Jap. Parliament in a truthing craze!

[Atomic_Piggy]

New person for the ignore list. Two people in one day, without anyone since '04. Whats going on?

Aye. He's the second person on my ignore list

 

[Jintor]

Again and again we wind up talking about the same ****ing thing in different threads, Wadsy. The same unsubstantiated claims. All your posts are starting to look friggin' identicle.

 

[Gray Fox]

-I could just presume for starters that fires definatively did not bring them down. I have a peer reviewed scientific investigation that says otherwise.

That guys mustache makes it hard not to laugh at everything you post.


P.S. you read peer reviewed articles, how fancy.
Got any interesting electronic sources you'd like me to read about any subject, whatsoever?

 

[Solaris]

That guys mustache makes it hard not to laugh at everything you post.


P.S. you read peer reviewed articles, how fancy.
Got any interesting electronic sources you'd like me to read about any subject?

That guy was a hero.

I don't read them, just I'm referring to the 911 commisions reports.

 

[Gray Fox]

Yeah, well lets see how you like it.

Also why not read them.
I remember at uni I spent whole afternoons reading Science, scientific American, New Scientist, Nature. And I still sneak in to my old uni's library once in a while to read them.

 

[15357]

Anyway, you want to imprison widows?
Is that what you want, dude??
Eat shit, man, if you still believe in the government's innocence, it's so implausible.

That's the idea.










I kid, I kid. *dodges stones*

You cannot "paint me crazy and call me a liar" if I am right, right?

Actually, I can, but I suppose that's beside the point.


Wasn't there a rule or decree against the posting of 9/11 conspiracies on the politics forum?

 

[Glirk Dient]

There is and there should be. It's stupid to think the government had any hand in 9/11. If Bush is capable of this massive cover up, why can't he simply plant WMDs in Iraq? That would make him look so good. We know he has no moral boundaries since killing thousands of people to go to war for no apparent reason seems like a good idea, then planting WMDs and justifying his war would be the next step. Except that hasn't happened. Why then W4d5Y would Bush allow the killing of thousands of Americans but not commit a simple lie?

 

[Solaris]

Yeah, well lets see how you like it.

Also why not read them.
I remember at uni I spent whole afternoons reading Science, scientific American, New Scientist, Nature. And I still sneak in to my old uni's library once in a while to read them.

Oh I do read those, but they're light.

 

[W4d5Y]

There is and there should be. It's stupid to think the government had any hand in 9/11. If Bush is capable of this massive cover up, why can't he simply plant WMDs in Iraq? That would make him look so good. We know he has no moral boundaries since killing thousands of people to go to war for no apparent reason seems like a good idea, then planting WMDs and justifying his war would be the next step. Except that hasn't happened. Why then W4d5Y would Bush allow the killing of thousands of Americans but not commit a simple lie?

Yes, that definitively is a point I have been struggling with for some time by now, the question why they wouldn't just launch more false flag operations for the sake of containing that momentum of appreciation they have been granted thanks to 9/11 instead of letting their old 9/11 accounts fall under public scrutiny.

However, you have to think beyond Bush, because that idiot never ever could have come up with a plan so clever to trick the public, to whatever degree it would have required the government's direct actions anyway.

Keep in mind that out of 19 persons having signed the PNAC document (calling for transformation of the military, especially on the matter of information processing, which as such doesn't sound particularly sinister actually, while this should be aided with the catalystic effect of a "new pearl harbour" [bear in mind that FDR was very well aware of the impending catastrophy of Pearl Harbour, however it was necessary to depict the japanese as the aggressor in the subsequent pacific war for the sake of public support, white house memos substantiate that, a possible explanation for the ignoring of australian intelligence warning of a japanese pacific fleet underway towards Hawai]) 10 actually joined the Bush-administration.
Bush also has Carl Rove for a brain, his national security advisor Rice was on the executive Board of a big oil company, can't remember which one right now, doesn't even matter which, evil they all are.
Bush in turn is Cheney's right hand.
Cheney also was head of military industrial complex wunderkind Halliburton Construction and Engineering and also on the board of another oil company, just like Rice.
Rumsfeld is part of the pharma-industrial complex, having gained indirect profit from Bush's scare about the impending virulent doom of america, due to the ever-threatening bird flu, receiving tax-payers' hard-earned money because the assignment for the tamiflu vaccine was received by a company which Rumsfeld also was a former head of, and, by having his respective stock interests, therebye made money by having his good ol' pal cheating on the american public, just as he has always done before.


So my basic premise is that Bush is not the mastermind of anything, that's selfevident.
He was a puppet put into office by the supreme court only to serve the financial interests of other people he served.

My assumption is that the government as such isn't a faction, but rather those pulling the strings behind the scenes.
Which would be sorta everybody else but Bush.

So you have to ask yourself what those people in turn could have done for example to receive more support from the public instead of wondering about Bush.

Needless to say it's a waste of time reflecting on Bush's motivations, because he lacks those thanks to the absence of a sentient mind.

 

[CptStern]

ffs you ****ing crazies with your misinterpretation of of the PNAC statement ..it's so plain that it's meant as a blueprint into getting a foothold into the middle east ..that one statement is NOT evidence of a conspiracy, PNAC has been active far longer OPENLY commenting on presidential policy ..it's really annoying that consiracy dipshit take that one line about pearl harbor and IGNORE the other 90 pages of the document ..they outline in specific detail why Saddam should be pressured, why Iran is a threat etc ..it does not in any way provide evidence that 9-11 was an inside job

seriously you people cling to the ridiculous instead of seeing what is painfully obvious to everyone but you

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

I remember at uni I spent whole afternoons reading Science, scientific American, New Scientist, Nature.

I do do that

 

[W4d5Y]

ffs you ****ing crazies with your misinterpretation of of the PNAC statement ..it's so plain that it's meant as a blueprint into getting a foothold into the middle east ..that one statement is NOT evidence of a conspiracy, PNAC has been active far longer OPENLY commenting on presidential policy ..it's really annoying that consiracy dipshit take that one line about pearl harbor and IGNORE the other 90 pages of the document ..they outline in specific detail why Saddam should be pressured, why Iran is a threat etc ..it does not in any way provide evidence that 9-11 was an inside job

seriously you people cling to the ridiculous instead of seeing what is painfully obvious to everyone but you

Very true, the pull-it quote was such a piece (of disinformation on Silverstein's side, I suspect that guy has blood on his hands).

Yeah, is it posted somewhere on the net?
Oh bloody hell, what is google for these days.

I just wanted to say that it's rather ugly if your president is run by think-tanks, who'll tell you how to get rid of saddam and why iran is a threat, because both of these prospects are total BS anyway.

I gotta read more about the "transformation" Rumsfeld longed for, as mentioned in the book "plan of attack", I was quite stunned to see just what PNAC outlined in their document right there on the 20th-ish page in that book.

Hey, anyway, I might reckon checking screw loose change again.
(btw, their comment on the flight-X/UA93 with cleveland or whatever that wasn't really convincing because they stated the story Avery cited had been retracted in fact. Sure it was retracted, how could you possibly think a generic small newspaper would keep such stories up?!)


Well, sure 9/11 was preventable, it comes to mind wether the white house abused the intelligence the FBI and CIA had gathered to create that "new pearl harbour" (I'm not speaking about the PNAC pearl harbour, but just ANY new pearl harbour I could think of.) which simply create legitimicy for every sinister coup the US is persuing, wether domestic or abroad.
Then, yeou wonder to what degree the gov't actually could have been involved, or wether it was at all, and to what extent that theory is even plausible.


Anyway.

Melts my brain.

I reckon I'll have to thank loose change for sorta screwing up my life, because I've first gotten aware of 9/11-issues after watching his movie.

Thanks for everything, Dyllan.

 

[Solaris]

One question, why is Dylan still alive if he's right.

 

[Jintor]

Because the Government is a bunch of scheming sneaky bastards AS WELL as incompetent.

 

[theotherguy]

Yeah, well lets see how you like it.

Also why not read them.
I remember at uni I spent whole afternoons reading Science, scientific American, New Scientist, Nature. And I still sneak in to my old uni's library once in a while to read them.

I do read those

 

[W4d5Y]

One question, why is Dylan still alive if he's right.

Dude
Dylan is an amateur, you people flame him all the time for not being a professional, so the gov't wouldn't have to take care of him or at least try discredit him anyway.

I mean please, loose change is just the tip of the iceberg.

I'd rather talk about the assassinations of these guys:
[Ron Paul] poor guy. I'm really worried about him.
Tom Daschle (almost killed by anthrax after being asked by both Bush and Cheney to narrow down the investigation into 9/11, dunno wether it was about limiting probes or cancelling an investigation altogether.)
Senat0r Patrick Leahy (requested that attorney general Ashcroft answer some questions before senate. He complied, but only after Leahy himself received an anthrax letter with a trillion spores per gramm, something that has only been achieved by US bio-weapons facilities :smoking
Paul Wellstone
JFK
Mel Carnahan
Robert Kennedy
The other Kennedy (so many of them, third victim of a plane "crash" I am to list here)
David Kelly (UK weapons inspector)
Gary Webb (uncovered CIA drug trafficking, just like the author of "crossing the rubicon", michael C Ruppert.
And YES he was murdered, how the hell could have shot himself in the head several times!?)
Hunter S Thompson (said he was to be "suicided", ran a story on the WTC collapse and allegedly had some interesting pieces of evidence )

As you can see, it's quite bloody exhausting to seperate plausibility and probability in this field.

Is the government sinister? Yes.
Are we giving it too much credit? Yes.

So where's the balance?

The government could do more if it could, but also it already has done much.
Or the CIA.
Or anybody else.
The CIA probably is to be credited concerning the anthrax letters, they were the only ones who had access.

 

[Jintor]

Do you have any idea how ****ing inconsistant you are? D:

 

[Solaris]

You need to BBC source your bullshit.

 

[W4d5Y]

Well, if you proove my respective opinion on an issue wrong, then I'll have to stand corrected and accept that.

But now, if I want to be "consistant" I must ignore any criticizm?

And please ****ing specify.

What am I inconsistant in?
What topic?

And which source do you need?
From the BBC?

The BBC has nothing that could be of worth to my questions because it censors anything hostile towards the establishment.

Anyway, I believe you're just sarcastic and trying to piss me off.

Oh yes, and making fun of me.

Hey did you know Prisonplanet actually covers other peoples' stories?

Does that label any third-party news distribution platform stupid, too?

 

[Solaris]

Exhibit A of why W4D5Y is an absolute ****tard who makes no sense:

"Hey did you know Prisonplanet actually other sources' stories?"

??????

 

[Eejit]

There's an ignore list for a reason.

 

[W4d5Y]

Exhibit A of why W4D5Y is an absolute ****tard who makes no sense:

"Hey did you know Prisonplanet actually other sources' stories?"

??????

I'm sorry, but frequently writing for so many twats kinda reduces my mental powers after a while.

 

[Jintor]

This is the internet. You have plenty of time to bug off and recuperate.

 

[15357]

Might be a bit late:

Read this. http://www.cras25342534039#534039#l

First, picture the demolitions teams wiring up the World Trade Center towers with explosives prior to the attack. Obviously you couldn't do it during business hours, since it'd be kind of hard to explain to the 100,000 people who worked at or visited the WTC towers on any given day why you had a huge chunk of wall torn out and were wiring up a bomb on the steel beams there.


World Trade Center observation deck. Notice: people are there.

I mean, keep in mind, I don't know how big of a job that would be (no one has ever demolished a building that size before) but a building just half the size of one WTC tower took 4,000 separate charges to bring down. Four thousand.

That job took seven months of prep work... and they had the run of an abandoned building, without having to hide their work from 100,000 people every day. Our demolition crew, on the other hand, can work only at night and has to spend the last bit of every shift carefully repairing the wall and hiding any evidence of charges or detonators as not to be discovered during the day.

Huge teams of demolitions experts, who had no problem wiring a building full of innocent New Yorkers to explode, hired in secret, worked every night for what had to be a year (and that's only if they had a big enough crew) placing maybe 10,000 separate charges in each tower and another few thousand in WTC 7 (the smaller WTC tower that also collapsed, later in the day on 9/11).

And nobody notices.

That's right. That's the theory they're putting out there. 100,000 DVD's they've sold with this.

Truckloads of bombs, dozens of mysterious workers, going in and out of the building, night after night. Security at the building doesn't catch them, Port Authority Police don't catch them, random eyewitnesses who stumble across the operation and call the cops don't catch them, maintenance workers who stumble across wet paint and repaired walls and bits of strange wire don't catch them, security cameras don't catch them.

The bomb-sniffing dogs who were brought in from time to time (remember, these buildings were bombed by terrorists in 1993) who are trained to find even one bomb, fail to notice the 10,000 bombs lining their building.


If you're saying that nothing could possibly be more retarded than that, you're wrong.

No, they're just getting started. It's at this stage of the hypothetical plot when the 9/11 conspiracy guys say the real cover-up began. This is when all of the many, many people who could have blown the lid off the whole thing chose to stay silent because they were paid off by the government.

That includes hundreds of private researchers and government employees who prepared gigantic reports about the collapse of the towers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Also, officials in the New York City Fire Department.

All were written fat checks, say the conspiracy guys, to cover up the murder of 3,000 New Yorkers. Keep in mind, some of them were New Yorkers themselves - all of the FDNY guys were - and some of them had friends who died in the towers. The theory even says it was the commander of the FDNY itself who detonated one of the buildings, and therefore he was in on the decision to kill 343 of his own firefighters and 60 police officers.


For money. If that were you... how big would that check have to be? These are people he saw every day, worked with every day. He went to weddings, birthday parties, to baseball games with these guys. In the mind of the 9/11 conspiracy, he'd kill them all for a big enough pile of cash.

Would you?

There's more. We have hundreds, if not thousands, of reporters and writers who researched the collapse, including the nine reporters and dozens of experts for the huge Popular Mechanics article on the subject.



They were paid off, too. And paid enough to walk away from the story of a lifetime, a chance to blow the lid off the conspiracy. Paid enough to refuse a sure Pulitzer and a lifetime of fame and riches as one of history's greatest heroes. And paid in such a way that no other reporters would notice and get jealous or ask questions. These people do tend to be the curious type, you know.

We're getting a nice sized payroll here. Now let's add in the hundreds of people from a dozen different agencies and police departments who claim to have helped clean up flight 93 wreckage, including 300 volunteers. The conspiracy guys say there was no plane, therefore they were paid to lie, along with all of the witnesses in Pennsylvania who claim to have seen the plane go down.

But wait, there's more. Because there are hundreds of thousands of civil engineers and structural engineers in the world (people who are experts in what makes buildings fall down) and lots of demolitions experts. Approximately zero of them say the 9/11 attacks looked like bombed buildings. All of them either say outright that the demolition theory is asinine, or are silent in the face of what the Loose Changers say is video proof of mass murder so obvious even an uneducated jackass off the street can spot it.

The conspiracy guys' explanation?

You guessed it. They were paid to stay silent. Hey, why not? Probably half a million people there, but, you know. Since we've got the checkbook out anyway...

Also, think of all of the friends and family of these paid conspirators, who suddenly see all this mysterious wealth...


...Wouldn't some rumors get started?

You've got some hypothetical professor who was about to write a paper proving the towers were demolished, suddenly coming into Powerball-sized wealth and abandoning the paper at the same time... his wife never let it slip? His kids didn't object? All his jealous colleagues who noticed the sudden new cars and new home and elaborate vacations, nobody asked questions? Nobody made an anonymous call to the IRS, just out of spite? All the bank employees who noticed thousands of mysterious deposits, all of which have to be reported to the IRS, that didn't leave a trail?

I mean, we're up to a sizeable portion of the US population here. Odds are you've passed some of these people on the street.

Today.

And keep in mind, this can't be chump change. Even in a world where every structural engineering desk jockey is okay with mass murder, they're still not going to risk jail and career ruin and walk away from a huge book deal for ten grand. Oh, no, it's got to be millions, per person, just to make it worth it. Even a dedicated conspirator would need to know he or she was set for life.

Let's say they wrote 500,000 checks (hell, you've got more than 120,000 people in the American Society of Civil Engineers alone, and they'd be the first ones to speak out). Say the average payout was ten million (barely enough to live rich the rest of your life, but let's just say). So that's 500,000 times ten million which is...

...Five TRILLION dollars.

That's about half of the value of all goods and services produced in the United States last year. Therefore the 9/11 conspiracy was, in terms of payroll, the single largest employer in the history of the world.


And here's the kicker...

100% of the people who were offered the deal, took it.

After all, we don't have a single person who has come running into the offices of the New York Times, waving a check and saying, "look! Here's a check for ten million smackers that the government gave me to be silent about 9/11! Can you believe these assholes? Now give me my book deal!"

Not one. Even with the lure of fame and fortune and a chance to go down in history as The Guy Who Saved American Democracy, even with the crushing guilt of seeing thousands of bodies hauled out of the rubble, even seeing the horrors of a nation turned inside out by war and paranoia that was completely manufactured as a gruesome hoax, some of these people having their own friends and families and colleagues die in the attacks, not one turned down the money... or took the money and came forward anyway.

And that, is the conspiracy mindset.

 

[W4d5Y]

Again, you don't get the point.
I wasn't saying it was explosive agents that brought them down, that's just a conspiracy theory.

I simply stated that the towers couldn't have fallen to office fires.
That's nobody, not even the government, has managed to appropriately debunk for me.

I just said in a recent post that's it's open to speculation WHAT brought them down.

But what falls under the area of SCIENTIFIC examination is conclusion by elimination.

You have to determine what possibilities can be excluded first.
And the only scenario that remains must, however implausible or improbable, the only remaining accurate explanation.

 

[15357]

Ok, what do you think caused the towers to fall?

 

[CptStern]

ya I guess the obvious explanation of "two really big airplanes slamming into the side of the building brought it down" isnt obvious enough ..or perhaps too obvious ..it has to be something more incredulous than that ...therefore it's a conspiracy ..not sure what but you just know the guys in the suits are up to no good ...better suit up


ignore the obvious I always say because the ludicrous is much more entertaining

 

[K e r b e r o s]

anyways, I'll repeat what I always say in these types of topics ...I find it funny that people are so willing to believe a ridiculous conspiracy when a real conspiracy is right in front of their noses: bush used 9/11 as a pretext to invading iraq (FULLSTOP) ...but NOOOOOOO you people have to take the most outlandish theory possible instead of something which is so painfully obvious to anyone who's mentally sound

I'll bite -- do you think he could've plotted 9/11 as an excuse to do this?

Think about -- Bin Laden gets what he wants, total anarchy and chaos in Iraq, possible 2nd Caliphrate; Bush gets Saddam and all teh oil companiz0rz.

Is. It. Possible?

 

[CptStern]

I'll bite -- do you think he could've plotted 9/11 as an excuse to do this?

Think about -- Bin Laden gets what he wants, total anarchy and chaos in Iraq, possible 2nd Caliphrate; Bush gets Saddam and all teh oil companiz0rz.

Is. It. Possible?

no ...

 

[K e r b e r o s]

LOL. Sorry, y'know I had to ask.

 

[CptStern]

LOL. Sorry, y'know I had to ask.

you only ask because in many people's mind anti-iraq war/anti US foreign = "9/11 truther" ..the whole truther movement has given legitimate criticism towards bush's policies in the middle east a back seat. People are lazy, they'd rather believe the simplistic over the complicated. there's literally volumes of required reading behind the build up to war and the subsequent occupation of iraq, whereas all it takes is a 5 minute youtube video to plant a seed of doubt in some people's minds ... no matter how ridiculous

 

[Solaris]

Again, you don't get the point.
I wasn't saying it was explosive agents that brought them down, that's just a conspiracy theory.

I simply stated that the towers couldn't have fallen to office fires.
That's nobody, not even the government, has managed to appropriately debunk for me.

I just said in a recent post that's it's open to speculation WHAT brought them down.

But what falls under the area of SCIENTIFIC examination is conclusion by elimination.

You have to determine what possibilities can be excluded first.
And the only scenario that remains must, however implausible or improbable, the only remaining accurate explanation.

I'm sorry but there is where I have to give you a huge dose of shut the **** up.

Of course I may have made a mistake, you might not be an uneducated, arrogant, ignorant, self assured retarded asshole that I made you out to be.

Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps your not this, perhaps you just failed to mention that you are a qualified demolitions expert, or structural engineer. At the very least of course, if I'm wrong, you are an expert in construction, or building fires. You have of course been educated at Harvard, wrote the textbooks and are the leading expert in your field. In fact, you are such a genius you know so much more than the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of qualified experts who support the official explanation. You know something that those who peer reviewed the explanation did not. You know more than the entire scientific community, who agree with the official explanation.

Hell, these people are so dumb and you are so clever that you spotted that there was nothing flammable in those buildings to burn. All the experts simply overlooked that fact; I must apologise if this is true, I did not know they were as ****ing retarded as that to not realise a simple fact that even a moron on the internet could work out.

Or perhaps, in the millions of hours put into investigating 911, they did find things that could burn. But we shouldn't trust them? We should trust you.

You.

The worlds most ingenious structural engineer.

Or some asshole who thinks some of the words greatest minds are complacent in the murder of thousands of innocent people.

Just get the **** out of here. You didn't deserve a second of the time it took to write this.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I really want to close this thread but I can't be arsed to read through it to make sure it needs closing.

 

[15357]

Christ's sake, man. You're a Super Moderator! You shouldn't need to read threads to have them closed.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Well...you're a Super Cockwit! Get out!

/broom

 

[15357]

*cowers under the onslaught*

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

I'm sorry but there is where I have to give you a huge dose of shut the **** up.

Of course I may have made a mistake, you might not be an uneducated, arrogant, ignorant, self assured retarded asshole that I made you out to be.

Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps your not this, perhaps you just failed to mention that you are a qualified demolitions expert, or structural engineer. At the very least of course, if I'm wrong, you are an expert in construction, or building fires. You have of course been educated at Harvard, wrote the textbooks and are the leading expert in your field. In fact, you are such a genius you know so much more than the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of qualified experts who support the official explanation. You know something that those who peer reviewed the explanation did not. You know more than the entire scientific community, who agree with the official explanation.

Hell, these people are so dumb and you are so clever that you spotted that there was nothing flammable in those buildings to burn. All the experts simply overlooked that fact; I must apologise if this is true, I did not know they were as ****ing retarded as that to not realise a simple fact that even a moron on the internet could work out.

Or perhaps, in the millions of hours put into investigating 911, they did find things that could burn. But we shouldn't trust them? We should trust you.

You.

The worlds most ingenious structural engineer.

Or some asshole who thinks some of the words greatest minds are complacent in the murder of thousands of innocent people.

Just get the **** out of here. You didn't deserve a second of the time it took to write this.

/thread. Thank you Solaris for saying what we have all wanted to say for sooooo long.

 

[Glirk Dient]

/thread. Thank you Solaris for saying what we have all wanted to say for sooooo long.

It won't get through. He won't listen to it. I mean look at everything he says, if he payed attention to anything logical he would never have bought into that crap before. People like him are the reason myspace is spammed with trojan bulletins. They believe any crap they read on the internet.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

you only ask because in many people's mind anti-iraq war/anti US foreign = "9/11 truther" ..the whole truther movement has given legitimate criticism towards bush's policies in the middle east a back seat. People are lazy, they'd rather believe the simplistic over the complicated. there's literally volumes of required reading behind the build up to war and the subsequent occupation of iraq, whereas all it takes is a 5 minute youtube video to plant a seed of doubt in some people's minds ... no matter how ridiculous

OMG, I almost sigged. ^^ Thanks for explaining that.