What Year Did You Stop Your Cognitive Dissonance Towards The 9/11 OS ?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

You link three stories that get back to an event that only one person claims happens and everyone else that was there says did not. An event at a UN sponsored meeting with NO US government representatives. In other words, you rely on falsehoods.

Then, "the US had plans to invade Afghanistan"....here is a hint for you. The United States Department of Defense, has plans to invade damned near every country in the world. It is called being prepared.

It's interesting how people say the media is controlled by TPTB and should not be used as a trusted source.
Then the same people cite the media to support their side in 911.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

I quoted Pakistani UMMAT interview 28 September 2001 ...

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.

Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Once again, you miss the point.

My posts were about the multitude of reasons I doubt the official story. One reason was the Taliban & the Afghan pipeline. You listed 2 links which claim the pipeline was dead in 1998 & 1999. I showed 3 links that show the US was planning to attack Afghanistan before 9/11, with 2 of them mentioning the pipeline you said was dead. One of these links was from wsws.org, the same site you used as a source for your own argument! Then I posted a LA Times link that shows the US-based Afghan government was trying to revive the pipeline in 2002, after our invasion.

So once again, what was I confused about? Then you reply by saying the events in my links never happened, then immediately turn around and say the US has plans to attack everyone! Which one is it?

1. You say my sources aren't credible even though you used the same site to support your argument.

2. I said the Afghan pipeline was one reason I doubted the official story. You admitted the new US-backed Karzai government tried to revive the Afghan pipeline but was rebuffed.

3. I showed 3 links saying the US was planning to attack Afghanistan even before 9/11. You say the events in my sources aren't credible because only 1 person is said to have claimed it, then you turn around in the same post & say the US actually has plans to attack everyone (which agrees with the 3 links I mentioned).

So what exactly are you arguing? And where exactly am I wrong? You seem to be agreeing with me without even realizing it.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Once again, you miss the point.

not so much miss, as refuse to see.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: snowspirit
It never made sense that 3 buildings would fall into their own footprint so well.

As none of the WTC buildings fell into their own footprint.... what are you on about?

You are more or less correct, they turned into powder and floated across the river for the most part.

originally posted by: ChiefD
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

I never did, because there isn't and never has been a conspiracy to begin with.

I find it sad that there are those who believe there ever was a conspiracy regarding 911.

We do not BELIEVE anything, we KNOW the official line is so far off it is incalculable.

And actually it is not sadness we feel towards those such as yourselves, but amusement that you are able to tie your own shoes on command as well.

originally posted by: ChiefD
a reply to: svetlana84

I stand by what I say. It was a horrific tragedy. It was not a conspiracy.

A tragedy ?

What is tragic about watching buildings disappear into thin air ??

Oh wait, that was caused by planes and fires, right.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ChiefD

The 911truth website was one of the first exposures to this silly conspiracy theory I first encountered. I had heard rumblings of distrust up until then, but I really took notice when I heard about that site. Then I looked at the claims it was making and couldn't believe that anyone would even buy that garbage.

Sadly everyone of you sound exactly the same, use the same memes, and attempt to taunt everyone who knows dam well this is one of the biggest and EASIEST to see scams in history.

But you know that already, and it gives you get a good belly laugh.

I have noticed that those who believe in the official story are also far FAR easier to scam in the real world, on any manner of topics.

All one has to do, is find out the level of programming a person has, and then exploit it for easy EASY profits, or to just blow the minds of these poor souls.

I have yet to encounter one of you in person, who by the time I am done with them, has not had life changing epiphanies.

But no time left for that, you guys just flat out lack the courage, and the tools to ever be a part of anything new, or better, that is not an insult it is the unfortunate, TRUTH.

The best parts are, they think they actually are not affected by things around them, this is the best control group EVER.

Off topic but how TF do I post on this forum? Help please.

originally posted by: samkent
It's interesting how people say the media is controlled by TPTB and should not be used as a trusted source.
Then the same people cite the media to support their side in 911.

It is more interesting that you believe one version of every narrative, despite various media sources claiming all different things.

Just how did you come to decide that a church based Zionistic it had to happen a certain way storyline was the way to go for you ???

And for that matter, please tell me about the debris from the towers, your eyes see nothing funny about dust clouds bigger than a volcano blast floating away and cars parked mere feet from the towers, have literally no damage ??

a reply to: snowspirit
Regarding WTC tower 1 and 2 (110 stories)
There has never been a demolition of that magnitude using conventional demolition techniques ever. Matter fact it cannot be done very much like you cannot recreate the Pyramids of Giza. If they were going to take down those 2 towers a professional demolition team would do it in sections or dismantle it to a proper height....end of discussion.

Sorta stuff you see in SciFi movies like Captain America and the Avengers....too far out there in left field to accept....thus 14 years later and no one can get to the bottom of it still.

This kind of non budging logic that transcends CONventional logic that i have just shared with you gets you properly surveillanced and what I like to call spooked. Saw my first undercover Jade Helm agent from China(asian sp ops guy) today in Cedar Park Tx in an old 240z and purple heart license plate. Heightened sense of awareness trumps satellites, technologies and trained teams all day long.

At this point its too late to believe me and irrelevant to not believe me. You may fire your jokes and ask for proof or totally disregard. It no longer matters. Any of it.

.sorry I don't know what I'm doing on this site

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Hmmm. I'd say it was in 2001 when this was all going down! There was some oddities there that I could NOT digest!!! Still CANNOT!!!

a reply to: Blue_Jay33 No I thought at the time I was not watching a "collapse".16.5 acres of 4" thick concrete pulverized into dust by a jet loaded with kerosene? -Imagine swinging a 500,000 ton building 490mph into a stationary 767 jet ? Like a fly swatter against a fly.

a reply to: glend Right, a story written based on a list of questions that were given to the Taliban....not based on an actual sit down with Osama. Good grief, I thought everybody knew that...

a reply to: enlightenedservant You posted the links to three stories that go back to the same bull# story. A Paki diplomat who told the Taliban than the US was going to attack them based on a conversation that the Paki diplomat apparently had with himself and not a single, solitary member of the US government. Then, you post a link to a story about Hamid Karzai wanting UNOCAL to come back and build a pipeline. What you fail to see is that, by the end of 1999, the US Government did not give a flying fart in space about a pipeline in Afghanistan. Most of your links, all go back to crap that isn't complete.or accurate.

Oh, and having contingency plans to attack a nation, does not mean you are actively working towards that. Hell, Russia would have been a glass parking lot decades ago if that was true.

a reply to: ParasuvO That was a heck of a lot of twisted metal and chunks of concrete for three buildings that disappeared into thin air. Just saying...

I think it was around the time that I discovered Cheney had ordered a stand down allowing a plane to hit a target.

I mean, looking at the scene objectively, without any bias or pre-conceived notions, why would the VP who was in charge of the unfolding scenario, purposefully allow a plane to crash into the pentagon, knowing full well what had just occurred in Manhattan?

For this to take place, there need only be a single person in charge to allow it to happen. Dick Cheney was that man. We have the air defense systems in place to stop attacks, even the planes that hit NY could have been neutralized, but I can see how this could have caused some hesitation among a decision maker, seeing that there was no absolute proof that the planes were going to really hit a target.

The twin tower explosions were all the evidence needed to clear away any doubt that the pentagon incoming flight was absolutely going to end with an attack, so why would Dick still hesitate?

I believe he's central to this entire conspiracy. I would love for some of those CIA waterboarding torture techs to have a few hours over at Dick's house. I'm sure we could get the truth out of him.

a reply to: Greathouse
Perhaps those events you mention didn't in involve 3000+ civilians on U.S. soil. Also, I'm sure there are a number of other factors such as social/political climate or mass attitude/programming at the time of said events to help decide the "radical relevance" for some serious foreign intervention.