A mind numbing amount of evidence

[uk_dave]

Apparently there is a mind numbingly amount of evidence for there to be an 'inside job'......

.... anyone know of any?

[HereticHulk]

Well if we only knew what Sibel Edmonds was gagged for? IF we only knew what was on those CIA tapes? IF we only knew what the contents of the MILLIONS of MIA emails at the WH were/was? IF we only knew why Chimpy sat there reading "My Pet Goat"? If we only knew what these supposed terrorists in Gitmo knew? If we only knew why we didn't heed the many warnings before the attack? If we only knew why we flew certain people of interest out of the country when all other air traffic was grounded? If only we knew who made the decision to have John O'Neill stop investigating Al-qeada accounts........ do you want more?

Here is a hypothetical for ya:

Lets say the most powerful crime scene investigator was trying to frame someone for a crime. They silenced witnesses/perps through whatever means, hid evidence, destroyed evidence, stonewalled our hypothetical defense attorney's investigations, left a bunch of phoney clues to throw the dogs off the scent (so-to-speak) and our CSI said, If your not with me, your with the guy they framed and will be treated as such.

Now lets say that you are the defense attorney, where would you start collecting your evidence to proof your client innocent?

[beachnut]

9/11 truth never had any! Zero facts, just weird people who show up after the fact and claim thermite, C4 or dumb ideas! Each one is just misleading dumb people.

[Gravy]

Haven't you heard?

“Oh, Massive Evidence! We Have Total Evidence!” –Alex Jones

[Gravy]

9/11 truth never had any! Zero facts, just weird people who show up after the fact and claim thermite, C4 or dumb ideas! Each one is just misleading dumb people. Not sure I'm clear about this, beachnut: how many facts does the truth movement have?

:p

[gumboot]

Haven't you heard?

“Oh, Massive Evidence! We Have Total Evidence!” –Alex Jones


Oh looks! I is found another raging clue!

[R.Mackey]

Here is a hypothetical for ya:

Lets say the most powerful crime scene investigator was trying to frame someone for a crime. They silenced witnesses/perps through whatever means, hid evidence, destroyed evidence, stonewalled our hypothetical defense attorney's investigations, left a bunch of phoney clues to throw the dogs off the scent (so-to-speak) and our CSI said, If your not with me, your with the guy they framed and will be treated as such.

Now lets say that you are the defense attorney, where would you start collecting your evidence to proof your client innocent?

The obvious answer is to provide an alibi.

The mistake you make, as do all those in the Truth Movement, is to shirk your duty -- you are not the "Defense Attorney." If you were, then where are the highjackers today? Why does bin Laden still take credit for it? Why did Khalid Sheikh Mohammad admit to masterminding the job even before being captured? Great job of protecting an alibi, eh?

But no, you guys are the prosecution. You're sitting there telling me that Bush, or the NWO, or the Reptilians, or somebody did it. And that means you have to state your case.

You still haven't. After so many years, I can only assume you are all paid by the hour.

[Architect]

The biggest problem for the Truth Movement is the lack of evidence....

Wait, no, the TWO biggest problems for the Truth Movement are the lack of evidence and the absence of any credible expert opinion.....

Wait, no, sorry, the THREE biggest problems for the Truth Movement are the lack of evidence, the absence of any credible expert opinion, and Alex Jones......

Wait, no aha, wee mistake tere, the FOUR biggest problems for the Truth movement are the lack of evidence, the absence of any credible expert opinion, Alex Jones, and Al-Queda admitting they did it.....

Wait, no, oops.....


etc.

[A-Train]

But no, you guys are the prosecution. You're sitting there telling me that Bush, or the NWO, or the Reptilians, or somebody did it. And that means you have to state your case.

You still haven't. After so many years, I can only assume you are all paid by the hour.

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.

[Architect]

Really? There is a rather large study....or series of studies......making a very detailed case for what might be called the official account.

Presumably you have actually read such documents?

[Pardalis]

It looks like a CD, good enough?

;)

[R.Mackey]

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.

Except if you can't come up with a better story, then you've got nothing.

I was going to simply say, "what's the matter, afraid to show your hypothesis?" But then I saw who it was posting, and decided not to. I already know about your Jews-disguised-as-Arabs, jumping out the nose wheel doors at cruising speed, parachuting into thin air story, and it reeks. Please run along.

[WildCat]

Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.
You mean like this? http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/

Stepped in it big time there, didn't you A-Train? :rolleyes:

[FM21.105]

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.

I wonder what Zacharias Moussaoui would say about that...

Oh thats right he pled guilty. in the standards of an American courtroom. to plotting 9/11 with other al-Qaeda Arabs who were also guilty of the crime

[StoneRook]

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.



Didn't Al-Qaeda come out and say they did it? OBL made a few videos and had them posted.

Didn't AlJazeera show those videos and others showing that Al-Qaeda claimed the attacks as their own?

[jhunter1163]

The biggest problem for the Truth Movement is the lack of evidence....

Wait, no, the TWO biggest problems for the Truth Movement are the lack of evidence and the absence of any credible expert opinion.....

Wait, no, sorry, the THREE biggest problems for the Truth Movement are the lack of evidence, the absence of any credible expert opinion, and Alex Jones......


I'll come in again...

[JimBenArm]

You know, this could explain a lot. The evidence is so massive, it numbed the twoofers brains, thus rendering them incapable of presenting this evidence in a coherent and logical fashion. This inability to do so makes them only appear to be stupid, paranoid and racist, as they normally are super-sleuths that put Sherlock Holmes to shame!
Yeah, that must be it!

[FactCheck]

Oh looks! I is found another raging clue!

And its pointing... that way! ->

[FactCheck]

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.Everyone knows the people who hijacked the planes were arabs. I'm just wondering why you needed to point that out? Why did you say "You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs" and not just Al Qaeda?

[OldTigerCub]

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.

Soooo....you are stating that you would prefer to take part in the defense of al-Qaeda rather than in the prosecution of a well documented terrorist organization? You realize, do you not, that such a position could implicate one as an enemy sympathizer?

[Gravy]

Everyone knows the people who hijacked the planes were arabs. I'm just wondering why you needed to point that out? Why did you say "You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs" and not just Al Qaeda?Oh, so who were those people parachuting from the nose wheel wells, with the six-pointed parachutes, after throwing their guns out the windows?

[AMTMAN]

Oh, so who were those people parachuting from the nose wheel wells, with the six-pointed parachutes, after throwing their guns out the windows?

Well they could have parachuted out of the nose wheel well if they had brought along an acetylene torch or one of those saws fire fighters use in auto wrecks. ;)

[FactCheck]

Oh, so who were those people parachuting from the nose wheel wells, with the six-pointed parachutes, after throwing their guns out the windows?

If I had to guess I'd say it was Alex Jones and his supporters after the "Arabs" said they were hijacking the plane.

"AHHH! WE'RE BEING HIJACKED by ARABS!!! Grab your golf umbrellas boys and follow me!..."

[HereticHulk]

The obvious answer is to provide an alibi.

The mistake you make, as do all those in the Truth Movement, is to shirk your duty -- you are not the "Defense Attorney." If you were, then where are the highjackers today? Why does bin Laden still take credit for it? Why did Khalid Sheikh Mohammad admit to masterminding the job even before being captured? Great job of protecting an alibi, eh?

But no, you guys are the prosecution. You're sitting there telling me that Bush, or the NWO, or the Reptilians, or somebody did it. And that means you have to state your case.

You still haven't. After so many years, I can only assume you are all paid by the hour.

Well, the hijackers are dead. Are you referring to the fake tape? LOL!

Something doesn't make sense w/ your hypothesis. The FBI stated there is no credible evidence to link OBL to 9/11. Do you think the FBI forgot about your confession tape?

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad?
You omitted a key word in your hypothesis...."allegedly"...

allegedly revealed that Mohammed was the instigator and prime organizer of the attacks
Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed

All other 'confessions' were made under duress in respect to torture.

So you have a mythical man in a fake tape.

A forced/coerced confession.

So where is your proof?

You're sitting there telling me that Bush, or the NWO, or the Reptilians, or somebody did it.

BTW, I never said that.

[defaultdotxbe]

Well if we only knew what Sibel Edmonds was gagged for? IF we only knew what was on those CIA tapes? IF we only knew what the contents of the MILLIONS of MIA emails at the WH were/was? IF we only knew why Chimpy sat there reading "My Pet Goat"? If we only knew what these supposed terrorists in Gitmo knew? If we only knew why we didn't heed the many warnings before the attack? If we only knew why we flew certain people of interest out of the country when all other air traffic was grounded? If only we knew who made the decision to have John O'Neill stop investigating Al-qeada accounts........ do you want more?

Here is a hypothetical for ya:

Lets say the most powerful crime scene investigator was trying to frame someone for a crime. They silenced witnesses/perps through whatever means, hid evidence, destroyed evidence, stonewalled our hypothetical defense attorney's investigations, left a bunch of phoney clues to throw the dogs off the scent (so-to-speak) and our CSI said, If your not with me, your with the guy they framed and will be treated as such.

Now lets say that you are the defense attorney, where would you start collecting your evidence to proof your client innocent?
if only we knew what works were lost in the destruction of the library of alexandria, we might have the proof we need to show the illuminati have been secretly ruling the world for centuries!

[HereticHulk]

The biggest problem for the Truth Movement is the lack of evidence....

Wait, no, the TWO biggest problems for the Truth Movement are the lack of evidence and the absence of any credible expert opinion.....

Wait, no, sorry, the THREE biggest problems for the Truth Movement are the lack of evidence, the absence of any credible expert opinion, and Alex Jones......

Wait, no aha, wee mistake tere, the FOUR biggest problems for the Truth movement are the lack of evidence, the absence of any credible expert opinion, Alex Jones, and Al-Queda admitting they did it.....

Wait, no, oops.....


etc.

If our government is not hiding anything from us and everyone is squeaky clean, why the secrecy?

[Gravy]

Masterminds of Terror: The Truth Behind the Most Devastating Terrorist Attack the World Has Ever Seen by Yosri Fouda (http://www.amazon.com/Masterminds-Terror-Behind-Devastating-Terrorist/dp/1559707178)
When star Al-Jazeera TV reporter Yosri Fouda received an anonymous call summoning him to a secret interview in Pakistan with al-Qaeda, he knew he could be walking into a deadly trap, as Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl had done only months before. But he took the risk and hit pay dirt. For 48 hours, Fouda listened as two of the world's most wanted men, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, head of al-Qaeda's military committee, and Ramzi Binalshibh, the link between Mohammed Atta and the senior al-Qaeda leadership, proudly claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon – the first time al-Qaeda took direct responsibility. During the course of the in-depth interview, they detailed exactly how, over a two-year period, the plot was conceived, planned, and executed. Based on that interview and hours of follow-up investigation, MASTERMINDS OF TERROR also contains dramatic accounts of the subsequent seizure of both Binalshibh and Mohammed and analyzes al-Qaeda's attempts to justify its actions on what it calls 'Holy Tuesday.'

Oh, lookee: heaps o' confessions and other evidence here. (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/linkstoterrorism%2Calqaedainfo)

[stateofgrace]

Well, the hijackers are dead. Are you referring to the fake tape? LOL!

Did the guy who was faked in them admit it was not him ? Why not? Why is he playing along and allowing fake confessions of him to be made public? Why does he not say anything ?Why does he not destroy the USG by implicating them ?
Something doesn't make sense w/ your hypothesis. The FBI stated there is no credible evidence to link OBL to 9/11. Do you think the FBI forgot about your confession tape? Wrong, it was no HARD evidence, stop lying.
So you have a mythical man in a fake tape.
so he doesn't exist ?
A forced/coerced confession.Didn't he admit it before he was caught ?
So where is your proof?You first, where is yours?

[A-Train]

Really? There is a rather large study....or series of studies......making a very detailed case for what might be called the official account.

Presumably you have actually read such documents?

I have read them, like the 9/11 Commission Report. They are rather large, and they are indeed detailed.

But large and detailed does not equal conclusive, or even compelling, proof. Proof in a courtroom means evidence showing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Writing a few million words does not somehow demonstrate guilt in any way.

You guys can't even prove your suspects boarded the planes-- because the surveillance video has mysteriously disappeared-- much less that they actually carried out the hijackings.

[TheRedWorm]

So what evidence has the so-called "truth movement" provided that is so compelling to you, personally, A-Train?

[Childlike Empress]

Masterminds of Terror: The Truth Behind the Most Devastating Terrorist Attack the World Has Ever Seen by Yosri Fouda (http://www.amazon.com/Masterminds-Terror-Behind-Devastating-Terrorist/dp/1559707178)


Oh, lookee: heaps o' confessions and other evidence here. (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/linkstoterrorism%2Calqaedainfo)



When exactly did that interview take place, Gravy?

[HereticHulk]

Masterminds of Terror: The Truth Behind the Most Devastating Terrorist Attack the World Has Ever Seen by Yosri Fouda (http://www.amazon.com/Masterminds-Terror-Behind-Devastating-Terrorist/dp/1559707178)


Oh, lookee: heaps o' confessions and other evidence here. (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/linkstoterrorism%2Calqaedainfo)


Ok, so why would these people supposedly confess? That doesn't make any sense? They were already all suspect within like 48 hrs of 9/11. Why? What would be the point of confessing? They were already getting props fro the deed.

If you were in their shoes, wouldn't you deny everything? Why make it so easy? Did they suddenly get a conscious, guilt?

[FactCheck]

I have read them, like the 9/11 Commission Report. They are rather large, and they are indeed detailed.

But large and detailed does not equal conclusive, or even compelling, proof. Proof in a courtroom means evidence showing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Writing a few million words does not somehow demonstrate guilt in any way.

You guys can't even prove your suspects boarded the planes-- because the surveillance video has mysteriously disappeared-- much less that they actually carried out the hijackings.

I think hes right, a few words on a ticket proves they were on the planes more than millions of words on conspiracy web sites who say they weren't.

I just agreed with a conspiracy theorist! Excuse me while I puuu.....

[HereticHulk]

Why are the construction documents of WTC 1/2 buildings that will never exist again placed into classified?

Security? That the terrorists would figure out how to blow up a non-existant building?

[Hokulele]

Why are the construction documents of WTC 1/2 buildings that will never exist again placed into classified?

Security? That the terrorists would figure out how to blow up a non-existant building?


Classified by whom?

They are the intellectual property of the client who commisioned them in the first place.

[FactCheck]

Ok, so why would these people supposedly confess? That doesn't make any sense? They were already all suspect within like 48 hrs or 9/11. Why? What would be the point of confessing? They were already getting props fro the deed.

Why would you even have to ask this question? err...umm... maybe because they did it for a political/religious reason and they wanted everyone to know the exact reason? Ya tink? Why can't you answer this absurdly simple queston yourself? I think that's the real question here.

Why do the people who do school shootings make tapes and such which talk about the plan??? Are those also faked?

[stateofgrace]

Ok, so why would these people supposedly confess? That doesn't make any sense? They were already all suspect within like 48 hrs of 9/11. Why? What would be the point of confessing? They were already getting props fro the deed.

If you were in their shoes, wouldn't you deny everything? Why make it so easy? Did they suddenly get a conscious, guilt?

Are you saying the confessions are now real but you cannot understand why they would confess?

Can you name a single terrorist attack where nobody has admitted responsibility?

What is the point of carrying out a terrorist attack and not claiming responsibility?

[Childlike Empress]

Why would you even have to ask this question? err...umm... maybe because they did it for a political/religious reason and they wanted everyone to know the exact reason? Ya tink? Why can't you answer this absurdly simple queston yourself? I think that's the real question here.


If his question is so irrelevant, what about mine? When did the Fouda interview happen?

[beachnut]

Ok, so why would these people supposedly confess? That doesn't make any sense? They were already all suspect within like 48 hrs of 9/11. Why? What would be the point of confessing? They were already getting props fro the deed.

If you were in their shoes, wouldn't you deny everything? Why make it so easy? Did they suddenly get a conscious, guilt?
If you were a normal person who had paid attention since the Soviet Union left Afgan land, you knew a prime suspect after the second impact was UBL. Otherwise you are just a lack of knowledge 9/11 truth person, unable to understand history or warnings even UBL himself published! (hint: UBL said he would kill Americans when he can! Do you read?)

It was suspected the moment the second plane hit, unless you are brain dead! (if you paid attention to world events, and can think with logic, using facts and evidence)

So why are you surprised, are you one of the challenged people on world events?

UBL is proud, capture him and he will tell you the truth, unlike 9/11 truth which tells only lies!

[HereticHulk]

Are you saying the confessions are now real but you cannot understand why they would confess?

Can you name a single terrorist attack where nobody has admitted responsibility?

What is the point of carrying out a terrorist attack and not claiming responsibility?

So you can carry out more terrorist attacks!

Lets not compare (western influenced)American high school shootings to (adult eastern influenced religious extremists).

Anyway, why confess and roll over on your Jihad buddies? Then no more terrorist attacks for you.

BTW, none of this disproves a LIHOP scenario.

[FactCheck]

If his question is so irrelevant, what about mine? When did the Fouda interview happen?
April 2002

[dbalsdon]

So you can carry out more terrorist attacks!

Erm. They've been carrying out attacks for years, and admit to them each time. Doesn't mean f all if we can't catch them.

[stateofgrace]

So you can carry out more terrorist attacks!

Lets not compare (western influenced)American high school shootings to (adult eastern influenced religious extremists).

Anyway, why confess and roll over on your Jihad buddies? Then no more terrorist attacks for you.

BTW, none of this disproves a LIHOP scenario.

You are joking , right?

The whole point of extreme action is to put across an extreme point of view. What on earth do you think motivates terrorism?

It is motivated by a belief, whether it be political or religious. It is not motivated simply by the action itself but the message behind the action. The message sent to you, me,us all on Sept 11th was crystal clear.

" Stop ignoring us, stop pretending we don't exist, start taking notice of us and our extreme views".

I guess you didn't get the message.

[Childlike Empress]

April 2002


Yeah, that's what Fouda says. If i believe him, i have to conclude that the poeple that interrogated KSM last year are incompetent fools who don't even get the basic facts right.

Paragraph c: In an interview with an al Jazeera reporter in June 2002, the Detainee stated he was the head of the al Quaida military committee.


They didn't notice that Fouda changed the date of his alleged interview from June to May to April. And the interviewed guy is the alleged mastermind in this conspiracy, a guy of whom not one single photo was released after the "dirty shirt and bad hair" thing in 2003. That's the kind of "evidence" you people rely on.

[HereticHulk]

If you were a normal person who had paid attention since the Soviet Union left Afgan land, you knew a prime suspect after the second impact was UBL. Otherwise you are just a lack of knowledge 9/11 truth person, unable to understand history or warnings even UBL himself published! (hint: UBL said he would kill Americans when he can! Do you read?)

It was suspected the moment the second plane hit, unless you are brain dead! (if you paid attention to world events, and can think with logic, using facts and evidence)

So why are you surprised, are you one of the challenged people on world events?

UBL is proud, capture him and he will tell you the truth, unlike 9/11 truth which tells only lies!

Why doesn't he turn himself in if he is so 'proud'. He could sing it from the rooftops!

If it was so obvious that he was going to 'kill Americans' why did we take John O'Neill off the case? He was was blocked by (Barbara) Bodine and others.subject to a "smear campaign"when O'Neill knew WTC would be hit again “They’ll probably try to finish the job.”

Furthermore to support my assertion of LIHOP:
http://www.amazon.com/Road-11-Wealth-Empire-America/dp/0520237730
meticulous examination of how U.S. foreign policy since the 1960s has led to partial or total cover-ups of past domestic criminal acts, including, perhaps, the catastrophe of 9/11. Peter Dale Scott, whose previous books have investigated CIA involvement in southeast Asia, the drug wars, and the Kennedy assassination, here probes how the policies of presidents since Nixon have augmented the tangled bases for the 2001 terrorist attack. Scott shows how America's expansion into the world since World War II has led to momentous secret decision making at high levels. He demonstrates how these decisions by small cliques are responsive to the agendas of private wealth at the expense of the public, of the democratic state, and of civil society. He shows how, in implementing these agendas, U.S. intelligence agencies have become involved with terrorist groups they once backed and helped create, including al Qaeda.

[dbalsdon]

Why doesn't he turn himself in if he is so 'proud'. He could sing it from the rooftops!

You're taking the p**s now, right?????

[TheRedWorm]

So what evidence has the so-called "truth movement" provided that is so compelling to you, personally, A-Train?


A-Train signed off before he could answer, but maybe HH or CE can. If anyone else would like to answer, that is fine too. However, arguments from incredulity will be frowned upon. Thank you.

[HereticHulk]

You are joking , right?

The whole point of extreme action is to put across an extreme point of view. What on earth do you think motivates terrorism?
Our foreign policy.

It is motivated by a belief, whether it be political or religious. It is not motivated simply by the action itself but the message behind the action. The message sent to you, me,us all on Sept 11th was crystal clear. It still begs the question, if OBL is so proud and wants to be recognized for being a player, why not turn himself in? Why did we let him escape in Tora Bora?

[stateofgrace]

Our foreign policy.

Correct, Al Qaeda is motivated by the hatred of US foreign policy.

It still begs the question, if OBL is so proud and wants to be recognized for being a player, why not turn himself in? Why did we let him escape in Tora Bora?


Why would he turn himself in ?

What prove have you that "we" let him escape?

[dbalsdon]

It still begs the question, if OBL is so proud and wants to be recognized for being a player, why not turn himself in?

Because it's quite hard to organize terrorist attacks from Guantánamo???

{edit}
I personally believe he'll be shot on sight. He probably thinks the same
{/edit}

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Question:
Why doesn't he turn himself in if he is so 'proud'.


Answer:
So you can carry out more terrorist attacks!

[MetalliSociety]

Well, the hijackers are dead. Are you referring to the fake tape? LOL!

Something doesn't make sense w/ your hypothesis. The FBI stated there is no credible evidence to link OBL to 9/11. Do you think the FBI forgot about your confession tape?

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad?
You omitted a key word in your hypothesis...."allegedly"...


Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed

All other 'confessions' were made under duress in respect to torture.

So you have a mythical man in a fake tape.

A forced/coerced confession.

So where is your proof?



BTW, I never said that.


Oh you poor soul. You should never use Wiki as a source for an argument since ANYONE can put inforation on that site about anything.

And....a fake tape? What about all the other tapes with OBL saying he's esponsible for the attacks?

[Childlike Empress]

A-Train signed off before he could answer, but maybe HH or CE can. If anyone else would like to answer, that is fine too. However, arguments from incredulity will be frowned upon. Thank you.


Have you watched "Press for Truth"? If not, please do. They have a new film out, "In their own words", which i just downloaded and are going to watch. You'll find both at google video. Sorry but you'll have to stick with these atm, it's 2008 and i am as bored with the whole thing as the average debunker is, so don't expect a narrative from me. www.911proof.com is a good site too.

[TheRedWorm]

So nothing all that compelling, huh?

[HereticHulk]

Correct, Al Qaeda is motivated by the hatred of US foreign policy.



Why would he turn himself in ?

What prove have you that "we" let him escape?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62618-2002Apr16
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/9/10/10951/5080

[MetalliSociety]

OBL's hatred for the US pretty much starts with the Iraq invasion of Kuwait. OBL offered his al-Qaeda's services to Saudi Arabia, but they decided to use the united States instead.

Then after that the US tried to be the sort of "policemen of the ME" and it pissed OBL off beyond belief and wanted to bleed the super power to death like hedid to the Soviet Union.

It's definately not hard to see OBL as a man that'd do anything to harm the United States. He caught us while we were fat cats thinknig we were invincible and could never be attacked. Why is this so hard to believe?

[Childlike Empress]

So nothing all that compelling, huh?


Do your own research™ ;)

[dbalsdon]

Those articles say 'we' "failed" to catch him, not that 'we' let him escape.

[dbalsdon]

Do your own research™

So WE are meant to try and figure out, what it is YOU think is wrong with the "official story"?

[HereticHulk]

Oh you poor soul. You should never use Wiki as a source for an argument since ANYONE can put inforation on that site about anything.

And....a fake tape? What about all the other tapes with OBL saying he's esponsible for the attacks?

Your right, all sources are bunk when they don't support your claims.

This whole discussion is pointless. We'll prolly never know.

Besides I'm headin out here now to see some live music and have a few beers!

LIHOP!

[TheRedWorm]

Do your own research™ ;)


I didn't ask what would be compelling to me, I asked what you found so compelling. Obviously, since you can't be bothered, even you find "truth seeker" stuff to be...well... fill in your own derogatory adjective.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Your right, all sources are bunk when they don't support your claims.


Oh, the irony...

[twinstead]

Out of all the asinine conspiracy theories surrounding 911, any that ascribe anything sinister about our inability to capture or kill OBL are some of the most idiotic.

[Childlike Empress]

I didn't ask what would be compelling to me, I asked what you found so compelling. Obviously, since you can't be bothered, even you find "truth seeker" stuff to be...well... fill in your own derogatory adjective.


Or maybe it's not a priority of mine to convince YOU of all people of my beliefs? Maybe that's the reason i and many others don't answer to the tenthousandst "Here is a question for you, truthers"-Thread started by some random conformist? (Don't take it personally RedWorm but i'm really bored and i have a habit of biting back :))

CU

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Or maybe it's not a priority of mine to convince YOU of all people of my beliefs?


Come on, now. You have to pay more attention than that. He didn't ask you to convince him. He just asked what you found compelling.

[twinstead]

Or maybe it's not a priority of mine to convince YOU of all people of my beliefs? Maybe that's the reason i and many others don't answer to the tenthousandst "Here is a question for you, truthers"-Thread started by some random conformist? (Don't take it personally RedWorm but i'm really bored and i have a habit of biting back :))

CU

I find your mention of 'conformist' ironic. You are every bit of a conformist; you just conform to a different world view.

[TheRedWorm]

Come on, now. You have to pay more attention than that. He didn't ask you to convince him. He just asked what you found compelling.



Yep, that's what I thought I was saying all along. Perhaps I was not clear enough.

[Slayhamlet]

Yeah, that's what Fouda says. If i believe him, i have to conclude that the poeple that interrogated KSM last year are incompetent fools who don't even get the basic facts right.

Which basic facts? Be specific.

They didn't notice that Fouda changed the date of his alleged interview from June to May to April.

Evidence of this?

[dbalsdon]

Or maybe it's not a priority of mine to convince YOU of all people of my beliefs? Maybe that's the reason i and many others don't answer to the tenthousandst "Here is a question for you, truthers"-Thread started by some random conformist? (Don't take it personally RedWorm but i'm really bored and i have a habit of biting back )

So, who are you trying to convince then????

[FramerDave]

Apparently there is a mind numbingly amount of evidence for there to be an 'inside job'......

.... anyone know of any?

Well yes, it is all mind-numbing, just not quite in the way Troofers think it is.

[Childlike Empress]

I find your mention of 'conformist' ironic. You are every bit of a conformist; you just conform to a different world view.


The habit of putting every 911 sceptic into one little "twoofer"-drawer is rampant on your side of the issue. I'm quite sure that no one except Gravy (and he may be on a nice blueberry tart party right now) understood that my question about Fouda was a loaded one. I've brought my point across in #44. Be assured that i have done my research and try to seperate the wheat from the chaff very much.

@RedWorm: So where is the difference? Is it that everything i say can't convince you because you have made up your mind already?

[Childlike Empress]

Which basic facts? Be specific.



Evidence of this?


Do your own research™

:rolleyes: Really.

[twinstead]

The habit of putting every 911 sceptic into one little "twoofer"-drawer is rampant on your side of the issue. I'm quite sure that no one except Gravy (and he may be on a nice blueberry tart party right now) understood that my question about Fouda was a loaded one. I've brought my point across in #44. Be assured that i have done my research and try to seperate the wheat from the chaff very much.



So. What to do with those who also do their homework, research just as much as you, are every bit as smart as you, are every bit as honorable as you, yet come to different conclusions?

Oh, that's right. They are called 'shills' or 'sheep'. I forgot.

My bad. I shouldn't have labeled you. :eek:

[Childlike Empress]

So. What to do with those who also do their homework, research just as much as you, are every bit as smart as you, are every bit as honorable as you, yet come to different conclusions?

Oh, that's right. They are called 'shills' or 'sheep'. I forgot.

My bad. I shouldn't have labeled you. :eek:


No, i ask them loaded questions.

[TheRedWorm]

@RedWorm: So where is the difference? Is it that everything i say can't convince you because you have made up your mind already?


What difference? I asked you what evidence you found was so compelling. Instead of relating a piece of evidence, you linked me to a video (or two) and said "watch." You couldn't even be bothered to say what you found most compelling. If you don't really find the evidence all that compelling, all you have to do is say so.

[beachnut]

Not sure I'm clear about this, beachnut: how many facts does the truth movement have?

:p
zero

[twinstead]

No, i ask them loaded questions.

Ah, duh!

And maybe they ask YOU loaded questions...

[Childlike Empress]

What difference? I asked you what evidence you found was so compelling. Instead of relating a piece of evidence, you linked me to a video (or two) and said "watch." You couldn't even be bothered to say what you found most compelling. If you don't really find the evidence all that compelling, all you have to do is say so.


I've linked you to two videos and a website that in context you should look at as links from me to media that i find compelling. That stuff contains evidence that leads to the view that the official story is not to be trusted. If you, after looking at it, still think that there is nothing to see here, well, then so be it.

You still have to clarify the difference between stuff that is compelling to me and stuff that is potentially compelling to you.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Instead of relating a piece of evidence, you linked me to a video (or two) and said "watch."


One of which he hasn't yet watched himself. I tell, you that's the epitome of intellectual honesty right there. Yepper. :rolleyes:

[dbalsdon]

zero

Now now. Lets give them some credit. I'd say they have one fact. That WTC 1, 2 and 7 collapsed on 9/11. At least they get that bit right. I think thats where any similarities end though.

[CHF]

Our foreign policy.

So America attacked itself because of US foreign policy?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

You still have to clarify the difference between stuff that is compelling to me and stuff that is potentially compelling to you.


Wow. You're not understanding his question, are you? No part of his question required that what you find compelling should also be compelling to him. None. He has no reason to clarify. You have no reason to post anything that he would find compelling. Just post what you find compelling.

I thought that was a pretty simple request.

[twinstead]

zero

Do you mean zero Fahrenheit, zero Celsius, or Absolute Zero?

[Childlike Empress]

Wow. You're not understanding his question, are you? No part of his question required that what you find compelling should also be compelling to him. None. He has no reason to clarify. You have no reason to post anything that he would find compelling. Just post what you find compelling.

I thought that was a pretty simple request.


Well, what about those two videos and a website and my remark that he shouldn't expect a narrative from me?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Well, what about those two videos and a website and my remark that he shouldn't expect a narrative from me?


You haven't even watched one of those videos. How can you possibly include it in a list of things you find compelling?

[CHF]

Or maybe it's not a priority of mine to convince YOU of all people of my beliefs?

Well then why are you here?

Surely you'd want to convince as many people as possible of the "truth" behind 9/11.

Part of spreading any message is to answer questions about it.

[Childlike Empress]

Of course. God forbid somebody question YOUR world view. It's better when you can be all warm and cozy and question the shills, right?

LOL


What about the Fouda interview? Anything to add or do you wanna keep on exchanging gratuitous bickering?

[beachnut]

now 0 - 1j

[Childlike Empress]

You haven't even watched one of those videos. How can you possibly include it in a list of things you find compelling?


I'm sure that the new video is worth watching and "Press for Truth" is essential. Did you watch it or were you taken off by Brainster's lies about its content?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I'm sure that the new video is worth watching [...]


Ahh... Faith. We're done here.

[twinstead]

What about the Fouda interview? Anything to add or do you wanna keep on exchanging gratuitous bickering?

No, gratuitous bickering is pretty much all we have, Fouda interview included.

As an aside, though, do you think that the Fouda interview is the end all, catch all, black hole, gratuitous bickering stopping whirlwind of doom? Is that your reason to hand wave away all the folks who still may disagree even AFTER viewing your evidence?

Wow. I guess you're right. I really should shut up now.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

How do you know that i didn't watch it yet? Maybe i've told you?


Yes, actually, you did...

Have you watched "Press for Truth"? If not, please do. They have a new film out, "In their own words", which i just downloaded and are going to watch. You'll find both at google video. Sorry but you'll have to stick with these atm, it's 2008 and i am as bored with the whole thing as the average debunker is, so don't expect a narrative from me. www.911proof.com is a good site too.


Have you managed to cram a 2 hour video into the 1.5 hours since you told us all that you haven't yet watched it?

[Gravy]

Now now. Lets give them some credit. I'd say they have one fact. That WTC 1, 2 and 7 collapsed on 9/11. At least they get that bit right. I think thats where any similarities end though.Actually, many of them put "collapse" in quotes. Let's not be unnecessarily generous. They haven't earned it. :D

[Childlike Empress]

Actually, many of them put "collapse" in quotes. Let's not be unnecessarily generous. They haven't earned it. :D


Oh, me again. :o

Gravy, as you are back from your blueberry tart party or what ever, please answer my question or, as i have spilled the beans already, tell me what you think about the critical thinking abilities of the people who interrogated KSM. Are they to be trusted?

[Undesired Walrus]

Oh, me again. :o

Gravy, as you are back from your blueberry tart party or what ever, please answer my question or, as i have spilled the beans already, tell me what you think about the critical thinking abilities of the people who interrogated KSM. Are they to be trusted?

It's always interesting when people claim KSM's confession is worthless because he was supposedly tortured.

Infact, KSM never gave up the location or existence of an Al Qaeda spy in South Africa, even though Hambali claimed he provided him with two addresses for these men, one in california and one in south africa.

[Childlike Empress]

It's always interesting when people claim KSM's confession is worthless because he was supposedly tortured.

Infact, KSM never gave up the location or existence of an Al Qaeda spy in South Africa, even though Hambali claimed he provided him with two addresses for these men, one in california and one in south africa.


Nice that you show up here, UW. At least YOU do your own research. Did you read Chaim Kupferberg's groundbreaking article There's something about Omar (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP310A.html)?

Please take the time to read it completely. I know that it sounds confusing and paranoid but think about the implications of a paragraph like this written in 2002:

The events of September 11 gave birth to three parallel threads - or counter-legends - pointing the way to the culpability of three possible foreign suspects, or patsies - namely, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Israel. Of the three, the Saudis were the patsies of choice for the mainstream "critics", who were a motley assortment of neo-cons, FBI investigators, or "retired" national security types opposed to the war in Iraq. The Pakistan/ISI thread to 9/11 flared up most noticeably in the events surrounding the death of Daniel Pearl and the alleged involvement of Omar Saeed Sheikh - events which were used, in fact, to smother the Pakistani/ISI connection to the 9/11 money trail. As regards Israel, the most radical opponents of the War On Terror were nursed on the twin threads of an Israeli spy ring and a neo-con cabal supposedly at the helm of the Bush Administration.


After reading it you'll understand why no one,- not even the "master-debunkers" - participated in your Omar Sheikh-Thread. Open a new "paragraph by paragraph"-debunking thread on this article - i'm sure it'll be "fun".

[OldTigerCub]

I'm sure that the new video is worth watching and "Press for Truth" is essential. Did you watch it or were you taken off by Brainster's lies about its content?

Can you cite some of Brainster's lies? What did he get wrong? Sceptical minds want to know!

[Childlike Empress]

Can you cite some of Brainster's lies? What did he get wrong? Sceptical minds want to know!


http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=75008

[Undesired Walrus]

Please take the time to read it completely. I know that it sounds confusing and paranoid but think about the implications of a paragraph like this written in 2002:


First, do not quote me and then not follow up on anything I said, indeed do not start a completely different topic, as that kind of thing breaks membership rules and pisses me off.

There is no evidence Omar wired that money, or that the money existed at all.

[Childlike Empress]

OK, another try:

It's always interesting when people claim KSM's confession is worthless because he was supposedly tortured.

Infact, KSM never gave up the location or existence of an Al Qaeda spy in South Africa, even though Hambali claimed he provided him with two addresses for these men, one in california and one in south africa.


KSM is in a black box, a man nobody has seen, was reported several times as being killed; no evidence but a shady audio file was provided that he is in custody of US authorities. No picture available. That's for the man who is allegedly the mastermind of 9/11. No trial. So, we had two trials in germany. One of the two men is free in morocco now because the US refused to let KSM's sidekick Binalshibh, the other shady man in this farce, testify in the trial. The other man is in jail but only because of a scandalous decision of german law authorities... the evidence, or better the lack of it, is the same as in the other trial. The 911 commission narrative is not based on tortured confessions, it is based on nothing but two shady people we are to believe "told the story". Two people in a black box.

Now read Kupferberg's article.

[Undesired Walrus]

OK, another try:

Another? You didn't 'try' it once.

KSM is in a black box

Yes, so black that KSM helped British police arrest Dhiren Barot, who admitted conspiracy to cause explosions, travelled to America before 9/11 (Recording the WTC with somebody voicing 'boom' behind the camera), and wrote a 40 page manual entitled 'GAS LIMOS PROJECT'.

now because the US refused to let KSM's sidekick Binalshibh, the other shady man in this farce, testify in the trial.

Ramzi, shady? That must have been why there was a drawn out gunfight between his men and the Pakistani police before he was captured and photographed in Pakistan, September 2002.

The other man is in jail but only because of a scandalous decision of german law authorities... the evidence, or better the lack of it, is the same as in the other trial. The 911 commission narrative is not based on tortured confessions, it is based on nothing but two shady people we are to believe "told the story". Two people in a black box.


Ramzi BAS, who lived with the hijackers in Hamburg, has his address stamped on the back of Jarrah's (uncle's) card found in united 93's destruction, and on audio admitting to co-ordinating the attacks? The same guy on video with Ziad Jarrah and OBL? That guy? We are told to believe that?

[Gravy]

Ramzi, shady? That must have been why there was a drawn out gunfight between his men and the Pakistani police before he was captured and photographed in Pakistan, September 2002.

Ramzi BAS, who lived with the hijackers in Hamburg, has his address stamped on the back of Jarrah's (uncle's) card found in united 93's destruction, and on audio admitting to co-ordinating the attacks? The same guy on video with Ziad Jarrah and OBL? That guy? We are told to believe that?Give a man a break. Haven't you ever been in the wrong place at the wrong time?

[Gravy]

Stop pretending to know what's going on. Witness Gravy making a complete fool of himself right now. Continue researching. :)Stop pretending to know what's going on? That won't be hard, because I don't know what's going on. However, I know what went on (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/muhammad_sheikh_Khalid.pdf).

[Pardalis]

Stop reading globalresearch, it's not good for your sanity.

[gumboot]

You've got that backwards. You are the prosecution. You are the ones who contend it was al-Qaeda Arabs are guilty of this crime. Now, using the standards of an American courtroom, prove that it was indeed these defendants who committed the crime.

You might start by demonstrating conclusively that it was your defendants who boarded the planes and carried out the hijackings.

Been there, done that. (http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/)

Conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries - guilty
Conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy - guilty
Conspiracy to destroy aircraft - guilty
Conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction - guilty
Conspiracy to murder United States employees - guilty
Conspiracy to destroy properly - guilty

-Gumboot

[Childlike Empress]

Stop pretending to know what's going on? That won't be hard, because I don't know what's going on. However, I know what went on (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/muhammad_sheikh_Khalid.pdf).


You want me to click on a .pdf from FOXnews? Are you serious? What about telling us why the super investigators of KSM's crimes didn't manage to get the date of Yosri Fouda's damned interview straight?

[gumboot]

If it was so obvious that he was going to 'kill Americans' why did we take John O'Neill off the case?

The only person who took John O'Neill "off the case" was John O'Neill. He resigned from the FBI.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

I'm sure that the new video is worth watching and "Press for Truth" is essential. Did you watch it or were you taken off by Brainster's lies about its content?


Press for Truth is terrible and completely refutes its own premise, which is quite a spectacular feat.

-Gumboot

[Pardalis]

You want me to click on a .pdf from FOXnews? Are you serious?

Yeah, and globalresearch.ca is an objective and totally sane source of information... :rolleyes:

[Childlike Empress]

What are you, four years old? It's the content of the PDF that matters, not who hosts it. Some "researcher" you are, CE.


Yeah, i've dunnit. And what? It contains the very quote i've asked you about:

c. In an interview with an al-Jazeera reporter in June 2002, the detainee stated he was the head of the Al-Qaida military committee.


Why did they not manage to get the date of the interview straight? In four years? What are we to expect from "researchers" like this?

1. The detainee's name was on a list in a computer seized in connection with a threat to United States airlines, United States embassies and the Pope.


LOL :rolleyes:

[gumboot]

LOL :rolleyes:


I take it you've never heard of Bojinka?

-Gumboot

[Gravy]

Yeah, i've dunnit. And what? And what? Here's what, Sunshine:


FROM: OIC, CSRT (08 Feb 07)
SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE FOR COMBATANT STATUS REVIEW TRIBUNAL - MUHAMMAD, KHALID SHAYKH
... 3. The following facts support the determination that the detainee is an enemy combatant.
b. The detainee served as the head of the al Qaida military committee and was Usama bin Laden's principal al Qaida operative who directed the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States.

c. In an interview with an al Jazeera reporter in June 2002, the detainee stated he was the head of the al Qaida military committee.

d. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained information about the four airplanes hijacked on 11 September 2001 including code names, airline company, f light number, target, pilot name and background information, and names of the hijackers.

e. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained photographs of 19 individuals identified as the 11 September 2001 hijackers.

f. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained a document that listed the pilot license fees for Mohammad Atta and biographies for some of the 11 September 2001 hijackers.

g. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained images of passports and an image of Mohammad Atta.

h. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained transcripts of chat sessions belonging to at least one of the 11 September 2001 hijackers.

i. The detainee directed an individual to travel to the United States to case targets for a second wave of attacks.

j. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained three letters from Usama bin Laden.

k. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained spreadsheets that describe money assistance to families of known al Qaida members.

l. The detainee's name was on a list in a computer seized in connection with a threat to United States airlines, United States embassies and the Pope.

m. The detainee wrote the bojinka plot, the airline bomb plot which was later found on his nephew Ramzi Yousef's computer.

n. The bojinka plot is also known as the Manila air investigation.

o. The Manila air investigation uncovered the detainee conspired with others to plant explosive devices aboard American jetliners while those aircraft were scheduled to be airborne and loaded with passengers on their way to the United States.

p. The detainee was in charge of and funded an attack against United States military vessels heading to the port of Djibouti.

q. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained a letter to the United Arab Emirates threatening attack if their government continued to help the United States.

r. During the capture of the detainee, information used exclusively by al Qaida operational managers to communicate with operatives was found.

s. The detainee received funds from Kuwaiti-based Islamic extremist groups and delivered the funds to al Qaida members.

t. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained a document that summarized operational procedures and training requirements of an al Qaida cell.

u. A computer hard drive seized during the capture of the detainee contained a list of killed and wounded al Qaida martyrs.

v. Passport photographs of al Qaida operatives were seized during the capture of the detainee.

Why don't you have him over for dinner and ask him if he plans to murder your neighbors like he murdered mine, Sunshine?

[Pardalis]

Press for Truth is terrible and completely refutes its own premise, which is quite a spectacular feat.

-Gumboot

I like the bit when they mention WTC 7, and then never mention it again.

Weird editing choice.

[Darat]

Tried to clean-up this thread - multiple posts split to AAH. Warning to all participants cut out the personal attacks.

[geggy]

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/11/911-cover-up.html

So much for debunkers' claim that investigations toward 9/11 attacks were "complete, thorough and adequate." Ha. You people are getting crazier every day.

[geggy]

I couldn't find the updated version of the link I posted above but it didn't include the CIA's failure to provide, or deliberately withheld, the interrogation tapes to the 9/11 commission after being asked to provide all documentations when in fact they admitted the tapes were destroyed. Come on, its pretty blatant and obvious there's a massive cover up going out there, moonbats! Ha.

[Par]

BTW, none of this disproves a LIHOP scenario.


It is not our responsibility to disprove any conspiracy theory. If you want people to believe that the prosaic theories of the 9/11 attacks are appreciably in error, then by all means present your evidence for the same. Remember, as a conspiracy theorist, the burden of proof is on you.

[TC329]

remove

[TC329]

Apparently there is a mind numbingly amount of evidence for there to be an 'inside job'......

.... anyone know of any?

yeah (http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html).

there's even video documenting such evidence. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2585146227169989321&q=reichstag+911&total=163&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0) :eek:

[Horace Wheeljack]

yeah (http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html).

there's even video documenting such evidence. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2585146227169989321&q=reichstag+911&total=163&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0) :eek:

TC329, i reckon you should check out the claims made in the video before you accept them as fact. What if there are reasonable and logical explanations to the claims made in the film? Why write them off before you hear them? Even the title 'Reichstag 911' is misleading, the evidence doesnt indicate Nazi involvement in the Reichstag fire. When the title of the film is so dubious it should be a good warning of the veracity of the claims within.

[1337m4n]

yeah (http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html).

there's even video documenting such evidence. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2585146227169989321&q=reichstag+911&total=163&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0) :eek:

I'm curious, how exactly is "prior knowledge" compatible with MIHOP?

I mean, it doesn't make sense. It's basically saying that the US KNEW al-Queada was going to attack...but then the US attacked itself instead?

[1337m4n]

Well if we only knew what Sibel Edmonds was gagged for? IF we only knew what was on those CIA tapes? IF we only knew what the contents of the MILLIONS of MIA emails at the WH were/was? IF we only knew why Chimpy sat there reading "My Pet Goat"? If we only knew what these supposed terrorists in Gitmo knew? If we only knew why we didn't heed the many warnings before the attack? If we only knew why we flew certain people of interest out of the country when all other air traffic was grounded? If only we knew who made the decision to have John O'Neill stop investigating Al-qeada accounts........ do you want more?


If only we knew why not one single whistleblower has come out about any of these things.


Here is a hypothetical for ya:

Lets say the most powerful crime scene investigator was trying to frame someone for a crime. They silenced witnesses/perps through whatever means, hid evidence, destroyed evidence, stonewalled our hypothetical defense attorney's investigations, left a bunch of phoney clues to throw the dogs off the scent (so-to-speak) and our CSI said, If your not with me, your with the guy they framed and will be treated as such.

Now lets say that you are the defense attorney, where would you start collecting your evidence to proof your client innocent?

I would set about proving fraud on the part of the prosecution in order to secure a retrial.

Has the Truth Movement been able to prove such fraud?

[HereticHulk]

It is not our responsibility to disprove any conspiracy theory. If you want people to believe that the prosaic theories of the 9/11 attacks are appreciably in error, then by all means present your evidence for the same. Remember, as a conspiracy theorist, the burden of proof is on you. Sibel Edmonds and the CIA tapes are PROOF of a conspiracy! To what extent and who is involved we cannot say when evidence is gagged and destroyed!

[defaultdotxbe]

Sibel Edmonds and the CIA tapes are PROOF of a conspiracy! To what extent and who is involved we cannot say when evidence is gagged and destroyed!
sibel edmonds knows the reason bush sat in the classroom with a dumb look on his face is because he crapped his pants

the tapes destroyed by the CIA are from the microphones in thebathroom and laundry room where the soiled garments were removed and cleaned





hey, its got as much evidence as any other conspiracy theory

[HereticHulk]

If only we knew why not one single whistleblower has come out about any of these things.



I would set about proving fraud on the part of the prosecution in order to secure a retrial.

Has the Truth Movement been able to prove such fraud?
You are not that naive? Ask Gary Webb about blowing whistles......oh wait he committed suicide with 2 bullets to the back of the head. He was depressed that he could not find a job...I forgot. :rolleyes:

[uk_dave]

So HereticHulk,

Did you decide 9-11 was an 'inside job' before or after you heard about Sibel Edmonds and/or the CIA tapes?

[1337m4n]

Sibel Edmonds and the CIA tapes are PROOF of a conspiracy! To what extent and who is involved we cannot say when evidence is gagged and destroyed!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds

I don't see anything about 9/11 in any of her profiles...

[1337m4n]

You are not that naive? Ask Gary Webb about blowing whistles......oh wait he committed suicide with 2 bullets to the back of the head. He was depressed that he could not find a job...I forgot. :rolleyes:

And yet Dylan Avery, Alex Jones, Lyte Trip, and yourself, among others, continue to live.

Furthermore, it is not unheard of for people to commit suicide for inane reasons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan_Meier_suicide_controversy

[1337m4n]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb

Again...where is 9/11?

[HereticHulk]

So HereticHulk,

Did you decide 9-11 was an 'inside job' before or after you heard about Sibel Edmonds and/or the CIA tapes?

I haven't decided about anything yet. Like I said, with all the cover-ups and destroyed evidence we'll probably never know the whole truth. That is where I'm at today. I'm inclined to think 9/11 was a LIHOP scenario.

Gary Webb has no connection to 9/11. He was an example put forward by me as someone that was trying to blow the proverbial whistle and he killed himself with a .38 revolver 2x's in the back of the head.

I do venture to guess that if a truly independent investigation re: 9/11 would be started and the house of cards starts to fall for Bu$hco, I think more people come forward.

[1337m4n]

Gary Webb has no connection to 9/11. He was an example put forward by me as someone that was trying to blow the proverbial whistle and he killed himself with a .38 revolver 2x's in the back of the head.


I see.

Tell me, if we assume LIHOP, roughly how many people do you think were in on it?

Now, tell me how many people were in on Watergate.

Finally, take note of how long it took for a whistleblower to expose Watergate.

[HereticHulk]

I see.

Tell me, if we assume LIHOP, roughly how many people do you think were in on it?

Now, tell me how many people were in on Watergate.

Finally, take note of how long it took for a whistleblower to expose Watergate.

Not sure what watergate has to do w/ 9/11?

I would say a good place to start would be the authors of the PNAC.

And this is a loaded question.

[uk_dave]

Not sure what watergate has to do w/ 9/11?

I would say a good place to start would be the authors of the PNAC.

And this is a loaded question.


Do you believe that the people on the ground, the ones who actually planted the explosives/evidence or covered up same or failed to follow through on the investigations, are ideologically committed to the conspiracy like the PNAC signatories, or was there some other reason they did what they did and never spilled the beans?

[HereticHulk]

Do you believe that the people on the ground, the ones who actually planted the explosives/evidence or covered up same or failed to follow through on the investigations, are ideologically committed to the conspiracy like the PNAC signatories, or was there some other reason they did what they did and never spilled the beans?
I have conceded that CD was not involved. I think its a red herring. So lets take that out of the picture.

And yes, I do think some would be ideologically committed to this.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Not sure what watergate has to do w/ 9/11?


Ooo... I hope you never bring up Operation Northwoods.

[uk_dave]

I have conceded that CD was not involved. I think its a red herring. So lets take that out of the picture.

And yes, I do think some would be ideologically committed to this.

Some but not all?

What would be the motivation for the others?

[1337m4n]

Not sure what watergate has to do w/ 9/11?


The same thing Gary Webb has to do with 9/11.

But it's not about what it has to do with 9/11. Just answer the questions I gave you and you'll quickly see how extraordinarily unlikely it is that a conspiracy of this magnitude could've gone unexposed for over 6 years.

[HereticHulk]

Ooo... I hope you never bring up Operation Northwoods.

What does operation northwoods have to do with watergate?

[1337m4n]

What does operation northwoods have to do with watergate?

Exactly.:)

[PhantomWolf]

Gary Webb has no connection to 9/11. He was an example put forward by me as someone that was trying to blow the proverbial whistle and he killed himself with a .38 revolver 2x's in the back of the head.

He blew the whistle on the CIA in 1998 about an issue that then under went an investigation and was proven to be correct. So what then? They killed him for it 6 years later? I'd have thought if you were going to kill someone for "blowing the whistle" you'd do it a) before they blew it, and b) before any investigation. Not 6 years later.

eta: I guess at that rate Steve Coll better start watching his back. he might have a CIA hit squad turning up around 2011.

[MetalliSociety]

I haven't decided about anything yet.

Is that why you internet shouted LIHOP when you said you were leaving for some drinks?

[TC329]

I'm curious, how exactly is "prior knowledge" compatible with MIHOP?

I mean, it doesn't make sense. It's basically saying that the US KNEW al-Queada was going to attack...but then the US attacked itself instead?

insured their success and blocked investigations that would have uncovered the plot at the bare minimum and even then assisted in the attacks by capitalizing and placing bombs inside of 3 skyscrapers and insuring no fighter jets stopped any flight from it's target with the exception of Flight 93 and that was only because of the unexpected delay left them no choice.

[beachnut]

insured their success and blocked investigations that would have uncovered the plot at the bare minimum and even then assisted in the attacks by capitalizing and placing bombs inside of 3 skyscrapers and insuring no fighter jets stopped any flight from it's target with the exception of Flight 93 and that was only because of the unexpected delay left them no choice.
And no facts from you! Good job

Fantasy!

[uk_dave]

insured their success and blocked investigations that would have uncovered the plot at the bare minimum and even then assisted in the attacks by capitalizing and placing bombs inside of 3 skyscrapers and insuring no fighter jets stopped any flight from it's target with the exception of Flight 93 and that was only because of the unexpected delay left them no choice.


Whatcha talkin' about? You have spotted that there was a military stand down on 9-11 which allowed the wtc and pentagon attacks to go ahead, and yet they had no choice but to shoot down flight93 otherwise people would have noticed?

[DavidJames]

insured their success and blocked investigations that would have uncovered the plot at the bare minimum and even then assisted in the attacks by capitalizing and placing bombs inside of 3 skyscrapers and insuring no fighter jets stopped any flight from it's target with the exception of Flight 93 and that was only because of the unexpected delay left them no choice.Speaking of making claims without evidence, don't forget those claims you made about physics in this (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3332778&postcount=173)tread.

[Pardalis]

I'm inclined to think 9/11 was a LIHOP scenario.


Whatever happened to your CD theories?

I mean... Don't they look too much like CDs?

And what about the laws of physics, Hulk, what about the laws of physics!