See other War, War, War Articles
Title: Ridicule of Conspiracy Theories Focuses On Diffusing Criticism of the Powerful
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.georgewashington2.blogsp ... nspiracy-theories-focuses.html
Published: Feb 12, 2010
Author: Washington's Blog
Post Date: 2010-02-12 06:41:06 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 1296
Comments: 112
The label "conspiracy theory" is commonly used to try to discredit criticism of the powerful in government or business. For example, just this week - after Tony Blair was confronted by the Iraq Inquiry with evidence that he had used lies to sell the Iraq war - Blair dismissed the entire Iraq Inquiry as simply being part of Britain's "obsession with conspiracy theories". (Not only did Blair know that Saddam possessed no WMDs, but the French this week accused Blair of using of ‘Soviet-style' propaganda in run-up to the Iraq war). Of course, the American government has been busted in the last couple of years in numerous conspiracies. For example, William K. Black - professor of economics and law, and the senior regulator during the S & L crisis - says that that the government's entire strategy now - as during the S&L crisis - is to cover up how bad things are ("the entire strategy is to keep people from getting the facts").Similarly , 7 out of the 8 giant, money center banks went bankrupt in the 1980's during the "Latin American Crisis", and the government's response was to cover up their insolvency. And the government spied on American citizens (even before 9/11 ... confirmed here and here), while saying "we don't spy". The government tortured prisoners in Iraq, but said "we don't torture". In other words, high-level government officials have conspired to cover up the truth. And Tom Brokaw notes: All wars on based on propaganda. A concerted effort to produce propaganda is a conspiracy. Acceptable Versus Unacceptable Conspiracy Theories Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials have been found guilty of conspiracy. See this, this, this, this and this. Time Magazine's financial columnist Justin Fox writes: Some financial market conspiracies are real ... Most good investigative reporters are conspiracy theorists, by the way. Indeed, conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven by the evidence. But - while people might admit that corporate executives and low-level government officials might have engaged in conspiracies - they may be strongly opposed to considering that the wealthiest or most powerful might possibly have done so. Indeed, those who most loudly attempt to ridicule and discredit conspiracy theories tend to focus on defending against criticism involving the powerful. This may be partly due to psychology: it is scary for people to admit that those who are supposed to be their "leaders" protecting them may in fact be human beings with complicated motives who may not always have their best interests in mind. And see this. For example, Obama's current head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs - and a favored pick for the Supreme Court (Cass Sunstein) - previously: Defined a conspiracy theory as "an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role." He has called for the use of state power to crush conspiracy allegations of state wrongdoing. See this, this and this. Similarly: Michael Kelly, a Washington Post journalist and neoconservative critic of anti-war movements on both the left and right, coined the term "fusion paranoia" to refer to a political convergence of left-wing and right-wing activists around anti-war issues and civil liberties, which he claimed were motivated by a shared belief in conspiracism or anti-government views. In other words, prominent neocon writer Kelly believes that everyone who is not a booster for government power and war is a crazy conspiracy theorist. Similarly, psychologists who serve the government eagerly label anyone "taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, ... and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook" as crazy conspiracy theorists. This is not really new. In Stalinist Russia, anyone who criticized the government was labeled crazy, and many were sent to insane asylums. Using the Power of the State to Crush Criticism of the Government The bottom line is that the power of the state is used to crush criticism of major government policies and actions (or failures to act) and high-level government officials. Pay attention, and you'll notice that criticism of "conspiracy theories" is usually aimed at attempting to protect the state and key government players. The power of the state is seldom used to crush conspiracy theories regarding people who are not powerful . . . at least to the extent that they are not important to the government.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
The federal government believes in conspiracies. Because there is about 10,000 people in prison for them.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" "The state is the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies, too; and this lie creeps from its mouth: `I, the state, am the people.'... Everything about it is false; it bites with stolen teeth. " -- Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) Source: from "Thus Spake Zarathustra"
Just excellent. Thank you.
Those are serving time for acceptable conspiracy theories
Because there is about 10,000 people in prison for them. That's just a crazy loony conspiracy theory ya moonbat lib'tard. /Satire
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
NONE DARE CALL IT CONSPIRACY by Gary Allen, 1971 _____________________ Originally published by Concord Press P.O. BOX 2686 Seal Beach, Calif. 90740 ... ........ This act (the Federal Reserve Act) establishes the most gigantic trust on Earth... When the President signs this act, the invisible government by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation, will be legalized... The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation..." Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. December, 1913 "IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY WE HAVE IN EFFECT TWO GOVERNMENTS... We have the duly constituted government... Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers reserved to Congress by the Constitution." - Congressman Wright Patman, (former) Chairman of the House Banking Committee ........ "Those that create and issue the money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in their hands the destiny of the people." Reginald McKenna, (former) president of the Midlands Bank of England. ....... ... Chapter 3 The Money Manipulators Many college history professors tell their charges that the books they will be using in the class are "objective". But stop and ask yourself: Is it possible to write a history book without a particular point of view? There are billions of events that take place in the world each day. To think of writing a complete history of a nation covering even a year is to entertain a fantastic conceit. Not only is a historian's ability to write an "objective" history limited by the sheer volume of happenings but by the fact that many of the most important happenings never appear in the papers or even in somebody's memoirs. The decisions reached by the "big boys" in the smoke-filled rooms are not reported in even the New York Times, which ostensibly reports all the news that's fit to print. ("All the news that fits" is a more accurate desription.) In order to build his case, a historian must select a miniscule number of facts from the limited number that are known. If he does not have a "theory", how does he separate important facts from unimportant ones? As Professor Stuart Crane has pointed out, this is why every book "proves" its author's theory. But no book is objective. No book can be objective and this book (NDCC) is not objective. The information in it is true, but the book is not objective. We have carefully selected the facts to prove our case... Most of the facts that we bring out are readily verifiable at any large library. But our contention is that we have arranged these facts in the order that most accurately reflects their true significance in history. These are the facts as the Establishment does not want you to know them. Have you ever had the experience of walking into a mystery movie two-thirds of the way through? Confusing, was'nt it? All the evidence made it look as though the butler were the murderer, but in the final scenes you find out that, surprisingly, it was the man's wife all along. You have to stay and see the beginning of the film. Then, as all the pieces fall into place, the story makes sense. This situation is similar to one millions of Americans find themselves in today. They are confused by current happenings in the nation. They have come in as the movie, so to speak, is going into its conclusion. The earlier portion of the mystery is needed to make the whole thing understandable. (Actually, we are not really starting at the beginning, but we are going back far enough to give meaning to today's happenings.) In order to understand the conspiracy (to usurp the constitutional right of governments to coin money so as to force these governments to borrow money with usury [interest]), it is neccesary to have some rudimentary knowledge of banking and, particularly, of international bankers. While it would be an over- simplification to ascribe the entire conspiracy to the international bankers, they nevertheless have played the key role. Think of the (world) conspiracy as a hand with one finger labeled "international banking", others labelled "charity foundations" (i.e. Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller Foundations, etc.), the "anti- religion movement", "Fabian Socialism", and "Communism". But it was the International Bankers of whom Professor Carroll Quigly (of the Foreign Service School at Georgetown University) was speaking when we quoted him earlier (in this book) as stating that THEIR AIM IS NOTHING LESS THAN CONTROL OF THE WORLD THROUGH FINANCE. (Professor Quigly does not see anything harmful in this(!), only objects to the secrecy with which these aims are cloaked. Hence his book, a 1300 hundred page, 8 pound tome, Tragedy and Hope.) Where do governments get the enormous amount of money they need? Most of course comes from taxation; but governments often spend more than they are willing to tax from their citizens and so are forced to borrow. Our national (U.S.) debt is now (1974) 455 billion dollars - every cent of it borrowed at interest from somewhere. The public is led to believe that our government borrows from "the people" through savings bonds. Actually, however, only a small percentage of the national debt is held by individuals in this form. Most government bonds, except those held by the government itself through its trust funds, are held by vast banking firms known as international banks . For centuries there has been big money to be made by international bankers in the financing of governments and kings. Such operators, however, are faced with certain thorny problems. We know that smaller banking operations protect themselves by taking collateral, but what kind of collateral can you get from a government or a king?. What if the banker comes to collect and the king says, "Off with his head!" The process through which one collects a debt from a government or a monarch is not a subject taught in the business schools of our universities, and most of us - having never been in the business of lending money to kings - have not given the problem much thought. But there is a king- financing business, and to those who can ensure collection it is lucrative indeed. Economics professor Stuart Crane notes that there are two means used to collateralize loans to governments and kings. Whenever a business firm borrows big money its creditor obtains a voice in management to protect his investment. Like a business, no government can borrow big money unless willing to surrender to the creditor some measure of sovereignty as collateral. Certainly, international bankers who have loaned hundreds of billions of dollars to governments around the world command considerable influence in the policies of such goverments. But the ultimate advantage that the creditor has over the government or ruler is the threat that if the borrower steps out of line the banker can finance an enemy or rival and can even create an enemy by such means. Therefore, if you want to stay in the king-financing business, it is wise to have an enemy or a rival waiting in the wings to unseat every ruler to whom you lend. If the king does'nt have an enemy, you must create one. Pre-eminent in playing this game was the famous House of Rothschild (German for Redshield, a name adopted by this family for the red shield over the front door of their house). Its founder, Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfurt, Germany, kept one of his five sons at home to run the Frankfurt bank, and sent the others to Paris, London, Vienna and Naples. The Rothschilds became incredibly wealthy during the nineteenth century by financing governments to war with one another. According to Professor Stuart Crane: "If you will look back at every war in Europe during the Nineteenth Century, you will see that they always ended with the establishment of a 'balance of power'. With every re-shuffling there was a balance of power in a new grouping around the House of Rothschild in England, France or Austria. They grouped nations, so that if any king stepped out of line a war would break out and the war would be decided by which way the financing went. Researching the debt positions of the warring nations will usually indicate who was to be punished." In describing the characteristics of the Rothschilds and other major international bankers, Professor Quigly tells us that they remained different from ordinary bankers in several ways: they were cosmopolitan and international; they were close to governments and were particularly concerned with government debt, including foreign government debts; these bankers came to be called "international bankers". (Quigly,Tragedy and Hope, p.52) A major reason for the historical blackout on the role of the international bankers in political history is that the Rothschilds were Jewish. ANTI-SEMITES HAVE PLAYED INTO THE HANDS OF THE CONSPIRACY, by trying to portray the conspiracy as a Jewish conspiracy to rule the world. Nothing could be further from the truth! The traditionally Anglo-Saxon J.P.Morgan and the Baptist Rockefeller international banking institutions have played a key role in the conspiracy. But there is no denying the importance of the Rothschilds and their satellites. However, it is just as unreasonable and immoral to blame the Jewish people for the crimes of the Rothschilds as it is to hold Baptists accountable for the crimes of the Rockefellers. (Other authorities, however, trace the Rockefellers' Jewish roots and hold their adoption of the Baptist faith and their church-going a sham. -editor.) The Jewish members of the conspiracy have used an organization called the Anti-Defamation League (A.D.L.) as an instrument to try to convince everyone that any mention of the Rothschilds or their allies is an attack on the Jewish people. In this way they have stifled almost all honest scholarship on international bankers and made the subject taboo in the universities. Any individual or book exploring this subject is immediately attacked by hundreds of A.D.L. committees all over the country. The A.D.L. has never let truth or logic interfere with its highly professional smear jobs... But actually, nobody has more of a right than the Jewish people to take just vengeance on the Rothschilds and their clique. The Jewish Warburgs (bankers), part of the Rothschild empire, helped finance Adolph Hitler. There were few, if any, Rothschilds or Warburgs in the Nazi concentration camps! They sat out the war in luxurious hotels in Paris or emigrated to the United States or England. As a group, the Jewish people have suffered most at the hands of these power-seekers. A Rothschild has much more in common with a Rockefeller than with a Jewish tailor from Budapest or the Bronx. Since the keystone of the international banking empires has been government bonds, IT HAS BEEN IN THE INTEREST OF THESE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIERS TO ENCOURAGE GOVERNMENT DEBT. The higher the debt, the more the interest on the debt. Nothing drives government deeply into debt like a war (in 1935, before the out- break of World War Two, total U.S. public debt was $28 billion 708 million, or $225.55 per capita. In 1940, before the attack on Pearl Harbour, the public debt was $42 billion 968 million, or $325.23 per capita. But, by 1945, with the cessation of hostilities, it was $258 billion 682 million, or $1,848.60 per capita! -ed.); and it has not been an uncommon practice among the international bankers to finance both sides of the bloodiest military conflicts! For example, during the American Civil War the North was financed by the Rothchilds through their American agent, August Belmont, and the American South through the Erlangers, Rothschild relatives. But while wars and revolutions have been useful to the international financiers in gaining or increasing control over governments, the key to such control has always been control of money. You can control a government if you have it in your debt; a creditor is in a position to demand the privileges of monopoly from the sovereign. Money-seeking governments have granted monopolies in state banking, natural resources, oil concessions, transportation, medicine, and others. However, the monopoly the international financiers have most coveted is control over a nation's money. Eventually, these bankers actually owned as private corporations the central banks of the various European nations. The Bank of England, Bank of France and Bank of Germany were not owned by their respective governments, as almost everyone imagines, but were PRIVATELY-OWNED MONOPOLIES granted by the heads of state, usually in return for loans. Under this system, observed Reginald McKenna, president of the Midlands Bank of England: "Those that create and issue the money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in their hands the destiny of the people." ONCE THE GOVERNMENT IS IN DEBT TO THE BANKERS IT IS AT THEIR MERCY. A frightening example was cited by the London Financial Times of September 26, 1921, which revealed that even at the time: "Half a dozen men at the top of the Big Five Banks could upset the whole fabric of government finance by refraining from renewing Treasury Bills." All those who have sought dictatorial control over modern nations have understood the necessity of a central bank. When The League of Just Men hired a hack revolutionary named Karl Marx to write a blue-print for conquest called The Communist Manifesto, the fifth plank read: "Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly." Lenin was later to write that the establishment of a central bank was ninety percent of communizing a country! Such conspirators knew that you cannot take control of a nation without military force unless that nation has a central bank through which you can control its economy. The anarchist Bakunin sarcastically remarked of the followers of Karl Marx: "They have one foot in the bank and one foot in the socialist movement." The international financiers set up their own front men in charge of each of Europe's central banks. Professor Quigly reports: It must not be felt that the heads of the world's chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather they were the technicians and agents of the dominent investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up, and who were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called "international" or "mercantile" bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks..." (Quigly, op.cit., pp.326-7) Dr. Quigly also reveals that the international bankers who owned and controlled the Banks of England and France maintained their power even after those Banks were theoretically socialized. Naturally, those who controlled the central banks of Europe were eager from the start to fasten a similar establishment on the United States. From the earliest days, the Founding Fathers had been conscious of attempts to control America thruogh money manipulation, and they carried on a running battle with the international bankers. Thomas Jefferson wrote to John Adams: "...I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies..." But even though America did not have a central bank after President Jackson abolished it in 1836, the European financiers and their American agents managed to gain a great deal of control over (the American) money system. Gustavus Meyers, in his History of the Great American Fortunes, reveals: "Under the surface, the Rothschilds long had a powerful influence in dictating American financial laws. The law records show that they were powers in the old Bank of the United States (abolished by Andrew Jackson)." During the nineteenth century the leading financiers of the metropolitan East often cut one another's financial throats, but as their Western and rural victims started to organize politically, the "robber barons" saw that they had a "community of interest" towards which they must work together to protect themselves from thousands of irate farmers and up-and-coming competitors. This diffusion of economic power was one of the main factors stimulating the demands for a central bank by would-be business and financial monopolists. In Years of Plunder Proctor Hansl writes of this era: Among the Morgans, Khun-Loebs (bankers) and other similar pillars of the industrial order there was less disposition to become involved in disagreements that led to financial dislocation. A community of interest came into being, with results that were highly beneficial to themselves ..." But, aside from the major Eastern centers, most American bankers and their customers distrusted the whole concept. In order to show the hinterlands that they were going to need a central banking system, the international bankers CREATED A SERIES OF PANICS as a demonstration of their power - a warning of what would happen unless the rest of the bankers got into line. The man put in charge of conducting these lessons was J. Pierpont Morgan, American-born but educated in England and Germany. Morgan is referred to by many, including Congressman Louis McFadden (a banker, who for ten years headed the House Banking and Currency Committee), as the top American agent of the English Rothschilds. By the turn of the century, J.P.Morgan was already an old hand at creating artificial panics. Such affairs were well coordinated. Senator Robert Owen, a co-author of the Federal Reserve Act (who later deeply regretted his role), testified before a Congressional Committee that the bank he owned received from the National Banker's Association what came to be known as the "Panic Circular of 1893". It stated: "You will at once retire one-third of your circulation and call in one half of your loans..." Historian Frederick Lewis Allen tells us in Life magazine of April 25, 1949, of Morgan's role in spreading rumours about the insolvency of the Knickerbocker Bank and the Trust Company of America, which rumours triggered the 1907 panic. In answer to the question: "Did Morgan precipitate the panic?" Alan reports: "Oakly Thorne, the president of that particular trust company, testified later before a congressional committee that his bank had been subjected to only moderate withdrawals...that he had not applied for help and that it was the (Morgan) 'sore point' statement alone that had caused the run on his bank. From this evidence, plus other fragments of other supposedly pertinent evidence, certain chroniclers have come to the ingenious conclusion that the Morgan interests took advantage of the unsettled conditions during the autumn of 1907 to preciitate the panic, guiding it slowly as it progressed so that it would kill off rival banks and consolidate the pre-eminence of the banks within the Morgan orbit." The 'panic' which Morgan had created, he proceeded to end almost single-handedly. He had made his point. Frederick Allen explains: "The lesson of the Panic of 1907 was clear, though not for some six years was it destined to be embodied in legislation: the United States badly needed a central banking system." The man who was to play the most significant part in foisting onto America that central bank was Paul Warburg, who along with his brother Felix had immigrated to the United States from Germany in 1902. They left brother Max (later a major bankroller of the Russian (Bolshevik) Revolution) at home in Frankfurt to run the family bank (M.N.Warburg & Co.). Paul Warburg married Nina Loeb, daughter of Solomon Loeb of Khun, Loeb & Company, America's most powerful international banking firm. Brother Felix married Frieda Schiff, daughter of Jacob Schiff, the ruling power behind Kuhn,Loeb & Co.. Stephen Birmingham writes in his authoritative Our Crowd : "In the eighteenth century the Schiffs and Rothschilds shared a double house" in Frankfurt. Schiff reportedly bought his partnership in Khun,Loeb with Rothschild money. Both Paul and Felix Warburg became partners in Kuhn,Loeb and Company. In 1907, the year of the Morgan-precipitated panic, Paul Warburg began almost all of his time writing and lecturing on "the need for banking reform". Kuhn, Loeb & Company was sufficiently public- spirited about the matter to keep him on salary at $500,000 a year while for the next six years he donated his time to 'the public good'. Working with Warburg in promoting this "banking reform" was Nelson Aldridge, known as "Morgan's floor broker in the Senate". Aldridge's daughter Abbie married John D. Rockefeller Jr. (the late Nelson Rockefeller, Richard Nixon's Vice-President and long- time Governor of New York, was named for his maternal grandfather). After the panic of 1907, Aldridge was appointed by the Senate to head the National Monetary Commission. Although he had no technical knowledge of banking, Aldridge and his entourage spent nearly two years and $300,000 of the tax-payers' money being wined and dined by the owners of Europe's central banks as they toured the Continent 'studying' central banking. When the Commission returned from its luxuriuos junket it held no meetings and made no report for nearly two years. But Senator Aldrich was busy 'arranging' things. Together with Paul Warburg and other international bankers, he staged one of the most important secret meetings in the history of the United States. Rockefeller agent Frank Vanderlip admiited many years later in his memoirs: "Despite my views about the value to society of greater publicity for the affairs of corporations, there was an occasion, near the close of 1910, when I was as secretive - indeed, as furtive, as any conspirator...I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyl Island (Georgia) as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System."
The term conspiracy theory is an accurate description of allegations for which there is no proof.
Results 1 - 10 of about 230,000 for FBI "no evidence" bin laden
Yeah, and?
The ONLY conspiracy theory with no proof is the official conspiracy theory.
There is no PROOF of the various conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. No PROOF that the planes were remotely piloted. No PROOF that a missile hit the Pentagon. No PROOF that Flight 93 was shot down. No PROOF that the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives and no PROOF that anyone other than Muslim radicals were involved in the planning and execution of those attacks.
...and the PNAC/AEI/neocon lashup said, in september 2000, just before they were installed into high positions by a rigged election recount in a state governed by a PNAC member, that they needed "a new pearl harbor" they were duly installed into their high positions a few months later. a few months after that, their "new pearl harbor" happened... it just so happens that these same people are the purveyors of the official conspiracy theory, which seems to be horseshit seeing as how the FBI cant find any evidence to support that official conspiracy theory. so now america must pick up people, more or less at random, confine them indefinitely without legal counsel or due process, and waterboard "confessions" out of them. good deal.
There is a lot more evidence supporting the above than there is supporting the Official Conspiracy Theory.
the PNAC/AEI/neocon lashup said, in september 2000, just before they were installed into high positions by an election recount in a state governed by a PNAC member, that they needed "a new pearl harbor" they were duly installed into their high positions a few months later. a few months after that, their "new pearl harbor" happened... None of that proves they were behind 9/11. it just so happens that these same people are the purveyors of the official conspiracy theory, which seems to be horseshit seeing as how the FBI cant find any evidence to support that official conspiracy. Were the planes hijacked or remotely controlled? What proof is there that a missile hit the Pentagon? What proof is there that Flight 93 was shot down? What proof is there that explosives were used to bring down the Twin Towers? Who planted those alleged explosives? What proof is there that Dick Cheney orchestrated 9/11? I could go on but there's no point since you have no answers to those questions.
What proof is there that Osama Bin Laden orchestrated 9/11?
There is a lot more evidence supporting the above than there is supporting the Official Conspiracy Theory. Evidence is not proof which is why every 9/11 conspiracy theory shall remain a conspiracy theory.
There is a lot more evidence supporting the above than there is supporting the Official Conspiracy Theory. You are right, MC, there is no PROOF that many things occured or did not occur on the day of this tragedy. There is no PROOF because many pieces of evidence have not been probed in an open forum of inquiry, and I submit that there is no PROOF because mountains of evidence are held in SECRET. There is no PROOF, for example that there were any Arabs on those planes. I invite you to PROVE it.
and why doesnt anyone have any answers to those questions? surely not because the evidence was shipped to japan, melted down and turned into toyotas before your PNAC buddies finally condescended to submit to a sham investigation.
There is none. Just as there is no proof that Cheney was behind it.
Including the Official Conspiracy Theory?
I invite you to PROVE it. Ticketing information, surveillance footage, reports from the flight crew and cockpit voice recordings serve as proof.
would you mind explaining why the experts from the israeli american media were blaming bin laden before the towers even fell? what evidence were they basing their judgment on? you and your whole project reek... and now the project has degenerated into looting america as it collapses, the biggest looting caper in history. i hope you, as a faithful footsoldier, are getting your cut of the loot.
It proves conspiracy to commit, which typically carries the same or harsher punishment whether or not they actually carried out the crime.
No, it's a pejorative term. Conspiracies happen all the time. It's no theory. Here is a list of conspiracy "theories" that are true: www.newworldorderreport.c...y-Person-Should-Know.aspx We didn't get the proof from the 9/11 Commission. So only those involved know what happened. We just have pieces of the puzzle and even those we argue over. Follow the money. You can't just focus on the attack, but on what came before it as well as what came after. Like the Unocal pipeline and the failed negotiations with the Taliban. I think that is why it happened.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or How about we try just three questions... Do you believe the planes were piloted remotely? If so, what is your evidence? Do you believe a missile hit the Pentagon? If so, what is your evidence? Do you believe that individuals within the US government were involved in carrying out 9/11? If so, what is your evidence?
I can't explain their motivation for blaming bin Laden other than to say it seemed like the logical choice.
No it doesn't PROVE anything. If they had written about their plans to carry out such attacks, then you would have a point.
how can there be evidence of anything when there was such a concerted effort by the most powerful people in america to destroy evidence, thwart investigations, and propagandize people into submission to the official conspiracy theory? what was the function of the anthrax attacks, if not to send a message: "get with the program or get a nasty letter"
Without proof, a conspiracy remains a conspiracy theory. If a conspiracy theory is proven it's no longer a conspiracy theory! None of the items on the list you linked to are conspiracy theories precisely because they've been proven. Every 9/11 conspiracy theory, however, remains just that.
In other words you have no evidence, only theories. You prove my point.
so then you'll have to admit that the official story of 9/11 is nothing more than a conspiracy theory... ...seeing as how the government has been unable to come up with proof. Results 1 - 10 of about 230,000 for FBI "no evidence" bin laden good enough
...seeing as how the government has been unable to come up with proof. There is plenty of proof that Muslim radicals were behind 9/11. There is no proof that the planes were remotely piloted or that the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosives or that a missile hit the Pentagon or that Flight 93 was shot down.
...after those muslim radicals were waterboarded into providing the "proof".
I believe that something other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. I submit as my evidence, the NTSB's Flight 77 FDR analysis and animation included in this video by Pilots for 9/11 Truth: If something other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, then the Official Conspiracy Theory falls apart and proves that a conspiracy and coverup exist at the highest levels of the US government.
The Muslim radicals who hijacked the planes were not waterboarded. I'd still like to know whether you believe the planes were remotely piloted or not?
pretty successful operation, wasnt it? but how can you miss when you've got the media, the congress, the president and exxon behind you? how can you miss when you can parlay 50 years of holyhoax propaganda into support for the israelis and israeli americans who most likely dreamed this shit up? why did netanyahu think 9/11 was such a good deal?
why did PNAC say they needed "a new pearl harbor"?
Why would the conspirators attack the Pentagon with something other than one of the hijacked airplanes?
Gee, it must be because they were planning 9/11 and they wanted to telegraph their nefarious plot to the world!
No way - its obvious that the 777 jetliner went through the 10 foot diameter hole in the pentagon - only a American hating KOOK would think otherwise. Besides that's what the government said happened and they are always up front with us and would NEVER twist the facts to cover up their failures. Only a KOOK would think otherwise. And they need to be water bordered to come to their senses.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" In other words, you admit you have no proof to support your theories. But I already knew that.
and you still wont admit that the official version of 9/11 is, according to your own definition of "conspiracy theory", a conspiracy theory, huh? why is that?
I not sure. I can't read the minds of psychopaths. Maybe there was a specific target in the Pentagon that needed to be hit, like an auditing department, that could not be sufficiently damaged by a plane, therefore requiring the use of a missile? Are you conceding that the FDR data does not support 77 hitting the Pentagon?
By it's very nature 9/11 was a conspiracy. Where we may part company is in who the conspirators were. That is the "theory" part. Look at the actual strikes. You had some real fuckwits what could not walk and chew gum at the same time do some pretty good flying in multi-engine planes at very high speeds. IMO one of the weakest links is related to that. It's the Pentagram hit. Do you know what "ground effect" is, and how speed and altitude directly affects it? Then there's Bldg 7 and it's collapse. There's enough out there that I know the official story is bullshit, and I don't need all the answers to be able to say that because they could just as easily have blamed the fucking tooth fairy as being behind it all, and it would be as believable. I would like to know what really happened.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or Were the planes remotely piloted?
post mortem waterboarding? yeah, that'd be kinda unproductive, wouldnt it, if you needed defendants for your show trials.
how do i know? the evidence was screwed with before a proper investigation could be mounted... and the last thing in the world the most powerful people in america wanted was a proper investigation, anyhow. the fact remains: there are plenty of technologies available to have steered those planes into those buildings, without pilots.
Not at all. I am asking why the conspirators would go through the trouble of executing a plot in which 4 planes were hijacked but only two planes were used as weapons. Why, when they had a plane to use, would the conspirators shoot a missile into the Pentagon? There is no explanation for this from the conspiracy believers.
Yes and allegations that people within the US government were behind it is where the "theory" part comes in.
how do i know? Exactly. You don't know. Thanks!
...and the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is still a conspiracy theory, because, as you have pointed out, there's no proof bin laden did it.
Ticketing information, surveillance footage, reports from the flight crew and cockpit voice recordings serve as proof. Sir, you have none of these to offer in evidence. 1. There is no documented record of the purported 9-11 terrorists making a plane reservation. If so, there would be a “record locator,” complete with details. 2. There is no documented record of the purported 9-11 terrorists buying or using a ticket. (IDs required) 3. There is no hard-copy of a printed ticket ‘copy.’ 4. There is no record of the purported 9-11 terrorists on any of the passenger manifests, with all legitimate passengers being accounted for. 5. There is no record of the purported 9-11 terrorists in the autopsies. 6. There is not as much as a suggestion that the purported 9-11 terrorists had the needed pilot skills - but rather the contrary. 7. At least seven of the purported 9-11 terrorists are known to be still alive - with no questions being asked. 8. There is no documentation (per the FBI [Mueller] to link the purported 9- 11 terrorists to the events of the day! 9. The presented pictures of the 9-11 hijackers don't match the purported terrorists.
of course, it we boil the whole thing down to traditional methods of compiling a suspect list... "motive, means, and opportunity"... then we've got to go with the PNAC people, dont we? they said they needed a new pearl harbor, which is indication of motive. they had all the means in the world, once they were installed into their positions after the florida election recount, which was looked after by a PNAC member and the president-elect's brother. opportunities abounded, seeing as how these people had been set up in some of the most powerful positions in america.
Sir, you are free to reject reality with as much gusto as you can muster.
33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know...
if we add a couple parameters to the "motive, means, opportunity" method of compiling a suspect list, then what? how bout if we add "character" and "prior convictions"... seeing as how this seems to have been a joint israeli/israeli american/oil company project, we can look at israel's character and prior convictions. israel was founded in terror, and it's no stretch to imagine they'd use terror in an attempt to preserve themselves... that's their "character". then we come to "prior convictions"... proven false flag attacks, by israel, on their supposed friends in attempts to manipulate those friends into doing the bleeding for them.
Here's one: The Pentagon mysteriously lost over a trillion dollars and there was an investigation trying to find it. According to some, the area of the Pentagon hit on 9/11 was the same area where the accounting records were kept, and that it was a recently renovated and reinforced section of the building. To destroy it blatantly with a missile would not work out so well, so the missile strike had to happen under the cover story of a hijacked plane hitting the building. But, once again, I am not a psychopath, and have trouble thinking like one. All I know for sure is that the the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) is a coverup of what actually happened that day. The EVIDENCE of it being an inside job far outweighs the evidence supporting the OCT. The actual flight data recorder data shows the plane on a different flight path and a much higher altitude than required to hit the light poles and the Pentagon as claimed by the OCT.
Seems to me I remember them taking that off of their website. I know it was there, I saw it myself. I wonder what standards of proof would suffice for the skeptics, because that high standard of proof is not even in the commissions report. If it was, there would be no doubt at all.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or 9/11 is not on that list.
That is a convenient way to plug holes in the "inside job" conspiracy theory.
it's there now, but i remember a kerfluffle a couple years ago about it disappearing... it could be that they did a little trial of taking it down, but so many people had downloaded it and made a fuss about it that they had to put it back up in an attempt to save face. i dont ever remember NOT finding that quote, on the PNAC website, when i looked for it, though. Rebuildi ng America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century PNAC page number 51
That is a convenient way to ignore evidence of an inside job.
It would be easy for the FBI to release the security videos they took from the gas station across the road the evidently had a good view of exactly what happened. The video was taken by the FBI within minutes of the attack. And no I am not going to spoon feed you this - any honest person can easily find it on their own. Leaves you out, I am sure.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" it's pretty plain to see that the israelis are degenerating into downright psychopathy... for instance, here's mr dror in the jewish forward, who says that all jews must abandon their morals in defense of israel... When Survival of the Jewish People Is at Stake, There’s No Place for Morals ...which is kind of a joke, seeing as how it's obvious that radical zionist jews were racial supremacist psychopaths from day one. what does that have to do with 9/11? what does that have to do with the dancing israelis, who, by their own admission, were dispatched on 9/11 to "document the event"?
Sir, you are free to reject reality with as much gusto as you can muster. It is not gusto, my friend. I am asking you to demonstrate a positive.
9. The presented pictures of the 9-11 hijackers don't match the purported terrorists. And there is no security video from any of the four major airports that shows any of the alleged perps going through ticketing process. Evidently all the cameras were inop that day! Horray! Seems my liquor has much better security videos that the US airports. We have on store for thirty days a record of anyone who comes close to our front door.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" And there is no security video from any of the four major airports that shows any of the alleged perps going through ticketing process.
that's my high school choir director. he's good friends with both of these guys...
Airport Video No Video Shows Hijackers Boarding Targeted Flights Until 2004, the only video available to the public showing the alleged hijackers at any airport was a clip from a security camera at the Portland, Maine airport showing Mohammed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari going through security. 1 The public has not been treated to any video showing any of the alleged hijackers at Boston Logan Airport, the origin of Flights 11 and 175, or Newark Airport, the origin of Flight 93. Video allegedly showing four hijackers boarding Flight 77 at Dulles Airport was released by a law firm representing some survivors' families in July of 2004, on the same day that the Kean Commission released its report. 2 At a time when most convenience stores across the country had security cameras, Logan, a major international airport, supposedly had no security cameras in its departure lounges. 3 According to Michael Taylor, president of American International Security Corp, the Newark airport does have video cameras in its departure lounges. So does Dulles International Airport. 4 However, the FBI has refused to release any video from these airports that might prove that the alleged hijackers boarded the flights. http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/airportvideo.html
"Satan / Cheney in "08" That Muslim radicals purchased tickets, boarded the planes and hijacked them has already been demonstrated over the past 8 years in everything from news reports to evidence presented at the Moussaoui trial. What hasn't been demonstrated is that 9/11 was an inside job.
That site is as credible as prison planet.
are you going to post transcripts of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's confessions, as he was being waterboarded for the 183rd time?
Portland, Maine And this is all you have. All that you can reasonably be expected to come up with at a moment's notice, I'll grant you that. But you won't find much more. We want to see hijackers in the airports that the fated flights took off from. Here is Atta, LATE because the Portland flight is late, on his way to his historic mission. A mission that was years in the planning. He should be Johnny-on-the-spot as purported ringleader of this operation, and here he is lollygagging around Portland. And what is his car doing at Logan? We would like some reasonable explanation of these facts almost ten years on. And lots of us would like to see these guys getting on a plane at the gate or at least walking through the airports of origin on video which it seems is too classified to date for us to even get a still of.
So MC what time is in in your video?? 5:45 or 5:53?? Or maybe both?
"Satan / Cheney in "08" you dont seem to be willing to admit the beauty of this operation: everybody does what they're told to do, even if it violates the constitution and basic human decency, because the neocon octopus is so powerful. "you need a patsy for 9/11, mr rumsfeld, mr cheney, mr perle, mr zakheim...?" "no problem, sir, we'll have a confession in a couple minutes... please wear your raincoat and galoshes, sir."
Perhaps you can provide me a list of sites that are approved by you.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" That's not what you want. You want to cling to your conspiracy theory because it allows you to wallow in a self righteous "I know the TRUTH" attitude. 9/11 "truth" is the vehicle by which you feel superior to others.
9/11 "truth" is the vehicle by which you feel superior to others. With that, as far as I am concerned, your credibility is shot.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" 5:45 or 5:53?? Or maybe both? The only reasonable explanation for these two different time stamps is that two different time lapse vcrs were looped together, each recording the video simultaneously, with each having their time and date generator set to different times. The "24h" on each time stamp was generated by a VCR recording in the 24hr mode, meaning 24 hours of video condensed onto a 2 hour tape. The video passed through one vcr which added its time stamp, then fed the other vcr which added its time stamp and recorded both time stamps.
Time stamp's not the issue here. with respect.
I'm not surprised that you can't see the juvenile level of self righteousness that every "truther" proudly displays.
nope. the problem is: nobody knows the truth except the perps and their accomplices. the most likely suspects are people who had the most motive, means, opportunity, character and prior convictions. those people also had the most motive, means, opportunity, character and prior convictions to destroy evidence, manipulate the investigation, and propagandize the public into acceptance of the official theory... ...not to mention the fact that they also had the motive, means, opportunity, and character to terrorize potential troublemakers into compliance by mailing them anthrax letters.
In the past, some folks have concluded that the two different times are proof that the video was doctored. Having worked in the CCTV field for 25 years, I am fairly certain that it was just a case of redundant VCRs. Tom questioned the two times. I was just inserting my 2 cents. With respect. :)
With that, as far as I am concerned, your credibility is shot. Fer the record, this is where the ad hominem slinging began on this thread. Forget "truth." Just give me some facts. I don't feel or want to feel superior to anyone. I just want some facts so that I won't feel that my gevernment is making a fool of me. Let's see if we can keep this civil.
Copy. Gotcha. ; )
The hijackers moves have been documented from the time Atta was in Hamburg, Germany. There is ample evidence of their movements in the US leading up to 9/11 including where they lived, the flight training they took and money transfers they received. One of the hijackers even bought the plane tickets using his Visa card. I don't believe you want any facts which is why you cling to a conspiracy theory. There is nothing that will satisfy you. You WANT to believe in 9/11 "truth."
aha... so you must be saying that these hijackers, who were completely superfluous to the operation, were patsies, that the israelis and israeli americans knew about the operation ahead of time, and allowed the hijackers to pull it off because, as the neocons noted in september of 2000, they needed a new pearl harbor to get their PNAC land and oil acquisition project off the ground. i can see that, but it seems more likely that the ringleaders could have picked their patsies, staged the operation, and then immediately obliterate every shred of common sense with a nonstop media blitz that assigned blame on the patsies, as the neocons cleaned up any rough spots in the execution of the operation. later, they could torture confessions out of other patsies who would substaniate the official conspiracy theory and provide cannon fodder for the neocons' show trials. so far it's worked, but it's too bad that so many people are skeptical... and it looks like, sooner or later, the government is gonna have to enforce the official conspiracy theory at gunpoint. but that's okay, too... there's nothing like shooting a few million people to get morale back up where it belongs. just ask the russians and chinese.
Everything you say is true. I was waiting for the inevitable "There is nothing that will satisfy you." I've told you what will satisfy me. I want someone to put these guys on these planes. Having followed these arguments for years, I haven't seen anyone do that. And I'd advise you to stay away from arguments relating to the training of these guys because our fingerprints are all over that.
It's inevitable because it's true. Nothing will satisfy a 9/11 "truther."
I'm still waiting. Put these guys on the planes.
Turtle, is that you???
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or No, I think he is Jeff Gannon: That's rich. If it's Turtle, his truck's not firing on all cylinders this morning.
He posted the same kinds of topics and responses. As much as I disagree, at least they don't get into name calling like some do. IMO it's possible that they are one and the same. Just going back and reading pings to and from each other, they have similar styles. One could have been a sock puppet that took on a life of its own. It's all very conspiratorial... Or maybe they are not the same. If it is, I don't expect an admission, just denials of a conspiracy, like on 9/11 ;)
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or It's inevitable because it's true. Nothing will satisfy a 9/11 "truther." and all it takes are a few words from baalzabush to satisfy a bushbot liar.
What would it take to convince you? Video of them entering the plane and taking their seats?
Nope.
and while they are at it, they might as well release the videotapes of the plotters boarding the plane at Logan.
How do you know such a video even exists?
How do you know such a video even exists? that's right! MC's handlers could have already destroyed all of the tapes in question.
Footage was released of the hijackers going through passenger screening but the inside job guys just had to destroy footage of them boarding the planes. Uh, yeah.
Exactly "Uh, yeah." That's the stuff you can't hunt down because it's no longer there or under wraps, or you would stick it under our noses here, and rightly so. Believe it or not, I hate casting aspersions on our government. I hate to feel that it is lying to me or holding important stuff back that really deserves open scrutiny. But the FBI has simply confiscated to much stuff. They scooped up all the videos from the airports and from the hotels surrounding the Pentagon. It's almost ten years on. You can't tell me it's "national security." Without offering any particular "conspiracy theories," I just wanna ask, "What's the big secret?" Can you understand my skepticism?
Can you understand my skepticism? Your skepticism doesn't make any sense if it hinges completely on the lack of video of the hijackers entering the planes. You ignore everything else and cling to this one thing. I guess you don't believe that flight attendants called their airlines during the flight and reported the seats the hijackers were sitting in.
how many impossible cell phones were used to fabricate the official conspiracy theory?
I don't cling to anything. There are tons of things that are wrong with the government story. Many issues that get discussed get quite technical and folks go round and round on the minutia. But it seems clear to me that if eleven guys are boarding aircraft in major international airports there's going to be video. We've all been to big airports and we've seen how many security cameras there are, and were even in the days preceding the event. Where's the beef?
But one of the biggest sacrifices - especially in today's fast-paced environment - of not being able to use your cell phone, is quickly becoming history thanks to an Israeli-developed system which enables in-flight cell phone use. American-based pioneer and world leader in CDMA technology, Qualcomm (Nasdaq: QCOM) and its subsidiary Qualcomm Israel teamed with American Airlines last summer to demonstrate satellite-based air-to-ground cellular service. And after two years of development by Qualcomm Israel, American and Qualcomm officials circled the West Texas skies this past summer making calls from their cell phones in a flight authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Communications Commission to test the technology's safety and transmission quality. *shrug*
I don't cling to anything. There are tons of things that are wrong with the government story. Many issues that get discussed get quite technical and folks go round and round on the minutia. There are plenty of things wrong with the numerous conspiracy theories. For example, some say the planes were holograms while others say the planes were remote controlled. Of couse, there is zero evidence to support either claim. But it seems clear to me that if eleven guys are boarding aircraft in major international airports there's going to be video. We've all been to big airports and we've seen how many security cameras there are, and were even in the days preceding the event. Where's the beef? See, you are clinging to this one thing and ignoring everything else. If they weren't on the planes, how did the planes crash into the Twin Towers?
anybody with any sense will wonder how many ridiculous theories were planted by israeli american disinformation operations in an attempt to discredit people who question the official conspiracy theory... ...especially after watching performances such as yours, here, today.
it's almost as if you've never heard of rabbi dov zakheim, his position at the pentagon, and his prior job at a company that makes remote controls for aircraft. it's almost as if you've never heard of GPS-coupled approaches, which are accurate to a couple feet after civilians were allowed to use the military- quality signals beginning on May 1, 2000 then there's ILS, ADF, inertial guidance systems... and all these things eliminate the need for arab hijackers to overpower the flight crew, take control of the airliner, and perform manuevers that would be hard for a professional airline pilot to perform... ...not to mention the fact that your arab patsy pilots were apparently inept pilots. but nevermind all that: you're an empire now, and you create your own reality.
That has to be one of the utterly damning statements that came from the mouths of the Bushies over the last eight years.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" VIDEO SURVEILLANCE TAPES DISAPPEARED? Why haven't we seen the routine video surveillance tapes of ANY of the passengers alleged to have boarded the ill-fated 9/11 flights at Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international airports? Author: Stephen M. St. John Source: Verizon.net NEW YORK, 6 NOVEMBER 2005 -- Those who have bothered to read the 9/11 skeptics know about the extraordinary "coincidences" that took place that fateful morning. One of them happens to be the lack of routine video surveillance tapes of ANY of the passengers alleged to have boarded the ill-fated flights at Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international airports. The 9/11 Commission simply ignored this issue even though it can be fairly said that not only did the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington originate at these airport gates, but so did the resulting invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. Why haven't we seen these video tapes? Why has the Fourth Estate failed to ask, Why haven't we seen these video tapes? Why the conspiracy of silence? Well, the answer may very well lie in Holland. You see, security at some if not all of these airport gates of 9/11 was in the hands of an American minimum-wage subsidiary of a Dutch corporation called ICTS-International. What is most remarkable about this arrangement is that the Dutch corporation ICTS- International was, as of 9/11, Dutch in name only. An early 2003 check of its web-site showed a Board of Directors consisting entirely of nationals of the Zionist state with the single exception of the Comptroller, who apparently was the nominal Dutchman. And if I need to clue in the clueless, the Zionists were hellbent on finding a reason for the USA to invade Iraq. And it would be fair to say that these Zionists of ICTS-International were the gatekeepers of 9/11 and all that followed, such as the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Interesting, eh? But the story gets even wilder. Not long after 9/11, the chairman of ICTS, Ezra Harel, whose surname is famous in the annals of the Mossad, died suddenly of a heart attack in his early 50s on his yacht off the coast of Palestine. Talk about not being available for comment! But that's not the kicker. Hours before the House version of the first Patriot Act went to a vote, "technical corrections" were inserted into the body of the legislation whereby foreign security companies such as ICTS-International would be immune from lawsuits related to the events of 9/11. Talk about not being available for deposition! This "Patriot" act legislative sleight of hand occurred before the inception of the 9/11 Commission when Fearless Leader George W. Bush was still resisting the very IDEA of an investigation into 9/11. Hence, in the face of an institutional cover-up, citizens were denied the possibility of a discovery process which is normally afforded to litigants. Without such discovery process, ICTS-International would never be compelled by a court of law to give testimony and show evidence related to the missing airport video surveillance tapes of 9/11 or any other aspect of security measures in place on 9/11. The legal situation has since changed and ICTS-International is now a co- defendant in a lawsuit in Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York. (see www.sept11tortlitigation.com) More about this will follow. And so, we are supposed to believe that even as multiple NORAD drills were underway, video surveillance tapes from multiple cameras at multiple locations in three different "Category X" high security international airports just happened to fail to capture images of ANY of the passengers - the good, the bad and the ugly - about to board the ill-fated flights of 9/11! As many 9/11 skeptics already know, what I have just described here is just one aspect of the BIG LIE about 9/11. Some of the answers to our national security problem will be found in Holland. That is for sure! But there are those who will insist that they have seen on television video surveillance tapes of the hijackers of 9/11 and are satisfied with the official explanation of what happened on that fateful day. However, these people are confused by the tape repeatedly shown on TV of two of the alleged hijackers (Mohammad Atta being one of them) passing through a security checkpoint at Portland Maine International Airport to take a connecting flight to Boston on the morning of 11 September 2001. This Portland tape has no timestamp, which makes it suspect. Also, even IF the tape were genuine, it does not place either of the two young Arabs at Logan International Airport. Nearly all Americans were lulled into believing that the Portland, Maine tape was sufficient proof when it was not. People were mesmerized by the repeated showing of this tape on TV and in their emotional state did not realize exactly what they were looking at and what they weren't looking at. Also, yet another tape was shown in the 24 hour interval leading to the official release of the 9/11 Commission Report; however, this tape, released to the news media by the South Carolina law firm Motley Rice LLC, was almost immediately withdrawn because it quickly became apparent that it was bogus. This Motley Rice surveillance tape purportedly showed two young Arabs boarding flight 77 at Dulles International Airport on the morning of 9/11. But again, just like the Portland Maine tape, there is no timestamp, which makes it suspect. Beyond that, as pointed out by the late, great Internet researcher/writer Joe Vialls, who some believe is really Ari Ben-Menashe (see www.judicial-inc.biz), the shadows appearing just outside the terminal door are those you would expect to see at midday rather than in the early morning. Moreover, the surveillance camera is no ordinary surveillance camera; for the tape reveals a panning camera focused on the two young Arabs and then zooming in on them and then moving left as they move left instead of following the pretty blonde lady who was going to the right. Clearly, some person unknown at some time unknown was filming these young Arab men for a specific but unknown reason. This Motley Rice film was never shown again because of the critical eyes of researchers, many of whom preserved copies of the mysterious tape in their computers. In consideration of the foregoing, one must conclude that no tape has EVER been shown that reveals ANY of the passengers boarding the 9/11 flights out of Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international airports. One must also ask, if the 9/11 surveillance tapes at these airports do in fact exist, why haven't we seen them? And if they do not even exist, how can this be explained?
MC explains it all away by believing everything baalzabush put forward as the official conspiracy theory for him and the rest of the 'bots facts and truth mean nothing if they go against what whorge said.
#2. To: Ada (#0)
Power of the State
#3. To: Lysander_Spooner, Ada (#2)
#4. To: tom007 (#1)
Because there is about 10,000 people in prison for them.
#5. To: tom007 (#1)
The federal government believes in conspiracies.
#6. To: Ada (#0)
#7. To: Ada (#0)
The label "conspiracy theory" is commonly used to try to discredit criticism of the powerful in government or business.
#8. To: Mister Clean (#7)
there is no proof
#9. To: groundresonance (#8)
Results 1 - 10 of about 230,000 for FBI "no evidence" bin laden
#10. To: Mister Clean (#9)
Yeah, and?
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#11. To: Critter (#10)
The ONLY conspiracy theory with no proof is the official conspiracy theory.
#12. To: Mister Clean (#9)
(Edited)
and?
#13. To: Mister Clean (#11)
There is no PROOF of the various conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. No PROOF that the planes were remotely piloted. No PROOF that a missile hit the Pentagon. No PROOF that Flight 93 was shot down. No PROOF that the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives and no PROOF that anyone other than Muslim radicals were involved in the planning and execution of those attacks.
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#14. To: groundresonance (#12)
#15. To: Mister Clean (#14)
What proof is there that Dick Cheney orchestrated 9/11?
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#16. To: Critter (#13)
There is no PROOF of the various conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. No PROOF that the planes were remotely piloted. No PROOF that a missile hit the Pentagon. No PROOF that Flight 93 was shot down. No PROOF that the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives and no PROOF that anyone other than Muslim radicals were involved in the planning and execution of those attacks.
#17. To: Critter, Mister Clean (#13)
There is no PROOF of the various conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11.
#18. To: Mister Clean (#14)
I could go on but there's no point since you have no answers to those questions
#19. To: Critter (#15)
What proof is there that Osama Bin Laden orchestrated 9/11?
#20. To: Mister Clean (#16)
Evidence is not proof which is why every 9/11 conspiracy theory shall remain a conspiracy theory.
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#21. To: randge (#17)
There is no PROOF, for example that there were any Arabs on those planes.
#22. To: Mister Clean (#16)
(Edited)
Evidence is not proof which is why every 9/11 conspiracy theory shall remain a conspiracy theory.
#23. To: Mister Clean (#14)
None of that proves they were behind 9/11.
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)
#24. To: Mister Clean, all (#7)
The term conspiracy theory is an accurate description of allegations for which there is no proof.
die kill ~~ Me
#25. To: groundresonance (#18)
surely not because the evidence was shipped to japan, melted down and turned into toyotas before your PNAC buddies finally condescended to submit to a sham investigation.
#26. To: groundresonance (#22)
would you mind explaining why the experts from the israeli american media were blaming bin laden before the towers even fell?
#27. To: Esso (#23)
It proves conspiracy to commit,
#28. To: Mister Clean (#25)
(Edited)
what is your evidence?
#29. To: PSUSA (#24)
No, it's a pejorative term. Conspiracies happen all the time. It's no theory.
#30. To: groundresonance (#28)
how can there be evidence of anything when there was such a concerted effort by the most powerful people in america to destroy evidence, thwart investigations, and propagandize people into submission to the official conspiracy theory?
#31. To: Mister Clean (#29)
(Edited)
Without proof, a conspiracy remains a conspiracy theory.
#32. To: groundresonance (#31)
so then you'll have to admit that the official story of 9/11 is nothing more than a conspiracy theory...
#33. To: Mister Clean (#32)
There is plenty of proof that Muslim radicals were behind 9/11.
#34. To: Mister Clean (#25)
Do you believe a missile hit the Pentagon? If so, what is your evidence?
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#35. To: groundresonance (#33)
...after those muslim radicals were waterboarded into providing the "proof".
#36. To: Mister Clean (#32)
There is no proof that the planes were remotely piloted or that the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosives or that a missile hit the Pentagon or that Flight 93 was shot down.
#37. To: Mister Clean (#35)
#38. To: Critter (#34)
If something other than Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, then the Official Conspiracy Theory falls apart and proves that a conspiracy and coverup exist at the highest levels of the US government.
#39. To: groundresonance (#37)
why did PNAC say they needed "a new pearl harbor"?
#40. To: Critter (#34)
#41. To: groundresonance (#36)
but how can you miss when you've got the media, the congress, the president and exxon behind you?
#42. To: Mister Clean (#38)
#43. To: Mister Clean (#38)
Why would the conspirators attack the Pentagon with something other than one of the hijacked airplanes?
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#44. To: Mister Clean (#29)
Every 9/11 conspiracy theory, however, remains just that.
die kill ~~ Me
#45. To: groundresonance (#42)
and you still wont admit that the official version of 9/11 is, according to your own definition of "conspiracy theory", a conspiracy theory, huh?
#46. To: Mister Clean (#35)
The Muslim radicals who hijacked the planes were not waterboarded.
#47. To: Mister Clean (#45)
(Edited)
Were the planes remotely piloted?
#48. To: Critter (#43)
Are you conceding that the FDR data does not support 77 hitting the Pentagon?
#49. To: PSUSA (#44)
By it's very nature 9/11 was a conspiracy.
#50. To: groundresonance (#47)
Were the planes remotely piloted?
#51. To: Mister Clean (#49)
allegations that people within the US government were behind it is where the "theory" part comes in.
#52. To: Mister Clean (#21)
There is no PROOF, for example that there were any Arabs on those planes. I invite you to PROVE it.
#53. To: Mister Clean (#50)
#54. To: randge (#52)
Sir, you have none of these to offer in evidence.
#55. To: Mister Clean, EVERYONE ELSE (#54)
#56. To: Mister Clean (#50)
(Edited)
#57. To: Mister Clean (#48)
There is no explanation for this from the conspiracy believers.
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#58. To: groundresonance, all (#53)
they said they needed a new pearl harbor
die kill ~~ Me
#59. To: Itistoolate (#55)
33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know...
#60. To: Critter (#57)
But, once again, I am not a psychopath, and have trouble thinking like one.
#61. To: PSUSA (#58)
(Edited)
Seems to me I remember them taking that off of their website.
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.
#62. To: Mister Clean (#60)
That is a convenient way to plug holes in the "inside job" conspiracy theory.
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#63. To: Mister Clean (#48)
(Edited)
#64. To: Mister Clean (#60)
(Edited)
#65. To: Mister Clean (#54)
Sir, you have none of these to offer in evidence.
#66. To: randge (#52)
8. There is no documentation (per the FBI [Mueller] to link the purported 9- 11 terrorists to the events of the day!
#67. To: tom007 (#66)
#68. To: Mister Clean (#67)
(Edited)
#69. To: Mister Clean (#67)
#70. To: randge (#65)
I am asking you to demonstrate a positive.
#71. To: tom007 (#69)
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/airportvideo.html
#72. To: Mister Clean (#70)
#73. To: Mister Clean (#67)
#74. To: Mister Clean (#67)
#75. To: Mister Clean (#71)
(Edited)
#76. To: Mister Clean (#71)
That site is as credible as prison planet.
#77. To: randge (#73)
We would like some reasonable explanation of these facts almost ten years on.
#78. To: Mister Clean (#77)
hat's not what you want. You want to cling to your conspiracy theory because it allows you to wallow in a self righteous "I know the TRUTH" attitude.
#79. To: tom007, Mister Clean (#74)
So MC what time is in in your video??
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#80. To: Critter (#79)
#81. To: tom007 (#78)
With that, as far as I am concerned, your credibility is shot.
#82. To: Mister Clean (#77)
(Edited)
You want to cling to your conspiracy theory because it allows you to wallow in a self righteous "I know the TRUTH" attitude.
#83. To: randge (#80)
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#84. To: Mister Clean (#81)
(T)hat's not what you want. You want to cling to your conspiracy theory because it allows you to wallow in a self righteous "I know the TRUTH" attitude. 9/11 "truth" is the vehicle by which you feel superior to others.
#85. To: Critter (#83)
Tom questioned the two times. I was just inserting my 2 cents. With respect. :)
#86. To: randge (#84)
Just give me some facts.
#87. To: Mister Clean (#86)
(Edited)
#88. To: Mister Clean (#86)
#89. To: randge (#88)
I was waiting for the inevitable "There is nothing that will satisfy you."
#90. To: Mister Clean (#89)
#91. To: Mister Clean (#89)
die kill ~~ Me
#92. To: PSUSA (#91)
Turtle, is that you???
The only real restraint on gummints is people who say "live free or die" ... and mean it. - Enderby
#93. To: PSUSA (#91)
(Edited)
Turtle, is that you???
#94. To: randge (#93)
die kill ~~ Me
#95. To: randge (#89)
(Edited)
I was waiting for the inevitable "There is nothing that will satisfy you."
computer counted ballots are ballots that have been counted in secret, and with all probability not the way one voted.
#96. To: randge (#90)
Put these guys on the planes.
#97. To: PSUSA (#91)
Turtle, is that you???
#98. To: tom007 (#63)
It would be easy for the FBI to release the security videos they took from the gas station across the road the evidently had a good view of exactly what happened.
#99. To: Ada (#98)
and while they are at it, they might as well release the videotapes of the plotters boarding the plane at Logan.
#100. To: Ada (#99)
and while they are at it, they might as well release the videotapes of the plotters boarding the plane at Logan.
computer counted ballots are ballots that have been counted in secret, and with all probability not the way one voted.
#101. To: IRTorqued (#100)
MC's handlers could have already destroyed all of the tapes in question.
#102. To: Mister Clean (#101)
Uh, yeah.
#103. To: randge (#102)
Without offering any particular "conspiracy theories," I just wanna ask, "What's the big secret?"
#104. To: Mister Clean (#103)
#105. To: Mister Clean (#103)
#106. To: Mister Clean (#103)
Israeli-developed airplane cell phone technology takes flight December 05, 2004
#107. To: randge (#105)
#108. To: Mister Clean (#107)
There are plenty of things wrong with the numerous conspiracy theories. For example, some say the planes were holograms while others say the planes were remote controlled. Of couse, there is zero evidence to support either claim.
#109. To: Mister Clean (#107)
(Edited)
did the planes crash into the Twin Towers?
#110. To: groundresonance (#109)
you're an empire now, and you create your own reality. That has to be one of the utterly damning
#111. To: IRTorqued (#100)
How do you know such a video even exists?
#112. To: Ada (#111)
One must also ask, if the 9/11 surveillance tapes at these airports do in fact exist, why haven't we seen them? And if they do not even exist, how can this be explained?
computer counted ballots are ballots that have been counted in secret, and with all probability not the way one voted.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest