[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff

I never said the government did 9/11. You can go back what? 10 years now or more and from my first post on this subject I never said the U.S. government did it. I think there might have been some cooperative elements in key places, maybe, but there was no way this was some Northwoods style proposal that got funded - no chance at all.

I have to remain agnostic on who did it but that doesn't mean I can't debunk the governments laughable narrative and "case". I have a realist worldview. I try to look at the institutional level and see what guides them and what their tactics are and extrapolate those observations onto recent events, making adjustments and refinements as events support or conflict with my institutional model.

You, on the other hand, might as well be reading a coloring book called A Bad Bad Boy Named Putin. You are ingesting and repeating pure fairy tales.

Why do you have to remain agnostic on who did it? And given your agnosticism, what is the point of this exercise?

That is actually how the law works, the government can't prosecute you using illegally-obtained evidence.

But you dodged my question: What's your explanation?

There was a terrorist attack. People died. No valid investigation of the origins and mechanism of the crime using the physical and intelligence evidence has ever been conducted. This is why the correct position on why 9/11 happened is agnosticism. We can't, as of now, know who did it because those who have control of the evidence refuse to either share it or interrogate it faithfully with the aim of finding out what in fact happened. In several places evidence has been intentionally destroyed.

You can see this pattern all over our recent timeline. Something happens, some kind of event which is categorically intolerable, and those in positions of power use their power to shape the public interpretation of the event in ways the powerful deem favorable to their agenda. These efforts have been more brazen and sloppy over time, but with 9/11 the narrative was by no means airtight.

Look at Trump saying that these assassins are coming from the Left when they have no affiliation with any Leftist organization or any other dispositive attributes defining them as Leftists. These are just naked assertions, just like much of the attributions for the 9/11 terrorism. They said there was increased chatter among the AQ they were monitoring prior and everyone was like "I'll be damned I knew those bastards did it!".

My point has been that even though we don't know who did it, we can sometimes know when the people who claim they know who did it are lying, and can see where their story falls apart or is not supported by the fact pattern.

The 9/11 commission report literally says the money trail doesn't matter. Do you accept that? Or do you have the intelligence or knowledge to know that the money trail is absolutely critical to knowing who was involved? If the latter, then congrats you might not be a tool of someone else's mind. If the former, well, God help you.

See kids, this is a so called centrist. He looks at the posts of a worthless, brain-dead moron like BJ and asks: C'mon, why is he banned?!

The moral of the story: Don't be like formula72!

Except Bob, you could most certainly post better than the current character that you represent. f72 is a better 2+2er than you imo.

Posters here are not wrong when they say you are a troll that doesn't post anything of value.

Sure, the babbling centrist who wishes BJ would still be here for his personal entertainment is a better poster. 100%.

Jeeeeeeez.

Can't find the post where you explain to the centrist that Bj's anti-vax propaganda was dangerous but whatever...

This is mostly true, but even without the entertainment aspect, I’d still treat BJ with the same respect I give Deuces here, or Vic, or even you. I treat all of them with the same level of respect. It isn't that hard. How do you treat them?

Respecting people who post dangerous lies.....what a guy.

I would treat all of them with disdain, as I would anyone who spreads lies that get people killed and actively harm society.

Zero respect.

Tolerating that crap is one of the reasons we are here.

right, says the guy who supports the genocidal Democratic Party and pushes genocidal propaganda from the ADL.

Seems like a leak.

So, Gorgo posts something from the ADL website one time, and that means he's 'pushing genocidal propaganda?'

You're becoming a parody of yourself at this point imo.

He's just a lying idiot. He knows BOTH of those things are untrue but he's more interested in spewing vitriol than ever saying anything useful or even true.

It's best to just completely ignore him. He's irrelevant.

yep. afiact, he hasnt retracted it or his broader point about antisemitism. he should be more careful especially after being shown the facts.

This is all for entertainment purposes only (if I could have an undertitle I would prefer "for entertainment purposes only"). That's not to say I'm trolling - obviously I am not. But nothing said here or even on more populated sites has any significant impact on world events, unless you maybe consider the time we waste in such places could be spent on RW organizing. People who control concentrated capital control the world.

Look at all the discussions and fretting about the environment. Despite a strong scientific consensus, popular support for environmental protection, and billions of online statements and arguments, we just continue to dig up oil out of the ground at whatever rate the oil companies want, and continue to process it at whatever rate the oil companies want, and continue marketing poisonous byproducts to be sold at whatever price the merchants decide. The politically correct sentiment is to say down with fossil fuels. But the public opinion and discourse has no significant effect on what is actually happening materially. So don't get all dramatic about what people post. The system is broken and immovable and no posting is going to either make it more so or unjam it.

He says after posting a dramatic wall of text lmao

Pearl Harbor attacks were an event leading directly to war. Whether or not it was facilitated by U.S. warmongers, Japan attacked us and there is no disputing that. In that case you don't need an investigation because the evidence floods naturally. You should have one, of course, but mostly for other reasons than determining the perpetrator.

But it is rare that some explosive event leads us into war. For the Iraq war we just made up stuff and killed a million people on that made up basis. Colin Powel invited world dignitaries to sit cross legged around a fire while he held a flashlight under his chin and spun up some spooky tales about mobile chemical weapons factories posing as ice cream trucks. The intelligence failures were documented pretty much in real time. It didn't change anything. It was a complete fabrication, the casus belli. I assume you would agree an investigation by a third party or international body might have been helpful there?

There is no reason we couldn't have had an open and transparent investigation into the 9/11 attacks. Initially that was shot down by those in power, but the families of the victims, who happened to have money and some influence, demanded an investigation. We got a sham investigation. But it could have been good faith and that would have been good and our country would not suffer due to exposing intelligence failures or classified info. Are you saying our intelligence should be allowed to mess up in the dark with never any accountability? That's a very weak argument that guarantees elites can repurpose any event to suit their agenda. But if you don't accept class warfare as the metal agenda then you can wander all over into weird positions.

Right, we made up WMDs and had Colin Powell tell spooky stories with a flashlight under his chin - which was more than enough. That alone undercuts the idea that the US would welcome a third party investigation when narrative control is the entire game.

But what isn’t rational is imagining that Bush and Co would Hollywood their way into wiring building 7 on some assumption that two airliners crashing into the WTC a few yards away wouldn't be enough to drive home the narrative, so we just torpedo a random building, a building that is already on fire, and we are good to go!

It seems like a perfectly reasonable take to assume the government has its own shady motives for going to war while also accepting that Building 7 simply collapsed.

Which sort of undercuts your entire theory. You don't need to create the largest cover-up in human history and murder thousands of Americans in a secret false-flag attack when the American people are quire happy to go off to war based on flimsy lies about WMDs.

Crazy they went through all the trouble of pinning it all on Al Qaeda only to be forced to invade Afghanistan which was a huge inconvenience and contrary to their goals. They should have blamed Iraq and Iran from the start but I guess they forgot or something.

I might have appeared to have contradicted myself somewhere upstream. But I think we can all agree that the Iraq war doesn't happen with the 9/11 attacks, with most Americans believing Iraq helped do 9/11 at the time after being mislead by the major news outlets. And, again, Bush didn't do 9/11. And just to make myself seem even crazier to you, I think Bush and those in apparent command were intimidated by whoever did 9/11, who they knew were not AQ or the like. Bush was threatened by someone in one instance we know, which is why they flew him to the middle of the country. And I think whoever did the Anthrax attacks also did the airplane terrorism. It's not an accident that the leading Dems, Daschle and Leahy, were both directly targeted directly with highly weaponized anthrax, as were the more liberal news outlets. Whoever did 9/11 made their wishes clear to their shills in DC and made clear attempts to intimidate the people in positions to oppose the response we saw.

So then Justice went out and blamed the first person they could find who worked at a government lab and tried to pin the Anthrax attacks on them - some completely innocent guy (Mueller did that because he is so competent and ethical). Then when that blew up in their face they tried pinning it on some other guy. PBS, of all outlets, published a whole expose disproving the case against that guy who conveniently decided to kill himself.

You know that there are people who decide who we get to choose from when we vote in national elections, right? I mean we are constantly choosing between the most hated people in the country, not so democratic in my estimation. Well, why can't these people, who have so much money and influence, also commit false flag terrorism if they have an agenda that needs a paradigm shift in public opinion? We're only talking about trillions of dollars after all.

When you say "the government" you mean some person who gets elected and proceeds to act like they are possessed by a demon. When I say "the government", I'm talking about the demon.

Who is they? Whose goals and what were they? Did those goals involve the trillions of dollars transferred from the American taxpayer? Do you think Boeing and Raytheon consider the invasion of Afghanistan a huge inconvenience?

I've heard this argument before. Why blame AQ if you want to invade Iraq? But they also successfully blamed Iraq while also blaming AQ. I suppose they were counting on the passive racism of the American public. Seems pretty bankable. They had to get some terrorists from somewhere to sit on those giant converted drones as they were driven into the Twin Towers. They just needed to look the part.

But who is to say the invasion of Iraq was the plan of whoever did the acts? I don't think it was the plan of AQ to bring their little holy war here and invoke a retrenchment of the U.S. military into Muslim lands. You should be able to assign a strategy to AQ which isn't just seeing the blood of Americans, which has some political goal in mind. Attacking Americans over there, the kind of terrorism AQ did pre and post 9/11, makes sense as a way to deter American presence from the region and keep your brand strong. Handing the American planners the political cover to send in forces all over the ME would seem like and obvious misstep, not to mention way, way too ambitious for AQ. They were hard nosed, practical fighters trained by our own CIA, not dreamers who unwittingly induce a red tide of world opinion against them and destroy their political project just for the fun of killing Americans.

Maybe whatever entity planned these attacks didn't also have tactical or strategic influence over the military response. Maybe they knew they couldn't lose no matter what happened because they stood to profit whether we went to war with the Saudis, the Iraqis, the Afghans, or whatever Arab looking people who have something they want.

Obv the Lizard People staged the largest conspiracy in human history, killing thousands of people with top-top-secret remote-piloted 747s and secretly lining the WTC with microthermite without anyone noticing. Then they planted evidence framing the Saudis, all in order to start a war with *checks notes* Iraq. Nevermind that the American people were ready to go to war at the drop of a hat and only needed vague rumors of WMDs to gin up support for an invasion. It all makes perfect sense if you huff enough paint.