Hey woddy, that new job must be pretty easy.

Woody wrote:

Philly the Kid wrote: There are some serious serious questions and they have not all been debunked.

And what are they? And I don't want you to say, "It's all there for you to read"; "I've posted them before"; "You can do the homework" yourself.

I want you to post them off the top of your head. Tell us what the serious questions are that have not been debunked.

You've been trying to suck me in to this game for years. I'm not going to do it. I don't need to prove anything to you Woody. I don't need to prove that I'm an intelligent critical thinker who has formed his opinions and holds questions and concerns -- that are quite reasonable. This is a rigged debate. Tenured calls them conspiracy theorists, that language already shapes the prism and skews the discussion. I'm on the defensive. Not worth it. We've danced this a bit before and it's not going to get us anywhere. No one here is going to change one single think they think because of P-t-K's assertions and any evidence or anlysis P-t-K presents will be shot up as non-credible.

Like I said, I'm a citizen. Not an expert. I don't know what happened, whether it was planned in some greatest conspiracy of all time, perhaps even one in a line of conspiracies going on for decades, or soemthing else. But there are enough bits and pieces for reasonable men to have some very troubling questions. It has not been debunked to my satisfaction and one of my biggest questions -- is about the nature of the Towers collapseing??

Anyway -- have it. Slice and dice. I'm not getting sucked in to this any further. it's not 'on me' to defend any position. Any devout Catholics or Jews here who want to defend the "truth" of their religion? The unfallability of their faith? I can't convince people who call me conspiracy theorist (substitute infidel, pagan, non-believer, whatever) -- we're pretty much having a pointless religious debate.

TenuredVulture wrote:Hey woddy, that new job must be pretty easy.

you have no idea

nvm, if you wanted to answer you would have already

The "Pentagon was hit by a missile" canard personally pisses me off, as I knew someone who was on that plane.

Actually, having been down in lower Manhattan that morning, I take that one personally as well.

It doesn't follow, however, that I would buy the "official explanation" lock stock and barrel. You all know I'm not particularly deferential to the pronouncements of the Bush administration, or for that matter to the mainstream media. Whether through malice, incompetence or both, they all get it wrong with some regularity.

Further, it's plausible to me that some of PtK's "unanswered questions" are valid, and should be asked, and can be verified: the steel shipped to China, for example. If that happened, it would be interesting to know why.

But I can't get past two things. One is Occam's Razor. As with the JFK assassination, what happened was so traumatic, so unlikely, so consequential that we want to find some suitably grand explanation. It's just that logic and what's known tend to knock them all over.

The other is the false duality PtK repeatedly sets up between "open-minded citizen who doesn't swallow the pabulum fed by the Man" and "fat stupid contented American sucker who swallows said pabulum." I doubt that many if any here are completely confident that we know everything there is to know about it, or that the official parties have been totally forthcoming. But it simply doesn't follow that the Masons and PNAC and everyone else got together in A Conspiracy So Vast to kill 3,000 Americans, start two wars, and ultimately wreck the Republican Party.

philliesr98 wrote:nvm, if you wanted to answer you would have already

"... saying there is not proof that a plane hit the Pentagon ... necessarily implies the following:

1.That the scores of accounts of a large plane are either faked or coerced.
2. That the damage to the Pentagon, including an approximately 100-foot-wide expanse of punctured facade walls on the first floor, were somehow produced by a means other than a plane.
3. That fires that smelled like burning jet fuel, running about 200 feet across the facade of the Pentagon, were produced by some other means, or the photographs were faked.
4. That the swath of downed lamp-poles the width of a 757's wing span were sliced and knocked over by some other means, and that smashed objects lying in the paths of the engines were damaged by some other means.
5. That the identification of human remains of the crew and passengers of Flight 77 was fraudulent.
6. That the Flight 77 with its crew and passengers were disposed of elsewhere, and their fate remains unknown.

To believe that the Pentagon was not hit by Flight 77 requires one to accept points 5 and 6. To believe that no plane hit the Pentagon, one has to accept all six points. Such a belief isn't consistent with a rational analysis of the evidence. "


No, I don't currently believe the missile theory. I will say this though... and I want to add something first --

I intensely followed the 911 investigations from inception til about 05. I have not had my head in this at the same level the last 3 years. I'm not up-to-date on the very latest -- anyway -- at the time, supposedly -- there were video cameras on top of a hotel and gas station that had an angle on the plane toward the Pentagon. Those tapes were confiscated by govt officials within 24 hours and no one has ever seen them. For all we know they captured nothing at all. But why would these be disappeared and not be shown to the public? There are 100's of little things like that that have not been answered to my satisfaction. I have not followed up lately, maybe these tapes are out there now and show nothing or support govt reports? I don't know...

Woody, that link is phenomenal.

I heard that Rosie O'Donnell ate a baby at a Satanic Ritual once -- is that true? Can you please provide the evidence that this did not in fact happen? Thanks.

I hate the pentagon missle theory, it's the worst


[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8[/youtube]

dajafi wrote:The "Pentagon was hit by a missile" canard personally pisses me off, as I knew someone who was on that plane.

Actually, having been down in lower Manhattan that morning, I take that one personally as well.

It doesn't follow, however, that I would buy the "official explanation" lock stock and barrel. You all know I'm not particularly deferential to the pronouncements of the Bush administration, or for that matter to the mainstream media. Whether through malice, incompetence or both, they all get it wrong with some regularity.

Further, it's plausible to me that some of PtK's "unanswered questions" are valid, and should be asked, and can be verified: the steel shipped to China, for example. If that happened, it would be interesting to know why.

But I can't get past two things. One is Occam's Razor. As with the JFK assassination, what happened was so traumatic, so unlikely, so consequential that we want to find some suitably grand explanation. It's just that logic and what's known tend to knock them all over.

The other is the false duality PtK repeatedly sets up between "open-minded citizen who doesn't swallow the pabulum fed by the Man" and "fat stupid contented American sucker who swallows said pabulum." I doubt that many if any here are completely confident that we know everything there is to know about it, or that the official parties have been totally forthcoming. But it simply doesn't follow that the Masons and PNAC and everyone else got together in A Conspiracy So Vast to kill 3,000 Americans, start two wars, and ultimately wreck the Republican Party.

Some of this is fair Jeff, but I've been back-pedaling on the defensive for years. I don't think people here are th contented American sucker who swallows said pablum -- though some may be, but they act that way quite often. No one here is even allowing that any questions or concerns I hold could have any merit, excpet perhaps you.

The one area where I diverge from you and others like you -- of which I know and respect many -- is the lack of belief in the possibility of various cabals and plans. I beleive there is extensive planning, some secret, some shielded from the public but known to many. You gave a quick summary

"A Conspiracy So Vast to kill 3,000 Americans, start two wars, and ultimately wreck the Republican Party"

That may be an over-simplification. Maybe there is no conspiracy at all, and I can see how folks like you are more apt to believe they are too incompetent to pull it off, and more likely, just covering their blunders ... it seems more plausible at the face of it. But if you have a historical view like I do, it become less outrageous and random. If you start connecting dots in a certain way -- it becomes a lot more reasonable. And all of the reasons may not be known? How long it had been planned?

There are many many things that could simply be coincidences, the rush on 'puts' on only the two airlines involved in the crashes. Military planes ordered to not follow protocols, the proclamations of the neo-cons and the entire unfolding since Patriot Act, Gitmo, secret rendition, the increase in private military and security on a scale unforseen -- may not be anything other than the convenient fall-out -- but a lot of things ahve gone very well for the neo-cons on the strength of this event. It was symbolic. Bush was at a low in his ratings prior and jumped to a high after for quite some time, enough to perhaps keep him in office another 4 years. Nothing I've stated is anything really. But those who have studied this, and placed it in a context -- are a lot more compelling, and enough-so to cause me a lot of question and concern and to not be quite satisfied with your explanation.

Perhaps we'd allow that your questions have some validity--but you won't freakin' tell us what they are! I've asked you point blank a number of times and all I get is a long defensive answer in your roundabout, tangential writing style

Yes, if you connect the dots in a certain way things become more reasonable...Unfortunately, that way is completely in contrast to the logical and objective critical thinking you claim to use.

So just to get this straight, this is what PTK believes:

Planes manned with inside goverment officials risking their own lives with US passengers on them where flown into prewired twin tower buildings, at which point soon after they are demolitioned.....

or do you believe they were empty computer controlled???
did they in fact have missles and or the detonation charges on them...??

who was on the planes???


as for the pentagon, same deal.... Who manned these planes???



ok as far as pittsburgh goes, what was that, did the remote control break, or did the people on that plane actually overthrow the goverment officials flying it.... or did extremists flying this one just suck


basically if this was an inside job, who were on the planes to fly them where they went.....?

last question then im done

Another ridiculous aspect of the Truther mentality:

"Prove my theory is wrong and then we'll talk."

This is asinine. It is literally no different than saying that you believe the word "Blue" is spelled "Felda" and demanding the person who calls you nutty prove it.

The burden of proof is squarely on one side of this thing, and it's not on the side of the "9/11 deniers".

philliesr98 wrote:So just to get this straight, this is what PTK believes:

Planes manned with inside goverment officials risking their own lives with US passengers on them where flown into prewired twin tower buildings, at which point soon after they are demolitioned.....

or do you believe they were empty computer controlled???
did they in fact have missles and or the detonation charges on them...??

who was on the planes???


as for the pentagon, same deal.... Who manned these planes???



ok as far as pittsburgh goes, what was that, did the remote control break, or did the people on that plane actually overthrow the goverment officials flying it.... or did extremists flying this one just suck


basically if this was an inside job, who were on the planes to fly them where they went.....?

last question then im done

No, that's not what I believe. Where did I say any of that??

I said certain people pull triggers and certain people pull strings. I think it is possible to peel away back from the hi-jackers and find that so-called independent Al Qaeda or whoever, are not entirely independent at the highest levels or in all cases. I'm saying that it might be possible to brainwash some zealots and get them in the country to do stuff, but that who and what is behind it may and could tie back to powerful interests in secrety cabals,

How many times do I have to say it? I DO NOT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.

I just don't find the theory of planes crashing and those Towers going down as they did, credibly explained by govt and mainstream press. I think there are enough challengers, many whom are credible to at a minimum call for a need for some debate and discussion. That's really all I have firmly asserted.

How, why, is up to debate.

Philly the Kid wrote:

philliesr98 wrote:So just to get this straight, this is what PTK believes:

Planes manned with inside goverment officials risking their own lives with US passengers on them where flown into prewired twin tower buildings, at which point soon after they are demolitioned.....

or do you believe they were empty computer controlled???
did they in fact have missles and or the detonation charges on them...??

who was on the planes???


as for the pentagon, same deal.... Who manned these planes???



ok as far as pittsburgh goes, what was that, did the remote control break, or did the people on that plane actually overthrow the goverment officials flying it.... or did extremists flying this one just suck


basically if this was an inside job, who were on the planes to fly them where they went.....?

last question then im done

No, that's not what I believe. Where did I say any of that??

I said certain people pull triggers and certain people pull strings. I think it is possible to peel away back from the hi-jackers and find that so-called independent Al Qaeda or whoever, are not entirely independent at the highest levels or in all cases. I'm saying that it might be possible to brainwash some zealots and get them in the country to do stuff, but that who and what is behind it may and could tie back to powerful interests in secrety cabals,

How many times do I have to say it? I DO NOT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.

I just don't find the theory of planes crashing and those Towers going down as they did, credibly explained by govt and mainstream press. I think there are enough challengers, many whom are credible to at a minimum call for a need for some debate and discussion. That's really all I have firmly asserted.

How, why, is up to debate.

first off ty for answering the questions

second,
You have such a firm stance on this whole thing only because you want to see a fair debate??? it sounds like you wholeheartedly believe so much more than just having open fair debates, you know.....?

OK, I'm gonna jump in.

What I believe about 9/11.

1) Kind of like the widespread belief that FDR knew the attack on Pearl Harbor was going to happen, I believe to some degree, and I can't specify what, the Bush administration allowed the attacks to happen. Maybe President Bush didn't read the President's Daily Briefing of Aug. 6, 2001, but I suspect Rice, Cheney and other high-ranking aids did.

2) One of the reasons I believe this is the basic question: "Who benefits?" In the first few years after the attacks, the Republican party and people who owned or were invested in military and defense businesses did.

3) Another reason I believe this is the way Bush and Cheney went about "cooperating" with the official investigation into 9/11 - sealed testimony behind closed doors, etc. I'm sure there were national security considerations to keep some of what was said secret, but the other parts of this proceeding should have been public record.

4) The relationship between the Bush and Bin Laden families may be just a huge coincidence. But would anyone care to imagine what the political environment had been like had Clinton still been in office and there was a family friendship between the Clintons and Bin Ladens?

Otherwise, I try to have reverence for the memory of that day and what was lost. I thought in the aftermath, the country would be more united. (Kind of like in "Indepedence Day" which showed even muslims and Israelis working together to defeat the aliens.) At the time, I lived about a mile and a half from the Pentagon and drove past it each day on my way to work - so the possibility of being in the wrong place at the wrong time really hit home.

I just read this thread for the first time in weeks. There are so many things wrong with this country and the world right now, why are we still fixated on who knew what about 9/11?

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST OSAMA IS ONE OF LIKE 500 BIN LADENS AND GUESS WHAT MOST OF THEM ARENT ISLAMIC JIHAD FIGHTERS WHO GO POO POO IN CAVES.

@#%$@#^&^&*$%^*$@%$@#$%^%$&&*^$%^&@$%@#%@#$^&^%$*!@!%@#$%#$@%#$%^%#&%&@#%$@$#$%@

i think i threw up in my mouth a little bit.

it's simple, really

aliens all have been controlling our minds

The Red Tornado wrote:it's simple, really

aliens all have been controlling our minds

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!