9/11 Truth: A Movement of Disinformation

I guess the point I was trying to drive here, which, perhaps, is a bit of a hopeless effort, is to try to turn some attention to the rampant corruption in the US government. Whatever you might believe about specific events, that corruption, which involves both parties and myriad agendas, is the root of all "conspiracies" involving the US government. Thus, I think it would be more productive to attempt to identify the corrupt individuals, and find "proof" by focusing on these individuals, rather than grasping at air, trying to prove anything about any single event, when those who conspire are going to focus most on hiding the proof of the event.

Look at it this way. Take Ruby Ridge and the Branch Davidian's in Waco. I think most people here can agree that there were actions taken there that were...questionable, to say the least. But thats about all that can be said. The lead FBI agent for both? Larry Potts. And now, he's been singled out by Terry Nichols as being involved in setting up the OK city bombing. Now, Im skeptical of anything coming from Nichols, but I think it gives some good reason to further investigate Larry Potts. The man, more than just the events. To establish patterns, and build a larger picture of what may be occurring. The same can be done with any possibly "conspiracy" events. There are a lot of players, sure...but not an unlimited roster.

If we could use this network of identified likely parties, to give a shape and define a clearer motive, a criminal profile, if you will, then we can, in turn, use it s a profile. We can know who to keep an eye on, what might come next, etc. And productively counteract it. Rather than, say...putting up billboards about Bush being the new Hitler, or staging obnoxious protests about specific events being inside jobs. Actions that only exacerbate the problem, by encouraging the skeptics to turn a blind eye to the "conspiracy nuts."

I was thinking about this the other day, especially actually, with regards to the US presidency.. I mean, if you ignore party politics, there's a distinct possibility of the following -

Bush. Clinton. Bush. Clinton.

20+ years worth of essentially the same two families in the presidency..

And yes, I think it's wrong to simply assume that any problems in government are restricted to only one party, or administration. If you're really trying to achieve the goals that some here believe are behind many government actions, the best way to do so would be a fake two party system..

wow...i've been gone a long time...seems like the rings were just here yesterday...

Oh well..what better way to come back than this?

So, what can we gather from studying the OP poster?

Are they perhaps a paid disinfo distributor?...some soulless, shameless purveyor of half truths, and falsehoods?

...Or perhaps just a clueless fan of the current administration?

I've noticed in nearly every post they've made in this thread, there's been mention of bush, hitler, about how people shouldn't hate bush...is the OP perhaps just a shameless bush fan, that doesn't want to see us hate on him so much?

At any rate...the conspiracy...that's what we're here to discuss...

Now, there are a few schools of thought at work when it comes to what happened back in '01....

The first school of thought is "LIHOP", or "Let It Happen On Purpose"...the central thesis of this argument being that the government knew the attacks were coming, and let them happen, so they could use them to start invading the middle east..

The second, is "MIHOP", or "Made It Happen On Purpose"...the central thesis of this argument being that certain criminal elements within the US government (not the whole damned thing, you nutters) planned and carried out the attacks, to facilitate invasion of middle eastern countries, for the purpose of securing resources.

The third is "BPWTDI", or "Brown People With Turbans Did It", also known as "The official story"...the central thesis of this argument being that Osama Bin Laden ordered the attacks, him and his band of "Evil Henchmen™" planned the attacks, then they got some people to go carry it out, with no outside help whatsoever.

Then there's the fringe theories, like aliens, UFOs, king kong, badgers with flamethrowers, and a whole catalogue of similarly mindless rubbish...

Anyway, we'll just toss the fringe theories into the bin straight off..they're not worth even looking at...so well skip straight to the brown people theory. The brown people theory is, in my opinion, the weakest of the bunch....there's a lot to support the weakness of it...little things like Bin Laden being a former/current CIA asset, and him still receiving support and medical attention from the US government.

This doesn't even take into account the outright impossibility of some of the elements of the brown people theory having been the true way things went down..Things like a lot of the positively identified hijackers showing up alive and well in the middle east, a passport surviving the fireball at impact, a little jet fuel burning for under an hour brining down three steel framed buildings, one of which wasn't even hit by a plane. If the official story is to be believed, then that would make the WTC incident the ONLY instance we see of steel framed buildings being brought down by fire....ever...i'm sorry, but that doesn't flush....

Then there's LIHOP....this is middle on my scale of believability....It's nearly as plausable as MIHOP, but not all of the pieces fit together just right.

Which brings us to MIHOP..the crazy thing about MIHOP is that EVERY piece of evidence, every clue, every little thing, even stuff you might not notice at first...it ALL has a place...everything fits PERFECTLY....

You've got PNAC talking about a "New Pearl Harbor" type event being necessary to facilitate a reinvigoration of american power, then you've got Bush, and his ties to the oil industry, and middle eastern business interests. Then there's cheney, with his still strong ties to halliburton, who he later arranges high-paying no bid government contracts for. You've got strange power blackouts and "Security upgrades" accompanied by hordes of personnel at all hours of the night for weeks before the attack. There's Larry Silverstein taking out a MASSIVE insurance policy on the complex with specific protection against acts of terrorism.....there's much much more....all you need do is ask..

Then there's the pentagon....they expect us to believe that a man who could not even pass qualification to fly a cessna would be capable of flying a 757 with the kind of precision necessary to make the kind of strike that was made? Also, let's look at where the Pentagon was hit.....a section that had JUST been renovated and reinforced....the only part of the building that would be suitable to "catch" an aircraft...

and let's rewind a little bit.....the day before the attack, Rummy comes to congress, and lets them know that they've(the government) lost track of 3.2 BILLION dollars...

An IMMEDIATE investigation was launched, and the special group investigating the missing money, was housed in the section of the pentagon that was hit. also in that section of the building was ONI. all the records for the investigation, along with the personnel assigned to it, were killed in the attack. The investigation never recommenced, and congress completely forgot about the missing money.

Fast forward....so the pentagon's hit....but by what?...notice there's no impact marks on the lawn, the hole is not consistant with what they're telling us hit the building, not to mention that according to actual flight data recorder numbers, the plane was over 400 feet off the ground at the time of impact...

We can't tell what actually hit it because the witnesses were less than useless, and the ONLY reliable witnesses, the multiple cameras pointed at the pentagon were silenced by government agents mere moments after the impact...Let's count em...there was a camera at the gas station across the street, a camera on the hotel across the street, a convenience store, virginia DOT camera, the security cam at the heliport, and security cams on the pentagon itself....that's like 7 cameras....all would have yielded perfectly good evidence as to what actually hit the building....

What do we get instead?...we get 5 blurry, non-consecutive frames from the helipad security cam....the view is obscured, the frames are blurry, and you can't make anything out but the fireball...

At this point, it's more likely that a cruise missile hit the pentagon, than a 757 piloted by an incompetent cave dweller

(Running short on characters now)

Then there's flight 93...that one's a doozy..i'll cover it in another post...

One last thing...where in the hell was all of our air cover during this circus?.....they were out, running drills....drills of hijacked airplanes hitting buildings, and russian missiles and bombers...this whole thing stinks of a false flag terrorism operation.

Indeed Daedalus,

For those that have done their homework, --case closed...for those that have NOT done their homework,...GET TO IT!!

We live in a a time that floats between those in the know and those with their heads in the sand,...

Technology will FORCE those with their heads in the sand to jerk their heads up and out and face the facts....

Good luck...

There are obviously some odd things that happened on 9/11, and I can't explain all of them.

But here is why I will never align myself with the "Truth Movement" again:

Originally posted by Daedalus
..the crazy thing about MIHOP is that EVERY piece of evidence, every clue, every little thing, even stuff you might not notice at first...it ALL has a place...everything fits PERFECTLY....

See that's fascinating and empowering and...unfortunately...not even close to true.

I'll just pick one of your points:

There's Larry Silverstein taking out a MASSIVE insurance policy on the complex with specific protection against acts of terrorism.....there's much much more....all you need do is ask..

Cool. I would like to ask how much Silverstein initially attempted to insure the Towers for? Any idea? Here's your "massive" policy as described by Forbes magazine...

Trade Center Financing on Shaky Ground
In its court papers, Swiss Re shows how Silverstein first tried to buy just $1.5 billion in property damage and business-interruption coverage. When his lenders objected, he discussed buying a $5 billion policy. Ultimately, he settled on the $3.5 billion figure, which was less than the likely cost of rebuilding.

So Silverstein attempted to woefully UNDER INSURE the towers but was set straight by his lenders (although possibly still not enough to make the KILLING you are implying). Makes no sense whatsoever that he is even being discussed as having inside knowledge of 9/11. None of his actions back those claims up.

See now if you just would have stuck with the odd way the towers collapsed, I wouldn’t have been able to respond…I just would have had to nod slowly.

But you got greedy and started writing fiction.

Streamline. Please. It’s the only way.

One of the BEST solutions to the 911 issue is understanding it was not only just a terrorist staged event, but actually a hegelian dialectic. It is a technique of creating ones own opposition in order to appear as the savior to the problem they created in the first place.

As Alex Jones puts it 'problem reaction solution' but it is also noted that this event also combined the Delphi Technique of driving everyones emotions, supporting those who wanted a 'state solution' whilst ostracizing anyone who brought forward a individual solution.

See everyone looks to the state or the collective as the solution in this problem. That is the very problem with it. Its akin to how the UN goes in to monitor a slaughter, and comes back to the world body and says, the situation is dire- we need more funding to combat this and bring effective solutions. In the end governments feed more money to the UN who never solves the original problem, but always uses it to grow itself stronger. If you do not think this is so please reflect the percentage of the time UN peace keepers actually use force to solve a problem, if the UN ever simply just provided weapons and support to counter a emerging threat. You see the truth is always the opposite of what we are told, the UN enters conflicts because it grows the UN, and does NOT solve anyones fighting.

Its like a bouncer looking after your bar who watches a brawl outside. He runs in and says theres 10 people fighting outside the door if you pay me 2X my rate I will put the fight out. So you the owner agree to this - to which he runs back outside and 'peacefully monitors' the fighting and comes back and says its worse! There are now 20 people fighting outside the bar. I've convened a panel of experts who suggest the solution is to pay me 4X my rate I WILL find a peaceful solution to the fighting. Then he runs back outside and 'peacefully monitors' the situation and by then everybody who was there got their beating and he runs back in and says Boss, our mission is a total success the fighting is ended, aren't you glad you increased my funding!! In fact if we hire more bouncers we can stop even MORE and LARGER brawls. And so the cycle of collectivism continues.


A very good site on deprogramming yourself on collectivism is found at www.freedom-force.org

So Silverstein attempted to woefully UNDER INSURE the towers but was set straight by his lenders (although possibly still not enough to make the KILLING you are implying). Makes no sense whatsoever that he is even being discussed as having inside knowledge of 9/11. None of his actions back those claims up.

Silverstein ate breakfast every morning in WTC1. The local 911 truth movement in New York was informed off record by Silversteins driver that on the morning of September 11th, Silverstein received a phone call and the driver only overheard "Its been cancelled." to which he promptly phoned his daughter to inform her as well that "Its been cancelled." What was cancelled, why is it coincidental, Its in the documentary itself about some locals who try to express their free speech in downtown NewYork and the things that they go through in doing this.

Originally posted by Essedarius

See that's fascinating and empowering and...unfortunately...not even close to true.

I'll just pick one of your points:

There's Larry Silverstein taking out a MASSIVE insurance policy on the complex with specific protection against acts of terrorism.....there's much much more....all you need do is ask..

Cool. I would like to ask how much Silverstein initially attempted to insure the Towers for? Any idea? Here's your "massive" policy as described by Forbes magazine...

Trade Center Financing on Shaky Ground
In its court papers, Swiss Re shows how Silverstein first tried to buy just $1.5 billion in property damage and business-interruption coverage. When his lenders objected, he discussed buying a $5 billion policy. Ultimately, he settled on the $3.5 billion figure, which was less than the likely cost of rebuilding.

So Silverstein attempted to woefully UNDER INSURE the towers but was set straight by his lenders (although possibly still not enough to make the KILLING you are implying). Makes no sense whatsoever that he is even being discussed as having inside knowledge of 9/11. None of his actions back those claims up.

See now if you just would have stuck with the odd way the towers collapsed, I wouldn’t have been able to respond…I just would have had to nod slowly.

But you got greedy and started writing fiction

Fiction?

Did you know that after the attack, he argued in court that each airliner strike was a SEPERATE act of terrorism, that would entitle him to collect TWICE on the policy?

did you also know that a jury sided with him?

did you know that just from building 7, he actually made a 500 million dollar profit?

In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million.

- Facing Our Fascist State, page 47

Take a look at this page, it's full of information regarding silverstein, and the insurance situation

there's no fiction here man....all of this interconnects..

Originally posted by Daedalus
Did you know that after the attack, he argued in court that each airliner strike was a SEPERATE act of terrorism, that would entitle him to collect TWICE on the policy?

I did know that.

Did you know that to collect insurance on separate occurences that Silverstein's lawyers had to argue AGAINST the paperwork used to bind the insurance (search WilProp Form), because Larry's broker used paperwork that SPECIFICALLY defines the 9/11 attacks as a "series of occurences" and only allows him to collect as ONE occurrence?

did you also know that a jury sided with him?

By deciding that certain insurance companies DID NOT USE the paperwork provided to them by Larry Silverstein.

The companies that clearly used the paperwork Larry gave to them...they never had their day in court. They simply paid on ONE OCCURENCE like Larry's paperwork told them to.

did you know that just from building 7, he actually made a 500 million dollar profit?

Good for him. That might cover his attorney fees for this whole mess.

Let me make something clear here: Larry Silverstein may actually end up making some money because of 9/11. But that's not what we're arguing, is it?

What we're arguing is whether or not he INTENTIONALLY situated himself to financially capitalize on the 9/11 attacks.

Clearly he did not. Quite the opposite.

And he is a perfect example of certain "Truthers" building their house on the sand when there is PLENTY of more legitimate stone to build on.

Originally posted by EssedariusI did know that.

Did you know that to collect insurance on separate occurences that Silverstein's lawyers had to argue AGAINST the paperwork used to bind the insurance (search WilProp Form), because Larry's broker used paperwork that SPECIFICALLY defines the 9/11 attacks as a "series of occurences" and only allows him to collect as ONE occurrence?

say what now?

By deciding that certain insurance companies DID NOT USE the paperwork provided to them by Larry Silverstein.

The companies that clearly used the paperwork Larry gave to them...they never had their day in court. They simply paid on ONE OCCURENCE like Larry's paperwork told them to.

again, what?

Good for him. That might cover his attorney fees for this whole mess.

Let me make something clear here: Larry Silverstein may actually end up making some money because of 9/11. But that's not what we're arguing, is it?

What we're arguing is whether or not he INTENTIONALLY situated himself to financially capitalize on the 9/11 attacks.

Clearly he did not. Quite the opposite.

Ok, so how is it clear that he didn't intentionally put himself in a position to make money off this?

And he is a perfect example of certain "Truthers" building their house
on the sand when there is PLENTY of more legitimate stone to build on.

You're not very good at debate...you ignored everything else in my initial post, and picked a single point to attack..and you're not even doing THAT well..

The case of the 9/11 truth movement isn't built solely on silverstein cashing in on the disaster..it's but one of many parts...there are others, like the towers collapsing the way they did, everything having to do with building 7, everything having to do with the pentagon, the cleanup, the obstruction of investigation at the time, the withholding of information relating to the events, the stuff leading up to, and immediately following the event in question...there's a lot here that you've chosen to ignore. When looking at something like this, you need to seriously look at who benefits...you follow the money, you usually find your culprits..

Would you like to perhaps discuss another aspect of this, rather than trying poorly to pick at something you consider "Easy"?

I can not, and WILL not address the contents of your post, unless you start making sense.

Originally posted by Daedalus
You're not very good at debate...you ignored everything else in my initial post, and picked a single point to attack..and you're not even doing THAT well..

Boy you got me. I'm super dumb.

I'm also done with people like you.

Have fun storming the castle.

Originally posted by Essedarius

Originally posted by Daedalus
You're not very good at debate...you ignored everything else in my initial post, and picked a single point to attack..and you're not even doing THAT well..

Boy you got me. I'm super dumb.

I'm also done with people like you.

Have fun storming the castle.

didn't say you were dumb..i just said you're not terribly good at debating.

You picked a small piece of my overall position, then attacked it, saying it was my whole position...so, in essence, you're attacking a distorted version of my position on the matter..that's called a straw man....

you wanna be done with "people like me" (wtfever that means), that's great...you come in here, spout a bunch of stuff that makes not much sense, then get pissy with me for not biting...i couldn't be happier to be rid of you.

You wanna actually debate the issue (9/11 as a whole) fine, i'll be around..if not, that's fine too....

Originally posted by Daedalus
You picked a small piece of my overall position, then attacked it, saying it was my whole position...so, in essence, you're attacking a distorted version of my position on the matter..that's called a straw man....

People don't like it when you point out their clever modus operandi.

So now he's done with people like you!


Usually the situation is that people will ignore things most "dissonant" with their current position and focus on things easier, take them one at a time, trying to justify them and force them to make sense with their current view of the world. Conspiracy theorists are conveniently stereotyped as saying crazy things, so that helps too.

What I rarely see is a "debunker" that focuses only on the scientific, objective points. Usually the "easy" points are the ones that have to do with what somebody says, who had a motive, political things, etc., and everybody jumps in on these. Nobody wants to explain how WTC7 fell, though.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Daedalus
You picked a small piece of my overall position, then attacked it, saying it was my whole position...so, in essence, you're attacking a distorted version of my position on the matter..that's called a straw man....

People don't like it when you point out their clever modus operandi.

So now he's done with people like you!

OMG! REALLY?!

Usually the situation is that people will ignore things most "dissonant" with their current position and focus on things easier, take them one at a time, trying to justify them and force them to make sense with their current view of the world. Conspiracy theorists are conveniently stereotyped as saying crazy things, so that helps too.

true...i mean, sometimes i'll even go after the easy stuff first, while i compose exactly what i should say to tackle the big stuff...but with something like 9/11 everything's pretty equally big..

What I rarely see is a "debunker" that focuses only on the scientific, objective points. Usually the "easy" points are the ones that have to do with what somebody says, who had a motive, political things, etc., and everybody jumps in on these. Nobody wants to explain how WTC7 fell, though.

well, the thing about building 7 is that there's really no way to explain it WITHOUT bringing up controlled demolition...the facts speak for themselves.

I mean, Simon said on the podcast how he was surprised more people weren't talking about building 7...and he's right...noone really talks about it, and they should be....building 7 really is kinda the smoking gun of the whole day...there was no reason for it to fall, yet it did....

[edit on 3-5-2007 by Daedalus]

You are testing me.

I promised myself I would quit wasting time on 9/11 threads and then you guys...it's evil. You're evil and you're testing me.

Here...I'll bring out the white flag and then we can be buds:

9/11 was totally an inside job.

Like Saul on the road to Damascus, I've seen the light and my life will never be the same.

I can't thank you guys enough for your deep wisdom and kind guidance.

I'm going away now on a long journey where I will picket places, shout things at passers by, and...if my heart is true...make sweet love to Rosie O'Donnell with the sound of Loose Change: Final Cut ringing tenderly in the background.

Fight on, my brothers.

Originally posted by Essedarius
You are testing me.

I promised myself I would quit wasting time on 9/11 threads and then you guys...it's evil. You're evil and you're testing me.

Here...I'll bring out the white flag and then we can be buds:

9/11 was totally an inside job.

Like Saul on the road to Damascus, I've seen the light and my life will never be the same.

I can't thank you guys enough for your deep wisdom and kind guidance.

I'm going away now on a long journey where I will picket places, shout things at passers by, and...if my heart is true...make sweet love to Rosie O'Donnell with the sound of Loose Change: Final Cut ringing tenderly in the background.

Fight on, my brothers.

O,o

You're an odd one...even on my WORST days i wouldn't want to even IMAGINE rosie o'donnell anywhere near naked, much less in any kind of adult situation

anyway, no tests here, just a friendly offer of debate on a topic that is quite important...there's no need for the sarcasm, and use of extremes and absolutes....it's kinda childish.





..I REALLY wish the OP poster would show up here....i'd LOVE to debate with them on the validity of the title of this thread

[edit on 4-5-2007 by Daedalus]

Originally posted by Daedalus
An IMMEDIATE investigation was launched, and the special group investigating the missing money, was housed in the section of the pentagon that was hit. also in that section of the building was ONI. all the records for the investigation, along with the personnel assigned to it, were killed in the attack.

I never heard about THAT one before, do you have a source for this info?
Not that i don't believe you, I am just curious here.

Cheers,
PepeLapew

Originally posted by Essedarius
You are testing me.

I promised myself I would quit wasting time on 9/11 threads and then you guys...it's evil. You're evil and you're testing me.

Here...I'll bring out the white flag and then we can be buds:

9/11 was totally an inside job.

Like Saul on the road to Damascus, I've seen the light and my life will never be the same.

I can't thank you guys enough for your deep wisdom and kind guidance.

I'm going away now on a long journey where I will picket places, shout things at passers by, and...if my heart is true...make sweet love to Rosie O'Donnell with the sound of Loose Change: Final Cut ringing tenderly in the background.

Fight on, my brothers.

Bye.

At least I will not have to read you cling to Sliversteins Insurance as your only straw for the 8 millionth time.

Originally posted by PepeLapew

Originally posted by Daedalus
An IMMEDIATE investigation was launched, and the special group investigating the missing money, was housed in the section of the pentagon that was hit. also in that section of the building was ONI. all the records for the investigation, along with the personnel assigned to it, were killed in the attack.

I never heard about THAT one before, do you have a source for this info?
Not that i don't believe you, I am just curious here.

Cheers,
PepeLapew

It was mentioned in a video i watched a few weeks back....i'll see if i can track it down after i get home from work

Just wanted to say i'm home, but i don't have time to find the source for that bit Pepe asked about just yet, my work schedule is insane...i hafta be back there in about 5 hours. I'm not skipping out on this, i WILL find a confirmable source, and get it to you as soon as possible.