Credible People Who Say 911 Was An Inside Job: CIA Agents, Foreign Presidents, Etc

Gather No Moss · March 2008

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

That's the most ridiculous thing you could possibly say to someone. Did it ever occur to you that maybe they bring this up because they love america so much that they feel they've been betrayed by the people meant to protect them most?

Hell, I feel betrayed by the actions of the govt. because of 9/11 and I don't even believe they participated in it!

Anyone that spreads or believes this kind of ANTI-American propaganda is either insane or they seriously hate the great country they live in. The next time there is a TERROSIST ATTACK maybe someone they know will die. Then they will feel pretty stupid for rejecting the obvious truth because they are so obsessed with conspiracy theories.

JD Sal · March 2008

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I think could very well be a brilliant approach to have the public believe this admin is simply 'feeble' and 'incapable'. They have, afterall, accomplished everything they set out to do. Keeping this war a fiasco and neverending mess keeps us over there indefinitely. Which in turns keeps the funding pouring in for the war machine, defense contractors and profiteers. How have they not gotten what they set out to do?

So let me get this straight. You think the Bush administration fucked up for 8 years to brilliantly show their ineptitude and make an inside 9/11 job seem unfeasible? That is absolutely ludicrous.

yes I did. it's right there in my last reply.

To control the population by fear so we would go along with their plans of war and occupation and with a nation gripped by fear and panic, they would be able to easily erode our rights without substantial protest.

Uh, no. What is the specific motive for 9/11 being an inside job? You're telling me that it wouldn't have been easier to just blow up a suitcase nuc, tie it back to Iraq, and start a war? Can you even fathom the number of people that would have to be involved with a 9/11 inside job? How complicated this would be to even pull off, much less cover up? You're not making much sense here.

Simply planting WMDs somewhere would not shock the people into the state of panic and fear they would need to pass the patriot act and go to war indefinitely. They didn't have to bother with planting WMDs, by then it was too late to anyway...they were in and Iraq was bombed to bits so we have to stay to fix it.

OMG. You don't think WMD's would have actually validated their call for war and caused more panic and fear?

Also, I personally, think it would have been harder to plant WMDs in an enemy country than to fly planes into buildings here where they control everything.

It would be harder to plant WMD's in Iraq than to pull off 9/11 as an inside job? Are you really being serious?

I guess this is why I don't regularly get into debates like these. Now I know why Bill Maher refuses to even have a conversation on his show about this topic. There's absolutely no logic to your argument and I see why they the 'truth movement' is not taken seriously at all.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

Anyone that spreads or believes this kind of ANTI-American propaganda is either insane or they seriously hate the great country they live in. The next time there is a TERROSIST ATTACK maybe someone they know will die. Then they will feel pretty stupid for rejecting the obvious truth because they are so obsessed with conspiracy theories.

I hope post #130 of yours was better...

1/10

Dirtie_Frank · March 2008

I have to agree that planning a 9/11 would have been a lot harder than planitng a few gallons of anthrax in Iraq. I also think it is pretty funny that all these moving pieces and no one has talked about being part of a 9/11 inside job. Eventually someone would crack. Then there is the theory that a missle hit the Pentagon. What happend to all the people on the plane? Executed? in jail? Come on you people are giving our government too much credit.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

If they planted WMD's in Iraq, there would be huge authenticity/forensic issues....not to mention the war would end because they found the WMD's so everyone could go home....mission accomplished. this was not the plan. The plan was to stay.

Also the US sold Saddam the WMD's to gas the Kurds and the Iranians in the first place....bit of a conflict of interest to make it the be all, and end all don't you think?

and the motives for 9/11....holy crap... more the the US had motives for 9/11. A lot of governments around the world are benefiting from this war on terror situation.

cmon...this is just common sense.

Dirtie_Frank · March 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

If they planted WMD's in Iraq, there would be huge authenticity/forensic issues....not to mention the war would end because they found the WMD's so everyone could go home....mission accomplished. this was not the plan. The plan was to stay.

Not trying to sound like a dick here but they can pull off 4 planes being used as missiles but authenticity of WMD's would be more difficult to forge? That just does not sound right.

Gather No Moss · March 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

If they planted WMD's in Iraq, there would be huge authenticity/forensic issues....not to mention the war would end because they found the WMD's so everyone could go home....mission accomplished. this was not the plan. The plan was to stay.

Also the US sold Saddam the WMD's to gas the Kurds and the Iranians in the first place....bit of a conflict of interest to make it the be all, and end all don't you think?

and the motives for 9/11....holy crap... more the the US had motives for 9/11. A lot of governments around the world are benefiting from this war on terror situation.

cmon...this is just common sense.

Common sense?

You really need to get out more!

I think living in your cave and spending your life trying to get to 10,000 posts here have seriously warped your sense of reality...

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

If they planted WMD's in Iraq, there would be huge authenticity/forensic issues....not to mention the war would end because they found the WMD's so everyone could go home....mission accomplished. this was not the plan. The plan was to stay.

Not trying to sound like a dick here but they can pull off 4 planes being used as missiles but authenticity of WMD's would be more difficult to forge? That just does not sound right.

So you know the war and outlook towards it would end eh? Mission accomplished.

And yes, it would be discernible by professionals as to where the equipment/WMD was manufactured if they were analyzed.

Abookamongstthemany · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

So let me get this straight. You think the Bush administration fucked up for 8 years to brilliantly show their ineptitude and make an inside 9/11 job seem unfeasible? That is absolutely ludicrous.

Uh, no. What is the specific motive for 9/11 being an inside job? You're telling me that it wouldn't have been easier to just blow up a suitcase nuc, tie it back to Iraq, and start a war? Can you even fathom the number of people that would have to be involved with a 9/11 inside job? How complicated this would be to even pull off, much less cover up? You're not making much sense here.

OMG. You don't think WMD's would have actually validated their call for war and caused more panic and fear?

It would be harder to plant WMD's in Iraq than to pull off 9/11 as an inside job? Are you really being serious?

I guess this is why I don't regularly get into debates like these. Now I know why Bill Maher refuses to even have a conversation on his show about this topic. There's absolutely no logic to your argument and I see why they the 'truth movement' is not taken seriously at all.

I think there is plenty of logic in what I said. Just proclaiming how ludicrous you think it is doesn't really tell me anything about why. This is why I don't like these discussions. People start acting like their view can be the only one possible and shut their ears to anything else. I'm open...if you can give me a reply that is substantial instead of remarks on how crazy you think it is. All you need to do is civilly tell me why you disagree and we can go from there. If you've got the market cornered on logic then you should have no problems carrying about a discussion on this with a level head.

How have they failed at getting what they set out to do?
Why is it ludicrous to think they would manipulate the public into thinking they are a bunch of inept morons?
Hasn't this perpetual war worked out well for the Bush cronies?
If it had been a well devised war, could they have justified an occupation this long and kept money pouring into the war profiteers pockets?
How would it not be just as complicated to plant WMDs in an enemy country and cover that up?
We know N Korea is building nuclear capabilities and I don't see that being brought up constantly on the news or see bumper stickers saying never forget N Korea. How do you figure an attack on our homeland, a grand spectacle for everyone to see on the news repeatedly, pointing out our vulnerability, seeing loved ones die before a horrific death before our very eyes be less frightening and anger arousing than finding WMDs in Iraq? I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. Sorry.

They have achieved everything they set out to do. I think it's just as ludicrous to assume these people inside the Admin are all just dummies who just so happen to be getting richer by the minute since GW strolled into office. What a coinkydink how this all worked out for them!! But whatever you want to believe...it doesn't really matter to me which story you choose to believe.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

Gather No Moss wrote:

Common sense?

You really need to get out more!

I think living in your cave and spending your life trying to get to 10,000 posts here have seriously warped your sense of reality...

Your counter argument and reasoning aside from blather is?

*crickets*

Edit: if you obviously know so surely, as you would seem to imply you do better than I .... then... well...

what is it then?

please share your wisdom Nostradamus...

The Champ · March 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

I wish just ONCE.
Just ONCE the people who stepped up to threads like this and threw themselves around calling people fools, asking if they "buy this shit", etc etc would EVER come back after a decent response was put up and say,

"you know what, i DID NOT KNOW THAT. That is some INTERESTING STUFF! WOW! You know you could be right. You COULD be right."

I think this is very foolish. However, I did not know this before opening the thread. It is interesting and entertaining stuff. Wow, you know you could be right, but probably not. Did I miss anything? Btw, the uppercase letters and bold font is a great touch..

DriftingByTheStorm · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

The Bush administration had nothing to do with JFK. Let's stay on topic and answer the questions at hand.

Actualy if you want to talk about "diversions", there are a lot of weird "coincidences" that seem to indicate George HW Bush WAS involved in the JFK assassination.

The least of which 2 items are

1. A Dallas FBI Field Agent Memo written the week of the assassination, saying that the night of the murder a man who identified himself as "George Bush" called and had information he thought may be important to share about a man he had talked to whom said he wanted to kill the president. The man (Bush) indicated that he had been on business in Dallas (where JFK was killed!) that night and was headed back to (whereverthefuck) Texas.

2. A memo by JE Hoover (Head of FBI!) that mentions a one "George Bush of the CIA" ... and the letter is headed "Kennedy Assassination" about these two guys (bush and someone else) who entered his office and apparently asked him some threating questions about what he "knew"?

George bush denies that the #2 memo was about him.
He says, "it must haave been some other George Bush" because he was not in the CIA at the time.

Hmm. Because he WAS in the CIA.
"George HW Bush Center For Intelligence" Langley, VA. Look it up.

Hmm.
And then there are his apparent connections to Bay of Pigs.

So.

?

JD Sal · March 2008

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I think there is plenty of logic in what I said.

We'll agree to disagree on that one.

Just proclaiming how ludicrous you think it is doesn't really tell me anything about why. This is why I don't like these discussions. People start acting like their view can be the only one possible and shut their ears to anything else. I'm open...if you can give me a reply that is substantial instead of remarks on how crazy you think it is. All you need to do is civilly tell me why you disagree and we can go from there. If you've got the market cornered on logic then you should have no problems carrying about a discussion on this with a level head.

I'm short on time because I'm at work and am about to leave in a few minutes, but somehow if you fail to see the logic in why pulling off an inside job of epic proportions like 9/11 would be more difficult to orchestrate than simply planting WMD's, then explaining it would probably not do much good.

Why is it ludicrous to think they would manipulate the public into thinking they are a bunch of inept morons?

You've followed this administration closely, yes? So I probably don't need to list the hundreds of mistakes they've made over their 8 years in office, particularly the colossal ones. If you really think this was part of a plan to look inept throughout their entire administration to simply make a 9/11 inside job seem impossible, then sadly it's not worth explaining. Again, you don't seem to see the error in all of this so called logic, and it doesn't appear like either of our viewpoints are going to change, so why continue the discussion?

How do you figure an attack on our homeland, a grand spectacle for everyone to see on the news repeatedly, pointing out our vulnerability, seeing loved ones die before a horrific death before our very eyes be less frightening and anger arousing than finding WMDs in Iraq? I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. Sorry.

*sigh* Where did I say this? What I said was, if you are intelligent enough to pull of 9/11 as an inside job, then why not plant WMD's to finish the so called job? That doesn't make any sense at all.

JD Sal · March 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Actualy if you want to talk about "diversions", there are a lot of weird "coincidences" that seem to indicate George HW Bush WAS involved in the JFK assassination.

The least of which 2 items are

1. A Dallas FBI Field Agent Memo written the week of the assassination, saying that the night of the murder a man who identified himself as "George Bush" called and had information he thought may be important to share about a man he had talked to whom said he wanted to kill the president. The man (Bush) indicated that he had been on business in Dallas (where JFK was killed!) that night and was headed back to (whereverthefuck) Texas.

2. A memo by JE Hoover (Head of FBI!) that mentions a one "George Bush of the CIA" ... and the letter is headed "Kennedy Assassination" about these two guys (bush and someone else) who entered his office and apparently asked him some threating questions about what he "knew"?

George bush denies that the #2 memo was about him.
He says, "it must haave been some other George Bush" because he was not in the CIA at the time.

Hmm. Because he WAS in the CIA.
"George HW Bush Center For Intelligence" Langley, VA. Look it up.

Hmm.
And then there are his apparent connections to Bay of Pigs.

So.

?

Okay, I now see the light. George Bush killed JFK and bombed the trade centers. Hillary Clinton is a murderer and a hit woman. It's all making sense now. :rolleyes:

The Champ · March 2008

Seriously though guys, couldn't all this knowledge and energy be directed toward something meaningful through a more relevant platform? Why waste all this passion and time on a Pearl Jam message board? Maybe this information can really make a difference somewhere..

RolandTD20Kdrummer · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

Okay, I now see the light. George Bush killed JFK and bombed the trade centers. Hillary Clinton is a murderer and a hit woman. It's all making sense now. :rolleyes:

You're being irrational to avoid thinking. Quick question to confirm my immediate suspicions...

What do you know of Mossad?

DriftingByTheStorm · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

Okay, I now see the light. George Bush killed JFK and bombed the trade centers. Hillary Clinton is a murderer and a hit woman. It's all making sense now. :rolleyes:

Try doing some reading for once in your life, you know like, off of this message board.

Abookamongstthemany · March 2008

JD Sal wrote:

We'll agree to disagree on that one.

I'm short on time because I'm at work and am about to leave in a few minutes, but somehow if you fail to see the logic in why pulling off an inside job of epic proportions like 9/11 would be more difficult to orchestrate than simply planting WMD's, then explaining it would probably not do much good.

You've followed this administration closely, yes? So I probably don't need to list the hundreds of mistakes they've made over their 8 years in office, particularly the colossal ones. If you really think this was part of a plan to look inept throughout their entire administration to simply make a 9/11 inside job seem impossible, then sadly it's not worth explaining. Again, you don't seem to see the error in all of this so called logic, and it doesn't appear like either of our viewpoints are going to change, so why continue the discussion?

*sigh* Where did I say this? What I said was, if you are intelligent enough to pull of 9/11 as an inside job, then why not plant WMD's to finish the so called job? That doesn't make any sense at all.

I was hoping you'd answer my questions directly and not with more questions. And I was also hoping you'd tell me the spcifics of why your thoughts on this were more logical than mine. But tis true...these discussions usually don't go anywhere on either side and take way more energy than I feel like putting into it right now.

Btw, what did you think of the info in that link?

DriftingByTheStorm · March 2008

The Champ wrote:

I think this is very foolish. However, I did not know this before opening the thread. It is interesting and entertaining stuff. Wow, you know you could be right, but probably not. Did I miss anything? Btw, the uppercase letters and bold font is a great touch..

Foolish.
You mean like wasting your breath to do nothing more than insult me for having an prefered font & writing style?

Its not even original.
At least you didn't try the lame, "hey man, like, maybe i'd read what you had to say, if i wasn't too stupid to read bold letters and colors."

I've had people tell me that MULTIPLE times.
Hey man, bold, and red font, like, wow ... i can't read!
Oh no!

It's like i said to that "argument" originaly.
If some bold letters and colors are enough to stunt your comprehension, i may as well stop wasting my time. Because if the PHYSICIAL quality of the words on the page is enough to stupify you, god help us when we get to actualy understanding the MEANING on the page.
:rolleyes:

Gather No Moss · March 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Your counter argument and reasoning aside from blather is?

*crickets*

Edit: if you obviously know so surely, as you would seem to imply you do better than I .... then... well...

what is it then?

please share your wisdom Nostradamus...

Sorry I took so long to get back to you.. I'm sure you have not left your computer for days... I actually had something to do..

I just have one question for you:

1. You think the US government hired terrorists to fly planes into our own buildings and kill are own people and then they set off the bombs?

I am sorry if I seem simple to you, King of the message pit, that is your name right...but give me a fucking break! You really don't believe this do you. I would have to be a complete idiot to even argue with you on this subject.

Credible People Who Say 911 Was An Inside Job: CIA Agents, Foreign Presidents, Etc

Comments

Categories