If Al Qaeda Planned 9/11...

[Ragnarok]

Whatever the truth behind what happened that day, as long as OCTers and Truthers can resist the urge to string each other up, or _______ ( add preferred method of execution), something positive CAN arise from the tragic events of that day.

Already, investigations have revealed the failings of those charged with protecting the USA, and further investigation and inquiry can only shine more light on some very murky areas. The public should always be prepared for what shocking, scuttling things may come out of these darkened corners.

Assuming there is nothing there because we have never seen it, doesn't seem to be a very productive process. Are you that confident in your beliefs that you don't have to even try to imagine whether a scenario was possible, not just highly unlikely?

 

[twinstead]

Whatever the truth behind what happened that day, as long as OCTers and Truthers can resist the urge to string each other up, or _______ ( add preferred method of execution), something positive CAN arise from the tragic events of that day.

Already, investigations have revealed the failings of those charged with protecting the USA, and further investigation and inquiry can only shine more light on some very murky areas. The public should always be prepared for what shocking, scuttling things may come out of these darkened corners.

Assuming there is nothing there because we have never seen it, doesn't seem to be a very productive process. Are you that confident in your beliefs that you don't have to even try to imagine whether a scenario was possible, not just highly unlikely?

You'll find very few people here who say the US didn't made some mistakes prior to 911. We're not mindless drones supporting the government, as much as truthers like to make out we are.

But, concerning an 'inside job', assuming there is nothing because we have never seen it is the ONLY way to approach the issue. When faced with 2 scenarios, one that has mountains of evidence to support it and one that may be possible, but highly unlikely, how is any rational person supposed to think?

Until that highly unlikely scenario has 'something' instead of 'nothing' to support it there is NO other rational way to feel about it.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

From a purely mathematical point of view, the attack on the WTC was a dismal failure.

I have to disagree.

If by "mathematical point of view" you mean number of lives lost, sure, there are ways that could have been worse. But think about it. They struck at the heart of America's financial district. The stock market shut down. All flights were frozen for weeks. We ended up in a multi-billion dollar war. Gas prices went through the roof. The economy tanked.

Mathematically, I'd say the effect was quite significant.

 

[~enigma~]

I have to disagree.

If by "mathematical point of view" you mean number of lives lost, sure

Yes, that is what I meant and it would have been a good idea to ask before making a post claiming you disagree at the same time saying you agree.

 

[jaydeehess]

However I am quite sure that even one suicide hijacking into a major US city (hell, even a medium sized one) would have resulted in live coverage of the aftermath.

I was referring to the actual act of mass murder rather than coverage of the aftermath.

A matter of degree. The crash on ONE airliner was shown live on TV. That , and all three others were also mass murder but the three were not shown live and there is one video of the first impact and one series of stills of one other. Flight 93 crashed no where near any camera.
The collapse of the two towers were both mass murder and seen live but the coverage was a consequence of the first aircraft crashes. The cameras were there BECAUSE they were covering the aftermath of the very first impact.

I have seen much the same from coverage of mass car crashes on icy roads. There are at first only a few vehicles blocking the road after crashing into each other, cameras arrive and catch dozens of ensuing crashes. Is that supposedly some evidence that a nefarious plan was in effect to catch mass destruction (and often fiery death) on video by some person or organization.

You seem to have assigned some significance to the fact that cameras were there at all when in fact it is a natural consequence of the previous acts. I seem to see that you might believe that this was done not by bin Laden/AQ but planned by unknown others. However you have shown no evidence to support such a view. Am I incorrect?

However, if any of bin Laden's alleged statements can be taken at face value, he also stated that his aim was to draw the US into unwinnable wars and bankrupt it as the US did with the USSR in Afghanistan. The US was already well on the way to bankruptcy before 911 but it is arguable that bin Laden's alleged plan has worked very well.

Agreed, have I ever argued that bin Laden was a stupid man?
Are you saying that you now believe that a fundementalist Islamic organization that considers itself at war with the west and in particular the USA, planned and carried out an attack on the USA to further their goal of ridding the middle eastern Holy Lands of western influence?
If not, will you state that it is at least highly probable?

 

[T.A.M.]

Whatever the truth behind what happened that day, as long as OCTers and Truthers can resist the urge to string each other up, or _______ ( add preferred method of execution), something positive CAN arise from the tragic events of that day.

Already, investigations have revealed the failings of those charged with protecting the USA, and further investigation and inquiry can only shine more light on some very murky areas. The public should always be prepared for what shocking, scuttling things may come out of these darkened corners.

Assuming there is nothing there because we have never seen it, doesn't seem to be a very productive process. Are you that confident in your beliefs that you don't have to even try to imagine whether a scenario was possible, not just highly unlikely?

1. You will find that most of the "stringing up" that OCTers do, wrt truthers, occurs because they arrive here without evidence, accusing innocent people of horrendous crimes, and expect us to say "oh my god, I can see clearly now, the rain is gone!"

2. You will find that very few, if any, posters here will pardon the USG of any misdoing, or failings. There is a gigantic difference between "failings" and "orchestration" wrt the events of that day.

3. I don't use my imagination when it comes to ANALYSIS of an event. I tend to use evidence, and a minimal amount of speculation, based on the evidence.

TAM

 

[~enigma~]

I can see clearly now, the rain is gone!"

I will never look the same at Johnny Nash again...

 

[JihadJane]

A matter of degree. The crash on ONE airliner was shown live on TV. That , and all three others were also mass murder but the three were not shown live and there is one video of the first impact and one series of stills of one other. Flight 93 crashed no where near any camera.
The collapse of the two towers were both mass murder and seen live but the coverage was a consequence of the first aircraft crashes. The cameras were there BECAUSE they were covering the aftermath of the very first impact.

Yes, whoever orchestrated the attacks used mass media MO to their advantage.

I have seen much the same from coverage of mass car crashes on icy roads. There are at first only a few vehicles blocking the road after crashing into each other, cameras arrive and catch dozens of ensuing crashes. Is that supposedly some evidence that a nefarious plan was in effect to catch mass destruction (and often fiery death) on video by some person or organization.

All I did was mention an initial thought that I had shortly after hearing about the attacks, a couple of days after they happened. You appear to have read much more into my statement than is actually there.

You seem to have assigned some significance to the fact that cameras were there at all when in fact it is a natural consequence of the previous acts.

No, it was what one would expect. Bin Laden's PR success which would have been impossible without these natural consequences.

I seem to see that you might believe that this was done not by bin Laden/AQ but planned by unknown others. However you have shown no evidence to support such a view. Am I incorrect?

I have shown "no evidence to support such a view" because it was not relevant to the discussion.

Agreed, have I ever argued that bin Laden was a stupid man?

Have I ever argued that you have ever argued that bin Laden was a stupid man?

Are you saying that you now believe that a fundementalist Islamic organization that considers itself at war with the west and in particular the USA, planned and carried out an attack on the USA to further their goal of ridding the middle eastern Holy Lands of western influence?
If not, will you state that it is at least highly probable?

I don't like to base judgements about history on belief. I don't know who planned and carried out the attacks. They have yet to be comprehensively investigated.

You stated that 911 made sense as PR for al Qeada. I agreed and suggested there could also have been a concrete strategic, economic warfare logic to the attacks.

Do you believe that if al Qaeda (or similar) "planned and carried out" the attacks, then that automatically rules out the involvement of anyone else?

 

[Baylor]

When crimes occurs in the real world, the list suspects/motives is pared down as evidence works to exculpate the innocent & incriminate the guilty. When this crime occured & 911 troother criminals 'Hi-Jacked History', the of list suspects/motives :

EXPANDED & CONTINUES TO EXPAND TO THIS DAY !

WHY?

As always because more $ could be made on video's, speaking engagements & books if the list of suspects is endless & is based upon unfounded speculation atop a mountain of flawed reasoning .

Dark machinations in the death of President Kennedy laid the spiratual groundwork for todays bizarre plots behind 911.

In both cases the obviously guilty culprits are ignored in favor of politically expedient & more desirable targets.

 

[dtugg]

Do you believe that if al Qaeda (or similar) "planned and carried out" the attacks, then that automatically rules out the involvement of anyone else?

Not necessarily. But I require proof to believe anyone else, be it the USG, the jooos, aliens, whomever, was involved. There isn't any.

 

[twinstead]

I don't know who planned and carried out the attacks. They have yet to be comprehensively investigated.

I can't stress enough that just saying this does NOT make it true.

 

[T.A.M.]

yes, well as far as I am concerned, until the 9/11 Commission reopens the case, investigates the possibility that LEPRACHAUNS we involved, I will not rest.

I mean since we don't rely on things like evidence to steer us in any particular direction, who is to say the little green irishmen were not in on it??

TAM

 

[JoeyDonuts]

yes, well as far as I am concerned, until the 9/11 Commission reopens the case, investigates the possibility that LEPRACHAUNS we involved, I will not rest.

I mean since we don't rely on things like evidence to steer us in any particular direction, who is to say the little green irishmen were not in on it??

TAM

You Racist Bastard.

-A Mick.

 

[JihadJane]

Dark machinations in the death of President Kennedy laid the spiratual groundwork for todays bizarre plots behind 911.

In both cases the obviously guilty culprits are ignored in favor of politically expedient & more desirable targets.

What is the process by which the verdict "obviously guilty” is arrived at?

I can't stress enough that just saying this does NOT make it true.

I can't stress enough that just saying this does NOT make it true.

yes, well as far as I am concerned, until the 9/11 Commission reopens the case, investigates the possibility that LEPRACHAUNS we involved, I will not rest.

I mean since we don't rely on things like evidence to steer us in any particular direction, who is to say the little green irishmen were not in on it??

TAM

You won't get any rest if you rely on reopening 911 Commission to lead you to the truth.


You are mistaken about the ethnicity of leprechauns.

 

[Bananaman]

JihadJane, you have no evidence to support your speculation. None. If you did have evidence, of any sort, even a shred, the world would know about it.

All you have is poltical ideological bias. That's fine, but you have no evidence to back up your fantasies based on that ideology. Zip. Zilch. Zero. That's why we tend to sigh when reading your remarkably illogical posts.

Bananaman.

 

[JihadJane]

JihadJane, you have no evidence to support your speculation. None. If you did have evidence, of any sort, even a shred, the world would know about it.

All you have is poltical ideological bias. That's fine, but you have no evidence to back up your fantasies based on that ideology. Zip. Zilch. Zero. That's why we tend to sigh when reading your remarkably illogical posts.

Bananaman.

Where is your evidence that al Qaeda/bin Laden acted alone?

 

[funk de fino]

What is the process by which the verdict "obviously guilty” is arrived at?

Study of the facts and evidence. Try it some time. Take off your political blinkers.

 

[dtugg]

Where is your evidence that al Qaeda/bin Laden acted alone?

I don't think you understand what burden of proof means.

 

[JoeyDonuts]

Where is your evidence that al Qaeda/bin Laden acted alone?

I believe our current understanding of physics would discount the possibility of Usama Bin Laden personally and simultaneously hijacking, then crashing all four airliners.

 

[T.A.M.]

You Racist Bastard.

-A Mick.

Does that make me an Anti-Lepite?

TAM