You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What do you think about the '9/11 Truth' movement?
- Thread starter Rearden Metal
- Start date
From your VAST 9/11 research.....what details can you tell me about the United 93 supposed crash site?Quote from Range Rover:
My life is good AMT.My government protects me from local and foreign threats to a more then reasonable extent.Even in bad economic times like now anybody can make good life for themselves.The people of the US can choose their leaders without violence
Is our government perfect ?no.Can it be improved ? Yes.As long the the government protects us and gives every citizen the opportunity for a good life I cant be a part of your crusade
Lets take a look at just SPECIFICALLY the crash site for a few minutes;
Supposed crash site REALITY (1:31 for the lazy)......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUzrHHDu96U&feature=related
Supposed crash site REALITY (1:31 for the lazy)......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUzrHHDu96U&feature=related
I suppose if we read enough eventually we'll have a seed of doubt. If my kids asked me this question and I encourage them to think for themselves and draw their own conclusions I would suggest they read other conspiracy theories thorughout history..
Did FDR allow the japanese to attack Pearl Harbor?
Stalin knew Germany was going to invade and yet did nothing.
(To name a few, there are others, Kennedy, etc)
These two theories have political basis, human error, disregard for their own countryman. and could be true.
How have we survived as a country living through other conspiracies?
Did FDR allow the japanese to attack Pearl Harbor?
Stalin knew Germany was going to invade and yet did nothing.
(To name a few, there are others, Kennedy, etc)
These two theories have political basis, human error, disregard for their own countryman. and could be true.
How have we survived as a country living through other conspiracies?
So we have the United 93 event that just happened to PERFECTLY crash into a SCAR in the ground THAT WAS ALREADY THERE.Quote from AMT4SWA:
Lets take a look at just SPECIFICALLY the crash site for a few minutes;
Supposed crash site REALITY (1:31 for the lazy)......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUzrHHDu96U&feature=related
What was observed immediately after event in the new round crater perfectly centered in the PREVIOUSLY scarred field....... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0FXrGUtlLc&feature=related
Heck, even a simple common man gets it......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lObZaph7sQY&feature=related
First responders about PERFECTLY sum up the 9/11 CON JOB............"NOTHING there but a hole in the ground"
Ripping PentaCON official story a new a$$hole!
Pentagon Police Officers and other witnesses REMEMBER what they saw at the Pentagon on 9/11 (exceptional step by step due diligence)....... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o&feature=fvw
Pentagon Police Officers and other witnesses REMEMBER what they saw at the Pentagon on 9/11 (exceptional step by step due diligence)....... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o&feature=fvw
What is so funny about this is all the conspiracy theories that sprang up, when the actual official story is one of the biggest and most successful conspiracies of all time. I mean look at it - 20+ foreign muslim extremist terrorists train for months, hijack multiple passenger jets, and demolish one of the largest building complexes in the USA and the world, killing thousands of people in the biggest terrorist atrocity in human history. Er, correct me if I'm wrong, but that looks like a pretty big and dastardly conspiracy to me! But apparently, this is not conpiratorial or dastardly enough for the truther movement!
There are simple principles for how to assess claims and evidence. For example, David Hume's rule - no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless it is more likely that the miracle happened, than that the testimony were mistaken. You can modify that slightly to apply it to conspiracy theories - no theory is sufficient to establish a conspiracy, unless it is more likely that the conspiracy really happened, than that the conspiracy theory is mistaken.
If you look at the weight of evidence, the official story clearly has the most to support it. The conspiracy theories are mostly riddled with errors, logical mistakes, incorrect assumptions, or rank speculation with no supporting facts. We cannot be certain that the official story is true, and that there are not other secret facts waiting to come out, but on the current evidence, it is the most plausible.
There are other trader heuristics in favour of it too. If someone could uncover a real additional 9/11 conspiracy or cover-up, they would instantly become the most famous journalist on the planet, they would make tens of millions of dollars, get to fuck some of the hottest women on earth, and be able to interview and investigate any story out there, with groups and individuals queueing up to help them and give them acclaim and support. Given those huge incentives, and the fact that every investigative journalist and media group on the planet has spent 9 years looking for this, the fact that NO serious evidence has come out of an alternative conspiracy, highly suggests that it is not actually out there. In today's internet dominated world, with sites like wikileaks, all it would take is one whistleblower, one spy, one reporter, and the whole conspiracy would be blown. So, using trader analysis (i.e. Bayesian probability and human incentives) the odds strongly favour the official story being the most likely to be true.
There are simple principles for how to assess claims and evidence. For example, David Hume's rule - no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless it is more likely that the miracle happened, than that the testimony were mistaken. You can modify that slightly to apply it to conspiracy theories - no theory is sufficient to establish a conspiracy, unless it is more likely that the conspiracy really happened, than that the conspiracy theory is mistaken.
If you look at the weight of evidence, the official story clearly has the most to support it. The conspiracy theories are mostly riddled with errors, logical mistakes, incorrect assumptions, or rank speculation with no supporting facts. We cannot be certain that the official story is true, and that there are not other secret facts waiting to come out, but on the current evidence, it is the most plausible.
There are other trader heuristics in favour of it too. If someone could uncover a real additional 9/11 conspiracy or cover-up, they would instantly become the most famous journalist on the planet, they would make tens of millions of dollars, get to fuck some of the hottest women on earth, and be able to interview and investigate any story out there, with groups and individuals queueing up to help them and give them acclaim and support. Given those huge incentives, and the fact that every investigative journalist and media group on the planet has spent 9 years looking for this, the fact that NO serious evidence has come out of an alternative conspiracy, highly suggests that it is not actually out there. In today's internet dominated world, with sites like wikileaks, all it would take is one whistleblower, one spy, one reporter, and the whole conspiracy would be blown. So, using trader analysis (i.e. Bayesian probability and human incentives) the odds strongly favour the official story being the most likely to be true.
Quote from AMT4SWA:
Alex "CALLED IT"......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8
What did you do...............??? :eek:
Actually, Rick Rescorla predicted it in the 1990s (actually predicted it, not a vague generalist non-prediction like that weak video link you showed). He even said it would be disgruntled terrorists from an area of the world that the US occupied or stationed troops in; and that this time they'd attack from the air, rather than a ground-level bomb like the first WTC attack. Unlike Alex Jones, he tried to warn the authorities and get countermeasures put in place, rather than yapping to an audience of ineffectual conspiracy theorists.
Rescorla of course was an analytical, intelligent, logical-thinker, a former soldier and Vietnam Vet, turned security professional, who had travelled extensively around the world. He had actual experience and proven performance, not just hot air and empty words. As opposed to Alex Jones, who has no experience of the world outside the USA, never studied foreign cultures, no CV or achievements apart from blogger/radio host. Guess who has the more accurate analysis? Rescorla also literally sacrificed his life, staying totally calm and cool in the face of certain death, to evacuate more people rather than save his own hide.
I know which of the two I find admirable. Jones has his heart in the right place, but he is an embarrassingly misguided conspiracy theorist and blowhard pundit. He is the libertarian equivalent of Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
Simple trader logic test: which is more likely - the broad mass of the world's engineers, scientists, pilots, investigative journalists are correct; the lack of leaks 9 years after the fact is because there is nothing to leak; several in-depth professional investigations from both government and worldwide media were correct.
Or - a small minority of basement-dwelling freaks and losers, overwhelmingly located in the USA, who also believe a whole other number of whackjob conspiracy theories; most of whom don't even have passports, most lacking degree education, professional qualifications, experience in engineering or explosives/fires/demolitions, have somehow uncovered the grandest conspiracy in human history; a conspiracy that the other 6 billion people on the planet, including some of the smartest, richest, most resourceful, both pro and anti American, or just neutral players, have somehow not managed to uncover for themselves despite years of investigation, and a huge incentive to find out the truth.
Come on now - if you had to bet your entire net worth on backing one of these two groups, which would it be? The crazies, or normal society? Even the Chomskys and John Pilgers of this world aren't on board the 9/11 truther bus. That's how far-out it is.
Or - a small minority of basement-dwelling freaks and losers, overwhelmingly located in the USA, who also believe a whole other number of whackjob conspiracy theories; most of whom don't even have passports, most lacking degree education, professional qualifications, experience in engineering or explosives/fires/demolitions, have somehow uncovered the grandest conspiracy in human history; a conspiracy that the other 6 billion people on the planet, including some of the smartest, richest, most resourceful, both pro and anti American, or just neutral players, have somehow not managed to uncover for themselves despite years of investigation, and a huge incentive to find out the truth.
Come on now - if you had to bet your entire net worth on backing one of these two groups, which would it be? The crazies, or normal society? Even the Chomskys and John Pilgers of this world aren't on board the 9/11 truther bus. That's how far-out it is.
I would encourage everyone interested in this subject to read a book called "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll.
You will come to realize that those who were knowledgeable on the subjects of terrorism, Bin Laden, and the Middle East at the time, would not find it hard to predict an attack such as 9/11. Years before 9/11, the CIA was well aware of the risk of an attack from the air, but for various reasons could not prevent 9/11.
Any event of this magnitude will attract the conspiracy theorists to conjure up various interpretations of facts and twist them in such a way so as to plant a seed of doubt in the uneducated mind. As an earlier poster mentioned, think of any major event in the past century and you can certainly find someone out there who has proposed an alternate theory as to what happened and why (Pear Harbour, etc.). The simple fact of the matter is that these theories require quite an imagination to really believe.
You will come to realize that those who were knowledgeable on the subjects of terrorism, Bin Laden, and the Middle East at the time, would not find it hard to predict an attack such as 9/11. Years before 9/11, the CIA was well aware of the risk of an attack from the air, but for various reasons could not prevent 9/11.
Any event of this magnitude will attract the conspiracy theorists to conjure up various interpretations of facts and twist them in such a way so as to plant a seed of doubt in the uneducated mind. As an earlier poster mentioned, think of any major event in the past century and you can certainly find someone out there who has proposed an alternate theory as to what happened and why (Pear Harbour, etc.). The simple fact of the matter is that these theories require quite an imagination to really believe.