9/11 conspiracy theory..>READ [Merged Threads]

[Derek Flint]

Originally posted by Bible_Belt


And Neil Bush was in charge of security.

Neil Bush was in charge of exactly what?

 

[Derek Flint]

9-11 Conspiracy theories debunked, by a credible, non-partisan, non-biased, non-agenda driven source:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Hopefully, this will put an end to the silliness, but somehow, I doubt it.

 

[toddC]

still doesn't answer the questions i proposed.

 

[Bible_Belt]

whoops, Marvin Bush, not Neal. Marvin was a principal in the now-defunct Stratesec, Inc. which had the security contract for the World Trade Center.

And you do know that the Bush family fortune came from Grandpa Prescott's trading with the Nazis, right? That's not a theory. Congress had to pass the Trading with the Enemy Act to get Prescott to stop selling raw materials to the Nazis even after the US joined WWII.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

 

[Derek Flint]

Originally posted by Bible_Belt
whoops, Marvin Bush, not Neal. Marvin was a principal in the now-defunct Stratesec, Inc. which had the security contract for the World Trade Center.

And you do know that the Bush family fortune came from Grandpa Prescott's trading with the Nazis, right? That's not a theory. Congress had to pass the Trading with the Enemy Act to get Prescott to stop selling raw materials to the Nazis even after the US joined WWII.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

That's quite a stretch to say that the Bush family fortune came from trading with Nazi's.

Again, do some research before jumping to such wild conclusions.

Your agenda is starting to show here.

Why don't you just come out and say what everyone knows your trying to say?

BTW, isn't the UK Guardian the newspaper that initiated a letter writing campaign on behalf of its readers urging Ohio residents to vote for Kerry?

(Yes, it was: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1326033,00.html)

No agenda there, right?

No bias there, right?

Also, from the article:

"The Anti-Defamation League in the US is supportive of Prescott Bush and the Bush family. In a statement last year they said that "rumours about the alleged Nazi 'ties' of the late Prescott Bush ... have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated ... Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathiser."

Later in the article:

"More than 60 years after Prescott Bush came briefly under scrutiny at the time of a faraway war, his grandson is facing a different kind of scrutiny but one underpinned by the same perception that, for some people, war can be a profitable business."

So the ADL says Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer, yet the writer(s) of the article go on to speculate and editorialize and insert their own biased opinion, which reveals their (anti-war) agenda.

And, what does this have to do with 9-11?

Face it, you guys are chasing ghosts, and looking quite foolish while doing so.

And, from the UK Guardian article that I linked to:

"Air America, the upstart liberal radio counterweight, is still in its infancy, but it can be picked up in parts of Ohio and other battleground states. Listen to the flagship show presented by the leftwing humourist Al Franken at www.airamericaradio.com, also between 5pm and 8pm on weekdays, then call in on 001 866 303 2270 (neither call will be free from the UK). Franken's focus yesterday was the "absolutely shameless" behaviour of the conservative media in America."

So, they are promoting Al Franken talking about the "shameless conservative media" in America.

Let's look at the facts.

68% of the American media's campaign donations go to Democrats.

Source: http://opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?Ind=B02

Yet, Franken is calling the American media "conservative" and the Guardian UK doesn't even question it, and they even go so far as to promote him and his opinions.

Again, no bias there, right?

I can easily go in and pick apart the UK Guardian article you posted in much the same manner.

Might just do so when I have some more time, but then, you'd probably just change the subject again as well as the argument, and we'd go round and round and round.

Again, read the Popular Mechanics article I posted that debunks the 9-11 myths/conspiracy theories.

They are unbiased, credible, non-agenda driven and also source their claims.

That's more than I can say of the conspiracy theory crap that's being posted here as "evidence"

 

[Derek Flint]

Originally posted by toddC
still doesn't answer the questions i proposed.

Yes it does.

You just don't want to hear facts that don't back up your wild-ass, unsubstantiated theories.

It's a false argument - make wild accusations based on speculation, then claim that they haven't been disproved, so therefore, they must be true.

It's like saying, you can't prove that you are not a child-molestor, so therefore, it must be true.

 

[toddC]

If you watch the video it will raise your eyebrow's trust me. I'm not someone who is ANTI bush. I LOST a dear dear loved one in the world trade center and seeing this video just made me feel terrible. Exactly how can someones video camera shake exactly 9 seconds before a crash and a peice of debry fall of the top WITHOUT a bomg going off. Why for the first time were certain floors doing certain drills (that they've never done before) up to a week and a half before the attacks? And why wre bomb sniffing dogs removed from the world trade center? All this BEFORE the attacks, just coincidence?

 

[diplomatic_lies]

I think the real question is, why would a stable democratic government order the death of 3000 of their own people, and risk (if caught) losing ALL their credibility and shattering the entire United States?

No stable government in the world will take that kind of risk, and certainly not for trivial things like "a bit more oil" or "a few extra dollars".

While we make fun of politicians, in reality they're not that retarded.

 

[Kaptain]

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

This act was suspected to have been performed by a stable, democraticaly elected government.

 

[Bible_Belt]

That's quite a stretch to say that the Bush family fortune came from trading with Nazi's.

Again, do some research before jumping to such wild conclusions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush
"documents from The National Archives and Library of Congress confirm that Bush and his partners continued their Nazi dealings unabated. These activities included a financial relationship with the German city of Hanover and several industrial concerns. They went undetected by investigators until after World War Two."

 

[diplomatic_lies]

Originally posted by Kaptain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

This act was suspected to have been performed by a stable, democraticaly elected government.

Are you actually serious? :crackup:

No wait, you're serious, aren't you?

Calling the Nazi government a "stable democracy" would be like suggesting Zimbabwe is the world's richest country. Considering Europe's circumstances during the 1930s, Germany's immense poverty and instability, and the fact that, uhhh, the Nazis weren't exactly a democracy...

 

[Bible_Belt]

uhhh, the Nazis weren't exactly a democracy..

They kinda were. There was voting involved. There has never been a country that is a true democracy. The US is a "representative republic."

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/dictator.htm
On March 23, the newly elected Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich." If passed, it would in effect vote democracy out of existence in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.

The vote was taken - 441 for, and only 84, the Social Democrats, against

 

[Alicorn]

Originally posted by Bible_Belt
That's quite a stretch to say that the Bush family fortune came from trading with Nazi's.

Again, do some research before jumping to such wild conclusions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush
"documents from The National Archives and Library of Congress confirm that Bush and his partners continued their Nazi dealings unabated. These activities included a financial relationship with the German city of Hanover and several industrial concerns. They went undetected by investigators until after World War Two."

Of course you miss the opening part that says:

"This article may not conform to the neutral point of view policy.
A Wikipedian has nominated this article to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page."

Why don't you just deny the Holocost next? Or say that Canada did it or some stupid ****?

 

[diplomatic_lies]

Originally posted by Bible_Belt
uhhh, the Nazis weren't exactly a democracy..

They kinda were. There was voting involved. There has never been a country that is a true democracy. The US is a "representative republic."

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/dictator.htm
On March 23, the newly elected Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich." If passed, it would in effect vote democracy out of existence in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.

The vote was taken - 441 for, and only 84, the Social Democrats, against

If you want to debate about the democratic elements of Nazi politics and society, send me a PM. Nazi Germany was the focus of my history minor, so I'd be happy to quibble over the facts.

My point was, the chances of a stable, modern first-world democracy (ie. the US) killing 3000 of their own people, for very little gain and at a high risk, would be unlikely.

 

[Kaptain]

Originally posted by diplomatic_lies

My point was, the chances of a stable, modern first-world democracy (ie. the US) killing 3000 of their own people, for very little gain and at a high risk, would be unlikely.

you nevery said "modern first-world" before

i think that the conspiracy theorist would argue that the gains are quite high (a la mike moore's fahrenheit 9/11. although that just explores who gains not who was at fault)

 

[Derek Flint]

Again, the Popular Mechanic's article Swiss-Cheeses all the 9-11 conspiracy theories, not to mention, those theories don't pass the logic test either.

Does anyone actually think you could wire those buildings for explosives without being detected?

This isn't even worth debating, because the theories crumble under the weight of the facts.

One more thing: Why not blame Hussien instead of the then-mostly unknown Al-Qaueda and Osama Bin Laden?

Again, doesn't pass the logic test.

And I'll repeat this:

"The Anti-Defamation League in the US is supportive of Prescott Bush and the Bush family. In a statement last year they said that "rumours about the alleged Nazi 'ties' of the late Prescott Bush ... have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated ... Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathiser."

So why would the ADL defend Bush against rumors of his ties to Nazism if there was any truth to them?

I'm not expecting any answers to those questions, because it's much easier for the intellectually lazy to keep posting non-credible sources and quotes in a weak attempt to back up their lame conspiracy theories.

They won't answer specific questions, because their case falls apart rapidly when they do.

 

[Derek Flint]

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=TECHNOLOGY-qqqs=themarket-qqqid=10336-qqqx=1.asp

On Wikipedia, anyone can edit an entry. It's a recipe for revisionism, defamation and downright rubbish.

And, from the founder:

“You should take Wikipedia with a grain of salt,” said Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia's founder. “It's a work in progress.”

 

[Derek Flint]

Originally posted by toddC
If you watch the video it will raise your eyebrow's trust me. I'm not someone who is ANTI bush. I LOST a dear dear loved one in the world trade center and seeing this video just made me feel terrible. Exactly how can someones video camera shake exactly 9 seconds before a crash and a peice of debry fall of the top WITHOUT a bomg going off. Why for the first time were certain floors doing certain drills (that they've never done before) up to a week and a half before the attacks? And why wre bomb sniffing dogs removed from the world trade center? All this BEFORE the attacks, just coincidence?

How about sourcing those claims?

Legit sources please.

 

[Kaptain]

Originally posted by Derek Flint
Again, the Popular Mechanic's article Swiss-Cheeses all the 9-11 conspiracy theories, not to mention, those theories don't pass the logic test either.

i wouldn't say all conspiracy theories....

the Popular Mechanic debunking the shooting down of flight 93 is quite weak imo. not that the conspiracy theory about flight 93 is strong.

Originally posted by Derek Flint
One more thing: Why not blame Hussien instead of the then-mostly unknown Al-Qaueda and Osama Bin Laden?

Again, doesn't pass the logic test.

but it does makes sense logically: uf you wanted to rid yourself of both hussien and al-qaueda it is logical to do them in turn and not to split your attention between the two targets. ie. eliminate the uncontained and more mobile bin laden then focus on hussien holded up in iraq.

 

[The Antichrist_Star]

Let's face it folks... this isn't going anywhere...

What's done is done... let's move on for Christ's sakes.

Besides... none of us were there so none of us really know what happened.

AS