NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey you guys should check this out. Take it with a grain of salt. It does kinda make u wonder though :confused:

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php

Conspiracy Theory? Wasn't that a Mel Gibson/Julia Roberts movie? J/k.

In all seriousness, though, I've seen it before.

The American government knew it was going to happen, or why else would the government workers at the Twin Towers suddenly have a 'random' day off that day... think about it and it makes sense.

It was Romulans, no doubt. ;)
Doesn't make any sense, though. Why would the US Gov't want to blow up the Pentagon after they'd been working on refinishing it? Something's up, sure, but I don't know if the gov't planned it or anything.

You guys need to adjust your tinfoil hats...

Interesting film, it does make some good points I think. Still taken with a grain of salt though. I can't wait for the freedom of information act to kick in here.

On a side note, that act should kick in pretty soon so we can all find out what really happened with the Kennedy Assasination. Or at the very least shut up those government assasination nuts (like one od my teachers).

[bump] for interest.

Oh, Hi Panhandlia, haven't seen you in a while.

Of coarse there are always "government conspiracies", but lets be serious. This was the third time I have seen this video, and it has all of the makings of propaganda. Lots of fuzzy pictures, music that carries off the point of the film, and lots of "quotes." What one must relize is that works like these show up all the time on the internet, and are proven totally false. I'm not saying that this film is right, or wrong, but you can't take it seriously. It is presented in the same way as propaganda, so therefor one can conclude that if this acculy was the case it would be presented in a more accecaptable form that led one to believe it was true for it's contents, and the theory. Not because it had flashy music, and seemed cool. Basically what im trying to say is, don't just believe the video, it was presented in a propaganda format, and I dont believe that it can be trusted. Just be wary.

Interesting film, it does make some good points I think. Still taken with a grain of salt though. I can't wait for the freedom of information act to kick in here.

On a side note, that act should kick in pretty soon so we can all find out what really happened with the Kennedy Assasination. Or at the very least shut up those government assasination nuts (like one od my teachers).

[bump] for interest.

Oh, Hi Panhandlia, haven't seen you in a while.
Good to see you again, BLARG. Been busy, being a capitalist and all. How ya doin'?

Good to see you again, BLARG. Been busy, being a capitalist and all. How ya doin'?

I'm excellent. Learning economics and why capitalism fails. Okay, not really, but I'm good. Check your other post, it wasn't laoding properly.

Anyway, while I'm not a huge fan of conspiracy theories, I do look forward to the day that this information becomes available.

i realize that this is a propogandist conspiracy theory with flashy music and ulterior facts...BUT... the questions still stands. Why no conclusive videos? You gotta think somethings up. And you know the pentagon has videos showing what happened. Why haven't we seen them?

OMG!!!11!! TEH G0\/3|2|\||\/|3|\|t 15 teh (_)83|23\/1l

sorry, had to throw that in.

I've also seen images that superimpose a plane the size of one that supposedly hit over the damage it did, and it's clear from that that the wings of the plane *vanished* before hitting the building, because they didn't scratch it at all and they didn't end up on the ground.

Its a good point. If the wings were where the fuel was located they should have made A big mark.

A cruise missile couild easilly be mistaken for plane. Thoe old nuclear capable ones from the 70s-80s would have done niceley.

does raise 1 or 2 interesting questions. Where are the wings, the fact that the plane came in a 2ft off the ground at that speed and the confiscation of the videos.

But I liked the fact that it appears that in washington, alot of people can tell the difference between a fighter plane, missile and passenger plane.
Also i don't care for the comparison between past plane accidents, which all appeared to crash in open spaces, and the pentagon strike. I would assume a large part of the plane would have disintegrated due to force of impact....

I saw a video of it. But you couldn't make anything out.

does raise 1 or 2 interesting questions. Where are the wings, the fact that the plane came in a 2ft off the ground at that speed and the confiscation of the videos.

But I liked the fact that it appears that in washington, alot of people can tell the difference between a fighter plane, missile and passenger plane.
Also i don't care for the comparison between past plane accidents, which all appeared to crash in open spaces, and the pentagon strike. I would assume a large part of the plane would have disintegrated due to force of impact....
this isnt dragon ball z, things dont disentigrate technically

If the plane came in at a roll angle of 90 degrees or so (with the wings aligned vertically), they would've got all smasherated up in the same hole as the fuselage, especially if they dived in at high speed.

Not that that rules anything out, but it does stop people leaping to conclusions based on something not immediately explicable.

I always wonder if conspiracy theorists have ever actually dealt with the government. Been to the DMV, worked at the CDC, been a military contractor, tried to get a small business loan, gone through unemployment lines, etc. The idea that the same people could run such an innefficient wall of crap and yet manage to pull off conspiracies involving litterally thousands of people is beyond me.

If more than 4 separate and disparate people have to tell the same story to maintain the ruse, it ain't gonna happen.

Conspiracy Theory? Wasn't that a Mel Gibson/Julia Roberts movie? J/k.

In all seriousness, though, I've seen it before.

It was and it was the worst film I have ever seen until 'The Last Samurai' came out. No sorry again. 'The Last Samurai' was the worst film until 'Catwoman'.

Some interesting points I guess, I'd like some sort of informed counter-response though. It did strike me as odd though that the other 60 odd eye witnesses who confirmed it was a plane would be mistaken (or maybe they were all secretly government agents) I also wonder what the conspiracists would say happened to the plane and all of its passengers.

Can't believe I'm actually taking this seriously enough to reply to it.

The same thing that happened to the planes that crashed into the Twin Towers. Virtual disintegration, nothing much left but very small peices of scrap metal.

Noone wonders what's left of a missle after it crashes into a solid bunker, the planes had about the same amount of energy as a missle and the pentagon was built like a bunker. I would be surprised if anything larger than 10-20 lb chunks were left over.

The best part of the video was the bit where it said "could a plane have crashed through a solid steel wall".

With all that weight, fuel, and the speed of impact the answer of course has to be "yes - duh".

I always wonder if conspiracy theorists have ever actually dealt with the government. Been to the DMV, worked at the CDC, been a military contractor, tried to get a small business loan, gone through unemployment lines, etc. The idea that the same people could run such an innefficient wall of crap and yet manage to pull off conspiracies involving litterally thousands of people is beyond me.

If more than 4 separate and disparate people have to tell the same story to maintain the ruse, it ain't gonna happen.
have you ever been to the DMV?

the dmv's official job is to piss people the fuck off. when my mom was getting her license it took her like 15 minutes go to the courthouse some onetwsts you done. now they moved it out of the courthouse into some crappy little building, a total of THREE FUCKING PEOPLE WORK THERE, THREE. thats not including the lady taking pictures. you have to get there 2 hours before it opens because they only take like 30 people an hour in there, and ocne you get there are 5 am you still have to wait in a 16 person line for 2 hours until it opens, and if you get there at 5:30 you've been waiting for an hour and a half and dont get to go in because you got there too late. and once you get inside you gotta wait for 3 hours until they can get to your ass.

I just watched the movie and I'm a little bit interested but theres some informations missing:

If this really was a conspiricy what ever happened to the real plane that was stolen?
And if the pentagon was a conspiricy, what about the twin towers. Theres hard video evidence showing the plane crash into the towers.

I just watched the movie and I'm a little bit interested but theres some informations missing:

If this really was a conspiricy what ever happened to the real plane that was stolen?
And if the pentagon was a conspiricy, what about the twin towers. Theres hard video evidence showing the plane crash into the towers.

Yeah, it's not like the pentagon needed to be hit after the Twin Towers in order for someone to get some money. People were pissed off enough to let anything fly after 9/11, the Pentagon attack was icing on the terrorist cake.

Perhaps the wreckage was cleared away before those pictures were taken as part of the rescue/clean-up operation?

It was and it was the worst film I have ever seen until 'The Last Samurai' came out. No sorry again. 'The Last Samurai' was the worst film until 'Catwoman'.
I rather liked Last Samurai. :(

And this "oh look I'm cool I use Fight Club music!" flash was the most pathetic thing I've seen on the net recently.

I always wonder if conspiracy theorists have ever actually dealt with the government. Been to the DMV, worked at the CDC, been a military contractor, tried to get a small business loan, gone through unemployment lines, etc. The idea that the same people could run such an innefficient wall of crap and yet manage to pull off conspiracies involving litterally thousands of people is beyond me.

If more than 4 separate and disparate people have to tell the same story to maintain the ruse, it ain't gonna happen.

Thats always the fallback position. The point of a conspiracy is that you account for all possibilities.

I'd sure like to know the secret of the pentagon's gardener... I mean, look at that lawn!! :D

I always wonder if conspiracy theorists have ever actually dealt with the government. Been to the DMV, worked at the CDC, been a military contractor, tried to get a small business loan, gone through unemployment lines, etc. The idea that the same people could run such an innefficient wall of crap and yet manage to pull off conspiracies involving litterally thousands of people is beyond me.

If more than 4 separate and disparate people have to tell the same story to maintain the ruse, it ain't gonna happen.

Amen. I wish I had enough respect for the national government to believe they could intelligently fool the population. Instead, we are shown over and over again that the only people the government fools is government officials.

Amen. I wish I had enough respect for the national government to believe they could intelligently fool the population. Instead, we are shown over and over again that the only people the government fools is government officials.


http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm


http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm


Those should clear up a few things. Looks like somebody just felt like deceiving all of you tin-hat gullibles.

I always wonder if conspiracy theorists have ever actually dealt with the government. Been to the DMV, worked at the CDC, been a military contractor, tried to get a small business loan, gone through unemployment lines, etc. The idea that the same people could run such an innefficient wall of crap and yet manage to pull off conspiracies involving litterally thousands of people is beyond me.

If more than 4 separate and disparate people have to tell the same story to maintain the ruse, it ain't gonna happen.
Ya know, the pilot episode of X-Files or maybe even the Deep Throat episode had Scully saying your top line almost verbatim. ;)

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm


http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm


Those should clear up a few things. Looks like somebody just felt like deceiving all of you tin-hat gullibles.
I read somewhere there was a site that debunked commonly held misconceptions from the snopes site ... anyone remember that one?

Hey you guys should check this out. Take it with a grain of salt. It does kinda make u wonder though :confused:

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php
That is quite possibly the stupides thing I have ever seen. Thanks for bringing out the tinfoil hat brigade.

It was Romulans, no doubt. ;)
Doesn't make any sense, though. Why would the US Gov't want to blow up the Pentagon after they'd been working on refinishing it? Something's up, sure, but I don't know if the gov't planned it or anything.
Insurance scam, no doubt.

It was and it was the worst film I have ever seen until 'The Last Samurai' came out. No sorry again. 'The Last Samurai' was the worst film until 'Catwoman'.
I dunno about you but my interest in "Catwoman" goes somewhere beneath the intellectual capacity and more towards the titillation category ... i could plug my ears and get what i really wanted out of it. Most of it, 'cept when she's all breathy.

There were several things I noticed about this film that displeased me, but I'll just talk about a few.

Their examples of plane crashes were all open field plane crashes. There is a radical difference between open field crashes and building crashes. An open field crash typically minimizes forward crumple behavior, because the force is typically only focused on the bottom. Also, most airplane crashes occur at relatively low speeds, when compared with the speeds involved here.

A noted picture that questions the type of aircraft has pixels the SIZE OF MY FINGER.

Airplanes can and do punch neat holes. Just like any other roughly cylindrical metal thing that moves at high speeds.

Wings, as compared to the rest of the plane are very fragile, they tend to be able to disintegrate very easily if nailed with the wrong kind of stress.

That damage was too big for a smaller plane, and too small for any missile besides a WWII V1 rocket-bomb.

That damage was too big for a smaller plane, and too small for any missile besides a WWII V1 rocket-bomb.

You do of course realise that "Buzz bombs" Were in fact the first rudimentay cruise missiles right>?

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm


http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm


Those should clear up a few things. Looks like somebody just felt like deceiving all of you tin-hat gullibles.


Just for clarification on my part (maybe it's too late at night here), you're backing up my assertion that the government is too stupid and disorganized to actually fool the populace for long with websites that show the "hunt the boeing" site is just misleading. Yes?

But doesn't all this skeptisim proove that they can?>

Thats not to implicate the government of course.

I remember all that when it happened. I also remember eyewitnesses who saw and heard explosions from the second level of the World Trade Center. I remember watching the videos that website said they didn't show, and each video was delayed snapshots which didn't capture what flew into the Pentagon - so there's only a half truth being presented. I don't believe it was a 757 that struck the Pentagon. So my first question would be; What happened to the plane then?

You do of course realise that "Buzz bombs" Were in fact the first rudimentay cruise missiles right>?

Yes, I know that.

well, I visited the amazing "find the boeing" website, and I found it rely way too heavily on anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence has been used to support everything from telepathy to aliens, so I personally don't put too much stock in it.

I love the part where they quote those people saying "It wasn't a plane" and "It didn't sound like a plane."

Hmm, how many of those people know what a plane in powerdive going at speeds well over the safe limit sounds like? With turbojet engines just like conventional missiles use? How many people would have figured planes would deliberately fly into buildings at that point in time?

When planes fly straight in steel-reinforced concrete, the results are not pretty (http://www.sandia.gov/media/NRgallery00-03.htm) (scroll to bottom.)

Jet fuel burns above the melting point for aluminum, couple this with the fact a good portion of the fuel is stored in the wings of the plane in addition to the central tank and your plane is gone.

If you look at the Snopes article you see this idiocy was debunked in 2002 ... this flash is merely a rehash of old, refuted ideas.

I'm surprised everyone is relying on snopes. Isn't anyone willing to discuss it. I had heard it came in low and heavy. How else could it have clipped streetlights?

Either way, its not difficult to melt Aluminium. You can do it with A jetflame lighter. On beer cans :D

They're generally a reliable source, not the only that does stuff like this but probably the most well known.

There's really nothing to discuss, just a bunch of nuts making something out of nothing. Like "Aliens building the Great Pyramids" or "The Moon Landing hoax."

But its those who accept the official story that are making excuses and stretching the evidence to make it fit.

I cant find A website that debunks snoopes, But I did find this.

Shock-awe (http://shock-awe.info/archive/000858.php)

Since when is explaining the mechanics and physics involved as well as indicating that these "problems" are actually invalid "making excuses and stretching the evidence to make it fit"?

QUITE EVERYONE!!!!!! their watching us right now!!!!!!!

i'm joking this does rise some interesting points though.

Hey you guys should check this out. Take it with a grain of salt. It does kinda make u wonder though :confused:

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php

Snopes has addressed this and proven it false. I dont remember the exact page, so ill let you browse.

http://www.snopes.com/

You've been beaten. Badly.

Aw dear, should have read the rest of the thread.

I just have to go back to the basics. It's the concensus of this forum (the majority anyway) that Bush is dangerously stupid, yet he's able to pull off an international conspiracy theory in which at least 1, if not 4 huge airliners disappear along with all the passengers whose cell phones all cut out at the correct time of impact while talking about the cities they're flying over, meanwhile, arranging to have /separate/ planes or missiles launched at the same targets?

If you're one that believes only the pentagon was faked ... why? I mean, didn't he have all the ammo he needed with just the two towers hit? Not many people really cared about the pentagon once they found out it only hit a reconstruction wing and virtually nobody was hurt.

This is the same president / administration who didn't manage to pull off /any/ conspiracy to prove that WMDs existed in Iraq, couldn't hide the fact that 380 tons of explosives went missing, and couldn't create any ties to Al Queda closer than Zarqawa (sp)?

I don't buy it.

Since when is explaining the mechanics and physics involved as well as indicating that these "problems" are actually invalid "making excuses and stretching the evidence to make it fit"?

The Physics is fine. But no can seem to agree on what actually happened, how so the physics is just speculatory.

""This" is how it happened"
"But how do you explain "this""
"Ok then it must have gone down "this" way"
"But then "this" doesn't make sense"

Its all about Occams razor. From What I've seen the official story (Which is still hazy and circumstantial even after the 9\11 report) seems to be reliant on coincidences and unlikely happenings. Occams razor would seem to suggest that it simply isn't true in the first place and to look for a simpler explaination.

What I find interesting is if they knew nothing of the attacks then why did suspicion turn to Usama Bin Laden almost immeadiately?

Mac. You're making many assumptions there. No one ever said Bush was behind it. I wont go back to read this thread, But I doubt anyone made any strong assertions as to who was responsible. All this thread is about is evidence that doesn't add up.

And uhh Mac, Cellphones dont work on Airplanes. Planes move so fast that Phones aren't able to lock onto a base station before it goes out of range.
Once again, the story must be altered to fit the evidence.

Its all about Occams razor. From What I've seen the official story (Which is still hazy and circumstantial even after the 9\11 report) seems to be reliant on coincidences and unlikely happenings. Occams razor would seem to suggest that it simply isn't true in the first place and to look for a simpler explaination.

Funny, I thought Occams Razor would suggest that a massive coverup including the dissapearance of the planes suspected in the crashes was the more complex of the options and thus couldn't be true.

What I find interesting is if they knew nothing of the attacks then why did suspicion turn to Usama Bin Laden almost immeadiately?

I have no doubt they knew /something/ of the attack, myself. I got the impression from all the initial footage that we knew something was coming towards the WTC again, but we weren't sure in what form, and thus, couldn't prevent it. It was called a failure of intelligence on more than one level.

Mac. You're making many assumptions there. No one ever said Bush was behind it. I wont go back to read this thread, But I doubt anyone made any strong assertions as to who was responsible. All this thread is about is evidence that doesn't add up.

Fair. I just meant to throw him in with the "administration". Nearly the entire government would have to be involved in a coverup this large, which doesn't make sense to me. Besides, many other people I know /have/ asserted that Bush was directly involved.

And uhh Mac, Cellphones dont work on Airplanes. Planes move so fast that Phones aren't able to lock onto a base station before it goes out of range.

That's simply a myth. For one, /I/ have used a cell phone on an airplane. Secondly, the 9/11 tapes all have examples of the cell phone callers from the planes and those were being reported live on some channels during the attack. It's true that you get bad reception sometimes (unless you're digital), but the real problem is that you reach /dozens/ of towers at once and if too many people do this, you can cause problems (overflow) in the network.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2002-10-22-air-cell_x.htm

Once again, the story must be altered to fit the evidence.

Like assuming cell phones don't work, and that because there's virtually no footage of the plane hitting the pentagon, it's a conspiracy ... just like the first plane to hit the WTC that has only one camera showing it out of the thousands of tourists that visit that area every day?

It seems the event simply happened too fast for any realistic footage to be taken, so we're left with poor image quality, pixelated shots of something moving at over 500mph.

The real problem is there's barely any evidence for /either/ side. For fun, let me throw this in. At the time, my father was working at the pentagon. He told me he had seen (with his own eyes) fragments of an airplane inside the rings (and he's not the only one who has). I don't know ... before I believe the five or six people that "hunt the boeing" site references over and over again, I'll believe the eyes of my own father and the other 70 or so witnesses that claim it was a 747.

hhhhhhhhmmmmmmm very intersting, glad i do not live in America, maybe some one should ask some quetions to the US GOVERNMENT!

I'm of the 'government is far to inefficient to pull off this sort of cover-up' train of thought.

I still like the movie though, because well-pulled-off propaganda (not related to content, I'm talking about the effects and music and layout etc) amuse me greatly.

The Physics is fine. But no can seem to agree on what actually happened, how so the physics is just speculatory.


Who's "no one"? There is no real controversy. There is no Boeing to hunt, it literally disintegrated.

Remember the Flight 427 crash in 1994?

The Boeing 737 jet was approaching Pittsburgh under perfect weather conditions when it rolled over 180 degrees and went into an uncontrollable corkscrew dive. It smashed into the earth nose first with such force that the aircraft disintegrated into millions of small pieces.


Its all about Occams razor.


Don't cut yourself.

"The principle states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed."

"In its simplest form, Occam's razor states that explanations should never multiply causes without necessity. When two viable explanations are offered for a phenomenon, the simplest full explanation is preferable. If a charred tree is on the ground, it could be because of a lightning strike or because of a secret government weapons program. The simplest explanation that is sufficient is the logical one, according to Occam's razor, and there was a lightning strike."

Funny how Wikipedia made it easier for me.

A plane crashed into the building wins over elaborate government conspiracy to make it look like a plane crashed into the building but it was really something else.


From What I've seen the official story (Which is still hazy and circumstantial even after the 9\11 report) seems to be reliant on coincidences and unlikely happenings. Occams razor would seem to suggest that it simply isn't true in the first place and to look for a simpler explaination.


Need a band-aid?


What I find interesting is if they knew nothing of the attacks then why did suspicion turn to Usama Bin Laden almost immeadiately?


He's got a history. Suspicisons were later vertified.


Once again, the story must be altered to fit the evidence.

Actually, the tinfoils alter the evidence to not fit the story. Like the way cell phones don't work on planes, am i rite? http://members.rogers.com/dariuszalina/emot-q.gif

I love the part where they quote those people saying "It wasn't a plane" and "It didn't sound like a plane."

Hmm, how many of those people know what a plane in powerdive going at speeds well over the safe limit sounds like? With turbojet engines just like conventional missiles use? How many people would have figured planes would deliberately fly into buildings at that point in time?



If you look at the Snopes article you see this idiocy was debunked in 2002 ... this flash is merely a rehash of old, refuted ideas.

Let's also remember that the engines on a 757 are a whole hell of a lot more powerful than the engines in a Tomahawk cruise missle.

The US is slated to replace the engines on the B-52s with the 757 engine.

Just for clarification on my part (maybe it's too late at night here), you're backing up my assertion that the government is too stupid and disorganized to actually fool the populace for long with websites that show the "hunt the boeing" site is just misleading. Yes?

Actually, I meant to just reply. I didn't mean to quote you.

My comment had NOTHING to do with yours. Sorry. LOL

Actually, I meant to just reply. I didn't mean to quote you.

My comment had NOTHING to do with yours. Sorry. LOL

Good. Your style of speech (when reflecting back on what I wrote) really had me confused there! :)

The conspiracy nut-jobs (I'm not showing any bias here am I? ;) ) have never explained what happened to the hi-jacked 757. They keep going on and on about how a crashed plane leaves evidence. Well, where's the evidence of the 757 if it crashed elsewhere? You think someone would have noticed a huge burning pile of wreckage in the shape of a plane somewhere in DC.
As for the conspiracists, how can you take a person seriously who says this:
I'm not including my email or url because I don't know who else might be checking this site. Not to be to paranoid but somthing screwy is going on in this country and one does have to be very aware of their actions.
That was the end of a particularly good rant (posted 5 times for effect!) about how the US military have developed an illusion projector, so ppl only thought they saw a 757 fley into the building.
This was taken from: http://shock-awe.info/archive/000858.php (a site posted earlier).

Another example of the rationality of the conspiracists can be found in the reply to a person posting an eyewitness account of the event. The response:
Furthermore, that is the same lie Snopes told about the Pentagon, that something hit the ground.
...
No 757 Hit The Pentagon, You Idiot.
Riggghhtttt....the person is an Idiot, because they're spreading the 'same lies' as other eyewitness accounts. However, a conspiracist who wasn't there is in a far better position to know what happened. :rolleyes:

These things show the inherrent danger of the internet: It can be misused to prolifigate the lies, ridiculous theories and insane ramblings of mentally abnormal paranoid delusionals with way too much time on their hands.

You guys need to adjust your tinfoil hats...
Why is it that whenever someone points out that government agents are lying and hiding things, the tinfoil hat accusations begin?

I just watched the movie and I'm a little bit interested but theres some informations missing...

Of course there is. If they claimed to know exactly what happend, that would be reason enough to ignore them. The missing information is exactly what they want.

The conspiracy nut-jobs (I'm not showing any bias here am I? ;) ) have never explained what happened to the hi-jacked 757. They keep going on and on about how a crashed plane leaves evidence. Well, where's the evidence of the 757 if it crashed elsewhere? You think someone would have noticed a huge burning pile of wreckage in the shape of a plane somewhere in DC.


How the hell would they know? If I wanted to hide a plane and silence the passengers, I'd consider arranging a "water landing". But what the hell do I know? I just want to see the evidence. From what I gather, that's all these guys want.



As for the conspiracists, how can you take a person seriously who says this:

I'm not including my email or url because I don't know who else might be checking this site. Not to be to paranoid but somthing screwy is going on in this country and one does have to be very aware of their actions.


Oh I don't know. Considering that the FBI stops by (http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch03/mc0721a03.html) when you get "caught" reading subversive material (http://www.rense.com/general39/mass.htm), his concerns are legitimate. Albeit, he's actions are kind of silly. I'd be more worried about spam than government thugs over posting my e-mail, as if they can't figure out who posted the content.


That was the end of a particularly good rant (posted 5 times for effect!) about how the US military have developed an illusion projector, so ppl only thought they saw a 757 fley into the building.
This was taken from: http://shock-awe.info/archive/000858.php (a site posted earlier).

That's pretty far out, but don't assume everyone critical of the official story takes that stuff seriously. Anyone can knock down a strawman.



Another example of the rationality of the conspiracists can be found in the reply to a person posting an eyewitness account of the event. The response:

Riggghhtttt....the person is an Idiot, because they're spreading the 'same lies' as other eyewitness accounts. However, a conspiracist who wasn't there is in a far better position to know what happened. :rolleyes:

These things show the inherrent danger of the internet: It can be misused to prolifigate the lies, ridiculous theories and insane ramblings of mentally abnormal paranoid delusionals with way too much time on their hands.

Freedom of speech has always been dangerous. It carries the risk that bad ideas will be spread. Without it though, is the greater risk that good ideas will not. Freedom is not free, but it's worth the cost.

"Liberty carries with it the seeds of its own destruction." -- Baron de Montesquieu

I just have to go back to the basics. It's the concensus of this forum (the majority anyway) that Bush is dangerously stupid, yet he's able to pull off an international conspiracy theory in which at least 1, if not 4 huge airliners disappear along with all the passengers...

Wait minute. Back off. Who said Bush was responsible?

When the obviously dubbed videotape of Osama had him supposedly saying "We thought it would do some damage, but nothing as dramatic as this", it immediately occured to me that these were the thoughts of the American planners of the disaster, posted onto this fall guy.


See, they just wanted to scare us, and get the president extra support and power. They didn't really mean to kill all those people. Once the deed was done, however, it was too late to turn back.

Wait minute. Back off. Who said Bush was responsible?

If you would just read two threads down ... just /two/ ....

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7331438&postcount=55

Ya know, the pilot episode of X-Files or maybe even the Deep Throat episode had Scully saying your top line almost verbatim. ;)

I probably stole it from her.

Pithica, not a single orgininal thought since 1983™.