PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

On 2005-03-28 11:05, Spirit wrote:
Casper, I not asking you to convince me, I'm asking what it is that you're continually implying. It now seems to be that 9/11 was an insurance scam and the invasion of Afghanistan was because US banks were upset at losing their opium crop ?

Is that about right ?

Things usually happen because of a certain amount of different causes for them to happen.
What I'm pretty sure of is that never in the whole human history such amounts of money have been spent if not to make more money, and when this money goes in the pocket of those who financed Bush elections, this tradition is very hard to ignore....

Isn't that people in the same rank of those that knowing what Enron was going to face, speculated to get big money causing the ruin of the lives of so many small investers?

That is the real world mafia, and they never stopped in front of death and sorrow.

And I can't believe that the U.S. didn't have all the power to avoid 9/11, didn't have the strength of removing their former allied Saddam from his place with 1/1.000.000 of the money spent for the war.

And the golden rule: who gains?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: alfonso on 2005-03-28 11:25 ]</font>

Indeed... look at who is gaining right now.

Speculating about what happened on 9/11 is something you can do all day and not get anywhere.

It will only distract you from looking at what is happening now - American military and economic imperialism increasing. Whether they planned it or not, it's happening. Whether they killed their own people, or if their people were killed by a small terrorist organization doesn't matter. More people are dying NOW and 9/11 is no justification whatsoever for this.

If you support the war in Afghanistan, Iraq and God knows wherever is next, then you are no better than the Islamic fanatics or the amoral economists in Washington. You regard death and misery with casual indifference, and human suffering to be some kind of statistical triviality.

I certainly support the liberation of Afghanistan. Remember the Taliban ? Blowing up historical monuments, hosting terrorist training camps, banning music, movies and most books ? No education at all for females ?

Now there is a president elected by Afghanis and minimal - mainly European - military patrols.

Sounds fine to me.

C'mon Spirit. Who sponsored the Taliban to have food on the ground near that part of the USSR? Who paid them to fight communism?

Unolocal

On 2005-03-28 10:35, Casper wrote:
...
If the Boeing 757 did hit the Pentagon I expected to look a bit(just a bit) more like this--->

http://members.shaw.ca/freedomseven/business-jet.jpg
...

Casper, if YOU picture something coming in twice as fast as free fall with a sliding plane that even lost speed over a highway and finally hit that tiny wall, you just haven't got the competence dealing with all those 'facts' you introduce...

sorry, Tom

here's a funny movie about it(masters of terror)....

http://www.infowars.com/videos.html#MOT

"Casper, if YOU picture something coming in twice as fast as free fall with a sliding plane that even lost speed over a highway and finally hit that tiny wall, you just haven't got the competence dealing with all those 'facts' you introduce...

sorry, Tom
"

And how about your comment's on the facts!
That picture isn't part of those facts now is it?
Sorry for that poor picture, but i couldn't find some other.

You keep dodging the fact's.
Picking out this poor example from me is too easy. Please forgive me for beeing synical.
But I gladly want to know what remarks you have on all the other +- 50 points that are pointed out to you (all).









<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Casper on 2005-03-28 13:00 ]</font>

Plenty conspiracy about, i'm just tired of all the theorising

I know a solution! I'll avoid this thread

11/9/01 changed nothing of what i know of imperialism + terrorism.

the 'missing Pentagon plane' was one of your core arguments, the 'steel will hold' another one.
Obviously I watched the same architect interview as Spirit, which made complete sense to me and commented about the dynamics of falling objects in contrary to static loads.
The steel used in buildings is by no way an extraordinary solid material, btw

Another of your points is that mysterious 200 million 'investment' versus 7 billion insurance.
The insurance contract is certainly about the current 'value' of the complex including revenues from rent, installation and so on.
The 'investment' also includes (as a 'hidden fee') the responsibility of the owner for keeping the object in shape.
That simple.

As every coin has 2 sides there will always be pro and contra arguments.
I have a book from 1957 on my shelf, titled 'The exploration of Mars', written by top scientists of the time, Willy Ley and Werner von Braun. Lot's of prooven evidence for life on Mars in there (reads gorgeous), but also detailed calculations for journey fuel and even satellites and space shuttle previews.
The latter HAS happened, part one of the predictions failed.

That's why I won't step through your other 46 'facts'.
The main point is that you believe and search for evidence that 9/11 was a hired attack - and I don't. That government may be corrupt, violent or whatever - but which government isn't (or wasn't) at least to a degree ?

8-bit made some nice remarks about human nature. We are humans and we have to deal with imperfection.

cheers, Tom

On 2005-03-28 05:57, Casper wrote:
question of where flight 77 went.
The truth is , nobody knows!

So somebody arranged the secret disappearance of an entire Boeing 737 and over 60 people whilst simultaneously blowing an airplane sized hole in the Pentagon?

They should've called me. I'd have shown them how to kill two birds with one stone.

Given that we all saw two planes hit WTC1&2 and know another crashed in Pennsylvania, how does it serve your cause to persist with this ludicrous fairytale?

That's the question that I find most interesting.

"how does it serve your cause to persist with this ludicrous fairytale? "

I get 100000.99 dollar for each post !
I think you'd believe that right away.

Why oh why didn't i take the blue pill

On 2005-03-28 15:32, Casper wrote:
I think you'd believe that right away.

I don't believe anything without good evidence.

I think the answer to my question is that you oppose the USA and want to discredit it in any way possible.

I'm going to leave this thread now but I'd offer this advice at the risk of sounding patronising:
Choose your battles carefully.
There are plenty of genuine issues on which to base your opposition without resorting to fantasies which undermine your own credibility.

Good luck.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: doodyrh on 2005-03-28 15:45 ]</font>

I did never , ever , ever sad anything to discredit America. I love that country!
Only those who currently run that government do I resent.

But be my guest , vote for Patriot Act II!
You won't read it , they are counting on you not reading it. pff.

Well the truth hurts doesn't it?
Until the next Hegelian Principle

On 2005-03-28 11:32, dArKr3zIn wrote:

Speculating about what happened on 9/11 is something you can do all day and not get anywhere.

It will only distract you from looking at what is happening now - American military and economic imperialism increasing. Whether they planned it or not, it's happening. Whether they killed their own people, or if their people were killed by a small terrorist organization doesn't matter. More people are dying NOW and 9/11 is no justification whatsoever for this.

If you support the war in Afghanistan, Iraq and God knows wherever is next, then you are no better than the Islamic fanatics or the amoral economists in Washington. You regard death and misery with casual indifference, and human suffering to be some kind of statistical triviality.

dArKr3zIn - nigh on complete agreement. We need to start any normative discussion (discussion of the way things should be) from NOW. With all its fuck-ups. One can't be a good idealist unless one is to a certain extent a realist.

On the discussion of conspiracies, I think it odd that if Bush was in on 9/11 that he chose to be filmed reading a stupid story to 5 year-olds at the time of impact, and that he then spent hours looking utterly impotent. Not a good PR outcome from such a massive PR event.

On the physics side of things I'm also unconvinced. You can break steel with NO rise in temperature if you apply enough force. And the speed of the collapse appears due to the fact that the floors were supported by external steel braces. Push one floor down at the top and you push the braces out. Push the braces away at the top and the floors are no longer supported at all.

In general, I am sort of surprised that phrases like 'i'm not trying to convince' and 'opinions should all be respected' keep appearing here. Firstly, because (lets face it) we DO all want to convince people of our own outlooks (a desire which should always be tempered by an equal-and-opposite desire to be convinced by strong enough cases against - but often isn't).

Secondly, because we SHOULD all be trying to convince. Facts and arguments are (and should be treated as) normative - that is, they should be convincing without me being able to decide whether or not I want to be convinced. So any statement of fact, and any sound argument, just WILL be convincing (if one is convinced that it is a fact, or a sound argument ... that's the tricky bit here, right ?)

Not all opinions are born equal (e.g. the opinion that non-arians are inferior). I don't like the idea that I've got to respect everyone's opinions (BTW, not really talking about anyone here ...) ... sometimes people's opinions are just wrong ! Like the British and American politicians' opinion that Iraqis would welcome them with open arms (that was just crazy, and no rational person could possibly, in my view, have seriously considered it. But that means that Bush and Blair should not have been allowed to have it. Hence that they should be blamed for having it).

I guess maybe, though, such a forum is not the best environment for detailed debate.

my 2c

Will.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: mr swim on 2005-03-28 21:04 ]</font>

On 2005-03-28 12:30, Spirit wrote:
I certainly support the liberation of Afghanistan. Remember the Taliban ? Blowing up historical monuments, hosting terrorist training camps, banning music, movies and most books ? No education at all for females ?

Now there is a president elected by Afghanis and minimal - mainly European - military patrols.

Sounds fine to me.

The Taliban were by all accounts an ugly, ignorant and repressive lot, and I can't believe anyone has any regrets that they are no longer a serious force (although they do apparently still control some of the country, and are hence still banning people from listening to music and women from being people).

C'mon Spirit. Who sponsored the Taliban to have food on the ground near that part of the USSR? Who paid them to fight communism?

As we all know, it was the west, especially America.

But the fact that someone has done something with bad consequences in the past doesn't stop them doing things with good consequences in the future (whether by happy coincidence or design. Shame I can't ever expect the latter from we imperialist nations).

So if you think it IS good that the taliban have gone, then what the Americans have done in the past (indeed, even what their intentions were for the future) shouldn't immediately be relevant.

Of course if you think that the American presence is going to cause lots more misery and destruction for Afghanis (not unlikely ) then if you're thinking just about them, you've got to weigh this up against the horror of living under the Taliban. That's pretty tricky.

But (american gung-ho flippancy about collateral damage during the war exluded for now) the Afghani's must be better off being allowed to be educated, to vote, and to live how they want to.

I left unecessary collateral damage out because we should now be in a position to say that it was a good thing to overthrow the taliban, even though we should say that the way in which US and UK forces went about it ('daisy-cutters' and all that) was a bad thing.

That's given that the Afghani's really are more free without the taliban. They may not be. I'm not sure if any one of the warlords is really much better than any other, and internal fighting still continues apace. Karzai has no real authority outside of Kabul (I gather) hence the democratic rights of the majority of Afghanis is not really being enjoyed by them.

Still. I have NO sadness that the taliban are out of power.

_________________

mr swim's home

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: mr swim on 2005-03-28 21:06 ]</font>

watch the movie. the articles he references are stored and linked on his site if you really want to know a little more than you do. if you just want to take sides or think you know already even though there is WAY too much to sift through and i doubt if any of you really have studied this as much as you think you have. either way, it matters little what we think unless we really want to know the truth about things. then, the powers that be, that make things happen as they do in the world would be exposed and powerless and things would be a lot nicer(as people returned to their "normal" and "true" nature).

the logic of politics is always great in theory, but in reality, things rarely happen for the reasons stated or imagined. this can be called crank thinking, or calmly reflected on. i WILL NOT fight the government or the official position. fighting will get me nowhere but snuffed. the movie i referenced is fun because it references OFFICIAL pronouncements as they change and morph. they tell the truth although the details will likely die with ALL the participants, because there is no progress and the same rulers that have always existed with the same religion that has always existed still exist. do the sheep truly know the intent of the shepard?

even IF everything is as the government sez in regards to 911(the number to dial on american phones for emergency), the CAUSE and the RESPOSIBLE PARTY for the event will be hidden. your arguements are pointless. your scope(here's the cwa tie in, and yet here's the cwa difference ) is too limited.

watch the movie it's free and the guy's a crank(so he's fun to watch), but be sure and watch the WHOLE 2 hours! don't just sit there predetermined and say "this and this is false so i'm right and i don't have to watch it". when it's over, THEN you will have something to START discussing calmly and rationally. OF COURSE, some of the info in it is not so good, after all, the sources include fox, the AP, the BBC, the French News Agency and the white house(hey,i'm NOT being disrespectful. these guys(in the "white house") have something called "national security" which means that sometimes they must keep secrets and lie for the greater good. of course the word "nation" means "tribe" so "national security" literally means that in america, a land of many nations, that some guys are just looking out for their tribe....).

here's a funny movie about it(masters of terror)....

http://www.infowars.com/videos.html#MOT

Garyb have you seen the lecture of Mike Gave In November 2001 "THE TRUTH & LIES OF 9/11"

It's a tough one to watch but it clearly explanes a big part of what's going on.

It's 3 ours of lecture. If somebody knows a way for me to upload it somewere do tell me.
I'm happy to share it!


Casper

Spirit:

War plans are drawn up to attack virtually every country in a variety of scenarios.

Really? That is no less alarming.

Obviously Iraq & Afghanistan are going to be near the top. I imagine Iran, Syria, & North Korea are currently top of the pops.

Sure. This is already happening. A few days ago they told news "more and more foreign terrorists arrive into Iraq. They are coming from Iran and Syria".

So this is a clear entitlement to attack into those countries, insn't it?

<i>4) Accidentally on 9/11 five maneuvers were held at USA's eastern air space, in which fighting against hijacking was trained and radar harassing practiced </i>

Maybe, but what's your point ? If there was a grand conspiracy then wouldn't this be the last thing to practice ?

What's the point? Isn't obvious? Radars are disturbed so it's easier to tell stories about boeings' journeys.
And fighters are out of real usage. Although I agree it's pretty difficult, what the fighters could really do with passenger planes.

As for the later points dealing with engineering and physical aspects, its the Apollo nutters all over again. These are the same sort of weak-science arguments like the old "why is the flag flapping on the moon" rubbish.

Well, a child can tell those moon stories are rubbish, but what is your evidence against these theories?

And was the previous attempt to knock down a WTC tower also part of this conspiracy ?

Well, who said that REAL terror didn't exists? It does. Although right now the USA's liberalization and democratization is much more severe terror than terror by terrorists.

dArKr3zIn wrote:
American military and economic imperialism increasing. Whether they planned it or not, it's happening.

Exatcly!

And that was my point in starting this thread, not speculating who collapsed WTC and why.

Spoimala wrote: Although I agree it's pretty difficult, what the fighters could really do with passenger planes

It's common practice, that when VHF communication is lost with Ground Control for one or another reason and the ultimate backup system to establish contact with a large airplane fails, one or more fighters are sent out to go and have a look at the airplane. It is a matter of safety indeed: the crew could have lost sense of position or direction, in which case the fighters will lead the airplane to safe ground. When communication is lost with an airplane, it's mostly 'fingerproblems' (for example pilot forgot to switch to next frequency), sometimes technical failures. But in case of no cooperation of the crew, they theoretically will take the airplane down. Fortunately, it never got that far. worst thing it does is it scare's the sh!t out of the crew when they see the fighters, but after that it's another roadtrip flying in formation

at0m.