*edit for clarity*
Here is the talk page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:September_11%2C_2001_attacks
I would like to see the evidence that conflicts with the government story on the page.
My suggestion to was not welcome by understatement. I have been banned 3 times for suggesting references. I had never edited a page jet I just made a suggestion on the talk page.
I was then accused of "soap boxing" while my post was decapitated into a meaningless heap of words with my name under it. Not one of the numerous insults at my address had anything to do with that what I suggested. So I then tried to remove the meaningless words with my own name under them in order to retract my posting. There was no point in arguing with people who create postings under my name. The meaningless chunk of words was then put back on the page and I was banned for soap boxing within the same 30 seconds by the same person.
It's very interesting to complain about some-ones contribution so that he tries to retract it then change his words to your likeings and ban him over this? All I said was that this are valid referrences, then assult me with 15 vs 1 ?? Lets just say I'm an idiot and crazy and a soap boxing person etc etc who cares? ... now what about there referrences?
==no Osama means no Muslims==
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm
''Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world.''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden#_note-56
the FBI says: ''The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden?s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'' thus the word Muslim may only be quoted at best.
==secondary account ==
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403757&in_page_id=1770
''Around 75 top professors and leading scientists believe the attacks were puppeteered by war mongers in the White House to justify the invasion and the occupation of oil-rich Arab countries.''
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,1864657,00.html
''We don't believe that 19 hijackers and a few others in a cave in Afghanistan pulled this off acting alone," says Jones. "We challenge this official conspiracy theory and, '''by God''', we're going to get to the bottom of this.''
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html
''Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away''
For this suggestion I was banned! Can you imagine that? So, please help me take back wikipedia before Bush starts recruiting soldiers for his war against Iran. I think it's important enough for you to help me. But maybe you just want to see the fascists editing wikipedia with your own 2 eyes. Just don't forget to call them liars. We don't want their war here. We already allowed them to put half a million Iraqi woman and children in bags. We have to take some responsibility? Help fight those disgusting liars. Our american friends think they are at war with the Muslim communty, wikipedia is the propaganda bottleneck. This is where you can destroy their warmongering effort.
you have my thanks in advance and my best wishes of luck. ;)
I add an image for referrence, this person clearly says it's not my job but yours. Your opinion is worth so much more to Mr email. Where he says Americans have to accept being lied to he is lieing are you accepting it?
bush hid the evidence, those are the official publications.
Now remember, this topic is not about what happend that day. It's about the have and have not's of official evidence on the page.
Don't make to much effort of it, then they wont stalk you.
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 06, 2007, 01:07:31 AM
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html
''Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away''
I think the Time magazine article you cited has a pretty good rundown on why the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 are dismissed by the mainstream:
"But there's a big problem with Loose Change and with most other conspiracy theories. The more you think about them, the more you realize how much they depend on circumstantial evidence, facts without analysis or documentation, quotes taken out of context and the scattered testimony of traumatized eyewitnesses. (For what it's worth, the National Institute of Standards and Technology has published a fact sheet responding to some of the conspiracy theorists' ideas on its website, www.nist.gov.) The theories prompt small, reasonable questions that demand answers that are just too large and unreasonable to swallow. Granted, the Pentagon crash site looks odd in photographs. But if the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, then what happened to American Airlines Flight 77? Where did all the real, documented people on it go? Assassinated? Relocated? What about eyewitnesses who saw a plane, not a missile? And what are the chances that an operation of such size--it would surely have involved hundreds of military and civilian personnel--could be carried out without a single leak? Without leaving behind a single piece of evidence hard enough to stand up to scrutiny in a court? People, the feds just aren't that slick. Nobody is."
Really, more than for any other reason, the lack of leaks is what drives it home for me. There is no way that this whole thing could have happened and not a single person leaked the slightest detail about the plot. I mean we are not just talking about CIA agents used to keeping secrets. This would have to involve lots of lower level people.
Also, think about the risk that the government would have to take before undertaking such a plot. If nothing else, you must admit that politicians always seek to protect their own asses. Do you really think anyone would risk being implicated in this horrendous crime, and for what? Money for the oil companies? No lobbyist could convince a single politician to undertake this crazy venture, no matter how much money is involved.
The 9/11 conspiracy theories are not at all supportable, and therefore have no place in the Wikipedia under the main 9/11 entry. There is already a separate topic for them at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy)
and that is where they belong.
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 06, 2007, 01:43:28 AM
Really, more than for any other reason, the lack of leaks is what drives it home for me. There is no way that this whole thing could have happened and not a single person leaked the slightest detail about the plot. I mean we are not just talking about CIA agents used to keeping secrets. This would have to involve lots of lower level people.
Oh, but just like perpetual motion, you would have to look before you can say what evidence there is or isn't available. You say there are no leaks, but the story is one big leak. There is no good official explanation for the air force standing down? The thing is all the news media is corrupt, we only have wikipedia left. People expect the wiki to tell them the truth but in reality the wiki is even worse as fox news.
But hey? If there is no Osama there are no muslim extreamists?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13664.htm
'''''On June 5, 2006''', the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden?s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden?s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, ?The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden?s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.?''
They can only ban me when I suggest FBI sources. They did that 3 times already.
what about victims of the pre collapse explosions in the basement who worked there for many years? Here is one still in the hospital bed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSGZYP--wz0
A youtube video of ABC new like this is not good enough for wikipedia. Meanwhile they use the overdebunked TV testimonial of Osama that was translated by 8 government officials and had no official source. This is the reason for America to attack Muslims where ever they live. Even US Muslims get discriminated over this LIE.
You claim there was no leak but William Rodr?guez RICO actually filled a lawsuit
''In October 2004, William Rodr?guez|Rodr?guez filed a civil RICO lawsuit directed against George W. Bush]], Richard B. Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld and others, including a total of 100 defendants, together with Ellen Mariani and lawyer Phil Berg. The government filed a motion to dismiss, or at least transfer, the case on grounds of national security.'' is worthy of it's own paragraph.
You see? They just rejected the case which obviously is not legal.
Furhter more Larry Silverstein earned 4 000 000 000 PER BUILDING in insurance!! He rented it at the beginning of the month.
All the gold and silver stored in the basements (also hundreds of millions but no one knows how much exactly) was shipped out of the building the same morning.
That should be evidence enough for you.
Then the German reverse engineering of the salvaged harddisks showed the banks where also robbed electronically 1 min before controlled demolition.
The buildings spontaneously changed into dust.
And if you cant see an explosion in that, then what about the satellite images showing the 5000 Megawatt afterglow from the Termite emissions?
I don't want a world war, you may think it's all unimportant how much hate Bush can create, I know it's mandatory for his world war to work out. Not before the whole world hates America can Bush start his global war agenda.
Similarities between the Reichstag fire and The September 11 Attacks are as striking as those between the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Patriot act. :-[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire
please go read what the fascists have to say on the wiki.
Every reasonable argument gets deleted.
here you can see at the left what I wrote and at the right what was left after Arthur Rubin deleted everything.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:September_11%2C_2001_attacks&diff=155962381&oldid=155960688
Am I wasting my time on you or are you going to do something?
Everything I wrote was deleted, there need to be more people writing down the truth here! What am I the only one who likes to hear the truth? You all like to be lied to or something?
:'(
create a new topic on wiki with "September 11, 2001 true story" instead of trying to change an existing one
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 06, 2007, 02:55:59 AM
Everything I wrote was deleted, there need to be more people writing down the truth here! What am I the only one who likes to hear the truth? You all like to be lied to or something?
Sir, I think you need the extra heavy duty tinfoil, because the regular stuff is clearly not working for you.
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 06, 2007, 02:55:59 AM
And if you cant see an explosion in that, then what about the satellite images showing the 5000 Megawatt afterglow from the Termite emissions?
Darn, those genetically engineered superfarting termites created right under our noses! I bet the feds deny those too. >:(
Gaby, I'm not sure how many of us have the inclination to drop our tools, forget about providing a solution to the world's energy needs and start blindly following your demands to edit a Wiki.
Surely it is more constructive to reduce the value of oil by providing an alternative. No reliance on oil = no reason for Bush to be interested in the Middle East.
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 06, 2007, 09:57:44 AM
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 06, 2007, 02:55:59 AM
Everything I wrote was deleted, there need to be more people writing down the truth here! What am I the only one who likes to hear the truth? You all like to be lied to or something?
Sir, I think you need the extra heavy duty tinfoil, because the regular stuff is clearly not working for you.
He is using the aluminum foil which does not offer the same protection as tin foil. I think you pointed this out in another thread.
;)
Hi Gaby and all,
who is in charge of Wikipedia ?
Who rules, what is being posted there ?
I tried a while ago to put a link there into a perpetual motion article to overunity.com and it also was deleted...
So who is in charge of this ?
I think it is a good idea to put the "right" story there.
Is nobody from the alternative underground doing a computer graphics generated movie with "digital actors" to tell the true story, e.g. about the Shanksville cruise missile not being a plane ?
The only thing I still wonder is about, why nobody yet from the demolition team has come forward to tell the truth, but I guess,all people that were involved are much too afraid about it.
Look at the Astronauts, they still deny it until today, that they ever went to the moon, although the evidence is
overwheelming, that they never went there...
Hi guys,
Just my 2 cents.
What about these "Controled" Crash vids?
http://freenrg.info/Controled_Crash/ (http://freenrg.info/Controled_Crash/)
Best
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 06, 2007, 12:58:26 PM
Hi Gaby and all,
who is in charge of Wikipedia ?
Who rules, what is being posted there ?
If you can quote a mainstream source then it's good enough for wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources
For scientific topics they demand peer review journals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
QuoteI tried a while ago to put a link there into a perpetual motion article to overunity.com and it also was deleted...
So who is in charge of this ?
The rules make it hard even for the SMOT device to survive, njaudin is just about considered a quack on that page. The administrators are in charge, but they use NWO tactics so most of the moderators are active paid propagandists, handsomely paid that is.
QuoteI think it is a good idea to put the "right" story there.
The rules are "valid sources" what ever that is suppose to mean. Like fox news. That's a valid source, or George Bush that's incredibly credible.
But in reality the company with the most employees gets to delete the most articles. the administrators do nothing ad delete things it seems. You almost cant blame them, wiki software is fun for a small organisation. For wikipedia it's totally unfit.
QuoteIs nobody from the alternative underground doing a computer graphics generated movie with "digital actors" to tell the true story, e.g. about the Shanksville cruise missile not being a plane ?
Not a valid source.
QuoteThe only thing I still wonder is about, why nobody yet from the demolition team has come forward to tell the truth
Marlene Cruz is a pre collapse explosion victim from the basement, here she is still in the hospital. She was one of the first to arrive (obviously)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSGZYP--wz0
This is ABC news it should be a valid source.
Quotebut I guess, all people that were involved are much too afraid about it.
No, they are to nihilistic, they think that what happened to Germany can never happen to them. This while Prescott Bush himself had his properties seized for financing Hitler. This while under the America nooses they exported mass murder for profit from Vietnam to Iraq. They cant even buy Medicare anymore, it's just ridiculously exploited all the way.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13664.htm
'''''On June 5, 2006''', the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden?s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden?s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, ?
The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden?s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.?''
That should be more then good enough for wikipedia. But they will find an excuse to complain about you being there if that's what it takes. Your links don't go on the page. The admins keep all controversial topics locked until everyone who disagrees has disappeared. It's a very lame game and they are very good at covering their tracks.
QuoteLook at the Astronauts, they still deny it until today, that they ever went to the moon, although the evidence is overwhelming, that they never went there...
Yes, I specially loved one of the interviews, both astronauts clamped their heads with both hands from the same questions. Asking more information about specifics made them both angry, but not in a normal way. They would snap in and out of pure anger mode. They have all the signs of brainwashing. Buzz turned from a peoples person into some one who wanted to be alone all day. In Alternative 3 you can already see how he gets angry from asking questions.
If you see 2 people get angry over the same question then you may conclude it's brainwashing. Like: "how did you get that huge rover out of that small box." Both of them said, not to remember exactly how that happened, then got angry.
I guess my wikipedia adventure gave me new insight in how great your forum really is. It looks like a mess but BOY it's so well structured and organised compared to a wiki.
They have long debates about structure of information on wikipedia. That stuff goes all by it self here, the result may not be optimal but at least it works.
I much rather read tin foil head references as having people delete my comments because they disagree. :D
Hartiberlin,
I have thought about why more ppl havent come forward also. But the more I try to put my self in the masterminds shoes, the more things make sense to me. If I was a mastermind coordinating an operation I would keep the operation as compartmentalized as possible. At critical points such as the demolition teams I would put either the most trustworthy people I could imagine or simply have them assasinated shortly after they performed the operation because they know too much. There is nothing new about that strategy. It is used by the Mofia, dictators, and of course our lovely CIA; when you think about it you have to admit it is brilliant provided you are morally bankrupt.
Quote from: TheOne on September 06, 2007, 08:53:16 AM
create a new topic on wiki with "September 11, 2001 true story" instead of trying to change an existing one
You are right, there already are such pages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truther
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Forking
QuoteA content fork is usually an unintentional creation of several separate articles all treating the same subject. A point of view (POV) fork is a content fork deliberately created to avoid neutral point of view guidelines, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. Both content forks and POV forks are undesirable on Wikipedia, as they avoid consensus building and violate one of our most important policies.
So I want the damn real story side by side with the nonsense version.
Then people will start asking all kinds of "BAD" questions.
Like why wasn't building 7 covered in the official report? :o
Why did the air force stand down??? :o
Where did those Hermite reactions come from? :o
How did the jet fuel "destroy" reinforced steel? :o
Why did the building change into dust if there was no effect from gravity? :o
Why did the US gov commit obstruction of justice? Common! You pretend you know what happened but there was never an investigation. You president was reading a book to a class of little kids.
This is a mainstream publication, where is the boeing?
''Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away''
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html|time.com
But today, you have all kinds of hard worked films! You are all spoiled! Here is a good short film
Ten Questions That Every Intelligent Skeptic Must Answerthis film does in 20 minutes what takes other video 90 minutes or
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5615710732442096687
Then view this
counter to killing civilianshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOoJlKGc1ic
Then see this.
ZEITGEIST, The Movie - Official Release - Full Filmhttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331
Then view this also, then you get a real picture of the shit you are in.
The truth about the Federal Reserve Systemhttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3286459385978771924
then if you still have time view additional civilians get blown away.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyuPgkZ5OAk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0qs71TYwoM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8zBOr-JioQ
You had your government kill a million civilians. So what do you have to say for yourself?
The most ironic part is that you wont be responsible for very long, soon bush will become dictator of the world. Iraq is just setting an example. Now if you are to stupid to see there are no Muslim terrorists. Then everyone will die globally. If you continue making jokes about it. Then you will accomplish the exact opposite.
You have real Nazi style concentration camps man!
http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/fema.htm
QuoteWhat can FEMA do? It can suspend laws. It can move entire populations. It can arrest and detain citizens without a warrant and can hold them without a trial. It can seize property, food supplies, and transportation systems. And it can even suspend the Constitution of the United States.
Similarities between the Reichstag fire and The September 11 Attacks are as striking as those between the Reichstag Fire Decree and Patriot act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act
The only thing missing is the swastika's? I'm sure we will see those pretty soon. Ok, that should keep you bussy for the rest of the week. You think after Katrina Bush will care about those Nukes Iran will drop on you? He will use that to recrute more troops. It will work much in his advantage. Why do you think you have all those crazy desasters in the first place? It's all to make you belive in government, you really don't need any of it but you are paying for it though the nose.
But you've seen that in the films..... :'(
Listen to Kay Griggs, and you'll have an idea about how this could be done without anybody telling about it: http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=kay+griggs
There are compartments in the military that has their own budget, their own agenda, their own troops and there own ideals about society.
Also, try to make this experiement of thoughts.
A terrorist group is about to blow a nuke in central NY killing 1,000,000 people. You can push a button and neutralize the threat, but will take 1000 civilian lifes also by doing so. Would you push the button if you where 100% sure that you could neutralize the threat? ... of .cause, who wouldn't.
Would you push the button if you where 99% sure? What about 80 or 50%.
To make my point a bit more clear. When you have an agenda to secure your countrys position, military and politically, and you feel the situation is slipping out of your hands, how much are you then willing to risk to fullfill your agenda.
To make my point perfectly clear. I think you could find noumerous of military people (specially seen in the light of Kay Griggs testamony) who would see kililng 3000 civillians as a reasonable sacrifice to secure the political climate.
I actually belive that many of the people involved in the 911 false flag operation think they ultimately are serving their country.
SwinG
Quote from: SwinG on September 06, 2007, 06:40:23 PM
I actually belive that many of the people involved in the 911 false flag operation think they ultimately are serving their country.
There is nothing to believe here, 99% of the soldiers in Iraq where drafted using 911 propaganda.
There have to be thousands of them, they should all say the same thing.
After figuring out Osama was not even responsible for 911 the terroistmuslim hybrid becomes a very weird enemy.
We have seen zero terrorists but millions and millions of civilians died.
You have a weapon factory? What is your means of advertisement? FEAR perhaps?
You should look up all the US bombings and try to find out what happened to the remains of the buildings.
There seems to be a scientists with questions in every case. In non of the cases are they allowed onto the secret debris dump.
I have to ask, are you all pulling my leg, or do you really believe in this fake moon landing and 9/11 conspiracy nonsense? Because, if you are serious, it really paints your overunity research work with a shade of crazy.
post retracted,
shruggedatlas does not give any evidence of his claims for side by side comparison.
No, of course he doesnt believe in the 9/11 conspiracy. He understands that the terrorists just coincedently played perfectly into the hands of the Oil corporations by giving the USA an excuse for invading Iraq. He also understands it was just a coincidence that they provided themselves as a new enemy to help ensure incredible profits for the Defense industry since the cold war had been over for almost a decade and defense spending was becoming harder to justify. Finally, he knows that the terrorists hit us because they hate our freedoms and coincidently the 9/11 attacks allow the Government to now routinely violate the 4th amendment "Having probable cause before you search someone" ie wiretaps and random checkpoints. The 9/11 attacks also coincidently allow the governement to violate the 6th amendment "Right to a speedy trial" ie. Jose Padilla; by simply declaring you an enemy combatant. They also violate the 5th amendment "Right against self incrimination" ie torture or shall we call it pressure to be politically correct. I know just as well as he does that this is all just coincidence. Even though the Governement allied with these powerful coorporations had the power to orchastrate the 9/11 attacks and have benefitted greatly from them, they would never do so because it would be very mean to kill that many innocent people and we all know that they wouldnt do mean things.
Quote from: chadj2 on September 06, 2007, 08:15:41 PM
No, of course he doesnt believe in the 9/11 conspiracy. He understands that the terrorists just coincedently played perfectly into the hands of the Oil corporations by giving the USA an excuse for invading Iraq. He also understands it was just a coincidence that they provided themselves as a new enemy to help ensure incredible profits for the Defense industry since the cold war had been over for almost a decade and defense spending was becoming harder to justify. Finally, he knows that the terrorists hit us because they hate our freedoms and coincidently the 9/11 attacks allow the Government to now routinely violate the 4th amendment "Having probable cause before you search someone" ie wiretaps and random checkpoints. The 9/11 attacks also coincidently allow the governement to violate the 6th amendment "Right to a speedy trial" ie. Jose Padilla; by simply declaring you an enemy combatant. They also violate the 5th amendment "Right against self incrimination" ie torture or shall we call it pressure to be politically correct. I know just as well as he does that this is all just coincidence. Even though the Governement allied with these powerful coorporations had the power to orchastrate the 9/11 attacks and have benefitted greatly from them, they would never do so because it would be very mean to kill that many innocent people and we all know that they wouldnt do mean things.
Everything you are saying can be similarly explained by the Administration's simple decision to invade Iraq. While it would have been harder to get this done without the 9/11 attacks, the bottom line is that the primary motivation given for the invasion was WMDs, and not the 9/11 connection, and so the invasion could have been accomplished without the plane crashes. So why engineer the ridiculously crazy plot?
Also, you are unnecessarily attributing the Administration's exploitation of the attacks with the causation of the attacks. It is perfectly plausible that someone can try to exploit a bad situation, even without causing said situation.
I would have differ with you on the Iraq invasion being possible without the 9/11 attacks. Saddam was linked to 9/11 in very careful and roundabout ways. I talk to ppl all the time on the topic and find many people that believe that Saddam was linked to the terrorists and had a working relationship. There is no way support for the Iraq invasion would have been that high without 9/11. On your second point all I am saying is that it is an interesting coincidence. You must admit that the Government and coorporate factions had the power to make 9/11 happen and had a tremendous gain from it. I would use the analogy of watching someone who picks the lottery numbers coincidently win the 500 million dollar jackpot. Yes, granted it could just be a incredibly lucky coincidence for the person picking the numbers and nothing more; but you must admit a lot of people probably including yourself would be raising eyebrows.
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 06, 2007, 08:11:26 PM
http://moonlanding.go-here.nl
Have you encountered a conspiracy theory you did not believe? If so, I would be curious to know what you actually recognize as bunk. I do not believe there is a theory crazy enough for you to reject. At the risk of Godwining this thread, I must ask, are you a Holocaust denier as well?
The irony is that you use basically the same methods to justify your reasoning that the Bush administration used to invade Iraq. They generally accepted as true all evidence that supported their position without much critical analysis and discarded evidence that contradicted their position.
A 10 minute Google search found rebuttals for every point the picture you link makes regarding the moon landing being fake. I know they will not convince you, but to a reasonable person, they should cast serious doubt.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html)
Anyway, I know there is evidence that supports your position, but given the mass of evidence to the contrary, as a rational person, all I can say is, "You may be right, but it seems highly unlikely." The fact that you are 100% convinced of your position, and no evidence to the contrary even gives you any pause, tells me you are not a rational person.
Quote from: chadj2 on September 06, 2007, 10:52:59 PM
I would use the analogy of watching someone who picks the lottery numbers coincidently win the 500 million dollar jackpot. Yes, granted it could just be a incredibly lucky coincidence for the person picking the numbers and nothing more; but you must admit a lot of people probably including yourself would be raising eyebrows.
It is easy to make a case from bad analogies. A terrorist attack is not a 1 in 250 million chance, like the Powerball lottery is. And it would not have taken the destruction of the towers to get us to attack Afghanistan. The mere hijacking and crashing of four planes would have sufficed.
Furthermore, there were plenty of alternatives. Let's say this is before 9/11. I am the President, and I want to invade Iraq for money and glory. I am so evil that I would be willing to kill thousands of American civilians to give a justification. So what would I do? Well, I can go ahead with this crazy plot to crash planes into buildings and hope it works (planes fly straight, pilots do not chicken out) and no one talks (if they do, I get impeached, become instantly known as the most shameful president in history, and spend the rest of my life in prison or worse, be executed under a treason or mass murder conviction). Or, let's see, there are other options. If I wanted to invade Iraq, I would first and foremost make sure the attacks looked like they came from Iraq, and not Al Queda or Saudi Arabia, like the 9/11 attacks did. Moreover, I do not even need an attack. Heck, why not manufacture WMD evidence? Have a test nuclear explosion occur on Iraqi soil. Plant some biological agents for the inspectors to find. Anyway, I am sure you can think of thousands of simpler, more directly attributable to Iraq, easier to cover up, less bloody, and frankly more effective methods to get us into a war.
You cannot with the same breath grant the Administration this awesome ability to carry out this massively risky and complex plot to perfection, but take away their reasoning ability, the same ability that would have inevitably drawn them to one of hundreds of simpler and more effective alternatives, if they were in a mood to wholly manufacture reasons to get into a war with Iraq.
You are once again saying the US people are so ready for war at the drop of a hat. Basically hijack and crash some planes and we will enthusiastically go invade some country and get into a guerilla war for half a decade or more. I would have to ask why we havent invaded anyone before when a terrorist attack has occurred against our citizens or soldiers? I disagree that the US would have been massively supportive of an invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq without an extremely traumatic event like "A New Pearl Harbor". You would need a massive body count. I would also take issue with you chalking this all to the President. I believe that if this event was orchastrated the President was a minor player. If the President is an advanced thinker he sure plays the role well of not being one. An event like this would take good coordination of people in key positions who can think well on their feet. You claimed that it would be easier or necessary to plant WMD evidence in Iraq or test a biological weapon or chemical or nuke in Iraq or make the terrorists look like they were from Iraq. I would submit that if this was orchastrated the planners looked at that scenario and concluded that that would be unnecessary. Observe, we didnt need to have evidence that Iraq did anything to us we simply wanted revenge on someone who looked like the alleged terrorists. We were presented with Iraq by our officials and we jumped on it. This isnt that hard to predict if you understand American psyche. Our population is not generally known for being very informed about really anything of real relevance. We are good with sports and movie stars. I acknowledge your point about there being a risk associated with carrying out any conspiracy, but that has not stopped people from carrying them out in the past in other countries and in America. I am sure that the orchastrators did a risk vs reward analysis. Dont believe this stuff about governement officials being incompetent. They are very effective and efficient with things that count. How long do you think you can get away with not paying your taxes? Do you think you can penetrate a Air force base and steal a fighter jet? Do you think it was an accident that we have cruise missiles that can go through a particular window of a structure if instructed? These people in charge are not stupid. Also, please dont oversimplify the benefits to be gained with the 9/11 attacks. If you want I can list a number of things that were gained that would have been very difficult without 9/11. Lastly, I would ask you what the terrorists gained from the 9/11 attack? Why is their balance sheet so empty in the reward category of "Risk vs Reward"? Dont just fall back on the "they were just stupid crazy terrorists." People who could carry out an attack of that complexity typically would not be that stupid and shortsighted as far as likely reactions to their attack. What have they gained other than a few more recruits? And once again how has our government been hurt in any way?
@Stefan,
you should just ban war apologists if they don't want to listen.
Or you end up with their paid2spam on your site.
Or did this spamer read one post written here?
I most certainly don't think so.
He is here to wreak my topic.
Here is the talk page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:September_11%2C_2001_attacks
please help, the idea is to have both versions of the story on the page. The inside job and the government version. But there is all kinds of paid help editing the wiki so I have been banned 3 times for suggesting references. 3 times people! And I have never edited a page jet! I just made a suggestion on the talk page and they said it was to long called me a liar and locked my page! They only have limited locking abilities. I need your help! All you have to do is click edit and past some of this stuff into the page.
==no Osama means no Muslims==
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm
''Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world.''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden#_note-56
the FBI says: ''The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden?s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'' thus the word Muslim may only be quoted at best.
==secondary account ==
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403757&in_page_id=1770
''Around 75 top professors and leading scientists believe the attacks were puppeteered by war mongers in the White House to justify the invasion and the occupation of oil-rich Arab countries.''
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,1864657,00.html
''We don't believe that 19 hijackers and a few others in a cave in Afghanistan pulled this off acting alone," says Jones. "We challenge this official conspiracy theory and, '''by God''', we're going to get to the bottom of this.''
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html
''Why the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Won't Go Away''
For this suggestion I was banned! Can you imagine that? So, please help me take back wikipedia before Bush starts recruiting soldiers for his war against Iran. I think it's important enough for you to help me. But maybe you just want to see the fascists editing wikipedia with your own 2 eyes. Just don't forget to call them liars. We don't want their war here. We already allowed them to put half a million Iraqi woman and children in bags. We have to take some responsibility? Help fight those disgusting liars. Our American friends think they are at war with the Muslim communty, wikipedia is the propaganda bottleneck. This is where you can destroy their warmongering effort.
you have my thanks in advance and my best wishes of luck. ;)
[/quote]
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 06, 2007, 01:43:28 AM
I think the Time magazine article you cited has a pretty good rundown
No it does not, if you paid attention I used that reference to show it's possible to write both sides of the story on one page.
You are reading things out of context and you are misbehaving. Could you act normal, by the definition of the rest of the world? Ignorance is not something to be proud of, just like patriotism is not.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.anairhoads.org%2Fgraphics%2Fnazi.jpg&hash=bd3dc73a5a552c0288106b99e03cff5579e7c367)
That's patriotism. It's very real, and you come tell us about
how superior you are in this context?
If you don't agree with the controlled demolition theory. Then you show us your evidence of collapsed, try convince us ahh?? Your proofs are non existent?
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 07, 2007, 09:21:50 AM
@Stefan,
you should just ban war apologists if they don't want to listen.
Or you end up with their paid2spam on your site.
Or did this spamer read one post written here?
I most certainly don't think so.
He is here to wreak my topic.
Sure, ban everyone that does not agree with the conspiracy "theories" and "opinions" of others.
I agree with you topgunner. I do not want to see ppl banned just because they do not agree with me. Especially if we can have an intelligent exchange. Maybe I can learn to see something from a new perspective. Also, I enjoy talking to Neocons and trying to understand their perspective.
Quote from: chadj2 on September 07, 2007, 12:26:26 PM
I agree with you topgunner. I do not want to see ppl banned just because they do not agree with me. Especially if we can have an intelligent exchange. Maybe I can learn to see something from a new perspective. Also, I enjoy talking to Neocons and trying to understand their perspective.
I am not even sure what Neocon is exactly, but knowing what I know now, there is no way I would have supported the war in Iraq. If we could really have done it all in a year and had a stable government by now, I would feel different, but seeing the way things are, it is pretty obvious the war was a big mistake. Do keep in mind that Saddam was a terrible tyrant, using torture and mass fear to keep the populace in line, so any opposition to the war in Iraq necessarily entails leaving him and his sons in power. As much as the current situation sucks and is not worth the American lives spent (no compelling U.S. security interest), people do tend to conveniently ignore the previous state of affairs.
But to address some of your points. You seem to think that the Iraq war was sold as a revenge war to the public. This is not what happened. The reason for going into Iraq was WMDs, at least that is how it was sold. The Afghanistan attack was the one that was directly justified by 9/11. True, some links were attempted, placing Al Queda in Iraq during certain times, but intelligence on this was sketchy and that alone would not have justified the war, and that is why the WMD/weapon inspector issue was stressed to no end. You must recall this. So based on this, we must give some allowance that if the Iraq war is what the administration wanted, there were other ways go about it. Heck, if you are going to stage a 9/11, why not have Iraqis in the pilots' seats? How does having Saudi Al Queda members there help your case to go to war with Iraq? Look at how tenuous the connection between 9/11 and Iraq was at the time we invaded and how hard the administration had to play up the WMD angle. Surely, if it was planned from the get go, it would have been planned much better.
Regarding benefit to the terrorists, it is quite clear. They provoked America into acting aggressively on the world stage, and this has brought Al Queda into the spotlight as the Muslim resistance force. Now, Muslim sentiment toward America around the world is clearly negative, and more money is flowing into the pockets of Al Queda from various sources, and more volunteers are joining the ranks. If you are going to play "follow the money" with american contractors and oil companies, it is hypocritical not to do the same with the other side.
Lastly, do think about the accusations you are making about the administration and if these were true, what other things you would expect to logically occur. I believe you are focusing too narrowly on the evidence related to 9/11 and ignoring other things that should logically be happening, if your theory was true. For example, let's say the administration is as evil and corrupt as you say and is willing to manufacture whatever evidence it needs to. Do you recall what a tremendous embarrassment it was (and still is!) when no WMDs were found? For someone who can engineer 9/11 and get away with it, do you think it would be hard to manufacture evidence of WMDs? Why did this not happen? Nothing like uncovering nuclear materials (or better, a nuclear suitcase bomb stolen from the Russians) to have everyone say, "Well this war is a quagmire, but I am glad we went in there, or Saddam would have been threatening us with nukes soon. All of New York could have been a goner. This has all been worth it."
Look, I guess my point is that you can lose yourself in 9/11 conspiracy evidence if you want to. For every point I make, you can trot out something that somehow points back to the government, and this discussion will never end. You obviously want to believe it, and so you will naturally give more weight to evidence that supports your position. But just try to think of the big picture and how things would really play out, if what you are saying is true. I think if you look at it honestly, you will find some big inconsistencies.
And hey, having some credible witnesses testifying to the conspiracy would be helpful too. The circumstatial evidence can be interpreted multiple ways, as has been demonstrated, so you really need to get some people to talk.
Were any of you watching tv like I was that day? Did you not see the second plane hit the tower on live tv? And subsequently the buildings collapse at that point (not from the bottom). If you believe CNN and the other liberal news channels were part of the conspiracy there is no hope for you.
Remember, when you think of an alternative to war, peace is often not an option, only slavery or death. If the extremists gain power, those are the only two options they will give you.. to either convert (slavery to their faith) or die. You know which one I will choose.
Danner
formerly Sgt. USMC
Quote from: Danner on September 07, 2007, 02:09:02 PM
Were any of you watching tv like I was that day? Did you not see the second plane hit the tower on live tv? And subsequently the buildings collapse at that point (not from the bottom). If you believe CNN and the other liberal news channels were part of the conspiracy there is no hope for you.
Oh yeah sure,
"I must take everything the TV says as the DIVINE TRUTH or I am hopeless"A total bullshit statement.
Rupert Murdock owns the news. Over a hundred cable networks, practically all US media, hundreds of newspapers. So you might as well say
Ruppie is GOD!!!!
HALLELUJAH CRACKPOT!!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7798.htm
Quote from: Topguner2 on September 07, 2007, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 07, 2007, 09:21:50 AM
@Stefan,
you should just ban war apologists if they don't want to listen.
Or you end up with their paid2spam on your site.
Or did this spamer read one post written here?
I most certainly don't think so.
He is here to wreak my topic.
Sure, ban everyone that does not agree with the conspiracy "theories" and "opinions" of others.
You are talking bullshit,
Please explain your version of what happened.
I demand evidence of all of it, your opinion BS will not do.
I asked for your help and you talk bullshit.
View a video apologist morons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 07, 2007, 03:28:43 PM
View a video apologist morons.
Morons?!!
Now you are using multiple mirrors there?!!! ;D
One is enough. Try it together with a nice magnifier to see yourself much better! ;)
And I?d like to kindly ask Stefan to give you at least a serious warning.
Tinu
What are we talking about here? The TRUTH, and Gaby is standing on the high ground. People like Shruggedatlas have been misled and have not done enough homework. You could show them a orange and tell them its a apple and they would believe you. People are brainwashed, Just look at former Sgt. Danner, I guess they didn?t teach him anything about physics during sleep deprivation at boot camp? Keep following orders Jar head I feel a lot safer knowing your protecting what few freedoms I have left. Oh wait? I thought the terrorist could never take our freedoms away? No only the corrupt Politician's can do that. Also you could have tried harder in Iraq, I?m still paying $3.00 a gallon for gas. Am I pissed? You bet. And when you finally wake up you will be also. Thanks for playing.
Here?s something to think about, If you could fill your car up with your water hose every morning, why do you need a gas station every 2 miles? What industry is the largest political contributor? What reason DO you have to trust the government?
Lovingly, Bob in accounting
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 07, 2007, 03:28:43 PM
I asked for your help and you talk bullshit.
View a video apologist morons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8
Youtube??
Of course, everything over there is credible!
:D
Quote from: bobinaccounting on September 07, 2007, 03:50:52 PM
What are we talking about here? The TRUTH, and Gaby is standing on the high ground. People like Shruggedatlas have been misled and have not done enough homework. You could show them a orange and tell them its a apple and they would believe you. People are brainwashed, Just look at former Sgt. Danner, I guess they didn?t teach him anything about physics during sleep deprivation at boot camp? Keep following orders Jar head I feel a lot safer knowing your protecting what few freedoms I have left. Oh wait? I thought the terrorist could never take our freedoms away? No only the corrupt Politician's can do that. Also you could have tried harder in Iraq, I?m still paying $3.00 a gallon for gas. Am I pissed? You bet. And when you finally wake up you will be also. Thanks for playing.
Here?s something to think about, If you could fill your car up with your water hose every morning, why do you need a gas station every 2 miles? What industry is the largest political contributor? What reason DO you have to trust the government?
Lovingly, Bob in accounting
Do you complain?
When you?re going to pay 5.15 USD/gallon, then what?!
Can?t you see that some of your views are way off this reality?
There was another fellow here, accusing that the whole Middle East has a grip on you. Well, maybe I also have a grip on you because I have some gasoline into my tank, bought at 5.15, right? Maybe you wanna take it anyway from me. Maybe you find normal to have cheap resources, right? Or maybe you?re just happy because in a ?global economy?, I buy expensive what you buy cheap therefore you are smart and I am fool. Does it make you happy?! Assume my country finds some oil resources and in the future I?ll buy cheap and you?ll buy expensive. Then what? How will you be then? It has to be your resources, right? Just because you?re pissed off?
You?re soo pissed of because you have to pay 3USD/gallon and, in the same time, you are against the Iraq war?!!! Don?t you think you have a huge contradiction in your brain? Whose brain was really washed up pall? Make your own mind before talking. Your post is like slapping your own face, not somebody else?s.
That sld has no other chance but obeying orders exactly because you and others like you are pissed of. And, in the same time, you still worth exact one vote, damn it? Brain washed or not, the vote is still yours.
But that?s an internal problem. Do you vote for a global government?! If not, then wait until that time, before opening subjects on this line inhere again.
Also, you may have an attitude problem when comparing yourself with the rest of the world but that issue should be again discussed in a national thread, not in an international, less in a European founded one. So, go back wash your dirty clothes in your own family, ok? Take Gaby with you if he really wants so.
I?m pity for the victims of 9/11 events.
I am pity for all victims in Iraq, also.
But I?m not guilty because the oil will be over one day not very far in the future.
And I?m surely not here to discuss politics, neither national diverging positions nor international conflicts.
So go back where these subjects are rightfully debated and leave us here the way we are, ok?
And I?m not a moron in any case.
Neither are the vast majority of the members here.
Tx,
Tinu
Stefan, I kindly suggest to close this thread.
It is truly not in the topics of OU.com
If you think I'm pissed because of the monetary cost of gas, you missed the point completely. I?m not interested in attacking anyone?s beliefs but I think as intelligent human beings we should be prepared to question our beliefs ? and the people who encourage us to make life decisions based on the information they give us.
Quote from: bobinaccounting on September 07, 2007, 03:50:52 PM
What are we talking about here? The TRUTH, and Gaby is standing on the high ground. People like Shruggedatlas have been misled and have not done enough homework. You could show them a orange and tell them its a apple and they would believe you. People are brainwashed, Just look at former Sgt. Danner, I guess they didn?t teach him anything about physics during sleep deprivation at boot camp? Keep following orders Jar head I feel a lot safer knowing your protecting what few freedoms I have left. Oh wait? I thought the terrorist could never take our freedoms away? No only the corrupt Politician's can do that. Also you could have tried harder in Iraq, I?m still paying $3.00 a gallon for gas. Am I pissed? You bet. And when you finally wake up you will be also. Thanks for playing.
Here?s something to think about, If you could fill your car up with your water hose every morning, why do you need a gas station every 2 miles? What industry is the largest political contributor? What reason DO you have to trust the government?
Lovingly, Bob in accounting
With regard to our men in the military, I will quote George Orwell: "We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us." You, sir, seem like an ingrate with your attitude. But hey, we have fought wars to give people like you the right to say ungrateful things, so you just keep at it.
As far as filling your car up with water, nothing is stopping you from inventing your own water-powered engine and bringing it to market. Oh, you do not have the technical skill? Then, don't complain because it is not handed to you. Oh wait, I know, Big Oil will send men to get you if you do, right? Then open source it. Oh wait, you do not have the technical skill, so never mind. Just shell out the cash and moan, then.
Incidentally, if you worked a little harder and/or smarter, that $3 per gallon would not seem like such a hit in the pocketbook. Try running your own business, or are you the kind of person that works for the man and then complains about the man keeping you down?
Quote from: Topguner2 on September 07, 2007, 04:23:40 PM
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 07, 2007, 03:28:43 PM
I asked for your help and you talk bullshit.
View a video apologist morons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8
Youtube??
Of course, everything over there is credible!
:D
You are right, you should be looking at this show on the official pinkyshow homepage.
http://pinkyshow.org/archives/episodes/070525/
Excuse me for my incredible laziness. I mean combined with yours it's quite an impossible mission to get any words accross. So in case you view the video I should exploit that opportunity to make you look at the rest of pinky's fantastic work.
I will try be less lazy from now on. ok?
Shruggedatlast,
You made a very insightful statement at the end of your points in which you were addressing my arguments. For every point you make, I will be more likely to be more skeptical of the government and this discussion will never end. That is dead on and you were able to see it more clearly and quickly that I was able to. Ultimately the main disagreement that we have is that I am appearantly a thousand times more suspicious of the Government and coorporate influence than you are, and who knows you may be right and this is just another false alarm. I dont believe I am behaving irrational or paranoid and I will explain why. I do enjoy studying history somewhat and one thing I constantly run across is that human government no matter what nation or race given enough time WITHOUT EXCEPTION slides toward tyranny and dictatorship. Think about all the powerful governements throughout history and where they ended up and what path they took getting there. I am simply assuming that the people in charge of our government are the same as the people that were in charge of those other governments in the past that eventually slid downhill. Attacking your own population with terrorists attacks to get them to react a certain way is absolutely not unprecedented. The Japanese blew up their own railroads to justify going into Manchuria in WWII. The Germans destroyed their own Reichstag to allow them to pass something similr to the Patriot Act. Governments also historically have had no problem whatsoever slaughtering their own people to further whatever crazy agenda that have had back then. In fact the worst attrocities commited against a population are pretty much always done be one's own government. This once again cuts across all nations and racial lines. White Russians had no problem setting up machine guns behind soldiers to make sure that they could not retreat or they would be shot. Stalin and his soldiers also had no problem killing millions of their own countrymen for as far as I can tell almost no reason. Pol Pot and his helpers slaughtered millions of Cambodians for some strange idea involving moving out of the cities to a more rural life and never repented. Chairman Mao had no problem killing millions of his countrymen during the cultural revolution. In Rwanda you had the dominant group of people have no problem killing millions of their fellow countrymen for another pretty much stupid reason when you look back on it now. After the French revolution you have the revolutionaries start slaughtering thousands of French people for silly suspicions. My point is look at human governments track record. Why should I give them the benefit of the doubt when they keep doing the same thing over and over again? Why should I trust them if they offer no transparancy? It seems like every question is blocked by "denied due to NATIONAL SECURITY." I know you dont believe that your government really represents you or that your vote counts anywhere near as much as what the cooporate lobbyist instructs the politician to do. Given this information, I know that ALL powerful governments go bad; and we all know that our government is run by cooporate lobbyists I dont think it is an illogical leap for me suspect the government is behind certain attacks that benefit both the powerful coorporations by dramatically increasing profit and benefit the government by greatly increasing and enhancing its power over the citizenry.
Quote from: chadj2 on September 08, 2007, 12:40:47 AM
I do enjoy studying history somewhat and one thing I constantly run across is that human government no matter what nation or race given enough time WITHOUT EXCEPTION slides toward tyranny and dictatorship. Think about all the powerful governements throughout history and where they ended up and what path they took getting there.
You are wise to be skeptical of government actions. I am a strong believer that organizations like the ACLU and such, while they sometimes take wrongheaded positions, are critical to the long term freedoms we cherish, because they are constantly vigilant of the government abusing its power.
That said, I think it is overly paranoid to assume that we are constantly sliding into tyranny and see the absolute worst angle in every government action, to the point of ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Even Noam Chomsky, the famous liberal and one of the most vehement critics of the current administration, thinks the 9.11 conspiracy theories are bunk:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzGd0t8v-d4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzGd0t8v-d4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoDqDvbgeXM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoDqDvbgeXM)
Finally, remember that in two years, Bush and the administration will be out of office, and not through the use of force, but peacefully. The Republican party is already out of power in both houses of congress, again, peacefully. We still have the freedom of the press and we still have the right to openly ridicule the government (well, you may not think this if you read conspiracy theories exclusively, but let me assure you, no one will arrest you for your political blog entries). The fact that the 9/11 conspiracy theories are on full display on many U.S. based webservers is ironic evidence of our continued freedom of speech and of the press. Why are they not shut down? If you can get away with crashing 4 planes and taking down a few buildings, what's pulling the plug on a few hundred servers?
Anyway, I hope you can keep up your critical reasoning.
I must admit that I have a bit more respect for the ACLU because some of their recent challenges to the power of the government. I used to have a completely negative view of the organization when I used to be more of a right wing type person. I agree with you that this republican admistration will be out of power soon (I dont really go so far as some who say we will have another attack and elections will be cancelled) but, I realize that the problem goes much farther than Left vs Right. I beleive there are varying degrees of tryanny right now I think we are in a lite form. You cant tell me that you feel as free now as you did before 9/11. Examples, right after the 9/11 attacks what do you think would have happened to you if you went to work and started handing out anti-Bush and anti-government literature? In my geographical area I think I would have lost my job. Now you can say a bit more but you still have quite a few limits. Have you heard of free speech zones? That is not the traditional meaning of freedom of speech. There are severe limits on what you can do to protest President Bush in Crawford Texas now. I hate to post links because I know they are tedious to read but if you want to look ( http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/26399 ). That is a link of regular American citizens being put on no fly lists for being critical of Bush or the government. I am an airline pilot by trade so I have the opportunity to fly with many people that come here from other countries. I was talking to a guy I was flying with a few months ago from the former Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union was in a more heavy form of tyranny that we were I asked him what would they do to people that were overly critical of the government officials or government itself. He said they would typically punish them economically. He gave the example that if you were a teacher they would possible switch your job to street sweeper. They wouldn't arrest you or hang you from your toenails. There are of course more hardcore forms of tyranny for example the Nazis where if you handed out anti Nazi flyers during the war there was a good chance you would be put to death. Im not saying we are there by any stretch yet, but we are moving in that direction. We dont have freedom of the press. With all the major media outlets owned by a few ultra-powerful coorporations how can you expect to get the real story when it would damage their other financial interests. An example of this is the "embedded" media that rode with our troops into Iraq. How can you possibly be objective when you are attached to a unit on one side that is responsible for protecting you? You are correct that they wont go after every blogger that is critical of the governement but things are getting worse. BTW are you a believer in free energy or overunity? I would like to hear some of you views on whether the government is covering up or not some significant energy discoveries over the last century.
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 08, 2007, 01:56:10 AM
Even Noam Chomsky, the famous liberal and one of the most vehement critics of the current administration, thinks the 9.11 conspiracy theories are bunk:
Look, the situation is a mass grave. People want to know what is happening, the bush administration does not release the facts so all we have is an unofficial story.
People who find it necessary to attack other investigators while discussing such mass grave are real fascists. The subject is not at all the sanity of the person having the alternative theory. You don't win a scientific argument by slandering peoples research with generalisations. The situation is a mass grave, the people investigating should be allowed to report their findings. You are always free to disprove each and every fact.
But investigating mass murder by calling people names is of the most indecent behaviour. We should lock people up for that. If you use the word bunk as some kind of rationalising argumentation while in court as if this is a self evident fact you will be corrected. It's just considered indecent, and that's a good example of what kind of things fascism stands for.
All previous civilisations collapsed though mass ignorance, all wars where bloodbaths that didn't serve any purpose of any kind. And after millions of years of that stuff you come tell us that Fascist Bush who hacked your elections and killed a million Iraqi civilians is not a problem of any kind. In fact you insist upon hunting down the conspiracy untermensh. Yeah sure, You didn't learn anything in millions of years. How laughable.
This topic is about having the alternative facts on the wiki page. Are you for or against the suppression of information? Do you like to hear nothing and bath in ignorance or can you judge things by yourself? I don't really care what your view is on the subject. I just want both versions on the page, that seems more honest for a historical record. You want that to? Do you want to learn from the wiki about everything? Others should also not have access to information? yes? It should not just be called bunk by your nanny representative. You don't need some one to pre chew your food for you.
We have a million dead people. The soldiers all went there thinking 11 September was a terrormuslim attack with all the evidence hidden and everyone asking questions miraculously disappearing. So they follow order and kill a million civilians thinking it's those boogyman from the terrormuslim squad. While there is no evidence of any kind to support this.
And no evidence at all is very far away from something that is fully proven as the unmistakable truth? Don't you agree? But lets kill those million people anyway, just to be sure? WTF?? You really think civilian genocide is going to do your national security any good? I have to disagree...
Biggest lie in the history, this is in fact the biggest problem on this world. How embarrassing for Americans it really is to share a country with those in denial.... The whole world is upset and some would excuse the bushterror and say " oh it will all go away it 2 years or so "
It will not, the last elections where fake.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8112825559202389150
Besides 911 attack 1 and 2 other big US bomb blasts have one thing in common. Outside experts where never allowed to look at the buildings remains. Even their valid questions was no reason to let them on the walled off terrain. They are so obvious in what they do!!And you apologise though the thing all the way like a madman!!!
Why did the air-force stand down?
Why didn't the planes have any passengers?
Why the weird flight path?
How did the jet fuel melt the reinforced steel core?
How did the building slump into it's footprint?
Why was there a 5000 megawatt afterglow?
Why are there pre collapse explosion victims from the basement?
Why did people who worked in the WTC hear demolition workers at work weeks before? The building was even sealed off for 2 days.
Why was Silverstein & co the owner for only 30 days but had 4 000 000 000 insurance per building?
Why did Silverstein & co lease a building for 99 years they couldn't afford for 6 months? And the market was moving in the wrong direction .
Where has all the basement gold disappeared to?
Why is there no plane at the pentagon but does the official story talk of a plane?
How did building 7 collapse even tho flight 77 never reached it?
Why the 3 buildings have all the characteristics of controlled demolition.
Why non of the characteristics even looks like collapse.
Why is there there no plane at the pentagon.
Why was the small pentagon building is not vaporised by the jet fuel?
Why no flight recorder records of any flight?
Why the massive stock trade before the event?Wikipedia doesn't mention any published fact that casts doubt it's been edited out. You are not asked to cast doubt on any of those questions, we all have our doubts about events. You are asked if this should not be mentioned at all in the wiki. My point of view on the topic is irrelevant in this. All I ask is for an objective side by side article with both official stories that doesn't compliment the war vs Iran. Seems a rather good start towards honesty? no? Wikpeidia forbids forking articles over POV.
If you want my point of view:
There is this interesting $4.5 billion options bet on catastrophe within four weeks (http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress?p=6569). Earn your terror millions today!
Thats POV.
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 08, 2007, 12:53:34 PM
This topic is about having the alternative facts on the wiki page. Are you for or against the suppression of information?
I am against the suppression of information. You are free to express your opinion on whatever medium is willing to accept it, and I am all for that. The key point here is that the Wikimedia Foundation has not found your point of view worthy enough to appear alongside the mainstream theory. Keep in mind that the 9/11 conspiracy has a topic all its own, so if someone was searching for 9/11, he or she would probably find it.
Also keep in mind that there is literally no end to possible theories that could be expressed, many of them impossible to disprove to the satisfaction of the parties making the claims. For example, I could preach the brain-in-the-vat theory all my life, claiming that I am the only being in existence, and everything I see, feel, smell, taste and hear are simply false sensations being fed into my brain. No one and nothing else exists, just my brain sitting in a vat being life-supported and fed false information. There is no way you could disprove the theory to my satsifaction - I will have an answer to every objection. Should I get up in arms and demand that the Wikipedia add my theory to every single topic? Under my theory, nothing exists, and I think the people of the world should be aware that they do not exist, so they can stop taking everything to seriously. Therefore, every Wikipedia topic needs a mention of my very important "alternative" theory.
The bottom line is Wikimedia Foundation has the right to make a decision about what is topic-worthy and what is not. Sorry, you did not make the cut, but this is Wikimedia's website, not yours. Your freedom of expression does not trump their ownership rights. If you want to make your own wikipedia wesbite, no one is stopping you. Until then, be happy that your fringe view appears in the Wikipedia at all, even if under its own topic.
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 08, 2007, 03:09:47 PM
I am against the suppression of information.
Where you say it's up to wikimedia you are 100% wrong. Are you familiar with the wikipedia rules?
It's up to the effort of the public to supply well sourced information and discuss the structure of the page by further rules. Supression of discussion and removal of links without motivation is not part of the deal.
The wikimedia rules say you cant delete well documented information from the page to make it fit your point of view. The rules are extreamly acurate on that and every edit that remotely looks like that is deleted.
Wikipedia is not about publishing the truth, it's about documenting well established facts, no original research only quality resources are allowed.
If you are perfectly cool with people pushing a story that incriminates half the planet as terrorists in a time of genocidal war. Then thats your right! But the actual rules say you cant push your opinion as facts untill you supply decent evidence. This vandalism is only allowed on the wiki as long as everyone agrees with it. That means it's up to you. As long as people like yourself don't care if others suck up war propaganda the page will stay the way it is.
If there is no court of law incriminating the person and the FBI says there is no link.
That's why I ask you if building 7 is worthy of no more as a footnote?
And if you get attacked from all sides when you suggest something as simple as this then what does it mean?
It not easy to change a page into such propaganda gallery you know? You can see that takes a lot of effort.
And the excuse that there are other pages on wikipedia where the references are allowed is nonsense.
This is the page about the event, this is the NR 1 search result on google, and it's one big heap of lies.
You really have to be damn stupid if you cant see that.
You are not going to post anything on the page rather crap all over my topic ah???
Please piss off if you are such a nihilist.
I think Gaby de Wilde has really a point here !
Why do we allow to have wikipedia , the no1 in Google search
spreading lies ?
What kind of people are we, if we do not stand against lies
and let the bad people go on with their lies ?
There is a very important sentence:
"When the good do nothing the bad will always win.."
So, how can we maybe register a simular domain like wikipedia name
and bring it to number2 in google search engine and have the truth displayed there...
Some asked me to stop these "politics thread"
but surely politics always will play a role, when we have a free energy machine
that will go into the market.
Politics was always the "bad man" that our kind of research is not funded
and must be done on a shoestring hobbist budget and is
laughed at and being ridiculated...
I am so tired of the politicians, who are responsible for this, that I think
this must be changed...
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 09, 2007, 02:03:44 PM
So, how can we maybe register a simular domain like wikipedia name
and bring it to number2 in google search engine and have the truth displayed there...
Your wish is already a near reality. If you Google search "9/11", number 5 on the list is 911truth.org, which contains views consistent with yours and Gaby's. Maybe if you spread the word about that website, it can be number 1.
And Gaby, the Wikipedia does not owe you anything. Wikipedia allows anyone to edit content, but there are restrictions on this privelege. You have no absolute rights on that website. You quote their rules like they are some kind of law that cannot be changed without legislation. The Wikimedia Foundation is a private organization, and if they want to apply their rules to stop you from editing their site, they can do so at their whim. There is nothing you can really do until your conspiracy theory about 9.11 becomes more generally accepted, which I think will never happen.
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 09, 2007, 02:03:44 PM
I think Gaby de Wilde has really a point here !
Why do we allow to have wikipedia , the no1 in Google search
spreading lies ?
What kind of people are we, if we do not stand against lies
and let the bad people go on with their lies ?
There is a very important sentence:
"When the good do nothing the bad will always win.."
So, how can we maybe register a simular domain like wikipedia name
and bring it to number2 in google search engine and have the truth displayed there...
Wikipedia is yours to edit, you can make a post on the talk page. They have to break all the wiki rules to make the page like this. So we need some extra people on the page.
I was just viewing some videos of the US army shooting at things. The videos where not so clear on what was happening. But the comments are VERY CLEAR. Some Americans love seeing people get killed with machine guns. They don't seem to get enough of it. And I mean quite a lot of them cheering the slaughter.
The video only shows a house under massive night fire. There is nothing to see. Here are some examples of what our American friends think they see in the darkeness:
Quote"toasty muslims.......mmm mmm good"
and:
Quote"why dont they just nuke the country, i say that
only cuz killing them all one by one just seems a
lil mean. lol, it doesnt matter, in ten tyears
the red armys gonna wipe the us off the map just
like we did in iraq, and then well be the
insurgents with goofy bastards in china making
glib remarks about our civilian casualties, the
tables always turn assholes"
then some guy says:
Quote"This home was attacked because a false lead from
an Iraqi informant, the owners of the home and
their children who were killed in the attack were
completely innocent and not involved in resistance
activity whatsoever."
The response:
Quote"Yeah, I'm sure you were there right? Nice try douche bag. "
and
Quote"hell yeah waste those camel ****ers!!! the whole
world thanks you for getting rid of them!!! "
and
Quote"That is because anyone with a IQ above a carrot
can tell you are absolutely full of sheot.
Not one of your ridiculous ass statements has ever
been proven to be accurate. Not even close to
accurate.Just something that flies right out of
your ass.This is just a fact.
It is as true as gravity.
You might as well have been trying to convince us
that you had seen "Elvis" in the damn
mall.
It would have been just as believable.
And the sad thing about it is,you effen know it"
and
Quote"Funny, we don't believe we should attack OUR
enemies at any cost. This is what differentiates
people like us from psychopaths like you."
You can clearly see the Ubermensh right there. The discussion is not important, it's important to shout down everyone who disagrees with you.
So, it's official, the US is now a fascist dictatorship with a brainwashed fascist population. The difference is obvious,
here people are shocked when they see people getting killed. It's not fun to see people get blow to piles of organs where I live.
It's not entertainment for normal people.We are not entirely without blame, we allowed their wikipedia propaganda to happen right in front of our nose. Millions of people sucked up those lies thinking it was just another wikipedia page.
But Osama is still not related to 911, at least that's what the FBI says.
How are such facts not good enough for wikipedia?
All you have to do is ask a question really. This creates a lot of work for them.
The admin who made the page his own apparantly anwered my question about the FBI and Osama like this:
"yeah right, and all those terrorists in Iraq, are you going to say those are not real either?"
So he referred to the million woman and children the US military slaughtered and claims that proves it.
Disgusting.
Here you can vote if you don't want the Architects_and_engineers_for_9/11_truth article deleted.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Architects_and_engineers_for_9/11_truth
Our warmongering friends are doing a great job aint they?
:(
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 06, 2007, 01:43:28 AMIf nothing else, you must admit that politicians always seek to protect their own asses. Do you really think anyone would risk being implicated in this horrendous crime, and for what? Money for the oil companies? No lobbyist could convince a single politician to undertake this crazy venture, no matter how much money is involved.
You underestimate the attractiveness of wealth and power, to politicians, of all people. Such naivete does not strengthen your position. They shun corruption out of fear? Only when they think they would get caught. But criminals never think they'll get caught.
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 09, 2007, 02:54:00 PM
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 09, 2007, 02:03:44 PM
So, how can we maybe register a simular domain like wikipedia name
and bring it to number2 in google search engine and have the truth displayed there...
Your wish is already a near reality. If you Google search "9/11", number 5 on the list is 911truth.org, which contains views consistent with yours and Gaby's. Maybe if you spread the word about that website, it can be number 1.
You are not getting my point of view at all?????
I want BOTH versions of the story on the page.
And you want only Bush to talk there??
The wikimedia rules are very clear, your suggestions to improve the page are welcome. This means I am free to invite you to contribute to the page.
I don't care what your opinion is, I just like to hear both sides of the story.
As long as people like yourself insist only Bush may speak then it stays that way.
Those are the wikimedia rules.
For your reference: Being a fascist means people who don't agree with you should be shut up, with violence lies and all other means available. Like for example gass chambers.
So I think I've been very clear on what I think about the page. What is your opinion on it? Do you like calling Muslims terrorists? And what do you have to show to back up this claim? Nothing??? :o That makes for a very weird opinion?
And now that last bit.
The part where
you claim there is no doubt of any kind. That's the part I don't agree with.
Please explain what makes you 100% sure.
You have not one bit of evidence and you are 100% sure about something?
Quote from: gaby de wilde on September 09, 2007, 03:24:31 PM
For your reference: Being a fascist means people who don't agree with you should be shut up, with violence lies and all other means available.
Pretty funny you bring this up. During this entire discussion, you are the only one who has told people you do not agree with to shut up. I will quote an earlier post of yours. I called your idea "bunk", and you responded with.
QuoteBut investigating mass murder by calling people names is of the most indecent behaviour. We should lock people up for that.
Also, I recall you asking Stefan to ban me as well. So I think I will regard you as a fascist from this point forward.
Quote from: shruggedatlas on September 09, 2007, 03:41:22 PM
Also, I recall you asking Stefan to ban me as well.
Yes, address the topic or STFU, that's not an unreasonable demand. Now you go clearly state your opinion. Lets do an American election, you pick from 1 options:
[ ] I want just the lies on the page and they must be made to look like facts
Make your choice and explain why.
shruggedatla is a government agent. His/her lies are only to distract. Do you have children shruggedatla? I feel sorry for the world they will grow up in. Read about john titor. There is something more dangerous than 911 coming.
Gaby, after much soul searching, I now realise that I have been wrong!
I am now convinced that 911 was an inside job.
- The towers collapse vertically (only demolition can achieve this).
- The towers were re-insured for the max amount of money just prior to the scam.
- Steel columns with 45deg thermite cuts can be seen in debri.
- Evidence of mini nukes used with high gamma output and low radiation debris.
- Laser dot seen on buildings just prior to plane impacts.
- Hitting 2 buildings dead center with amateur pilot skills is near impossible.
- Firefighters told to evacuate prior to "building being pulled".
- Air force stood down.
- The list goes on.
So all I can say is sorry, I've been a blind low IQ ass and feel ashamed to have been misled by such simple and blunt propoganda.
QuoteGaby, after much soul searching, I now realise that I have been wrong!
I am now convinced that 911 was an inside job.
* The towers collapse vertically (only demolition can achieve this).
* The towers were re-insured for the max amount of money just prior to the scam.
* Steel columns with 45deg thermite cuts can be seen in debri.
* Evidence of mini nukes used with high gamma output and low radiation debris.
* Laser dot seen on buildings just prior to plane impacts.
* Hitting 2 buildings dead center with amateur pilot skills is near impossible.
* Firefighters told to evacuate prior to "building being pulled".
* Air force stood down.
* The list goes on.
So all I can say is sorry, I've been a blind low IQ ass and feel ashamed to have been misled by such simple and blunt propoganda.
Haha, nice. Well at least you've got a sense of humor! I'll say that, even though I honestly do believe 911 was an inside job lol.
Oh and I'm sure it was discussed before, but just in case it wasn't: There was some rumblings a while ago about a fudged attempt to plant wmd's in Iraq, only for the black budged team given the assignment to be intercepted and killed by the legitimate US military. Whether there was any truth in this I really don't know, but worth checking out.
http://www.trinicenter.com/oops/ciadod.html
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/06/266752.shtml
Haha, Maybe I get the award for low IQ here! Just realised shruggedatlass is an impostor! Embarrassed now lol.
You have nothing to be ashamed off, you got tricked by the best. And it wasn't just you who got fooled. The Media is obviously 100% in on this. Or shall we call it Rupert Murdock?
The first few months I didn't even dare to say Bush initial speech sounded WAY over engineered. Bush was talking in full grammatically correct sentences that day. And he kept grabbing the bridge of his nose. But the idea to suggest he knew it would happen before it did was not something I was willing to talk about at all!
It's sad I didn't see any way to explain it in a nice way. But now that you understand this one big lie I'm happy to announce it's now your job to inform your fellow countrymen.
*shrug*
If you need some one to scream to about their irrational response you can use my email address. lol
Come help tell everyone the truth. Don't think you cant change the world on your own. I do this every day, people just don't know it was me. (HA-HA!)
So, Bush thinks he owns the world! Not my world he doesn't this one is entirely mine. Come lets debunk his Petroleum scam again, that's what the forum was for originally. :) You cant possibly think liquid mummies is the only way to propel a vehicle after this?
I mean ..... An economy powered by liquid mummies? WTF??
Oh, and last but not least. I have to compliment the way you write down exactly what you think. That's why you figured it out because if you didn't you wouldn't have. :)
I'm still working at my part. I should probably have send you a personal message. But I didn't think you would snap out of it. lol Guessing really doesn't go very far eh? Sorry about that ok. :)