| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/20/2006 : 10:53:49 AM
Landmark Implosion Looks Like WTC Collapse
Classic crimp and leaning mirrors Building 7, South Tower
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 20 2006
The controlled demolition of a North Texas building Saturday provided a stark reminder that WTC Building 7 and the twin towers could not have been brought down by any other means than planned implosion.
Watch the video of the Landmark Tower implosion in downtown Fort Worth and compare it to the South Tower of the WTC.
We see the classic crimp and leaning effects of controlled demolition in both cases.
The foundation of the building is blown first to weaken the structure and the building's 30 floors are then quickly popped out one by one to ensure the building falls rapidly in its own footprint.
WTC workers who were inside the building before its collapse state that they were eyewitnesses to underground explosions that were totally separate from the plane impacts.
The building falls faster than the speed of gravity as was the case with the twin towers.
Reminiscent of 9/11, dust then quickly engulfs surrounding city blocks.
Adjacent buildings receive minor damage such as broken windows and yet we are to believe that falling debris caused WTC 7, a 600 foot building that occupied an entire city block, to collapse in the late afternoon of September 11.
The twin towers and Building 7 were the first and only steel buildings to collapse from supposed fire damage in history.
Firefighter dispatch tapes prove that there were no raging infernos inside the towers and the fires were nearly extinguished. Photos before the collapse show a few minor fires in Building 7.
The Windsor Building in Madrid burned for nearly 24 hours as raging fires enveloped almost all of its 32 floors. The steel framed building did not collapse. The South and North towers collapsed within 56 and 103 minutes of being hit by planes respectively.
What is wrong with this picture?
|
| 97 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| rubylith |
Posted - 04/20/2006 : 4:07:40 PM
What a kick in the nuts:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12406547/
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - Defense lawyers closed their case for sparing Zacarias Moussaoui’s life Thursday after the government admitted it had no evidence that he and would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid were to have joined in a hijacking as part of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
What a surprise...
SHOW US THE PENTAGON VIDEOS!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| Emily |
Posted - 04/14/2006 : 3:35:23 PM
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
Here's a link with a bunch of timelines of the people and events that deal with 9/11. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 04/13/2006 : 11:30:25 AM
I was writing this and then I found a better wording. As I am not a prolific writer.
But to distance ourselves from allegations that whatever evidence the government produced we wouldn't believe them, the fact remains that alleged voice tapes from Flight 93 do not explain how an aircraft that supposedly nose dived into a Pennsylvania field fully intact before it hit the ground created a debris field 8 miles wide.
The government is certainly not reluctant to release tapes that contain voices of Arabs shouting Allah Akbar but seems to go shy when the tapes contain conversations between air traffic controllers, as the New York Times reported
"At least six air traffic controllers who dealt with two of the hijacked airliners on Sept. 11, 2001, made a tape recording that day describing the events, but the tape was destroyed by a supervisor without anyone making a transcript or even listening to it."
Officials destroyed the tapes despite FAA orders to retain all evidence relating to the events of that day. So keen were 'quality assurance managers' to get rid of the tapes that one, "crushed the cassette in his hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in different trash cans around the building."
The tapes included conversations between the air traffic controllers and people on the hijacked planes. No doubt that the tapes included conversations about the wargames that the real attacks were piggy-backed onto and also tidbits of information from the helpless passengers that would completely reverse the accepted orthodoxy of Arabs with boxcutters.
Why Americans have had to endure endless replays of Flight 175 hitting the south tower yet not one has seen Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon (bar a few grainy frames) remains to be seen
Another photo displayed to the jury in Alexandria, Virginia, taken by a parking-lot camera showed the explosion of the jetliner striking the Pentagon building. Sixty-four people on the plane and 125 military personnel and civilians in the Pentagon were killed. FBI Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire, who investigated the crash of American Airlines flight 77, described the photos for the jury," reported Bloomberg.
And just remember, Forrest Gump shook hands with Kennedy...
THIS JUST IN! They found a picture of the SHanksville wreckage finally!
|
| PJK |
Posted - 04/13/2006 : 10:50:27 AM
I think the flight box recorder put holes into your conspiracy theory about the plane not hitting the ground in PA. Flight 93 did go into PA soil nose first, no doubt about it in my mind.
There was a great show on the history channel last week about the grounding of all the airplanes on 9-11. The footage shown of the PA crash was definitely that of a commercial jetliner. There was a lot of debris on the ground and they did retrieve the flight box recorder.
|
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 04/01/2006 : 7:20:42 PM
You going to show us that picture of you now, HKG? |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 04/01/2006 : 03:49:48 AM
Your intense dementia intrigues me, HKG. AHAHA |
| HotKoreanGirl |
Posted - 03/31/2006 : 4:07:37 PM
What's up you guys?! I was gone long, but not forever, I missed the intense discussions, the meaningful banter about anything in particular...I'm glad 9/11 is being investigated further (I'll check out that other thread that was just started.)
Nice pic of Thom York and Bush...genius. See, it makes sense when you seem them in the same photograph...you just know they are in Cahoots! |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 10:34:47 PM
holy shit. the last person on the planet i expected to hear from again, especially in this thread. hahaha. magnificant. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 8:24:10 PM
Hey, everybody! It's everyone's favorite asian transsexual. Welcome back, Hot Korean He-She.
I am playing a show at the local Masonic Lodge this weekend, then being sacrificed to a giant owl.
Check it out.
Show at 8, Ritual Slaughter at 9. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 7:44:44 PM
I KNOW!!!
haha
anyway, I am gonna start a new thread because something very important just happened. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 7:12:05 PM
HAHAHAH HKG, you still bent over that radiohead thread?
oh man that made my day |
| HotKoreanGirl |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 4:48:25 PM
It is obvious to me by now, that Radiohead is responsible for the demolition of the twin towers & building 7.
Radiohead are freemasons--memebers of the ancient scottish rite, but not members of skull and bones, so their political ties are good but not as good as they could be.
Radiohead was hired as indpendent contractors by Jeb Bush's security company to rewire the WTC with faster CAT-5 ethernet cables on september 7th 2001--the weekend before the disaster. It is well documented that the building's security was shut down during the time of the wiring, allowing contractors, and plastic explosive experts (as well as Radiohead) to gain unrestricted, unsupervised access to the buildings.
Radiohead sensed that their music was becoming shitty, and they needed to go out with a bang. What better way then to destroy a key symbol of
the prime subject matter of their records?
I think the evidence is clear as crystal.
|
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 3:01:59 PM
nice Eric...and Dan, you are so fucking funny sometimes....
When I picture us typing I see a bunch of dudes with angry looks on their faces with the digital shine of a blue background bouncing off there face...ah the internet.
Anyway....looks like that about sums it up...I will post more stuff as it happens.
With the trial, they are suppossed to release the "video" of the "plane" hitting the Pentagon on a CD-ROM, yes a CD-ROM...not sure why.
Either way, lets say it shows a plane, everyone will complain that its fake...and If it didn't show a plane, I know they wouldn't release it.
Who knows, the truth movement is growing by the second, it feels good that we are no longer in the minority. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 2:33:50 PM
#1: The dates of said events and governments have nothing to do with the fact that they happened. You completely missed the point. The point shown was that governments have done such things before, and to not put it past human nature now. In fact, you disproved your point yourself in the same post. You're right, Rome was over a millenium ago, Japan was over 50. That's a span of quite many centuries, how can you say things like that can't or won't happen again? No one even said anything about the entire country being guilty of those actions, either.
#2: No, I have never talked to a member of the mafia. However, as for your idea that my notion of the mob is movie-driven, you've got quite an unrealistic view of criminals. Organized crime is an illegal form of immense profit, not a club that enjoys destroying property and killing people, only to make a few million a year on the side.
#3: Yes I have spoken to a person who is a millionaire and owns a sizeable portion of a company. Out of respect of privacy and common decency I'm not going to give you his first and last name. I will tell you this, however. He has told me some eerie stories about the communications business's cooperation with the NSA. If your previous few calls do not match certain algorithms or show a clear enough pattern, there's a very good chance that the NSA has listened in on your calls. You probably won't believe me anyways because you don't seem to be unwilling to accept anything we have to say, but take my word for it.
You keep saying a whole lot of nothing, bud. Sentences just trying to discredit or mock things we say. I still see almost no sources from you. I still see you've avoided numerous other points. Allow me to refresh your memory:
The missing rubble in the plane crashes
The missing black boxes
The collapse of a steel structure in an impossibly short time for a fire.
The only time a steel structure has ever collapsed like that "due to fire."
The controlled demolition of building 7.
The reports of blasts being heard by eyewitnesses.
The list goes on, but how about you reply to any of those first, hmm? |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 2:23:36 PM
why the fuck do you even bother? do you honestly think peewee gives a shit about anything you just wrote? you need to re-evaluate peewee before you try talking to him again. some things you need to understand is that he's playing the impericist card, not because he believes in that line of thought, but only because it helps his percieved points. he's a regular david hume, except hume always stuck with it. it's the desperate man's trump card:
"let me ask you something. Has anyone here ever talked to a member of the Italian mob? Have you gotten any information about who they are or how they operate thats not from a movie? The other accusation is the evil business owners. Has anyone here ever talked to a business man worth atleast $1 million in the past week. Past month? Past 10 years? How is it you know SOOO much about these people?" i find this line of questioning hilarious coming from someone who believes in god. turn this on yourself, peewee. take every belief you have. do they all have their roots in sensory input? i would suggest that they don't. i would also suggest that because they don't, this mode of argument is off limits to you. if you don't hold yourself to certain criteria, you cannot hold others to it, unless you either lack awareness about yourself, or are just full of shit.
i don't believe this theory, either. it's valid, but validity is not the same as truth. there are some facts you need to face. you have an extrodinarily loose grasp on the principles of debate and scientific method, and my guess is you care little for this debate at all one way or another. this is just more of your "introducing chaos" bullshit or whatever faux-intellectual name you put on "being an asshole to people you don't know for no reason."
i think now would be a good time to remind everyone that terrible spelling during debate makes you look like an idiot and does nothing to help your case. and always will. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 2:00:13 PM
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
I gave a few examples of fraud in general because you said that the reason why we think CEOs are bad is from television and movies (whihc I agree, television and movies can alter your opinion by using fiction, not fact). The worst financial crims in history have happened within the past 10 years.
If you want examples of fraud involving 9/11 here are some reads:
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/12_06_01_death_profits_pt1.html
FTW, December 6, 2001 -- On October 9th, FTW broke a story on insider trading connected to the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center that sparked worldwide controversy. In that story we reported how the Israeli Herzliyya Institute for Counterterrorism had documented that unknown individuals -- with accurate foreknowledge of the attacks -- had purchased an obvious and unusually large number of "put" options on United and American Airlines shortly before the attacks.
http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html
Pre-9/11 Put Options on Companies Hurt by Attack Indicates Foreknowledge
Financial transactions in the days before the attack suggest that certain individuals used foreknowledge of the attack to reap huge profits. The evidence of insider trading includes:
Huge surges in purchases of put options on stocks of the two airlines used in the attack -- United Airlines and American Airlines
Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of reinsurance companies expected to pay out billions to cover losses from the attack -- Munich Re and the AXA Group
Surges in purchases of put options on stocks of recorded by several financial services companies hurt by the attack -- Merrill Lynch & Co., and Morgan Stanley and Bank of America
Huge surge in purchases of call options of stock of a weapons manufacturer expected to gain from the attack -- Raytheon
Huge surges in purchases of 5-Year US Treasury Notes
In each case, the anomalous purchases translated into large profits as soon as the stock market opened a week after the attack: put options were used on stocks that would be hurt by the attack, and call options were used on stocks that would benefit.
Put and call options are contracts that allow their holders to sell and buy assets, respectively, at specified prices by a certain date. Put options allow their holders to profit from declines in stock values because they allow stocks to be bought at market price and sold for the higher option price. The ratio of the volume of put option contracts to call option contracts is called the put/call ratio. The ratio is usually less than one, with a value of around 0.8 considered normal. 1
Losers
American Airlines and United Airlines, and several insurance companies and banks posted huge loses in stock values when the markets opened on September 17. Put options -- financial instruments which allow investors to profit from the decline in value of stocks -- were purchased on the stocks of these companies in great volume in the week before the attack.
United Airlines and American Airlines
Two of the corporations most damaged by the attack were American Airlines (AMR), the operator of Flight 11 and Flight 77, and United Airlines (UAL), the operator of Flight 175 and Flight 93. Put option purchases for companies such as UAL and AMR. 2 According to CBS News, in the week before the attack, the put/call ratio for American Airlines was four. 3 The put/call ratio for United Airlines was 25 times above normal on September 6.
The spikes in put options occurred on days that were uneventful for the airlines and their stock prices.
On Sept. 6-7, when there was no significant news or stock price movement involving United, the Chicago exchange handled 4,744 put options for UAL stock, compared with just 396 call options -- essentially bets that the price will rise. On Sept. 10, an uneventful day for American, the volume was 748 calls and 4,516 puts, based on a check of option trading records. 5
The Bloomberg News reported that put options on the airlines surged to the phenominal high of 285 times their average.
Over three days before terrorists flattened the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon, there was more than 25 times the previous daily average trading in a Morgan Stanley "put" option that makes money when shares fall below $45. Trading in similar AMR and UAL put options, which make money when their stocks fall below $30 apiece, surged to as much as 285 times the average trading up to that time. 6
When the market reopened after the attack, United Airlines stock fell 42 percent from $30.82 to $17.50 per share, and American Airlines stock fell 39 percent, from $29.70 to $18.00 per share. 7
Reinsurance Companies
Several companies in the reinsurance business were expected to suffer huge losses from the attack: Munich Re of Germany and Swiss Re of Switzerland -- the world's two biggest reinsurers, and the AXA Group of France. In September, 2001, the San Francisco Chronicle estimated liabilities of $1.5 billion for Munich Re and $0.55 bilion for the AXA Group and telegraph.co.uk estimated liabilities of £1.2 billion for Munich Re and £0.83 billion for Swiss Re. 8 9
Trading in shares of Munich Re was almost double its normal level on September 6, and 7, and trading in shares of Swiss Re was more than double its normal level on September 7. 10
Financial Services Companies
Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. and Merrill Lynch & Co. were both headquartered in lower Manhattan at the time of the attack. Morgan Stanley occupied 22 floors of the North Tower and Merrill Lynch had headquarters near the Twin Towers. Morgan Stanley, which saw an average of 27 put options on its stock bought per day before September 6, saw 2,157 put options bought in the three trading days before the attack. Merrill Lynch, which saw an average of 252 put options on its stock bought per day before September 5, saw 12,215 put options bought in the four trading days before the attack. Morgan Stanley's stock dropped 13% and Merrill Lynch's stock dropped 11.5% when the market reopened. 11
Bank of America showed a fivefold increase in put option trading on the Thursday and Friday before the attack.
A Bank of America option that would profit if the No. 3 U.S. bank's stock fell below $60 a share had more than 5,900 contracts traded on the Thursday and Friday before the Sept. 11 assaults, almost five times the previous average trading, according to Bloomberg data. The bank's shares fell 11.5 percent to $51 in the first week after trading resumed on Sept. 17. 12
Winners
While most companies would see their stock valuations decline in the wake of the attack, those in the business of supplying the military would see dramatic increases, reflecting the new business they were poised to receive.
Raytheon
Raytheon, maker Patriot and Tomahawk missiles, saw its stock soar immediately after the attack. Purchases of call options on Raytheon stock increased sixfold on the day before the attack.
A Raytheon option that makes money if shares are more than $25 each had 232 options contracts traded on the day before the attacks, almost six times the total number of trades that had occurred before that day. A contract represents options on 100 shares. Raytheon shares soared almost 37 percent to $34.04 during the first week of post-attack U.S. trading. 13
Raytheon has been fined millions of dollars inflating the costs of equipment it sells the US military. Raytheon has a secretive subsidiary, E-Systems, whose clients have included the CIA and NSA. 14
US Treasury Notes
Five-year US Treasury notes were purchased in abnormally high volums before the attack, and their buyers were rewarded with sharp increases in their value following the attack.
The Wall Street Journal reported on October 2 that the ongoing investigation by the SEC into suspicious stock trades had been joined by a Secret Service probe into an unusually high volume of five-year US Treasury note purchases prior to the attacks. The Treasury note transactions included a single $5 billion trade. As the Journal explained: "Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the US. The notes are prized for their safety and their backing by the US government, and usually rally when investors flee riskier investments, such as stocks." The value of these notes, the Journal pointed out, has risen sharply since the events of September 11. 15
-----
But it was during the final few trading days (the market closes on weekends) that the most unusual variances in activity occurred. Bloomberg data showed that on 6 September 2001, the Thursday before that black Tuesday, put-option volume in UAL stock was nearly 100 times higher than normal: 2,000 options versus 27 on the previous day.
On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines' stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.
On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines' option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.
Also be sure to check out:
http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/archive/911/insider_trading.htm
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/29/MN186128.DTL
http://www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/14340.exclude.html
http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/INDEPENDENT_Mystery%20of%20terror%20%27insider%20dealers%27.htm
http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm
Now could we please get back to the subject at hand, perhaps commenting on this SFGate article:
http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/ |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 1:50:16 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
ugh.
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/speeches/ashley112105.htm
The Enron Task Force has charged 34 individuals to date, including 21 executives, and has seized over $227 million. Andrew Fastow, Enron's former chief financial officer, pled guilty to conspiracy charges. He will serve a 10-year sentence and will cooperate with investigators concerning the role of other Enron executives. Additionally, Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay, CEO Jeffrey Skilling, and Chief Accounting Officer Richard Causey were indicted on an array of charges, including multiple counts of securities fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, insider trading, and conspiracy.
http://www.askmen.com/money/professional_100/114b_professional_life.html
Jack Welch, former CEO and Chairman of GE, was offered a ton of stock options in exchange for postponing his retirement. Instead of accepting the gargantuan offerings, he simply asked the GE board of directors to extend some of the benefits that came with his position into his retirement. Thus, he would be afforded use of an apartment in Manhattan and of the GE jet.
http://www.fortuneeducation.com/preview_guides/fpg_04282003.html
"Exorcism at Tyco," pp. 106-110: Former CEO Dennis Kozlowski built Tyco through an epic buying spree in which he spent $63 billion from 1994 to 2001 to acquire 1,000 companies. It turns out that Kozlowski spent lavishly on himself as well as the company. With Kozlowski and former CFO Mark Swartz indicted for pilfering $400 million from company coffers, current CEO Ed Breen has the dual challenge of turning around the company's performance (last year Tyco lost more than $9 billion on mostly flat revenues of $36 billion) and its image (Tyco is at the top of the list of corrupt companies). In his first five months on the job, Breen replaced Tyco's executive team and its entire board. However, accounting problems are still surfacing. In March, after a major bond offering to refinance $6 billion of debt, Tyco announced more charges -- up to $325 million -- for accounting improprieties in the European units of alarm company ADT. Breen points to the difficulties of finding all suspect accounting practices in a company of Tyco's size. He also believes that any new charges will relate only to Tyco's previous financial statements, not future results. Only time will tell. (http://www.tyco.com)
I could keep going but I have a lot to do today.
And could we please stick to the WTC false flag attack? Comment on this SFGate article, it is very comprehensive.
http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/
And enough with trying to undermine me, I clearly not making anything up, what would be the point? I don't have to !
why would I want to hurt my credibilty as a normal guy who likes to read about fucking scumbags by making up stuff when there is a plethra of information available that confirms what I have been posting?
There's a HUGE difference between fraud and killing 2,000+ people.
I'm having fun because I don't really have to discredit you. We just have to keep seeing all the facts you're misinterpreting.
(I think now's a good time to remind everyone that my spelling is terrible and always will be) |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 12:26:47 PM
ugh.
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/speeches/ashley112105.htm
The Enron Task Force has charged 34 individuals to date, including 21 executives, and has seized over $227 million. Andrew Fastow, Enron's former chief financial officer, pled guilty to conspiracy charges. He will serve a 10-year sentence and will cooperate with investigators concerning the role of other Enron executives. Additionally, Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay, CEO Jeffrey Skilling, and Chief Accounting Officer Richard Causey were indicted on an array of charges, including multiple counts of securities fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, insider trading, and conspiracy.
http://www.askmen.com/money/professional_100/114b_professional_life.html
Jack Welch, former CEO and Chairman of GE, was offered a ton of stock options in exchange for postponing his retirement. Instead of accepting the gargantuan offerings, he simply asked the GE board of directors to extend some of the benefits that came with his position into his retirement. Thus, he would be afforded use of an apartment in Manhattan and of the GE jet.
http://www.fortuneeducation.com/preview_guides/fpg_04282003.html
"Exorcism at Tyco," pp. 106-110: Former CEO Dennis Kozlowski built Tyco through an epic buying spree in which he spent $63 billion from 1994 to 2001 to acquire 1,000 companies. It turns out that Kozlowski spent lavishly on himself as well as the company. With Kozlowski and former CFO Mark Swartz indicted for pilfering $400 million from company coffers, current CEO Ed Breen has the dual challenge of turning around the company's performance (last year Tyco lost more than $9 billion on mostly flat revenues of $36 billion) and its image (Tyco is at the top of the list of corrupt companies). In his first five months on the job, Breen replaced Tyco's executive team and its entire board. However, accounting problems are still surfacing. In March, after a major bond offering to refinance $6 billion of debt, Tyco announced more charges -- up to $325 million -- for accounting improprieties in the European units of alarm company ADT. Breen points to the difficulties of finding all suspect accounting practices in a company of Tyco's size. He also believes that any new charges will relate only to Tyco's previous financial statements, not future results. Only time will tell. (http://www.tyco.com)
I could keep going but I have a lot to do today.
And could we please stick to the WTC false flag attack? Comment on this SFGate article, it is very comprehensive.
http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/
And enough with trying to undermine me, I clearly not making anything up, what would be the point? I don't have to !
why would I want to hurt my credibilty as a normal guy who likes to read about fucking scumbags by making up stuff when there is a plethra of information available that confirms what I have been posting?
|
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 12:09:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Rome, Israel, U.K., U.S., and I believe the SOvet Union was documented as being "involved" in an attack on either a hospital or a school.
I'm not cutting down the same tree, I'm eating away at foundations of sand. You guys, once again, are beleiving Rubylith without question. Not only that anything posted after this specific thread I'm qouting is all speculation. "I believe", "I think"... that's all your saying, especially when not citing any sources.
Let me ask you something. Has anyone here ever talked to a member of the Italian mob? Have you gotten any information about who they are or how they operate thats not from a movie? The other accusation is the evil business owners. Has anyone here ever talked to a business man worth atleast $1 million in the past week. Past month? Past 10 years? How is it you know SOOO much about these people? In this case Rubylith is very right about not watching T.V.. These money arguments, along with the thread tearing down christianity, are mostly based on movies. In most cases the movies you watch are propaganda against these people.
I mean let's start by naming a single CEO's first and last name. Then name a single person currently in the mafia. Name someone worth more than $1 million that's not bill gates or donald trump. (Obviously musicians are immune to greed so they don't count)
You guys are building these arguments on such speculations and stereotypes. I'm not by far the one grasping at straws. And by the way I did talk to a millionaire this week on the phone. I'm about to e-mail him. Want me to ask if he's ever killed anyone? I'm sure the movie Hostel is based on him.
EDIT: (not done ranting yet)
"Rome, Israel, U.K., U.S., and I believe the SOvet Union"
Rome as in the romans? Over 1,500 years ago?
Isreal? When who where?
U.K.? This one really confuses me because I can't think of a common conspiracy for the U.K. but likely you're refering to a war with the Scottish or the French. None of these are even close to current events.
U.S.? Oh you mean when we helped castro take over... OVER 50 YEARS AGO
Soviet Union? Likely but once again, the soviet union does not currently exist.
Japan? Oh you mean BACK IN WWII!!?!?!!?!? OVER HALF A CENTURY AGO
This is why you have to be specific. Once again the same people in power then are not now. Just because somebody else did something a long time ago, doesn't mean everyone in that country is guilty of those actions.
Let's focus on a specific and simple concept of Economics.
"America stops trade with Japan"
Not true, or possible. America deoesn't trade with Japan. An individual of America decides to trade with an individual of Japan. They happen to live in seperate companies, but the whole of the united states has nothing to do with the owner of Sears ordering TV's from the owner of Sony. So remember that a specific person carried out the actions in question. In all of these examples I'm pretty sure the people involved, like the emperor of Japan, are dead right now. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 07:50:59 AM
I'd give my life for the cause, bring it on tyrants!
Great point Dan, most people do have a price. Most people are obsessed with gadgets, money, status, fashion, and all out crap. I think television has played a huge role in this. Actually, nevermind, it has always existed, what I think television has done is made it more widespread, and made people with relative wealth feel as if they are them, but they aren't.
We swallow our pride like a birth control pill, selling our soul to the eye on the back of the dollar bill.
Check out this great SFGate article:
http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/
Here it is: an absolutely exceptional inside scoop on the white-hot world of Sept. 11 conspiracy theories, writ large and smart by Mark Jacobson over at New York magazine, and it's mandatory reading for anyone and everyone who's ever entertained the nagging thought that something -- or rather, far more than one something -- is deeply wrong with the official line on what actually happened on Sept. 11.
See, it is very likely that you already know that Sept. 11 will go down in the conspiracy history books as a far more sinister affair than, say, the murky swirl of the Kennedy assassination. You probably already know that much of what exactly happened on Sept. 11 remains deeply unsettling and largely unsolved -- or to put another way, if you don't know all of this and if you fully and blithely accept the official Sept. 11 story, well, you haven't been paying close enough attention.
But on this, the third anniversary of the launch of Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq by way of whoring the tragedy of Sept. 11 for his cronies' appalling gain, what you might not know, what gets so easily forgotten in the mists of time and via the endless repetition of the orthodox Sept. 11 tale, is the sheer volume, the staggering array of unanswered questions about just about every single aspect of Sept. 11 -- the planes, the WTC towers, the Pentagon, the fires, the passengers and the cell phone calls and the firefighters and, well, just about everything. It is, when you look closely, all merely a matter of how far down the rabbit hole you are willing to go.
|
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/30/2006 : 12:56:36 AM
money is a very persuasive force. but i don't think it's money itself. i think it's the power that money transfers. that power can vary. it can be the power that comes from being influential in your community, the power you can exert over other people through money, and so on to larger and larger scales. but the power can be smaller, more subtle, but just as potent. we all feel jealousy. money would allow us to make those we once envied become envious of us, and we've all wanted to rub their noses in it. we've all had to deal with bigger people knocking us aroud. we've all feared the rich and powerful. and there's always some part of us that wants to strike back at these people, and we hold it in check because we lack the means. money could give you those means. though we may not admit it except late at night in the darkness, there's a part of us that wants nothing more than revenge. money tempts us to fall to this.
i believe, wholeheartedly, that everyone has a price. everyone you pass on the street, me, you, everyone on this board, everyone in all of our families. everyone. for some people, that price may be very high, impossibily high even. for others, relatively low. some never realize that they've made a deal at all. what do you want most of all? even for the most noble cause, that is your price. this of course begs the question, what would you do for it? |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 9:04:29 PM
Biff, not every one, and had I not spent about 10 hours after watching the movie finding the documentation behind the points, I'd not bring them up.
Dave also finds a lot more time to put into this, and thank goodness for that. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 7:45:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Rome, Israel, U.K., U.S., and I believe the SOvet Union was documented as being "involved" in an attack on either a hospital or a school.
Not to mention the Japanese. They bombed their own railroads in Korea to initiate their invasion, claiming they struck first.
Peewee, once again, forget Osama that's a very small aspect of the debate here. There's a forest of points to counter here, and you're still trying to cut down the same tree. Either way, Osama would be a convincing suspect because that's what prime suspects are: convincing. At least until empirical evidence is found.
What about the blasts? What about the towers falling after less than two hours of burning? What about the unusual "wreckage sites?"
By the way, don't question money as a force for motive. It's not just a movie-theatre plot. Do you think the Italian mafia murder and steal regularly for fun, or for millions? Do you think the textile industry as well as the lumber industry lobbied against legal marijuana because they thought it was an evil plant? Wake up, the tremendously wealthy can often be tremendously wicked.
|
| Bakun214 |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 4:16:50 PM
peewee..I may only be 14..I may not know much of this subject, but to me it seems like you're losing. Just stop the nonsense..please. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 3:34:45 PM
Rome, Israel, U.K., U.S., and I believe the SOvet Union was documented as being "involved" in an attack on either a hospital or a school. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 3:18:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
they found 2 passports on the ground of the "hichjackers'...bullshit.
We are gonna keep going abck and forth, either way, the fact remains, Building 7 was taken down by a controlled demolition and 9/11 was carried out with military presescion.
Who had the equipment, the means, the motive?
I think that much is clear.
Governments do this, they carry out attacks and blame it on their enemies.
Honestly I don't think the motive is clear. I mean you can try to repost the plot to The World is not Enough again.
"Governments do this"
Explain. which governments? When? |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 1:41:24 PM
they found 2 passports on the ground of the "hichjackers'...bullshit.
We are gonna keep going abck and forth, either way, the fact remains, Building 7 was taken down by a controlled demolition and 9/11 was carried out with military presescion.
Who had the equipment, the means, the motive?
I think that much is clear.
Governments do this, they carry out attacks and blame it on their enemies. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 1:34:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Biff actually, that video came out about 2 and a half years after I found out what the government did. The only reason I tell people to watch the video is because it is easier for people to do. People don't like to read or reasearch and the video is VERY well done, and very easy to watch...
-text removed for space-
First of all
http://abcasiapacific.com/cause/network/harakat.htm
"the hijacking of an Indian airliner en route from Nepal to India in December 1999. One passenger was stabbed to death; "
(can't take over a plane with a knife... not at all!)
Second all of those sources are confirming what I just said. Also HUM, also on that same source, was destroyed thansk to our war in Afghanistan."until they were destroyed by coalition air strikes in 2001, in eastern Afghanistan." so I say that's an even better reason to have gone in.
Now I'm not questioning that The U.S. government aided the Majahudin. I'm also not questioning that they helped fund any other organizations. I'm sure they were more than happy to help anyone stop communisim, even if unknowingly helping a worse enemy. That conspiracy theory has motive atleast and I don't really doubt it. Just remember in America we have a republic consisting of elected officials. These officials have term limits and have to be re-elected. The people elected to be in power between 1988-1996 are not specificially the people elected to be in power in 2001-present. So if you're so obsessed with this portion name the people in power.
Lastly I'm not sure where you're going with the last source about Osama being a prime suspect. Like I've stated before I'm pretty sure that he was on the top 10 FBI most wanted for terrorist attacks. Excuse the president for pointing his fingers at someone on the top 10 most wanted list.
Now if you're talking about the "Bush administration concluded without supporting evidence, that 'Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organisation were prime suspects'" and refereing to where I didn't see evidence directly pointing to Osama. Notice how it talks about his organization. He has deep roots in that organization and several other terrorist organizations. One such is HUM that you've mentioned. Although he specifically is not accused, he is in an organization that was and we are hunting everyone in that organization.
About the source you discredit it was the first hit when going to ask.com and searching "what about afghanistan". I was going to leave it out but I thought that it was important that the first hit on ask.com disproves you. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 11:15:30 AM
Biff actually, that video came out about 2 and a half years after I found out what the government did. The only reason I tell people to watch the video is because it is easier for people to do. People don't like to read or reasearch and the video is VERY well done, and very easy to watch. I do not sit ethat as a source, it is full of documents and resources to research. I think it is a good video, but I base my knowledge on the documents (which they do cover) that I have sifted through for a while now.
I'm sorry but "http://www.storm.ca/~ouelletr/x-ray/index.htm" is not a source....Here is a little info on the connection bewtween the two:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahidin :
The mujahedeen won when the Soviet Union pulled troops out of Afghanistan in 1989, followed by the fall of the Mohammad Najibullah regime in 1992. However, the Mujahedeen did not establish a united government, and they were in turn ousted from power by a radical splinter group known as the Taliban in 1996. They regrouped as the Afghan Northern Alliance and in 2001 with U.S. and International military aid, they ousted the Taliban from power and formed a new government under Hamid Karzai.
http://abcasiapacific.com/cause/network/harakat.htm :
HUM is aligned with Osama bin Laden's network and has been assisted by al Qaeda in the form of finance and training, including training at camps in Afghanistan that also provided training to al Qaeda recruits.
Or read Zacarias Moussaoui's Indicment :
http://www.msnbc.com/modules/wtc/walker/
providing, attempting to provide, and conspiring to provide material support and resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations, namely, al-Qaeda and Harakat ul-Mujahideen ("HUM"),
(6) from a Taliban recruiting center in Kabul, Afghanistan, Walker was referred to an Arabic mujahideen group that Walker was told was run by Usama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist organization;
(9) after training at al-Farooq, Walker was deployed with other al-Qaeda mujahideen to the front line in Takhar;
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html :
A few hours after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Bush administration concluded without supporting evidence, that "Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organisation were prime suspects". CIA Director George Tenet stated that bin Laden has the capacity to plan ``multiple attacks with little or no warning.'' Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks "an act of war" and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would "make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them". Former CIA Director James Woolsey pointed his finger at "state sponsorship," implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, "I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution."
Meanwhile, parroting official statements, the Western media mantra has approved the launching of "punitive actions" directed against civilian targets in the Middle East. In the words of William Saffire writing in the New York Times: "When we reasonably determine our attackers' bases and camps, we must pulverize them -- minimizing but accepting the risk of collateral damage" -- and act overtly or covertly to destabilize terror's national hosts".
The following text outlines the history of Osama Bin Laden and the links of the Islamic "Jihad" to the formulation of US foreign policy during the Cold War and its aftermath.
|
| Biff the Pig |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 11:11:54 AM
peewee you have to understand that hopeful is getting EVERY ONE of his facts from that video he is trying to tell you to watch.. now rubylith is doing mostly the same thing but he has bought into this so much that he has taken the time to try to do a little research on his own. i cant say whether im for or against what rubylith and hopeful are arguing with you about, but if you arent going to watch that video i just thought you should know where "sources" were coming from. now continue to argue all. hearts! |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/29/2006 : 10:55:11 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Actually Al-Qaeda was not formed by Osama, but rather they were created from the Mujahadeen, who was created, funded, trained and armed by our own government. After the Soviets were gone the remaining members, who were in an FBI database that was referred to as "The Base" later changed to Al-Qaeda.
"The group was founded by Usama Bin Laden and Muhammad Atef"
http://www.storm.ca/~ouelletr/x-ray/al-qaeda-history.htm
"Al-Qa’ida was established by Usama Bin Ladin in 1988 with Arabs who fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union."
http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/qaida.htm
an Islamic terrorist organization started in 1988 by Osama bin Laden to resist Soviet forces in Afghanistan
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=Al-Qaeda
"Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khadamat (MAK) — a mujahideen resistance organization fighting against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Osama bin Laden was a founding member of the MAK"
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Al-Qaeda
Pay attention mostly to the last fact (notice that I use sources). This is what you're misinterpreting. I'm assuming that you're lying or wrong about this and everything else until you start using sources. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 11:30:45 PM
It's all there, man. Seek and ye shall find.
The coroner said there wasn't "a drop of blood anywhere." Hmm? |
| PJK |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 11:29:56 PM
For what its worth, In 1994 in Aliquippa PA a Boeing 737 went down near Pittsburgh PA. From what I remember people saw it justtook a nosedive into the ground, slamming in hard.
I only remember this one because at the time my son was on a travel soccer team and one of the other soccer mom's had a brother who was a pilot. He told her that the plane was downed because there was someone who was in the witness protection program on board. He said they were told not to say anything about it, but he told his sister and she told me. I imagine others told people as well.
Anyway, point is, they did find pieces of wreckage. Here is a link to a website with pictures http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1997/beat-reporting/works/737-3/
Also information. September 8, 1994
The crash of U.S. Air flight 427 near Aliquippa, Pennsylvania is one of the worst U.S. airline disasters still assigned to the unexplained category. All 132 people aboard (126 passengers and a crew of six) perished when the Boeing 737 mysteriously plunged to the ground while preparing to make a stop at Pittsburgh International Airport while en route from Chicago to West Palm Beach, Florida. A five-month study by the Federal Aviation Administration failed to reveal even a single clue to the cause of the disaster. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 10:17:30 PM
Yeah those are all the pictures I saw, as well as the supporting evidence of the normal plane crash. Any other normal plane crashes to help support that? I nkow history channel said that flight 191 was "the worst plane crash ever in american history" but that might not be in terms of sheer oblivion of rubble.
Everytime I watch footage of the buildings coming down I get chills now. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 9:57:19 PM
Delta or AA flight 191? Was there no rubble in that case? I am not familiar, however I did find
http://www.airdisaster.com
There are a lot more accidents then you would think.
WHAT PLANE? |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 9:29:45 PM
Wow... Have there ever been any other plane wreckages where there was no rubble found? I saw the clip of flight 191's crash, but that's only one contradicting case. Any more? That's really fascinating. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 9:14:49 PM
BUILDING 7:
http://70.84.33.210/%7Einfomedi/video/previews/170305martialpreview2.wmv |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 5:26:46 PM
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/emptyhole.htm
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/index.htm
Where is the plane?
God damn I can't believe people believe the official story, it is such bullshit. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:37:24 PM
quote:
You guys don't have much understanding of the human thought process.
First of all evidence requires scrutiny. Questions have never been evidence.
Second, and very important, the burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is no where even near me. These are some very serious accusations. Even supported with facts and citation, which they haven't been, they're still accusations. My responsibility in a debate and in real life is to merely cast a shadow of doubt.
human thought process? quit being belligerent for no reason, it makes you seem like an ass. please take note that i'm not calling you an ass, i'm saying it makes you sound like one. second, the burden of proof is on you in this discussion simply because you're the primary debater against this whole 9/11 set-up idea, so please, if you're going to post 10 times on a thread in a debate arguing, back it up. I wouldn't call it a burden, really, though i guess, it's more of a social understanding. If you stand on a soap box shouting accusations about the government blowing up the towers, you get nowhere and look like a moron. If you present points that POSE questions, not present questions, but present EVIDENCE(please don't twist my words, especially when you quote from me), then you look intelligent, insightful, and bring up debate. Likewise, if you counter an argument with a whole lot of words that don't disprove any of the points made and start off your posts with sentences insulting our intelligence, you look like an ass. Please, I challenge you to give a sound explanation as to why the black box was not found from the plane and is the first to have ever not been found. I challenge you to give a sound explanation as to how molten steel was found in the wreckage when the heat produced from a plane crash, burning jet fuel, etc., could not have burned hot enough to melt steel. I challenge you to give a sound explanation as to why the twin towers went down in a matter of minutes when steel buildings have burned for hours and been gutted, but never have come crashing to the ground in such a manner. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:21:02 PM
Dan P, much respect. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:17:31 PM
pee wee is one of these republicans who doesn't deal well with facts that run counter to he's somewhat rosy view of america. you're not going to convince him because guess what? he doesn't want to be convinced. it's not that he's stupid or scared. just stubborn. he's not that different from me.
that doesn't excuse you, pee wee. i won't sit here and tell you not to be so "mean" or whatever. but i will say that you need to fucking look at the posts before you retype the same shit over and over again. no citations. i see links everywhere. even if i discount some of the more dubious ones, there's still links. do you bother to look at them? because you're not really responding to anything. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:15:14 PM
Kids shouldn't have kids.
Again, if you'd watch the documentary, all of the sources are there: from articles to network TV broadcasts to official documents.
If these things won't change your mind, then nothing will, because these are the facts and it is the truth. When the few become many, maybe then you will remove your head from the sand.
You're right, I don't have a clue about your perception of life. Thank God. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:10:31 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Hopeful Rolling Waves
Again, you say nothing, congrats.
I hope you'll be happy with the world your children are gonna grow up in.
I actually said quite a bit. It's like nobody but me has even been in a debate class.
I forgot to mention one little detail to Rolling Waves: Have twin girls who are teething and then call somebody lazy again. You have no clue about real life, do you? |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:06:00 PM
please stop talking about me.
Please, comment on the building 7 video evidence...im kinda sick of this thread. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 4:05:47 PM
Again, you say nothing, congrats.
I hope you'll be happy with the world your children are gonna grow up in.
Again, if you'd watch the documentary, all of the sources are there: from articles to network TV broadcasts to official documents.
If these things won't change your mind, then nothing will, because these are the facts and it is the truth. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 3:58:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by guitarisPIMP
I've tried to stay out of this thing for a while, but I have to add my two cents, now, because this is really getting heated when it shouldn't be.
First of all, if this is going to be a civilized discussion, argument, debate, whatever you wanna call it, leave the name-calling out of it. It just squelches each others' interest in listening to the coherent things each party is trying to say here.
Second, I don't see the point in demanding proof. I would prefer to call most of the information cited and discussed here that has to do with the topic "evidence." That's what it is. There are a multitude of peculiar events involving 9/11 that one could call evidence that the government was involved in 9/11. That is UNDENIABLE. Peewee, if you deny this, then I am forced to conclude that you really haven't read much of what rubylith and hopeful have been saying.
Nevertheless, there could be evidence supporting the other side of this claim: that the government was just as much a victim as everyone else in the disaster.
Scanning over this post one more time, I've come to notice that there is quite alot of evidence supporting rubylith's claim. Alot of unanswered questions, alot of supported claims. Looking at this thing rationally, I would say Peewee has got to do a little more research to give a convincing argument, at this point I really just see the belittling of everything rubylith has been saying, and some unecessary dispute over one FBI file that has little relevance to 9/11.
You guys don't have much understanding of the human thought process.
First of all evidence requires scrutiny. Questions have never been evidence.
Second, and very important, the burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is no where even near me. These are some very serious accusations. Even supported with facts and citation, which they haven't been, they're still accusations. My responsibility in a debate and in real life is to merely cast a shadow of doubt.
Too many people here truely believe that the burden of proof is on anyone that disagree's with Rubylith. Imagine a world where everyone who made an accusation had the benefit of the doubt. Pretty much the exact opposite of our (united states) current court system. I say Rubylith rapes goats. Now prove me wrong!!!
To address rolling waves, I'd like to point out that he previously stated he'd ignore me, right after calling me names for almost no aparent reason. For he who ridiculed me for not haveing a computer, he's not kept true to that. Also the reason I've not really even bothered to read that post you refer to is that I'm speaking with rubylith. I'm generally talking to him specifically and I apologize if I take precautions to avoid the fact that everyone's ganging up on me. I'm focusing arguments on his comments and not really yours but I can try to include you if you feel left out.
The basic premiss of my arguments are that I personally am not the one with the burden of proof, therefore I must merely cast shadow of a doubt. I'm winning a debate because Rubylith keeps refusing to cite sources when I challenge him. He refuses to take this burden of proof seriously. Sadly when he can't even take that seriously everyone takes him so serious. But no matter how you slice it these claims are off the cuff at least and for the sake of intellegent beings everywhere he must not be given the benefit of the doubt.
Lastly about the "rewritting history" argument. History was written one way. Rubylith claims it was wrong. Nomatter whether he is right or wrong this conspiracy theory is the one rewritting history. You may beleive it's for the better but that doesn't change the one doing it. Once again I really beleive you can find out what rubylith is up to by listning to what he accuses the other side of. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 2:49:36 PM
yea peace everyone. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 2:46:48 PM
Thanks for your poignancy, Eric, but peewee_zz is still a lazy fuck. AHAHA.
You have to understand, it is not just on the board that we talk about these things, we try to ask questions of everyone we know about what they really know about what happened on 9/11 and other events, so when we try to explain to someone who is clearly trying to beat around the issues we are specifically trying to address, it gets frustrating. I don't dislike peewee-zz, I just think he's fucking ignorant; and he has proven as much.
I think I have established myself on these boards as a pretty positive source in the TR community over the last couple years, and it's not just on here I try to help out others and whatnot. When peewee_zz establishes himself as something other than a self-absorbed blabber-mouth, I will stop the slander. Until then...
PEACE! |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 2:31:40 PM
nice job, thanks  |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 2:14:52 PM
I've tried to stay out of this thing for a while, but I have to add my two cents, now, because this is really getting heated when it shouldn't be.
First of all, if this is going to be a civilized discussion, argument, debate, whatever you wanna call it, leave the name-calling out of it. It just squelches each others' interest in listening to the coherent things each party is trying to say here.
Second, I don't see the point in demanding proof. I would prefer to call most of the information cited and discussed here that has to do with the topic "evidence." That's what it is. There are a multitude of peculiar events involving 9/11 that one could call evidence that the government was involved in 9/11. That is UNDENIABLE. Peewee, if you deny this, then I am forced to conclude that you really haven't read much of what rubylith and hopeful have been saying.
Nevertheless, there could be evidence supporting the other side of this claim: that the government was just as much a victim as everyone else in the disaster.
Scanning over this post one more time, I've come to notice that there is quite alot of evidence supporting rubylith's claim. Alot of unanswered questions, alot of supported claims. Looking at this thing rationally, I would say Peewee has got to do a little more research to give a convincing argument, at this point I really just see the belittling of everything rubylith has been saying, and some unecessary dispute over one FBI file that has little relevance to 9/11. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 1:19:27 PM
the poll finished with 50,000 individual votes and 83% agreeing that there was a 9/11 coverup.
I think it is time the video of the pentagon is released...if they want to prove us wrong, just release the video.
Either way building 7 taken down by a controlled demolition, there is no way to dispute that and anyone who thinks fires did it is either a child, uneducated, or just plain ignorant. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 1:12:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by spaceoddity
Peewee ZZ mentioned at the end of one of his posts here..."Its not OUR responsibilty to inform you".I was just curious to know who the "OUR" is. quote:
Next you have to prove that an alternative scenereo is impossible. In this case recreate the plan crash and fires. Try this to see if the destruction is consistant. If it's not then try again. Present your results. If somebody doubts your evidence then conduct the experiment again. In this case once again release the results. If somebody doesn't beleive your results then they simply don't. I bet you don't believe results saving millions of HUMAN lives. It's not our responsibilty to beat this information into you. If you don't believe it then you don't believe it.
I apologize I didnt have time to to quote this properly before, I guess what you said is..."It's not our responsibilty to beat this information into you".I guess what I'm wondering if the "OUR" you are referring to are the 83% or the 17% per the CNN Headline News poll.
83% and 17% being the people that watched that segment. Also being the people that were aware of the poll and that bothered to enter it. (not everyone who watches American Idol Votes BTW) When I had looked at the poll it was a poll of about 2,000 people. If that's the whole of the audience of CNN they really need to rethink their strategies. A more accurate poll would be a neilson ratings of the people who did not even tune in versus the people that did. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 12:07:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
you're an idiot. You have no refuted one piece of anything either one of us has said, you are convinced that amatures with boxcutters did this...but I assure you, if you do a little research and check out the video footage of building 7 and flight 93, you will see, it is all BULLSHIT.
All you do is call me names and tell me to watch a video. Also the "facts" you mention are never cited nor explained. You have not offered any actual proof apart from telling me to watch a video. (btw did you watch hannibal again yet?)
I'll generalize you and you try to disprove it:
To find out what Rubylith is up to, look at what he accuses you of. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 12:04:56 PM
you're an idiot. You have no refuted one piece of anything either one of us has said, you are convinced that amatures with boxcutters did this...but I assure you, if you do a little research and check out the video footage of building 7 and flight 93, you will see, it is all BULLSHIT. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 11:59:51 AM
quote:
Originally posted by peewee_zz
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Actually Al-Qaeda was not formed by Osama, but rather they were created from the Mujahadeen, who was created, funded, trained and armed by our own government. After the Soviets were gone the remaining members, who were in an FBI database that was referred to as "The Base" later changed to Al-Qaeda.
By the way, the FBI page is exactly the same, mine came from a direct link toward the bottom right of www.fbi.gov.
The "highjackers" (who are still alive) and AL-Qaeda are certainly not innocent...Dude just look at building 7...it was a controlled demolition..no doubt.
NO IT WASN'T..
Notice the page you gave has no date of creation. There's 1 or 2 traits missing. And one of the paragraphs is changed.
I didn't have time to type out the entire thought, in fact i had to close the window quickly. My point is that the document he used has doubt, especially since it didn't have an issue date. If this document is false or out of date how many other documents has Rubylith cited that are either false or out of date.
To address the same server, ip addresses and domain names can be easily spoofed. One possibility is that it's a user uploaded file on a public folder. www.microsoft.com/rubylith would still be the microsoft domain. This probobly is not the case, although a possibility which is why I also mention that it could be out of date or even discontinued.
You "raise some interesting questions" but when I ask for actual proof you call me names. This is an equivilent question. If you don't need facts I don't need facts. Now that you've been fed your own crap see how it digests. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 11:45:43 AM
It's still on the fbi.gov server, it's the same site; and it doesn't explain the discrepancy between the "confession tape" and the FBI description of Bin Laden.
You are reallly grasping for straws here.
Again, please counterpoint my 3/27/06 post from 3:13PM. You asked for some facts, now you do your part. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 10:51:41 AM
Are we even arguing about anything relevant anymroe? Like reports of 4th explosions going off on every news channel? Or Building 7's collapse...or the insider trading before 9/11.
Enough with the conspiracy theory of the official story. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/28/2006 : 10:34:48 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Actually Al-Qaeda was not formed by Osama, but rather they were created from the Mujahadeen, who was created, funded, trained and armed by our own government. After the Soviets were gone the remaining members, who were in an FBI database that was referred to as "The Base" later changed to Al-Qaeda.
By the way, the FBI page is exactly the same, mine came from a direct link toward the bottom right of www.fbi.gov.
The "highjackers" (who are still alive) and AL-Qaeda are certainly not innocent...Dude just look at building 7...it was a controlled demolition..no doubt.
NO IT WASN'T..
Notice the page you gave has no date of creation. There's 1 or 2 traits missing. And one of the paragraphs is changed. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 7:24:24 PM
Yeah, that page is identical, now we all know you're not paying attention.
Thanks for the help proving you're an idiot. Now do me a favor, and counterpoint my post from this afternoon (3:13:22 PM). I am curious to see what shit you come up with there. Maybe the same exact facts? You lazy fuck.
EDIT: I was gonna remove the offending clause, "You lazy fuck." But you are a lazy fuck, so I left it. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 7:11:11 PM
Actually Al-Qaeda was not formed by Osama, but rather they were created from the Mujahadeen, who was created, funded, trained and armed by our own government. After the Soviets were gone the remaining members, who were in an FBI database that was referred to as "The Base" later changed to Al-Qaeda.
By the way, the FBI page is exactly the same, mine came from a direct link toward the bottom right of www.fbi.gov.
The "highjackers" (who are still alive) and AL-Qaeda are certainly not innocent...Dude just look at building 7...it was a controlled demolition..no doubt.
|
| spaceoddity |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 5:08:08 PM
Peewee ZZ mentioned at the end of one of his posts here..."Its not OUR responsibilty to inform you".I was just curious to know who the "OUR" is. quote:
Next you have to prove that an alternative scenereo is impossible. In this case recreate the plan crash and fires. Try this to see if the destruction is consistant. If it's not then try again. Present your results. If somebody doubts your evidence then conduct the experiment again. In this case once again release the results. If somebody doesn't beleive your results then they simply don't. I bet you don't believe results saving millions of HUMAN lives. It's not our responsibilty to beat this information into you. If you don't believe it then you don't believe it.
I apologize I didnt have time to to quote this properly before, I guess what you said is..."It's not our responsibilty to beat this information into you".I guess what I'm wondering if the "OUR" you are referring to are the 83% or the 17% per the CNN Headline News poll. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 4:58:36 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Check out his FBI profile...
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm
Doesn't even mention 9/11
I started some light research on Usama (about 15 minutes at the end of the work day) and here's what I found out:
The actual Bin Laden page form the FBI is:
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
Yours might be fake or outdated as it has less actual information on him.
As far as the 9/11 they I did not find comments accusing him directly, only having been associated with. However I'd like to hear you prove that Al Queda was not directly involved. (which bin laden founded)
Also Bin Laden never actually worked for the CIA. Here's the fact and the source that you're misinterpreting:
"Bin Laden eagerly sent money, supplies, and weapons to the mujahideen in Afghanistan. Furthermore, under CIA supervision Bin Laden was trained by American special forces in guerilla warfare to counter the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden
NEXT! |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 3:51:01 PM
Check out his FBI profile...
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm
Doesn't even mention 9/11 |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 3:25:16 PM
If you take so much stock in the FBI's Most Wanted List, why is Bin Laden listed as being left-handed when in the "confession tape" he writes a note with his right hand, also he wears a gold ring which is forbidden by Islamic law and not mentioned in his profile.
Hmm?
And P fucking S, retard. You think Rubylith just made made that up outta thin air? What if he did cite sources for you? It wouldn't make a difference. You're going to believe what you believe cause that's all you have. Luckily, other people here are actually looking into this matter for themselves, which you clearly have done none of, and are finding out the same things Dave and I have been following for a long time now. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 3:17:20 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Anyone that supports the war in Afghanistan probably doesn't realize the massive pipeline deal that was set in stone days before 9/11.
Afghanistan was directly in the way of the path for the pipeline.
Did you know that the Taliban visited Texas when Clintonw as President. Israel also trained them in Pakistan.
As quiet as the media was about the evidence pointing towards Israeli involvement in 9-11, the media was quite the opposite when it came to claims of proof linking ex CIA agent Osama bin Laden with the crimes. The reason was obvious. Long before the attacks on the World Trade Towers the United States had been planning for a war in Afghanistan to create a climate more favorable for American oil companies. John Marcesca, as part of a UNOCAL working group on the Afghanistan pipeline project, had gone before Congress and stressed the necessity of replacing the Afghanistan government before a pipeline from the Caspian sea to the gulf of India could be built. The Bush White House admits that a plan to attack Afghanistan existed BEFORE 9-11. Following 9-11, the US did replace the government of Afghanistan, and the pipeline is under construction. One member of the UNOCAL working group, Hamid Karzai, is the President of the new government in Afghanistan. Another UNOCAL group member, Zalmay Khalilzad, is the US special envoy to Afghanistan. A cozy relationship to be sure!
Nice story, I'd like to see actual facts used (citing sources)
One interesting thing to point out against your love affair with Osama is that I'm pretty sure he was #1 on the F.B.I. wanted list before 9/11. If not he was close. Watch Hannibal, (Feb 2001) and look at the most wanted list that the frenchman reads about Hannibal. Osama's on that list.
(I can tell you to just go wtch movies too!) |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 3:13:22 PM
Alrighty then, guy.
Shanksville, PA: No plane wreckage. Parts of shrapnel from said plane (no larger than a phone book) spread 8 miles from the 'crash site.' A crater 20' by 10', no fire, no wreckage, coroner reports stating he found not a drop of blood, let alone a body. Hmm?
Pentagon: The 16 foot hole in the Pentagon certainly does not appear to be the product of a 130 ft wide commerical airliner flying into at 500mph. Donald Rumsfeld didn't even leave the building.
Surveillance cameras from businesses in the area that would have captured a plane flying into the side of the Pentagon were immediately seized by the FBI, and never released, despite the fact that if they released the video, there would be no questions as to the story's validity.
Bits of fuselage and engine components found at the site have all been examined and reported by their manufacturers to NOT be pieces from the plane said to have hit the Pentagon.
There is no damage to the lawn at the Pentagon despite governments reports that the plane hit the ground and skidded into the building.
WTC: Larry Silverstein 6 weeks before the attacks buys the WTC complex and insures it for 3.5 billion dollars on a 99 year lease, insuring it specifically against terror attacks.
Days before the attacks, thousands of put options are placed on Boeing and American Airlines, millions of which has yet to be claimed because of the implications involved with collecting this money. The SEC will NOT release their findings in the investigation of this matter.
Despite never previously happening, the WTC buildings held 'security drills' and blackouts, during which surveillance cameras were useless and guard dogs were removed from the buildings. These security operations were enacted by Marvin Bush, George's cousin, who is the head of security for the WTC complex, Dulles Airport and other high security establishments. Hmm?
During the time before the buildings' collapses, many firefighters inside the towers were reporting that the fires inside the buildings could be put out, though, also reported were many secondary explosions inside the building, from the firefighters as high as the 78th floor down to reports from a 20yr WTC maintainence man reporting explosions in the BASEMENT. Two magnitude 2 earthquakes were recorded seconds before the buildings collapsing, which doesn't occur unless the force is ground-coupled.
A study was done shortly after this event to determine the effectiveness of cellular telephones on airplanes in the same conditions as the 9/11 flights. It was concluded that it is near impossible to get a single cell phone connection, let alone all the calls reported to have been made during the flights (only one of which was released, and is highly suspect in nature.)
And the list goes on...
PS: The Taliban is a great excuse to get into Afghanistan to build the pipeline, again, we funded the Taliban's operations in the 90's and gave them money, weapons, and intelligence support. Why go after them now? To stop a dictatorship? AHAHAHA...Do you have any idea what's been going on in Sudan for years now? Mass murder and displacement of millions of innocent Sudanese. Being massacred for the same reason early Americans massacred the Natives here. Why? Shit, why does anyone kill anybody? No logical answer to that. But if you think we're being all brave and shit, and taking out some horrible oppresive government, you're being extremely naive. America does not get involved in ANYTHING unless it's got $$$ involved. Ain't no oil Sudan, so all those people can be slaughtered, and that's just fine by us. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 1:15:47 PM
Anyone that supports the war in Afghanistan probably doesn't realize the massive pipeline deal that was set in stone days before 9/11.
Afghanistan was directly in the way of the path for the pipeline.
Did you know that the Taliban visited Texas when Clintonw as President. Israel also trained them in Pakistan.
As quiet as the media was about the evidence pointing towards Israeli involvement in 9-11, the media was quite the opposite when it came to claims of proof linking ex CIA agent Osama bin Laden with the crimes. The reason was obvious. Long before the attacks on the World Trade Towers the United States had been planning for a war in Afghanistan to create a climate more favorable for American oil companies. John Marcesca, as part of a UNOCAL working group on the Afghanistan pipeline project, had gone before Congress and stressed the necessity of replacing the Afghanistan government before a pipeline from the Caspian sea to the gulf of India could be built. The Bush White House admits that a plan to attack Afghanistan existed BEFORE 9-11. Following 9-11, the US did replace the government of Afghanistan, and the pipeline is under construction. One member of the UNOCAL working group, Hamid Karzai, is the President of the new government in Afghanistan. Another UNOCAL group member, Zalmay Khalilzad, is the US special envoy to Afghanistan. A cozy relationship to be sure! |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 12:52:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Hopeful Rolling Waves
You are a young man with a bad attitude and even worse sense of humor.
Watch the documentary and come back with counterpoints, I can't type 1 hr and 20 minute worth of points for you on the board, because you need to be spoonfed everything. I know you're afraid, as fear is all you've really revealed to us here.
"You're afraid".. that's even better than "Watch the video" which you've also squeezed in there. "Watch the video" is not an argument or even a generalization misused as an argument.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. And what makes it even more fun is that you refuse to argue on my terms. I made some logical arguments on how to interpret mentioned facts. Instead of addressing ANYTHING that I say you want me to play in your ball park. You're specifically setting up an uneven playing field. Because I'm smart enough to avoid it and not anty-in you disegard me.
This means I can simply keep saying whatever I want and since all you're going to do is name call and tell me to watch more movies I'll make another point.
One thing I've noticed is that Rubylith also disagrees with the Afgahnistan war. So far plenty of people disagree with the Iraq war and get pretty involved with opposing it. One thing that maintains rather unbreakable is the justification for the war in Afgahnistan. Nobody wanted the Taliban in power and at the very least we've destroyed a good portion of people that are responsible for much more attacks than just 9/11. Anyone who opposes the war in Afgahnistan generally commits immediate political suicide.
Certain absolute, no matter what, war is evil beleivers haven't had the ability to attack the war in Afgahnistan because there's no grounds to oppose it, especially with the human rights attrocities hapening from the Taliban. Now with 9/11 out of the way in your views you can extend from anti-Iraq war to anti-Afgahnistan war. I'm not saying that everyone buying into the conspiracy does it for this reason, but I get the impression that this and just plain anti-Iraq mentalities are fueling this. It really looks like people standing in crowds with "Bush is Hitler" signs.
|
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 10:55:05 AM
You are a young man with a bad attitude and even worse sense of humor.
Watch the documentary and come back with counterpoints, I can't type 1 hr and 20 minute worth of points for you on the board, because you need to be spoonfed everything. I know you're afraid, as fear is all you've really revealed to us here. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 10:53:06 AM
ugh... |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/27/2006 : 09:53:11 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Hopeful Rolling Waves
You are the most malinformed person I had have ever had contact with.
You'll have to point out specific things. I mean if you want to keep up an intelligent argument then you can't just make accusations.
You could call me an @$$hole again. I think that would help the cause loads! |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 11:09:16 PM
You are the most malinformed person I had have ever had contact with. |
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 9:08:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
The official version of the WTC collapses defy both Galileo’s Law of Falling Bodies, and also Isaac Newton’s First Law of Motion.
The law of falling bodies is the total distance travelled at the end of any specific time in a total vaccuum and it is measured by Distance (D) = (32.16/2) x time in seconds squared. If there there is any resistance then the speed and time of the body slows down in relation to that resistance.
It would take 9.1627 seconds with no resistance. There was resistence by 250 steel columns and thousands of steel trusses.
When a theory, or even a law of physics is challenged by actual events it is then tested and altered by scientists. This happened several times about 5 years ago with the laws of gravity. A satallite didn't react to gravity according to the existing theory. They applied the scientific method, edited the theory and haven't lost one because of it since.
Back to the point that the demolition of a different building (most specificially with drastically different interior support structures) does not specifically apply to the demolition of another unless the theory has actually been tested. One such insident DID happen with 2 very similar buildings. It happened on 9/11/01. Obviously it happened just like the satellite unexpectedly repelled by gravity instead of attracted. Instead of making accusations you should perform experiments. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 7:53:04 PM
The official version of the WTC collapses defy both Galileo’s Law of Falling Bodies, and also Isaac Newton’s First Law of Motion.
The law of falling bodies is the total distance travelled at the end of any specific time in a total vaccuum and it is measured by Distance (D) = (32.16/2) x time in seconds squared. If there there is any resistance then the speed and time of the body slows down in relation to that resistance.
It would take 9.1627 seconds with no resistance. There was resistence by 250 steel columns and thousands of steel trusses.
|
| peewee_zz |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 7:13:15 PM
I'm going to try to start it off right this time.. about the demolition theory.
Rubylith may or may not raise some interesting questions, however in the real world things have to be proven. He talks about how people so much smarter than us agree, therefore it has to be right.
Dear Mr. Weather man, when will the next tornado happen? Oh you could make an educated guess? That's certainly not a fact. Well do you think we'll get another this year?
O.k. enough fun with that.
The real point is that in REAL life the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is used to test theories. In the case of the Scientific method you'd set up a control group. This would be an actual building or a scale model of a demolition. Then you set up the expirmental group. In order to prove that the towers collapsed in a way consistant with an implosions, you try to recreate what happened. It may be very well not possible for towers of that size, shape, and location to implode in the manner that MUCH SMALLER buildings that you show in your picture. I'm no expert but I do know that nothings proven until you apply this.
Next you have to prove that an alternative scenereo is impossible. In this case recreate the plan crash and fires. Try this to see if the destruction is consistant. If it's not then try again. Present your results. If somebody doubts your evidence then conduct the experiment again. In this case once again release the results. If somebody doesn't beleive your results then they simply don't. I bet you don't believe results saving millions of HUMAN lives. It's not our responsibilty to beat this information into you. If you don't believe it then you don't believe it.
The point is that instead of creating random speculation you've done everything in your power to actually prove something. You have scientific evidence. If you or all of your PHD friends don't have the resources to do this, write in to Mythbusters. They've actually performed the scientific method more than you guys have. So in essence you have less credibility than the myth busters.
You have my conditions, now stop speculating and start getting some actual evidence.
BTW the "WATCH MY VIDEO" response is still funny. If only you watch enough videos. Obviously I don't have the access to the pamphlets that you have. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 5:45:15 PM
Thanks for that tremendous insight, Biff.
I was refering to the Japanese people's enviromental acuity and conservativism as opposed to the Chinese, who are less earth-concious and certainly more populous, however, share the same over-ethusiasm for American 'free' enterprise. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 1:33:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Hopeful Rolling Waves
The Japanese, depsite us firebombing their entire country (destroying most of their predominantly wooden structures, and killing an insane amount of civilians) have been completely obsessed with American lifestyle for decades now, but they are no where near the dimensions of the Chinese.
|
| Biff the Pig |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 03:19:11 AM
japan china not the same |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 4:47:32 PM
and there's a shit-ton of americans obsessed with japanese culture, too. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/24/2006 : 1:24:04 PM
AHAHA, I don't actually sulk about this stuff, if anything, it's empowering to know that there actually is a good fight to be fought.
As for me, I have a great life. Just took a few months off to hang out (cause I could comfortably afford to)...got to see Tim play 3 nights in a row, got to hang out with the guy, got the shows on tape to share with the community I am actively a part of.
Aside from all the anti-fascist stuff I post, I put pretty decent guitar tabs up of Tim's stuff, and I just got to play an open mic by myself for the first time last nite. My life is pretty damn fun, man.
Although, I can't forget about those people who can't have lives like ours becuase they were born into a situation where it was not possible. America is great in theory, free enterprise, everyone can win...I like that idea. BUT...big business sucks that dry...media crushes creativity...fraud and lawsuits ruin insurance and health care for the common man. Too much bad stuff.
And for the record, China doesn't hate us, Bill Clinton's economical whoring out of our country and resources saw to it that we would make billions in China, and now most of what were traditional Chinese are now chomping at the bit to lead an excessive American lifestyle, and this means BIG problems for China's ecosystems, and the world in general. Because of production by-prodcuts and waste, 7 rivers in China are dangerous to the TOUCH they are so contaminated. The Japanese, depsite us firebombing their entire country (destroying most of their predominantly wooden structures, and killing an insane amount of civilians) have been completely obsessed with American lifestyle for decades now, but they are no where near the dimensions of the Chinese.
It's all happening man, and it's not get better before it gets worse unless EVERYONE does a part. |
| Biff the Pig |
Posted - 03/24/2006 : 08:39:36 AM
hopeful, you guys got me. i seriously do pretty much believe the 9/11 stuff. i had always questioned it in my mind, but that propaganda video helped a tad. i still dont agree with a few of the arguements on there(such as the only motive being gold..), but even with those few disaggrements it is still very out of the ordinary. i also still retain my happy life. knowing that doesnt cause me to sulk, because i still have so many blessings that i am thankful for. i also believe that there are bigger things to come. so i am just in preparation for those things. im not ignorant to what happend in the past, im preparing for things in the future. |
| Hopeful Rolling Waves |
Posted - 03/24/2006 : 03:00:09 AM
Ignorance certainly is bliss, eh, Biff. Enjoy your existence, guy, more power to you.
All we do is sit around and cry about all these horrible things that happen everyday that you can ignore because you live in a world where these troubles don't exist.
I wish I didn't have to worry about how much energy I use everyday, or about how a covertly oppresive government-that has been allowing a fool to sign whatever bills he wants into law despite Congress' vetoes of them while him and his Big Oil buddies make billions of dollars strangling the energy market with the same Persian pals that 'we' are sworn against, while us suburbanites sit around saying "Gee...that gas is gettin' expensive."-is slowly destroying the concept of PRIVACY. Man, that would be just dandy...but, silly me...I think about people other than myself...
...what an asshole I am.
Carving out a life for yourself is respectable, I try to do the same...but how many people can you touch if you have your head down?
Dan, from what I understand, billions of dollars and the power to do essentially whatever you want is a pretty good motive.
The CIA gave Bin Laden and Al Qeada hundreds of millions of dollars and tons of weaponry hardly a decade ago...why? We didn't know they were crazy? They played it straight at the meeting where the US GOVERNMENT gave them a war-in-a-handbasket? Where do you think they got all this shit they are killing people with? The Soviet Union? The Bin Laden family is among the richest families in Saudi Arabia...remember...the country we just sold 7 major Eastern ports to? Building 7? 3 buildings collapsed that day, one of which was hardly even mentioned...yup, just a big fat building, falling to the ground at freefall speed...no plane hit it, and this, several hours after this first 2 buildings collapsed. Molten steel found 7 sublevels down in the towers 5 weeks after the collapses. No plane wreckage in Shanksville...footage courtesy FOX Television, thanks, guys. Black Box info from the planes said to be not found, or not publically released, despite the fact that none of those particular Black Boxes were ever NOT recovered from a domestic plane crash.
Too many questions, guys, too many.
I require rest. Good night, and good luck. AHAHA |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/24/2006 : 01:48:02 AM
you realize of course, with that last paragraph, that you wrote something with which i cannot argue, thereby creating a paradox of such psycological weight that it has shattered the space time continuum into what are called "reality shards." these shards act a prism, giving birth to myriad warring universes, all suspended in a sea of untime.
i hope you're fucking happy. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 03/22/2006 : 12:38:43 AM
Plus your name is Biff the Pig. I like your name. I don't know what it means, but I like it sir and/or ma'am. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/22/2006 : 12:30:30 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Biff the Pig
ive been meaning to keep my nose out of everything that you say rubylith...but this is all you talk about. horray, you've found your answers. we are all aware of how you think. i like to think about things that make me happy that i live in this country, and happy that i have a wonderful family, and happy that i have this opportunity at life, and HAPPY. i dont try to blot out adversity, i try to keep a realistic view of the world around me. and realisticly i have no reason to worry about how 9/11 happend, it was tragic, but i believe there are bigger things to come which i need to prepare for. i really dont know why im saying this on a forum, other than i like the characters here. its like reading a book b/c i dont know what any of you look or sound like in reality. i know a few things;
dan p. argues with everybody, rubylith talks about this stuff and probably always will, half of the people here side with rubylith it seems and half don't, Fluffy is the main man (the guy that takes Tim on his tours and does stuff with the site, i met him, he is very cool), peewee_zz is a newbie but i think hes is one of the funniest on this site, and EVERYONE tries to act smart on here, and they post paragraphs (me included now)
this place is awesome
Hell yea that is the best thing I have heard all day |
| Biff the Pig |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 10:54:26 PM
ive been meaning to keep my nose out of everything that you say rubylith...but this is all you talk about. horray, you've found your answers. we are all aware of how you think. i like to think about things that make me happy that i live in this country, and happy that i have a wonderful family, and happy that i have this opportunity at life, and HAPPY. i dont try to blot out adversity, i try to keep a realistic view of the world around me. and realisticly i have no reason to worry about how 9/11 happend, it was tragic, but i believe there are bigger things to come which i need to prepare for. i really dont know why im saying this on a forum, other than i like the characters here. its like reading a book b/c i dont know what any of you look or sound like in reality. i know a few things;
dan p. argues with everybody, rubylith talks about this stuff and probably always will, half of the people here side with rubylith it seems and half don't, Fluffy is the main man (the guy that takes Tim on his tours and does stuff with the site, i met him, he is very cool), peewee_zz is a newbie but i think hes is one of the funniest on this site, and EVERYONE tries to act smart on here, and they post paragraphs (me included now)
this place is awesome |
| guitfiddler |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 9:20:36 PM
This subject is fascinating to me. I had heard of this before i started reading these threads, but never really looked into it, so forgive me for not being too educated on it. Don't you think that there are more reasonable ways to accomplish the same goal that does not involve killing thousands of people? Don't you think that they would have tried those first? I realize that they acting on behalf of large corporations that are by definition heartless, but that is just a little too ballsy. Osama had already "declared war" on the U.S. during the Clinton administration. Was that not enough of an excuse to attack any country harboring him? To be guarded enough to make new policies like Homeland Security? If you can make sense of this, that would be great.
By the way, does ruby remind anyone else of Dale Dribble from King of the Hill? (no offense) |
| Jay |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 8:43:02 PM
My faith in humanity has fallen so far down the hole that I wouldn't be half surprised if one day, Bush just said, "Hey, lets blow sumthin' up..." |
| SpaceMonkey |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 8:41:22 PM
i love hearing "new world order" and "bloodlines" in the same thread; it either has something to do with the knights templar or professional wrestling...two fantastical subjects of note
sorry, i'm just bustin yer chops...i hope yer right..i need something like big brother to get my ass in gear anyways..dude i am one lazy mofo |
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 5:50:26 PM
alright. fair enough. i mean, except for fear. that's not really a motive in and of itself. that's more a means to an end. and i think you're oversimplifying the lack of motive for bin laden and al-qaida. |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 10:29:29 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rubylith
Did al-CIAda have the motive...who I might add we created, trained, armed, and funded!
No they did not.....
Did our government?
Hmmm Patriot Act, Afghanistan, Iraq, Biometrics, Homeland Security?
I think we have a winner.
I briefly explained the movites. I mean look at the trillions of dollars our government has received and the contractors, look at the establishment of Homeland Security, the roll back of civil rights with the Patriot Act, the survellience, RFID technology, the takeover of the media, and FEAR.
Our government had the motive, hands down, not some group of poor trash who would have put a target on there homeless families living in inhumane conditions in Afghanistan.
I believe some of the figures would be the Rothschilds, Rockafellers, Cheney, Bush's, Bundy's and some other bloodlines.
|
| dan p. |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 09:55:42 AM
all of this great and everything. i'll take the physics shit at your word. but one thing that i've never seen explained in any of these theories is the small detail of "motive." you see, when people do things, they tend to have reasons for them. motive is really important for proving someone did something. and everyone just focuses on the physics. that doesn't mean anything, none of this means anything, without establishing a motive. i'm not going to buy any new world order stuff either, just a heads up.
when you talk about the new world order, do have specific people you think are part of it, or it more just a board of shadowy figures in your imaginings? |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/21/2006 : 09:14:28 AM
First to address the "You're Crazy" comment and the "Conspiracy Theory" comment.
I'd say the conspiracy theory is that 19 highjackers (who some are still alive see this BBC report) carried out the most sohpisticated attack on American history, taking orders from a CIA agrent named Bin Laden from a cave. Not to mention they found not ONE but TWO passports which managed to fly through the burning plane, through the metal, down on to the ground for the police to fnid, yet they weren't able to locate any black boxes (which actually isn't true they did find one but the informationw as never made public).
Not to mention that they are withholding thousands of amature video from the WTC demolition and the FBI confiscated all video survellience from the Flight 77 attack (Pentagon), including one from a Citgo gas station across the street. So far no video has been released showing a 757 hit the poentagon, not to mention the hole created was 16 feet in diameter.
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also served.
Check out this video showing the blast points form the world trade center.
The buildings came down at the speed of gravity, which would be IMPOSSIBLE according to Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies.
No steel building has ever collapsed due to fire, yet every building at the WTC complex did that day, and the main engineer for the two towers said "they could withstand multiple airline crashes and a 150 year storm".
And don't forget Larry Silverstein admitted they "pulled building 7 and watch the building collapse".
Also take into account the Northwoods Document which calls to carry out terrorist attacks and blame it on Cuba including highjacking a plane full of government officials (when in actuality would be college students on vacation) and crash it into a building and blame it on Cuba.
Or the Project for a New American Century who's members include Paul Wolfawitz, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Scooter Libby and others who in September 2000 report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses" called for "a helpful, catasrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor."
I'm crazy?? What about these group of prominent scholars questioning the official story.
Here is a member list.
I think it is pretty clear. Theres about a thousand smoking guns, however the one that is 100% provable is building 7. It was demolished, it was admitted so, but the emdia and government covered it up. WHy? WHY???? I think we all know why, look who had the motive...
Did al-CIAda have the motive...who I might add we created, trained, armed, and funded!
No they did not.....
Did our government?
Hmmm Patriot Act, Afghanistan, Iraq, Biometrics, Homeland Security?
I think we have a winner.
it is time for everyone to accept this tragedy, and demand a REAL investigation. Too bad we cannot analyze the materials, they were shipped off overseas and buried underground so no explosive tests could be done, and everone was so thrille dthat they removed the rubble so quickly.
We have been warped and brainwashed and people are finally beginning to wake up. I just hope, when they do, they releaize this was BUSH who did it, it was criminal elements within our government, DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS, and the last thing we need in 2008 is a democrat or a republican. We need a third party...but too bad the elections are rigged anyway.
BUT REMEMBER AN ELECTION CAN ONLY BE RIGGED IF BOTH CANDIDATES ARE CONTROLLED. As with the case with Bush and Kerry, both cousins and Skull and Bones members. Sworn to secrecy and sworn to brotherhood. Didn't you find it odd Kerry conceded before most counts were even in? Take into consideration the electronic voting machines and you got yopurself a dictatorship!
I do want to mention that there is A LOT of dis information on the internet, about pods and holograms, those are garbage theories that have no evidence. Everything I mentioned above is well documented and on public record. So be careful when researching because there is a lot of stuff thrown out there to purposely discredit the 9/11 truth movement. Some good websites to check out are:
www.911blogger.com
www.wtc7.net
www.911truth.org
That is all for now. Please go read the facts, though it may be difficult, the truth will set you free....Let's Roll. |
| AGirlNamedPsycho |
Posted - 03/20/2006 : 9:55:32 PM
You know... for all the 'conspiracy theories' I've been exposed to, not-a-one ever brought the physics of demolition into the picture. Not that the insinuation with this post necessitates a quote-unquote "inside job", but rather that someone deliberately placed explosives inside the buildings to control the fall. It IS a bit odd that two towers fell in virtually the same manner, with comparatively little destruction to adjacent buildings. You'd think the weight of the planes and the transfer of inertia from plane to building would shift the structures and result in a lopsided collapse. I suppose the next logical question aftering making such an assertion is, if the means to demolish the towers were already planted why on Earth expend additional resource to make it appear to be the result of a major collision? Of course, the insinuations run rampant on this idea and I'm not equipped to answer but one must wonder. |
| SpaceMonkey |
Posted - 03/20/2006 : 6:30:12 PM
dude, you're crazy |
| rubylith |
Posted - 03/20/2006 : 1:07:45 PM
why was the WTC7 demolished or the recent Landmark impolision?
Building 7was destroyed possibly because it was used as the control room for the 9/11 attacks. Building 7 housed the DoD, FBI, CIA, IRS and others along with thousands of pages of documents relating to corp trials and the Oklahoma City BOmbing. Not to mention Giulliani's bumker that was bomb proof and had its own air supply. It would have been impossible for the attacks the happen and they deicde to demolish the building because it is unsafe because it takes weeks of preparations, no way that would have happened on one day alone, especially of all days, 9/11. Also Larrty SIlverstein admitte dthey "Pulled the building and watched it collapse" from a PBS documentary.
They must have known to rig the building with explosives, along with tower one and two. |
| Arthen |
Posted - 03/20/2006 : 12:18:37 PM
I'm sure you've posted something about it before, if it was blown up why? |
|
|
