[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
Did you read all that? If so, what's the TLDR? I'm mildly curious and also entirely sure it can be condensed to about 5% of the word count. Ain't no way I'm reading those essays though.
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 dro
in retrospect it was pretty dumb. Trump has shown how easy it is to manufacture the consent to do mass murder and resource theft.
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 dro
The secrecy required for this conspiracy wouldn't come close to that required for the Manhattan project or the NSA starting to spy on the entire country. Both of those efforts involved hundreds of thousands of people over many years before the public knew about them. And what would we know about the NSA programs were it not for Edward Snowden. Because, as I've explained to you before Trolly, the whistle blower has to have proof or he's just an insane person talking. Sever people tried to speak out against the NSA illegally spying on Americans before Snowden. Snowden grabbed the proof and now we know.
But 9/11 was a little different also in that it was clearly a crime. So those doing it would have all be subject to the wrath of justice as well as the class of people who killed Epstein. Furthermore there have been whistle blowers who have spoken out. If you compartmentalize people you limit what they can do, but there were certainly elements in the CIA who have spoken out about the series of anomalies which allowed the alleged hijackers to remain in the country unmolested for so long. You just choose to put the whistle blowers into the denials region of your mind.
9/11 researchers have been trying for decades to get the maintenance records of the twin towers leading up to the attacks for years to no avail. Why is that such a secret? Why are there so many spots where a small amount of information would debunk large swaths of conspiracy theories but it's never given? It's the same reason KSM is still breathing, because the case against AQ is nothing. I don't have a strong case for anyone else. I've said as much, so you don't get any points for poking holes in my nothing case. It should be a lot easer for you to just point to the substance of the case you pretend to support yet you never do.
in retrospect it was pretty dumb. Trump has shown how easy it is to manufacture the consent to do mass murder and resource theft.
I'll take the opportunity to disagree with Victor, in the Leftist tradition of endless debate with everyone.
Military action against Venezuela did not have popular support in the public at all. He just did it anyway. Trump could make his base ecstatic by bringing an end to the Ukraine war. He refuses. Strikes against Iran also had little public support.
The Dems could have easily won the presidency with just some rhetorical concessions on the genocide in Gaza and like a promise for a few free bus passes. They declined. They stood pat because they aren't interested in consensus anymore. It might be easy to just do things now since there is no organized opposition to the oligarchy, but it's not so easy to manufacture consent for the worst stuff, although you could make the case that the support for Ukraine came pretty cheap.
Did you read all that? If so, what's the TLDR? I'm mildly curious and also entirely sure it can be condensed to about 5% of the word count. Ain't no way I'm reading those essays though.
I don't have a strong case for anyone else. I've said as much, so you don't get any points for poking holes in my nothing case. It should be a lot easer for you to just point to the substance of the case you pretend to support yet you never do.
--This is more or less the 2 sentence summation of Deuce's efforts in this thread. He is underwhelmed by evidence supporting the accepted explanation that AQ perpetuated 9/11; but offers no counter explanations for why or how anyone else would have done it.
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 apparen
I'm going to guess that when you mention Demon that you mean some deep state, unelected something or other over some metaphor? Any speculation on who these Demons are? I assume they are humans?
But regardless of naming names, do you still believe that these demons wired up building 7 or are you open to the idea that these demons may control the world, but that building 7 just happened to have fallen? You'll walk circles around me with your ability to talk in abstract rhetoric but what odds do you give that the Demons wired building 7 and detonated it at the coincidental time that both the penthouse gave away + the debris of two airliners that happened to crash into the buildings down the street? You claim that an airplane hit the Pentagon, right? An Airliner hitting the Pentagon isn't enough to drive home the narrative that they had to demolish a random building just to be safe?
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.
Rumsfeld and the people in the Bush administration who wanted to invade Iraq right after 9/11 and were not happy they were forced to invade Afghanistan.
JIM LEHRER:
He also said and you've admitted to this "Rumsfeld complained that there were no decent targets for bombing in Afghanistan." In other words, you've said that.
DONALD RUMSFELD:
I said that publicly in a press briefing.
JIM LEHRER:
And he [Clarke] said "that we should consider bombing Iraq which he said had better targets. At first I thought Rumsfeld was joking, but he was serious."
The secrecy required for this conspiracy wouldn't come close to that required for the Manhattan project or the NSA starting to spy on the entire country. Both of those efforts involved hundreds of thousands of people over many years before the public knew about them. And what would we know about the NSA programs were it not for Edward Snowden.
This is completely unlike 9/11 conspiracy bros. If you just asked physicists in the early 40s they would tell you nuclear weapons are possible. There has been
in math/CS communities for decades on the degree to which the NSA and intelligence communities are ahead of the open world in applied cryptography. Maybe Snowden didn't have access to higher level stuff, but what he leaked was boring compared to what people were imagining the NSA could actually do. This is completely different from 9/11 building collapse conspiracies like you peddle which are rejected by people that can pass undergrad physics 101.
The secrecy required for this conspiracy wouldn't come close to that required for the Manhattan project or the NSA starting to spy on the entire country. Both of those efforts involved hundreds of thousands of people over many years before the public knew about them.
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
My dude, Einstein was writing letters against the development of the nuclear bomb back in 1939. It was no secret this was going on. The Manhattan Project was rife with spies and info that leaked out (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_spies) unlike the Lizard People's 9/11 project, which has thus far gone without a single whistleblower or a single leak after 25-30 years. My goodness, you could not have picked a more inept analogy.
For this to be remotely comparable, you'd have to have a situation where the existence of the Manhattan Project was exclusively the domain of crank conspiracy theorists until about 1970 or so.
I'm going to guess that when you mention Demon that you mean some deep state, unelected something or other over some metaphor? Any speculation on who these Demons are? I assume they are humans?
There are many in plain sight. The Adelsons are demons. They made money exploiting human weakness through their casinos, billions and billions of dollars. They have used a lot of the money to carry out ethnic cleansing and genocide. They gave 100 million to Trump and he has faithfully executed their genocidal policy preferences over the objections of Americans, over American interests at large.
There are deep state actors who I can't identify. It's like dark matter. You don't see them but you see their effects. Take Cube for example. Economic interests would love to trade with Cuba and build resorts in Cuba, etc. If it was just about money, we could be friends with Cuba. But we're not. Obama made some motions towards that end, but there is a deep state power, something above pure immediate monetary gain, above the preferences of the American voters, which is obsessed with destroying Cuba. This is an evil force. And it's not just some Cuban exile community in Florida. It's deeper than that. The intellectuals in any administration will articulate an anti-Cuba strategy, but you can't pin it on them. It's not just like the smart thing to do. It comes from an allegiance to capitalism and white supremacy which supersedes even corporate interests. I don't know how this power fuels itself. It hints to itself as a sinister power at the heart of America. We saw it on display recently in the kidnapping of Maduro. That might look like a money or resource grab, but I see it as another means to strangle Cuba. You can't jack a countries oil by kidnapping one guy. But you can threaten the leadership enough to divert oil from certain countries. Think about all the money that operation cost, all the planning and bribing that went into it. You think they did that for you or me? You'd have to be beyond delusional to think that was in the interest of the American people. This is what Trump does when he gets in trouble, he immediately turns to serving the dark power of the American deep state.
But regardless of naming names, do you still believe that these demons wired up building 7 or are you open to the idea that these demons may control the world, but that building 7 just happened to have fallen? You'll walk circles around me with your ability to talk in abstract rhetoric but what odds do you give that the Demons wired building 7 and detonated it at the coinciden
I favor the hypothesis, not mine alone but that put forward by the scientists who have obsessed over this to the extent of sacrificing their careers, that thermite was poured into the columns under the guise of maintenance, or maybe in the form of charges or some novel demolition method invented by some military somewhere using thermite. There is a lot of evidence for this. Attempts to disprove this have been inexplicably abandoned by scientists skeptical of the claim. I mean, seriously, why would a scientist who believes the official story set up and carry out an experiment to disprove the presence of thermitic material in the dust of the towers and then, when they got to the critical point which could disprove the conspiracy hypothesis, stop the experiment? Show me the peer reviewed science supporting the official story or become an agnostic like me. Those are your choices if you don't want to live in the pre enlightenment. But everyone is getting dumber so maybe you want to stay with the crowd?
The university of Alaska engineering department did a massive study of building 7 collapse and has contradicted the summary findings of the NIST investigation. They didn't go so far as to say assert the building was demolitioned, but they say it didn't go down the way NIST says it did.
Who did building 7? The demons? I don't know. I tend to think they were a collaboration of foreign and domestic demons. This is in the context of demons not being tied to a given country. There is a concept of global capital. If you have a billion dollars you can live anywhere in the world. Do you think Elon Musk or Bezos really thinks of themselves as Americans? That class is building shelters and bunkers all over the world like there is no tomorrow. You think they are going to suffer with us because they have some loyalty to us as countrymen. No, you don't. You know that much. But unfortunately you don't understand the depths of their depravity and what they are willing to do to gratify their bottomless fears.
Keep in mind that it is proven that there was foreknowledge of these attacks in people outside of the alleged attackers. Where did that foreknowledge evince itself? not at book clubs or bowling leagues. It would only show itself in institutions connected to the real perpetrators. Can we agree on that much?
Oh I'm just laughing that he vomited another wall of text that nobody will read. That combined with him still believing crap that was solidly debunked (hell, by me on this forum) over 10 years ago is just hilarious to me.
Oh and he thinks that "they" pretended to do "maintenance" and instead somehow poured thermite into the "columns" of the building. He also seemed to remember part-way through that that isn't how either building columns or thermite work and so said "or maybe it was some magical demolition method only the military knows about." He says there's a lot of evidence for this secret method that no one knows about. LMFAO
I actually recommend you read the 3rd paragraph. It's hysterical. The rest was tough to stay awake through, I'll be honest.
Oh I'm just laughing that he vomited another wall of text that nobody will read. That combined with him still believing crap that was solidly debunked (hell, by me on this forum) over 10 years ago is just hilarious to me.
I don't recall you as being on the short list of those who ever made cogent arguments supporting the official narrative, a list which is open to even the most personally offensive people. But you're not like Trolly either. Trolly intentionally doesn't make cogent arguments because he thinks it is beneath him to do so. You actually think you are doing something when you're not. Pathetic.
Oh and he thinks that "they" pretended to do "maintenance" and instead somehow poured thermite into the "columns" of the building. He also seemed to remember part-way through that that isn't how either building columns or thermite work and so said "or maybe it was some magical demolition method only the military knows about." He says there's a lot of evidence for this secret me
If you're in an honest mood tell me, if I stopped you on the street and asked you if the American government or CIA has ever knowingly lied to the public in order to advance unpopular policy initiatives, what would you say?
Honestly, it doesn't surprise me that those who set aside glaring omissions and contradictions in the bedtime stories their government tells them have short attention spans. You are the subject the oligarchs have been laboring to produce: trusting of authority on a deep psychological level, passive, defensive of master, educated enough to be useful but not enough to gain perspective on the system itself.
You stop reading anything once you determine it both contradicts your fragile reality and that it might be correct.
Yeah that's what happened. I stopped giving two craps about your dumbas 9/11 conspiracy bs when I debunked it over 10 years ago. Grow up. Time to put away the kids stuff.
Gorgonzola, you should waste your time reading something that may be correct. It goes against most of the experts and lacks any real definitive conclusions but it may be correct.
Less than a 1% chance in most estimates.
There are many in plain sight. The Adelsons are demons. They made money exploiting human weakness through their casinos, billions and billions of dollars. They have used a lot of the money to carry out ethnic cleansing and genocide. They gave 100 million to Trump and he has faithfully executed their genocidal policy preferences over the objections of Americans, over American in
It feels like you alternate between the money and the science depending on the conclusion that you hope for.
It appears to me that you reject explanations on the basis that they lack perfect proof and can’t answer a particular question to your satisfaction yet suddenly trust an organization that hasn’t been peer-reviewed or independently replicated? That makes it hard for me to believe that you are more interested in what actually happened than what you want to believe.
But UAF doesn't even share you opinion on how it collapsed but when you say this....
The university of Alaska engineering department did a massive study of building 7 collapse and has contradicted the summary findings of the NIST investigation. They didn't go so far as to say assert the building was demolitioned, but they say it didn't go down the way NIST says it did.
You seem more focused on the fact that they didn’t go far enough to reach your preferred conclusion than on what the study actually says. I think that's rather large leak but it seems to be the go to tactic when tribalistic folks talk about their preferred economic ideology. Ftr, I did watch the UAF video that you linked God knows when and, in my opinion, I do think it was smart of them to avoid supporting the demolition theory because I think doing so would have gone beyond what their data actually supported. I think that restraint that keeps the imagination flowing did them well.
But besides that yeah, Sheldon was an immensely powerful POS, but business dudes are going to vote for the party that better supports their financial situation. But I don't think either of us think him or his henchmen wired #7.
He says while trusting his worthless conspiracy """sources""" on a deep psychological level.....
The official story, which is itself a conspiracy theory, is mostly a set of empty assertions. The people here and over the past 10 years who have been trying to defend the official story hardly even know what the official sources say. I have to tell them to help them. They feel like they know things which have actually never even been conveyed to them, let alone supported.
The sources I use make actual arguments with actual evidence. They aren't manipulative people and don't have the means to be so. We should all be able to agree that the 9/11 researchers, whether you agree with them or not, are pure of motive. They publish everything they have and make every attempt to have their work peer reviewed.
Your source, the shills in our government, had to be dragged into a sham investigation. Their data is not published or peer reviewed. The main report outlining the official criminal conspiracy says, directly, that it is not important to follow the money trail. You didn't know it said that, but it does in plain English and not in any context that changes the plain meaning. So it appears the government can tell you anything at all and you just swallow it like a good girl. I figure that has to be the result of psychological tricks. Then again I never understood how pimps get women to give them money after what they have to swallow. Maybe the government has been taking notes from Iceberg Slim and that's how it got you guys to accept bs like that.
The official story, which is itself a conspiracy theory, is mostly a set of empty assertions. The people here and over the past 10 years who have been trying to defend the official story hardly even know what the official sources say. I have to tell them to help them. They feel like they know things which have actually never even been conveyed to them, let alone supported.The s
He says while his sources are not peer reviewed and have been properly debunked for years lol
It feels like you alternate between the money and the science depending on the conclusion that you hope for. It appears to me that you reject explanations on the basis that they lack perfect proof and canÂ’t answer a particular question to your satisfaction yet suddenly trust an organization that hasnÂ’t been peer-reviewed or independently replicated? That makes it hard for m
I don't think you are trolling me. But if you are, I would say you are the greatest of them so I wouldn't even be mad at you.
I reject explanations which are beyond absurd. The pancake theory of collapse, for example, besides lacking any in depth mechanistic explanation, is absurd on its face. It's not something that almost makes sense. It's absolutely absurd. Get me one PhD physicist willing to put their name behind the pancake theory. I can find you quite a few who dispute it. Find me one putting their name on it. That is what I don't think you get, that the official story doesn't make sense anywhere. It's not that there are a few missing explanations here or there. No. That's normal. That is what happens whenever you observe anything even a little complex. 9/11 is like I'm in the room with the proverbial elephant and I'm feeling fur and horns and nothing that could possibly belong to an elephant. It doesn't check out anywhere. You don't see this because you are afraid to reach to touch the so called elephant. You have a psychological block on doing so.
As for the evidence I accept, it is presented in the scientific tradition with full disclosure and, where possible, submitted for peer review. Scientists have sacrificed their careers to disprove the official story. Scientists don't want to support the official story because they don't want their names associated with an apparent falsehood. They believe one day the truth will be accepted and they will be seen as complete idiots. Very few scientists are willing to risk being remembered as a the type of moron who thinks the top of a building can crush through the remainder at near free fall acceleration, not even for money. That's why Neil Degrasse Tyson doesn't speak on this subject. It's not because he wants to spare insane idiot conspiracy theorists embarrassment. Doing that is his raison d'etre. It's because he is terrified the truth would come out later and destroy his intellectual legacy if he lies or he will get fired if he tells the truth. So he is mute. It's the most significant scientific question facing this society ever, most people believe it was some conspiracy other than the official one, and he is mute on it. His peers must have made the same calculation.
Ftr, I did watch the UAF video that you linked God knows when and, in my opinion, I do think it was smart of them to avoid supporting the demolition theory because I think doing so would have gone beyond what their data actually supported. I think that restraint that keeps the imagination flowing did them well.
But we kinda knew that would be the conclusion, because low key we all know AQ didn't do this and we know that no institution that wants to live can say different.
But besides that yeah, Sheldon was an immensely powerful POS, but business dudes are going to vote for the party that better supports their financial situation. But I don't think either of us think him or his henchmen wired #7.
Did you know Larry Silverstein had weekly phone calls with Netanyahoo? Silverstein tells the story of how he had breakfast every day at the top of one of the towers, but on 9/11 he had a dermatologist appointment that kept him from going and saved his life. I've always wondered what his attendance record was for that breakfast. He said "every day" but that could mean anything from 2-3 times most weeks to literally every day. My digging into it for anecdotes of his attendance indicates it was more like literally every day.
Why was Silverstein talking to Netanyahoo every week? If you're a Jewish real estate mogul you just get that kind of audience with the president of Israel? I'm sure Benny wanted donations but what level gets you weekly chats? What did Netanyahoo want from him?
Good thing that appointment wasn't in the afternoon. After the appointment he was able to get back to the towers and tell the fire department to "pull it", referring building 7. While I don't think Silverstein was intentionally confessing some role in the destruction of WTC7, I think he knew the building was controlled down and that was swirling around his head at the time of the interview and just came out. He blamed it on the fire department because, as we all know, the fire department doubles as demolition experts who can rig giant skyscrapers in 10 mins flat. More likely what happened is Silverstein knew he had taken instruction that led to the buildings being rigged to come down. He knew which buildings he'd let certain people into, he knew building 7 was next, and because he isn't totally without concern for human life, and probably didn't even know what he had done when doing it but knew now, he told people to get out of the building to save their lives.
Wow, this is one of the most incoherent and unconvincing wall of text on the subject I've ever read.
That is no small feat!
Also undermine any other post from you on the forum.
Way to go!
Lol, you had a STEM PhD (e d'a) ITT explain all this **** to you over and over, you lying knucklehead. You didn't believe he was a PhD or it was in the wrong discipline or something something something.
You think you are smarter than everyone and don't even realise that you are doing exactly the same thing as every other conspiracy nutjob and simply finding very tenuous reasons to discard any information that goes against your deeply held beliefs.
