Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Rayaan, I posted links to debunk every "forensic" claim you made. Your forensic evidence has been shown to not be the equivalent of a perfect DNA match, but rather instead more like a skin scraping taken from a 35-year-old dead llama a half-year ago; only with the barest of looks and the absolute pinnacle of ignorance would anyone ever look at this stuff and say "THIS SURE IS SUSPICIOUS AND IT MAKES SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS!!"
That's like someone going up to another person and saying "I PUT A LITERAL HALF-TON OF GINGER, GARLIC, AND SALT IN EVERYTHING I COOK! IT TASTES GREAT!" and that other person, who represents you, going "YOU SAY YOU COOK?! YOU SURE KNOW YOUR SHIT, I AM CREDULOUS TO THE IDEA OF TASTING THIS FOOD."
And then when you taste it and realize it tastes unbelievably fucking atrocious, you also either go "Well. Time to bite the bullet and admit I was a fucking idiot for believing this obviously idiotic claim," or you try to grin with tears in your eyes and your stomach clenching in refusal/ejection, and go "YUP! YUP IT TASTES *choke* G-GREAT!! I RECOMMEND THIS TO *PUKE*"
(October 18, 2013 at 12:59 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Anything that is inconvenient to the "conspiracy" has to go. That's Conspiracy Theory 101.
Anyone who opposes a conspiracy is in on it.
The trick is to oppose the conspiracy, and then just when they're about to call you out on it, you propose an even more elaborate and shadowy conspiracy. Takes the wind right out of their sails, every time. You might even end up with some fans, if you can sound convincing and portentous enough.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
(October 19, 2013 at 2:01 am)LastPoet Wrote: But tell us Rayaan, how did the conspirateurs managed to put charges all over the building, with carefull wiring and still account for 2 airplanes crashed into the building (wouldn't the airplanes explosions cause disruption in the wiring or cause a chain reaction??). The way they done it is like I said... godlike, if you believe that story.
There are many possible ways they could have done that.
The one and only explanation that I heard regarding your question comes from a former CIA asset named Susan Lindauer (whom I discussed more in this post), and she said that a high-ranking State Department official told her that at the end of August, for about two weeks, there were mysterious vans that used to arrive at the World Trade Center. The vans used to come at around 3 o'clock in the morning and they stayed for about an hour-and-a-half to two hours. He (the State Department official) said that this has never happened before, except on the last two weeks of August 2001. He said that the people coming out of the vans were not janitorial workers nor anyone else that he knew. They mysteriously came and left and they did this for about two weeks at around 3 o'clock in the morning.
He also said he was convinced that the vans were carrying some kind of explosives or government-level weapons, because he may have seen them unloading something from the vans and/or maybe captured them on tape. I don't know how, but either way, he said that he was convinced that the vans contained government-level thermite.
Here is a quote from an interview with Susan Lindauer where she mentioned this briefly (some emphasis added):
Quote:While I was writing my book, I had a high-ranking State Department official, who has a very very high, top-top-top security classification, and I cannot name him for you because I don't want to hurt his reputation. He's close to retirement, he's going to have a pension--they would crush him if he was ever exposed, I suspect. He thinks it too. He says that a couple of weeks before 9/11, at the end of August, for about two weeks, strange vans were arriving at the World Trade Center at three o' clock in the morning. They were staying from about three o' clock to about four-thirty or five. They were coming in for a brief period. And he swore to me that he personally had investigated the janitorial services, and he said "I know first hand how many employees the janitorial service had, what their trucks looked like, what their revenues were like, where they lived." He said "we know the addresses." We are confident that none of the people from the janitorial services were tied to these trucks. It had never happened before, it was a unique thing. This was not a constant thing like over a six month period. It was a strange anomaly right before (the attack on) the World Trade Center. And he was convinced that this was government-level thermite, government-level weapons, that had been put into either the stairwells or the elevator shafts. And he is convinced that this is when it happened.
And so the question is, is it just a coincidence that such a thing was witnessed only less than a month away from September 11 and it was never witnessed before?
And that no one even knew what they were doing exactly during those brief periods nor who the people were?
She also said the following in another interview:
Quote:9/11 was an Inside Job that played a magician’s trick on the American people. All eyes were on the left hand — that would be airplanes crashing into the Towers — But the real action was done by the right hand. The controlled demolition of the Towers using a combination of military grade explosives.
There, I bow to explosives experts on the type of explosive devices and materials. There has been some excellent research on thermatic bombs, which produce such heat intensity as to melt steel, and create dust from a sulfur compound. [More recent research, however, especially by T. Mark Hightower, suggests that thermite / thermate / nanothermite could not have been the principal cause of the destruction of the Twin Towers.] Throughout the summer, we discussed the use of a miniature thermo-nuclear device. It could have been a combination.
The point I must underscore is that our discussions from June, July and August always presumed explosives would be used in combination with the airplane hijackings to destroy the Towers. I recall conversations where and how somebody could locate the necessary explosives inside the United States—even a nuke. How those explosives could be stolen from a military base in driving range to New York City. We always forecast the total destruction of the Towers in the attack, and predicted "mass human casualties."
October 19, 2013 at 7:12 am (This post was last modified: October 19, 2013 at 8:12 am by Rayaan.)
Creed and Min,
Your articles in the "debunking 911" website are nothing compared to the very detailed and comprehensive study done by scientists and architects which was published in a peer-reviewed Chemical Physics journal. The title of that paper is "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" and you can view the entire thing at the link below:
Quote:Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.
(October 19, 2013 at 12:51 am)cato123 Wrote: Are you talking about the same government that couldn't keep secret that our top executive mistook a pussy for a humidor?
You can't have it both ways.
Yes, and the same government that didn't tell us anything about it's foreknowledge of 9/11 ...
Quote:A single foreign organisation has the proven capability to deliver *entirely undetected* billions of packages worldwide to hundreds of millions of building interiors, and all within a 24 hour period. Putting tens of thousands of fused explosives in a single building would take minutes at most, probably seconds.
The US military admits an organisation with this capability exists, even tracking them on occasion.
Rather than millions having to be "in on it", only one man was responsible.
And a number of "helpers". And the reindeer of course.
Has any of these conspiracy theorists about 9/11 mentioned a motive for the US to attack itself and blame the Middle Eastern countries?
I know that many people seem to base any US action in the Middle East to be all about oil, but why do we need to attack Afghanistan or Iraq for oil? We don't need any oil from them. We buy most of our oil from Canada and Latin America. The only oil we buy from the Middle East in any significant amount is from Saudi Arabia.
Quote:America is one of the world's largest oil producers, and close to 40 percent of U.S. oil needs are met at home. Most of the imports currently come from five countries: Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela and Nigeria.
...
"People have tended to exaggerate how much oil we imported from the Middle East," says John Duffield, an energy expert and professor of political science at Georgia State University.
"In the long term, it may look like a historical anomaly that the U.S. became so involved in the Persian Gulf," he adds.
(October 19, 2013 at 8:48 am)Rahul Wrote: Has any of these conspiracy theorists about 9/11 mentioned a motive for the US to attack itself and blame the Middle Eastern countries?
I know that many people seem to base any US action in the Middle East to be all about oil, but why do we need to attack Afghanistan or Iraq for oil? We don't need any oil from them. We buy most of our oil from Canada and Latin America. The only oil we buy from the Middle East in any significant amount is from Saudi Arabia.
No, it is not just about oil, as I will show below.
Firstly, it is already known that the US planned attacks on Afghanistan at least weeks before September 11.
Quote:A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.
Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.
Mr Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.
The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to topple the Taleban regime and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place - possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan King Zahir Shah.
...
He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks.
Quote:This conclusion is reinforced by reports indicating that the United States had made the decision to invade Afghanistan two months before the 9/11 attacks. At least part of the background to this decision was the United States’ long-time support for UNOCAL’s proposed pipeline, which would transport oil and natural gas from the Caspian Sea region to the Indian Ocean through Afghanistan and Pakistan. This project had been stymied through the 1990s because of the civil war that had been going on in Afghanistan since the Soviet withdrawal in 1989.
But again, this oil pipeline may be just a very small part of the story.
There could have been yet even a bigger and a more secretive reason for starting a war in Afghanistan which is probably that the CIA and the Pentagon officials had knowledge about the existence of a huge amount of mineral deposits and rare-earth metals in the country, and so then they thought they could make a good profit out of it. See the article below.
Quote:WASHINGTON — The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.
The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.
An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the "Saudi Arabia of lithium," a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.
...
"There is stunning potential here," Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. "There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant."
And it doesn't stop there; it gets even darker. The government's reason for invasion could have been much, much bigger than all the above.
Quote:Massive attention has now been given - and rightly so - to the reasons why Britain went to war against Iraq. But far too little attention has focused on why the US went to war, and that throws light on British motives too. The conventional explanation is that after the Twin Towers were hit, retaliation against al-Qaida bases in Afghanistan was a natural first step in launching a global war against terrorism. Then, because Saddam Hussein was alleged by the US and UK governments to retain weapons of mass destruction, the war could be extended to Iraq as well. However this theory does not fit all the facts. The truth may be a great deal murkier.
We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."
And as soon as the government has established its cynical plans in the Middle East, an attack occurs in America, just in time to gain public support for a war.
Oh woops! ... all this stuff is just a coincidence, guys. Never mind.
(October 19, 2013 at 12:51 am)cato123 Wrote: Are you talking about the same government that couldn't keep secret that our top executive mistook a pussy for a humidor?
You can't have it both ways.
Yes, and the same government that didn't tell us anything about it's foreknowledge of 9/11 ...
and then lied to us:
Bush lied to us, yes, but you are a moron if you think our government planted bombs in the towers. You might as well blame Obama for the Kennedy assassination.
(October 19, 2013 at 4:33 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Bush lied to us, yes, but you are a moron if you think our government planted bombs in the towers.
I have already posted several things that support that scenario. All you did is say that I'm a moron if I believe that the government did it without presenting any kind of an argument.
