Eddie believes in 911 inside job?

dg1979us

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

no matter how much logic and common sense you can throw at someone there's always a certain percentage of the population it just flies right over.

What about Noam Chomsky? Is he incapable of grasping common sense and logic? Just curious. I know he is widely respected on this board, as he should be. But obviously, if he cant grasp common sense and logic maybe he shouldnt be as respected. Wouldnt you agree?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzGd0t8v-d4

MakingWaves

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

at free fall speed uniformly all around th buildign(sss) 1,2,3... they all went down like textbook demolitions.

no way...

nope.

Stop just believing what you fucking here on Youtube (and before you say it please spare me standard response of "why dont you stop believing what you read in the official report" bullshit that you spew). Look how wide spread that debris was. That is not even fucking close to a textbook demolition. Give me a fucking break there really isn't anyway you truly believe that because some dude on youtube told you to. Look at the professional demoltion of a building. Go fucking google that. The fucking thing will fall within the envelope of the said building. This was nowhere fucking close to that and what you are saying makes your arguement laughable and your smart ass comments make you sound ignorant.

MakingWaves

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

The laws of physics are what they are

they don't vary much from state to state...

Just out of curiousity, how many Physics classes have you taken? And hearing a guy on Youtube talk about it doesn't count as taking a Physics Class.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

MakingWaves wrote:

Just out of curiousity, how many Physics classes have you taken? And hearing a guy on Youtube talk about it doesn't count as taking a Physics Class.

Physics equations solved with integral calculus is my level of understanding of physics.

more than enough in this instance.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

MakingWaves wrote:

Stop just believing what you fucking here on Youtube (and before you say it please spare me standard response of "why dont you stop believing what you read in the official report" bullshit that you spew). Look how wide spread that debris was. That is not even fucking close to a textbook demolition. Give me a fucking break there really isn't anyway you truly believe that because some dude on youtube told you to. Look at the professional demoltion of a building. Go fucking google that. The fucking thing will fall within the envelope of the said building. This was nowhere fucking close to that and what you are saying makes your arguement laughable and your smart ass comments make you sound ignorant.

Ok how much longer than freefall... 2 seconds...

nigga please...

you have no idea

RolandTD20Kdrummer

dg1979us wrote:

What about Noam Chomsky? Is he incapable of grasping common sense and logic? Just curious. I know he is widely respected on this board, as he should be. But obviously, if he cant grasp common sense and logic maybe he shouldnt be as respected. Wouldnt you agree?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzGd0t8v-d4

Yeah I know about Chomsky.

I also know how politics works and how he's choosing to play the 9/11 card.

nobody

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Yeah I know about Chomsky.

I also know how politics works and how he's choosing to play the 9/11 card.

you just know everything, don't you...
I think this thread alone shows pretty clearly that no normal productive debate is possible with you...

did you hear Chomsky: diverting people from serious issues!!! real problems!!! like you know...solving actual crisis without always blaming the man for it...

but why do I post even...the insults from you will be inevitable...
and I'm not involved in politics, so I don't play any card

m.

lgt

g under p wrote:

Well to me comes down simply to can we believe ANY of the official government version given about what happened on 9/11? Were there WMD's, did Iraq have anything to do with Al Queda?.....NO & NOTHING. We now know this some years later.

Even before that though, this leads me to question EVERY and ANY version given by this administration on 9/11. We are Americans and we should question the entity that governs it's citizenry and if that's Un-American then this is not the America I once knew.

It seems we've become way too complacent and comfortable to believe what this country is capable of in what it perceives to be it's own best interests, regardless of what it citizens want, think or feel. That friends is fucked up.

Peace

Doubts about WMDs were already voiced in the lead-up towards the war.

France, for instance, Hans Blix, not to mention David Kelly in Britain.

Indeed I'd even say that the WMDs claim was disbelieved CREDIBLY during those days by several people.

Of course, this does not imply you should take for granted everything a government says. Questioning and skepticism are very healthy.

It does make one think - or at least me! - why would a government resort to organise such a complex covert operation against his own people (innocent civilians) when an unfounded claim about WMDs proved quite enough to start a war.

Anyway, just wanted to point out that it was factually inaccurate to say that the truth, or rather the lie about WMDs came only years later. It was there already.

nobody

lgt wrote:

It does make one think - or at least me! - why would a government resort to organise such a complex covert operation against his own people (innocent civilians) when an unfounded claim about WMDs proved quite enough to start a war.

I will pose as the devil's advocate this time;)
and tell you that only the climate generated after 911 made it possible to mislead people into war against Iraq with the claim of WMDs...

m.

Heineken Helen

nobody wrote:

I will pose as the devil's advocate this time;)
and tell you that only the climate generated after 911 made it possible to mislead people into war against Iraq with the claim of WMDs...

m.

Yep, that was my reply to you in your thread

But yeh, we all forget that the world was completely different before 9/11. had Bush tried to invade Iraq, well I laugh thinking at how stupid the whole thing might have sounded. After 9/11 it's easy to strike fear into people and say 'well they have wmd's and they can use them against us like 9/11' before 9/11 people woulda said 'but nobody attacks america or ever will'

Now, this is not me saying that 9/11 was done so Bush could invade Iraq. It's in response to LGT's statement saying wmd's were reason enough. Before 9/11, they weren't.

nobody

Heineken Helen wrote:

Now, this is not me saying that 9/11 was done so Bush could invade Iraq. It's in response to LGT's statement saying wmd's were reason enough. Before 9/11, they weren't.

The first war in Iraq was legitimized with Iraq invading Kuweit, I think.
There was no mention of a direct threat to the US even...

So before 911, the same country, could be led by essentially the same leadership into a similiar campaign, WITHOUT any claim of a direct threat to the US and without the previous events of 911...

so a lot less than WMD was reason enough to start/join a war...and don't look back from now and say this war wasn't as bad as this one...for people at that time it couldn't have been obvious how the war will end...

m.

lgt

nobody wrote:

I will pose as the devil's advocate this time;)
and tell you that only the climate generated after 911 made it possible to mislead people into war against Iraq with the claim of WMDs...

m.

And I would totally agree with that.

The point is that you can manipulate events and people's minds opportunistically taking advantage of certain situations to suit your own agenda. However, it does not necessarily imply a causal link between the two.

For instance - to go back to the favourite Nazi topic - the Nazi party exploited the aftermath of WW1 and Versailles Treaty to get a stronghold in post-Weimar Germany and win the election. But this does not mean they had any involvement with either of those events (they did not sit at the peace treaty negotiations, they did not exist during WW1 although, of course, Hitler, was a soldier and was deeply affected by it and the reparations issue.)

And yes, 9/11 definitely played into the neo-con agenda but the causal link between Iraq and the 9/11 terrorists has not been established. (EDIT: neither a causal link between 9/11 and the US government of course. The 9/11 conspiracy theory is just conjectures with unsubstantiated evidence, so far.)

What I am trying to say:

- you can exploit events to your advantage but it does not follow you were necessarily behind it;

- there are different ways to pursue your own agenda objectives, more often than not, more insidious and less blatant than organising a complex plot such as 9/11.

nobody

Heineken Helen wrote:

'but nobody attacks america or ever will'

and this essentially is one (small) reason why the attacks happened. because of the ignorance of the american leaders to actually comprehend what is possible even if you are not the most powerful country in the world.

yet, proponents of an inside job CONTINUE to claim the US cannot be attacked from OUTSIDE forces (they often also make the claim that Pearl Harbor only could happen because the US let it happen KNOWINGLY)
this is claiming that the US is unvulnerable on its homesoil!
and thus, overblowing the influence and power of the US government in the world (and at home).
diverting attention from complex interdependecies between countries, that create wealth, and yes: also conflict and death...

m.

dg1979us

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Yeah I know about Chomsky.

I also know how politics works and how he's choosing to play the 9/11 card.

Explain. How is he using politics and playing the 9/11 card?

Sludge Factory

angryyoungman wrote:

the wmd's thing and this 9/11 conspiracy nonsense is apples and oranges bro. . .if you don't want to believe the government fine, its good to have a healthy mistrust of them but how bout believing the people who were there and lived through and still live through this

Okay, what about the Janitor guy (I think his name was William Rodriguez or something like that) who was actually in the building when this stuff happened. He has some alternate things to say when compared to the real story and I happen to believe him.

dg1979us

Sludge Factory wrote:

Okay, what about the Janitor guy (I think his name was William Rodriguez or something like that) who was actually in the building when this stuff happened. He has some alternate things to say when compared to the real story and I happen to believe him.

His complaints and depictions of what happened have been very inconsistent.

nobody

dg1979us wrote:

His complaints and depictions of what happened have been very inconsistent.

also he has a vested interest in claiming spectacular things, cause that is what many people want to hear(=buy).
Just compare the sales rates of a scolarly archaeology book on egypt, and one that claims aliens built the pyramides...

I am not downplaying his actual merits on the day of the attacks...

m.

MakingWaves

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Ok how much longer than freefall... 2 seconds...

nigga please...

you have no idea

Enough with this freefall bullshit because that is all it is. Here is a link that puts some of your physics into use http://debunking911.com/freefall.htm

You said this was textbook demolition. AGAIN, go look at how widespread the debris was then look at an actual demolition. Not even close to the same. Another arguement of yours proved wrong and you just ignore that and keep on going.

dg1979us

nobody wrote:

also he has a vested interest in claiming spectacular things, cause that is what many people want to hear(=buy).
Just compare the sales rates of a scolarly archaeology book on egypt, and one that claims aliens built the pyramides...

m.

WEll yes, he is getting paid to say the official story isnt true. Funny though, the few days after Sept 11th when he wasnt getting paid and was just being interviewed by local and national media, his accounts of what happened were remarkebly consistent with the "official" story.

There is a market for this stuff and people are making money off of these theories. It has become a business.

nobody

MakingWaves wrote:

Enough with this freefall bullshit because that is all it is.

You said this was textbook demolition. AGAIN, go look at how widespread the debris was then look at an actual demolition. Not even close to the same. Another arguement of yours proved wrong and you just ignore that and keep on going.

to play the devil's advocat once again...;)
you just follow the path of least resistance!

m.