Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,920 Year: 4,177/9,624 Month: 1,048/974 Week: 7/368 Day: 7/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   9-11 Conspiracy
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 148 (511057)
06-05-2009 11:20 PM


Plausibility
The scope of the alleged 9/11 conspiracy would be so massive so as to defy all credibility. See, that's the problem. Conspiracy theorists take disparate pieces of half-truths and anecdotes, jumble them all together, and essentially manufacture their own conclusions.
They seldom seem to really think what it would take to actually accomplish the job.
And then they say really stupid shit like Rosie O'Donnell, who seems to think that it's impossible for fire to melt steel. Yyyyyyeahhhh, cuz' swords have always shaped themselves, blowtorches use water, and the art of smelting is a figment of our overactive imagination.

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by onifre, posted 06-06-2009 11:20 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 105 by Rrhain, posted 06-06-2009 7:09 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 148 (511135)
06-06-2009 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by onifre
06-06-2009 11:20 AM


Re: Plausibility
It's about as hard as shooting a president from a moving convertible in broad day light, then disposing of the only person who could testify.
Are you being serious? And, yes, serious question on my part.
The average citizens just accepts that what he is told in the news by the elected officials is truth, and nothing else can be discussed against what they've said for risk of being labeled a "conspiracy theorist."
Notwithstanding the lemmings out there who, when you say "jump," they respond, "okay, how high," it is also unfairly presumptuous to insist that everyone is a drone without a mind of their own because the simplest explanation tends to be the correct one.
All you get from the news is "half-truths, anecdotes, jumbled up stories that are manufactured"
Sure, but what does the media have to do with it?
If nothing else, "conspiracy theorist" try to give an independent account of what took place - at least it's free press. If they're wrong, who cares? Everyones wrong once in a while - including the mainstream news.
The thing about conspiracy theorists is that they tend to believe in numerous conspiracy theories. If one believes in a 9/11 conspiracy, invariably he also believes in a JFK conspiracy, and an Area-51 conspiracy, and, and, and... We are dealing with very mistrustful people who generally shape their opinions about the military and government not because they have close ties with it, but actually because they have no ties with it!
It is easier to believe in these things when one doesn't really have a clue about how they operate. It is easier to sit in Mom's basement, endlessly playing World of Warcraft and scouring 9/11 Truth websites than it is thinking about what it would actually take to accomplish.
You seem to be leaning towards a 9/11 conspiracy. If we are going to discuss the matter, I first need to know the essentials:
Who?
What?
How?

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by onifre, posted 06-06-2009 11:20 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by onifre, posted 06-06-2009 12:54 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 103 of 148 (511142)
06-06-2009 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by onifre
06-06-2009 12:54 PM


Re: Plausibility
Yes, I'm quite serious.
Very well... Might have to make a new topic for this one.
I'm not saying people are "drones", people are simply preoccupied with their day to day lives and don't have time to check everything they hear on the news. The easiest thing to do is to listen to the news and accept that it's true. In fact, most people don't have any personal motives to check these stories for truth.
But people do have motives to cry conspiracy. No one can hold the conspiracy theorists accountable for omissions of truth, half-truths, or outright lies. There is at least legal recourse with the media.
A personal inquiry into the matters is what's usually best, but for the most part people don't have the time or the motivation to do this. Don't trust either side is my point.
How many people personally were allowed near the site? You have to admit, if 9/11 was a conspiracy, think how many people have to be on a pay roll covering it up. ALL independent sources have stated nothing more than the obvious, which is that planes took down the Towers. People with Fire Science PhD's are all saying the same thing. The ConSpi's are relying on a handful of loonbats touting pseudoscience and spouting empty rhetoric.
How is that any different from, say, creationists?
The thing about mainstream America is that they tend to believe in numerous stories that come from the mainstream news.
Again, what the hell does the media have to do with it? I'm not listening to the opinion of the media, but of the experts in the fields of physical science.
No, see that's the closed minded point of view. Each individual case can be dealt with without believing anything else about any other story.
I just said that it was common, not the exception to some rule. Most of these people are prone to it.
I accept that there is a 911 "cover-up", not a conspiracy. I also accept that there is a JFK "cover-up" not a conspiracy. The details of both can go from the lunatic idea to the minor quibble of a few details. But don't presume that anyone who finds issues with certain parts of a story will just believe any dumb thing said by conspiracy theories.
Very well, then. I'll simply have to hear your personal theory as the starting point.
Oh please, look at the history of this country's political and military actions, if you trust what they say then you are as blind to their lies as the people you claim to be conspiracy theorist are.
Look, you won't find anyone to be a bigger advocate for the rights of the People against the government... And shit, I work for the US gov't! My point was only that the people that tend to distrust the government the most are those that have never been around it at all and have no idea what they're talking about.
This goes for both sides. You don't know what the government is doing anymore than I do, or anyone else not involved in any top level politics.
I know what is in the realm of possibility and what isn't. I also have a realistic sense of the massive collusion it would take to plan and execute such a heinous plan in order to accomplish.... What, exactly?
You sure paint a pretty picture of some fantasy world in which anyone who has a different perspective is automatically labeled a World of Warcraft playing hermit who lives in their mom's basement. I can assure you that I do not fit that bill. But I'll give you a few more chances to guess my background, however, note that when you are done painting a characterization of me, it will be my turn to paint one of you, and I won't play nice.
Try not to get personally offended. You have to remember that the Alex Jones' of the world, you know, the peddler of nonsense, give sensible fellows such as yourself a bad name.
Take some time to read all of the previeous posts and reply to the one that you take issue with.
Will do...

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by onifre, posted 06-06-2009 12:54 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by onifre, posted 06-06-2009 3:30 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 148 (511165)
06-07-2009 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by onifre
06-06-2009 3:30 PM


Re: Plausibility
I also feel that the Bush admin knew about an attack on the US was coming and ignored all of the warnings, for what reason? I don't know. But finding out will be harder than just accepting that it was for some unknown reason, beyond simply saying "they screwed up".
But doesn't that come with a loathing for Dubya? The guy was a douchebag of a president, sure. But a lot of people turned him into a diabolical fire-breathing monster who preyed on unsuspecting children.
There is no evidence to suggest that he had prior knowledge, which sounds all the more ridiculous when you consider that the 4th plane was gunning for him!
If it's the 911 Commissions timelines then why did NORAD not adjust their original timelines, having access to the same tapes the 911 Commission did?
I'm not familiar with the timeline issue. You'd have to get me up to speed.
there is no full description as to how or why the towers fell the way they did.
Well, no one can simulate or thwart gravity, so I think that one kind of goes without saying.
I do feel that the folks responsible for 911 goes beyond Osama Bin Laden. I feel that more should have been done to find out who financed this attack.
I vividly remember on the day of the attacks thinking that is was the work of Osama bin Laden. This was long before he was a household name. I remember his name during the first Trade Center attack, the Tanzania towers, and the USS Cole. The bin Laden's are Saudi billionaires. And if you think about 9/11 from a tactical perspective, it was pretty low-tech. It's a lot more low tech than funding the on going insurgency in Afghanistan.
If you'd like to discuss these particulars then cool, but if you want to debate whether Bush orchestrated the attacks, or that the tower were controlled demos ( again, I don't think it was a controlled demo, but I still don't know how they fell that way), or some other typical conspiracy theory, then I won't be game for that. I would have originally, because of boredom, but once it because a legitimate debate then I'd have to drop the conspiracy crap and get serious with the facts.
Well, you sound vastly different than the 9/11 Truthers. You don't seem to have any real objections other than the U.S. didn't react quickly enough, there were omissions of truth by NIST, NORAD, etc, and the way the building seemed odd. Not much there to debate.
Whattya say we tackle the JFK conspiracy theories?

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by onifre, posted 06-06-2009 3:30 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by xongsmith, posted 06-07-2009 1:41 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 148 (511189)
06-07-2009 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by xongsmith
06-07-2009 1:41 PM


Re: Plausibility
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event——like a new Pearl Harbor"
How does this statement equal 9/11 being an inside job? What you quoted was nowhere near, "We need a new Pearl Harbor."

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by xongsmith, posted 06-07-2009 1:41 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 121 of 148 (511380)
06-09-2009 2:57 PM


Evidence?
The motives of why America would have deliberately stood down during an attack are absurd assumptions. Why would America, reputed to be the strongest and sole world super power, have deliberately embarrassed itself, having all its sophistication thwarted by 3rd World terrorists? As a mandate to go to war with Iraq? Does anyone really think that 9/11 was necessary to go to war with Iraq? An entirely other justification wasn't needed? Come on, now... Give me a break.
But the most important question is, what evidence is there to suggest that this is case to begin with? None of the testimonies I've yet to heart are proof of any misconduct, as it relates 9/11. This is pure conjecture. I'm waiting for something substantive.

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by onifre, posted 06-10-2009 12:22 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 125 of 148 (511525)
06-10-2009 5:52 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by onifre
06-10-2009 12:22 AM


Re: deductive reasoning
Nuggin is exactly right. Any reason would have sufficed. The scale an scope of 9/11 would never have been allowed intentionally just as Pearl Harbor. The U.S. doesn't need its 7th Fleet destroyed at the tune of billions of dollars, nor does it need its symbols of economic stability or military might to be decimated as a justification to go to war.
We all remember what happened when that time came. At least half the country was like, no fucking way! That was over 2 years after the fact, and it still did no good. This was the second most unpopular war in US history. So don't try and sell the idea that 9/11 was cooked up by the gov't to drum up support.
And then there's that whole no proof thingy, too. That one's kind of a biggie.
Look where were at right now? Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, etc clucked away and sold America on the ideal that they would get out of Iraq. They tarred and feathered Bush over the Iraq issue. But as you can see, they don't really disagree. They were just politicking like all of them do. Gosh, they were so vocal during election time about how they'd bring the troops the nano-second that anyone else was elected other than Bush or McCain. So as you can see... 9/11 was not necessary and did nothing to seduce any one, other than maybe crazed right-wingers, to war. But that's not all that remarkable. You could seduce them in to war by stealing a Snicker's bar.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by onifre, posted 06-10-2009 12:22 AM onifre has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 146 of 148 (511895)
06-12-2009 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Dr Adequate
06-10-2009 11:47 PM


Inept of nefarious?
No, look, the NORAD tapes trump the NORAD timeline: that's how we know that they did get it wrong. I gave you the notes of the Miller testimony because you asked how they got it wrong.
Do you have access to these tapes so that I can examine it and understand your objections?
There is still another possibility that you may have overlooked. It may be ineptitude on the part of America's defenses, not scheming and conniving malice.

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-10-2009 11:47 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by onifre, posted 06-12-2009 2:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 148 of 148 (511938)
06-12-2009 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by onifre
06-12-2009 2:46 PM


Re: Inept of nefarious?
I didn't go over them myself since there are a shit load of them.
Ya think! Yeah, there's like no way I'm gonna go through all that. Thanks though!

"An idealist believes the short run doesn't count. A cynic believes the long run doesn't matter. A realist believes that what is done or left undone in the short run determines the long run." --Sydney J. Harris--

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by onifre, posted 06-12-2009 2:46 PM onifre has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024