9/11 Conspiracy people: Please read!
fanch75
Posts: 3,734
Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
fanch75
Posts: 3,734
Comments
The overal SIZE of that conspiracy is its biggest debunking point, I would say. More so than all the 'facts' that are heavily debated by professionals on all sides of this event. There just seem to be so many variables that we can't account for.
I believe any government could pull a false flag operation on its people, and it has been done before all over the world. False flags or no false flags, innocent people die at the hands of authoritarian bodies every day in this world, be it at the hands of government or sometimes extreme groups. Often times, death tolls are in the thousands. If you believe that life is of equal value everywhere, from an Iraqi kid playing in the street, to someone working for a business in the WTC-- what's the real difference in losing 3,000 innocent people there versus 3,000 innocent people here? Answer: About a few thousand miles. There is none--innocent life is innocent life. Anyone who views people as 'collateral damage' just because they live between a different set of imaginary borders is sick, and obviously has no respect for life ANYWHERE. This includes life in their own set of imaginary borders, including civillians and especially soldiers. In terms of life being lost, 9/11s happen every day, and it's awful. It needs to stop. The only way its going to stop for America is if we stop trying to run the world empire. period.
But how does an event of this magnitude become a false flag? Could any less than at least a few hundred people be involved? Maybe even 1,000+? How do you get that many people to cooperate on such an idea, without their being serious amounts of whistleblowers, and exposure to it all?
I think, that if it was an 'inside job,' that it was all allowed to happen. The attack was from Al-Queda and was coming anyway. The walls between FBI and the CIA were nothing more than the usual government agencies getting in each others way, and getting in their own way. Pretty much business as usual for them at that point in our history. Our country's jet defense was directed to perform practice operations far enough away from the areas about to be attacked. I think all of this could be accomplished at the command of very few higher-ups, because so LITTLE would have to be done to allow an attack to happen. It's not what you DO that makes something like this easier, it's what you DON'T do.
Still, it's all still really strange. I've heard every explanation in the world about Building 7, and still don't know what to make of it exactly. And why would we ever pull all of our fighter jets far enough away from Washington, of all places? How does the Pentagon get hit by anything ever?
I still have my questions.
Story and WE ARE CHANGE VIDEO of the "confrontation" here
Check it out.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
But for a few years going now, I mostly just care about sex, food, beer, vacation, music, making more money - because I've thrown in the towel. You can't fight the assholes, but you can avoid them a lot of the time. I'll always bitch about them on the internet though. I mean, it feels good, and it's easy to do.
typeless.
I've researched the hell out of 9/11 as well. From my findings, it seems that the conspiracy was by both administrations to avoid warnings of such men as John O'Neill of the FBI. I don't know if it was intentional or not but it seems that not listening to a man who seemed to know more about terrorism than anyone in the White House was among the significant reasons that it happened.
Albany 2006 Camden 2006 E. Rutherford 2, 2006 Inglewood 2006,
Chicago 2007
Camden 2008 MSG 2008 MSG 2008 Hartford 2008.
Seattle 2009 Seattle 2009 Philadelphia 2009,Philadelphia 2009 Philadelphia 2009
Hartford 2010 MSG 2010 MSG 2010
Toronto 2011,Toronto 2011
Wrigley Field 2013 Brooklyn 2013 Brooklyn 2013 Philadelphia 2, 2013
Philadelphia 1, 2016 Philadelphia 2 2016 New York 2016 New York 2016 Fenway 1, 2016
Fenway 2, 2018
MSG 2022
St. Paul, 1, St. Paul 2 2023
MSG 2024, MSG 2024
Philadelphia 2024
"I play good, hard-nosed basketball.
Things happen in the game. Nothing you
can do. I don't go and say,
"I'm gonna beat this guy up."
This is a typical misreading of history, perpetuated by the media in order to hide the truth, deliberately covered up by the same.
This is addressed quite clearly in the documentary, Behind the Big News: Propaganda and the CFR.
Clinton HAD to be "brought down" by "Cigar-Gate" in order to DISTRACT and COVER UP the fact that information was surfacing that implicated him in a hugely TREASONOUS SCANDAL whereby Clinton allowed CLASSIFIED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY TO BE GIVEN TO THE CHINESE (APPARENTLY IN EXCHANGE FOR ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS).
In light of THAT fact, what do you think they would rather have their man go down for?
Getting his dick sucked (CigarGate),
or an Arms-To-China-For-Campaign-Funds scandal that amounts to treason?
ChinaGate -- read the little article, understand a little more.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Come on, like he'd need a BJ scandal to survive a weapons to China scandal? Why didn't Reagan invent a scandal then to shield himself from Iran-Contra?
I suppose you have all kinds of great proof about Clinton selling stuff to the Chinese for contributions?
I don't have to provide you proof, it is a story that is universally recognized as true.
Do your own goddamn homework.
Google search "ChinaGate" see what comes up.
Hell, you can even read about it on wikipedia if you want to. You just never heard about it on the nightly news.
If you want more on the handing over of secrets to China, you might try a search including "Wen Ho Lee".
As far as Reagan goes, who the fuck knows.
He was the ONLY president since FDR who hasn't been a Council on Foreign Relations member, they forced him to take on CIA super-spook GW Bush as his VP, and then he almost died from an assassin's bullet. I'm pretty sure Reagan wasn't truly welcome on the inside. All his stated policy aims from his campaign were rendered inert by the other members of his administration, and his intentions were completely undermined by the establishment. If you listen to some of Reagan's early speeches it is CRYSTAL CLEAR why "they" didn't like him. He wanted to severely reduce the size of government, eliminate the department of education, shrink taxes, get rid of government subisidation programs, and follow the constitution more closely. Who on the inside was going to cover up for HIM?
???
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I read your link, there are no facts. Just that x donor is a Chinese agent, with no evidence to establish that.
Also, if the sex scandal was just to cover up the Chinese thing, why distract attention from it? I mean, I thought the other conspiracy was that Clinton's bombing of Iraq and Kosovo was just to cover up the sex scandal? Seems odd to go to that trouble to create a smokescreen scandal and then try to cover up the cover up.
I've never heard our alternative theory involving Iraq and Kosovo, so i have no comment, other than to say i don't put much stock in that.
Like i said, you can verify the authenticity of ChinaGate via your OWN research.
Wikipedia alone should provide you with enough 'PROOF' that it is true.
The Federal Government itself was forced to investigate and bring convictions involving at LEAST the campaing finance portion of the affair. For the part involving the distribution of nuclear secrets, you have to dig a little deeper, but i trust you can find it if you look.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I do remember all this talk about Clinton selling nuke secrets to the Chinese for political contributions-- and I really had no interest in politics then (I was 16 or 17 maybe), I'd say I even made attempts to tune it all out. If this is true about Clinton, it is unbelievably fucked up. But what is Clinton most remembered for scandal-wise (and maybe even his presidency in general)? Neither this, nor Whitewater. He will always be best remembered for Lewinsky.
I think 'conspiracy' is simply protocol for all the parties involved at this point. Is there really any need to meet 30 floors below sea-level in a smoke-filled room to discuss these bullshit cat and mouse games the politicians and the media play with us? I think the media knows their role at this point-- it's not like they have to take direct orders from the 'higher-ups' everytime some new scandal comes to light. They know that the place for the REAL news, the stuff that is supposed to concern us is on page 34 in the lower left hand corner of the newspaper, or in a 30 second news brief, or not mentioned at all. It's a beautiful system. If there's nothing happening in the news, there's always a constant stream of bullshit coming out of Hollywood to exploit for weeks at a time, if need be. A great recent example: Anna Nicole Smith's death.
I've got to say, in all the time I've known you, this is the first and only time I heard of a conspiracy theory you DON'T put stock in... I'm stunned
I don't get your reasoning here.Would'nt this give them more reason to create some sort of scandal and have him impeached?
This is where I part ways with you all. Is real news "buried" due to orders from the shadowy evil conspirators on top controlling the entire universe? Or is it that news like that is on page 34 because most people don't care and the masses are stupid and sex scandals sell more newspapers? I think the latter. Quality news is not down because of some unified effort to keep things suppressed. Quality news is down because it doesn't sell well and the papers are just about turning a profit.
Well, there was at least ONE congressman in our great American history who STRONGLY DISAGREES WITH YOU.
"In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press....They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers.
[...]
An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers."
--U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 1917
???
If I opened it now would you not understand?
That was the point.
Soulsing was asking me, why if they DID try to create a cover up for Clinton, why did they NOT create one for Reagan?
My response was that REAGAN WAS NOT ONE OF "THEM".
He remains the ONLY president since FDR to have NOT been a member of the CFR.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Coincidentally, he was also among the worst president since FDR... topped maybe by LBJ alone.
Where do you get this stuff? Who the hell is Oscar Callaway and how is one congressman from 100 years ago the be-all end-all of this debate?
I'd ask why, if he was so right, he's the only one in 100 years you could come up with, but that's the beauty of conspiracy theories... no evidence is itself evidence of the conspiracy, because they've covered everything up!
Yes, the story of John O'Neil is a massive red flag. The fact that he was assigned a job at the WTC just a week or two before Sept 11, and that he died on that day definitely is a very strange coincidence.
Soulsing was asking me, why if they DID try to create a cover up for Clinton, why did they NOT create one for Reagan?
My response was that REAGAN WAS NOT ONE OF "THEM".
He remains the ONLY president since FDR to have NOT been a member of the CFR.
Then why not not hang him out to dry over the training of death squads in South America. Likewise I find hard to believe he wasn't one of the boys but still got the CIA to cause the carnage they did across South America.
Good point. For someone that was supposedly not part of the international conspiracy, he sure was the king of foreign policy that aims to achieve hegemony.
You make a great point here. However, I believe there was a point where these questionable characters did have some serious influence on what was and wasn't reported. Obviously, if REAL news couldn't be the focus of reporting, there has to be something to fill the gap, so they turned to Hollywood... and BAM! An instant success formula for everyone involved: The celebrities get all the positive and negative exposure they want, to help keep selling themselves, the media obviously makes bank on it all, and the people in control do whatever they want in broad daylight. The news business has grown significantly over the past 20 years or so. Remember when 24 hour news didn't exist?
The role of propaganda has expanded. It no longer has to rely soley on demonizing a group, and make another look good-- it can simply divert attention away from things that matter, to other DUMBER things.
Was the trend so hard to figure out, that people ultimately like sex, violence, and even just plain stupidity? We've gone from "Leave it to Beaver" to "Rock of Love."
From my understanding and non-expert interpretation, it seems that O'Neill wasn't taken seriously because the government was not a fan of the way he approached things, especially in Yemen when he clashed with Barbara Bodine (The ambassador) over the investigation of the U.S.S. Cole attacks.
It also didn't help matters that back then agencies like the CIA and FBI did not cross-reference their information with each other.
Albany 2006 Camden 2006 E. Rutherford 2, 2006 Inglewood 2006,
Chicago 2007
Camden 2008 MSG 2008 MSG 2008 Hartford 2008.
Seattle 2009 Seattle 2009 Philadelphia 2009,Philadelphia 2009 Philadelphia 2009
Hartford 2010 MSG 2010 MSG 2010
Toronto 2011,Toronto 2011
Wrigley Field 2013 Brooklyn 2013 Brooklyn 2013 Philadelphia 2, 2013
Philadelphia 1, 2016 Philadelphia 2 2016 New York 2016 New York 2016 Fenway 1, 2016
Fenway 2, 2018
MSG 2022
St. Paul, 1, St. Paul 2 2023
MSG 2024, MSG 2024
Philadelphia 2024
"I play good, hard-nosed basketball.
Things happen in the game. Nothing you
can do. I don't go and say,
"I'm gonna beat this guy up."
I "get this stuff" from doing research. Reading, watching movies, scrounging around in "the internets".
To not understand that groups like the Rockefeller clan or JP Morgan and his associates had an undue influence on this country and its government is to SERIOUSLY misread history.
This is NOT "the only one in 100 years" i could "come up with", it was THE MOST RELEVANT.
If you think i am going to be able to pull out a dozen quotes on the spot from congressman and senators DIRECTLY related to media control is ridiculous.
BUT THERE IS AMPLE COMMENTARY THROUGHOUT THE AGES TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO ANY BUT THE MOST OBSTINANT THAT THERE IS A GROUP OF HIGHLY INFLUENTIAL MEN THAT MANIPULATES THE WILL OF THE STATE TO THEIR INTERESTS.
For instance, here is another great quote, from New York Mayor John Francis Hylan
I have provided DOZENS of quotes to this board, from senators, congressmen, presidents, and influential men in business and politics, and EVERYTIME someone tries to write off those quotes as being "out of context" or "just one idiots opinion" or somesuch. Never do people seem to stop and consider that the recorded words of history are ON THE SIDE OF "CONSPIRACY" and NOT AGAINST it.
How many more quotes do you need?
Do you want them from Eisenhower? From FDR? From Lincoln? From Jefferson? From Lindberg? Madison? Wilson? Hylan?
When, in the course of your denial, will you finally concede that enough men, with enough cause to know better than you, have indeed conceded that there is a "conspiracy" of special interests -- primarily international bankers and oil & steel men -- set upon gaining control of governments the world over in order to advance their OWN agenda?
Because i can keep throwing up quotes if thats what you are after.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I have never denied that the rich and powerful have undue influence in government. They always have and they always will. It's the nature of humans and human society... just like every group of gorillas has a silverback, there will always be more powerful people using their power to advance their interests at the expense of the masses.
However, this does not mean that EVERY major event in world history was carefully planned and plotted by some shadowy conspiracy to control world affairs. The fact is that world economic and governmental system are far too complex for JP Morgan to single-handedly control the entire course of human history like human civilization is just a giant Rube Goldberg machine... a little bombing here, a little bribing there, and, of course, everything always goes perfectly according to plan. Ever hear of chaos theory? Complex systems are unpredictable and the kind of fine control and manipulation you attribute to these conspiracies is simply NOT POSSIBLE.
I do not want quotes... Jerry Falwell told me 9/11 was an act of God punishing us for accepting homosexuality. Should I believe the rhetoric of every politician that claims all of our problems are the resort of superhuman efforts to control the uncontrollable? What I want is FACTS... not conjecture. Not a quote by a NYC mayor paired with the fact that a rich guy bought a bunch of newspapers... that's not enough evidence to meet the lowest threshold of proof. There's never any evidence, just quotes by a bunch of people like you claiming the conspiracy exists. I know millions of people that tell me Jesus is the son of God and I have to accept him to get to heaven... a bunch of people saying the same thing means nothing without factual proof of its truth.