The Medusa Fora

You'll get no argument from me that 17 years after we were attacked by extremist dickheads we're left with more authoritarian governments, protracted and never-ending wars, hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, trillions of dollars spent, etc. The results of that attack are tragic. They were tragic the day it happened, and the aftermath continues to be tragic.

That doesn't change that "it's an inside job" is bullshit. It was a bunch of dedicated dickhead extremists determined to do the greatest harm they could. The plan worked better than they could have hoped for, both the tangible effects and the long term geopolitical and economic effects.

DzM wrote:You'll get no argument from me that 17 years after we were attacked by extremist dickheads we're left with more authoritarian governments, protracted and never-ending wars, hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, trillions of dollars spent, etc. The results of that attack are tragic. They were tragic the day it happened, and the aftermath continues to be tragic.

That doesn't change that "it's an inside job" is bullshit. It was a bunch of dedicated dickhead extremists determined to do the greatest harm they could. The plan worked better than they could have hoped for, both the tangible effects and the long term geopolitical and economic effects.

Okay, so you didn't bother to listen to the youtube video, or see any of the comments below it which add more to the conclusion that the official 9/11 story was a lie and the whole event was intended to justify starting a war to profit already rich corporations and families in collusion with the government and cause exactly the world situation that has resulted since then.

For starters, explain to me how the buildings collapsed in a way that only could have been by controlled demolition, how aluminum planes that can be dented by hitting birds could have caused steel frame structures to collapse like that, INCLUDING BUILDING 7 WHICH WAS NOT HIT BY A PLANE AT ALL. Explain how the Arab supposed pilots who flunked out of flight school could have maneuvered the planes with a precision that 25-year veteran pilots have said they couldn't possibly manage.

Here. Wikipedia, with links to source material. It's marginally better than the comments section of YouTube:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

This conversation is dead to me. Enjoy your Illuminati.

I read someone try to claim say that fires brought down Building 7. To debunk that, I found that "neither before nor since 9/11 have fires caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise — nor has any other natural event, with the exception of the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which toppled a 21-story office building.” So only with the help of an earthquake have fires been involved in toppling a steel-frame high rise building, and no doubt they didn't come down "controlled demolition"-style.

https://theantimedia.com/physicists-twi ... ition-911/

That link also ends with:

For example, if it’s crazy to question why media outlets reported on the collapse of WTC Building 7 before it even collapsed, then perhaps we should never question anything.

DzM wrote:Here. Wikipedia, with links to source material. It's marginally better than the comments section of YouTube:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

This conversation is dead to me. Enjoy your Illuminati.

So now you take the easy way out after accusing me of copping out with "bumper sticker" quotes that were nothing of the sort. Of course that Wikipedia section is going to be mixed with some "out-there" theories and heavily guarded with official-sounding rebuttals so that the sum total doesn't threaten the protected official story.

Anyway, that really should be: You Mr. Dzm, enjoy your Illuminati. They're obviously yours. No fucking way they're mine.

That site just states that what happened should not have happened like it happened because it never happened before. A tower collapsing because of fire (and a plane, one might add) ? Never happened before -> must be wrong. A building collapsing like an implosion but without explosive? Never happened before -> definitely wrong...

You can believe whatever you want, personally I believe that whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong.

left wrote:That site just states that what happened should not have happened like it happened because it never happened before. A tower collapsing because of fire (and a plane, one might add) ? Never happened before -> must be wrong. A building collapsing like an implosion but without explosive? Never happened before -> definitely wrong...

You can believe whatever you want, personally I believe that whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong.

These are impartial European physicists who have a better understanding of how these things happen than you or I, and like I mentioned before, the planes are made of aluminum that gets dented by birds in their path, so it's not possible that they would have made a dent in steel frame structures or caused a fire that was hot enough to melt them. Now I can repeat what you just said from my point of view. Believe whatever you want, personally I believe whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong. I don't think you quite understand that what you said right there can just as easily apply to the opposing point of view.

Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook said this not long before he suddenly died of a heart attack:

"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the devil only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US."

And this quote by the same deceased former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook has been all but scrubbed from the internet:

"Al Qaeda is not a terrorist organization. It is a group of CIA swindlers tied to massive arms and drug smuggling with their origin in the Mushahadeen and Bosnia."

leadshoes wrote:

left wrote:That site just states that what happened should not have happened like it happened because it never happened before. A tower collapsing because of fire (and a plane, one might add) ? Never happened before -> must be wrong. A building collapsing like an implosion but without explosive? Never happened before -> definitely wrong...

You can believe whatever you want, personally I believe that whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong.

These are impartial European physicists who have a better understanding of how these things happen than you or I, and like I mentioned before, the planes are made of aluminum that gets dented by birds in their path, so it's not possible that they would have made a dent in steel frame structures or caused a fire that was hot enough to melt them. Now I can repeat what you just said from my point of view. Believe whatever you want, personally I believe whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong. I don't think you quite understand that what you said right there can just as easily apply to the opposing point of view.

Nope. I accept that not everything that happened on that day has found a definitive explanation. Surely there was in some way some kind of twisted interests that wanted something like that to happen. What happened in the past rarely gets totally clarified.
But I think that being, like you are, completely convinced beyond any doubt that all this was a perfectly staged thing because of a need for war, that’s just trying to find the easy answer. That’s drawing a black/white conclusion. You just choose a line and stick with that, it’s clearly like a religious extremism to you, so any attempt at reasoning fails. Always repeating the same mantras is part of that.

For the record, I drive aluminium trains and, guess what? At 120mph they can easily smash whatever steel veichle is in front of them. Let alone birds. Food for thought?

left wrote:

leadshoes wrote:

left wrote:That site just states that what happened should not have happened like it happened because it never happened before. A tower collapsing because of fire (and a plane, one might add) ? Never happened before -> must be wrong. A building collapsing like an implosion but without explosive? Never happened before -> definitely wrong...

You can believe whatever you want, personally I believe that whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong.

These are impartial European physicists who have a better understanding of how these things happen than you or I, and like I mentioned before, the planes are made of aluminum that gets dented by birds in their path, so it's not possible that they would have made a dent in steel frame structures or caused a fire that was hot enough to melt them. Now I can repeat what you just said from my point of view. Believe whatever you want, personally I believe whoever comes to a black/white conclusion is wrong. I don't think you quite understand that what you said right there can just as easily apply to the opposing point of view.

Nope. I accept that not everything that happened on that day has found a definitive explanation. Surely there was in some way some kind of twisted interests that wanted something like that to happen. What happened in the past rarely gets totally clarified.
But I think that being, like you are, completely convinced beyond any doubt that all this was a perfectly staged thing because of a need for war, that’s just trying to find the easy answer. That’s drawing a black/white conclusion. You just choose a line and stick with that, it’s clearly like a religious extremism to you, so any attempt at reasoning fails. Always repeating the same mantras is part of that.

For the record, I drive aluminium trains and, guess what? At 120mph they can easily smash whatever steel veichle is in front of them. Let alone birds. Food for thought?

I'm going to disagree again. I think the easy answer will always be to believe the "official story" wholesale as told by the establishment media, which in this case is the "fact" that 9/11 was the result of Islamic terrorism and that it was the planes crashing into the buildings that caused them to come down in the way they did, etc... So to me, that's seeing things in black and white in this case. And I can't begin to know the details, but no, I don't believe that official story, and I know that there's more than enough evidence to doubt it and believe there were strong incentives to stage it in order to create a new version of the Cold War scenario, with a new monolithic enemy where none exists. And I wholeheartedly believe some advice I'd read, that in this world, if you want to get to the truth of things, you need to "follow the money." But it seems that would be difficult because the government has destroyed pre-9/11 stock trading evidence:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/unusual-t ... ions/19750

Btw do you think your aluminum trains could take down a steel-frame high rise in the way that those planes did? I believe you that trains can and will smash birds in many cases, since even a tin can could knock one cold with the right force, but I just read right now that they've started to use an improved aluminum foam for trains because of things like this: "Collisions with our feathered friends are relatively frequent and can pose real dangers to passengers. In 2013, a high-speed train en route to Beijing was forced to stop after a bird strike cracked the train’s exterior."

https://www.wired.com/2014/12/aluminum-foam-trains/

Anyway, I think this article about how the FBI often "heroically" disrupts "terror plots" is a good reminder of the lengths the government will go to:

https://theintercept.com/2015/01/16/lat ... kepticism/

And even though this episode of "The Power of Nightmares" skates around the issue of the actual 9/11 event itself, it does argue well for the reasons why these events would be manufactured or orchestrated:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD1BRE-DBsA

Another article on how the US conducts its "War on Terror":

https://www.thenation.com/article/deplo ... s-muslims/

And every now and then the truth slips out:

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRX8v_WjRGw

And apparently no one even flinched.

And why did the BBC report that WTC Building 7 had collapsed 23 minutes before it happened? The live report even shows it still standing in the background.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZqP8moItcc

Because they got it wrong? Quite believable, given the context.