Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
- Thread starter s_lone
- Start date
It is a pointless to ask someones bio on the net where people commonly have completely fictional personal info.
The example that comes quickly to mind, was a recent Aeon jewish hating posts where he claimed that he had a jewish girlfriend who agreed with him. That would be hard enough to imagine, giving his seething hatred exhibited, but the next day I was reading another forum and read another hate filled invective that finished the diatribe with references again to having a jewish girlfriend that backed up what he said. The posting was idoimatically and gramatically different enough to believe it was not Aeon. It was Much more likely that I was witnessing a common tactic of those attempting to cloak their hatred, the fictional girlfriend/friend that represents the hate object. The honesty of claims like this are not worth the electrons that transmit them.
As far as the workings of the minds that could put together a mental house of cards that holds up the belief that 9/11 was self inflicted, you must start with the premise that this is what they want to believe, through hatred of those they assign the blame. They then contort reality, ignore evidence and torture facts to hold up a demented house of cards that doesn't hold up to any kind of objective look at the facts. it is a willingness to choose belief over facts. Something that is hard to counter with reality.
A quote from someone I don't generally agree with, but the those of 9/11 conspiracy theorist ilk do: Noam Chomsky:
Here is a source that debunks ever link in the spindly house of cards. If it would do any good.
http://www.911myths.com/index.html
But it doesn't matter. Because belief and faith overide facts and reality for these people. They will constantly rationalize and stretch reality and try to find a way to make facts fit their beliefs, no matter how erroneous.
Two books that are good for a look into the thoughts of Conspiracy theorists are Michael Shermers: Why people believe wierd things, and Carl Sagans: The Demon Haunted Worlds. Sagans is the better book, but Shermer has section devoted exclusively to conspiracy theorist and the strange mental constructs they build.
The connection between the Haters and the Conspiracy theorists (often they are one and the same) is that belief is primary, while facts are of secondary or no importance.
I wonder where this leads, because today the net is filled with wacko "news" blogs of every type. Those who start with belief and lack of critical reasoning skills will find that they can find "information" that will back up whatever they choose to believe. Because no matter how crazy your beliefs, there is a blogger, only a google away that will back you up.
People need more critical thinking, less believing.
The example that comes quickly to mind, was a recent Aeon jewish hating posts where he claimed that he had a jewish girlfriend who agreed with him. That would be hard enough to imagine, giving his seething hatred exhibited, but the next day I was reading another forum and read another hate filled invective that finished the diatribe with references again to having a jewish girlfriend that backed up what he said. The posting was idoimatically and gramatically different enough to believe it was not Aeon. It was Much more likely that I was witnessing a common tactic of those attempting to cloak their hatred, the fictional girlfriend/friend that represents the hate object. The honesty of claims like this are not worth the electrons that transmit them.
As far as the workings of the minds that could put together a mental house of cards that holds up the belief that 9/11 was self inflicted, you must start with the premise that this is what they want to believe, through hatred of those they assign the blame. They then contort reality, ignore evidence and torture facts to hold up a demented house of cards that doesn't hold up to any kind of objective look at the facts. it is a willingness to choose belief over facts. Something that is hard to counter with reality.
A quote from someone I don't generally agree with, but the those of 9/11 conspiracy theorist ilk do: Noam Chomsky:
Here is a source that debunks ever link in the spindly house of cards. If it would do any good.
http://www.911myths.com/index.html
But it doesn't matter. Because belief and faith overide facts and reality for these people. They will constantly rationalize and stretch reality and try to find a way to make facts fit their beliefs, no matter how erroneous.
Two books that are good for a look into the thoughts of Conspiracy theorists are Michael Shermers: Why people believe wierd things, and Carl Sagans: The Demon Haunted Worlds. Sagans is the better book, but Shermer has section devoted exclusively to conspiracy theorist and the strange mental constructs they build.
The connection between the Haters and the Conspiracy theorists (often they are one and the same) is that belief is primary, while facts are of secondary or no importance.
I wonder where this leads, because today the net is filled with wacko "news" blogs of every type. Those who start with belief and lack of critical reasoning skills will find that they can find "information" that will back up whatever they choose to believe. Because no matter how crazy your beliefs, there is a blogger, only a google away that will back you up.
People need more critical thinking, less believing.
As the one who started this thread, I feel I need to clarify my stand. There is nothing wrong with asking questions. This is what I am doing with 9/11. I'm not SAYING 9/11 was self-inflicted. It seems obvious that the US gov. couldn't do such a thing as this to its own citizens. This is common sense right?
But then I wonder... I just WONDER...
I reflect upon the abominations that plague human history. Some humans have the potential to be very sick and twisted when it comes to protecting self-interests.
Sometimes you need to consider options that sound ridiculous or just plain disturbing (in this case). If all facts discredit the option, then fine, so be it. But if the question is never asked, we might be missing something.
The conspiracy scenario doesn't have to be so extreme... One example is that perhaps, some powerful people within the Gov. DID know what Bin Laden and his gang were preparing... But these few twisted minds at the top of power decided that an attack on America could serve their interests pretty nicely. They simply closed their eyes to the evidence of a coming attack knowing very well it would be the perfect opportunity to start operations in the Middle-East.
Now I'm NOT saying this is what happened. This is a fictional scenario which might, which just might, be closer to truth than we think...
Think about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How many innocent people did the US Gov. decide to kill to supposedly stop the war. Did they really need to annihilate TWO cities to stop that war? Or was this a pretext to show the whole world that the US wasn't someone to fuck around with. Was it a twisted conveniant way to establish their military supremacy? How noble were the intentions of those who decided to destroy these cities??? You've got to wonder...
There's an old saying that says "the devil's best trick is to make you believe he doesn't exist"... It's food for thought...
Sometimes the truth can escape us because we refuse to consider the scariest options.
But then I wonder... I just WONDER...
I reflect upon the abominations that plague human history. Some humans have the potential to be very sick and twisted when it comes to protecting self-interests.
Sometimes you need to consider options that sound ridiculous or just plain disturbing (in this case). If all facts discredit the option, then fine, so be it. But if the question is never asked, we might be missing something.
The conspiracy scenario doesn't have to be so extreme... One example is that perhaps, some powerful people within the Gov. DID know what Bin Laden and his gang were preparing... But these few twisted minds at the top of power decided that an attack on America could serve their interests pretty nicely. They simply closed their eyes to the evidence of a coming attack knowing very well it would be the perfect opportunity to start operations in the Middle-East.
Now I'm NOT saying this is what happened. This is a fictional scenario which might, which just might, be closer to truth than we think...
Think about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How many innocent people did the US Gov. decide to kill to supposedly stop the war. Did they really need to annihilate TWO cities to stop that war? Or was this a pretext to show the whole world that the US wasn't someone to fuck around with. Was it a twisted conveniant way to establish their military supremacy? How noble were the intentions of those who decided to destroy these cities??? You've got to wonder...
There's an old saying that says "the devil's best trick is to make you believe he doesn't exist"... It's food for thought...
Sometimes the truth can escape us because we refuse to consider the scariest options.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
9-11 wasnt a surprise at all, once you know what the PNAC are up to, their plan overseas and at home, you start understand what is going on.
I've worked 22 years in a demolition company, and it is clear those building that fell, had explosives at the right place and exploded at the right moment.
s_lone said:
9-11 wasnt a surprise at all, once you know what the PNAC are up to, their plan overseas and at home, you start understand what is going on.
I've worked 22 years in a demolition company, and it is clear those building that fell, had explosives at the right place and exploded at the right moment.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
Can you provide the list of those who believed saddam had wmd?
Colpy said:The point is with the WMDs think is they weren't lies, they were mistakes.
Iraq had developed WMD. Iraq used WMDs on its own Kurdish population. The actions of Saddam (stupid) with UN inspectors would lead everyone to believe there were WMD. No country argued against the war because there were no WMDs, because EVERYONE, pro or anti-invasion (except the UN) believed there were WMDs. AND I'm not convinced that they aren't in Syria. I wish the Yanks would send a couple of hundred thousand GIs to Damascus to look.
Can you provide the list of those who believed saddam had wmd?
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
The UN for starters, when they voted and asked Saddam to disarm, or else.
Logic 7 said:
The UN for starters, when they voted and asked Saddam to disarm, or else.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
They voted for the resolution 1441, which doesnt ask saddam to disarm or else, it is about having UN,UNSCOM and IAEA inspectors more access to any location they want on the moment, having private interviews with iraqies/scientists, 1441 wasnt an ultimatum,unless iraq would have try to invade koweit for exemple, then the war would have been justified.
I think not said:
They voted for the resolution 1441, which doesnt ask saddam to disarm or else, it is about having UN,UNSCOM and IAEA inspectors more access to any location they want on the moment, having private interviews with iraqies/scientists, 1441 wasnt an ultimatum,unless iraq would have try to invade koweit for exemple, then the war would have been justified.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
With the exception of a few renegers, all the nations represented by the coalition forces , for two.
Logic 7 said:Colpy said:The point is with the WMDs think is they weren't lies, they were mistakes.
Iraq had developed WMD. Iraq used WMDs on its own Kurdish population. The actions of Saddam (stupid) with UN inspectors would lead everyone to believe there were WMD. No country argued against the war because there were no WMDs, because EVERYONE, pro or anti-invasion (except the UN) believed there were WMDs. AND I'm not convinced that they aren't in Syria. I wish the Yanks would send a couple of hundred thousand GIs to Damascus to look.
Can you provide the list of those who believed saddam had wmd?
With the exception of a few renegers, all the nations represented by the coalition forces , for two.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
The cease-fire conditions of Security Council resolution 687 clearly stipulates that Iraq must dispose of all biological, chemical and nuclear weapons and long-range missiles and facilities that produce them.
Continued here: http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
Resolution 1441 was offered Iraq to opportunity to comply with resolution 687 to continue the cease fire agreement.
Logic 7 said:
The cease-fire conditions of Security Council resolution 687 clearly stipulates that Iraq must dispose of all biological, chemical and nuclear weapons and long-range missiles and facilities that produce them.
Continued here: http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
Resolution 1441 was offered Iraq to opportunity to comply with resolution 687 to continue the cease fire agreement.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
There was an article in Saturday's National Post about the 9/11 "truth" movement and how its trying to claim credibility whereas everyone else sees them as crackpots.
The article stated that virtually all academics who are behind the movement are from the arts - i.e. philosophy, history, etc. - not the sciences - i.e. engineering - with the exception of one. They interviewed a few academics from the sciences, asking them why they don't offer a rebuttal to those who claim that the WTC came down in the manner "logic" above claims. The answer is because its so ridiculous, why spend any time refuting it when you can be doing serious research. Its tantamount to taking the time and the effort to refute the Flat Earth Society.
Logic 7 said:
There was an article in Saturday's National Post about the 9/11 "truth" movement and how its trying to claim credibility whereas everyone else sees them as crackpots.
The article stated that virtually all academics who are behind the movement are from the arts - i.e. philosophy, history, etc. - not the sciences - i.e. engineering - with the exception of one. They interviewed a few academics from the sciences, asking them why they don't offer a rebuttal to those who claim that the WTC came down in the manner "logic" above claims. The answer is because its so ridiculous, why spend any time refuting it when you can be doing serious research. Its tantamount to taking the time and the effort to refute the Flat Earth Society.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
And what are they upto?
As what? A gopher?
Logic 7 said:
And what are they upto?
Logic 7 said:
As what? A gopher?
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
They voted for the resolution 1441, which doesnt ask saddam to disarm or else, it is about having UN,UNSCOM and IAEA inspectors more access to any location they want on the moment, having private interviews with iraqies/scientists, 1441 wasnt an ultimatum,unless iraq would have try to invade koweit for exemple, then the war would have been justified.[/quote]
The cease-fire conditions of Security Council resolution 687 clearly stipulates that Iraq must dispose of all biological, chemical and nuclear weapons and long-range missiles and facilities that produce them.
Continued here: http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
Resolution 1441 was offered Iraq to opportunity to comply with resolution 687 to continue the cease fire agreement.[/quote]
Resolution 687 was written in the 90's in those ciscumstances, yes 1441 recalls this resolution , but means nothing to the situation before the war in iraq.
Like i said before, 1441 was agreed for more access.
Said1 said:
They voted for the resolution 1441, which doesnt ask saddam to disarm or else, it is about having UN,UNSCOM and IAEA inspectors more access to any location they want on the moment, having private interviews with iraqies/scientists, 1441 wasnt an ultimatum,unless iraq would have try to invade koweit for exemple, then the war would have been justified.[/quote]
The cease-fire conditions of Security Council resolution 687 clearly stipulates that Iraq must dispose of all biological, chemical and nuclear weapons and long-range missiles and facilities that produce them.
Continued here: http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
Resolution 1441 was offered Iraq to opportunity to comply with resolution 687 to continue the cease fire agreement.[/quote]
Resolution 687 was written in the 90's in those ciscumstances, yes 1441 recalls this resolution , but means nothing to the situation before the war in iraq.
Like i said before, 1441 was agreed for more access.
Re: RE: Self-inflicted 9/11 ???
I don't have to search for anything, the towers were falling on my head on September 11th.
And you insulted yourself by implying you know enough of demolition to draw parallels with the WTC collapse. You haven't the foggiest.
Logic 7 said:
I don't have to search for anything, the towers were falling on my head on September 11th.
And you insulted yourself by implying you know enough of demolition to draw parallels with the WTC collapse. You haven't the foggiest.