Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.....
"We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
Although the commission's landmark report made it clear that the Defense Department's early versions of events on the day of the attacks were inaccurate, the revelation that it considered criminal referrals reveals how skeptically those reports were viewed by the panel and provides a glimpse of the tension between it and the Bush administration.
A seven-page memorandum prepared by Philip D. Zelikow, the panel's former executive director, concluded that ''further investigation is needed'' to determine whether the C.I.A.'s withholding of the tapes from the commission violated federal law.
In interviews this week, the two chairmen of the commission, Lee H. Hamilton and Thomas H. Kean, said their reading of the report had convinced them that the agency had made a conscious decision to impede the Sept. 11 commission's inquiry.
Mr. Kean said the panel would provide the memorandum to the federal prosecutors and congressional investigators who are trying to determine whether the destruction of the tapes or withholding them from the courts and the commission was improper.....
Among the statements that the memorandum suggests were misleading was an assertion made on June 29, 2004, by John E. McLaughlin, the deputy director of central intelligence, that the C.I.A. ''has taken and completed all reasonable steps necessary to find the documents in its possession, custody or control responsive'' to formal requests by the commission and ''has produced or made available for review'' all such documents.
Both Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton expressed anger after it was revealed this month that the tapes had been destroyed.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
shoot a can or something and tell me it moves forward or backwards....the shot supposedly came from behind kennedy and yet his head moved backwards and to the left, which would be the direction of the grassy knoll.
did you watch the doc? I don't have to shoot a can to know the force moves it the direction the bullet is going, what about if it is attached to stick in the ground, would it stay forward or come back?
a can attached to a stick in the ground is not the same as a human being sitting down
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Sounds like text-book ass-covering, only the commission caught on and was pissed about it.
Point is, this is no proof of a conspiracy. It is proof of the regular corruption and attempts to control the flow of information for political purposes. The latter being the bread and butter of everyday politics.
See, my point isn't that noone has done anything wrong, or that there aren't shady aspects to the investigation, official statements etc. But I view it as nothing more than the usual taking advantage of events, and trying to brush up one's own (or one's organization's) image in the whole ordeal. The top military brass wanted desperately to look as if they were in control and competent, thus hampering the attempts of others of finding out what really happened, as they risked looking incompetent and stupid. You don't need a conspiracy to allow for these events, regular small corruption and image control will suffice.
(edit) Although I grant, that image control could be counted as a conspiracy I guess. But of a very much smaller and much more believable scale motivated by saving their own asses.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
did you watch the doc? I don't have to shoot a can to know the force moves it the direction the bullet is going, what about if it is attached to stick in the ground, would it stay forward or come back?
a can attached to a stick in the ground is not the same as a human being sitting down
Sure is closer to the same thing than a free floating object. When was the last time someone next to you got shot? I guess I will take the word of professionals that REACREATED the exact thing rather than something just saying something on the internet...but then again I am in on it
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I think the purpose of this thread is a moot point. I think there is a small group that really wants to believe in this conspiracy theory. There is a ton of information to grab from, combined with holes and missing information due to agency in-fighting and politics. And I'm sure it is great fun put theories together and since building #7 has the least coverage available, it makes it the easiest target to attach a theory to.
Sounds like text-book ass-covering, only the commission caught on and was pissed about it.
Point is, this is no proof of a conspiracy. It is proof of the regular corruption and attempts to control the flow of information for political purposes. The latter being the bread and butter of everyday politics.
See, my point isn't that noone has done anything wrong, or that there aren't shady aspects to the investigation, official statements etc. But I view it as nothing more than the usual taking advantage of events, and trying to brush up one's own (or one's organization's) image in the whole ordeal. The top military brass wanted desperately to look as if they were in control and competent, thus hampering the attempts of others of finding out what really happened, as they risked looking incompetent and stupid. You don't need a conspiracy to allow for these events, regular small corruption and image control will suffice.
(edit) Although I grant, that image control could be counted as a conspiracy I guess. But of a very much smaller and much more believable scale motivated by saving their own asses.
Peace
Dan
if you say so....the point remains the documentary that was given made a certain claim, i just proved that claim it made in the first 8 minutes of the broadcast was a complete lie. but instead of addressing that the documentary starts off with a lie it is instead dismissed as 'well, of course they had to cover their ass!' cool, but that's not what the documentary was saying, was it?
we're supposed to believe this documentary as fact eventhough it starts off with a lie at the 8min mark? because it's an acceptable lie because in your mind it was only to cover their asses? well, gee, i'm sure they were truthful in every other aspect
the documentary claims the governments timeline has always been consistent and yet the actual 9/11 commission says they lied about their timeline.....but i'm supposed to believe everything else it claims is the honest truth? oh yeah, it's an acceptable lie the documentary is making so just disregard that one. the 2 heads also claim the commission was set up to fail.
Post edited by Pepe Silvia on
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
did you watch the doc? I don't have to shoot a can to know the force moves it the direction the bullet is going, what about if it is attached to stick in the ground, would it stay forward or come back?
a can attached to a stick in the ground is not the same as a human being sitting down
Sure is closer to the same thing than a free floating object. When was the last time someone next to you got shot? I guess I will take the word of professionals that REACREATED the exact thing rather than something just saying something on the internet...but then again I am in on it
yes, i have seen people shot and i've never seen anyone shot that leaned away from the shot than sprung back towards the direction of the shot. either they move in the same direction as the bullet was traveling or they collapse, no wobble back and forth then the falling in the opposite way of the bullet. and it's been a while since i watched the footage but i don't recall kennedy being thrown forward and then moving back and to the left, i seem to recall him just going back and to the left....
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
yes, i have seen people shot and i've never seen anyone shot that leaned away from the shot than sprung back towards the direction of the shot. either they move in the same direction as the bullet was traveling or they collapse, no wobble back and forth then the falling in the opposite way of the bullet. and it's been a while since i watched the footage but i don't recall kennedy being thrown forward and then moving back and to the left, i seem to recall him just going back and to the left....
well watch it again, you clearly see an exit wound on his forehead as his body slumps to the side. this back and to the left olver stone shit is a bit overblown
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
if you say so....the point remains the documentary that was given made a certain claim, i just proved that claim it made in the first 8 minutes of the broadcast was a complete lie. but instead of addressing that the documentary starts off with a lie it is instead dismissed as 'well, of course they had to cover their ass!' cool, but that's not what the documentary was saying, was it?
we're supposed to believe this documentary as fact eventhough it starts off with a lie at the 8min mark? because it's an acceptable lie because in your mind it was only to cover their asses? well, gee, i'm sure they were truthful in every other aspect
the documentary claims the governments timeline has always been consistent and yet the actual 9/11 commission says they lied about their timeline.....but i'm supposed to believe everything else it claims is the honest truth? oh yeah, it's an acceptable lie the documentary is making so just disregard that one. the 2 heads also claim the commission was set up to fail.
OK, you make it sound like I'm telling you to believe some linked documentary here. I merely responded to the text excerpts you provided, and how i interpreted them. I did not even watch the link, so I dont know how it was presented, nor am I asking you to take that as gospel. But there are far more alternatives than gulping down the entire exact presentation of events from the government or giving credence to all the "alternative" theories out there. I read the official political statements with some pinches of salt, the engineering report as science, and generally view most alternative theories as based on superficial data and speculation to varying degrees.
And it's not about "believing what they say". It's about taking a step back, think about what various claims would mean in real terms (both the gov side and the CT side) and judging their merit on that. Again, I am not suggesting the whole official story is completely truthful, but it is my judgement that it hangs mostly together. The engineering report says how it physically happened, and as a group of peer-reviewed professionals treating a crucial question for their profession, I trust them and find it highly unlikely that they would write something that was knowingly wrong. That is, without causing a storm in the professional world of structural engineering. And accepting that throws out a lot, if not most, of the CTers right there.
You seem to be hung up on "either it's THE TRUTH or it's all A LIE". The real world of politics is never that black and white. Half-truths and misrepresentations abound here, and often baked together with the truth. It's not nearly as simple as just finding something that you think is a lie or misrepresentation, and thus discredit everything. Which is why I suspect that most of it is truthful to their knowledge (which may always be faulty and the source of inconsistencies), but with the skewing (or hiding) of some facts to save certain people's asses.
Also if you apply the same standard of rigourousness to the alternative theories as you do the official report, you will find that they certainly don't hold up to scrutiny either. Asking questions does not give the answer by inference. The questions may well not have an answer (that anyone knows), be incorrectly framed or simply be the wrong questions for acquiring the desired information. Questioning the official story do not strengthen alternative theories, just as questioning science do not strengthen creationism. The alternative theories must build their own cases, providing alternative predictions that can be shown to be true. In my view they rely far too heavily on merely criticism for 10 pages, and then a paragraph or two of speculation and maybe some superficial evidence like a photo to replace it.
That's what I'm saying.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
If somebody would stab you in the back or step on you to get ahead in the office that you work in. Which everybody on this board has seen at least once in their working lives. The 911 stuff shouldn't be a stretch when you add in the ultimate powers that would come with it. Just saying.
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
If somebody would stab you in the back or step on you to get ahead in the office that you work in. Which everybody on this board has seen at least once in their working lives. The 911 stuff shouldn't be a stretch when you add in the ultimate powers that would come with it. Just saying.
The 911 stuff requires that a big number of the aforementioned backstabbers cooperate flawlessly with noone getting tempted to spill the beans for own benefit or after not getting whatever was promised.
It's not altruism that makes me think the conspiracy unlikely, it is the knowledge that certain ambitious people act exactly that way.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Truther Jihadist Wishes Al-Qaeda Had Committed 9/11 Attacks
News in Brief • terrorism • World • News • ISSUE 49•32 • Aug 8, 2013
DHAMAR, YEMEN—Calling the attacks on the World Trade Center “a missed opportunity for al-Qaeda,” 9/11 truther and militant jihadist Fahad al-Mouqrin reportedly expressed his deep disappointment Thursday that the September 11 attacks were in fact not carried out by the terror organization. “It would have been perfect if al-Qaeda did deliver such a devastating blow to the American infidels, but unfortunately, it was all planned and executed by the Bush administration to justify the Iraq War,” said the militant Islamic fundamentalist and conspiracy theorist, noting that it “really kills [him]” to think of the widespread carnage and chaos at Ground Zero, knowing deep down that it was not truly the work of his fellow mujahideen. “I wish we had destroyed those two buildings in the name of Allah, instead of the controlled demolitions at the base of the World Trade Center that actually caused both towers to collapse. But the whole thing was an inside job by the U.S. government and then covered up by the mainstream American media. Unfortunately.” Al-Mouqrin added that he is at least relieved al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is still alive and currently planning imminent attacks on several major U.S. cities.
The thing that makes this unlikely is the amount of people that would have had to be involved keeping their mouths shut. After all these years somebodies conscience would have got the better of them or they would get the urge to spill the beans, either for money or for fame.
I read somewhere that the amount of money "missing" the pentagon couldn't find that Rumsfeld spoke of on sept 10th would have been enough to pay 100 people 23 million each to keep quiet.
Not saying that's what happened, but that shows you it is possible. I'd shut up for 23 million.
"All I Ever Knew" available now in print and digital formats at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and iBooks.
The thing that makes this unlikely is the amount of people that would have had to be involved keeping their mouths shut. After all these years somebodies conscience would have got the better of them or they would get the urge to spill the beans, either for money or for fame.
I read somewhere that the amount of money "missing" the pentagon couldn't find that Rumsfeld spoke of on sept 10th would have been enough to pay 100 people 23 million each to keep quiet.
Not saying that's what happened, but that shows you it is possible. I'd shut up for 23 million.
No, it doesn't show you how it would be possible to keep an unimaginable amount of people quiet for so long.
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
everyone who posted/posts in this thread & other government conspiracy type threads & even on this site are logged & read after by the fbi/cia & so on, yes/no? do you believe the fbi/cia follows this website, yes/no?
The thing that makes this unlikely is the amount of people that would have had to be involved keeping their mouths shut. After all these years somebodies conscience would have got the better of them or they would get the urge to spill the beans, either for money or for fame.
I read somewhere that the amount of money "missing" the pentagon couldn't find that Rumsfeld spoke of on sept 10th would have been enough to pay 100 people 23 million each to keep quiet.
Not saying that's what happened, but that shows you it is possible. I'd shut up for 23 million.
No, it doesn't show you how it would be possible to keep an unimaginable amount of people quiet for so long.
Exactly. Once the money was paid out there would be no further incentive for anyone to keep their silence.
everyone who posted/posts in this thread & other government conspiracy type threads & even on this site are logged & read after by the fbi/cia & so on, yes/no? do you believe the fbi/cia follows this website, yes/no?
First I would like to say forgive me because I did not read all the posts prior.
My opinion is that way too much happened that would have had to been covered up. I cannot see this as being an inside job.
Plus, what would have been the reason?
To go to war? Well, it cost us billions and is still ongoing.
To go get oil? Gas prices are fuckin ridiculous right now.
To boost the economy? Too many ups and downs.
To boost patriotism? Well, that lasted a while, until we entered a whole different war in Iraq.
If it was, then the only reason could be:
Sometimes I think that those who believe it was a cover up just can't handle the truth that we, Americans, were attacked. Not saying this is the original poster's beliefs, but in general I believe many people are like that.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
This is exactly right. Unfortunately, many if not most if not all the supposed "UFO" sightings in that area were top secret planes like the U2 and B2 being tested. Military aircraft, not extraterrestrial aircraft. People see whatever they want though and that is exactly what leads to conspiracy theories.
Comments
8:01
"the government's timeline has been consistent."
word??
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01300.html
9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon
Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.....
"We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. "It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
Although the commission's landmark report made it clear that the Defense Department's early versions of events on the day of the attacks were inaccurate, the revelation that it considered criminal referrals reveals how skeptically those reports were viewed by the panel and provides a glimpse of the tension between it and the Bush administration.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A9619C8B63
9/11 Panel Study Finds That C.I.A. Withheld Tapes
A seven-page memorandum prepared by Philip D. Zelikow, the panel's former executive director, concluded that ''further investigation is needed'' to determine whether the C.I.A.'s withholding of the tapes from the commission violated federal law.
In interviews this week, the two chairmen of the commission, Lee H. Hamilton and Thomas H. Kean, said their reading of the report had convinced them that the agency had made a conscious decision to impede the Sept. 11 commission's inquiry.
Mr. Kean said the panel would provide the memorandum to the federal prosecutors and congressional investigators who are trying to determine whether the destruction of the tapes or withholding them from the courts and the commission was improper.....
Among the statements that the memorandum suggests were misleading was an assertion made on June 29, 2004, by John E. McLaughlin, the deputy director of central intelligence, that the C.I.A. ''has taken and completed all reasonable steps necessary to find the documents in its possession, custody or control responsive'' to formal requests by the commission and ''has produced or made available for review'' all such documents.
Both Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton expressed anger after it was revealed this month that the tapes had been destroyed.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
a can attached to a stick in the ground is not the same as a human being sitting down
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Point is, this is no proof of a conspiracy. It is proof of the regular corruption and attempts to control the flow of information for political purposes. The latter being the bread and butter of everyday politics.
See, my point isn't that noone has done anything wrong, or that there aren't shady aspects to the investigation, official statements etc. But I view it as nothing more than the usual taking advantage of events, and trying to brush up one's own (or one's organization's) image in the whole ordeal. The top military brass wanted desperately to look as if they were in control and competent, thus hampering the attempts of others of finding out what really happened, as they risked looking incompetent and stupid. You don't need a conspiracy to allow for these events, regular small corruption and image control will suffice.
(edit) Although I grant, that image control could be counted as a conspiracy I guess. But of a very much smaller and much more believable scale motivated by saving their own asses.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
if you say so....the point remains the documentary that was given made a certain claim, i just proved that claim it made in the first 8 minutes of the broadcast was a complete lie. but instead of addressing that the documentary starts off with a lie it is instead dismissed as 'well, of course they had to cover their ass!' cool, but that's not what the documentary was saying, was it?
we're supposed to believe this documentary as fact eventhough it starts off with a lie at the 8min mark? because it's an acceptable lie because in your mind it was only to cover their asses? well, gee, i'm sure they were truthful in every other aspect
the documentary claims the governments timeline has always been consistent and yet the actual 9/11 commission says they lied about their timeline.....but i'm supposed to believe everything else it claims is the honest truth? oh yeah, it's an acceptable lie the documentary is making so just disregard that one. the 2 heads also claim the commission was set up to fail.
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
yes, i have seen people shot and i've never seen anyone shot that leaned away from the shot than sprung back towards the direction of the shot. either they move in the same direction as the bullet was traveling or they collapse, no wobble back and forth then the falling in the opposite way of the bullet. and it's been a while since i watched the footage but i don't recall kennedy being thrown forward and then moving back and to the left, i seem to recall him just going back and to the left....
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
OK, you make it sound like I'm telling you to believe some linked documentary here. I merely responded to the text excerpts you provided, and how i interpreted them. I did not even watch the link, so I dont know how it was presented, nor am I asking you to take that as gospel. But there are far more alternatives than gulping down the entire exact presentation of events from the government or giving credence to all the "alternative" theories out there. I read the official political statements with some pinches of salt, the engineering report as science, and generally view most alternative theories as based on superficial data and speculation to varying degrees.
And it's not about "believing what they say". It's about taking a step back, think about what various claims would mean in real terms (both the gov side and the CT side) and judging their merit on that. Again, I am not suggesting the whole official story is completely truthful, but it is my judgement that it hangs mostly together. The engineering report says how it physically happened, and as a group of peer-reviewed professionals treating a crucial question for their profession, I trust them and find it highly unlikely that they would write something that was knowingly wrong. That is, without causing a storm in the professional world of structural engineering. And accepting that throws out a lot, if not most, of the CTers right there.
You seem to be hung up on "either it's THE TRUTH or it's all A LIE". The real world of politics is never that black and white. Half-truths and misrepresentations abound here, and often baked together with the truth. It's not nearly as simple as just finding something that you think is a lie or misrepresentation, and thus discredit everything. Which is why I suspect that most of it is truthful to their knowledge (which may always be faulty and the source of inconsistencies), but with the skewing (or hiding) of some facts to save certain people's asses.
Also if you apply the same standard of rigourousness to the alternative theories as you do the official report, you will find that they certainly don't hold up to scrutiny either. Asking questions does not give the answer by inference. The questions may well not have an answer (that anyone knows), be incorrectly framed or simply be the wrong questions for acquiring the desired information. Questioning the official story do not strengthen alternative theories, just as questioning science do not strengthen creationism. The alternative theories must build their own cases, providing alternative predictions that can be shown to be true. In my view they rely far too heavily on merely criticism for 10 pages, and then a paragraph or two of speculation and maybe some superficial evidence like a photo to replace it.
That's what I'm saying.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
It's not altruism that makes me think the conspiracy unlikely, it is the knowledge that certain ambitious people act exactly that way.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
News in Brief • terrorism • World • News • ISSUE 49•32 • Aug 8, 2013
DHAMAR, YEMEN—Calling the attacks on the World Trade Center “a missed opportunity for al-Qaeda,” 9/11 truther and militant jihadist Fahad al-Mouqrin reportedly expressed his deep disappointment Thursday that the September 11 attacks were in fact not carried out by the terror organization. “It would have been perfect if al-Qaeda did deliver such a devastating blow to the American infidels, but unfortunately, it was all planned and executed by the Bush administration to justify the Iraq War,” said the militant Islamic fundamentalist and conspiracy theorist, noting that it “really kills [him]” to think of the widespread carnage and chaos at Ground Zero, knowing deep down that it was not truly the work of his fellow mujahideen. “I wish we had destroyed those two buildings in the name of Allah, instead of the controlled demolitions at the base of the World Trade Center that actually caused both towers to collapse. But the whole thing was an inside job by the U.S. government and then covered up by the mainstream American media. Unfortunately.” Al-Mouqrin added that he is at least relieved al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is still alive and currently planning imminent attacks on several major U.S. cities.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/truther-jihadist-wishes-alqaeda-had-committed-911,33421/
I read somewhere that the amount of money "missing" the pentagon couldn't find that Rumsfeld spoke of on sept 10th would have been enough to pay 100 people 23 million each to keep quiet.
Not saying that's what happened, but that shows you it is possible. I'd shut up for 23 million.
No, it doesn't show you how it would be possible to keep an unimaginable amount of people quiet for so long.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
yes & yes
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Exactly. Once the money was paid out there would be no further incentive for anyone to keep their silence.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
D'oh!
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
My opinion is that way too much happened that would have had to been covered up. I cannot see this as being an inside job.
Plus, what would have been the reason?
To go to war? Well, it cost us billions and is still ongoing.
To go get oil? Gas prices are fuckin ridiculous right now.
To boost the economy? Too many ups and downs.
To boost patriotism? Well, that lasted a while, until we entered a whole different war in Iraq.
If it was, then the only reason could be:
Sometimes I think that those who believe it was a cover up just can't handle the truth that we, Americans, were attacked. Not saying this is the original poster's beliefs, but in general I believe many people are like that.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
You're welcome
This is exactly right. Unfortunately, many if not most if not all the supposed "UFO" sightings in that area were top secret planes like the U2 and B2 being tested. Military aircraft, not extraterrestrial aircraft. People see whatever they want though and that is exactly what leads to conspiracy theories.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."