The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll(911) - NY Magazine

[hagbard]

Good overview read on the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. I'm a subscriber to 3(c) with a touch of Mossad foreknowledge with resulting knowledge by the Bush Administration.

March 27, 2006 issue of New York Magazine (9 pages):

http://newyorkmetro.com/news/features/16464/index.html

[will1087]

cool read.

[Crotchety Old Man]

That's a pretty level-headed overview of the "conspiracy" theories.

[FastFokker]

That's a pretty level-headed overview of the "conspiracy" theories.OooooOooo! This sounds good, I'll be reading it tonight.

[hagbard]

Wow, only three people read this?

[xKagex]

I'm a MIHOP (made it happen) believer, although I believe there's a lot more to it than "the american government". The fact that the world's elite are obsessed with the occult (the twin towers and the 9/11 date are more examples of this occultist obsession), means that it's yet another move towards a global government. I guess you can think of this as PNAC, Project for the New American Century. http://www.newamericancentury.org/

Hopefully we can throw some wrenches into the machine and at the very least slow them down.

But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They needed only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely sooner or later it must occur to them to do it? - George Orwell

[poedua]

I'm a MIHOP (made it happen) believer, although I believe there's a lot more to it than "the american government". The fact that the world's elite are obsessed with the occult (the twin towers and the 9/11 date are more examples of this occultist obsession), means that it's yet another move towards a global government. I guess you can think of this as PNAC, Project for the New American Century. http://www.newamericancentury.org/

Hopefully we can throw some wrenches into the machine and at the very least slow them down.

But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They needed only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely sooner or later it must occur to them to do it? - George Orwell

Good quote...here's one from a bumper sticker i saw...

" The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is working."


...which gets to the heart of all these conspiracy theories. They all suffer from the fallacy ad ignorantiam - or arguing from ignorance. This fallacy occurs when conspiracists claim their theory is true simply because it can't be refuted. Trouble is, a lack of arguments against their claims is certainly no support for the them : the burden of proof is always upon the conspiracists making the claims as to the "real truth " behind 9/11.

[xKagex]

Good quote...here's one from a bumper sticker i saw...

" The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is working."


...which gets to the heart of all these conspiracy theories. They all suffer from the fallacy ad ignorantiam - or arguing from ignorance. This fallacy occurs when conspiracists claim their theory is true simply because it can't be refuted. Trouble is, a lack of arguments against their claims is certainly no support for the them : the burden of proof is always upon the conspiracists making the claims as to the "real truth " behind 9/11.

You're entitled to your opinions, whatever those might be (I guess we'll all keep guessing). Personally, I don't much care about where the burden of proof lies. I think the mountains of evidence against the official story should be enough for anyone to do their own research and come to much the same conclusion as the rest of us "conspiracy theorists".

I don't have the time or energy to convince people that I'm right, I just know I'll do whatever it takes to protect myself and my family from tyranny. I actually do love freedom, not this farce where we've done nothing but give up freedoms for the sake of so-called security.

Come on Poedua, tell us what you really think, we'd all like to know.

[poedua]

You're entitled to your opinions, whatever those might be (I guess we'll all keep guessing). Personally, I don't much care about where the burden of proof lies. I think the mountains of evidence against the official story should be enough for anyone to do their own research and come to much the same conclusion as the rest of us "conspiracy theorists".

My conclusion. I know of no evidence to even remotely suggest a conspiracy theory...if you have some...give me the Top 10 pieces of evidence that prove it.


There's no evidence to support any conspiracy whatsoever - that's the point. Not to mention any "alleged " conspiracy would have to of involved - either directly to cover it up , or to be stymied by those doing the cover-up - a conspiracy touching on the active investigation inolving a few thousand people .

Thousands from of conspirators from ...

- the State department,
-the defense department -
- the CIA,
- the FBI,
- the FAA,
- the NTSB,
- the NYPD,
- NYTFD,
- the NY Port Authority,
- the US Air Force,
- US Special Forces,
- airlines and their staff,
- WTC staff ,
- countless salvage clean-up companies
- and on and on and on .

Suffice it to say, paranoid conspiracy theories are the defining example of irrational thinking IMO.

I don't have the time or energy to convince people that I'm right, I just know I'll do whatever it takes to protect myself and my family from tyranny.

Protect my family from tyranny ? You read too many comic books IMO. Ease up on the paranoia ....the world isn't out to GET YOU....really ! :)

Keep it simple. Pay the mortgage, and provide your family with good health and a good education ....there really isn't a lot of time left to "protect them from tryranny " ...leave the 'tyranny fighting " to all those sceret agents / special forces / super heroes out there :)


Come on Poedua, tell us what you really think, we'd all like to know.

Simple some nut jobs exploited the lax US airport security ( and rules on flight training ) and flew planes into the WTC and the Pentagon.

Now you tell me...one question - i thought palnes brorught the WTCs down...what do you think brought them down ?

[asim99]

I don't have the time or energy to convince people that I'm right, I just know I'll do whatever it takes to protect myself and my family from tyranny. I actually do love freedom, not this farce where we've done nothing but give up freedoms for the sake of so-called security.
amen to that, brother!

[poedua]

amen to that, brother!

How's life under the porch ? :)

[xKagex]

Simple some nut jobs exploited the lax US airport security ( and rules on flight training ) and flew planes into the WTC and the Pentagon.

don't forget building 7.. oh wait, that was never hit by a plane.

Anyway, some things for people to research, I guess:

1. Air force stand-down
The FAA, NORAD and the military have cooperative procedures by which fighter jets intercept commercial aircraft under emergency conditions. These procedures were not followed.

2. Bush's complicit behaviour
"My cell phone rang as President Bush's motorcade coursed toward Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Fla. A colleague reported that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center in New York. No further information.

He then goes on to read stories to children (endangering their lives, if the country was really being attacked) for another 25 minutes.

3. The fictitious Hijackers
If 19 Arabs hijacked the planes, why are there no Arabic names on any of the passenger lists? If they used non-Arabic aliases, which of the "innocents" on the lists are alleged to be the hijackers?

If they are alleged to have been using non-Arabic aliases (19 obviously Arabic men got on board using non-Arabic ID, with 100% success rate?), why did the FBI claim that they were traced through the use of credit cards to buy tickets in their own names?

4. No evidence against Bin Laden
Why is it that the US government doesn't feel confident enough of it's case against Bin laden to lay any formal charges, but keeps "finding" convenient video "confession" tapes?

"I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation," said the statement, broadcast by Qatar's Al-Jazeera satellite channel.

5. Insider Trading reveals foreknowledge
In the first few hours after the attacks, it was reported that investigators were already looking into huge volumes of insider trading on airline stocks in the weeks leading up to the attacks.

6. Pentagon crash
It is alleged that that American Airlines 77 (a hijacked Boeing 757) crashed into the Pentagon. A Boeing 757 is a very large aircraft with a wingspan of 125 ft and a length of 155 ft. So how did it make an initial hole 12 ft wide, collapsing only about a 35 ft depth of the outer ring of the building - and not leave any wreckage outside?

7. If the attack on Afghanistan was retaliation, why was it planned months earlier?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1550366.stm

8. US and Bin Laden co-operate behind the scenes
An article in the French daily Le Figaro confirms that Osama bin Laden underwent surgery in an American Hospital in Dubai in July.

During his stay in the hospital, he met with a CIA official. While on the World's "most wanted list", no attempt was made to arrest him during his two week stay in the hospital, shedding doubt on the Administration's resolve to track down Osama bin Laden.


9. Suspicious collapse of the WTC towers
How did the WTC collapse? Why no serious inquiry? Why was the debris rushed away for recycling before any examination could be held?

Steel melts at 1539 degrees. Jet fuel (kerosene) burns at 800 degrees.

Probably hundreds of articles related to the actual physics of the collapse, and how it couldn't have happened simply by jet fuel.

10. Hands off Bin Laden
Why were the FBI told to not investigate the Bin Laden family links in the US?

11. Not so surprising
In 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved a CIA plan to commit terrorist acts against the U.S. and frame Cuba.

I have the de-classified document in front of me and they actually discuss using a hijacked plane and/or other terror attacks.

12. Who funded and created Al Queda?
13. Who created civil war in Afghanistan?
14. Why have moves towards an independant inquiry into 9/11 been resisted by the President/Vice President?



Your arguments that too many people would have had to be involved are nonsense. There were war-games happening on 9/11 and nobody had any idea that anything was wrong until planes started hitting buildings. These organizations are so compartmentalized that often people have no idea why they're doing what they're doing, and can't really see the result of their 'handiwork' until they can see the big picture.

[will1087]

stuff..

dude, poedua is just gonna ask more questions... the guy NEVER has a straight answer - dont even bother.

[hagbard]

dude, poedua is just gonna ask more questions... the guy NEVER has a straight answer - dont even bother.

The way to deal with him is to add him to your ignore list.

[FastFokker]

Edit: Made a thread about this. Click here to be re-directed! (http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=269769)



It's Charlie Sheen going public about his (and most others) questions regarding the 9/11 Government coverup and was broadcasted by ShowBiz tonight (covered twice due to the huge interest):

Low Quality Streaming video:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/240306alexvideo.htm
High Quality (Windows Media):
http://www.infowarsmedia.com/video/news_clips/september_11/showbiz_tonight_alex_032306.wmv
High Quality Torrent version:
http://www.********.org/tor/261551



During the interview of Alex Jones, he says to google "Operation Northwoods", so here it is:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=operation+northwoods&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

And a simplified version of "Operation Northwoods" from Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Here's an original article from PrisonPlanet:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/240306challengeme.htm

[asim99]

dude, poedua is just gonna ask more questions... the guy NEVER has a straight answer - dont even bother.
ever heard of cyber stalkers?

[BigBadBoo]

Keep it simple. Pay the mortgage, and provide your family with good health and a good education ....there really isn't a lot of time left to "protect them from tryranny " ...leave the 'tyranny fighting " to all those sceret agents / special forces / super heroes out there :)



LOL! Ya you do that. Just don't change your mind when your wife goes to work in the morning, and then you find out her building was blown up by 'terrorists'. Keep paying your taxes dude.

[xKagex]

The way to deal with him is to add him to your ignore list.

I don't believe in ignore lists. I would be a hypocrite if I said I believed in the freedom of speech and then wouldn't be willing to listen to people who have a different opinion.
.

[poedua]

1. Air force stand-down
The FAA, NORAD These procedures were not followed.

Nice list. Guess i asked for it . :)

Try this - as it may help this debate. Cite the proof / evidence you have and once you cite it..... draw the logical conclusion that can be drawn from it - that is a proper form of argument. Premise ...evidence ..logical conclusion.

I find this list of "alleged "evidence that follows falls into a classic "appeal to ignorance " line of fallacious reasoning. Namely - when conspiracists like you and others claim that your position on 9/11 is true simply because it cannot be refuted. To suggest a lack of arguments against a position is support for the position - well, that's fallacious reasoning. Again, when you use this "ignorance " approach, the burden of proof is always upon the person making the claim.

#1 is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. You claim NORAD and the FAA were part of this monolithic conspiracy.

Procedures weren't followed. Fine. That is your evidence. can you say "why" they weren't followed. What do you conclude by this claim - what was the reason they weren't followed ? Link ? What's your conclusion.

2. Bush's complicit behaviour
"My cell phone rang as President Bush's motorcade coursed toward Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Fla. A colleague reported that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center in New York. No further information.

And this alleged quote is from which person - "my cell phone " ? link ? And again, this is proof of what exactly ? Again, - you cite some "alleged " evidence and then forget to provide a statement that it is evidence of "what "- what conclusion does it support ?

He then goes on to read stories to children (endangering their lives, if the country was really being attacked) for another 25 minutes..


This proves what exactly ? If he left immediatley, there is no conspiracy ? You can be tardy and leave the country open to attack and not be part of a conspiracy. That's illogical IMO.

3. The fictitious Hijackers
If 19 Arabs hijacked the planes, why are there no Arabic names on any of the passenger lists? If they used non-Arabic aliases, which of the "innocents" on the lists are alleged to be the hijackers?


Again another alleged claim of evidence What is your conclusion ? Let's go with your thought. Assume there were no Arab hi-jackers. 19 Arab hijackers did not fly planes in to the WTC - fine. This obviously supports some theory you have. Is this your conclusion ...you ask a a lot of "why's" and don't provide conclusions to answer them. Whht is your theory ?.......

- there were no hi-jackers on the civilian planes that hit the WTC ?
- civilian planes did or didn't hit the WTC ?
- pilots flew the planes into the WTC ?
- some "other "planes were flown by pilots in to the WTC ?
- some "other "planes were flown "remote control "in to the WTC ?


4. No evidence against Bin Laden
Why is it that the US government doesn't feel confident enough of it's case against Bin laden to lay any formal charges, but keeps "finding" convenient video "confession" tapes?

Some bin laden tapes were sent to al Jeezera...and al Jeezera is one of the most credible news outlets in the world - as we all know.

How do you know there is no "evidence " ?

It appears your reasoning is unless we can prove that the Bin Laden is the 9/11 mastermind , we must conclude that Bin Laden is not the 9/11 mastermind - that's illogical IMO.....it's like saying there can't be life on other planets because no one can prove there is.

"I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation," said the statement, broadcast by Qatar's Al-Jazeera satellite channel.

Another quote ? Link ?

5. Insider Trading reveals foreknowledge
In the first few hours after the attacks, it was reported that investigators were already looking into huge volumes of insider trading on airline stocks in the weeks leading up to the attacks

High volume trading ? Sorry, on it's own it proves nothing.

6. Pentagon crash
It is alleged that that American Airlines 77 (a hijacked Boeing 757) crashed into the Pentagon. A Boeing 757 is a very large aircraft with a wingspan of 125 ft and a length of 155 ft. So how did it make an initial hole 12 ft wide, collapsing only about a 35 ft depth of the outer ring of the building - and not leave any wreckage outside?

What size hole does a 757 leave...dimensions ? If your claim is a 757 didn't do it. Let's say you're right. ...what did it then ?

Again, your doing it again - you cite some "alleged " evidence and forget to provide a statement that it is evidence of "what "- what conclusion does it support ? The burden of proof is always upon the person making the claim - in this case to refute the government. A 12' and 35 ' footprint is evidence of what ?


7. If the attack on Afghanistan was retaliation, why was it planned months earlier?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1550366.stm

So, what you're saying is that 9/11 then simply becamae a convenient excuse for prior plans they had made, And why had they made plans ? Did bin Laden atack US interests before 9/11 and did the Taliban ever provide refuge to al quada / terrorists before 9/11 ?

8. During his stay in the hospital, he met with a CIA official. While on the World's "most wanted list", no attempt was made to arrest him during his two week stay in the hospital, shedding doubt on the Administration's resolve to track down Osama bin Laden.


Link ? And this means what - what is your conclusion ?


9. Suspicious collapse of the WTC towers
How did the WTC collapse?

2 planes hit it


Why no serious inquiry?

it's called death

Why was the debris rushed away for recycling before any examination could be held?

Link ? Tell us why then. What is your conclusion as to why ?

Steel melts at 1539 degrees. Jet fuel (kerosene) burns at 800 degrees.

"Melting" steel isn't required for a failuire in structural integrity. Link ?

Probably hundreds of articles related to the actual physics of the collapse, and how it couldn't have happened simply by jet fuel.


Hundreds eh ?

Then it wasn't just jet fuel alone then was it. Tell me, how many have there been of ANY articles that support the claim that the was collapse based on 2 planes hitting ?

And more to the point. What do you think brought the towers down and based on what evidence ? 3 choices really. 1. planes did it. 2. naturally occuring structural failure 3. demolition/ bombs.

Bombs eh ? Lets' see, Bush suggested they fly 2 planes in to the WTC, and while the buildings were burning wait till the entire nation had an hour to train every media camera that could be found in NYC on the WTC just before detonating them to fall - Bush wanted to make sure there was ample video evidence of the bombing and audio evidence of the bombs going off ( via fire and police and media channels ) and ( by merans of video ) ample evidence ( due to physics ) to refute a plane being the cause.

10. Hands off Bin Laden
Why were the FBI told to not investigate the Bin Laden family links in the US?

Links ? Go ahead. Tell us .

11. Not so surprising
In 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved a CIA plan to commit terrorist acts against the U.S. and frame Cuba.

Link ? Which means what ? The CIA targets foreign countries ?

I have the de-classified document in front of me and they actually discuss using a hijacked plane and/or other terror attacks.


From where ?

12. Who funded and created Al Queda?.

Tell us . What is your point ?

13. Who created civil war in Afghanistan?
Since the late 70's there has been a civil war - the Afghans.


Your arguments that too many people would have had to be involved are nonsense.

No, involved and thwarted ( of those not involved ) from doing a proper investigation. It's perfectly logical.

What's nonsense is the paranoia that lies behind all these stupid conspiracy theories. This rampant and obssesive paranoia that here is some sinister hidden monolithic big brother marching to some diabolical hidden agenda - these dark forces and secret cabals / societies pulling all the strings from behind the scenes. Big brother is empowered with some omnipotent power that allows them to employ all these hidden forces at will - and without detection mind you - simply to fool us all to the truth.

Want to see a classic paranoia conspiracy culture in action ? Look at the JFK assassination . Guess who your conspiracy friends think killed JFK.......

-LBJ Conspiracy
-Military-Industrial Complex Conspiracy
-CIA Conspiracy
-Organized Crime Conspiracy
-Oil Industry Conspiracy
-Anti-Castro Cuban Conspiracy
-Cuban Conspiracy
-Soviet Hard-liners Conspiracy
-Khrushchev Conspiracy
-Federal Reserve Conspiracy
-Freemason Conspiracy
-Onassis Conspiracy
-Corsican Mafia Conspiracy
-Israeli Conspiracy
-President Diem Conspiracy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennedy_assassination_theories


...speaks for itself IMO

[poedua]

I don't believe in ignore lists. I would be a hypocrite if I said I believed in the freedom of speech and then wouldn't be willing to listen to people who have a different opinion.
.

Sadly, others - i.e hagbard ( I think he is up to at least 10 people on his ignore list...and i think that speaks for itself IMO ) - don't share your view.

That said. xKagex...I have a renewed respect for you. I don't have ignore lists either. Don't believe in them in any way shape or form . It is a matter of hypocrisy...on freedom of expression and open and vigourous - and assertive - debate. You have to " walk the talk " as it were.

While it seems you and i disagree on many things , at least you have the guts to defend your position ins a debate, answer questions and "dish it out " too . I respect that. For that, you should be commended.

If this 9/11 debate continues, i suspect it may be an "assertive "one on my part ....nonetheless, look forward to your continued input. :)

[poedua]

LOL! Ya you do that. Just don't change your mind when your wife goes to work in the morning, and then you find out her building was blown up by 'terrorists'. Keep paying your taxes dude.

I don't beleive in leading a life based on paranoia. :)

[masterhapposai]

Good quote...here's one from a bumper sticker i saw...

" The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is working."


...which gets to the heart of all these conspiracy theories. They all suffer from the fallacy ad ignorantiam - or arguing from ignorance. This fallacy occurs when conspiracists claim their theory is true simply because it can't be refuted. Trouble is, a lack of arguments against their claims is certainly no support for the them : the burden of proof is always upon the conspiracists making the claims as to the "real truth " behind 9/11.

Well then, take this into account :

When the twin towers went down, I said "watch, iraq is going to be attacked".

And almost got into a fist fight with FRIENDS. They screamed that I was implying this was all a sham, because attacking Iraq would prove 100% 9/11 was manipulated/caused by the U.S government(that was their conclusion, not mine btw, I only said the words of iraq being attacked next).

Now, these same people claimed later Iraq had everything to do with 9/11 just like Bush did. Then all of a sudden claimed nothing had to do with anything, and I was crazy because saddam gassed people and that was the reason to attack.


So, wtf, which side is the crazy one? I think the followers are just as insane if not worse than the most hardcore conspiracy theorists.


I don't beleive in leading a life based on paranoia. :)

Is it better to be a follower then and promote deception?

[Paksis]

One should never let facts interfere with a good story. Many people still believe the Earth is flat and the Apollo Missions were made in Hollywood. They know better but still insist in believing fantasies.

[hagbard]

One should never let facts interfere with a good story. Many people still believe the Earth is flat and the Apollo Missions were made in Hollywood. They know better but still insist in believing fantasies.

Like the ones the US gov't manufactures?

[FastFokker]

Just imagine what we're going to find out in the future, if you consider Operation Northwoods:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a contingency plan in 1962 to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro. The plan was not carried out but the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative was executed.

Northwoods, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state sponsored terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by two senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, and signed by the highest ranking member of the U.S. military, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.
I suppose anyone who theorized such claims prior to the documents being released, were just that.. nutjob conspiracy theorists. :rolleyes:
The suggestions included:
* Starting rumors about Cuba by using clandestine radios.
* Staging mock attacks, sabotages and riots at Guantanamo Bay and blaming it on Cuban forces.
* Firebombing and sinking an American ship at the Guantanamo Bay American military base—reminiscent of the USS Maine incident at Havana in 1898, which started the Spanish-American War—or destroy American aircraft and blame it on Cuban forces. (The document's first suggestion regarding the sinking of a U.S. ship is to blow up a manned ship and hence would result in U.S. Navy members being killed, with a secondary suggestion of possibly using unmanned drones and fake funerals instead.)
* "Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type [sic] planes would be useful as complementary actions."
* Destroying an unmanned drone masquerading as a commercial aircraft supposedly full of "college students off on a holiday". This proposal was the one supported by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
* Staging a "terror campaign", including the "real or simulated" sinking of Cuban refugees
* "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute [sic] to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized."
* Burning crops by dropping incendiary devices in Haiti, Dominican Republic or elsewhere.Say, anyone remember how and why the US got into the Vietnam War?

From my perspective, the truth is more frightening than "conspiracy theories".