Odigo says workers warned of 9/11 two hours before it happened

12467

Comments

  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    Of course not, but one can also go to the opposite extreme and assume that NOTHING the government says is truthful. I think history is rife with half-truthes ... At face value? Maybe not. Assuming that the government MUST be involved? Equally close-minded and potentially off-the-mark.

    how is it close-minded if no one can prove they were NOT involved? ... ultimately, as it pertains to 9/11 - people form their opinions based on what they know (hopefully as opposed to what they hope - that goes both ways) ...

    so, assuming it is ok to question the gov'ts account - why is there then some sociological symptom being suffered by 9/11 truthers? ... just as some people call others sheep and blind ... calling people kooks or satisfying some psychological dysfunction really doesn't help either ...
  • Sure, and by all means, question. The problem I perceive is that you've already made up your mind. Its WAY too soon for that ...


    How else does one point a case towards reopening the 9/11 investigation?

    talk about tele-tubbbies?

    I would think highlight any and all suspicions that have not been addressed.

    but maybe the answer is to just watch more tele-tubbies...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    4 words explain the "truth" movement to me

    lack of common sense



    dont get me wrong, i liek peopel asking questions and i dotn think they should stop. but it is flat out funny the shit they come up with and the shit they ingore because they already have their mind made up. "truthers" always present thier view and opinion as FACT.. which is even funnier :D
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    i tell you what.


    when Alex Jones comes up with the 'smoking gun" and has ACTUAL EVIDENCE, give me a call.
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    How else does one point a case towards reopening the 9/11 investigation?

    talk about tele-tubbbies?

    I would think highlight any and all suspicions that have not been addressed.

    but maybe the answer is to just watch more tele-tubbies...

    I actually think the Tele-tubbies were responsible for 9/11 ... makes as much sense as most of the crackpot theories posted here and elsewhere.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • my2hands wrote:
    war profitting has been going on in this country since WW1 and before...

    we have had the worlds largest military bidget even in peace time.. ther eis no need to risk 9/11 to bloat a budget, the budget has been bloated since day 1


    so 9/11 was for no bid contracts?


    There are boated defense budgets and abuses of power in normal circumstances and then there is all that greatly multiplied when a nation is gripped by fear and vengeance.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • OpenOpen Posts: 792
    my2hands wrote:
    i can see debating with you is pointless


    you pull out 1 tank of sarin gas and those reports go up in smoke


    I wonder what happens if you blow up two towers?
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    my2hands wrote:
    war profitting has been going on in this country since WW1 and before...

    we have had the worlds largest military bidget even in peace time.. ther eis no need to risk 9/11 to bloat a budget, the budget has been bloated since day 1


    so 9/11 was for no bid contracts?

    and yet pentagon (not even accounting spending that is hidden in other areas of the budget) is like the only thing that has increased in bush's time while there are cuts to everything else ...

    haliburton was having to run social security programs during the clinton years - now, they are back to what they do best ... which is overcharge taxpayers ...
  • I actually think the Tele-tubbies were responsible for 9/11 ... makes as much sense as most of the crackpot theories posted here and elsewhere.


    Really?.. then you know as much about 9/11 as the gay teletubby after suffering a sever brain trauma...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    Really?.. then you know as much about 9/11 as the gay teletubby after suffering a sever brain trauma...

    My point exactly ...
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    polaris wrote:
    how is it close-minded if no one can prove they were NOT involved? ... ultimately, as it pertains to 9/11 - people form their opinions based on what they know (hopefully as opposed to what they hope - that goes both ways) ...

    so, assuming it is ok to question the gov'ts account - why is there then some sociological symptom being suffered by 9/11 truthers? ... just as some people call others sheep and blind ... calling people kooks or satisfying some psychological dysfunction really doesn't help either ...

    One cannot support a theory as being true by pointing towards a lack of evidence of non-involvement. That is horrid science, first off, and it's not morally appropriate either (IMO).
    If something is true, one must be able to point towards tangible evidence. I don't know ... I'm not the thought police. People can believe whatever they'd like, and use whatever evidence they'd like. When they put their stuff out there as truth, though, that's when people are allowed to hold them accountable. That's all that's happening in this thread, and its a healthy process. Deleting the thread and not permitting the discourse would be unhealthy.
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    One cannot support a theory as being true by pointing towards a lack of evidence of non-involvement. That is horrid science, first off, and it's not morally appropriate either (IMO).
    If something is true, one must be able to point towards tangible evidence. I don't know ... I'm not the thought police. People can believe whatever they'd like, and use whatever evidence they'd like. When they put their stuff out there as truth, though, that's when people are allowed to hold them accountable. That's all that's happening in this thread, and its a healthy process. Deleting the thread and not permitting the discourse would be unhealthy.

    I can't prove i wasn't with O.J. when he killed Nicole and Ron. Therefore, I must be an accomplice to murder.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    Any 9/11 conspiracy just makes no sense to me. What would be the point? And, if the conspiracies are true, then it means the U.S. government had no qualms about killing 4,000 of its own citizens, but suddenly sprouted a conscience when it came to planting fake WMD in Iraq? "Fake WMD?!? We're not going to do that. THAT would be wrong."

    And what of bin Laden? Why would he take credit for something he didn't do? It would seem his life/operations were a hell of a lot easier before he told everyone he blew up the World Trade Center towers.

    bin laden of whom was previously on the cia payroll? ... bin laden who has yet to be caught while thousands die in iraq and afghanistan?
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    I can't prove i wasn't with O.J. when he murdered Nicole and Ron. Therefore, I must be an accomplice to murder.

    Precisely.
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    One cannot support a theory as being true by pointing towards a lack of evidence of non-involvement. That is horrid science, first off, and it's not morally appropriate either (IMO).
    If something is true, one must be able to point towards tangible evidence. I don't know ... I'm not the thought police. People can believe whatever they'd like, and use whatever evidence they'd like. When they put their stuff out there as truth, though, that's when people are allowed to hold them accountable. That's all that's happening in this thread, and its a healthy process. Deleting the thread and not permitting the discourse would be unhealthy.

    absolutely ... so, do you think your post saying that truthers are satisfying some sociological need is healthy or unhealthy to the process?
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    polaris wrote:
    bin laden of whom was previously on the cia payroll? ... bin laden who has yet to be caught while thousands die in iraq and afghanistan?

    There we go ... he's probably kicking it in Maui somewhere on the government dime, drinking daiquiris, eating hummus and chasing skirts.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    polaris wrote:
    absolutely ... so, do you think your post saying that truthers are satisfying some sociological need is healthy or unhealthy to the process?

    Healthy, in that my goal was not to shut them up. My goal was to make people think about why they hold the beliefs they do.
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    There we go ... he's probably kicking it in Maui somewhere on the government dime, drinking daiquiris, eating hummus and chasing skirts.

    He probably wears a Speedo ...
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    There we go ... he's probably kicking it in Maui somewhere on the government dime, drinking daiquiris, eating hummus and chasing skirts.

    there we go what?

    is anything i wrote not a fact that most people on this thread would agree on?
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    Healthy, in that my goal was not to shut them up. My goal was to make people think about why they hold the beliefs they do.

    i would say your result was similar to the tin-foil hat comments
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Even the term "truther" has an a priori flavour to it ... More like "the decided". We seek "the truth" .... This stance does not allow for the possibility that you might already have it!
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    He probably wears a Speedo ...

    sporting the rarely pulled-off "Speedo and turban" look ...
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    polaris wrote:
    i would say your result was similar to the tin-foil hat comments

    Maybe I did fumble the attempt, sure. I probably injured my credibility with the jokes. Truly, though. Its worth thinking about, truthers and otherwise.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.

    And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.

    How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Julius Caesar.
  • OpenOpen Posts: 792
    Even the term "truther" has an a priori flavour to it ... More like "the decided". We seek "the truth" .... This stance does not allow for the possibility that you might already have it!

    I would think you would like that; labeling makes it much easeier to be dismissive.

    Through the course of this thread my2hands started arguing with me about things i never said, i guess he thought i was a "truther".
  • My point exactly ...


    I can see your agruments so far....

    uuhhh I just don't understand it all....the gov't is honest gosh darnit...those 9/11 people are crazy...so ima gotta be right.

    yeap...

    try again..
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Open wrote:
    I would think you would like that; labeling makes it much easeier to be dismissive.

    Through the course of this thread my2hands started arguing with me about things i never said, i guess he thought i was a "truther".

    Nope, I hate labels. They are often unhelpful. And for the record, are you not dismissing me as we "speak" (type)?
  • Commy wrote:
    Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.

    And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.

    How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Julius Caesar.


    Such conspiracy...

    history lies...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • So why lie about WMD's if you're not going to plant WMD'S

    anyone?
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,761
    So why lie about WMD's if you're not going to plant WMD'S

    anyone?

    I've often wondered that myself Roland...
Sign In or Register to comment.