|
Data Graham posted:If you buy that it's 19 dudes with box cutters, how is that functionally different from accepting the "official story"? I don't think the official story is entirely fabricated. I think it's likely a mix of truth and rear end-covering and/or coverup. There aren't any really reliable sources. I mean, if you have nothing to hide why would Kissinger be your first pick to head the investigation?
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:23 |
|
|
It's a shame that in a bastion of diligent nerds who like to argue on the internet that I can't find a single individual willing to actually face the foolish arguments of these Truthers. In all this bullshit is there not a single person willing to confront it? Or should I just accept that no one is willing to watch a video like that, because only crazy people watch them. hmm.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYUYya6bPGw&t=109s
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Toothy McBeard posted:It's a shame that in a bastion of diligent nerds who like to argue on the internet that I can't find a single individual willing to actually face the foolish arguments of these Truthers. It's an hour long documentary my dude.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
One of the worst loving things about truthers is that they've completely poisoned the well for any legitimate inquiries into intelligence errors surrounding 9/11. For real though, I see no problem with the official story - except that there is an open question about whether our government could have done more to catch it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
I don't think there's any argument that Bush would do something like that if he thought he could get away with it, because he obviously would, or if not him then Cheney definitely would deliberately murder thousands of Americans even for an absurdly small profit, probably as low as literally one dollar. The big sticking point for the Bush Did 9/11 is that the years of his administration's incompetence, buffoonery, and total inability to plan their way out of a paper bag made it drastically less believable that they could pull off such a plot without anyone finding out. They didn't even plan ahead enough to plant the WMDs during they invasion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
Toothy McBeard posted:It's a shame that in a bastion of diligent nerds who like to argue on the internet that I can't find a single individual willing to actually face the foolish arguments of these Truthers. You sure are offended that no one wants to debunk this video for you instead of doing a bit of googling for yourself. Perhaps you are being about as subtle as an Amway salesperson. Just saying. Keeshhound posted:This has all been very informative. Thank you. I was blinking "T H I S I S A T R A P" in Morse code at him the entire time and he still bit right down on the bait.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:One of the worst loving things about truthers is that they've completely poisoned the well for any legitimate inquiries into intelligence errors surrounding 9/11. Questioning if more could have done it is perfectly valid because there is evidence that there was warning of an attack and due to either neglect or malicious intent it was ignored. But "yeah seems like something they'd do" isnt sufficient, theres a reason we ask for motive, means and opportunity in a crime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Questioning if more could have done it is perfectly valid because there is evidence that there was warning of an attack and due to either neglect or malicious intent it was ignored. But "yeah seems like something they'd do" isnt sufficient, theres a reason we ask for motive, means and opportunity in a crime. Malicious neglect would fit the bill "Seems like something they'd do." is as reasonable a basis for belief as accepting the government's stance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:
It's not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:It's not. It is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I don't think there's any argument that Bush would do something like that if he thought he could get away with it, because he obviously would, or if not him then Cheney definitely would deliberately murder thousands of Americans even for an absurdly small profit, probably as low as literally one dollar. In order to have "Bush did 9/11," I don't think you have to posit that Bush himself, or anyone in his administration, actually did anything at all beyond coming up with the simple idea of carrying out a clump of spectacular terrorist attacks in furtherance of...whatever. It's easy for me to picture Cheney, or whoever, saying, as soon as he hears the idea, "Great idea! But right now, don't say another single, solitary word. We've talked about it enough. Something like this, we need to outsource it. Look, I know a guy. I'll go make a phone call. You forget about it, Georgie boy. You forget about it altogether, and we never had this conversation, and maybe eventually, you'll see something big on the news." For the record, no, I don't think that's what happened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:In order to have "Bush did 9/11," I don't think you have to posit that Bush himself, or anyone in his administration, actually did anything at all beyond coming up with the simple idea of carrying out a clump of spectacular terrorist attacks in furtherance of...whatever. It's easy for me to picture Cheney, or whoever, saying, as soon as he hears the idea, "Great idea! But right now, don't say another single, solitary word. We've talked about it enough. Something like this, we need to outsource it. Look, I know a guy. I'll go make a phone call. You forget about it, Georgie boy. You forget about it altogether, and we never had this conversation, and maybe eventually, you'll see something big on the news." Sounds like something they'd do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:In order to have "Bush did 9/11," I don't think you have to posit that Bush himself, or anyone in his administration, actually did anything at all beyond coming up with the simple idea of carrying out a clump of spectacular terrorist attacks in furtherance of...whatever. It's easy for me to picture Cheney, or whoever, saying, as soon as he hears the idea, "Great idea! But right now, don't say another single, solitary word. We've talked about it enough. Something like this, we need to outsource it. Look, I know a guy. I'll go make a phone call. You forget about it, Georgie boy. You forget about it altogether, and we never had this conversation, and maybe eventually, you'll see something big on the news." That still requires the administration to have 19 strangers willing to die for them for (???), whom they don't know yet are 100% assured that none of them will have second thoughts or back out at the last minute and spill it or tell someone in their family or Unless the plot is even more indirect like just secretly funnel money to Al Qaeda and hope something big happens, but then it's (a) still Al Qaeda doing it and (b) the plot is ultimately unnecessary because the attack cost a paltry some to carry out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:If you buy that it's 19 dudes with box cutters, how is that functionally different from accepting the "official story"? general distrust of government regardless of facts Toothy McBeard posted:It's a shame that in a bastion of diligent nerds who like to argue on the internet that I can't find a single individual willing to actually face the foolish arguments of these Truthers. yes, only crazy people sit through an hour long video of nonsense i linked you a solid rebuttal, if that's not good enough for you then nothing is and it's a waste of time to try anything else. this argument has been done to death, it's boring now. AE911T hasn't come up with a new argument in over a decade. it's the same reason nobody tries to argue about the moon landing anymore and the new hot trend in crank theories is internet pedophilia and crisis actors boner confessor fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That still requires the administration to have 19 strangers willing to die for them for (???), whom they don't know yet are 100% assured that none of them will have second thoughts or back out at the last minute and spill it or tell someone in their family or It doesn't require the administration to do anything except come up with the basic idea (the "high concept," as they might say in Hollywood) and know "a guy" that one of them can call. The less done by actual US government people, the better, for all sorts of reasons, as long as they're sure they can depend on this guy who gets called. And he's the one who picks up the ball and runs with it. He's the one who rounds up the nineteen. Or maybe he subcontracts the recruiting job out. Or whatever. Point is, the hijackers don't have to know who they're really working for or why. And again, I don't think that's what happened. I just don't think that describing the administration as inept is the right argument.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:It doesn't require the administration to do anything except come up with the basic idea (the "high concept," as they might say in Hollywood) and know "a guy" that one of them can call. The less done by actual US government people, the better, for all sorts of reasons, as long as they're sure they can depend on this guy who gets called. And he's the one who picks up the ball and runs with it. He's the one who rounds up the nineteen. Or maybe he subcontracts the recruiting job out. Or whatever. Point is, the hijackers don't have to know who they're really working for or why. This...makes the whole thing even more absurd. The more people you have involved in the process, even if they don't know the whole story, improves the odds that someone squeals.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:This...makes the whole thing even more absurd. The more people you have involved in the process, even if they don't know the whole story, improves the odds that someone squeals. That is before we get into the fact that there is no magical "guy" out there with the kind of resources it would take to pull off 9-11. Finding a single person willing to die for their cause in cold blood is actually pretty damned hard, finding 19 such indivuals is even harder. Usually such individuals are messes of human beings who can barely function: finding 19 individuals willing to die for their cause in cold blood who are also competent enough to execute an operation like this takes pretty much state-level access to resources.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:This...makes the whole thing even more absurd. The more people you have involved in the process, even if they don't know the whole story, improves the odds that someone squeals. Who are the "more people," and what do they say if they squeal? The one "guy" who first gets called puts it out there as an Al Qaeda operation, and that's all they need. Whatever took place in real life to recruit the nineteen who did it, that's what this guy does. It's not like he's going to call Kelly Services.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
20. Remember one guy chickened out or had visa problems or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:Who are the "more people," and what do they say if they squeal? The one "guy" who first gets called puts it out there as an Al Qaeda operation, and that's all they need. Whatever took place in real life to recruit the nineteen who did it, that's what this guy does. It's not like he's going to call Kelly Services. This mystical "one guy" is some illuminati jewish banker poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40719743 but but but chemtrails/gmos/fluoride/vaccines are harmless!!!
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:This mystical "one guy" is some illuminati jewish banker poo poo. Naw, not at all. It's not that complex a deal to send four guys to aviation school and then buy nineteen airline tickets for four flights that'll all be in the air at the same time. The biggest challenge would be to know how to appeal to the prospective hijackers. So he'd have to have a little more on the ball than my across-the-street neighbor Les, who's great to drink beer with, but if I'm being honest, I wouldn't trust him to be able to pick me up from the airport without making me wait for four hours. That's setting the bar pretty low, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40719743 (1) The study is not conclusive. I have no idea how the gently caress you could go with "no, vaccines/fluoride/gmos totally did this" but ignore, "this sperm count study may be jacked up!" Like, if you're skeptical of science, where's your skepticism of this paper? (2) How about obesity, etc?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Cosmic brain: the study is a fraud so Glorious Western Men will give up on having sex and their countries will be overrun by the unwashed hordes
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:34
|
|
Tater Love 
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:Naw, not at all. It's not that complex a deal to send four guys to aviation school and then buy nineteen airline tickets for four flights that'll all be in the air at the same time. The biggest challenge would be to know how to appeal to the prospective hijackers. So he'd have to have a little more on the ball than my across-the-street neighbor Les, who's great to drink beer with, but if I'm being honest, I wouldn't trust him to be able to pick me up from the airport without making me wait for four hours. That's setting the bar pretty low, though.  Heh, I could pull off a conspiracy so easily in my mind, therefore it is equally easy in real life. I'm a loving genius.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:
That's not the point. And it's unfortunate that I opened myself up to that one, but there you go. The point is, bottom line, the administration could outsource it. "We want these results. Make it happen." If your starting point is "inside job," and you're convinced of it, that's not a stretch ("you" not being you personally, but a hypothetical person who believes inside job). And there's no reason to suppose the contractor would necessarily have more trouble with it than the people who actually put it all together in real life because, well...we've seen that it can be done in real life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40719743 i mean ya they are tho EDIT: oh wait gently caress you're right! The Literal BBC posted:There is no clear evidence for the reason for this apparent decrease. But it has been linked with exposure to chemicals used in pesticides and plastics, obesity, smoking, stress, diet, and the psychic rays of the lizard peoples' mind control guns. Great Metal Jesus fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:Naw, not at all. It's not that complex a deal to send four guys to aviation school and then buy nineteen airline tickets for four flights that'll all be in the air at the same time. The biggest challenge would be to know how to appeal to the prospective hijackers. So he'd have to have a little more on the ball than my across-the-street neighbor Les, who's great to drink beer with, but if I'm being honest, I wouldn't trust him to be able to pick me up from the airport without making me wait for four hours. That's setting the bar pretty low, though. The point is, you have no evidence for your theory other than your feels. That's it. "It is conceivably possible, so I'm going to believe it". You've literally started with the belief that 911 was an inside job and come up with a theory. You're basically one step up the ladder from claiming the planes were holograms. I mean gently caress it, why not?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Illuminti posted:The point is, you have no evidence for your theory other than your feels. That's it. "It is conceivably possible, so I'm going to believe it". You've literally started with the belief that 911 was an inside job and come up with a theory. You're basically one step up the ladder from claiming the planes were holograms. I mean gently caress it, why not? I've stated at least twice in this thread tonight that I do not, in fact, believe that 9/11 was an inside job, and I've done so in pretty much exactly those words. I've tried to make it as clear as possible. Of course I have no evidence because I don't believe it. I've tried to make it clear that what I'm saying is just that I don't think that "the Bush administration was inept" is a sufficient argument to disprove "inside job" because they could have and probably would have contracted the job out to someone who's not inept, if someone wants to assume they wanted the job done. That's not hologram-level poo poo at all. There's no reason to suppose he's mystical or magical because... Someone did, in fact, talk nineteen gullible guys into flying airplanes into buildings. So we know it's possible in the real world. I've used language such as describing the hiring of said contractor as "I know a guy" simply because it amuses me to do so. I've compared the contractor favorably to my friend whom I wouldn't trust to pick me up at the airport on time because it amuses me to do so. Turns out that probably wasn't the best idea if I wanted to make sure there was no ambiguity in what I meant. But there are other reasons to discount "inside job," mainly, I would think, because there would be far too many unpredictable variables in the aftermath. I believe someone has already pointed this out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
If the Bush Administration had access to that perfectly competent one guy who could plan and execute a 19-man suicide attack whose perpetrators have no ideological reason to kill themselves and no idea why they're even doing it, without them or their families or anyone involved getting caught or wussing out, Bush should have called that guy to plant the WMD's.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If the Bush Administration had access to that perfectly competent one guy who could plan and execute a 19-man suicide attack whose perpetrators have no ideological reason to kill themselves and no idea why they're even doing it, without them or their families or anyone involved getting caught or wussing out, Bush should have called that guy to plant the WMD's. Why do you think the contractor wouldn't give them an ideological reason to carry out the mission? He could feed 'em a line about the United States being evil and decadent, or whatever, and them being heroes, and he can promise them seventy-two virgins. Tell 'em whatever works. That they would lie to people is the easiest part of this to believe. And why all the talk about guys getting caught or wussing out? The real plot carried exactly those same risks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:Also what's the huge global strategic advantage we gained by having our president mastermind a catastrophic false flag operation on our own soil? Whee perpetual quagmires in Afghanistan and Iraq, gas isn't cheaper for any reasons related to Middle East oil, and Russia fuckin owns the White House. Brilliant Now, this is not a real argument. The Gleiwitz Incident contributed to a series of events that would see Germany completely obliterated, but it doesn't mean it wasn't a false flag operation by German agents who thought they could gain from it. Just because somebody failed to account for possible consequences doesn't mean they didn't do something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:Why do you think the contractor wouldn't give them an ideological reason to carry out the mission? He could feed 'em a line about the United States being evil and decadent, or whatever, and them being heroes, and he can promise them seventy-two virgins. Tell 'em whatever works. That they would lie to people is the easiest part of this to believe. You can also argue, with no way to be proven wrong, that the planes were abducted by Trafalmadorian aliens who indoctrinated the crews into believing they were hired operatives used by the CIA to stage attacks under false identities as Muslim radicals. Needlessly complicated plots in place of ones that are much simpler without sacrificing explanatory power, as well as unfalsifiable premises, are the two main pillars of quackery.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 07:17
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:I've stated at least twice in this thread tonight that I do not, in fact, believe that 9/11 was an inside job, and I've done so in pretty much exactly those words. I've tried to make it as clear as possible. Of course I have no evidence because I don't believe it. Sorry I got you confused with Robotnik Nudes who seems to be making the point you were putting forward, but not as a hypothetical. Also your username clearly outs you as a shill muddying the waters of the important internet investigation into 9/11 and Pizzagate edit: my point still stands though. You have no reason to assume Bush organised or hired anyone other than speculation. He doesn't need to hire someone to indoctrinate someone and teach them to fly planes and let them through security and etc etc. They were already indoctrinated, anyone can get flying lessons and security is/was poo poo. Which scenario is more plausible? Illuminti fucked around with this message at 08:51 on Jul 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 08:47
|
|
|
Secret Agent X23 posted:Why do you think the contractor wouldn't give them an ideological reason to carry out the mission? He could feed 'em a line about the United States being evil and decadent, or whatever, and them being heroes, and he can promise them seventy-two virgins. Tell 'em whatever works. That they would lie to people is the easiest part of this to believe. Okay but then that's just the official story down to radical fundamentalist Muslim terrorists trained by Al Qaeda doing a suicide attack on US civilian and military targets except I guess one secretive contractor sent AQ an anonymous email with the plan? And the real plot didn't have the risk of "what if people find out it was us all along" because they always intended to take credit and say "yeah it was us, withdraw from the Middle East, Great Satan because we can attack your homeland and we'll do it again", and even if they got caught beforehand we wouldn't hate Bin Laden any more than we did when he succeeded. If Bush did it or even tried to do it but got exposed hooooooooooly poo poo it would be bad for him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
Like yeah I guess "what if Bush just gave Bin Laden the idea over an anonymous phone call and no one else knew" is reasonably safe from the "Bush was too incompetent to pull off the conspiracy" criticism, but typical 9/11 Truther posits a conspiracy much larger and more complex than that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 09:06
|
|
|
I like the apparent presumption that nobody hates America enough to carry out terrorist acts against Americans of their own volition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40719743 A bad thing might be happening or it might not and the reasons for it potentially happening are unknown but probably down to a complex and diverse mix of factors. Therefore all conspiracy theories are true. Checks out. Regarding the Bush did 9/11 stuff, why would they need to create such a complex and fragile plot if they just wanted a causus belli for a forever war? OBL and AQ were already on the naughty list following the first WTC bombing, the USS Cole attack plus a bunch of bombings at US embassies. If the Bush admin had such a hard-on for rolling over brown people they didn't need co-ordinated airline hijackings. A bunch of bombs in the US or another Lockerbie-style aircraft bombing would have been enough. In fact, as we discovered with Iraq, it was entirely possible to go to war over nothing at all. Bush could have gone on TV a month after his inauguration warning about the grave threat that international terrorism poses to the US homeland so now we're going to flatten <$*stan>. They didn't need to hit the WTC, they didn't need for it to fall over after it was hit and they didn't need such a complex plot. Literally anything would have been enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 11:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:23 |
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:In fact, as we discovered with Iraq, it was entirely possible to go to war over nothing at all. I don't think it's obvious that there'd have been enough public support for that war absent Bush's inflated approval rating generally and all the people pissed at Saddam for doing 9/11 specifically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2017 11:54
|
|
