9-11 - What's your take?


9-11 - What's your take?  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. The 9-11 attack was conceived and executed by Al-Qaeda

    • With Al-Qaeda acting alone
      5
    • With Al-Qaeda actively supported by other Islamist groups
      8
    • Al-Queda was merely a front and/or puppet to hide other organizations
      4
    • Al-Qaeda was not involved
      0
    • Other
      2
  2. 2. The 9-11 attack was conceived and executed by a non-Islamist organization with Al-Qaeda being merely a front and/or puppet

    • The USA government alone
      0
    • The USA government supported by Islamist groups
      0
    • The USA government supported by a powerful global unity consortium whose members are mostly not Islamist
      3
    • Israel alone
      0
    • The USA government jointly with Israel and sympathizers
      0
    • A powerful global unity consortium jointly with Israel and sympathizers but without the USA government
      0
    • A powerful global unity consortium without Israel or the USA government
      1
    • All of the above
      0
    • None of the above
      13
    • Other
      2
  3. 3. Your choices above are based on information from

    • The mainstream media
      3
    • Government reports
      0
    • Internet sites
      0
    • All or some of the above
      4
    • All or some of the above and other sources
      12


Recommended Posts

I believe 9/11 was carried out by the corporatists intelligence agencies such as any police or military organization under the UN may have carried it out or part of it. I believe the Jews are being scape-goated for the corporatist agenda of destroying The Rights Of Man, as necessary for a full implementation of globalization.

The ultimate goal is to destroy The Rights of Man and undermine the three main religions, Jewry, Muslim, Christianity and its various derivatives. This is necessary to undermine common law so that we can all be ruled by statute.

I wish I had a nickle for every cop, lawyer, professor, doctor, engineer, actuary, nurse, school teacher or any other professional member that thinks they will be at the head table with the banksters when this is all over.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

For me, the basic issue is metaphysical: Do we live in a benevolent universe or not? If so, then evil and corruption must be made. It doesn't just happen. Then some questions arise.

Who is capable of evil on the scale we are witnessing, a lot of it made possible by 9/11?

Who has benefited?

9/11 investigator David Ray Griffin points out that virtually everyone in this conversation is a conspiracist. The difference is, which conspiracy theory is accepted? The official one, or an unofficial one?

Then the question is, which theory accords with the evidence better? Here is Niels Harrit, a Danish Professor Emeritus of Chemistry

http://nielsharrit.org/

whom I saw in Sweden, answering this question directly as a scientist:



Lastly, which conspiracists say, "Believe us, do not question our explanation," and which say, "See for yourself"?

See for yourself.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, the basic issue is metaphysical: Do we live in a benevolent universe or not? If so, then evil and corruption must be made. It doesn't just happen. Then some questions arise.

Who is capable of evil on the scale we are witnessing, a lot of it made possible by 9/11?

Who has benefited?

9/11 investigator David Ray Griffin points out that virtually everyone in this conversation is a conspiracist. The difference is, which conspiracy theory is accepted? The official one, or an unofficial one?

Then the question is, which theory accords with the evidence better? Here is Niels Harrit, a Danish Professor Emeritus of Chemistry

http://nielsharrit.org/

whom I saw in Sweden, answering this question directly as a scientist:

Lastly, which conspiracists say, "Believe us, do not question our explanation," and which say, "See for yourself"?

See for yourself.

Some interesting points. The collapsing building at the beginning is the one that's most interesting as it's not one of the twin towers but it came down anyway. On a scale of one to ten in making his point or points I'd give him a two only, however, maybe a three if only to differentiate him from the nuts. "Unexploded nano-thermite" is not addressed in this video.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was a forbidden topic on OL. How dare anyone question government?

Most people think:

We have the official report from government. Anything else is a conspiracy theory and therefore must be rejected. (Never mind that the official story is also a conspiracy.) The official report is from government, therefore must be true. Anyone who doubts the official report is a conspiracy theorist and a kook. How dare anyone doubt the official report!

The NIST report is from government. Most people see government as a reliable source of information. Anything from government is 'official', 'authoritative', 'credible', 'accredited', 'documented', 'authenticated', etc. I see government as an unreliable source of information. Whatever government says probably is a lie. Why should the NIST report be an exception?

I would question whether it was an investigation or a coverup. I would question the wisdom of trusting a suspect (government) to do an honest investigation, and a suspect that has a history of doing bad things and telling lies. I would listen to (not automatically believe) engineers and architects who try to do a better investigation and who bring some expertise to it and who have no obvious reason to be dishonest. If questions are not permitted, I would see that as additional reason to be suspicious.

I would maybe interview those six people of the 10 who were on the NIST report who said the NIST report was a fraud (according to AJ).

I doubt anyone knows the truth about 9-11 except those who did it who are still alive.

One question is missing in the poll. Who benefited?

Answer: government benefited. 9-11 was used as an excuse to start this phony war on terrorism, which in turn was used as an excuse to increase government control. Never let a crisis go to waste. If necessary, create one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was a forbidden topic on OL. How dare anyone question government?

Jerry,

It is not forbidden. In fact, there are no forbidden topics on OL.

I get touchy when you (at times) or others treat OL members and readers with gratuitous disrespect.

For ex. Don't read this. Whatever the government says is true. This cannot possibly be taken seriously. Yada yada yada.

When you automatically presume the reader is a nincompoop or deluded at best (from brainwashing, obviously), and you belt it out to the four winds as a foregone conclusion, you have left the realm of rational discussion and entered into...

The Twilight Zone...

The place where only meanies, victims and the stupid fooled cattle reside--with OL members falling into the "stupid fooled cattle" category.

That's entertaining up to a point, but it's not intelligent discussion. And like all entertainment that repeats the same schtick too much, it gets irritating, especially when the performer insists on doing another round as if it were a new act, then another, then another, and so on.

When that happens, I identify what it is--cultural garbage. Then I move it to the proper place: The Garbage Pile. And if that doesn't work to stop the crap, I delete the new garbage, then start taking other measures. I have yet to reach that delete point with you, though.

Note that this has nothing to do with the substance of the issues and everything to do with presentation.

This is a house of respect and discussion with some flexibility. It's OK to get heated and edgy at times. It's OK to present weird ideas. Sometimes they end up not being so weird after all.

It's not OK to scapegoat OL people.

btw - You might have noticed that you are an OL people, too, and that I have defended your participation and free choice to present your ideas in whatever manner you choose--that is, when they are actual discussion or, at the very least, fall within my margins of flexibility. But you are not free to constantly and preemptively insult everyone. That is, you are not free to do that here. There's an entire Internet out there to do so if that is what you wish to do.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me I must either avoid saying what I think or else walk on eggshells to avoid the possibility of offending people. I was kicked out of OO for inoffensively asking for evidence that Iran wants to nuke USA. I thought that was a reasonable question but I guess it wasn't.

Another example is I said in OO that "Ayn Rand said x is not proof of x". I thought Ayn Rand would be the first to agree with that statement. But in OO that was taken as bashing Ayn Rand.

I did say "most people", not "OL members". And these are the things that most people do think.

Most people think:

We have the official report from government. Anything else is a conspiracy theory and therefore must be rejected. (Never mind that the official story is also a conspiracy.) The official report is from government, therefore must be true. Anyone who doubts the official report is a conspiracy theorist and a kook. How dare anyone doubt the official report!

The NIST report is from government. Most people see government as a reliable source of information. Anything from government is 'official', 'authoritative', 'credible', 'accredited', 'documented', 'authenticated', etc. I see government as an unreliable source of information. Whatever government says probably is a lie. Why should the NIST report be an exception?

By "most people" I exclude any OL members who don't think government is a reliable source of information. I thought this would be understood without being said but maybe I thought wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answer: government benefited. 9-11 was used as an excuse to start this phony war on terrorism, which in turn was used as an excuse to increase government control. Never let a crisis go to waste. If necessary, create one.

Are you saying the destruction of the WTC as another "Reichstag Fire"?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answer: government benefited. 9-11 was used as an excuse to start this phony war on terrorism, which in turn was used as an excuse to increase government control. Never let a crisis go to waste. If necessary, create one.

Are you saying the destruction of the WTC as another "Reichstag Fire"?

Ba'al Chatzaf

I don't know if it was planned that way. But it is used that way. Yes I know, watch out for black helicopters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it was planned that way. But it is used that way.

This is observable.

The government always uses a crisis to advance its agendas.

That is not the same thing as claiming the governemt causes the crises. That might happen at times, and when it does, it doesn't take too long for minor government officials to take the fall for the big guys. But it is not the norm.

Those who constantly claim--as fact--the government manufactures major disasters dilute the efforts of those who want to combat the government's use of them to grow, and the real disasters like war the government actually does manufacture.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it was planned that way. But it is used that way.

This is observable.

The government always uses a crisis to advance its agendas.

That is not the same thing as claiming the governemt causes the crises. That might happen at times, and when it does, it doesn't take too long for minor government officials to take the fall for the big guys. But it is not the norm.

Those who constantly claim--as fact--the government manufactures major disasters dilute the efforts of those who want to combat the government's use of them to grow, and the real disasters like war the government actually does manufacture.

This is government's biggest, most relentless, competence. Countries, like people, grow up and grow old and eventually cannot sustain themselves. Reality, not philosophy, will eventually deprive beneficiaries of their benefits and the government that feeds them those benefits. This is already happening in medicine as doctors are less and less inclined to the slavery of "health care provider."

Philosophy might be useful in establishing a new order. It is most useful now for those who insist on taking care of themselves--who don't want to be part of the cannibal feast.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it was planned that way. But it is used that way. Yes I know, watch out for black helicopters.

Using a misfortune (for political ends) is not quite the same as deliberately creating that misfortune.

That is what the Conspiracy Nuts fail to see.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Julius Caesar was assassinated by a conspiracy. That engenders whatever other conspiracies are your own favorites. Mine are Lincoln killed by his Cabinet, Pearl Harbor, and John F. Kennedy killed by his wife, just as I believe that Warren Harding was killed by his wife. We just passed MLK Day. In all the print and media. no one mentions that Coretta Scott King and the Family never accepted James Earle Ray as the assassin.

9/11 I accept prima facie.

I did not reply here earlier because I did not expect the poll and discussion. I was thinking in different terms about the fact that the terrorists enjoyed a strip club the night before. Hardly purifying the soul before death and all that, is it? But maybe it is, eh?

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Julius Caesar was assassinated by a conspiracy. That engenders whatever other conspiracies are your own favorites. Mine are Lincoln killed by his Cabinet, Pearl Harbor, and John F. Kennedy killed by his wife, just as I believe that Warren Harding was killed by his wife. We just passed MLK Day. In all the print and media. no one mentions that Coretta Scott King and the Family never accepted James Earle Ray as the assassin.

9/11 I accept prima facie.

I did not reply here earlier because I did not expect the poll and discussion. I was thinking in different terms about the fact that the terrorists enjoyed a strip club the night before. Hardly purifying the soul before death and all that, is it? But maybe it is, eh?

.

The Roosevelt administration waged economic war on Japan which resulted in the attack on Pearl Harbor, but I hardly think the actual attack on it was anything but a complete and unexpected surprise. I do think Roosevelt wanted war with Japan as a way to go to war with Germany.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Roosevelt administration waged economic war on Japan which resulted in the attack on Pearl Harbor, but I hardly think the actual attack on it was anything but a complete and unexpected surprise. I do think Roosevelt wanted war with Japan as a way to go to war with Germany.

--Brant

Franklin D. Roosevelt was Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1913-1920. He knew. Billy Mitchell lost his rank for speaking the obvious. War between the USA and Japan in the Pacific seemed inevitable to some people. Interestingly, my Mom told me that when she was a little girl, China was the Yellow Peril, the home of Fu Manchu coming for us. Japan was seen as modern and westernized. Many people expected the USA to do nothing about Japan versus China.

The Soong Dynasty by Sterling Seagrave tells about how the USA was brought into China's sphere by Mai Ling Soong (Madame Chiang Kai Shek). While Chiang Kai Shek was currying favor with Hitler and Mussolini, she hired the mercenaries we later called "The Flying Tigers." Although members of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade were threatened with loss of citizenship - hey, you wanna fight for Spain, fine, but that makes you Spanish, right? -- the Flying Tigers were carrying out de facto US foreign policy in the war against Japan. No one challenged them about wanting to be Chinese.

Also, Germany declared war on the USA. Of course, the USA was arming the UK. Though the "Axis" or "Fascintern" was public knowledge, of course, who declares war on whom is not always a foregone conclusion. Although "allied" with the USA, UK, and France, the USSR did not declare war on Japan until the war was almost over; and Japan did not declare was on them, either.

Immediately after Pearl Harbor, Time magazine speculated that the USA would launch a counterstrike from its bases in the Philippines. About 1943 or so, some liberal intellectuals, among them Margaret Mead, were commissioned to help plan the peace, to bring democracy to the world. Mead said that the first thing was that our own govenrment should have a policy of telling the truth, not covering up, they way they did with Pear; Harbor. She meant that the actual damage was kept from the American people for years, lest we lose heart and not want to fight. Just to say, it was complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the US military knew the Japanese were going to attack the Japanese would have suffered greater loses but done a lot more damage. Several of our battleships could have been lost at sea with most of their crews. US aircraft carriers might have been sunk. Instead of bombing obsolete battleships in harbor they would have destroyed the much more valuable and needed shore facilities. The only question is whether Nagumo would have launched a second strike or run. He actually got out of there as fast as he could after the second strike instead of launching a devastating third strike. That third strike could have added a year or two to the war in the Pacific. The first two only pissed us off 100 percent.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant and Michael:

Excellent observations.

I have been plodding through "At Dawn We Slept, by Gordon Prange," [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Prange], for the last three (3) years. It concerns the Pearl Harbor Attack.

It is highly detailed, with a plethora of cables, reports and other detritus of a pre-governmental centralized structure which is slow, inefficient and incapable of projecting strategic concepts.

We should start a separate thread on Pearl Harbor.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now