Topic: [Vote] Who did 911? (Read 63048 times)
i guess there is a theory that these 911 attack is just made with a conspiracy of the government , i really don't know what is the real thing about that . i know there's a conspiracy between the US government and the whatever group or society is that .
....
Definitly Bush and his "Illuminati-Friends"...
Definitly Bush and his "Illuminati-Friends"...
Whoa! The Evil Bush. Suuuuurrrrreeeee, buddy. The guy that went after the Muslims that did 911 is the guy that started 911.
What a fucking joke. Now the current Muslim of a POTUS, with his Muslim chief of staff, you might make that argument about them and their behavior. But no, you go back and sling mud at Bush.
Lol....
Here are quick summaries of the arguments.
The transnational drug cartel is a strong argument with only circumstantial evidence.
Vietnam was of course a central heroin waypoint in the era in which the U.S. invaded. Arguments for the U.S. invasion never held much water. Some suspected the U.S. invaded Vietnam under the control of a heroin cartel within several governments including that of the U.S. Evidence has appeared sporadically but witnesses disappear and testimony changes. One example at http://www.wanttoknow.info/militarysmuggledheroin.shtml
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was long rumored to be a result of interests in the heroin trade.
Shortly before the events of 911 the Taliban announced that they had virtually eliminated opium cultivation. Since Afghanistan produced well over 90% of the opium base used for heroin this meant that heroin was basically finished.
Shortly after 911 the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and opium cultivation skyrocketed. Heroin became plentiful again. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2102158/Heroin-production-Afghanistan-RISEN-61.html Other speculation http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/13/420107/-CIA-Torture-Jet-wrecks-with-4-Tons-of-COCAINE
The theory that radical Muslims by themselves were involved is the conventional theory promoted by the U.S. government.
However most people question this. Polls shortly after 911 showed a significant percentage of New Yorkers did not believe the government version. Further doubts were raised later when some polls showed strong support for the official line while others showed the opposite. The impression was that some mainstream polls may have been altered to give the impression that most people believed the government account. One summary of high level counts is at http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Some evidence has been presented that Israelis may have been involved.
Some of this evidence falls into the 'urban legend' category but other parts seem credible. David BenGurion and other early Zionists supposedly believed it was essential that America be under the control of its indigenous people rather than descendants of Europeans. This is discussed sometimes in other languages but never or seldom in English for some reason.
Perhaps Israelis were either associated with the earlier mentioned drug cartel or are involved in some nefarious scheme to transfer power in the new world back to first peoples.
Other theories?
Most recently there have been articles mentioning supposed Saudi involvement. Perhaps part of a secret Wahabi plan to turn Americans into Muslim Wahabis? Or something else?
Added
A 5th choice 'U.S. gov' was added. Votes to that point were 3,2,1 and 5 for the first four choices respectively.
The transnational drug cartel is a strong argument with only circumstantial evidence.
Vietnam was of course a central heroin waypoint in the era in which the U.S. invaded. Arguments for the U.S. invasion never held much water. Some suspected the U.S. invaded Vietnam under the control of a heroin cartel within several governments including that of the U.S. Evidence has appeared sporadically but witnesses disappear and testimony changes. One example at http://www.wanttoknow.info/militarysmuggledheroin.shtml
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was long rumored to be a result of interests in the heroin trade.
Shortly before the events of 911 the Taliban announced that they had virtually eliminated opium cultivation. Since Afghanistan produced well over 90% of the opium base used for heroin this meant that heroin was basically finished.
Shortly after 911 the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and opium cultivation skyrocketed. Heroin became plentiful again. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2102158/Heroin-production-Afghanistan-RISEN-61.html Other speculation http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/13/420107/-CIA-Torture-Jet-wrecks-with-4-Tons-of-COCAINE
The theory that radical Muslims by themselves were involved is the conventional theory promoted by the U.S. government.
However most people question this. Polls shortly after 911 showed a significant percentage of New Yorkers did not believe the government version. Further doubts were raised later when some polls showed strong support for the official line while others showed the opposite. The impression was that some mainstream polls may have been altered to give the impression that most people believed the government account. One summary of high level counts is at http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Some evidence has been presented that Israelis may have been involved.
Some of this evidence falls into the 'urban legend' category but other parts seem credible. David BenGurion and other early Zionists supposedly believed it was essential that America be under the control of its indigenous people rather than descendants of Europeans. This is discussed sometimes in other languages but never or seldom in English for some reason.
Perhaps Israelis were either associated with the earlier mentioned drug cartel or are involved in some nefarious scheme to transfer power in the new world back to first peoples.
Other theories?
Most recently there have been articles mentioning supposed Saudi involvement. Perhaps part of a secret Wahabi plan to turn Americans into Muslim Wahabis? Or something else?
Added
A 5th choice 'U.S. gov' was added. Votes to that point were 3,2,1 and 5 for the first four choices respectively.
Definitly Bush and his "Illuminati-Friends"...
There was a post on here asking why the US government would want to destroy its own buildings and I think the answer is simple. So we could go into another war, and increase oil prices for Bush. We wouldn't have went into Iraq without this happening, but hey, they wouldnt have weapons if we did not give them to them lol
Except there was virtually no relation between our going into Iraq and Al Queda driving planes into buildings.
Except that the fact that it worked out that way shows that there absolutely WAS a relation.
There was a post on here asking why the US government would want to destroy its own buildings and I think the answer is simple. So we could go into another war, and increase oil prices for Bush. We wouldn't have went into Iraq without this happening, but hey, they wouldnt have weapons if we did not give them to them lol
Except there was virtually no relation between our going into Iraq and Al Queda driving planes into buildings.
Iraq was a completely different matter than Afganistan. Al Queda was not sheltered by Iraq, they had little to do with each other.
So in a literal sense, your comment makes no sense.
There was a post on here asking why the US government would want to destroy its own buildings and I think the answer is simple. So we could go into another war, and increase oil prices for Bush. We wouldn't have went into Iraq without this happening, but hey, they wouldnt have weapons if we did not give them to them lol
us gov. no doubt about it
It was %90 chance inside job of USA to find reason to bomb Afghanistan.
Man, you are going to have to help me out with that one.
Why would anyone want to go to a lot of trouble to bomb Afghanistan?
Yes. Especially how do figure 90% rather than 100%?
It was %90 chance inside job of USA to find reason to bomb Afghanistan.
Man, you are going to have to help me out with that one.
Why would anyone want to go to a lot of trouble to bomb Afghanistan?
Hidden Crimes of the US Government
Read more at https://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/hidden-crimes-us-government/.
Hidden Crimes of the US Government
Was 9-11 one of them? John Denson talks to Lew Rockwell.
June 17, 2016
(Standard Podcast [ 31:00 ] Hide Player | Play in Popup | Download)
John V. Denson Archives
Operation Northwoods
Was 9-11 one of them? John Denson talks to Lew Rockwell.
June 17, 2016
(Standard Podcast [ 31:00 ] Hide Player | Play in Popup | Download)
John V. Denson Archives
Operation Northwoods
Read more at https://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/hidden-crimes-us-government/.
It was %90 chance inside job of USA to find reason to bomb Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda,all the "joos did it" or US government theories have zero reliable proof and were invented by paranoids who refuse to accept reality.
A few paranoids, yes...but a lot of actively working disinformation agents. Just think if you indoctrinate a Muslim low-IQ individual that the USA did 911 and blamed it on nice Muslims, you could maybe get him deluded and angry enough to do a suicide bombing...Well, what do you know? That's exactly what they are doing...
Al Qaeda,all the "joos did it" or US government theories have zero reliable proof and were invented by paranoids who refuse to accept reality.
Some evil people did it. Some were Jews. Some were Americans. Some were Arabs. Some of them were in the U.S. government. All of them worked together. None of them were Al Qaeda.
Al Qaeda,all the "joos did it" or US government theories have zero reliable proof and were invented by paranoids who refuse to accept reality.
The problem with Larken Rose and most other Americans is this. They can't get it through their heads that stepping into the legal system is not the way to do it. The Preamble, and the 6th, 7th, and 9th Amendments show government that it cannot keep people from moving in the ways that they did before government was around, to get relief from someone who has wronged them.
What. Are. You. Talking. About?
Do you listen to anyone or anything other than your own thoughts?
(Or are you high? LOL)
Now you see. Someone shows you the black and white paperwork of foundational law in America, and all you can say is, What are you talking about?
I know it might be hard for you, a slave, to comprehend freedom, but try, if you want to know what I am talking about.
Alright, so please walk me through it again... how does a piece of paper somewhere, written by some slave-owning men some centuries ago, somehow have anything at all to do with the idea of "foundational law" (which, btw, is Natural Law)?
You are right. It doesn't have anything to do with anything. However, if some government people adhere to it, then it does for them. It is your job, should they think that you are also a member of that paperwork, show them that you are not. It is so much easier to do when you can show them that their paperwork even says that you don't have to be a member of their paperwork.
Here is the trick why Larken lost. Larken told them that he wasn't a member of their paperwork. But he told them from what appeared to be a position of membership within their paperwork. And he didn't rebut that membership when they presumed it against him. So, even though he may not have been a member of their paperwork, he lost, because he looked and acted like he was a member even though he was saying that he wasn't a member.
What you seem to be saying is that Larken's piece of paper "authorizing" him to rob you is valid and applies to you UNLESS you show him that it doesn't apply to you. Do you not see how ridiculous that is? You seem to have fallen for a 2-dimensional mind-trap wherein pieces of paper with symbols on them ("foundational law"?) override the 3/4-dimensional reality (Natural Law) that you are experiencing... If Larken doesn't do it, I bet Mark Passio will help clarify your belief system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgRjTuQ039g
I'll check out Karl Lentz though and get back to you on that.
You are finally coming close to understanding. Larken's piece of paper comes close to being the truth as it stands, because there is a claim of a man backing it. But the paper, itself, is only a means of showing the world. Larken would have to make a claim that he is willing to get on stand under oath, in his own court at the courthouse, before it standed a chance of being valid... in America, that is. If he did such, you better better be ready to, at some time, refute his claim in court. You would refute with a claim of your own, which would include that his false claim is costing you valuable time away from work... therefore money as compensation.
You are presuming the legitimacy of man-made law systems, when that whole idea is a distortion of the real law, which is Natural Law. In other words, you are operating under the assumption of moral relativism, not understanding what Natural Law is. You seem to be saying, for instance, that the Vatican owns your soul, because a papal decree (i.e. a piece of paper somewhere) says so, and you haven't done anything to refute the claim. Did you watch that video by Mark Passio?
Can you answer this: From where does the IRS, or any other gang of thugs, derive/obtain/acquire its supposed "authority"?
A man-made law system is legitimate for the man that made it... as long as it doesn't harm another man and HIS man-made law system. People have the innate, inherent ability to make certain laws for themselves. And this under natural law.
Someone in the Vatican can jump for joy and laugh gleefully regarding the fact that he owns your soul. But he loses his ownership when he dies. So, there is no practical substance to his ownership. If the soul-ownership claim makes a physical change in your life, you better refute the claim.
For example. If I say that you owe me $100,000, and I take you to court over the matter, if you show up in court but don't respond, you just might wind up owing me the $100,000.
The IRS gets its authority from you. You signed the W-4, or the 1040. Other than that, they get their authority from you not refuting their claim.
This is very strange.
It starts by asking for proof that Bin Laden was responsible for 911.
But who said that he was? This is a bit like saying Obama was responsible for Bengazi.
Check Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_September_11_attacks
Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and electronic bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a key figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. Intercepts were also obtained that revealed conversations that took place days before September 11 between bin Laden and an associate in Pakistan. In those conversations, the two referred to "an incident that would take place in America on, or around, September 11" and they discussed potential repercussions. In another conversation with an associate in Afghanistan, bin Laden discussed the "scale and effects of a forthcoming operation." These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon, or other specifics.[24]
...According to interviews by Al-Jazeera[40] as well as United States interrogations of al-Qaeda members Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (captured in 2002 and 2003 respectively), Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the instigator and prime organizer of the attacks.
It starts by asking for proof that Bin Laden was responsible for 911.
But who said that he was? This is a bit like saying Obama was responsible for Bengazi.
Check Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_September_11_attacks
Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and electronic bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a key figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. Intercepts were also obtained that revealed conversations that took place days before September 11 between bin Laden and an associate in Pakistan. In those conversations, the two referred to "an incident that would take place in America on, or around, September 11" and they discussed potential repercussions. In another conversation with an associate in Afghanistan, bin Laden discussed the "scale and effects of a forthcoming operation." These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon, or other specifics.[24]
...According to interviews by Al-Jazeera[40] as well as United States interrogations of al-Qaeda members Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (captured in 2002 and 2003 respectively), Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the instigator and prime organizer of the attacks.
How has us gov managed to get to109 votes? you guys need to take off your tinfoil hats and settle down. Do yous really think in this day and age your own government would fly a plane into the twin towers? Im going to vote aliens, much more likely.
There was an Army plane that accidentally flew into the Empire State Building, IIRC.Im not up to speed on that, Ive actually never heard of that at all but as you say yourself it was accidental. I dont think the planes crashing into the towers were by any means accidental, and if it was then it was probably one of the biggest fuck ups in modern times. 911 was clearly on purpose but conspiracy theory's that it was the usa's own government is just ridiculous.
Yes there are totally insane conspiracy theories about 911. They are anti logic, anti evidence, and anti fact and science.
As I have said multiple times on this thread I am not even opposed to conspiracy theories - just produce ones that are self-consistent and which make sense.
As an example of what "doesn't make sense" some of these guys propose that the airliners were flown into the towers BUT THEN ALSO bunches of explosives were laid out AT THE SAME LEVELS the jets hit BUT THEY WERE SPECIAL EXOTIC EXPLOSIVES THAT ONLY THE NSA has.
I mean, this is batshit crazy talk. Wouldn't someone just simply bomb the towers? Why would any conspiracy involve both flying planes into the towers and bombing them also .... be obviously ridiculous?
But that's the sort of lengths they have to go to to try to get the facts to fit the conspiracy. The facts just don't fit too well.
So be my guest, introduce a 911 conspiracy theory that at least half makes sense.
How has us gov managed to get to109 votes? you guys need to take off your tinfoil hats and settle down. Do yous really think in this day and age your own government would fly a plane into the twin towers? Im going to vote aliens, much more likely.
There was an Army plane that accidentally flew into the Empire State Building, IIRC.Im not up to speed on that, Ive actually never heard of that at all but as you say yourself it was accidental. I dont think the planes crashing into the towers were by any means accidental, and if it was then it was probably one of the biggest fuck ups in modern times. 911 was clearly on purpose but conspiracy theory's that it was the usa's own government is just ridiculous.
But the government has its own conspiracy theory. You know, those box cutter boys CONSPIRED to pull off this thing and the head of the conspiracy was a guy with a laptop in the middle of nowhere in Afghanistan. So, that conspiracy theory is fine with you right?
How has us gov managed to get to109 votes? you guys need to take off your tinfoil hats and settle down. Do yous really think in this day and age your own government would fly a plane into the twin towers? Im going to vote aliens, much more likely.
There was an Army plane that accidentally flew into the Empire State Building, IIRC.Im not up to speed on that, Ive actually never heard of that at all but as you say yourself it was accidental. I dont think the planes crashing into the towers were by any means accidental, and if it was then it was probably one of the biggest fuck ups in modern times. 911 was clearly on purpose but conspiracy theory's that it was the usa's own government is just ridiculous.
Jump to: