The Great Conspiracy

I found this interesting video.



What are your thoughts?

 

I'm 28:16 into it already, I'm suspicious/skeptical of some parts.

I'm especially skeptical about programs that make references to "my book". It's a common-tactic, to make people believe "it's in a book, so it's got to be true" and taking advantage of people's lack of motiviation to actually chase up each claim and find things out for themselves.

And the "live interview" isn't live, it's obviously pre-recorded, reducing the show's producer's credibility already.

I also noticed the subtle emphasis on oil, and yet this is already refuted, the USA hasn't tried to exploit Iraq's oil.......yet.

"Who Benefits?"... the siren cry of the conspiracy theorist.

50 minutes into the presentation and he contradicts himself.

In the beginning, he claims Perl Harbour had a slight conspiracy theory element, but at 50:20 he metions it as if it were a "normal" disaster.

I've watched a few of these, and I just don't see the point anymore.

Unless some kind of smoking gun evidence to any of the claims these guys make is uncovered it is just a waste of time. These theories hold little or no power because so few people believe it.

Let's say that I watch it and become absolutely convinced it is a crazy conspiracy, so what? What is going to change? What can I do about it? ...

Anyway these theories are the enemy of common sense... They claim that the US gained something by doing this, but if you look at the  US's current economic position it is clear that they have loosed massively from the 911 attacks and the aftermath.

Not to mention the logistical difficulties of gaining entry to a burning building, setting up explosive charges that would otherwise take days or weeks and then escaping unnoticed.

There's ONLY ONE common conspiracy theory that I personally believe, and that is that the US shot down flight 93. And if you apply the common sense test to that scenario it ticks all the boxes... Could the US have shot down the plane? Yes. Was it the right decision? Yes. Could they have gotten away with it? Yes. Do they have a good reason to mislead the public? Yes.

I looked at it with open-mind. He raised some legitimate unanswered questions.

What surprised me is the fact that Mr. Bush lied to that kid. He never saw the first plane in tv. Bush lied there.

But after seeing it, I tend to agree with him somewhat. Mainly because of what I saw happen in the world after that event. What became of our freedoms and privacy. the aftermath gives support to what he says.



Could this be a modification of Operation Northwood, That remains to be seen.

Its interesting to note that the person talking is a professor and media critic from a respected University.



One question I want answered though is this: Ground Zero was a crime scene. Why was it not preserved until every piece of dust analyzed by the FBI and UN analists? Instead they shipped the steel to China to be melted and destroyed. The people who died there deserve that much, to let the experts investigate it thoroughly.

Shark_M wrote:

I looked at it with open-mind. He raised some legitimate unanswered questions.

What surprised me is the fact that Mr. Bush lied to that kid. He never saw the first plane in tv. Bush lied there.

Better counter-question:

Was there even a TV turned on outside the classroom?

£50 says Pacelvi replies to this thread with a rebuttal.

UnoriginalGuy wrote:



I've watched a few of these, and I just don't see the point anymore.

Unless some kind of smoking gun evidence to any of the claims these guys make is uncovered it is just a waste of time. These theories hold little or no power because so few people believe it.

Let's say that I watch it and become absolutely convinced it is a crazy conspiracy, so what? What is going to change? What can I do about it? ...

Anyway these theories are the enemy of common sense... They claim that the US gained something by doing this, but if you look at the  US's current economic position it is clear that they have loosed massively from the 911 attacks and the aftermath.

Not to mention the logistical difficulties of gaining entry to a burning building, setting up explosive charges that would otherwise take days or weeks and then escaping unnoticed.

But those individuals are the enemy within. They used the US as a means to get ritcher. They dont care about America, they care about their oil companies and their pockets. Did they get ritcher? Yes



Secondly, there is another video called Loose change 2 see it on google. It shows physics -supported evidence that the WTCs were rigged by explosives and they contrast them to the B-52 that hit the state empire building and never took it down.

So there are too many unanswered questions, and the people deserve to know an answer to these questions. The official theory that the government adobted never explains anything.



On what you can do about it. At least know in your heart of hearts that this happened and if all of us know these people, if they have any shame, would know they are exposed and they would stop hurting America and the free world. People need to know the truth. People deserve to know the truth. People have to know the truth inorder to make informed decisions as to who to elect next, and who to impeach and prosecute.

After seeing this , I keep thinking, America has been hijaked by a bunch of cowboys who wish our economy harm and our librities to be dissolved.

W3bbo wrote:



Shark_M wrote: I looked at it with open-mind. He raised some legitimate unanswered questions. What surprised me is the fact that Mr. Bush lied to that kid. He never saw the first plane in tv. Bush lied there.

Better counter-question:

Was there even a TV turned on outside the classroom?

£50 says Pacelvi replies to this thread with a rebuttal.

yea, There was not. The official story does not make any scence.



But what if we know what really happened. What if we know that its a modification of operation northwood. What would the people do?

These people turned this country into a gestapo state, a police state. They have positions of power , the average citizen has no power at all. So what now?

It was interesting to note the Hiter-Bush comparison he makes or hints at. Hitler used patriotism in a clever way, he turned one german against the others, He massed the germans against the Jews and that is how he drove his agenda.

Now just replace Jews with arabs or muslms. Do you see a pattern?

If it is as bad as you say in America today, why did you guys re-elect Bush in 2004?

UnoriginalGuy wrote:

If it is as bad as you say in America today, why did you guys re-elect Bush in 2004?

I never did

Secondly, Bush was appointed the first time, what makes you think he was re-elected the second time?

Mind bogglingly inane.

I was working as contractor for American Airlines on 9/11 at their flight operations and training center. All of the dispatchers worked on the floor below me, and the "situation room" was down the hall. The software I was working on showed real-time FAA flight information based on the latest radar track and transponder for all the flights and information that didn't have an update would blink on the screen (alerting the operator that the information wasn't current). The image of no flights in the air and the four blinking icons next to those flights is seared into my head.

It's weird, because I was listening to a CD on my way to work that morning, so I didn't know anything was happening until I got to work and saw security was beefed up. When I walked into the building, there were people crying in the lobby. The training center was on the first floor of the building, and flight attendants and pilots were there just in tears... That is when I first realized something terrible had happened...

The following weeks, a team of volunteers would come in and use the cubicles next to mine (starting around 5:00) making phone calls to families of the victims to help in any way possible, even if it was just a person to talk to. Scraps of conversation that I overheard are burned into my head.

The fact that the conspiracy nuts seem to have any credibility pisses me off to no end.

Here's the thing. If you believe this conspirancy nonsense, what did the US gain from invading Afghanistan and Iraq? Tell me, how much oil does the US get from those two contries (then and now). If not for the oil, then what other reason is there? Don't you think that if the cause were oil, that we'd be better suited making Venezuala the target? They are much closer, and we aren't exactly buddies with them.

Okay, next question... how many hijacked airlines had been used as "missiles" before 9-11? Before 9-11, if your plane was hijacked, the strategy was to let the terrorists land the plane, and make their demands and the chances of survival were much greater. I mean, that was always the case before 9-11. So, why is it so hard to believe that on 9-11 people assumed it was some terrorist organization that would make some demands and land the airplanes? Until the first WTC tower was struck, I don't think anyone realized this was different, and even then, nobody really knew what the deal was until the second plane hit.

Now then, all you Iraqi war detractors... Do this for me. Assuming you keep in mind that post-9-11 we aren't going to take threats lightly. Go and Google the name "Salman Pak" and tell me if it makes any more sense to you.

Sheesh, this stuff pisses me off so much.

Antitorgo wrote:

Here's the thing. If you believe this conspirancy nonsense, what did the US gain from invading Afghanistan and Iraq?

What does Iraq have to do with 911? And for that matter what did Afghanistan? The US didn't *do* anything, like five UK soldiers died there in the past couple of weeks, so clearly the US bombing the heck out of the place didn't do much at all.

And the fact that people coming up with alternate theories "pisses you off" isn't their fault, its your issue. Deal with it.

Antitorgo wrote:

Now then, all you Iraqi war detractors... Do this for me. Assuming you keep in mind that post-9-11 we aren't going to take threats lightly. Go and Google the name "Salman Pak" and tell me if it makes any more sense to you.

Salman Park, the burial grounds of one of the Prophet Muhammad's friends attacked by sectarian forces a few years ago.

EDIT: Ohhh... Salman Pak, this looks interesting, I'll read into it.

EDIT2: The Senate Select Committee concluded the Salman Pak Facility had zilch to do with terrorism back in 2005.

W3bbo wrote:


EDIT: Ohhh... Salman Pak, this looks interesting, I'll read into it.

EDIT2: The Senate Select Committee concluded the Salman Pak Facility had zilch to do with terrorism back in 2005.

I see, so the 9-11 comission report was inaccurate, but the Senate Select Committee is?

Antitorgo wrote:

Here's the thing. If you believe this conspirancy nonsense, what did the US gain from invading Afghanistan and Iraq? Tell me, how much oil does the US get from those two contries (then and now). If not for the oil, then what other reason is there? Don't you think that if the cause were oil, that we'd be better suited making Venezuala the target? They are much closer, and we aren't exactly buddies with them.

The cause is oil because its feasable to obtain it from the Middle east. But it much more than that. Its about global domination, and about destroying the average citizen's libreties and freedoms.

Dont you see , to say that a bunch of arabs in some cave in Afghanistan did this, is like saying a child can build a rocket and send it to space.

And who knows, maybe Venezuala's turn is comming. Time will tell.

Antitorgo wrote:

Okay, next question... how many hijacked airlines had been used as "missiles" before 9-11? Before 9-11, if your plane was hijacked, the strategy was to let the terrorists land the plane, and make their demands and the chances of survival were much greater. I mean, that was always the case before 9-11. So, why is it so hard to believe that on 9-11 people assumed it was some terrorist organization that would make some demands and land the airplanes? Until the first WTC tower was struck, I don't think anyone realized this was different, and even then, nobody really knew what the deal was until the second plane hit.

Now then, all you Iraqi war detractors... Do this for me. Assuming you keep in mind that post-9-11 we aren't going to take threats lightly. Go and Google the name "Salman Pak" and tell me if it makes any more sense to you.

Sheesh, this stuff pisses me off so much.

Oh an air plane was remotely controled and crashed in a test.  Operation Northwood was scripted to use Air planes as drones.

So why cant this be a drone? The planes did not look like normal AA planes. See loose change video on google.

You should be pissed off that the government did not answer many questions. Too many things were left unanswered, yet your willing to acceptthe official story as true?

That day was a terrible day for all. But the truth must come out. People have to know what really happened. I refuse to beleive that a bunch of arabs in a cave in Afghanistan would do this. These were amatures and they are supposed to have hit 75% of their targets.

Secondly the pentagon was attacked by missile, not air plane. So there is a cover up. That much is provable. But why the coverup?



I suggest you see the loose change video. It will show you some part of the truth. Also read Rebuilding America's Defences, and on page 51 it states : "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." -Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, and others. (et. al.).


Was the process of transformation (the so called war on terror) said to take some time? Use your mind to figure it out.

So 911 was a new pearl harbor?! Evidence would suggest so!


my 2 cents

Antitorgo wrote:

Mind bogglingly inane.

I was working as contractor for American Airlines on 9/11 at their flight operations and training center. All of the dispatchers worked on the floor below me, and the "situation room" was down the hall. The software I was working on showed real-time FAA flight information based on the latest radar track and transponder for all the flights and information that didn't have an update would blink on the screen (alerting the operator that the information wasn't current). The image of no flights in the air and the four blinking icons next to those flights is seared into my head.

It's weird, because I was listening to a CD on my way to work that morning, so I didn't know anything was happening until I got to work and saw security was beefed up. When I walked into the building, there were people crying in the lobby. The training center was on the first floor of the building, and flight attendants and pilots were there just in tears... That is when I first realized something terrible had happened...

The following weeks, a team of volunteers would come in and use the cubicles next to mine (starting around 5:00) making phone calls to families of the victims to help in any way possible, even if it was just a person to talk to. Scraps of conversation that I overheard are burned into my head.

That sucks.  Also, it says nothing to address the the credibility of the video.

antigorgo wrote:

The fact that the conspiracy nuts seem to have any credibility pisses me off to no end.

Yeah, it is pretty annoying, but when we aren't given any information and investigative media is openly scorned by the people in charge the only people left to tell us what happened are the fringe elements.

antigorgo wrote:

Here's the thing. If you believe this conspirancy nonsense, what did the US gain from invading Afghanistan

Al Quaeda was loosely associated with the taliban.

antigorgo wrote:

 
and Iraq?

1) Saddam attempted to assasinate Bush Sr.
2) Saddam was openly flauting the rules of the UN.
3) Saddam was a terribly guy and from eyewitness accounts, ate babies and had particularly bad body odor.
4) There is a crapload of oil under Iraq.

antigorgo wrote:

Tell me, how much oil does the US get from those two contries (then and now).

Not much.  But, Halliburton siphoned off somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 billion dollars in no-bid contracts from the US.  You mistakenly believe that this travesty is somehow helping the USA.  It is only helping a certain group of people who tend to avoid talking to the press (see above).

Remember this the next time you fret over welfare cheats.

antigorgo wrote:

If not for the oil, then what other reason is there?
Don't you think that if the cause were oil, that we'd be better suited making Venezuala the target? They are much closer, and we aren't exactly buddies with them.

Sure, but then every redneck and his cousin/sister/wife would understand what was going on.  This way, it's draped in "killin' dem towelheads for killin' all dem jews in NYC".

antigorgo wrote:

Okay, next question... how many hijacked airlines had been used as "missiles" before 9-11? Before 9-11, if your plane was hijacked, the strategy was to let the terrorists land the plane, and make their demands and the chances of survival were much greater. I mean, that was always the case before 9-11. So, why is it so hard to believe that on 9-11 people assumed it was some terrorist organization that would make some demands and land the airplanes? Until the first WTC tower was struck, I don't think anyone realized this was different, and even then, nobody really knew what the deal was until the second plane hit.

OK, so your point is that since the people in charge of the airlines were clueless.  Sure, I'll give you that. 

Again, it's just a conspiracy theory, but if you'd like to think it through a bit, do you think that if it were true, anyone would phone up some contractor at some random air field and let him know?

antigorgo wrote:

Now then, all you Iraqi war detractors... Do this for me. Assuming you keep in mind that post-9-11 we aren't going to take threats lightly. Go and Google the name "Salman Pak" and tell me if it makes any more sense to you.

I did.  It's been dismissed by anyone who came in contact with the witnesses.

antigorgo wrote:

Sheesh, this stuff pisses me off so much.

Me too.  I'm pretty sure it isn't some grand conspiracy, but I'm also pretty sure that our dipstick-in-chief decided to take advantage of the situation.  He has a cabinet full of people who were only too happy to profit from the situation.

Antitorgo wrote:



W3bbo wrote:  EDIT: Ohhh... Salman Pak, this looks interesting, I'll read into it. EDIT2: The Senate Select Committee concluded the Salman Pak Facility had zilch to do with terrorism back in 2005.

I see, so the 9-11 comission report was inaccurate, but the Senate Select Committee is?

All you are doing is countering one nutcase conspiracy theory with another....