Post #418 9/11 No Longer Matters "Sorry Jango, you've kind of gone off from my interest spectrum. I don't read that stuff because it's mostly political\conspiracy stuff, and frankly that's why I don't get interested."
I was referring to the subject matter, which we ceased talking about. I figured that would be implied where I said the political stuff doesn't interest me.
If that were absolutely true, then why did you quote, in this thread, the same subject matter that you found so uninteresting in the other thread? And directed at me no less? The contradiction is right there to be seen, Plague. You said you're not interested in me, political, or conspiracy stuff. But then you contradict yourself. So which is it? Can we discuss political and conspiratorial stuff, or is there going to be an obstruction any time the proverbial water gets too deep?
You told someone to google a clean break. I didn't bring it up, you did. I openly stated that it didn't have any answers to the questions I had asked of you and your ilk in regards to 9/11. I didn't ask anything about it, and I didn't discuss it. Instant subject change. I think the only contradiction is your own lack of understanding. I didn't contradict any of what I had said before. You asked me in another thread to read the article, and I did. You brought it up again, I stated it had no answers to my questions on 9/11, and then never discussed it again. I am not interested in politics, zionist bull(*)(*)(*)(*), or other conspiracy stuff. I don't care who you think killed Kennedy, or if we landed on the moon. None of it interests me at all. I said it, and I'll stand by it. I apologize you didn't understand that.
You had never asked me those questions, and you messed up my quote. Hence, this whole time, I've been surprised that you even acknowledged me. So I ask: why?
That was following your quote of "Google A Clean Break". If you're referring to the slight error above, I apologize. My laptop sometimes makes my thumb press random spots on the screen. I don't think my slight error affected the overall meaning of the post. People could scroll right above and see your phrase. It's not a game changer or anything. Can we get back on topic now? I think this has been hashed to death
I will leave it there and address your questions: You know I don't have a concrete number to this because if I did, there wouldn't be a conspiracy anymore. But as I have mentioned and alluded to before, I think that there is a small contingency of people involved. By small, I would reason that less than 100 men and women were au courant of the event before it happened, given demographics of businesses and trajectory of power. A principal of players, if you will, would know intimate details of the event beforehand. Those same individuals would be the ones leading policy once the event had finished. I have no idea to the first, and to the second: I thought there was, and what was found at the WTC clean-up? Do you have a list of everything recovered? I don't think KSM is innocent. I think al Qaeda is real. I think Osama bin Laden was real too. I don't know for sure, and neither does anyone posting here for sure for sure, that al Qaeda was co-opted by US federal agencies. I think that al Qaeda operatives were on our planes. I think that al Qaeda had planned and did the acts of 9/11 but that people from the federal government and military allowed the event to happen. And it was allowed to happen to further foreign policy goals. 'Foreign Policy' "A policy governing international relations" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb245/doc15.pdf http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm http://articles.nydailynews.com/199...hu-new-israeli-government-mideast-peace-talks http://www.netanyahu.org/joinsesofusc.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#Rebuilding_America.27s_Defenses http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf It's right there. But are you going to feint at the sight of heavy reading material again? To deny that stuff is to deny what is happening right now and what has happened already in the Middle East as a result of 9/11. It is also to deny everything that came in-between the links I have posted. Like when during the Clinton administration, it became policy for regime change in Iraq. That happened after A Clean Break was penciled. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act Also explaining A Clean Break: http://mailstar.net/iraq-war.html Where have I claimed that?
Jango AQ is real alright but they were funded by the CIA and The Bush administration allowed the bin laden family to fly out of town when everybody else was grounded. Oh and wikipedia is a terrible source to by for information,they have a long history of posting untruths.they mix in some truths with disinformation just so you know.
I will address the rest of the links after awhile. As I said, I don't really care about what people say the political motivations were. I refuse to acknowledge the idea that since the government has done bad things in the past, that they performed 9/11. It's just not rational. I have done bad things in my past too. Drank and drive, smoked a little herb, got in a few bar fights. However, I am still a good person. I pay my bills, take great care of my children, maintain my occupation, and I love my wife. I don't really care about the politics of it all. I also, despite popular belief, don't believe every single thing that was said by the government. That's a common truther tactic as well, because I defend parts of it that means I'm pro government, or that I am brainwashed. I fully admit that there were balls being dropped, and that our processes we had in place were not adequate to handle the events of 9/11. America got comfortable in it's arrogance. Letting 9/11, or making 9/11 happen I don't agree with. 9/11 happened because it was something we've never encountered before, that's what allowed it to be pulled off. We may have known an event was going to happen, but we didn't know when, we didn't know how. Having 100 or less to pull off a demolition would have been entirely too few. It took full crews over 4 months to demo a building 1/5 it's size. That was using standard demo equipment, and explosives. The reason Thermite doesn't match up is because it burns, it doesn't explode. The reason demo teams use explosives is because the "bang" shatters the steel in sequence. In essence it takes the legs out from bottom to the top in a sequential rhythm, then once the beams are broken gravity does the rest. Thermite is completely unreasonable, it burns at different times depending on chemical composition, it hasn't been proven to cut horizontally, and there is no detonation option to activate it that would work in those situations. Radio would have been unreliable as it could have set off the remote detonators and there was no det cord or detonation boxes located. On top of that they would need people to fly the planes, the passengers, their families. You would need flight controllers in on it, and there's so many more. That's the whole thing that makes the conspiracy laughable. If you get into the "let it happen" or "made it happen" you need even MORE people to cover it up. They'd have to cover up the fact the knowledge was there in detail, who knew about it, and all the people that covered it up. Look at the past, has any conspiracy made it longer than 5-10 years? So how is this one making it with no whistleblowers? There were 3 sites where the planes hit. How does flight 93 tie into it all? Are all of the eyewitnesses in on it too? Short answer, no. There is no comprehensive list of every individual item found at the WTC that I am aware of, although there might be something through NIST. What's the point though? You don't believe them anyway. Also, there was no thermite found in the dust, I have proven that with Dr. Millette's study. He has no government affiliation and it was truthers and debunkers that funded the study. Meaning truthers looked at the credits Millette had and deemed him able to provide us with the study. It was done that way for a reason, to make sure the sides were mutually in agreement. There were also several attempts to get a sample from Jones\Harrit to compare their dust as well. They were absolutely against providing any of their dust for the study. They were also going to release the rest of their data, and have refused to do so. I assure you, there was no thermite found in the dust at the WTC, even truthers are beginning to let this theory go. It's not reasonable. The "let it happen" and "made it happen" are very hard to swallow. It was proven there was no stand down. How did it benefit the government to let it happen on purpose? They could have gone to war for much less, they could have caught the culprits (if they knew), get that threat out of the way, plant a bomb, explode it killing far less, and then actually frame Iraq in order to invade the country. I mean, if they're willing to kill 3,000 people, why wouldn't they just do that? Much less complicated, much easier to pull off, you can pop off the person that planted the bomb to confirm that no one found out, and everything would still pan out. There is no way America still wouldn't have gone to war if 200 died, rather than 3K. Then we get to Iraq and have to eat crow cause they don't have WMD's. Why wouldn't the evil government just plant the WMD's? More questions come up from that then the normal conspiracy. Why make it so elaborate when something much less involved would suffice? It doesn't make sense, and mind you we are referring to people that truthers claimed "pulled this off with military precision." I'm sorry, I can't drink that kool-aid. No offense Jango, but I've probably read more on accident in regards to 9/11 than you have on purpose. I started out exactly opposite of you. I thought it could have been done by the government, then read as much as I could and found out that there is no way it could have been. It's impossible. I will read your articles once I find the time. As long as they're relevant to 9/11 and not some bull(*)(*)(*)(*) about how the government has been mean in the past. To be frank, I just don't care. I know we had multiple chances to kill OBL, and how shady our relationship has been in the past. I fully understand. This is nothing new to me, and I really don't care what's happening the middle east right now. My claim about 9/11 is that the government didn't blow up those buildings, it was 19 pissed off religious fanatics that took planes and rammed them into buildings. I am not disputing we have (*)(*)(*)(*)ty foreign relations, I am not disputing that we lie, cheat, and sometimes kill. All I am saying is that on 9/11, it wasn't our government that killed those people. I don't need to explain those things because they aren't related to the day 9/11 happened, and I am not defending our government in regards to all the crap they've done. I thought I had made that perfectly clear. I don't think the government is some holier than thou institution and I don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) what they are doing over seas. I have admitted that the government used 9/11 to it's advantage, and I don't deny it at all. I won't even begin to deny it. I don't know how to make that clearer. I said they were questions to truthers, I didn't say they were questions to you specifically.
I will address the rest of the links after awhile. As I said, I don't really care about what people say the political motivations were. I refuse to acknowledge the idea that since the government has done bad things in the past, that they performed 9/11. It's just not rational. I have done bad things in my past too. Drank and drive, smoked a little herb, got in a few bar fights. However, I am still a good person. I pay my bills, take great care of my children, maintain my occupation, and I love my wife. I don't really care about the politics of it all. I also, despite popular belief, don't believe every single thing that was said by the government. That's a common truther tactic as well, because I defend parts of it that means I'm pro government, or that I am brainwashed. I fully admit that there were balls being dropped, and that our processes we had in place were not adequate to handle the events of 9/11. America got comfortable in it's arrogance. Letting 9/11, or making 9/11 happen I don't agree with. 9/11 happened because it was something we've never encountered before, that's what allowed it to be pulled off. We may have known an event was going to happen, but we didn't know when, we didn't know how. Having 100 or less to pull off a demolition would have been entirely too few. It took full crews over 4 months to demo a building 1/5 it's size. That was using standard demo equipment, and explosives. The reason Thermite doesn't match up is because it burns, it doesn't explode. The reason demo teams use explosives is because the "bang" shatters the steel in sequence. In essence it takes the legs out from bottom to the top in a sequential rhythm, then once the beams are broken gravity does the rest. Thermite is completely unreasonable, it burns at different times depending on chemical composition, it hasn't been proven to cut horizontally, and there is no detonation option to activate it that would work in those situations. Radio would have been unreliable as it could have set off the remote detonators and there was no det cord or detonation boxes located. On top of that they would need people to fly the planes, the passengers, their families. You would need flight controllers in on it, and there's so many more. That's the whole thing that makes the conspiracy laughable. If you get into the "let it happen" or "made it happen" you need even MORE people to cover it up. They'd have to cover up the fact the knowledge was there in detail, who knew about it, and all the people that covered it up. Look at the past, has any conspiracy made it longer than 5-10 years? So how is this one making it with no whistleblowers? There were 3 sites where the planes hit. How does flight 93 tie into it all? Are all of the eyewitnesses in on it too? Short answer, no. There is no comprehensive list of every individual item found at the WTC that I am aware of, although there might be something through NIST. What's the point though? You don't believe them anyway. Also, there was no thermite found in the dust, I have proven that with Dr. Millette's study. He has no government affiliation and it was truthers and debunkers that funded the study. Meaning truthers looked at the credits Millette had and deemed him able to provide us with the study. It was done that way for a reason, to make sure the sides were mutually in agreement. There were also several attempts to get a sample from Jones\Harrit to compare their dust as well. They were absolutely against providing any of their dust for the study. They were also going to release the rest of their data, and have refused to do so. I assure you, there was no thermite found in the dust at the WTC, even truthers are beginning to let this theory go. It's not reasonable. The "let it happen" and "made it happen" are very hard to swallow. It was proven there was no stand down. How did it benefit the government to let it happen on purpose? They could have gone to war for much less, they could have caught the culprits (if they knew), get that threat out of the way, plant a bomb, explode it killing far less, and then actually frame Iraq in order to invade the country. I mean, if they're willing to kill 3,000 people, why wouldn't they just do that? Much less complicated, much easier to pull off, you can pop off the person that planted the bomb to confirm that no one found out, and everything would still pan out. There is no way America still wouldn't have gone to war if 200 died, rather than 3K. Then we get to Iraq and have to eat crow cause they don't have WMD's. Why wouldn't the evil government just plant the WMD's? More questions come up from that then the normal conspiracy. Why make it so elaborate when something much less involved would suffice? It doesn't make sense, and mind you we are referring to people that truthers claimed "pulled this off with military precision." I'm sorry, I can't drink that kool-aid. No offense Jango, but I've probably read more on accident in regards to 9/11 than you have on purpose. I started out exactly opposite of you. I thought it could have been done by the government, then read as much as I could and found out that there is no way it could have been. It's impossible. I will read your articles once I find the time. As long as they're relevant to 9/11 and not some bull(*)(*)(*)(*) about how the government has been mean in the past. To be frank, I just don't care. I know we had multiple chances to kill OBL, and how shady our relationship has been in the past. I fully understand. This is nothing new to me, and I really don't care what's happening the middle east right now. My claim about 9/11 is that the government didn't blow up those buildings, it was 19 pissed off religious fanatics that took planes and rammed them into buildings. I am not disputing we have (*)(*)(*)(*)ty foreign relations, I am not disputing that we lie, cheat, and sometimes kill. All I am saying is that on 9/11, it wasn't our government that killed those people. I don't need to explain those things because they aren't related to the day 9/11 happened, and I am not defending our government in regards to all the crap they've done. I thought I had made that perfectly clear. I don't think the government is some holier than thou institution and I don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) what they are doing over seas. I have admitted that the government used 9/11 to it's advantage, and I don't deny it at all. I won't even begin to deny it. I don't know how to make that clearer. I said they were questions to truthers, I didn't say they were questions to you specifically.
the government is not a living person, it has no soul, it is an organization for a purpose. So you feel that, even though, the bully beat you up every time you walked by his house, that its not rational to expect to be beaten up the next time you walk past? chump aint buying it.
If you can find one America on America attack of this magnitude please put it right here and I will digress. I am not talking about your woo crap, I am saying legit facts. Name one America on America attack that cost 2800 lives, and I will eat my words. Until then, you are just all bark. You got nothing.
Anyone else surprised Koko is lost yet again? No doubt he is going to try and pull some linguistic stunt in a futile effort at making himself seem intelligent.
Al Qaeda is nothing more than a real propaganda campaign. I suspect NATO was afraid law and order would make their militarism obsolete.
I don't know how else to phrase so that you can comprehend it better. Name one time in America's history where the government has attack it's country, and the death toll has been 2800+. Anything of the magnitude of what you say 9/11 was.
The funniest thing is the continued reliance on the idea that nanothermate is some sort of mysterious super explosive compound when it is an explosive compound to exactly the same extent and in exactly the same way wheat is. Any decent chemist could tell you that's nonsense. Chemical explosives rely on their cemical bonds for their explosive power. Guess what aluminum oxide and copper oxide the two most common nanothermates simply aren't large enough molecules to be powerful explosives because there aren't enough chemical bonds in them. The only palce tehrmates are used in explosives is to produce a specific color when burned as a byproduct of an explosion. You see all those lovely colors in a fourth of July fire works display? Nano thermates are the chief source of those colors. All nano thermate is is very finely ground thermate. Can you produce an explosion with nano thermate? Probably and in much the same way as you see grain silos in the midwest sometimes detonate. But I'm almost certain someone would have called complaining about the knee deep choking fine dust.
I estimate the intelligence of the slob who posted that at around 90, and will call him a drooling lunatic, no matter to whom I am speaking at the time. If I meet him face-to-face, I will also call him a "useful idiot" of the white nationalist movement. I suppose there are a lot of people who haven't had time to do the research and some of them can be swayed by this tactic. Once people have seen the proof of an inside job, there's really nothing you pro-official version posters can do; the proof is simply too clear to obfucate.[/QUOTE]I am still waiting for anybody with an ethiocal bopne in his body and a functioning brain between his ears to present any proof. The people who did the simulations of what the aircraft should look like have it about to run into the building well to the left of the heliport fire station. No brains behind that simulation. I've seen the video. It's garbage, posted by somebody with no knowledge of aircraft accident investigations. Some of these turds think there were six blast-ressistant concrete walls inside the Pentagon. Such a crock of bull (*)(*)(*)(*).
Horse hockey. Those of us who have any training in construction or fire investigations know that everythin he has posted so far is based on lies that he read somewhere. Most of what people think they know about the attacks is based on ignorance or the lies of a couple of flaming Nazis and a French criminal with a grudge against America, a little turd named Pierre-Henri Bunel. Bastard should have been shot when he was busted for treason. Would have saved the world a whole lot of trouble. The silly sack of crap even had the chutzpah to call himself an expert in aircrafdt fire fighting and pointed out all manner of things that he thought looked wrong about the Pentagon and showed himself a liar about every thing he wrote. Couldn't even identify a fire truck, but the tinfoilers took that sorry sack of crap at his word. Disgusting.
Actually, most of it was determined to be La Clede primer from the trusses, which was what appeared at first to give Chucklenuts Jones some credibility, because so little of it matched the Tnemec primer that we knew was used on the columns, Given the forces to which the trusses were subjected and their sheer surface area, it was quite natural that that would make up the majority of the red chips in the dust. - - - Updated - - - Everything the CTists think they know about the Pentagon is bull (*)(*)(*)(*).
Total lie, perpetrated in large part by a French felon who intends to harm Americans in any way he can, including by introducing false evidence into discussions of 9/11. The French should have shot that turd when they had an excuse.
