Why did 9/11 need to be so elaborate?

000063 said:
4) Truthers are never wrong

Truthers hate to admit being wrong or lack of knowledge on anything, even when they know it is illogical. So you get them saying one illogical thing at one point, and then another illogical thing later. When it's pointed out that the two positions are mutually contradictory, they stick their fingers in their ears and/or call you a poopyhead. Certain Truthers here are quite accomplished at that. And very predictable.
Click to expand...

Sig'd

With your permission of course! :D

(had to snip a bit due to size restraints)
 
Brass said:
There's a ton of all actions that truthers take that make you scratch your head and say "Huh?"

Gravy has always said it best - 9/11 Truthers take little anomalies, but not connecting them to a larger theory.

You can't show them any evidence, as they're in a position that if they turn back now and accept that 9/11 was not a conspiracy theory, they'll be humiliated and feel nothing but pure shame. They're also led by a guy who can't turn back either, and that man is Alex Jones. Jones made a huge decision, commitment and mistake when he decided to start a show that focuses solely on conspiracy theories. He put himself in a corner that he cannot get out of. If he doesn't say there's a conspiracy theory involved in an event, he doesn't have a show, he doesn't get money, he can't feed his family. It's as simple as that.

So why does it need to be so complex? Because it can't fit in with the official story, which is laid out perfectly. If it crosses any boundary between the official story and the conspiracy theory, they're basically admitting they're wrong. Common sense is thrown out the window, especially with 9/11 "truthers".
Click to expand...

I like you, Brass. Nice pic btw. However, never forget that your conspiracy theory is nothing more than that. This makes you a conspiracy theorist - like it or not. Honestly, stop putting yourself down so much. You'll be happier. We are all here to try to find out what really happened since so many questions still linger, that for whatever reasons, were never answered by the investigation. You can believe what you want, but be reasonable and understand where the truthers are coming from. If 9/11 were a false flag operation, or if it was an attack from some entity other than Al Qaeda, I would think that you would be caring enough to want to know the truth. Personally I applaud the truthers. They could end up being correct about a lot of things. :eek:
 
KreeL said:
... I applaud the truthers. They could end up being correct about a lot of things. :eek:
Click to expand...
You prefer fantasy. 911 truthers are wrong about everything. This is your yearly or biennial post of idiotic lies?


For you and 911 truth the complex plot is too much to handle.

Plot
1. Kill pilots
2. Crash planes

No wonder you prefer the simple idiotic delusions from truthers.
 
Last edited:
KreeL said:
I like you, Brass. Nice pic btw. However, never forget that your conspiracy theory is nothing more than that. This makes you a conspiracy theorist - like it or not. Honestly, stop putting yourself down so much. You'll be happier. We are all here to try to find out what really happened since so many questions still linger, that for whatever reasons, were never answered by the investigation. You can believe what you want, but be reasonable and understand where the truthers are coming from. If 9/11 were a false flag operation, or if it was an attack from some entity other than Al Qaeda, I would think that you would be caring enough to want to know the truth. Personally I applaud the truthers. They could end up being correct about a lot of things. :eek:
Click to expand...

Oooooh sorry, its was a conspiracy theory up until it was shown that AQ was responsible. At that point it became a fact that AQ conspired & carried out the attacks.

See, the reason truthers are considered conspiracy theorists is because they believe someone else carried out the attacks. As such the onus is on them to provide evidence for this claim and to date they have failed... spectacularly... I mean their biggest claim to fame atm is... what? ...

Anyway, truthers are the conspiracy theorists while "our side" is reality.
 
MirkoS said:
Hello, glad to be here!

I've been wondering something and would like the opinion from those who believe 9/11 to be a conspiracy.
Click to expand...
There is no question it was a conspiracy. This is how effective media and propaganda are that people literally forget the meanings of the words they are using and can even hold two contrary ideas about the same kind of event as you do here with 'conspiracy.'

MirkoS said:
All of these people who think that 9/11 was an inside job, I'm curious about something. Alright, the buildings were rigged with explosives and it was a controlled demolition. A missle hit the Pentagon instead of a plane. Flight 93 was shot down. OK, I get it.
Click to expand...

Wrong on the missile at the pentagon. That is only some people. I think anyone who looks carefully can conclude Flt 77 hit the pentagon. The Pentagon has been at the center of a disinformation campaign. (Terry Messan's early book on the subject was translated into over 20 languages!) The simple fact is that the perpetrator's of these crimes could not have assured ahead of time that no images or videos would leak out (chances are they would, especially nowadays with cameras being so prolific), and the evidence on the ground, large body of witness testimony, dna, plane parts etc I think conclusively show that flight 77 flew into the ground floor of the pentagon. (after an astonishing hairpin turn to plow into the only wedge that had just finished having special blast reinforced walls and windows installed. Some of those killed were workers finishing up this project. The other people killed were in the one office that had moved back in (Naval accounting office I believe it was)

Re flt. 93 Anyone can go to Wikipedia and read how the plane plowed intact into the ground yet left an 8 mile debris field. If you dont find these two 'facts' contradictory then that is fine. I think most people will

MirkoS said:
What I'm wondering is, and which I have yet to get a reasonable answer for no matter how many times I ask this: why in the world would anyone go to such lengths to engineer such elaborate measures, measures that are logistical nightmares, not only to set-up, execute, but also to conceal, when it wouldn't be necessary? Stop and think about it. Pull back from the details of the attacks and look at the larger picture. Why not simply recruit people (say through a radical Islamic organization fronted through one of our intelligence agencies) to fly planes into the buildings and let it play out however it does?
Click to expand...

It certainly looks like that is kind of what happened. Though I doubt anyone would leave such a vital and precarious thing to chance. The planes were most likely remote flown to their targets, -but that is pure conjecture.
It is always good to remember that our gut reaction can be wrong. 'Personal incredulity' is a logical fallacy for this reason. What is common sense is that all of the evidence has not been considered in the final investigations. That the investigations were underfunded and delayed. That the Bush admin fought any investigation and it took over 400 days to form the 911 Commission -whose work speaks for itself.
What is common sense is that if fires burned for 100 days and temperatures were recorded by Bechtel as high as 2800f over a week later (http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/asse_groundzero1.htm) and if there was molten metal, and explosions all over the place, and flashes, and highly redundant skyscrapers turned to dust and metal parts in mid air before our eyes leaving over 1000 human beings unaccounted for, -from gravity and fire we are told, and if wtc7 7 falls in a manner completely consistent with a planned implosion that it was one - NIST finally admitted that freefall was observed in it's collapse) that additional sources of energy must have been present.
9-11 happened. The events (and well recorded facts) are not in question. Finding the most satisfactory hypothesis to explain observations are. And what we are being told by official investigators cannot be true for these reasons.

MirkoS said:
This is what cracks me up about truthers, they're so concerned with the tiniest details they don't pull back and ask WHY.
Click to expand...

To rush us off to two wars, reposition our troops in the more geopolitically strategic middle east, install business friendly governments (where we wrote fiscal and economic policy prior to invading Iraq) and US military bases on either side of Iran. To increase military spending exponentially. If we dont use our weapons we can't build more. (look at Vietnam for a good history lesson on corporate warfare) and cut back on civil rights, the eradication of Habbeus Corpus and the killing of fellow Americans (and their children which we call 'collateral damage') without due process. A clearly phony war on terror, the creation of Homeland security and so on. All the changes we saw pinned to the back of 9-11. That is why it happened. Control of the Caspian Sea pipeline was another target. And opium production is back up higher than it ever was, -of which half a trillion dollars in profits makes it's way into the coffers of the big banks. That is the big picture.

MirkoS said:
Personally, if I were going to commit an attack on the scale of 9/11 I'd be smart enough to realize three things: 1) the less people involved the better..
Click to expand...
Im sure such operations are done in a very stratified manner so that each team or person doing a job does only that small part and knows only what they need to know to do that job. If they later put together that they were part of these attacks, as Im sure many did.. they are not about to come forward and implicate themselves as having been paid a lot of money to commit whatever acts that were part of this horrendous crime.

It is interesting that the company in charge of security at the wtc (securacom, later stratasec, -if im not mistaken) was also in charge of security at the airport where the planes flew out of. (I may be wrong on this point) I think Ryan goes into this stuff in his great essays on Demolition Access to the WTC. Worth reading: http://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html


MirkoS said:
The funny thing is, truthers believe that the U.S. government is capable of pulling off a feat such as 9/11 and keeping the wool over everyone's eyes for all these years, yet the very basis of their argument against it not being a conspiracy stems from incompetent preparation or oversights from that same government.
Click to expand...

You can generalize and call people names or be taken seriously. You cannot do both. I dont think it has anything to do with the government except the people who realize the truth, and shamefully, keep quiet. And that is most people who look at the facts. (I dont know how anyone could look at the facts of 9-11 and not think explosives must have been involved. All of them seem to congregate here. Well, here is to keeping an open mind.

Certainly the people at NIST are involved in a cover-up. you can hear it in their fumbling replies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw
 
Last edited:
atavisms said:
There is no question it was a conspiracy. This is how effective media and propaganda are that people literally forget the meanings of the words they are using and can even hold two contrary ideas about the same kind of event as you do here with 'conspiracy.'
Click to expand...
Oooo, lets remember that line!

Wrong on the missile at the pentagon. That is only some people. I think anyone who looks carefully can conclude Flt 77 hit the pentagon. The Pentagon has been at the center of a disinformation campaign. (Terry Messan's early book on the subject was translated into over 20 languages!) The simple fact is that the perpetrator's of these crimes could not have assured ahead of time that no images or videos would leak out (chances are they would, especially nowadays with cameras being so prolific), and the evidence on the ground, large body of witness testimony, dna, plane parts etc I think conclusively show that flight 77 flew into the ground floor of the pentagon. (after an astonishing hairpin turn to plow into the only wedge that had just finished having special blast reinforced walls and windows installed. Some of those killed were workers finishing up this project. The other people killed were in the one office that had moved back in (Naval accounting office I believe it was)

Re flt. 93 Anyone can go to Wikipedia and read how the plane plowed intact into the ground yet left an 8 mile debris field. If you dont find these two 'facts' contradictory then that is fine. I think most people will.
Click to expand...
Remember that line? Good! What was the debris that was 8 miles away? (You sure it was 8 miles btw?... anywho) was it engine parts? Wing tips? Windows?



It certainly looks like that is kind of what happened. Though I doubt anyone would leave such a vital and precarious thing to chance. The planes were most likely remote flown to their targets, -but that is pure conjecture.
It is always good to remember that our gut reaction can be wrong. 'Personal incredulity' is a logical fallacy for this reason. What is common sense is that all of the evidence has not been considered in the final investigations. That the investigations were underfunded and delayed. That the Bush admin fought any investigation and it took over 400 days to form the 911 Commission -whose work speaks for itself.
What is common sense is that if fires burned for 100 days and temperatures were recorded by Bechtel as high as 2800f over a week later (http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/asse_groundzero1.htm) and if there was molten metal, and explosions all over the place, and flashes, and highly redundant skyscrapers turned to dust and metal parts in mid air before our eyes leaving over 1000 human beings unaccounted for, -from gravity and fire we are told, and if wtc7 7 falls in a manner completely consistent with a planned implosion that it was one - NIST finally admitted that freefall was observed in it's collapse) that additional sources of energy must have been present.
9-11 happened. The events (and well recorded facts) are not in question. Finding the most satisfactory hypothesis to explain observations are. And what we are being told by official investigators cannot be true for these reasons.
Click to expand...
Whoa there... "gravity & fire" were the only things working on the towers? I seem to remember some other kind of damage. Some kind of highly destructive force...



To rush us off to two wars, reposition our troops in the more geopolitically strategic middle east, install business friendly governments (where we wrote fiscal and economic policy prior to invading Iraq) and US military bases on either side of Iran. To increase military spending exponentially. If we dont use our weapons we can't build more. (look at Vietnam for a good history lesson on corporate warfare) and cut back on civil rights, the eradication of Habbeus Corpus and the killing of fellow Americans (and their children which we call 'collateral damage') without due process. A clearly phony war on terror, the creation of Homeland security and so on. All the changes we saw pinned to the back of 9-11. That is why it happened. Control of the Caspian Sea pipeline was another target. And opium production is back up higher than it ever was, -of which half a trillion dollars in profits makes it's way into the coffers of the big banks. That is the big picture.
Click to expand...
Far simpler things could have been done to achieve all of that.... did you forget the OP as you were quoting it?


Im sure such operations are done in a very stratified manner so that each team or person doing a job does only that small part and knows only what they need to know to do that job. If they later put together that they were part of these attacks, as Im sure many did.. they are not about to come forward and implicate themselves as having been paid a lot of money to commit whatever acts that were part of this horrendous crime.
Click to expand...
Of course! As long as you forget that since they could easily prove they were part of the cell & they couldn't see the big picture until after the fact, bravely coming forward to blow the whistle becoming heroes in the process.

It is interesting that the company in charge of security at the wtc (securacom, later stratasec, -if im not mistaken) was also in charge of security at the airport where the planes flew out of. (I may be wrong on this point) I think Ryan goes into this stuff in his great essays on Demolition Access to the WTC. Worth reading: http://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html
Click to expand...
... its interesting that a security company that works with large buildings has more than on customer in the same region?



You can generalize and call people names or be taken seriously. You cannot do both. I dont think it has anything to do with the government except the people who realize the truth, and shamefully, keep quiet. And that is most people who look at the facts. (I dont know how anyone could look at the facts of 9-11 and not think explosives must have been involved. All of them seem to congregate here. Well, here is to keeping an open mind.
Click to expand...
How much did you know about explosives before 9/11?

Certainly the people at NIST are involved in a cover-up. you can hear it in their fumbling replies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw
Click to expand...

Their fumbling yet they sound far more rational than Gage, Fetzer, Jones, etc... interesting you think so.
 
I think there's a circular process involved.

Start with the idea that there is a conspiracy. It's an emotional commitment, and essentially a negative statement; that whatever everyone else thinks happened, it was actually something else.

Next step is to look for evidence of there being something wrong with the mainstream view (or their own straw man version of it; take your pick).

Then some bones of a narrative is constructed to fit that specific piece of evidence and ONLY that specific piece of evidence (such as, iron oxide = thermite).

With the evidence now established as supporting the overall theory (aka, conspiracy), the theorist is then able to cast their net wider in search of new evidence. The simplest form of this is deciding that since NIST, NYPD, whatever ignored the previously discovered piece of evidence, they must also be part of the conspiracy and ALL of their statements and actions can now be held up in front of a bright light.

And of course new evidence is found in this ever-expanding net. And each new piece is capable of having a supporting narrative built about it ("so and so said they heard a loud sound, therefor evidence of explosives"). Each new piece increases the feeling that they have a good case.

What is never even considered is whether each new piece fits an older pattern, or if there is any consistency, or even if there is ever a developed narrative.

In the scientific method, one might find one theory that accounts for three observations, and find that the fourth and fifth observation are actually of a completely distinct phenomena. But if nothing else, conspiracy believers are adamant about never letting go of anything. No matter how bad the "evidence" is, no matter how little it fits the pattern of any other evidence, they will not give up even the smallest.
 
And still they didnt include any Iraqi's on the planes, or make any links from 911 to Iraq so that their 911 Commission (who are also in on it of course) would criticise them for linking the two together.
 
Edx said:
And still they didnt include any Iraqi's on the planes, or make any links from 911 to Iraq so that their 911 Commission (who are also in on it of course) would criticise them for linking the two together.
Click to expand...

Planting some WMD's in Iraq would have been useful too. Maybe they should have spent more time in the planning stage.
 
twinstead said:
Planting some WMD's in Iraq would have been useful too. Maybe they should have spent more time in the planning stage.
Click to expand...

But they had time to fake plane crashes, plant evidence, make the FDNY think that WTC7 was going to collapse and convince the entire scientific community of impossible things. But... for no reason.
 
KreeL said:
I like you, Brass. Nice pic btw. However, never forget that your conspiracy theory is nothing more than that. This makes you a conspiracy theorist - like it or not. Honestly, stop putting yourself down so much. You'll be happier. We are all here to try to find out what really happened since so many questions still linger, that for whatever reasons, were never answered by the investigation. You can believe what you want, but be reasonable and understand where the truthers are coming from. If 9/11 were a false flag operation, or if it was an attack from some entity other than Al Qaeda, I would think that you would be caring enough to want to know the truth. Personally I applaud the truthers. They could end up being correct about a lot of things. :eek:
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
A conspiracy theory explains an event as being the result of an alleged plot by a covert group or organization or, more broadly, the idea that important political, social or economic events are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.
Click to expand...
debunked your equivocation
 
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
KreeL said:
I like you, Brass. Nice pic btw. However, never forget that your conspiracy theory is nothing more than that. This makes you a conspiracy theorist - like it or not. Honestly, stop putting yourself down so much. You'll be happier. We are all here to try to find out what really happened since so many questions still linger, that for whatever reasons, were never answered by the investigation. You can believe what you want, but be reasonable and understand where the truthers are coming from. If 9/11 were a false flag operation, or if it was an attack from some entity other than Al Qaeda, I would think that you would be caring enough to want to know the truth. Personally I applaud the truthers. They could end up being correct about a lot of things. :eek:
Click to expand...

Thank you. May Macho Madness stay in the hearts of millions forevers.

You may call me a "conspiracy theorist" but I actually prefer "rational thinker" so please, address me as that if you feel the need to address me as anything.

Your accusations of not being "reasonable" and my inability to "understand where the truthers are coming from" is absolutely without merit. Like I stated in my conversation with Jim Fetzer post, I was once a 9/11 Truther. Albeit for about one hour, but I actually believed everything that Loose Change told me after I watched it. Then, going along with everything my teachers and parents have taught me over the years, I examined both sides of the arguments and a half-hour later, I was anti-Loose Change that quickly. It joined Face Off at the bottom of my movies list.

Personally, I do not applaud the truthers, for many have spit in the faces of families and firefighters who gave their lives on 9/11, especially those like Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas and the devil himself, Alex Jones.

We're all entitled to believe what we want, but personally, I don't feel we're entitled to go around spewing hate and lies out of our mouths.
 
KreeL said:
However, never forget that your conspiracy theory is nothing more than that.
Click to expand...

It stopped being a theory when it was proved beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law in the conviction of Zacharias "The 20th Hijacker" Moussaoui.
 
Brass said:
Thank you. May Macho Madness stay in the hearts of millions forevers.

You may call me a "conspiracy theorist" but I actually prefer "rational thinker" so please, address me as that if you feel the need to address me as anything.

Your accusations of not being "reasonable" and my inability to "understand where the truthers are coming from" is absolutely without merit. Like I stated in my conversation with Jim Fetzer post, I was once a 9/11 Truther. Albeit for about one hour, but I actually believed everything that Loose Change told me after I watched it. Then, going along with everything my teachers and parents have taught me over the years, I examined both sides of the arguments and a half-hour later, I was anti-Loose Change that quickly. It joined Face Off at the bottom of my movies list.

Personally, I do not applaud the truthers, for many have spit in the faces of families and firefighters who gave their lives on 9/11, especially those like Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas and the devil himself, Alex Jones.

We're all entitled to believe what we want, but personally, I don't feel we're entitled to go around spewing hate and lies out of our mouths.
Click to expand...

We have a lot in common. I enjoyed the antics of the Macho Man. He was quite a performer. And like you, I switched sides. It took me longer than an hour. More like 8 months before it sunk in. I wish you the best, and carry on. :)
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
It stopped being a theory when it was proved beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law in the conviction of Zacharias "The 20th Hijacker" Moussaoui.
Click to expand...

He copped a plea did he? ...or was he waterboarded and put in a box until he couldn't take it any longer...I've heard of cases like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom