9/11 a staged attack

Post Reply New Topic

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194&q=Loose+Change/

When I watched that I wished I knew more about the scientific aspect so I could tell for sure, but I tend to think our government had a hand in there somewhere.

i've seen it. The only thing I don't understand is why some people think that it's impossible or even improbable, when various governments have done similar things for all throughout history. Discounting it because "they wouldn't do something like that" is just naive.

Evident of both a psychological divide between people and the government.

If there is no proof clearly and logically then there is no fact. Without fact there is only conspiracy propaganda.

This type of jargon is also popular among the ufology minded and other such conspiracy minded persons.

conversely, however, much of the proof presented to back up the official story is flimsy to say the least, at least as flimsy as that presented by the more believable conspiracy theorists, if not moreso.

This video isn't intended for regular people. It's meant for "MUSHROOM PEOPLE" , you know, kept in the dark and fed $hit!! !! !! !! !!

If you believe this crap, then you're a mushroom, eat it!! !

This reminds me of the Hollocaust denial movement.

But they made a video it must be true just like evrything else or why would they say it
To some people everything is a conspiracy and people will belive almost anything look here
http://www.crank.net/911.html there are lots of real nutters out there

Personally, I believe it. A lot of it adds up, and it does make sense. There's definately a motive (rationale to go to war), it definately fits within the Bush Admin's agenda, they definately WOULD do something like that (if you don't believe me there, look at how they cheated in both elections--yes, the second one, too, with electronic voting machines), the speculation (while lacking in evidence) is believable, and it's entirely physically possible. I don't see what reason there is to think this ridiculous. I can definately see why one would be skeptical, because there is indeed minimal concrete evidence that you yourselves can see, but let's face it--our government is extremely corrupt, doesn't care at all about the people it protects, has pataken in numorous illegal acts (many of which were never reported on by the mainstream media, such as covering up the data that linked thimerosol to autism), and would have every reason to orchestrate this attack. After Bush became president by making the votes of many African-Americans in Florida not be counted, a lot of people were pissed at him. Protestors were throwing eggs at Bush's limo as it drove by. They needed to have something to put the country in a state of fear, so that they could be more malluable...and what better way to unite a majority of the country than orchestrate an attack on American soil for the first time since Pearl Harbor (which some also consider the government to have had a hand in)? Americans never expected it; they were surprised and appalled, and most of all, scared as all hell--exactly the sort of emotional and psychological state that a government like the Bush Administration likes best, because it is when people are the easiest to manipulate.

Let me ask you all...why wouldn't this happen? I'm not asking why you don't believe it, for the "no concrete evidence" arguement is a somewhat valid one--though there have been plenty of covert government operations throughout history that had no concrete evidence until many years had passed. I'm asking you, how is this impossible, or even improbable? Why wouldn't they do it? What makes an administration that has already proven itself to be near-sociopathic in its ways beyond such a tactic?

Do you really think they could pull off such a thing and have it all work out just right and nobody would find out? It would not be that easy so many people would now too much so much cordination of resorces they screw so many simpler things up like hurricane relief what makes you think the could do this and fool everyone? I think you give them too much credit

Scrapheap,

I think the remark was foul...

You might think it foul but it's the same language and logic they use to defend their conspiracy.

That'd be a good point if the government had actually tried to help hurricane relief. Years before Katrina hit, engineers had asked the government for money to repair the levees, because otherwise they would breech. They even had an animated computer simulation to show them. The government paid a tiny fraction of what they asked for--certainly not enough to repair the levees. And even after Katrina hit, the government had poured so much of its resources into the Iraq War (effectively using its money to end lives instead of saving them) that they couldn't have provided adaquate relief if they really wanted to. 9/11, however, happened before the US waged war in Iraq and Afganistan. (Well, okay, the US went to Iraq before 9/11, with the OTHER Bush, but that's a whole nother story.)

Plus, it's not like the Bush Administration was the only group involved. They have serious connections to the bin Laden family, don't forget. Osama may be seen as the "black sheep" after the event, but he was generally regarded to have been behind the attacks. My own theory is that while he was doing it with intentions of his own, he himself may have been manipulated into doing it by those of his family, after his family had set up the idea with the Bush Administration. It would have been easy for them to plant the idea into his head, or have other involvement of some sort, without making him realize that in reality he was working for the very people he was against. Now, it's very possible I've said some things here that can easily been proven to be wrong, but it's a theory, and there can be many others thought up as well. The point is that the Bush Administration wasn't the only group involved in the attack. It's possible they were behind igniting the bombs that caused the towers to finally fall (if this was indeed the case), but I don't think that they did a majority of the actual operation themselves--rather, I think they were more behind the basics of the operation, setting up the general idea of what they would do.

And they could fool (almost) everyone the same way they did with the second election: extreme control of the media. Did manjor news sources report on the hundreds of thousands of callers who complained about the electronic voting machines, and how they had clicked to vote for John Kerry, only to be met with a message box that stated, "Thank you for voting to reelect George W. Bush!"? No, they didn't. The government can change everything that goes on most TV news stations if it wants to, and I'm not just talking about Fox. Ditto for most newspapers. You try to report on it, you lose your job, and the story doesn't run. So as a result, the only news sources that CAN report on it are independant free speech ones, which of course are labled the stuff of "liberal nutjobs" by the masses and are completely ignored. With minimal word of mouth support and widespread skepticism, it's easy for many very real government activities to be unknown to the masses.

For the record, though, I wouldn't believe just any conspiricy theories. I don't believe, for example, in the major theories brought in by the Da Vinci Code. (I'm happy to defend their plausibility, however.) I believe in the conspiricy theories that make sense, seem like they could very well have happened, and have a sufficient amount of truth to be based on. Truth doesn't always mean proof--if many people say that the pentagon didn't look like it was hit by a plane, but instead by a missile, and they compare the sounds and it sounds like a missile, then it may not be strictly proof, but it is close enough for me to believe it. If somebody told me that the Bush administration was secretly using a weather machine to cause hurricanes against its people, and they had nothing even remotely resembling proof, then I wouldn't believe it. I don't believe that they let Katrina happen because of all the blacks in New Orleans, either--I think that the amount of lower-class people there was a factor, and that if it had been full of rich people then they might have card more. But I don't think it was just about race. So I most certainly won't believe any anti-Bush conspiricy theory out there, thanks.

No it's not, it's just anti-government hoopla.

My partner and myself were talking the other day about what would happen if 9/11 had happened in Canada while the Liberals were in power. Most likely the terrorists would have been rounded up, given a psychiatric diagnosis as nutjobs, and then alot of the newspaper coverage would have been focused on the psychological origins of such violent behavior. Leaders from Islamic communities would have been interviewed on TV to show the public that the terrorists do not represent Islam.

But now in Canada we have a Conservative government in power. A whole different scenario. The Conservatives do not have enough seats in Parliament to pass any bills though, and thank goodness for that. Tonight on the news Canadians are being told about the arrest of 17 suspected terrorists who allegedly have tried to blow up the Peace Tower and other goverment buildings in Ottawa. They've been arrested. Reporters are asking politicians why we, as Canadians, don't have the same "security policies" as in the U.S.

It's hard to believe that a group of terrorists would try to attack the Canadian government. And this alleged attempted attack comes right after a Conservative government has been elected.

I think there will be a huge number of Canadians who are going to have a hard time believing in this one.

I still think there are things that simply don't add up in the official 911 story our government has handed us. Also there are questions that they will not answer that are not a matter of national security. I think it is at least possible that they knew it was going to happen and allowed it to happen. (Like Katrina). If anyone disagrees with me, fine. But this is what I believe. I would like to be wrong about it, actually, because if it's so, we are all in big trouble.