gave an error and rebooted everything, nothing worked correctly after that.
So in a way Bill Gates is guilty of 911. -
@unknownuser said:
It just lost all it's credibility.
@unknownuser said:
The new DVD is available in quantities of 1-7, 10 pack, and 25 pack.
They are selling this stuff JuanV.
miserables if you dont get them for free.
must be a higher vision as Tomasz suggests.
cheers -
@unknownuser said:
@unknownuser said:
Recently I have decided to explore more what Native American say about they spirituality. I am genuinely interested in learning more about their respect for 'Mother Earth', spiritual abilities and so on. In my search I have found a description of a 'Great Vision' experienced by the Red Elk. I have included the link to his story in my first post.
Now you are talking my language.....
Tomasz--they're many great books about Native (North) American spirituality and livelihood. "Touch the Earth" is a good start. "Book of the Hopi".. While I am wary of idolizing any culture (like most societies some Native tribes obviously oppressed women) there some beautiful insights. I feel sorry for you if you are spending your time with the sort of things you post, like the videos here.
-
I certainly didn't expect to find a conversation about 9/11 and conspiracy here; I come here to become a better SU user and find the absolutely fantastic plugins that the community has come up with (thanks again to all those creators!). I think I have to throw my $.02 in.
I work for one of the airlines involved in 9/11, my wife works for the other; both of us are crew. I didn't know any of the crew involved, but my wife did. I looked down on NYC from 27,000 feet and saw the smoke coming off of Manhattan before the towers fell, and we were told in no uncertain terms that that we had best proceed directly to our destination, immediately, and absolutely do not deviate from that course. It was the quietest flight, and the most silent, empty airfield I have ever seen - or hope to see again. I got inside just in time to watch the towers fall on the news.
I personally find the comments that this was some kind of conspiracy to deliberately kill thousands of people, cause hundreds more to have chronic illnesses (the cleanup effort) and destroy the economy for years, by their own government's hand or wilful inaction, absolutely absurd and offensive. The conspiracy theorists thrive in a vacuum of information, or excel at creating arguments that are as impossible to disprove as UFOs or chemtrails. My personal opinion is that you may use another "C" word instead of Conspiracy - Complacency. Scores of threats coming in constantly - Which one to act on? Can't disrupt the American's fat, dumb and happy life with worry about terrorists now can we? Dad helped son get a great job in the White House; party on, dude! After all, the best they did before was a car bomb...
Want to know why I think we were complacent (other than living it myself)? Look at the footage of George Bush when he was told what was happening. Where he was in a grade school reading class. The look of shock when he came back and sat down on the chair, with the book upside down in his hands if I recall correctly, says it all. He didn't have a clue. Never saw it coming. That's pretty much all of us. That cushy job dad helped him get just got mighty uncomfortable. I have seen the footage and many photos of the wreckage surrounding the Pentagon and the Trade Center, and there absolutely pieces of aircraft there. Engines and landing gear components are plainly visible, these components are the most resistant to high temperatures and the most solid, respectively; and therefore are most likely to survive an impact/fire. If a demolition, do you not think that someone would have noticed people carrying hundreds of feet of det cord, scores of explosive charges, remote detonators or any of the number of components needed to effectively destroy the buildings and have them begin to collapse EXACTLY where the aircraft struck? You've been watching too many bad American action movies.
Please give Americans more credit than that - even if all you remember of us lately is the last 8 years of the worst administrations I can ever remember (IMO).
My apologies if this seemed pedantic or browbeating, that was not my intent, and for it being so long. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I'm not a "rah, rah, USA! USA!" type, so don't pin that on me either; half my family is off-the-boat Berliners, and my other half spent half her life in Germany as well - so I also know that there are countries outside of the US!
(Oh, I'm not a CIA, G8, or WMF plant either. Unless you think I am 
. -
Alex jones, Architects for 911 truth,Dylan Avery who made Loose Change, William Rodriguez the WTC employee who led the fire crews in and out of WTC have all made very serious allegations that if unsubstantiated would probably get them sued for slander and deformation, possibly even imprisoned. So why haven't they been dragged through the courts? Could it be because there claims would stand up to more scrutiny than the explanations provided by the 911 comission report?
-
Good one.
So what you're saying is that the US government is capable of planning, executing and covering up a crime the size of the 9/11 attacks, but nevertheless fears the scrutiny of courts and lawyers?
@escapeartist said:
The conspiracy theorists thrive in a vacuum of information, or excel at creating arguments that are as impossible to disprove as UFOs or chemtrails.
That sums it up quite nicely. As for arguments that cannot be disproved ... Ah, I must admit I find it rather surprising that people who pride themselves in being critical would have such disdain for the falsifiability principle. Surely they have only the foggiest of ideas what true critical praxis is. Nevertheless there's this arrogance about them ... 'you are blind, we are not'. It's that combination of factors I find, well, rather disgusting.
Edit: A thought. Why is it that the average conspiracy theorist, if cornered, suddenly doesn't seem to understand the difference between a hypothesis and an opinion?
-"Barack Obama's an alien!"
-
"Prove it."
-
"Well that's just my opinion. I'm entitled to my opinions, aren't I?"
I believe this is more than mere childish tactics. This is an appropriate quote from Robert Hughes:
"Untrained in logical analysis, ill-equipped to develop and construct formal arguments about issues, unused to mining texts for deposits of factual material, the students fell back to what they could truly call their own: what they felt about things. When feelings and attitudes are the main referents of argument, to attack any position is automatically to insult its holder, even to assail his or her perceived 'rights'."
-
-
Stinki, your only reason for being here is to have a laugh and express your being disgusted. Those are your conclusions. You don't even intend to dwell longer on the many, too many in my opinion, discrepancies between an official explanations and what you have seen with your own eyes.
Personally I wouldn't be bothered by those terrible events if the top stories of two towers would gradually collapse and fall down as a single pieces. I wouldn't have doubts. Listen to a fireman in one of the films who is saying about secondary blasts while they were running down the stairs. Find videos of building no.7 and compare them with other controlled demolitions. Have you ever heard about a fire in a tall building that has caused WHOLE building to collapse? Two towers took the hit and went back to their position. I could continue here for a long time... but I don't see point. I don't know how someone has managed to put thermite that melts the steel in a blink of an eye.
There is always a question of credibility of the sources. Is Bush administration more credible that a professor who decided to investigate closer those discrepancies, despite the obvious resistance he had to face and has been sent for a 'holidays' and no longer can work as a professor of physics? It is your decision who you want to believe.
I am not bothered with 'fake landing on the moon', 'ufo', 'flying people', 'pyramids of Giza built by aliens' and whatever conspiracy theories out there. Even the Group that it is a topic of this thread, doesn't bother me much, unless it have something to do with global cataclysm.
Thanks pbacot for the titles of books.
Coen, It was me who started a thread about 2012 film. -
@unknownuser said:
Stinki, your only reason for being here is to have a laugh and express your being disgusted.
That's true. And I pointed out WHY I am disgusted. All you have to do to stop me from being disgusted, is provide the proof you said you'd come up with. And which you should've produced in the first place. Burden of proof, remember?
@unknownuser said:
Stinki, your only reason for being here is to have a laugh and express your being disgusted. Those are your conclusions. You don't even intend to dwell longer on the many, too many in my opinion, discrepancies between an official explanations and what you have seen with your own eyes.
With my own eyes, eh? So I was there then? Or do you mean I have access to REALLY sensitive information?
If one wants to produce a thought worthy of that name, one should refrain from acutely stretching the meaning of words, concepts and definitions. If one does not adhere to this little rule of thumb, one produces something commonly known as 'bullshit'.
Less whining, more proof.
-
stinkie, have you ever thought about the possibility that the PROOF you are looking for, may come when it is too late to do anything about it ?
There is an obvious conexion between 9/11 and our present events in the world. And the world is stinking.
maybe,instead of waiting,it is worthy to have a look about what other people are thinking about it. That, suppossed you have any wonder about it. It is clear that if you dont have any question about that event, all words are meaningless.
cheers. -
Juan, sorry, again I haven't a clue what you're on about.
I have a feeling, however, you've made up your mind already, like Tomasz has. Magical ability, that - to be able to draw conclusions without hard evidence.
You boys remind me of a farmer who's put his carriage in front of his horse - and nevertheless thinks he's travelling at an impressive speed.
-
@unknownuser said:
You boys remind me of a farmer who's put his carriage in front of his horse - and nevertheless thinks he's travelling at an impressive speed.
That is very nice fromm you stinkie,
thanks
))))) -
I think this is one of those debates in which both sides already made their minds, so any further discussion is useless.
-
@marian said:
I think this is one of those debates in which both sides already made their minds, so any further discussion is useless.
not if stinkie puts an V after my Juan
)))))
we may go on and lead to clarity
Advertisement