9/11 CTs in general

[AMTMAN]

Germany made this experience and it is proven to be sufficient to allow the government to control this one tiny part of your personal life. Keep track of which country you're traveling to and where you're living. Social security, taxes, ... There are so many things that let you keep track of people. And from a US government perspective, it is still not enough. I don't want to be chipped, like my dog. There is absolutely no need to have a dark vision of the future, where I can be held responsible for everything I do that might be considered out of line.

It's not of anyones business, where I am, who's with me in the same room, same place, whatever. And no 'act' should have the power to change that. Did anyone of you READ the patriot act? The bottomline is pretty obvious... But americans don't seem to be bothered about it. Anything like this in germany and we'd have a civil war.

The law that was passed in germany was introduced to identify people who actually come out of our own families, groups, etc. What's the point of the patriot act?

Hate to break the news to you but I have to have my civil liberties trampled upon. You seem to have no problem with having to register with the local police when you move. That's one thing that is not in the Patriot Act. If the government tried that here every congressman in the country would have their phone line jammed with angry calls.

I'm not sure if you are playing devils advocate for fun or you really believe some of the non-sense you are peddling here. If it's the latter all I can say is put down the Jägermeister. Quite frankly I find it insulting that anyone with half a brain would believe the whole no plane theory.

[AMTMAN]

...very funny ;)

I guess you didn't get the point I was trying to make.

[Minadin]

That's exactly my point in discussions with ignorant germans. You get stuff like 'They don't even know where Austria is...'. My reply to that is most likely: 'Well... Do you know where Texas is?' - You can imagine the rest of the conversation. I always tell them that there's no need for an american to know where austria is, as long as a german doesn't know where giant TX is.

That's a pretty good point - I think a lot of people from Europe don't really understand the dynamic that exists here amongst the various states. It really is similar to a number of small countries all packed together - so in that way it's a lot like Europe, but the same language (for the most part) is spoken in each, so in that way it's quite different.

One thing I've noticed, which I think shows this difference between how people think of America and Europe, is that Americans, when asked, will tell you what state / metropolitan area they are from, whereas Europeans will almost always give you a country. When a European asks me where I'm from, they expect me to say "the U.S." and not "St. Louis" or "Missouri." But, giving an answer like that makes as much sense to us as someone from München telling you they are from "Europe". Even when they say, "I am from Germany" I suspect that the next question (at least in the minds) of most Americans would be, "Oh? What part?"*

In any event, we've drifted away from talking about conspiracies into talking about politics and social issues, and I apologize for the derail. <back on track> I think that conspiracy theorist culture does not reflect well on our society, and certainly helps to reinforce those stereotypes at which I take umbrage.


*(Unless they're a very small country - in my experience the smaller the country the funnier the response)

[slyjoe]

Name one. I can't think of any.

The key was generated by myself. So it is nothing but a random hash noone else has access to.

I don't use any crap like Windows and the key is in a protected environment. There is really no way for anybody to gain access to my e-mail.

Of course, I don't encrypt everything of it, because it requires the other party to offer a public key that I can use to encrypt the message to him/her. But the important messages I write are all encrypted.

I pay a lot of attention to the information I offer about myself and how I deal with it. There was a german law, after 9/11, that allows the government, on suspicion, to look into your private mail if you use a freemail provider. I don't do that, but if I did, I would certainly encrypt all of my messages.

You may want to research or think a little harder.

Brute force methods:
- Trial division
- Quadratic Sieve (QS)
- Multiple Polynomial Quadratic Sieve (MPQS)
- Double Large Prime Variation of the MPQS
- Number Field Sieve (NFS)
- Birthday Attack

Others:
Chosen Cipher Text Attack
Low Encryption Exponent Attack
Error Analysis Attack
Passphrase Length/Information Theory Attack
Keypress Snooping
Van Eck Radiation Snooping
Memory Space Snooping
Disk Cache Snooping
Packet Sniffing
Trojan Horse Attack
Reworked Code Attack

And these are just the PUBLICLY known forms of attack.

[andreasz]

You may want to research or think a little harder.

Brute force methods:
- Trial division
- Quadratic Sieve (QS)
- Multiple Polynomial Quadratic Sieve (MPQS)
- Double Large Prime Variation of the MPQS
- Number Field Sieve (NFS)
- Birthday Attack

Check this one.
http://www.iusmentis.com/technology/encryption/pgp/pgpattackfaq/asymmetric/

Either you don't know what you are talking about or you are just 'testing' me. Brute forcing a 2048bit GPG key is really pointless. It's like using a pencil to tear down a steel door. Check the MIPS table for the time you would need to guess the key.

AND if you manage to guess it, you will still need to guess the passphrase. This is why this method is considered secure.


Others:
Chosen Cipher Text Attack
Low Encryption Exponent Attack
Error Analysis Attack
Passphrase Length/Information Theory Attack
Keypress Snooping
Van Eck Radiation Snooping
Memory Space Snooping
Disk Cache Snooping
Packet Sniffing
Trojan Horse Attack
Reworked Code Attack

And these are just the PUBLICLY known forms of attack.

Most of that stuff works for faulty windows software. On an OpenBSD system it's just as pointless to try 'hacking' as for the GPG key... there are no known remote holes in OpenBSD. You can check on openbsd.org, if you don't know this operating system.

Behind OpenBSD, you can have almost any kind of software, operating system or architecture. That's almost immune to any kind of attack.

'almost' just because I have worked with IT security my entire life. Most people would call this unbreakable. Windows users most likely don't even know this kind of security.

[andreasz]

*arches a brow* andreas, I work in the intelligence community. I am VERY aware of the power of information. And as the majority of your posts seem to be against the current Patriot Act, from an admittedly cursory inspection, I will tell you this. If the government wants to read my personal email, they are welcome to, because I am one of those people who dislikes breaking the law and would never consider sending an email that, upon a cursory inspection, would seem to be intimating I intended harm, either physical or psychological to others.

The information I deal with on a semi-daily basis is orders of magnitude more important than the trivial details of my life, which the government knows all about anyway due to the exhaustive background investigation they conducted to give me my clearance.

That being said, if I simply stick to your example, I can see your point; I just don't agree with it. You seem to be intimating that I should encrypt all of my correspondence, regardless of how trivial, and I view that as the beginnings of acute paranoia. Quite simply, if I don't want information to be splattered all over the internet, I don't post it, either via email, blog, or forum. There are easier ways of safeguarding your information besides encrypting your entire life, the main one of which is simply don't say or do anything in a public manner you wouldn't want splashed everywhere. It's a matter of self control versus "protection of your information" that the majority of people I know do tend to practice instead of encrypting everything. I find my way of "protecting my information" infinitely less complicated than the way you are advocating, and as I have yet to have my identity stolen or to have anyone blackmail me, I would say it seems to be working. Should one or the other of those happen, I would take whatever steps I felt necessary to prevent it from happening again, but I rather doubt I would include encrypting all of my correspondence into it. Just my two cents.

That's exactly what I mean. I have a lot of email contact. For my company, to my employees, private mail... Lots of online-communication. I don't want to change the way I communicate with my people just because some law allows the government to spy on me. They can kiss my a** and give the decryption a shot ;)

It's a matter of principle to me. It's just a plugin for my mailclient, I don't even notice the encryption being done. I really like to piss of anybody trying to invade my privacy in any way.

That's why most of the stuff I consider important is from a software perspective bullet-proof.

[andreasz]

You may want to research or think a little harder.
Van Eck Radiation Snooping


I had to look that one up. I know this is possible, but a TFT screen doesn't give away too much radiation, does it? And if so, I am still in a safe environment, way out of range for an attack like this.

Very unlikely. And for the record... I wouldn't know how the monitor radiation would expose anything of value to an attacker...? As far as I understood the attack, if successful, it gathers information on what was being displayed on the screen.

Since there is only the framebuffer being sent to the monitor, I don't see any vulnerability there.

Could you explain if I just misunderstand this attack?

[AMTMAN]

Hate to break the news to you but I have to have my civil liberties trampled upon. .

Oooppss, I meant to say "Hate to break the news to you but I have yet to have my civil liberties trampled upon".

[andreasz]

...and I thought you were just a funny person ;)

[slyjoe]

Check this one.
http://www.iusmentis.com/technology/encryption/pgp/pgpattackfaq/asymmetric/

Either you don't know what you are talking about or you are just 'testing' me.

No. Why would I want to test you? This is, as the name implies, an EDUCATIONAL forum. I said to think of something other than a brute force attack. You said you couldn't think of one. I gave you examples.

Brute forcing a 2048bit GPG key is really pointless. It's like using a pencil to tear down a steel door. Check the MIPS table for the time you would need to guess the key.

True, assuming you don't know about non-public factoring algorithms, or the computing power available to run them.

AND if you manage to guess it, you will still need to guess the passphrase. This is why this method is considered secure.

Most of that stuff works for faulty windows software. On an OpenBSD system it's just as pointless to try 'hacking' as for the GPG key... there are no known remote holes in OpenBSD. You can check on openbsd.org, if you don't know this operating system.

Known being the key word. Actually, the Windows OS has very little to do with other modes of attack. Many of the attacks I listed have nothing to do with the operating system.

Behind OpenBSD, you can have almost any kind of software, operating system or architecture. That's almost immune to any kind of attack.

'almost' just because I have worked with IT security my entire life. Most people would call this unbreakable. Windows users most likely don't even know this kind of security.

Agreed; 90% of Windows users don't know how to spell security. In addition you are correct regarding PGP - it is very good. OpenBSD may be good for IT security, but IT security has very little to do with cryptography and the methods to defeat it.

In general, good security is more of a process than any specific piece of software. PGP is pretty good; but so far NO single piece of software or operating system can guarantee that a secure communication cannot be broken.

My only point, as I mentioned, was to try to be educational when you said you could not think of anything other than a brute force attack. Or were you just testing me? :)

[slyjoe]

I had to look that one up. I know this is possible, but a TFT screen doesn't give away too much radiation, does it? And if so, I am still in a safe environment, way out of range for an attack like this.

Very unlikely. And for the record... I wouldn't know how the monitor radiation would expose anything of value to an attacker...? As far as I understood the attack, if successful, it gathers information on what was being displayed on the screen.

Since there is only the framebuffer being sent to the monitor, I don't see any vulnerability there.

Could you explain if I just misunderstand this attack?

I think you understand it reasonably well. It does seem to be an unlikely way to break the users keys. If I remember correctly, this is really used when you have a period of time for snooping, where the attacker can actually see how you set up the private keys based on monitor radiation. Of course, just being able to "see" the screen before an email is encrypted would bypass any encryption. This is definitely not a trivial problem.

[funk de fino]

Real terrorism, for instance, doesn't occur very often. In germany we had the RAF, don't know if you heard of it. In short: Back in the 1970s, these people tried to make a point by planting explosives, assassinating 'capitalists', robbing banks (irony?) to protest against US-like imperialism and capitalism in general.

pardon??

how many people were killed in the 30 years of terrorism in Northern Ireland?

Basque seperatists in Spain?

get real

[andreasz]

pardon??

how many people were killed in the 30 years of terrorism in Northern Ireland?

Basque seperatists in Spain?

get real

You are perfectly right. Now. This is actual terror with a political background. But you can tell the difference, right? I can name tons of connections in the concepts of the IRA, the seperatists in spain, the german RAF and many others. First of all, they're all at war with their own government or the neighbors one. The guy next door might be one of them... It's kind of a suburban guerilla war.

Don't you find it amazing, that the united states war on terror goes all across the planet to Afghanistan? Name ONE terror victim on this planet whose terrorists weren't of their own origin.

Sorry for cutting to the chase this quickly. But I do believe that most of the terror from the middle eastern militia is unprofessional and executed by almost untrained people. There are always exceptions, sure. But most of the stuff you get on evil beard-wearing terrorists is just a load of crap to keep an enemy image alive.

Just my opinion.

[peteweaver]

Hello everyone,

I got to this forum after watching the Zeitgeist movie because I was curious about any opinions and of course discussions related to that matter.

First of all, I've gotta say that I am kind of disappointed, which is why i registered my own account. To all of the 'debunkers' here, this seems to be a great hobby. Instead of discussing theories and certain ideas, people are being mocked and all the replies they get on the things they post into this forum are unnecessary comments like 'Do I really need to watch that crap or are the first 5 minutes sufficient?'

Seriously, if you have anything to say, just do so... But I don't see the point of commenting on things you didn't even take a look at.

So. Anyway, when I read the postings on this website, since it was the first hit on google, I wanted to know what JREF is. Funny fact, it's an educational foundation. Mocking people like that without even taking a look at what the present doesn't sound that educated to me.


So, why am I writing this? I have some questions myself and I don't want any wannabee-educated-debunker replying on this without considering anything I post here.

But well, sorry about the long introduction, I'll cut to the chase now.

Here in germany we don't get too many of those conspiracy theories, because we ignore most of the ones coming from the united states... Most of them are not based on anything but crazy ideas, so most of this gets kind of filtered.

But there are still some things that get through, such as the 'Zeitgeist' movie and 'September Clues'.

1.) Nobody ever gave any reply on the question, as to how it is possible, that the beams of the WTC were cut in a certain way you're only going to find it, if a building was demolished on purpose. I saw the pictures in the newspaper and there is absoutely no way this could be happened by accident.
Let's just say the steel structure was weakend by the intense heat of the 'jet fuel'. It was not entirely weakened all across the building. So how is it possible that the building collapses along it's own axis, where the steel structure is most powerful? Try to break a steel bar. You might be able to bend it with a lot of power. Put try to break it pushing along the axis of the steel bar. All the theories and explanations I read on '911myths' and 'debunking911.com' and similar pages don't seem to have any structural engineer working on that (yes, I did read who it was from, but he is obviously not considering all the details), regardless of the formulas and drawings on those sites... There is no possible way for the columns and beams to fail simultaneously. And lets say it was just one giant physical coincidence... But twice? No way. I read a lot about the tube in a tube design and all those little details that we have to pay attention to. But the structure along its axis with all the concrete would have probably caused the building to tumble and fall at a certain point. But not for it to collapse into its own footprint. I know it didn't exactly do that... But a collapsing building, ALSO one with a tube in a tube design, needs to have structural damage all over it, not only in the top floors. And even under the weight of the top floors this would have looked differently. At least their would be more left of the steel core itself.

So much about that.

2.) Please visit www<dot>brasschecktv<dot>com<slash>page<slash>108<dot>html

(sorry about the format. Forum won't allow me to post links otherwise.)

and watch the first video. This guy is a video editor from Norway with more than 20 years of experience in video editing. Now please, be so kind and answer the following questions to me:

How is it possible, that the plane appears black in the shot? And don't come up with ideas like the sun being behind the object. Take a close look and you'll see that it is supposed to be white. For the people who insist that it is the sun being behind the object, you could explain to me why the plane appears black from both sides.

On one of the other 'authentic' videos, you can see the 'plane' crash into the WTC. The wings appear white, although we're standing right underneath it.

Well... There are several other videos and there's an audio analysis... There's even a nice cover-up for an incoming object that is hard to spot... But I cross-checked all these things shown in the analysis with the tapes I have at home, which are several years old.

There's one very interesting aspect about the undamaged nose of the plane and a probable explanation for that. I really want to see you 'debunk' this.


Watch it and PLEASE, be objective this time. I am not the kind of guy who jumps upon any kind of CT ********, but this stuff is pretty obvious and the images are real. So take a close look and give me an opinion.

Regards from germany.

Andreas

Regarding your comment:
1.) Nobody ever gave any reply on the question, as to how it is possible, that the beams of the WTC were cut in a certain way you're only going to find it, if a building was demolished on purpose. I saw the pictures in the newspaper and there is absoutely no way this could be happened by accident.

Ever heard of flame cutters ?

The steel columns were cut after the collapse during the clean up and search and rescue operation.

http://iridescent-designs.co.uk/images/wtc/flamecutter-wtc-4.jpg

How is it possible, that the plane appears black in the shot? And don't come up with ideas like the sun being behind the object. Take a close look and you'll see that it is supposed to be white. For the people who insist that it is the sun being behind the object, you could explain to me why the plane appears black from both sides.

Well, cameras do not accurately capture all light, and things can often be under / over exposed, and there's also such a thing as shadows... And as my friend's uncle was at the scene, witnessed flight 175 crash with his own eyes, and was injured by falling debris on that day, I'd take his version of events as correct...

[andreasz]

Regarding your comment:
Ever heard of flame cutters ?


Ever noticed, that these beams are actually being cut right across and not in any angle? Simple explanation... Why cut it in an angle? It takes longer and there's no point in doing it. That people cut it afterwards to get rid of the rubbish, is perfectly understandable. But even IF they cut it, they wouldn't have cut it the way you see the remaining beams and columns on the pictures.


Take a look at your absolutely straight cut:
http://www.lux-medien.com/cutter.jpg

[Sabrina]

That's exactly what I mean. I have a lot of email contact. For my company, to my employees, private mail... Lots of online-communication. I don't want to change the way I communicate with my people just because some law allows the government to spy on me. They can kiss my a** and give the decryption a shot ;)

It's a matter of principle to me. It's just a plugin for my mailclient, I don't even notice the encryption being done. I really like to piss of anybody trying to invade my privacy in any way.

That's why most of the stuff I consider important is from a software perspective bullet-proof.

No offense, andreas, but that's a very paranoid way to live.

As I stated before, if I don't want someone to splatter my personal business everywhere, I don't post it. My way is much simpler and much more guaranteed to work, and if it fails, I have no one but myself to blame, not some nebulous evil government.

Then too, I recognize that the level of freedom we had prior to 9/11 is partially what led to us being able to be attacked by Al Qaeda, and in order to gain a safer country to raise my children in, I am willing to give up some small freedoms. My main freedoms have not been curtailed in any way; I am still allowed to say what I wish, when I wish (barring slander or libel against others), I am not being harrassed by police, I am free to support whomever I feel will do the best job in politics, etc etc etc. The freedoms we have been asked to give up in the name of safety are not innumerable or untenable; they are minor, and the majority of Americans go through their lives unchanged and unaware that these safety measures have been put in place. The difference, as I see it, between you and I is that you seem to feel these small changes are severely curtailing your freedoms, when that is not the case at all. Speaking as someone who works "on the inside", so to speak, I have to say that you really seem to be overreacting. And when I say that, remember I am subject to the exact same laws as any other American, and even in addition to "laws" they may not be (I am subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice as well, and it is possible to tried twice for the same crime if you are tried as a civilian AND as a military member; it's rare, but it happens), and if I find it to be workable, why shouldn't you?

ETA: I forgot; andreas isn't in the US, but my point still stands as regards the "loss of freedoms" we've supposedly suffers.

[Sabrina]

You are perfectly right. Now. This is actual terror with a political background. But you can tell the difference, right? I can name tons of connections in the concepts of the IRA, the seperatists in spain, the german RAF and many others. First of all, they're all at war with their own government or the neighbors one. The guy next door might be one of them... It's kind of a suburban guerilla war.

Don't you find it amazing, that the united states war on terror goes all across the planet to Afghanistan? Name ONE terror victim on this planet whose terrorists weren't of their own origin.

Sorry for cutting to the chase this quickly. But I do believe that most of the terror from the middle eastern militia is unprofessional and executed by almost untrained people. There are always exceptions, sure. But most of the stuff you get on evil beard-wearing terrorists is just a load of crap to keep an enemy image alive.

Just my opinion.

So, simply because most terrorism is home-grown, that means terrorism from other countries is impossible?

That makes absolutely no sense in the real world.

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Don't you find it amazing, that the united states war on terror goes all across the planet to Afghanistan? Name ONE terror victim on this planet whose terrorists weren't of their own origin.
My friend who died on 9/11. A Chinese immigrant, recently married to her college sweetheart.

Andreasz: I'm putting you on ignore for being a total piece of [rule8]

I hope you [censored]

[JonnyFive]

My friend who died on 9/11. A Chinese immigrant, recently married to her college sweetheart.

What the hell is andreas even saying with that comment? That he believes all terror victims are killed by people from their home country? Is he seriously?

Andreasz: I'm putting you on ignore for being a total piece of [rule8]

I hope you [censored]

It's [rule 10] now... stupid re-numbered rules.

[funk de fino]

You are perfectly right. Now. This is actual terror with a political background. But you can tell the difference, right? I can name tons of connections in the concepts of the IRA, the seperatists in spain, the german RAF and many others. First of all, they're all at war with their own government or the neighbors one. The guy next door might be one of them... It's kind of a suburban guerilla war.

Bolded bit was as far as you needed to go.

there were british terrorists carrying out attacks on israel, al quieda in spain, richard reid the shoe bomber, UVF not at war with own govt or neighbours, lockerbie disaster among others

Don't you find it amazing, that the united states war on terror goes all across the planet to Afghanistan? Name ONE terror victim on this planet whose terrorists weren't of their own origin.

No I dont, AQ were based mainly in Afghanistan, were they just supposed to do nothing

Sorry for cutting to the chase this quickly. But I do believe that most of the terror from the middle eastern militia is unprofessional and executed by almost untrained people. There are always exceptions, sure. But most of the stuff you get on evil beard-wearing terrorists is just a load of crap to keep an enemy image alive.

try telling that to victims of 911, madrid bombing, kenya bombings etc

Just my opinion

and a pretty misinformed one if you ask me

[AMTMAN]

Ever noticed, that these beams are actually being cut right across and not in any angle? Simple explanation... Why cut it in an angle? It takes longer and there's no point in doing it. That people cut it afterwards to get rid of the rubbish, is perfectly understandable. But even IF they cut it, they wouldn't have cut it the way you see the remaining beams and columns on the pictures.


Take a look at your absolutely straight cut:
http://www.lux-medien.com/cutter.jpg

So andreasz, where are your pictures of the absolutely straight cut? Like so many other 9-11 CT's when you ask for information and given info you don't like you try and dismiss it. Quite frankly you really don't care about the "truth". What you care about is trying to confirm all your little wacky conspiracy theories.

I'm starting to think that the only reason you are here is to get people worked up. After all, you would have to be an idiot to believe some of the things that you have said on this board.

Another thing I find interesting is that on one hand you say that the terrorist acts of the Red Army Faction were "real". However you try and tell us that 9-11 was not. Why don't you try and prove to us that those terrorist acts by the RAF were "real" and not a vast conspiracy by the West German government.

[andreasz]

SpaceMonkey: I was talking about a country as a victim, not about a person.

Sabrina/funk<forgottherest>: It's not that it is impossible, but it still is a little odd that this does turn out to be that organized. If you want to piss off a country, you don't need to wreck the entire WTC in a well planned airstrike.

That's a way to shock people. If you want a maximum amount of civilian casualties, you'd crash an airliner at the superbowl. There are so many easier ways and more common ways of terrorism if you want a country to do your bidding.

In the US it is pretty easy do fit in with the other illegals and just be somewhere, work out evil plans and do evil things. You get a fake social security number, pay your regular taxes, don't receive any pension whatsoever, but for the government everything works fine. Millions of mexicans do it, so don't deny it.

It's just as easy to get a gun, due to your hilarious laws about firearms.

So... If an organized terrorist group of wants to destroy the system, they attack key figures. For example: They try to assassinate Bush, Cheney, they revolt in a way you can't trace them back. He's your next-door neighbor, such a nice guy, next thing you know is he exploded at the superbowl killing 5.000 people with a home-made nerve-gas.

Destroying the WTC is pointless. That's what I am saying. Do you think it's just a matter of ego? To SHOW what they are capable of IF they on the other hand could do things that would really CHANGE things?

Do you have any idea, how many people tried to assassinate Hitler during WW2? And where do you think, these people came from? The united states? Don't think so.

Those guys were 'terrorists' with ideals. Stauffenberg for example was one of them. This entire 9/11 story is such a big bunch of things nobody knows anything about for a fact, because people who are governments contractors actually get their employees to believe that Al Qaeda carried out the attack on WTC.

All you people saying that there would have been easier ways to bring down the WTC than TV fakery, all those who are sooo convinced that this happened exactly the way the official story claims it to be...

Why don't you think further? Wouldn't there have been easier ways for the 'terrorists' to achieve their goals? Think from their perspective. What ideals do these people have.... And what's an effective way to reach them?

Having the US' reputation as a wannabee-world-police at hand why would you carry out a strike like that? Because they're stupid? Because they're fundamentalist? Yeah right... Dream on. You can't give them that much credit to believe the well-organized plane-story and call them narrow-minded in the same sentence.

Apply some logic to your thinking. On both sides.

[slyjoe]

Ever noticed, that these beams are actually being cut right across and not in any angle? Simple explanation... Why cut it in an angle? It takes longer and there's no point in doing it. That people cut it afterwards to get rid of the rubbish, is perfectly understandable. But even IF they cut it, they wouldn't have cut it the way you see the remaining beams and columns on the pictures.


Take a look at your absolutely straight cut:
http://www.lux-medien.com/cutter.jpg

So all the "angled" cut beams were not done by clean up crews? And by this argument, we can say:

"Why THERMITE it in an angle? It takes longer, requires 150% of the THERMITE, and there's no point in doing it."

[twinstead]

andreasz with all due respect it is you who needs to apply some logic to your thinking. You show a complete and utter lack of understanding of geopolitics, history, and human nature.

How old are you?

[funk de fino]

country, you don't need to wreck the entire WTC in a well planned airstrike.

So... If an organized terrorist group of wants to destroy the system, they attack key figures. For example: They try to assassinate Bush, Cheney, they revolt in a way you can't trace them back. He's your next-door neighbor, such a nice guy, next thing you know is he exploded at the superbowl killing 5.000 people with a home-made nerve-gas.

Destroying the WTC is pointless. .

WTC is the symbol of american financial and capitalist strength, i think if they had killed bush or cheney it would have caused less of a kerfuffle


home made nerve gas

that is without doubt the stupidest thing i have seen in this thread yet

destroying the WTC made a lot of point and the fact that the wars are ongoing now are proof of it

you need to get a grip

how would you feel if i said that the bombing of dresden did not happen?

[twinstead]

The WTC is exactly one of the targets I would expect Al Queda to attack. How could anybody who is even a tad bit world aware think differently?

[slyjoe]

The WTC is exactly one of the targets I would expect Al Queda to attack. How could anybody who is even a tad bit world aware think differently?

EXACTLY. I remember getting on CNN.com right after they put up the picture of 175 coming in. I thought someone had hacked their web site. Finding out a real attack was underway, I immediately thought "Bin Laden". He had a *** on for the WTC for at least 9 years before 9/11.

[Cuddles]

That's a way to shock people.

Exactly. And that's what terrorists want to do. QED.

[andreasz]

It is sensational, but it caused a war that those people, that you claim did it, would have never been able to take. And those well-organized cells are so stupid that they don't know that there's no way of winning a war like that? They are willing to have their home-country destroyed, just because the US is looking for this one guy who did it?

The thing about the nervegas wasn't to be taken literally... It doesn't need to be homemade... In the US you can get guns and everything. It won't be a big deal for these well organized terrorists to smuggle in some more effective weapons, would it?

Of course the WTC is a symbol of capitalism. But what's the longterm effect? To 'teach' the US some respect? You could easily keep people living in the US, attacking businessmen, heads of big corporations, politicians... That's the way terror works most effectively. To attack the persons in charge. Not their material symbols they can easily rebuild. Everybody knew from the first day on 9/11, that there will be a new WTC, bigger, better, stronger, blablabla...

Groups that are organized in splinters can easily attack individuals and do some real harm to them to keep those in fear who are responsible for the situation at hand. Don't you ever think about WHY so many people doubt that this was an act of terrorism?

About the Dresden bombings. The british never denied it... It was just a 'misunderstanding'. A big lie of course, it was just revenge for the V2 attacks on London... But there's no big secret about that. Those are facts. This happened at war times, never forget that.

[JonnyFive]

(snip)

So... If an organized terrorist group of wants to destroy the system, they attack key figures. For example: They try to assassinate Bush, Cheney, they revolt in a way you can't trace them back. He's your next-door neighbor, such a nice guy, next thing you know is he exploded at the superbowl killing 5.000 people with a home-made nerve-gas.

(snip)

I might be reading too much into what might just be a toss-out "scare" comment, but your understanding of biochemical warfare is substantially lacking.

For one thing, you don't just "make" some nerve gas - very few compounds are lethal in the doses that make them appropriate for aerosol dispersal as chemical weapons. All of those compounds are difficult to obtain, difficult to manufacture, and many have a limited shelf life.

Moreover, an open environment like a stadium would be highly inefficient, requiring larger quantities of the substance, and multiple dispersal points, to facilitate the sort of casualties you note.

If you have any interest in researching biochemical terrorism, might I suggest Lethal Mists (http://www.amazon.com/Lethal-Mists-Introduction-Biological-Terrorism/dp/1590331362/ref=sr_1_1/102-5476714-3862507?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187363957&sr=8-1)? I read it for a seminar on terrorism as a senior at my last university, and found it to be quite informative. More than anything else, it helped me understand why terrorist and insurgent groups continue to choose to use conventional weapons rather than try to go down the biochemical route.

[AMTMAN]

Well andreasz I'm still waiting for you to prove that the so called "terrorist" attacks by the RAF were not just some plot by the West German government.

[Dumb All Over]

The WTC is exactly one of the targets I would expect Al Queda to attack. How could anybody who is even a tad bit world aware think differently?
Not only that...weren't there two other targets that day? The WTC was not the only target (as andreasz would like us to believe).

[tarrou]

It is sensational, but it caused a war that those people, that you claim did it, would have never been able to take. And those well-organized cells are so stupid that they don't know that there's no way of winning a war like that? They are willing to have their home-country destroyed, just because the US is looking for this one guy who did it?

[...]

Of course the WTC is a symbol of capitalism. But what's the longterm effect? To 'teach' the US some respect? You could easily keep people living in the US, attacking businessmen, heads of big corporations, politicians... That's the way terror works most effectively. To attack the persons in charge. Not their material symbols they can easily rebuild. Everybody knew from the first day on 9/11, that there will be a new WTC, bigger, better, stronger, blablabla...

Groups that are organized in splinters can easily attack individuals and do some real harm to them to keep those in fear who are responsible for the situation at hand. Don't you ever think about WHY so many people doubt that this was an act of terrorism?


And this leads to 'No planes hit the WTC' how?

As charming and insightful as your musings on IT security and world politics may be, I would like to bring you back to your initial claim that you are convinced that no planes were involved in the attack on WTC.

You started out asking for comments. You have received plenty, including some from actual witnesses to the second impact.

Early on you claimed that:


But this video analysis is pretty new and the guy really makes some good points. And regarding the eye-witnesses who actually saw the planes... After all I have read on this matter, all I have seen and everybody I have talked to, I am (by now) convinced, that there were never ever any planes on that day.Now tell us: Have the comments made any impression on you at all?
Are you still convinced that no planes hit the WTC?

If so, I really think you owe an explanation as to how the criminal masterminds of this horrible conspiracy could possibly come up with a plan so absurd, so full of needless risks, and so incredibly stupid that it boggles my mind to even think about it.

You argue that the WTC was an unlikely target for foreign terrorists.

Please make a consistent argument as to why your 'No planes'-theory would be a likely choice for the men and women behind the greatest scam in history?

ETA: Or are you 'just asking questions'?

[andreasz]

For one thing, you don't just "make" some nerve gas - very few compounds are lethal in the doses that make them appropriate for aerosol dispersal as chemical weapons. All of those compounds are difficult to obtain, difficult to manufacture, and many have a limited shelf life.


In know that. It was just an example for some evil guy doing evil things. No substance in that whatsoever. I was just saying that it is not that hard to inflict damage.

[Sabrina]

It is sensational, but it caused a war that those people, that you claim did it, would have never been able to take. And those well-organized cells are so stupid that they don't know that there's no way of winning a war like that? They are willing to have their home-country destroyed, just because the US is looking for this one guy who did it?

One of terrorisms strengths, paradoxically, is that it does not require a "well-organized cell", andreas. Al Qaeda is not a well-organized group; it is highly fragmented, for lack of a better term, into INDEPENDENT cells that do not necessarily follow orders from on high. Not to mention, they can come from any country, anywhere. Don't make the mistake of assuming everyone in Al Qaeda is from the Middle East; quite a few can call countries in Europe, Africa, South America, and even North America home. All that is required is believing in the ideal advanced by Al Qaeda. You don't even need to follow the Islamic faith, necessarily.

Groups that are organized in splinters can easily attack individuals and do some real harm to them to keep those in fear who are responsible for the situation at hand. Don't you ever think about WHY so many people doubt that this was an act of terrorism?

Who is doubting this was an act of terrorism besides the so-called "Truth Movement"? And please don't quote polls saying 1/3 of Americans think the government knew more about 9/11 than they let on; believing the government might have withheld information is a far cry from believing the government had a hand in 9/11.

[Sabrina]

Al Qaeda knew exactly what they were attacking on 9/11. The major issues OBL had with the US was our riches and our military strength being used in ways he felt were an attempt to subvert the Islamic faith. And he knew that the government was, at least nominally, responsible for both. Hence the attack on a symbol of financial strength (the WTC), the military (the Pentagon) and the government (the White House or the Capitol, if 93 had reached its currently accepted target).

Makes perfect sense to me.

[Dumb All Over]

They are willing to have their home-country destroyed, just because the US is looking for this one guy who did it?

The hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Lebanon. Did the U.S. destroy these countries?

[andreasz]

And this leads to 'No planes hit the WTC' how?

As charming and insightful as your musings on IT security and world politics may be, I would like to bring you back to your initial claim that you are convinced that no planes were involved in the attack on WTC.

You started out asking for comments. You have received plenty, including some from actual witnesses to the second impact.

Now tell us: Have the comments made any impression on you at all?
Are you still convinced that no planes hit the WTC?


You're right. We are kinda off-topic here.




If so, I really think you owe an explanation as to how the criminal masterminds of this horrible conspiracy could possibly come up with a plan so absurd, so full of needless risks, and so incredibly stupid that it boggles my mind to even think about it.


The plan is not that stupid actually. Most of the people in the united states are amazed by television and they watch it all the time. They take everything that comes out of this box for real and once you planted this concept in peoples minds, it's quite hard to get it out of there, even using the same methods. People tend to believe what they saw. That's how the human mind is designed to do.

Nature never intended us to watch television and animated films that just seem real. The idea is not bad at all. And for now it works out pretty well.

You argue that the WTC was an unlikely target for foreign terrorists.

Please make a consistent argument as to why your 'No planes'-theory would be a likely choice for the men and women behind the greatest scam in history?

The american people are proud of their symbols of wealth. The WTC was one of them. A terrorist attack is not against pride, and if so, just secondary. The idea is not to humiliate but to achieve political goals.

Using the WTC as a target from a government perspective is a good choice because it angers people. It gets them to support the war in iraq, which is completely pointless (or do any of you support that war?). It demonstrates, that force is necessary to remove those terrorists from their caves (!).

It can be shown on live television for everybody to see. The twin towers are a perfect target for a hoax. You can't capture a terrorist attack on tape because you're going to be there before.

So you choose a target big and famous enough and of course one that you can hit twice, so the second one will be on live TV.

[AMTMAN]

Still waiting for you to prove that the so called "terrorist" attacks by the RAF were not just some plot by the West German government. Just like I'm wondering when you are going to produce those pictures of the striaght cuts on the WTC I-beams.

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

And this leads to 'No planes hit the WTC' how?

As charming and insightful as your musings on IT security and world politics may be, I would like to bring you back to your initial claim that you are convinced that no planes were involved in the attack on WTC.

You started out asking for comments. You have received plenty, including some from actual witnesses to the second impact.

Early on you claimed that:

Now tell us: Have the comments made any impression on you at all?
Are you still convinced that no planes hit the WTC?

What's funny too (funny in a sad way) is how ANGRY and hostile he got when anyone DARED to bring up eye-witnesses who saw the planes. Because of course his blurry postage stamp youtube video converted from NTSC to PAL to NTSC to PAL to XVID to Paper Flip Book to FLV is all the proof he needs.

I seriously think this guy is not legitimately here to discuss, and is either only here to rile us up... OR he's a 12 year old who's repeating the 4th grade... yet again.

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Don't forget Al Qaeda already tried to attack the WTC in 1993.

[tarrou]

You're right. We are kinda off-topic here.
It can be shown on live television for everybody to see. The twin towers are a perfect target for a hoax. You can't capture a terrorist attack on tape because you're going to be there before.

So you choose a target big and famous enough and of course one that you can hit twice, so the second one will be on live TV.

But why claim that planes hit the wtc at all, if no planes was involved in this gigantic conspiracy?

btw:
Are you still convinced that no planes hit the WTC?
Have any of the comments in this thread made an impression on you?

[andreasz]

But why claim that planes hit the wtc at all, if no planes was involved in this gigantic conspiracy?

Is that addressed to me? I don't understand the question. Did I say planes were involved?


btw:
Are you still convinced that no planes hit the WTC?
Have any of the comments in this thread made an impression on you?

I've got to admit I am not sure what to believe. From a moral perspective I feel really bad for the victims of this attack. If there were planes involved and I am sitting here, in a distance, claiming there weren't, I could perfectly understand these people being pissed off.

On the other hand, I find the research of september clues very conclusive. There are so many things 'fitting' in these videos that makes it real hard to ignore them. Did any of you guys watch the 5th and the 6th part of it? The thing with the audio glitch is really unbelievable.

Well, as some of you might have guessed, I didn't come here to convert people to my theory, I wanted some hard proof to debunk this theory. All that is basically left are the eye-witnesses.

I'll just leave it with that and hope for somebody to shine some more light on that subject as soon as there is something with substance. From both sides.

[Corsair 115]

About the Dresden bombings. The british never denied it... It was just a 'misunderstanding'. A big lie of course, it was just revenge for the V2 attacks on London...False. Dresden was just another nighttime area bombing raid that Bomber Command conducted, no different in planning and execution than the many such raids which preceded it. The only difference is that the unusual atmospheric and weather conditions allowed the formation of a firestorm.

Contrary to what some claim, Dresden was not a tranquil city devoid of military production. By 1945 there were two companies in the city which repaired aircraft engines and parts, and there were 24 other armament and engineering firms which made items such as small arms and ammunition, machine tools, radio receivers and transmitters for ships and aircraft, electric generators and motors for U-boats, cameras and lenses for U-boat periscopes, amongst other things. The city was also an important transportation centre with many railroad repair depots and yards.

The only reason for the high casualty figures in the city from the raid was because of the firestorm. Had weather conditions been a little different, the firestorm would not have happened and the casualties would have been no worse than similar raids on Berlin or other German cities.

[andreasz]

False. Dresden was just another nighttime area bombing raid that Bomber Command conducted, no different in planning and execution than the many such raids which preceded it. The only difference is that the unusual atmospheric and weather conditions allowed the formation of a firestorm.

Contrary to what some claim, Dresden was not a tranquil city devoid of military production. By 1945 there were two companies in the city which repaired aircraft engines and parts, and there were 24 other armament and engineering firms which made items such as small arms and ammunition, machine tools, radio receivers and transmitters for ships and aircraft, electric generators and motors for U-boats, cameras and lenses for U-boat periscopes, amongst other things. The city was also an important transportation centre with many railroad repair depots and yards.

The only reason for the high casualty figures in the city from the raid was because of the firestorm. Had weather conditions been a little different, the firestorm would not have happened and the casualties would have been no worse than similar raids on Berlin or other German cities.

Well. I would have to backcheck on that and ask my brother. He knows a lot about the Dresden bombings... But a claim like that never occured. I know Dresden as a revenge strike by the british.

[Dumb All Over]

...All that is basically left are the eye-witnesses.

I'll just leave it with that and hope for somebody to shine some more light on that subject as soon as there is something with substance. From both sides.
Are you saying the eye-witness evidence has no substance?

[andreasz]

Are you saying the eye-witness evidence has no substance?

Of course I am saying that. And if you think about that for more than 2 seconds you might realize that eye-witnesses are worth nothing against millions of viewers on television.

Imagine a few thousand people claiming that Hurricane Katrina was summoned by 20 bearded men gathered in a circle. Who gives a damn about eye-witnesses?

You can claim anything you want. Have it on tape, have others see what you saw or your witnessing is worth nothing.

And please, don't give me a moral lesson now about calling people liars and all that crap... An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea. Regardless of how your personal opinion towards eye-witnesses is, nowadays, one has to accept the fact that this has no value at all.

[Mr. Skinny]

Well. I would have to backcheck on that and ask my brother. He knows a lot about the Dresden bombings... But a claim like that never occured. I know Dresden as a revenge strike by the british.
I think the Dresden "bombings" were actually the work of a group of serial arsonists and explosives experts trying to make the Allies look bad.

Do we have any film or tape of a bomb actually falling out of the sky onto a building? I only ask because we can't believe the eyewitnesses.

[Drudgewire]

The thing with the audio glitch is really unbelievable.

...






...






Nah... too easy. :)

[dudalb]

Regardless of how your personal opinion towards eye-witnesses is, nowadays, one has to accept the fact that this has no value at all.

So Eye Witnesses have no value at all as evidence?
I suggest you tell that to any Lawyer,and then step back as he laughs right in your face.
Sheesh,you troofers are getting sillier by the minute.

[AMTMAN]

Of course I am saying that. And if you think about that for more than 2 seconds you might realize that eye-witnesses are worth nothing against millions of viewers on television.

Imagine a few thousand people claiming that Hurricane Katrina was summoned by 20 bearded men gathered in a circle. Who gives a damn about eye-witnesses?

You can claim anything you want. Have it on tape, have others see what you saw or your witnessing is worth nothing.

And please, don't give me a moral lesson now about calling people liars and all that crap... An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea. Regardless of how your personal opinion towards eye-witnesses is, nowadays, one has to accept the fact that this has no value at all.

So I guess those that witnessed the RAF's acts of terror have no value. What they saw was worthless. Your words not mine. I'm wondering why you you still won't address this issues along with the issue of the beams I bought up. Are you afraid to do so?

[andreasz]

AMTMAN: I have been ignoring your BS for a reason.

dudalb: As I told others on this forum before, you should really work on your selective perception.

So, once again, since many of you seem to need the important part of a sentence STRESSED, I will have to quote myself.

"An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea."

You see, right in the middle of that sentence, it says "concerning a matter that big". If this is not clear enough, here you go:

An eye-witness, concerning a matter, as big as a hurricane, the destruction of a huge building, a mass killing or anything else that affects a certain amount of lives, is worth NOTHING.

[Horatius]

Imagine a few thousand people claiming that Hurricane Katrina was summoned by 20 bearded men gathered in a circle. Who gives a damn about eye-witnesses?

You can claim anything you want. Have it on tape, have others see what you saw or your witnessing is worth nothing.




But we don't have thousands of eyewitnesses claiming they saw something different from what was on TV - they claim they saw exactly what the millions of others saw on TV! So you seem to have just debunked yourself.

[twinstead]

andreasz you keep insisting that eye-witnesses are nothing, it needs to be on tape.

Well, it IS on tape, and as a matter of fact thousands of eye witnesses corroborate the tape.

What exactly do YOU consider as proof that something actually happened?

[Dumb All Over]

Of course I am saying that. And if you think about that for more than 2 seconds you might realize that eye-witnesses are worth nothing against millions of viewers on television.
To give you the benefit of a doubt, I thought about it for 4 seconds. Millions of television viewers saw a missile in the form of a hijacked commercial airliner blast into the south tower. It must be true. They saw it on TV.

Imagine a few thousand people claiming that Hurricane Katrina was summoned by 20 bearded men gathered in a circle. Who gives a damn about eye-witnesses?
"Claiming" is different than "witnessing". If a few thousand people witnessed 20 bearded men summoning Katrina, I think we would have to examine that situation more seriously. Of course, nothing like that has ever been claimed or witnessed.

You can claim anything you want. Have it on tape, have others see what you saw or your witnessing is worth nothing.

And please, don't give me a moral lesson now about calling people liars and all that crap... An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea. Regardless of how your personal opinion towards eye-witnesses is, nowadays, one has to accept the fact that this has no value at all.
It sounds like a moral lesson is exactly what you need. Not only are you calling the eyewitnesses liars, you're calling the millions of TV witnesses liars as well.

[twinstead]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that in andreasz's world, there is no way to prove anything happens no matter how many people witnessed it, or how much of it was televised or taped.

Every event, no matter how well-documented, is totally open to interpretation by anybody no matter what.

I think somebody has watched too many Matrix movies.

[slyjoe]

...snip

An eye-witness, concerning a matter, as big as a hurricane, the destruction of a huge building, a mass killing or anything else that affects a certain amount of lives, is worth NOTHING.

Stundied.

[AMTMAN]

AMTMAN: I have been ignoring your BS for a reason.



Is that what you call it when someone asks you a legitaimate question and you have no answer? Or at least an answer that is logical.

You really are a joke. You somehow beleive that one terrorist act is "real" but one that was wittnessed by scores of people is not. Please tell me the difference between what the RAF did and what AL Queda did. While you are at it show us those pictures. Let me guess, you have no answers do you.

What are you afraid of andreasz?

[Mr. Skinny]

AMTMAN: I have been ignoring your BS for a reason.

dudalb: As I told others on this forum before, you should really work on your selective perception.

So, once again, since many of you seem to need the important part of a sentence STRESSED, I will have to quote myself.

"An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea."

You see, right in the middle of that sentence, it says "concerning a matter that big". If this is not clear enough, here you go:

An eye-witness, concerning a matter, as big as a hurricane, the destruction of a huge building, a mass killing or anything else that affects a certain amount of lives, is worth NOTHING.
So, the bombing of Dresden wasn't "concerning a matter that big" then?

[Corsair 115]

Well. I would have to backcheck on that and ask my brother. He knows a lot about the Dresden bombings... But a claim like that never occured. Which claim? The fact is the RAF could not create firestorms on command; if they could, they would have quickly burned to the ground a half-dozen or so German cities after Hamburg in 1943, and that just might have knocked Germany out of the war. But in all the bombing raids conducted by both sides during WWII, there are perhaps no more than six cases where firestorms were created. That's a very low percentage, and this would indicate that firestorms were very rare and unusual events.

I know Dresden as a revenge strike by the british.And how do you know this?

[twinstead]

So, the bombing of Dresden wasn't "concerning a matter that big" then?


Yea, only 20 or 30 thousand people. Not that big a matter.

[Drudgewire]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that in andreasz's world, there is no way to prove anything happens no matter how many people witnessed it, or how much of it was televised or taped.
That's not true at all. It's very easy to prove something to a truther, just tell them something they already believe. :)

[twinstead]

That's not true at all. It's very easy to prove something to a truther, just tell them something they already believe. :)

Ah, I did forget the one exception to the rule. :blush:

[Dumb All Over]

If a tree falls in the forest and an eyewitness sees it, does it make a sound?

[Dumb All Over]

The above post was brought to you by Dumb All Over. Thank you very much.

[twinstead]

Your humor has been reported to the NWO section commander. Please report to your quadrant headquarters immediately.

[andreasz]

Why do I feel the urge to start half of my postings here with "As I said before" and such?

So, anyway... First of all I wouldn't call myself a "truther". Second, I said before that I find it hard to believe anything about that 9/11 matter.

The eye-witnesses support the TV story and vice versa. But the official story on TV somehow got into the crossfire a lot. And SOME of those videos really got me thinking. Probably you are so used to people that are amazed by some BS very easily.

Please don't mistake me for one of these guys. I did not expect to get that kind of feedback when I first posted here.

And it's not about my world or my specific perspective. To most of the people I 'shared' these videos with to discuss them, noone offended me in any way. Skeptic, though... But none of them started 'debunking' right away. Not, because they're not critical thinkers, but most probably because they are not that much used to conspiracy theories like you guys are.

Before you advise me to discuss these things with guys on youtube, where I will most likely get a lot of positive feedback, try to not think of everybody posting one or another theory (that you might already know) as a complete moron.

It's not that hard to convince me of something. Until a few weeks ago, I was totally convinced that everything went the way the official story described it.

Now, the Zeitgeist movie is not the first conspiracy theory I stepped across, but to me, it was the first one that had some points... After digging a little further into that, I found those 'september clues' and wanted to hear some reasonable debunking or support, and not only the retarded typo-laden 'yeah man, way to go!' of some 16 year-old idiot who doesn't question anything.

So, for those who are really interested in what I am thinking now, after reading some statements, I repeat myself another time, that I am not really sure what to believe.

I can't take the video as a proof, because nowadays, it's pretty easy to deceive my eyes. Not because of my bad vision but because I would really have one hell of a hard life paying attention to the most tiny detail of every news report.

However, there are people who discover these tiny glitches. Some of them just come out of thin air and are based on nothing but a crazy idea.

The september clues video somehow got me thinking because of those details I mentioned in this thread several times.

- the nose-out on the fox tape. I compared two screenshots of the video myself. The one of the plane before it touches the tower and the one afterwards. Aligning those images and considering the chances that the same pixel alignment just happens to show up on two different places exactly the way the guy described, really got me thinking.

So. That's why I compared that myself. I did read the debunking911 version and the official explanation, but I can't think of any way that those pictures make a perfect match.

I wouldn't even have noticed that nose-out part if I hadn't been pointed at it.

- The framerate thing and the plane skipping across the screen.

I kind of debunked this myself, at least I found a possible explanation why this occurs, but stilll nothing detailed on that, except for corsair's statements, who pretty much agrees with me on that framerate part.

- The audio comparison of the tv networks and the audio blips are also something that got me thinking. What would be the reason for that?

There's much more in these videos and on the ones I have at home, that makes me think what I saw wasn't as real as I thought it would be.

So for now, I am pretty sure that I don't know what happened there, and I'd really appreciate it if people would keep their judgement concerning my person and my background for themselves. If you want to know, what I do, just ask me. 'Suggesting', I just might be a retarded 12 year old repeating 4th grade for the third time, seems really impolite to me.

I speak three languages fluently and I am not a native english speaker, how stupid can I be?

Not, that I want to measure intelligence with the knowledge of foreign languages, but there were so many disrespectful and insulting postings, that make me want to leave this forum as quickly as I joined it.

So, one more 'as I said before': I'll just leave it with that. I've got my feedback, that's exactly what I wanted, if I filter the unwanted crap out that I got here. I hope that some of the unanswered questions will be answered soon, I'll just have to wait until there's some more convenient criticism or support on those parts I am still uncertain about.

regards.

Andreas

[twinstead]

Andreas I don't think anybody here is accusing you of being stupid. I for one am impressed by anybody who has the command of a foreign tongue like you do English.

That said, I for one think you are simply a young ideologically charged German. I've lived in Germany and I have seen many of you. Smart, but emotionally attached to a world view that sometimes seems a little...well...irrational to others.

This is nothing personal.

[Dr Harry Rein]

Of course I am saying that. And if you think about that for more than 2 seconds you might realize that eye-witnesses are worth nothing against millions of viewers on television.

Imagine a few thousand people claiming that Hurricane Katrina was summoned by 20 bearded men gathered in a circle. Who gives a damn about eye-witnesses?

You can claim anything you want. Have it on tape, have others see what you saw or your witnessing is worth nothing.

And please, don't give me a moral lesson now about calling people liars and all that crap... An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea. Regardless of how your personal opinion towards eye-witnesses is, nowadays, one has to accept the fact that this has no value at all.

Except in this case, the eyewitness agree with the video evidence. Planes hit the WTC towers. And we are not talking about just a few. There were probably thousands of New Yorkers that saw the second plane hit, because every one was watching the north tower burn. And not a single witness has come forward claiming that the explosion in the south tower was not caused by a plane.

Keep in mind that there were quite a few amateur videos taken that day, that could not possibly have been manipulated or altered by the major television networks. They all show the same thing.

Besides, even if it were possible for the conspirators to alter the video from the news agencies (and if you believe that, then I don't think you understand how the news media works in the U.S.), how could they be sure that they could capture each and every amateur video? Suppose just one leaked out that showed a complete absence of a plane hitting the building? If you were planning this conspiracy, could you really count on fooling every eye witness, and every amateur videographer? Who would take such a stupid, unnecessary risk ?

[Dumb All Over]

I speak three languages fluently and I am not a native english speaker, how stupid can I be?


Do you really want an answer to this question?

[stateofgrace]

Of course I am saying that. And if you think about that for more than 2 seconds you might realize that eye-witnesses are worth nothing against millions of viewers on television.

Imagine a few thousand people claiming that Hurricane Katrina was summoned by 20 bearded men gathered in a circle. Who gives a damn about eye-witnesses?

You can claim anything you want. Have it on tape, have others see what you saw or your witnessing is worth nothing.

And please, don't give me a moral lesson now about calling people liars and all that crap... An eye-witness is, concerning a matter that big, an outmoded idea. Regardless of how your personal opinion towards eye-witnesses is, nowadays, one has to accept the fact that this has no value at all.

I know you are leaving, which is a shame, because in all likeliness you will not see nor answer my question, but I would like to ask it anyway.

Is this really, seriously, your vision of Al Qaeda?

[andreasz]

Do you really want an answer to this question?

Never mind... I didn't expect you to know what a rhetorical question is :)

[twinstead]

I think the tables can be turned on you, andreasz.

Do you think it is possible for people as intelligent as you, just as world aware, just as moral, to hold a diametrically opposed world view to yours?

[andreasz]

Is this really, seriously, your vision of Al Qaeda?

Certainly not. This was just something that got into my mind when I thought of the evil terrorist image that was called into existence. And it exists in so many heads by now, that I described it that way.

[stateofgrace]

Certainly not. This was just something that got into my mind when I thought of the evil terrorist image that was called into existence. And it exists in so many heads by now, that I described it that way.

Do you actually believe there is such a thing as Islamic terror groups, seriously?

[andreasz]

I think the tables can be turned on you, andreasz.

Do you think it is possible for people as intelligent as you, just as world aware, just as moral, to hold a diametrically opposed world view to yours?

Of course it can. I think everybody gets into discussions like these all the time, unless he or she avoids it. The question is not if the people can have the same impression of a world or the exact opposite. There are too many factors playing a role here. The media, your social network, your personal impression of a situation... There are many people who just keep these opinions to themselves because they want to avoid confrontation, because they are well aware of how different impressions cause different points of view.

I am really sick of people not having any opinion and never giving any statements, just because they're afraid they might offend others with that and no longer be everybodys darling...

But I don't need to tell you that ;) You know it by now.

[twinstead]

staetofgrace you are getting into some serious issues asking somebody like andreasz a question like that.

Islamic terror, and terror in general, while obviously existent has to be minimized in his eyes.

I predict his answer will be "yes, but they're not the threat they're made out to be. And besides, it's America's fault they exist in the first place"

[twinstead]

But I don't need to tell you that ;) You know it by now.

LOL ;)

[andreasz]

Do you actually believe there is such a thing as Islamic terror groups, seriously?

I know for a fact that there are. I even have a friend that was indirectly involved with one without even knowing it.

But most of the islamic terror acts I know are acts of desperation. People who lost their socail life, their family, their pride. These are most likely the ones blowing themselves up in front of an embassy. As you may know, we have a lot of turkish people here in germany. Some of them practising islamic faith, some of them not practising anything but calling themselves muslims anyway.

Many people coming from islamic families get a feedback from their home countries and also many of them know about terrorist organizations. But as I said before, I consider them very unprofessional and desperate. And desperation and loss of hope is most likely the reason for an act of terror.

[twinstead]

I know for a fact that there are. I even have a friend that was indirectly involved with one without even knowing it.

But most of the islamic terror acts I know are acts of desperation. People who lost their socail life, their family, their pride. These are most likely the ones blowing themselves up in front of an embassy. As you may know, we have a lot of turkish people here in germany. Some of them practising islamic faith, some of them not practising anything but calling themselves muslims anyway.

Many people coming from islamic families get a feedback from their home countries and also many of them know about terrorist organizations. But as I said before, I consider them very unprofessional and desperate. And desperation and loss of hope is most likely the reason for an act of terror.

While terrorists like you describe DO exist, there is also a large network of professional terrorists who ply their trade for other reasons than purely emotional ones.

Americans, and Westerners in general aren't the only people on Earth who worship money, and who do things that on the outside appear to have relatively honorable motives but actually are just about the cash and power.

There are imperialistic terrorists, there are idealistic terrorists, there are greedy terrorists, every motive under the sun.

Al Queda is a professional terrorist organization. The are a force to be reckoned with and a serious threat to me and my family no matter what 'reason's they have to kill us.

[andreasz]

And besides, it's America's fault they exist in the first place"

blah. It's no countrys 'fault', how would that be possible? Germany is just as capitalist as the united states. Though we do have a social network with public health insurance and welfare. But the principle is quite similar.

Germany would be quite an easy target, don't you think?

I wouldn't say that they are not a threat. I am just not giving them as much credit as many of you do. Maybe, because I know a lot of people of islamic faith and their networks.

I don't really like any kind of religious attitude. In my opinion, people go to war way too often because of religious hatred. George Carlin put that into words in one of his shows really perfectly.

But, just to get back to the point... Yes, I do think, that those terrorists you are talking about are just as dangerous as any american who could just walk into a store and buy a gun and ammunition.

[stateofgrace]

I know for a fact that there are. I even have a friend that was indirectly involved with one without even knowing it.

But most of the islamic terror acts I know are acts of desperation. People who lost their socail life, their family, their pride. These are most likely the ones blowing themselves up in front of an embassy. As you may know, we have a lot of turkish people here in germany. Some of them practising islamic faith, some of them not practising anything but calling themselves muslims anyway.

Many people coming from islamic families get a feedback from their home countries and also many of them know about terrorist organizations. But as I said before, I consider them very unprofessional and desperate. And desperation and loss of hope is most likely the reason for an act of terror.

This is the point. Do you agree the US; through her foreign policies have fuelled this desperation? Would you say that this desperation is so highly charged that individuals would subscribe to the ideology of Al Qaeda?

Please remember that it is the sworn goal of this ideology not only to drive the US from Saudi Arabia but to actually bring the Islamic struggle to the global stage.

So would desperation, driven by US foreign policy fuel this ideology or are there other factors involved?

[twinstead]

Germany would be quite an easy target, don't you think?


Quite frankly, if Germany would have been the lucky recipient of a 911-style attack the attitude of the average German would be quite different than it is today.

But, just to get back to the point... Yes, I do think, that those terrorists you are talking about are just as dangerous as any american who could just walk into a store and buy a gun and ammunition.

That American who walked into a store to buy a gun wouldn't have the capacity of killing thousands of people. There are domestic terrorists whom I fear, but it's the virulent Islamic type that is the one that scares me the most.

[andreasz]

Al Queda is a professional terrorist organization. The are a force to be reckoned with and a serious threat to me and my family no matter what 'reason's they have to kill us.

Due to its structure of semi-autonomous cells, al-Qaeda's size and degree of responsibility for particular attacks are difficult to establish. However, this may also be because its size and degree are exaggerated. Although the governments opposed to al-Qaeda claim that it has worldwide reach,[16] other analysts have suggested that those governments, as well as Osama bin Laden himself, exaggerate al-Qaeda's significance in Islamist terrorism.[17] The neologism "al-Qaedaism"[18] is applied to the wider context of those who independently conduct similar acts through political sympathy to al-Qaeda ideology or methods or the copycat effect. Wikipedia.

I think they are really made more of an actual threat than they really are. And I am also pretty sure that the introduction of the patriot act is not in any way responsible for them being less of a threat than they were 10 years ago.

[twinstead]

I think they are really made more of an actual threat than they really are. And I am also pretty sure that the introduction of the patriot act is not in any way responsible for them being less of a threat than they were 10 years ago.

See. I said you would say that ;)

Also, can you prove that the reason there have been no other major attacks since 911 on US soil isn't because of the Patriot act.

Oh. Wait. You don't think 911 was perpetrated by Al Queda. We have a serious difference of opinion about that. See, I consider an attack like 911 to be a serious threat. Of course, if you think 911 was some sort of inside job, you can rationalize downplaying the threat.

It's almost too convenient, with all due respect.

[andreasz]

That American who walked into a store to buy a gun wouldn't have the capacity of killing thousands of people. There are domestic terrorists whom I fear, but it's the virulent Islamic type that is the one that scares me the most.

Those are the kinds of sentences where I always think that you guys watched too much "24" or have a completely wrong impression of muslims. It's not that there are millions of muslims that think that way.

The problem with islam is, ALSO here in germany, that the development of that religion is way back, compared to christianity for instance.

With religion, moral standards develop, and so on, bla bla bla.

Many turkish women here wear coats and have their hair covered, just because they believe that their religion wants them to. Back in turkey, where these people once came from, they moved on. No woman wears those any more, in Istanbul it is even forbidden to wear them in universities, public places, etc.

That's exactly the point with fundamentalists. They disappear, one by one... People develop, like it or not. Sooner or later this will be gone. And the last thing you want is to have some fictive bearded muslim enemy image in your head once the dust has cleared.

[stateofgrace]

Those are the kinds of sentences where I always think that you guys watched too much "24" or have a completely wrong impression of muslims. It's not that there are millions of muslims that think that way.

The problem with islam is, ALSO here in germany, that the development of that religion is way back, compared to christianity for instance.

With religion, moral standards develop, and so on, bla bla bla.

Many turkish women here wear coats and have their hair covered, just because they believe that their religion wants them to. Back in turkey, where these people once came from, they moved on. No woman wears those any more, in Istanbul it is even forbidden to wear them in universities, public places, etc.

That's exactly the point with fundamentalists. They disappear, one by one... People develop, like it or not. Sooner or later this will be gone. And the last thing you want is to have some fictive bearded muslim enemy image in your head once the dust has cleared.

Who said that? Is the war on terror against Muslims or the ideology of radicalised Muslims?

Could you reply please?



This is the point. Do you agree the US; through her foreign policies have fuelled this desperation? Would you say that this desperation is so highly charged that individuals would subscribe to the ideology of Al Qaeda?

Please remember that it is the sworn goal of this ideology not only to drive the US from Saudi Arabia but to actually bring the Islamic struggle to the global stage.

So would desperation, driven by US foreign policy fuel this ideology or are there other factors involved?

[twinstead]

Those are the kinds of sentences where I always think that you guys watched too much "24" or have a completely wrong impression of muslims. It's not that there are millions of muslims that think that way.


Not once did I imply that I thought all Muslims think that way. I was referring to the minority of extremist islamists.

Not to burst your bubble, but not all Americans are stupid; I have a perfectly rational and realistic impression of the average Muslim, thank you very much.

[andreasz]

This is the point. Do you agree the US; through her foreign policies have fuelled this desperation? Would you say that this desperation is so highly charged that individuals would subscribe to the ideology of Al Qaeda?

Please remember that it is the sworn goal of this ideology not only to drive the US from Saudi Arabia but to actually bring the Islamic struggle to the global stage.

So would desperation, driven by US foreign policy fuel this ideology or are there other factors involved?

Fuelled yes, but not caused initially. The reasons for that go way back to the gulf war and before.

And no, I don't think individuals would join Al Qaeda due to that. As I said, most of them just blow themselves up. But this is just a desperate reaction and it's hitting the wrong guys. It's not the soldiers fault, that the people in Bagdad for example are left in this specific situation. But those suicide bombers did not know where else to attack but the closest thing they have to an enemy, regardless of how nice and friendly next doors Private Johnson has been to them.

The ideology of converting the whole world to islamic faith is widely known. But it has no substance. And people who believe that crap and actually try to bring their faith to others by force, even to those who are not religious at all, get fewer and fewer.

Religion is fading. Not only the christian one. Sooner or later, even people from Kansas will experience that.

[andreasz]

Not to burst your bubble, but not all Americans are stupid; I have a perfectly rational and realistic impression of the average Muslim, thank you very much.

hehe, sorry... Might have sounded that way, but shouldn't be taken as an offense. The idea of the extremist you gave me seemed pretty much like the 'standard' american image I am used to by many americans.

It's also not about where you are from, germans, french, british... Take a look at the average population and you'll see that they're all equally stupid. You find some bright people and you find the dull minds. And there's the average joe, too... Upon that, you have different levels of sophistication, which have not necessarily anything to do with intelligence or stupidity.

I am just saying, that in many american heads, an image of the average muslim exists, which is with a fifty/fifty chance evil :)

[twinstead]

I am just saying, that in many american heads, an image of the average muslim exists, which is with a fifty/fifty chance evil :)


Point taken. I will counter with in many German heads, the image of the average American exists, which is with a fifty/fifty chance of stupid :)

[andreasz]

Point taken. I will counter with in many German heads, the image of the average American exists, which is with a fifty/fifty chance of stupid :)

Sad but true. Those are most likely germans who have never been to the US ever. You can blame the media for that... And what the people get to see here...

But hey... I don't give a damn by now... The average german in the US has leather pants and dances on the Oktoberfest.

[stateofgrace]

Fuelled yes, but not caused initially. The reasons for that go way back to the gulf war and before.

And no, I don't think individuals would join Al Qaeda due to that. As I said, most of them just blow themselves up. But this is just a desperate reaction and it's hitting the wrong guys. It's not the soldiers fault, that the people in Bagdad for example are left in this specific situation. But those suicide bombers did not know where else to attack but the closest thing they have to an enemy, regardless of how nice and friendly next doors Private Johnson has been to them.

The ideology of converting the whole world to islamic faith is widely known. But it has no substance. And people who believe that crap and actually try to bring their faith to others by force, even to those who are not religious at all, get fewer and fewer.

Religion is fading. Not only the christian one. Sooner or later, even people from Kansas will experience that.

Actually it goes way further back than the Gulf war; maybe try the Afghanistan Soviet war. I take you have heard about it?

How about Arab Afghan fighters joined forces with the Afghanistan fighters to take on the Soviets all funded by the big bad US and Saudi Arabia? Know all about the war that was fought by proxy do you?

How the disbanded Arab fighters became Al Qaeda?

How the same fighters wanted to fight the first Gulf war for us, know all about it do you?

Please enlighten me.

Please tell me all about this Islamic terrorism group could not possibly have been developed without the total support of the US. How miraculously,Al Qaeda simply appeared long after the US had left Afghanistan.

I am all ears.

[andreasz]

Actually it goes way further back than the Gulf war; maybe try the Afghanistan Soviet war. I take you have heard about it?

How about Arab Afghan fighters joined forces with the Afghanistan fighters to take on the Soviets all funded by the big bad US and Saudi Arabia? Know all about the war that was fought by proxy do you?

How the disbanded Arab fighters became Al Qaeda?

How the same fighters wanted to fight the first Gulf war for us, know all about it do you?

Please enlighten me.

Please tell me all about this Islamic terrorism that could not possibly have been developed without the total support of the US. How miraculously Al Qaeda simply appeared long after the US had left Afghanistan.

I am all ears.

I am well aware of that. This is due to the US' principle 'the enemy of the enemy is my ally'.

The way, history developed, doesn't proof that it is the US' fault, that Al Qaeda even exists. There would be other extremists, of course. The situation got out of hand. And the way the US handled the situation was of course completely inappropriate.

But as I said before... Fundamentalists fade as well as religion does. And that's were governments will lose a lot of power, without having people kept in a lot of fear.

Consider this: Even if it was all crap and everything happened the way the official story claims it to be. Through discussions like these and people paying more attention, questioning things, it is now almost impossible to fake a huge terrorist strike, which would be necessary to keep the people in fear.

This situation will resolve itself, with the development of society. And not with the development of new laws that cut into your personal privacy.

[Dog Town]

Religion is fading. Not only the christian one.

Really?

From Wiki:

With an estimated 1.9 billion adherents in 2007, Christianity is the world's largest religion. It is the predominant religion in Europe, the Americas, Southern Africa, the Philippines and Oceania.[3] It is also growing rapidly in Asia, particularly in China and South Korea.[4]

There are between 0.9 and 1.4 billion Muslims, making Islam the second-largest religion in the world, after Christianity.[2]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

[twinstead]

I am well aware of that. This is due to the US' principle 'the enemy of the enemy is my ally'.



The 'US' principle????

ETA: The enemy of the enemy is my ally is an ancient and rational concept, BTW.

[andreasz]

Really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity

Well... That's what is on the paper. I am also a christian. I pay taxes for church. But that's just because I might want to marry some day in a church. That goes for many many others.

I am talking about people practising their beliefs. Religion as a way of life fades, is probably what I should have said. It loses importance in peoples lives. Which is, from my point of view, a very good thing.

It has its flaws of course... Sooner or later, people will have to teach their children some values without justifying everything with god :) But even the christians will wake up...

Worst case scenario: In the year 2150, when every christian fundamentalist awaits the end of the world, they will probably have to admit that this is all a load of crap.

Well... That of course, if the world hasn't come to an end already due to depleted resources and global warming.

Anyway, I gotta sleep now, it's 4 in the morning over here.

Good night.

[andreasz]

The 'US' principle????

ETA: The enemy of the enemy is my ally is an ancient and rational concept, BTW.

It's like a go-to-war concept invented by the US. FInd your enemies' enemy and make him your ally.

Whatever. Good night.

Edot/Correction: The practical application of it seemed like it was invented by the US. Of course it's ancient, but I don't know any nation who is known better to make use of this than the US.

[stateofgrace]

I am well aware of that. This is due to the US' principle 'the enemy of the enemy is my ally'.

The way, history developed, doesn't proof that it is the US' fault, that Al Qaeda even exists. There would be other extremists, of course. The situation got out of hand. And the way the US handled the situation was of course completely inappropriate.

But as I said before... Fundamentalists fade as well as religion does. And that's were governments will lose a lot of power, without having people kept in a lot of fear.

Consider this: Even if it was all crap and everything happened the way the official story claims it to be. Through discussions like these and people paying more attention, questioning things, it is now almost impossible to fake a huge terrorist strike, which would be necessary to keep the people in fear.

This situation will resolve itself, with the development of society. And not with the development of new laws that cut into your personal privacy.

Well since we are now both agreed that Islamic fundamentalism is real, as is the ideology of Al Qaeda, I see little point in continuing this discussion.

Of course you would argue that this ideology would never drive radicalised extremists to commit such a wicked and dreadful act as 911. They would never wish to sent us all a message, because as you have stated, the world view is that they are just 20 bearded guys sat in a circle.

Fundamentalism will not fade way, it has not gone way just because the US has not been attacked since 911,it is here for keeps. The people that subscribe to ideology of Al Qaeda are not cavemen; they believe deeply in their cause, they truly wish to bring the cosmic struggle to your lands. If you wish to ignore the message of 911, fine, feel free. If you wish to believe that your own Government is the driving force behind this ideology, fine, feel free.

As they say ignorance is bliss.

[Dog Town]

It's like a go-to-war concept invented by the US. FInd your enemies' enemy and make him your ally.


You can't be serious! Can you? If so...



http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/109234699fe7de0c94.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7037)

[Dog Town]

I pay taxes for church. But that's just because I might want to marry some day in a church. That goes for many many others.

No...I think only you, are capable of believing that! Ever heard of renting out the church? Look it up, it happens! LOL eleventy110000001111!!!!!

You pay taxes for church? Really?

[Drudgewire]

It's like a go-to-war concept invented by the US. FInd your enemies' enemy and make him your ally.
You know who's really cool? Sun Tzu. You know? That guy... from Brooklyn.

http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/lolsmilie.gif

[Minadin]

No...I think only you, are capable of believing that! Ever heard of renting out the church? Look it up, it happens! LOL eleventy110000001111!!!!!

You pay taxes for church? Really?

In some countries the churches are run in whole or in part by the state, and as such, if you are a member of the church, you pay an additional tax to help fund it. I'm not certain but I seem to recall that being the case in Denmark as well - I think that it is why most of my relatives there were not church members.

[andreasz]

Yupp, here in germany, if you are baptized, you pay taxes for church through your salary unless you leave church. That's not a good idea because you can't rent a church for marriage for example. It doesn't work that way.

And about that enemy/ally thing: The US adepted this concept in a very stupid way. They didn't think of any long-term effects and complex connections inbetween those parties. It seemed like the idea was to wipe out the entire enemy and noone's gonna hear from them ever again, so everything will be just fine.

That's why I said that they practically invented it. That the concept is very old (I didn't know it was part of 'The art of war', though) is for certain. But first, this is not how it was intented and second, applying it like this doesn't work as well as Sun Tsu probably intended it.

The result can be seen today.

[funk de fino]

Well. I would have to backcheck on that and ask my brother. He knows a lot about the Dresden bombings... But a claim like that never occured. I know Dresden as a revenge strike by the british.

I am saying it never occured, it was an false flag attack by the german high command and it was blamed on the British, if you disagree, I want proof

[Dumb All Over]

I am saying it never occured, it was an false flag attack by the german high command and it was blamed on the British, if you disagree, I want proof
The number of squibs required to wire the entire city for demolition was enormous and quite a feat for that point in history. Who can forget the now famous words spoken by Hitler, "Zupfen es." At the time, many thought he was referring to his little wiener schnitzel. Now, of course, we know exactly what he meant when he said, "Pull it!"

[andreasz]

Who can forget the now famous words spoken by Hitler, "Zupfen es."

What kind of low-budget translating program did you use for that? It doesn't mean anything, and the two words are even in the wrong order, wrong case, missing object.

If you have anything meaningful to say, please do so... But please stop writing crap. Have you tried youtube? Or some dating communities? I think that'll do for you guys.

[funk de fino]

So Dresden did not happen then?

You have no proof?

[Dumb All Over]

...It doesn't mean anything, and the two words are even in the wrong order, wrong case, missing object.

Nope. That's what he said, alright. He was in a state of delirium when he said it, but that's what he said. At the time, his words were widely misinterpreted. Now we know better.

[Jonnyclueless]

It's like a go-to-war concept invented by the US. FInd your enemies' enemy and make him your ally.

Whatever. Good night.

Edot/Correction: The practical application of it seemed like it was invented by the US. Of course it's ancient, but I don't know any nation who is known better to make use of this than the US.


Actually, I believe they adopted that from Germany.