• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
Xraye said:
It didn't in Hitler's case. He had his own parliamentary building, the Reichstag building, set ablaze...

So by no means is such an event impossible to be commited. And how about that good ole patriot act?...

Did you know that our government is now capable of holding military tribunals? ...

So in light of these facts, I don't think it's very inconcievable to imagine that our government would try to orchistrate something like 9/11. I personally don't think they're as stupid as they'd like us to believe.
Click to expand...
In light of the facts that Hitler existed, that we have the Patriot Act (which was passed overwhelmiingly by our elected representatives), and that we have military tribunals (which as far as I know we have always had), you think it's plausible that our government committed 9/11?

That's astonishing. I didn't think we'd devolve into geggy territory so quickly.
 
Last edited:
Huntsman said:
I'm already subject to military tribunals, and have been for the past 17 years.

Hasn't been a problem yet.

Also, you apparently did not read your link.




There are additional requirements as well.


Your lack of research didn't stop you from making comments that support your own position.
Click to expand...

I didn't miss that part of the document. However, I persoanlly believe that people who aren't americans have as much right to a fair trial as people who are.
 
Gravy said:
In light of the facts that Hitler existed, that we have the Patriot Act (which was passed overwhelmiingly by our elected representatives), and that we have military tribunals (which as far as I know we have always had), you think it's plausible that our government committed 9/11?

That's astonishing.
Click to expand...

It's happened before, what makes you think it can't happen again?
 
geggy said:
...I only came to conclusions that the bush admin was complicit in the attacks because there are just far too many coincidences...
Click to expand...

Hi geggy. Here's a 9/11 coincidence for you: Seth MacFarlane, the creator of the cartoon "Family Guy," was supposed to be on American Airlines 11 on September 11, 2001. But his agent gave him the wrong departure time, so he showed up at Logan Airport some 10 minutes after the flight took off. Doesn't that indicate MacFarlane (or at least his agent) had some foreknowledge that the flight would hit the WTC? And therefore MacFarlane must be complicit in the attacks? And doesn't that raise the possibility that "Family Guy" is yet another mouthpiece for the great conspiracy?

If you think all this is impossibly stupid, substitute Ben Chertoff for Seth MacFarlane, and Popular Mechanics for "Family Guy." How far would you CT'ers run with that little tidbit, if it were true?
 
Xraye said:
It's happened before, what makes you think it can't happen again?
Click to expand...

That's the kind of rethoric Conspiracists use. You can't compare loosely two distinct historical events, from two distinct eras and two distinct cultures.
 
Xraye said:
It didn't in Hitler's case. He had his own parliamentary building, the Reichstag building, set ablaze and blamed it on the communist in order to pass Article 48 which allowed him bypass the parliament in his decision making. Of course he promised to only use it in times of war. Sound familiar? The alleged arson was sentanced to death, but afterward in the Leipzig Trial it was found that the Nazi party itself orchistrated the events.

So by no means is such an event impossible to be commited. And how about that good ole patriot act?
Click to expand...

I've seen this Nazi analogy come up so many times... As I pointed out on the LC board, it is not sound reasoning to base a conclusion that Bush is behind the 9/11 attacks on the existence or prior behavior of the Nazis.

I'm not sure what the technical term is, but it is some type of fallacy. It's exactly the same type of argument used by people who bring up Northwoods.

Prior examples of a particular behavior is not evidence that the behavior is happening now with a different set of people.

Can it happen? Sure. There are numerous examples throughout history of individuals and governments blaming events on people other than the real perps. That's not the question. The question is -- did it happen in this case? And the problem for me is, when you look for the evidence of that, there is none to be found. Absolutely none. And further, the evidence to the contrary -- that the events were perp'd by the people the administration claims -- is overwhelming.
 
Xraye said:
I was wondering that myself. However, even if there wasn't the general principle remains the same that something similar has happened in the past.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. You want to make the point that mass murder orchestrated by the government on its own people, indiscriminately of race, gender, religion, ethnicity, is plausible. Were there massive civilian casualties in the Reichstag fire?
 
Xraye said:
No I can't, because I have very elementary knowledge of that.
Click to expand...
Do you plan on obtaining additional knowledge? Can you share your method of evaluating the evidence? Do you have the requisite level of knowledge and experience to evaluate the evidence or will you, at least partially, rely on the expertise of those who presented the evidence?
 
Xraye said:
It's happened before, what makes you think it can't happen again?
Click to expand...
That's VERY different from providing evidence that our government was complicit in 9/11. Eugenics laws could happen again. Should I assume that they have happened, or should I rely on evidence?

I am not encouraged by the way you've started here, Xraye. You're acting an awful lot like geggy.
 
Xraye said:
It's happened before, what makes you think it can't happen again?
Click to expand...

That question carries exactly the same amount of weight among critical thinkers as "when did you stop beating your wife?"

It is a rhetorical trap based on a strawman argument.

I hope you will give some time and thought as to why that is.
 
Let me add my kudos to Gravy for his Bull-Dogged persistance on this.

Posting this link this late in the discussion might be a mistake, and If it starts destabilizing the thread, I'll retract it or the mods can put it somewhere else.

But found a pretty good WTC 7 explanation, from 2002:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/020302nytimes

Apparently, Giuliani's Bunker and the Secret Service offices (among others) WERE the reason it collapsed, but only because they had Diesel Generators:

From the link: As much as 42,000 gallons of diesel fuel was stored near ground level in the tower and ran in pipes up to smaller tanks and emergency generators for Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani's command center, the Secret Service's office and other tenants."

"Investigators have determined that the burning fuel apparently undermined what is known as a transfer truss. The trusses, a series of steel beams that allowed the skyscraper to be built atop multistory electricity transformers, were critical to the structural integrity of the building and ran near the smaller diesel tanks. "


One note of interest (to me, at least) is the line in the article:

"But until now, the collapse of 7 World Trade has stood as one of the outstanding mysteries of the Sept. 11 attack, since before then, no modern, steel-reinforced high-rise in the United States had ever collapsed in a fire." (Bolding mine...actually, the entire citation was bolded in the article, so non-bolding was mine).

Implying that there are Non-U.S. Steel-reinforced high-rise buildings that Had Collapsed before 9.11.01. can we find those?


Trif
 
Pardalis said:
That's the kind of rethoric Conspiracists use. You can't compare loosely two distinct historical events, from two distinct eras and two distinct cultures.
Click to expand...

In discussing the possibility of an event it's relevant to show that other similar events have taken place. Ever heard the term "history repeats itself"? Is that supposed to only apply to instances that happen in the same culture and same area?
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
I am not encouraged by the way you've started here, Xraye. You're acting an awful lot like geggy.
Click to expand...
Ladies and gentlemen, I am making the following prediction.

Xraye will come to the conclusion that the OV of 9/11 is wrong, the evidence of the CTist is so strong he is forced to believe them.

He will do so without providing one shred of viable, verifiable independently produced evidence.

Xraye, I will be happy to admit I'm wrong. It's up to you now, show us what you got.
 
Last edited:
Xraye said:
In discussing the possibility of an event it's relevant to show that other events have taken place. Ever heard the term "history repeats itself"? Is that supposed to only apply to instances that happen in the same culture and same area?
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying you can't compare, I'm saying you can't compare loosely. You do have to take into account the different cultures and eras, the context in wich these events took place. To me, there are no similarities.
 
DavidJames said:
Ladies and gentlemen, I am making the following prediction.

Xraye will come to the conclusion that the OV of 9/11 is wrong, the evidence of the CTist is so strong he is forced to believe them.

He will do so without providing one shred of viable, verifiable independently produced evidence.

Xraye, I will be happy to admit I'm wrong. It's up to you now, show us what you got.
Click to expand...

As we say in French: "Give the runner a chance" ;)
 
Pardalis said:
I wasn't saying you can't compare, I'm saying you can't compare loosely. You do have to take into account the different cultures and eras, the context in wich these events took place. To me, there are no similarities.
Click to expand...

I don't know much about the culture of Germany before WWII. I agree that it's deffinatly relevant information. I'm personally just intrigued by the striking similarity beetween the doctrines of each culture, as well as they catalyst that put them into place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom