The reason for countering 9/11 conspiracy numpties

[JihadJane]

Appeal to emotion excised for the sake succinctness and relevancy.

I'm not too interested in your reason for telling a lie. It doesn't prevent it from being a lie.

It seems you don't think that many 911 family members doubt the official account then. What makes you think that and what is "many"?

 

[JihadJane]

That doesn't make them immune to stuff ups. You seem to be saying that it is possible for intelligence agencies to remain totally water tight even though they have supposedly been tasked with killing thousands of their own countrymen.

You really do think that people in these kinds of jobs are psychopathic robots, don't you?

I suggest you do some research into how Intelligence agencies work and how covert miltary operations are organised. There is a lot of information in the public domain on the subject.

 

[funk de fino]

I suggest you do some research into how Intelligence agencies work and how covert miltary operations are organised. There is a lot of information in the public domain on the subject.

I guess you should take your own advice if you think a normal type covert mission could carry out a MIHOP 911.

 

[Brainache]

I suggest you do some research into how Intelligence agencies work and how covert miltary operations are organised. There is a lot of information in the public domain on the subject.

What Funk de Fino said.

Let me get this point clear: Are you saying that you think it's possible for the CIA/FBI/WHOEVER to carry out a plan to kill thousands of US civilians without one whistleblower coming forward after 7 years?

 

[dudalb]

As an intelligent person has it ever occurred to you that, if 911 were a covert, criminal, Intelligence-orchestrated operation, then there would no be a trail of hard evidence other than the "evidence" that the perpetrators wanted to be found? The evidence pointing at such an operation is to be found in orchestrated lies and obstructions, surreal "evidence", the changing and inconsistent stories and in the removal and destruction of evidence that is necessary to maintain the ensuing cover-up. Of this there is a plentiful supply, all of it in the public domain.

Nice way of getting rid of the scientific evidence against the 9/11 Conspiracy theories.
BTW any such coverup would by any common sense involve the FDNY and the NYPD...something which you got annoyned about when we pointed that out.
.

 

[dudalb]

I suggest you do some research into how Intelligence agencies work and how covert miltary operations are organised. There is a lot of information in the public domain on the subject.

There is a lot of total crap about those two topics in the public domain.

 

[Tippit]

What Funk de Fino said.

Let me get this point clear: Are you saying that you think it's possible for the CIA/FBI/WHOEVER to carry out a plan to kill thousands of US civilians without one whistleblower coming forward after 7 years?

If whistleblowers would come forward (and they have), who would believe them? Certainly not you.

 

[Drudgewire]

If whistleblowers would come forward (and they have)

This should be good.

 

[Spud1k]

If whistleblowers would come forward (and they have), who would believe them? Certainly not you.

Well, when the whistleblower accounts truthers like to talk about involve things like secret controlled demolitions being preceded by a countdown, you can hardly blame people for being suspicious of their credibility.

 

[ComsatAngel2017]

If whistleblowers would come forward (and they have), who would believe them? Certainly not you.

Ah, who could forget the earth-shattering revelations of:
Mike the EMT!
Lauro Chavez!
The anonymous ex-CIA guy! (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115333&highlight=whistleblower)
And that buffoon from an American artillery unit in West Germany back in the 70's, whom I frankly can't be bothered to hunt down.

 

[Disenchanted]

I don't know much about it.

It is a fatal error to judge the predatory individuals at the top of the food chain as if they were normal people.

That is quite an arrogant statement to make that people in power are abnormally predisposed to be psychos while you are normal. What makes you any different more morally capable then people in power? They are people just as you who happened to come to power. Does that mean if you were given that power you would be a psycho and abuse power just as you claim they do? If you would not what is your evidence that you are different and morally better? If you would then that might say more about you then it does about them.

What about all other people in government like every member of the military, every member of the FBI or New York Firemen are they predatory as well? Seeing as the “predatory individuals” could not do anything without the people in government below them, wouldn’t they need to be so as well? If so what makes you better then them?

It seems to me representing people in power as psychos is away for you to dehumanize them and make it easier for you to cling to you to have fun with your 9/11 conspiracy nonsense.

The a priori "people can't keep secrets argument" is absurd. If there are things that have been successfully kept secret how would we know about them?

The irony of you calling any argument absurd after all of the absurd posts you have written is overwhelming.

Right here you use at least a couple logical fallacies like circular reasoning that the government has done evil acts because they are evil. It is both circular reasoning and an argument from ignorance to argue that the government must be successfully keeping secrets because and successfully keeping secrets because we do not know about it.

Begging the Question/Circular Reasoning

Argument from Ignorance

There is nothing absurd about the notion that people in government or else where cannot keep a secret. All of the whistleblowers and leaks like Mark Felt or just about any legit government abuse that you have heard of came about because someone came forward or leaked it, which shows how absurd your argument is.

ETA: wording change

 

[johnny karate]

It seems you don't think that many 911 family members doubt the official account then. What makes you think that and what is "many"?

I'm not the one making positive claims about what these people think, so I have nothing for which to account.

As far as what "many" means, I'll assume you have access to a dictionary. To describe a list of less than 50 names out of thousands as "many" is disingenuous at best.

All your verbal gymnastics aside, your claim is still unsubstantiated and has yet to be retracted, so it's still a lie.

 

[johnny karate]

If whistleblowers would come forward (and they have), who would believe them? Certainly not you.

There are no 9/11 whistleblowers. You are either a lying or have no idea what a whistleblower is. (Hint: It's not someone who maybe worked for the government at some point and believes 9/11 was an inside job.)

 

[TjW]

That doesn't make them immune to stuff ups. You seem to be saying that it is possible for intelligence agencies to remain totally water tight even though they have supposedly been tasked with killing thousands of their own countrymen.

You really do think that people in these kinds of jobs are psychopathic robots, don't you?

Well, since I already have a reputation for applying cod psychology to twoofers:

She knows how she'd behave in that situation, and since she's completely normal, that's what any normal person would do.

 

[Brainache]

If whistleblowers would come forward (and they have), who would believe them? Certainly not you.

Others have pointed out the obvious fact that there have been no 9/11 inside job whistleblowers.

The closest I've seen is Sibel Edmonds and all she did was complain about a bit of Beaureaucratic foot dragging by her boss who was trying to get more translators on his staff.

Do you know of any others? (Although, maybe a new thread would be more appropriate. Or perhaps one of the many whistleblower threads already on the forum)

I'd be willing to listen to them, if they brought solid evidence to the table.

 

[gumboot]

Thanks for your questions, ache.

The Military/Intelligence complex is in the business of manitaining a monopoly of violence. Much of what they do is covert.

Even pretending for a time that your fantasy of perfectly infallible sealed-tight covert military and intelligence units is true, you're left with the problem that any sort of significant US Government involvement in the September 11 Attacks necessitates the involvement of an enormous number of people outside the "Military/Intelligence Complex" who are not in the business of maintaining a monopoly of violence and do not do things covertly. Like the FDNY, for example. Or NIST. Or the world's media. In fact many of these organisations and entities were victims of the attacks, yet for these theories relating to 9/11 to be true, they must have been involved in the attacks themselves - or at the absolute least knowingly partaking in a post-attack deception.

 

[JihadJane]

A loyal citizens' army, unknowingly promoting bunk.

Even pretending for a time ... in a post-attack deception.

Yes, let's pretend, for a time, that the official account is bunk. If it were bunk then you, gumboot, would be part of covering-up the bunk.

No-one would be paying you for your countless hours of selfless service to an outrageous pack of lies. You'd know what to do. You wouldn't need to be told.

 

[JihadJane]

The closest I've seen is Sibel Edmonds and all she did was complain about a bit of Beaureaucratic foot dragging by her boss who was trying to get more translators on his staff.

Sibel Edmonds has complained about a lot more than that.

For example, she has complained that:

"Operating invisibly under the radar of media and public scrutiny, lobby groups and foreign agents have become the ‘epicenter’ of our government, where former statesmen and ‘dime a dozen generals’ cash in on their connections and peddle their enormous influence to the highest bidders turned clients. These groups’ activities shape our nation’s policies and determine the direction of the flow of its taxpayer driven wealth, while to them the interests of the majority are considered irrelevant, and the security of the nation is perceived as inconsequential."

"The Highjacking of a Nation

Part 2: The Auctioning of Former Statesmen & Dime a Dozen Generals"

By Sibel Edmonds

http://nswbc.org/Op Ed/Part2-FNL-Nov29-06.htm

 

[Brainache]

Sibel Edmonds has complained about a lot more than that.

For example, she has complained that:

"Operating invisibly under the radar of media and public scrutiny, lobby groups and foreign agents have become the ‘epicenter’ of our government, where former statesmen and ‘dime a dozen generals’ cash in on their connections and peddle their enormous influence to the highest bidders turned clients. These groups’ activities shape our nation’s policies and determine the direction of the flow of its taxpayer driven wealth, while to them the interests of the majority are considered irrelevant, and the security of the nation is perceived as inconsequential."

"The Highjacking of a Nation

Part 2: The Auctioning of Former Statesmen & Dime a Dozen Generals"

By Sibel Edmonds

http://nswbc.org/Op Ed/Part2-FNL-Nov29-06.htm

Seriously: Is this news to you? That wealthy interests lobby politicians to gain favour?

Wow.

It isn't news to me, but I still don't see how this is evidence of an inside job, unless you are saying that Al Qaeda successfully lobbied the President to attack his own country.

 

[JihadJane]

Seriously: Is this news to you? That wealthy interests lobby politicians to gain favour?

No, though Sibel Edmonds' charges have profound implications about the extent of routine criminality at the highest levels of the US State. Presumably that's why she has been gagged.

Wow.

Easy Tiger!

It isn't news to me, but I still don't see how this is evidence of an inside job, unless you are saying that Al Qaeda successfully lobbied the President to attack his own country.

Evidence of an inside job? I was just pointing out that, contrary to your bizzare claim, she has complained about more than a " bit of Beaureaucratic foot dragging by her boss who was trying to get more translators on his staff."