Jägermeister Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Wasn't there some poster that practically guaranteed there would be a false-flag attack during the Olympic games? Even gave an exact date Oh and he turned out to be wrong, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted September 24, 2012 Author Share Posted September 24, 2012 Possibly the funniest thread ever. /topic/333447-official-2012-illuminati-games/page__hl__illuminati">http://forum.canucks..._hl__illuminati Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Hahaha, that's awesome! Testimonials from 8 different people that have never met before and all still likely work in the area to this date; have the exact same description of the North route the plane took the day of the attack. This description completely differs from the “official” release of the South route the plane took.Interviews with the cab driver that was supposedly hit by the 1st pole the plane hit couldn't answer any question the OP was asking directly and made things very strange. When he thought he was off camera, his discussions with the OP were contradictory.Plane contents were never found (Head, Nose, Tail, Fuselage, Seats, Engine, etc.)Reports of a "second plane" ascending away from the crash site were documented (same plane).The official release of the Boeing 757s path to the pentagon didn't match up with the evidence found. According to them, the plane would have been going on such an angle the the engine would have penetrated the concrete. Nothing of the sort was ever discovered. Also the hole it created could not have concealed a Boeing 757, it was to small.Explosions were heard and documented on many news reports. Sorry dude, but how is that not good evidence? If you have an argument I would love to see it. My mind isn’t made up, but yeah, I’m leaning towards the side that has the most logic and evidence backing it up. You keep telling me to do some research, but yet you should be the one that is doing so. You haven’t presented anything to me that would make me put my argument in question. Also, I am on the “scientific and educational” side, because a lot of what I have researched and even presented makes a lot of sense. I welcome you, or anyone to debunk it, because my mind isn’t made up. Also, you clearly haven’t watched the video because it’s not just some guy who pieced together a documentary from other documentaries. I mean, there are some clips he uses to help present his teams case, but for the most part, he filmed the entire thing himself. You keep trying to point out I have my mind made up; when you’re the one who won’t even bring the alternate theories into question. There’s evidence to back up this side of the story, yet you mindlessly pass it up and dub it as “laughable”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted September 24, 2012 Author Share Posted September 24, 2012 Even if everything you're saying is true, which it isn't, what would be the point of using a fake plane to attack the pentagon? They used real planes to attack the twin towers. Why would they risk blowing the whole operation by using such an obvious fake on the pentagon? Edit: http://www.abovetops...thread79655/pg1 A pretty good site, with a bunch of pictures. Many show plane parts and contents such as engines, turbines, and seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I never said a "fake plane", the argument is that the plane never hit the pentagon (which I don't exactly fully lean towards because there weren't enough eye-witness accounts). What a great find! Thanks for the share of information! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 According to conspiracy theorists, it was a missle attack designed to look like an airplane suicide attack. They used real planes for the twin towers. Why wouldn't they do the same thing for the pentagon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 The "missle" theory also fails to account for the several lighting pole that were chopped off by the wings of the plane as it neared the building. A CBC documentary that aired around the 11th showed several photos of the severed poles strewn about the grounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 It also fails to take into account the testimony from the hundreds of people whose job it was to clean up the plane. They detail how they spent days removing bits of plane and human remains from the crash site. There's also many photos, which show bits of debris that clearly came from a plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Hence the theory of two missiles .. one to do the physical damage, and one full of bits and pieces of plane wreckage and human detritus to help confuse the clean-up crews .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Sarcasm wasted is sarcasm lost for ever more .. alas, tell me, "where are the Snowden's of yesteryear"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dral Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 If this actually WAS an inside job, I'm even more disappointed in the government because I can think of several ways to do it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Well according to figures 46% of Americans believe the Bible is gospel and the world is only 10,000 years old. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/09/24/bill-nye-evolution-creationism.html So sometimes offering logic doesn't go over so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trelane42 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Let's take these 'reasons' and have a closer look shall we? 1) Oil Theft and opening up bigger markets. So the U.S, gov't planned an attack on its own people in order to 'steal' oil from Afghanistan and Iraq? Well, there's none in Afghanistan, so that's pretty easy to look past, since you obviously meant Iraq. Who are the biggest players in oil in Iraq? Well, that's strange eh?? America conspired to attack itself, so that it could spend hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, for the benefit of Chinese, Russian and European Oil production companies... 2) Denying Russia and Chinese access to resources you say? Well, among the biggest beneficiaries of oil contracts are state run oil companies, in Iraq, again, are Chinese and Russian. Sooooo, it doesn't seem like they've been 'encircled' and 'denied access' in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trelane42 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 And everybody who doesn't believe in conspiracies must drink the government kool aid right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Pretty much (there being only 2 possible answers). But my main point was that the word “conspiracy” adds nothing, pro or con, to the debate. In court of law the charge is notoriously difficult to prove, and it may be that is how the snickering surrounding it got started. If it were otherwise I could go to court tomorrow and have all the gas venders brought up on collusion and price fixing. Fact that I can’t prove it in court doesn’t mean we all believe that gas prices reflect some innate market value that all companies, with different suppliers and refineries strung around the globe, are alone somehow privy to, and in the same instance no less. The US government's first explanation of the main buildings going down was a chain reactions, pancake effect of the floors. Recall that this was the official position for several months (years?) and anyone saying otherwise was a "conspiracy" guy. When it dawned on some that the theory could be disproved by anyone with knowledge of high school physics. Floors pancaking could NEVER approach free fall speed since there would be a slowing down, however miniscule, of every floor upon floor impact. The melting of structural steel, or the furnace theory, was trotted out and become the final, state sanctioned truth of the matter. I think this version is even more absurd then the first but at least all the guys with definitive knowledge of the conditions inside--the firefighters walking inside the furnace, who figured the fires would be put out quickly--are dead. "Treason never prospers. What's the reason?" Sorry to be the one tell you that there's no Santa Claus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Hahaha, that's awesome! Testimonials from 8 different people that have never met before and all still likely work in the area to this date; have the exact same description of the North route the plane took the day of the attack. This description completely differs from the “official” release of the South route the plane took.Interviews with the cab driver that was supposedly hit by the 1st pole the plane hit couldn't answer any question the OP was asking directly and made things very strange. When he thought he was off camera, his discussions with the OP were contradictory.Plane contents were never found (Head, Nose, Tail, Fuselage, Seats, Engine, etc.)Reports of a "second plane" ascending away from the crash site were documented (same plane).The official release of the Boeing 757s path to the pentagon didn't match up with the evidence found. According to them, the plane would have been going on such an angle the the engine would have penetrated the concrete. Nothing of the sort was ever discovered. Also the hole it created could not have concealed a Boeing 757, it was to small.Explosions were heard and documented on many news reports. Sorry dude, but how is that not good evidence? If you have an argument I would love to see it. My mind isn’t made up, but yeah, I’m leaning towards the side that has the most logic and evidence backing it up. You keep telling me to do some research, but yet you should be the one that is doing so. You haven’t presented anything to me that would make me put my argument in question. Also, I am on the “scientific and educational” side, because a lot of what I have researched and even presented makes a lot of sense. I welcome you, or anyone to debunk it, because my mind isn’t made up. Also, you clearly haven’t watched the video because it’s not just some guy who pieced together a documentary from other documentaries. I mean, there are some clips he uses to help present his teams case, but for the most part, he filmed the entire thing himself. You keep trying to point out I have my mind made up; when you’re the one who won’t even bring the alternate theories into question. There’s evidence to back up this side of the story, yet you mindlessly pass it up and dub it as “laughable”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted September 25, 2012 Author Share Posted September 25, 2012 Look I'm not saying you can't view them as evidence and real information. You can do whatever you want I'm just stating where I came from in the whole thing. Also please read my posts if you're going to respond to them. I wasn't saying that about the doc you posted. I have seen it and it's meh imo. I was saying however that when I used to consume those things like crazy I remember coming across one that was just a guy who pasted a bunch of scenes together from other docs. Get off the defensive please and thanks. He and his team presented the case they wanted to present. This is true of most documentaries and the one you posted is no different. A real documentary however isn't supposed to point it's supposed to show. You're doc isn't quite the pointer something like loose change is but it is certainly more tell than show. I also never pointed out that you had your mind made up. I've simple said that I hoped you did not. Bit of a difference with that. How about this to get started. Testimonials from 8 different people that have never met before and all still likely work in the area to this date; have the exact same description of the North route the plane took the day of the attack. This description completely differs from the “official” release of the South route the plane took. QUESTION: So what? 8 different people is nothing. Explain to me the actual significance of that past what you've already said. Likely is also a really bad word to use as a point about something being good evidence don't you think? How many people do you guess saw the route of the plane? Out of them how many do you think would be able to give you a baring of the direction the plane came from? Of them how many could do it just a tragic and extremely stressful situation.Interviews with the cab driver that was supposedly hit by the 1st pole the plane hit couldn't answer any question the OP was asking directly and made things very strange. When he thought he was off camera, his discussions with the OP were contradictory. Questions: Again I say so what? What does that mean. What does "very strange" quantify?Plane contents were never found (Head, Nose, Tail, Fuselage, Seats, Engine, etc.) Question: Why not? What are all the possible explanations? Are you sure they were never found or were they just never reported? (obviously there would be questions with each answer to these questions)Reports of a "second plane" ascending away from the crash site were documented (same plane). Questions: Can I just say dido and point to all the other questions?The official release of the Boeing 757s path to the pentagon didn't match up with the evidence found. According to them, the plane would have been going on such an angle the the engine would have penetrated the concrete. Nothing of the sort was ever discovered. Also the hole it created could not have concealed a Boeing 757, it was to small. Questions: I'm tired of the questions. There are explanations for this and if you really want to educate yourself about them you'd have found explanations for this already. Is there a possibility Boeing is wrong?Explosions were heard and documented on many news reports. Questions: So what could have caused those explosion. What are all the possibilities? Is there a possibility they weren't "explosions"? Ask yourself the questions or don't it doesn't matter to me but if you really want to educate yourself you have to ask questions from both sides supporting all possibilities. Please though I'm not trying to argue with you so if you're taking it personally I simply won't respond anymore because that's not my intention although it's seems to be being taken that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 So when you see this: You're thinking this? Amusingly I was doing a google search for cartoon impression and that's the first that came up. It lead to another article that will help the understanding of the physics involved. http://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 America and other Western states are no monolithic entities but mere chunks of real estate, inhabited by people of different backgrounds and allegiances. One might even say that the defining characteristic of these modern polities is that the actual ruling class--distinct from the one that kisses babies and begs for votes every few years--has little in common with the governed. Over the top talk of "killing one's own" or "attacked itself" is meaningless sans references. No oil in Afghanistan but pipeline projects and poppy fields galore. It would not be a proper war unless someone new was taking over the drug running. The region is strategically desirable and that has not changed since the British made their attempt in the “great game.” No question that things are not always as blatant as the Haliburton case. Where a company is incorporated is not always helpful when it comes to proper accounting of who benefits. There is a reason why nearly half the world’s merchant ships are registered with and fly Panama or Liberia flags. Scrutinize shareholders and foreign subsidiaries and you’ll get a clearer picture. Suffice to say the usual suspects went all in and Tony Blair’s whoredom on behalf of Little Britain did not go unrewarded. In war no battle plan survives contact with the enemy and the aftermath of war is no exception, so there are bound to be a few unforeseen profiteers. But in the end, he who has boots on the ground has the final say on where go the spoils. Reconstruction contracts count as such. And here I thought this was the one point guaranteed to not raise an eyebrow. Perhaps the Israeli student party/movie shoot across the river in Jersey during the event in question wasn’t loud enough. Just some silly kids not up to snuff on what's really good for Israel long term. Or maybe the high-fiving and cries of joy was their particular way of grieving. But that still leaves us with the problem of foresight--knowing when and where to set up shop. Come to think of it, prescience was all the rage in that community and its handling of the tragedy. Silverstein missed his calling as a developer. When you buy asbestos laden buildings in need of refurbishing--not on account of structural deficiencies-- that no one wants, and collects double the insurance few months later, I don’t care what anyone else says: you are the genuine oracle. As to your point about the Middle East being not as stable, with secular violence on the upswing, and Israel not being any safer for it, that is true but only at the individual citizen level, not state. Iraq, once the most modern and militarily potent entity in the region not named Israel, is no longer a threat to anyone. Resistance and terrorism will continue but that is no tragedy for the Jewish regime. It means a more unified populace, amenable to militarily interventions and extra measures needed to cope with the terror. Scratch one, now on to Persia. Look, if you “have a dog in this race,” and there is nothing in you posting that suggests you don’t, that’s fine, I won’t belabor the point unduly. It was an ancillary benefit of the “war on terror” for our corporate-political elite and the state security apparatus, to be sure, but very noticeable. Funny how the book sized "Patriot Act" appeared, with ribbons and whistles the next day. This actually bugs me the most, since it is an all about me world. People in the Middle East can settle their affairs as they like.I don’t much care who is left standing so long as my tax dollars aren’t going to anyone involved. But the troglodytes manhandling me at airports, purporting to be safeguarding my fvveedom against shoe bombers and such, are here and they are annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted September 26, 2012 Author Share Posted September 26, 2012 http://video.cpt12.o...ideo/2270078138 Here's a great documentary. Tons of evidence and expert arguments for all you skeptics. Edit: Seriously, watch it. People need to see this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.