Okay. SERIOUSLY now. What is the explanation for this? & I Said, SERIOUSLY

DriftingByTheStorm

beachdweller wrote:

To bad the Dem's are ball-less and won't take appropriate action, which makes them partially responsible.

AJ didnt' need to do any splicing. Both men flat out say CIA is behind 911. It isn't any shade of grey bullshit. They said it. Von Bulow was actualy interviewed by AJ himself as saying so. Not much editing needed there.

As far as your above quote, most of the house and senate are bought and sold with members that are primarily power-mongering elitists whom have the best interests of theirs and their corporate suitors at heart when votes are cast.

If the people making the laws are all for the most part bought and sold (literaly) by interests that prop them up through campaign finances and free media publicty ... what reason in the name of god do you ever think they would start fighting eachother ... they can just keep fucking you and everything is just fine!

Case in point:
McCain and Hillary ... political enemies or just two peas in a pod?

Once again, McCain and Hillary ...

are we to believe these are two people with bitterly opposed ideologies who are both contentiously vying for the Presidency ...
... or are they realy just two pre-selected shills that do mostly what they are told, and try to present their best possible image of having "differences" in order to prop up an image of choice?

OutOfBreath

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

AJ didnt' need to do any splicing. Both men flat out say CIA is behind 911. It isn't any shade of grey bullshit. They said it. Von Bulow was actualy interviewed by AJ himself as saying so. Not much editing needed there.

As far as your above quote, most of the house and senate are bought and sold with members that are primarily power-mongering elitists whom have the best interests of theirs and their corporate suitors at heart when votes are cast.

If the people making the laws are all for the most part bought and sold (literaly) by interests that prop them up through campaign finances and free media publicty ... what reason in the name of god do you ever think they would start fighting eachother ... they can just keep fucking you and everything is just fine!

The "evidence" presented so far in this thread dont prove much of anything. You have a few people who are convinced "it must have been the CIA" on the grounds they think only they could pull off something like that. Btw I thought you wanted this thread to be about 7/7. About which nothing more than that it happened during a drill has been unearthed here. Could be coincidence, could be planned by the terrorists. Could be they had drills so often as to make the coincidence more likely.

Case in point:
McCain and Hillary ... political enemies or just two peas in a pod?

Once again, McCain and Hillary ...

are we to believe these are two people with bitterly opposed ideologies who are both contentiously vying for the Presidency ...
... or are they realy just two pre-selected shills that do mostly what they are told, and try to present their best possible image of having "differences" in order to prop up an image of choice?

Yeah, god forbid that political opponents can be civil with eachother outside the spotlight. :rolleyes: Pictures of political opponents at the same place, smiling, is truly damning evidence.

Questions may be asked both about 9/11 and 7/7. But asking of questions and finding some pieces that doesnt quite add up, is not the same as proof of the massive conspiracy you claim. Which is again what it often boils down to. To accept your/Alex Jones' theories, you have to swallow at least as big pieces that doesn't add up. The raw evidence here doesnt go past what "some guy" who happened to be in a position some time ago thinks.

Peace
Dan

Nevermind

OutOfBreath wrote:

The "evidence" presented so far in this thread dont prove much of anything. You have a few people who are convinced "it must have been the CIA" on the grounds they think only they could pull off something like that. Btw I thought you wanted this thread to be about 7/7. About which nothing more than that it happened during a drill has been unearthed here. Could be coincidence, could be planned by the terrorists. Could be they had drills so often as to make the coincidence more likely.


Yeah, god forbid that political opponents can be civil with eachother outside the spotlight. :rolleyes: Pictures of political opponents at the same place, smiling, is truly damning evidence.

Questions may be asked both about 9/11 and 7/7. But asking of questions and finding some pieces that doesnt quite add up, is not the same as proof of the massive conspiracy you claim. Which is again what it often boils down to. To accept your/Alex Jones' theories, you have to swallow at least as big pieces that doesn't add up. The raw evidence here doesnt go past what "some guy" who happened to be in a position some time ago thinks.

Peace
Dan

Again, I thought I was naive.

ClimberInOz

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

I mean, i'm sure that statisticaly speaking, there must be like, what, a 1 in 2 chance that everytime you hold a terrorism drill an actual terrorist incident could occur?

You think its something like that? 1 in 2?
Or is it way higher, like 1 in 10?

:rolleyes:

BTW.
In case anyone believes anything AJ says, he got with some mathematicians and broke out some actuary tables and the odds they calculated, again if you believe calculating these odds is at all possible was ...

1 in 40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

I don't often these 911 threads very often because I don't know enough about the evidence to rebut every argument. However, I have a fairly good understanding of probability and it is all too easy to just throw numbers around the internet... so I decided to do some rough calculations myself.

To work out the probability of the date of the drill/actual bomb overlapping is very easy. Let's say that this type of terrorist drill was being held 50 times a year (In a city like London that would probably be conservative, but an error of +-49 in this figure would not make much of a difference to our calculations).

If we consider that they are going to run it on a working day, the probability of the days overlapping is 19%. (50 / 261)

Even if we assume no bias toward a particular timeslot, and base out time calculations at the minute scale, then the probability that both would occur at 9:30 (given it occurs in working hours, 9-5), is .002% (1 / 480)

If they were to choose from 50 different high profile locations (ignoring bias to the train station because of its higher probability of being attacked), then the probability of the locations overlapping is .02% (1 / 50).

The total probability of these the date, time and location overlapping is not the number you stated, in fact it is nowhere near it. It is closer (but with a large degree of error to .0 000 000 076% or 1 in 13 157 895. And that is ignoring all bias to that time and location.

But this still is not signifigant, because every second millions of events occur with much lower probabilities. A low probability event really is only signifigant when it is predicted- how often does your pulse raise in excitement when you read the license plate of the car in front of you on the highway? Because in many locations the probability of that license plate being in front of you would be somewhat similar to the number I quoted.

Nevermind

ClimberInOz wrote:

I don't often these 911 threads very often because I don't know enough about the evidence to rebut every argument. However, I have a fairly good understanding of probability and it is all too easy to just throw numbers around the internet... so I decided to do some rough calculations myself.

To work out the probability of the date of the drill/actual bomb overlapping is very easy. Let's say that this type of terrorist drill was being held 50 times a year (In a city like London that would probably be conservative, but an error of +-49 in this figure would not make much of a difference to our calculations).

If we consider that they are going to run it on a working day, the probability of the days overlapping is 19%. (50 / 261)

Even if we assume no bias toward a particular timeslot, and base out time calculations at the minute scale, then the probability that both would occur at 9:30 (given it occurs in working hours, 9-5), is .002% (1 / 480)

If they were to choose from 50 different high profile locations (ignoring bias to the train station because of its higher probability of being attacked), then the probability of the locations overlapping is .02% (1 / 50).

The total probability of these the date, time and location overlapping is not the number you stated, in fact it is nowhere near it. It is closer (but with a large degree of error to .0 000 000 076% or 1 in 13 157 895. And that is ignoring all bias to that time and location.

But this still is not signifigant, because every second millions of events occur with much lower probabilities. A low probability event really is only signifigant when it is predicted- how often does your pulse raise in excitement when you read the license plate of the car in front of you on the highway? Because in many locations the probability of that license plate being in front of you would be somewhat similar to the number I quoted.

If you havent researched much I suggest you watch Zeitgeist.

Kann

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Okay. SERIOUSLY now. What is the explanation for this? & I Said, SERIOUSLY

You have to admit that coincidences happen and certainly are not proof of the worst act of horror and treason that the cia would have done.
That something is wrong about the official stories, sure, no one can deny that
That some people, with the help of youtube videos, 20 years old pictures and paranoid deductions have cracked the case and hold compelling evidence against the cia, that's a bit too much.

Nevermind wrote:

Again, I thought I was naive.

You find this to be such a powerful argument that you use it twice in the same thread?

OutOfBreath

Nevermind wrote:

Again, I thought I was naive.

Again, at least I'm not paranoid.

Peace
Dan

Nevermind

Kann wrote:

You have to admit that coincidences happen and certainly are not proof of the worst act of horror and treason that the cia would have done.
That something is wrong about the official stories, sure, no one can deny that
That some people, with the help of youtube videos, 20 years old pictures and paranoid deductions have cracked the case and hold compelling evidence against the cia, that's a bit too much.




You find this to be such a powerful argument that you use it twice in the same thread?

Id like to know what your smokeing. Unless im blind i posted once in this thread.

Nevermind

OutOfBreath wrote:

Again, at least I'm not paranoid.

Peace
Dan

Im not paranoid fool. If you think both the u.s. and england both had a terror drill on the same day a terrorist attack happened you should shoot yourself in the face and get it over with. Let along both of them having the exact same terror drill that ended up happening,

Kann

Nevermind wrote:

Id like to know what your smokeing. Unless im blind i posted once in this thread.

Nevermind wrote:

I thought I was naive.

Nevermind wrote:

Again, I thought I was naive.

On the same page

Nevermind

Kann wrote:

On the same page

Holy shit im drunk. I sign off with that.

OutOfBreath

Nevermind wrote:

Im not paranoid fool. If you think both the u.s. and england both had a terror drill on the same day a terrorist attack happened you should shoot yourself in the face and get it over with. Let along both of them having the exact same terror drill that ended up happening,

Well, shoot yourself in the face too then.
Nice "debating" here. Wonder how long until this thread is closed...

Holy shit im drunk. I sign off with that.

nuff said.

Peace
Dan

spiral out

I'm sure someone posted on these boards, Roland i think it was, that there was a drill on the day of the 1993 world trade center bombs too.

I think it's too much of a coincidence.

DriftingByTheStorm

spiral out wrote:

I'm sure someone posted on these boards, Roland i think it was, that there was a drill on the day of the 1993 world trade center bombs too.

I think it's too much of a coincidence.

Yeah. The bomber is actualy ADMITTED to have been a "CIA\FBI Informant\Training Asset" ...

And the guy was given what HE thought was a "fake" bomb.
When he began to realize it may have been real, and started to ask questions about it, intelligence services simply told him, "Shut up, and go plant the bomb."

Sraight from good ole wikipedia (which i'm shocked, because ole Wikipedia usualy whitewashes this stuff ... or atleast the CIA stoogeballs that "edit" wikipedia usualy get to it ... see Creature From Jekyll Island, if you don't think the spooks try to wash it) ...

Wikipedia wrote:

In the course of the trial it was revealed that the FBI had an informant, a former Egyptian army officer named Emad A. Salem. Salem claims to have informed the FBI of the plot to bomb the towers as early as February 6, 1992. Salem's role as informant allowed the FBI to quickly pinpoint the conspirators out of the hundreds of possible suspects.

Salem, initially believing that this was to be a sting operation, claimed that the FBI's original plan was for Salem to supply the conspirators with a harmless powder instead of actual explosive to build their bomb, but that the FBI chose to use him for other purposes instead. [13] He secretly recorded hundreds of hours of telephone conversations with his FBI handlers; reported by Ralph Blumenthal in the New York Times, Oct. 28, 1993, section A,Page 1.[14]

In December 1993, James M. Fox, the head of the FBI's New York Office, denied that the FBI had any foreknowledge of the attacks.[citation needed] The 1993 WTC sting operation was depicted as a false flag operation

Yeah.

And i like the guy who just proved me wrong by giving us a statistical analysis of 1 in 13million ... which, though i am no great statistician, i would have to believe is inaccurate ... discounts multiple bombs, and only takes in to account one year in history ... to name a few reasons the analysis is off ... i mean, how bout the fucking odds that a terror group would even pick that COUNTRY on that day of that month of that year at that time in those places with say bombs and not machine guns ... and even still 1 in 13 million? come on.

Again, the ONLY argument i ever hear come from people that any of this could NOT have been government involvement is "shut up you dumb conspiracy theorist, it is just a COINCIDENCE!"

Well goddamn.
I guess i'll just shutup.

CLEARLY it is ALL nothing more than happenstance.

Come to send.

soulsinging

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Not one person wants to step up and take a stab at this, huh?

sure.

1. that's a lot of fucking reading that i don't feel like doing.

2. there's no hard evidence in there, only circumstantial supposition and conjecture. certainly nothing that could ever amount to proof in court.

3. based upon 2, what the fuck are you gonna do about it? jack fucking shit. becos you can't do a goddamn thing and you know it. why don't you recognize and admit that you are powerless and that the elite rule this country and most others, as has always been the case since the dawn of human history and will until our extinciton, let go of your utopian equal democracy dreams, and try to get your little piece of the pie before they get it from you.

DriftingByTheStorm

soulsinging wrote:

sure.

1. that's a lot of fucking reading that i don't feel like doing.

2. there's no hard evidence in there, only circumstantial supposition and conjecture. certainly nothing that could ever amount to proof in court.

3. based upon 2, what the fuck are you gonna do about it? jack fucking shit. becos you can't do a goddamn thing and you know it. why don't you recognize and admit that you are powerless and that the elite rule this country and most others, as has always been the case since the dawn of human history and will until our extinciton, let go of your utopian equal democracy dreams, and try to get your little piece of the pie before they get it from you.

Wow.
I can't believe you've littered this board with over thirty thousand a-hole posts.
Way to go.


BTW, the original post has links to 3 videos each less than 2.5 MINUTES. No reading, bub.

And FYI, in a court of law, this Mr. Powers douchebag would be under oath and required to answer questions by the judge. Given that he is probably not directly responsible, the judge would order him to answer ... and we would find out WHO helped him pick those tube stations.

THAT would probably get us somewhere.

Way to be a total jerk about it all too.
So basicaly you acknowledge that there is an elite powerstructure, but you think it is not in collusion in any seriously criminal matter, huh?

right.
:rolleyes:

soulsinging

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Wow.
I can't believe you've littered this board with over thirty thousand a-hole posts.
Way to go.

can't respond to point number 3 can you?

what are you gonna do buddy? what's your plan of action? how do you intend to "out" these criminals and see justice done?

DriftingByTheStorm

soulsinging wrote:

can't respond to point number 3 can you?

what are you gonna do buddy? what's your plan of action? how do you intend to "out" these criminals and see justice done?

Concerted grassroots effort to replace congress and the senate with "our guys".

See the consolidating Ron Paul "Revolution" Grassroots for an example of that. 40 some odd fellow patriots running for congressional office. In the next 5 years, i think we will see people reclaim some of their soverign powers.
Especialy if we get in the senate ... see Murray Sabin.
Filabuster, anyone?

soulsinging

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

So basicaly you acknowledge that there is an elite powerstructure, but you think it is not in collusion in any seriously criminal matter, huh?

the first part, yes. there is an elite. there always has been. every human society in history has had an elite ruling class. it is human nature.

as to the collusion, i've no doubt people on top are doing criminal things. the point is, so what? what are you gonna do about it? they caught nixon red-handed breaking the law and he was never even fully investigated. these people cannot be touched. so im not going to raise my blood pressure over it. it's the way of the world. just like i can't stop burglaries or win the wat on drugs. some fights just cannot be won.

as to your grassroots thing, good luck. i saw the results of that with ralph nader in 2000 and don't see much changing. even if you guys get A senate seat, it will change nothing, just as that republican going independent made no difference in the grand scheme. even if there is a "revolution" sweeping aside the current guys, so what? so the republicans die, as did the whigs and the federalists. a taste of power and suddenly the libertarians will slip right into the vacuum left. the same people who rule now will just switch parties, or just retire and let their children carry on the same things they did only under a different party name. meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

sweetpotato

drifting, it's a good thing you said "seriously"... TWICE... b/c i was about to pass up this thread, assuming it was just another of your ranting, stream-of-consciousness, talking-mostly-to-yourself threads, either about ron paul OR some other mass conspiracy...

wha? wait a minute... FUCK! turns out this IS another one of your ranting, stream-of-consciousness, talking-mostly-to-yourself threads.

my bad.

:rolleyes: