Who Has "The Burden of Proof"??

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by jthomas
Here's where you're at: You say Darwin's conclusions are wrong. Then you say Darwin must accept your claims. And your claims are based on the "laws of physics." And Darwin must modify his conclusions according to your claims and the burden of proof is not on you to demonstrate your claims, because you have the "laws of physics" behind you.

Any questions?

Nope, no questions. You pretty much got it except you left out one important thing. Those laws and precedents have already been proven and reproven already. By far greater minds than my own, I might add.

Then we agree for once. Amazing.




[edit on 27-2-2008 by jthomas]

This is by far one of the best studies done post 9-11 in relation to thermite being involved in the destruction of the world trade building and also building #7. It is a long read so take a deep breath. The truth can't be rapped up in a few paragraphs.

wtc.nist.gov...

Some of you may have already read some of his theories involving the World Trade Center, but I have not read a better argument in the fact that thermite was involved on 9-11. This is the one and only key to prove that these buildings were brought down by implosion.

Biography on Stephen Jones:

en.wikipedia.org...

Guz

reply to post by Griff


There's a big difference in -"it could've happened this way" and "we have proof that it happened this way" though. You'd still have to tear walls out to get to those support beams, which would be somewhat conspicuous.
How's this for a conspiracy- the original contractor that built the building used substandard steel/materials? I don't have proof, but hey, it could've happened.

Originally posted by percievedreality

You stated, "I haven't yet seen a credible explaination why folk, who having no prior background for mass murder and treachery,"

Whoa, no prior background? As long as humans have inhabited the earth there have been power showdowns between them, aka wars. What do you think Pearl Harbor was, a real attack that could not have been avoided? No, just as the case for 9/11, the government CHOOSE not to hinder the attack but rather capitalize on it with the effects it had on the citizens of its' state. They know that people are willing to fight when they perceive a threat, otherwise they are normally peaceful. Take one for the "team" and then you have envoked a mental change in your following and can now do whatever you wish as their "leader" including leading them into battle under the false assumption that they are doing a duty in protecting you. People are way more easy to manipulate than you think!

As to you statement, "If they're really that powerful, why would they need to go to such lengths to creating a hoax?" Well, then I will respond by asking you a question. If they are really that powerful, then why do you think it would be "such a length" for them to go to in order to create the hoax? It would have been easy, especially if they knew it was coming and had time to figure out how to direct it to their liking. Let's play some war games...ensure the WTCs come down, make sure the Pentagon is also hit, etc, etc.

[edit on 26-2-2008 by percievedreality]

How about an answer that's not disengenuous. Yes throughout human history, their has been villainy. That wasn't the point I made. I'm talking about specific people here, not the human race. It's quite a leap to say that someone without any background for having been criminal, murderous, treacherous, etc... would intentionally have 3,000 of their fellow countrymen(as well as various foreign visitors) murdered. Are there traitors throughout history? Of course. Are they all in the same government and numerous civilian agencies/private companies, and all in collusion? I haven't seen anything that would lead me to that conclusion. There isn't any amount of money that would cause me to betray my country, and I don't automatically assume that everyone else is for sale either(especially when I haven't seen evidence showing this to have happened to anybody involved).

Why would we need to be at war to feel like we're being protected? That's some crazy logic? Wouldn't we feel more protected if we weren't attacked, or at war?

I don't believe there is a shadow government, or that they're that powerful. I do believe there are various special interests who are more or less influential in matters of domestic or foreign policy. Can people be manipulated- sure. I don't believe that on a mass scale you're gonna have a bunch of Derek Zoolanders trying to kill the Prime Minister of Malaysia when they here a song though. Manipulation isn't an exact science. Not everyone is susceptible/vulnerable to the same things, so having masses all reacting to the same things isn't gonna happen. Manipulating someone into treachery is very unlikely, unless you're blackmailing them over another pretty serious situation.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
There's a big difference in -"it could've happened this way" and "we have proof that it happened this way" though.

When have I ever declaired that I have proof of my theories? At least physical, tangible proof? Other than not believing what we are told is the whole truth.

You'd still have to tear walls out to get to those support beams, which would be somewhat conspicuous.

Do you work in an office building? I work in a 13 story building. There is maintenance going on all the time. Do we know what everyone is doing on these 13 floors at a given time? No. I hear banging and stuff all the time. Now, imagine a 110 story building.

How's this for a conspiracy- the original contractor that built the building used substandard steel/materials?

You could be right on the money. Think about who funded the project and where they got their materials. I have heard conjecture that something like halfway through, they changed to a cheaper steel manufacturer. All conjecture of course and I have no definitive proof.

I don't have proof, but hey, it could've happened.

Quite right. Anything could have happened. And until full disclosure is seen from the government, we will never know. And these discussions will go on for ever too.

This whole goddamned thread just got punked. The OP had a great topic for some worthy discussion, but that discussion got derailed right quick.

I've never yelled psy-op before, but this thread reeks of it.

There is a poster on this thread writing lucid, intelligent, well thought out deflections. Not only do the sentence structure and grammer scream "brilliant individual," but the specific placement of bold text is completely calculated to have a psychological effect on those who may be unsure of the subject and are visiting ATS as a part of a larger quest. Bold text is not as simple as control B or whatever your word processor's hotkey is, you have to either type in these ][ things or click the little B button on the "post reply" screen.

The poster in question is also completely failing to provide any actual argument, instead he simply asserts himself with 100% certainty and authority. The objective with this type of arguing is not to get a rational and inquisitive debator to perhaps view things more objectively and come to a rational conclusion, the objective is to slam shut an opening mind before it researches a subject too deeply.

To be fair, I've seen this type of arguing on both sides of not only this subject, but many others. However, the level of skill this poster is demonstrating leads me to believe he is a professional.

And no, I'm not debating this subject anymore, I'm a cold, unfeeling ass and if I posted my true feelings about the subject both sides would hate me.

Originally posted by Sunsetspawn
And no, I'm not debating this subject anymore, I'm a cold, unfeeling ass and if I posted my true feelings about the subject both sides would hate me.

I wouldn't hate you. I can take criticism. What I can't take is badgering and trolling.

One thing I do hate though is being lumped in with everyone else just because I have a few questions that should have been answered by now.

Just because I believe there was outside help (other than plane damage and fires) to fell those buildings does NOT mean I am accusing the US government of anything. Other than covering up the truth of what really happened. Imagine if it were actually true that the terrorists were able to plant a few micro-sized nuclear bombs or something. Would the government really want to tell us this? No. But, I'm sick of "them" deciding what I can and can not handle.

Some posters around here have a hard time differentiating between people. I am NOT Alex Jones (or part of his movement) for Christ sakes.

Ok. Rant over.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Why would we need to be at war to feel like we're being protected? That's some crazy logic? Wouldn't we feel more protected if we weren't attacked, or at war?

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion from my comments, as I never said or implied that. I did say, "They know that people are willing to fight when they perceive a threat, otherwise they are normally peaceful. Take one for the "team" and then you have envoked a mental change in your following and can now do whatever you wish as their "leader" including leading them into battle under the false assumption that they are doing a duty in protecting you." But we were attacked (supposedly by Islamic terrorists) causing many to assume that we were not safe and needed to protect ourselves by going to war in two Middle eastern nations. My point being that the 9/11 inccident was used as a psychological tool against the people of this country to further the agenda of marching into war.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
I don't believe there is a shadow government, or that they're that powerful. I do believe there are various special interests who are more or less influential in matters of domestic or foreign policy. Can people be manipulated- sure. I don't believe that on a mass scale you're gonna have a bunch of Derek Zoolanders trying to kill the Prime Minister of Malaysia when they here a song though. Manipulation isn't an exact science. Not everyone is susceptible/vulnerable to the same things, so having masses all reacting to the same things isn't gonna happen. Manipulating someone into treachery is very unlikely, unless you're blackmailing them over another pretty serious situation.

We have had some limited debates before BlueRaja, so your position is not a surprise to me. However, I think that you should do some more research on the topic of a secret shadow government and the connections between the worlds elite, ie Builderburgers, Rothchilds, Rockerfellers, etc. You stated that you "do believe in various special interests who are more or less influential in matters of domestic and foriegn policy." Okay, well what logistically is stopping you from taking it a bit farther and hypothosising that infact they are the most influential groups in these matters and thus dominate and control it completely? I agree that Zoolander brainwashing, or Frank Durbin wearing a mind-controlling watch has nothing to do with reality of how things are done. Hollywood at its best!

Finally, I would like to point out that, you do not need to manipulate people into treachery if they believe that their actions are part of their job duties. Much like many people who were "just doing there job" on 9/11 by taking part in the "emergency preparedness senarions" or "war games" and such, that caused so much confusion and led to the inability to respond. I am not sure how at this point people can't see how planned it was. I recently read somewhere, that people normally accept the fact that the government showed gross negligence and incompetence that day. However, it does not seem to have negatively affected the publics' view of their government. What makes people believe that our own government, having admitted to gross negligence and incompetence on their part surrounding the events of 9/11, didn't continue with this work ethic, again showing gross negligence and incompetence on their part, when they did their "investigations"? I see no evidence that they changed their ways.

Originally posted by percievedreality
What makes people believe that our own government, having admitted to gross negligence and incompetence on their part surrounding the events of 9/11, didn't continue with this work ethic, again showing gross negligence and incompetence on their part, when they did their "investigations"? I see no evidence that they changed their ways.

I gave you a star for this part. Very well put.

Originally posted by Sunsetspawn

The poster in question is also completely failing to provide any actual argument, instead he simply asserts himself with 100% certainty and authority. The objective with this type of arguing is not to get a rational and inquisitive debator to perhaps view things more objectively and come to a rational conclusion, the objective is to slam shut an opening mind before it researches a subject too deeply.

To be fair, I've seen this type of arguing on both sides of not only this subject, but many others. However, the level of skill this poster is demonstrating leads me to believe he is a professional.

This is exactly what led me to state previously in this topic..."I am sure you are just doing your job" This person is a "professional". Dis-infomation artist and professional debater for our government, I have no doubts of this! They have been coached how to do this and I and Sunsetspawn see this. I thought we had moderators on this board that would be able to see this also and stop this derailing that occurs. Is it any wonder that we get nowhere when we are up against people like this?

reply to post by percievedreality


What makes you so certain that our government was intent on going to war that they felt the need to kill 3,000 on our soil, to get the population on board? Prior to 9/11 did you have the same feeling about Republicans, the military, etc...in general? If there is indeed a shadow government, why didn't they conduct this type of operation under Clinton(as many here say he's buddies with the Bushes and part of the NWO too)? CTers complain that there are holes in the official story, yet there are an incredible amount of holes in trying to connect all the dots they'd have us believe.

As far as taking leaps from special interests having some influence, to them being all powerful- well if I saw evidence of this it'd be helpful. I don't automatically assume that secret societies are sinister, or that being elite means one has ill will towards their countrymen. If the Rothschilds, Bilderbergs, members of the CFR, etc... were indeed up to no good, why is their existence even known? Wouldn't it be better if the unsuspecting masses had no idea about them? I'm more concerned about ideological differences than in club memberships.

Originally posted by BlueRaja

What makes you so certain that our government was intent on going to war that they felt the need to kill 3,000 on our soil, to get the population on board? Prior to 9/11 did you have the same feeling about Republicans, the military, etc...in general? If there is indeed a shadow government, why didn't they conduct this type of operation under Clinton(as many here say he's buddies with the Bushes and part of the NWO too)?

It is not so much that they "felt the need" but rather saw it coming and did nothing to stop it, instead choosing to capitalize on it. Motives, you ask? Probably the usual arguements you seen thrown out; power, money, control of natural resources, control of weaponary, control of technologies. Yes, prior to 9/11 I pretty much had the same views towards Republicans and our military that I do now. Actually,I would say that I have changed my mind when it comes to Democrats since 9/11. You see, Rep/Dem, aka the 2 party system is not benficial to our democracy, it promotes people to take sides (right or left, conservitive or liberal). The shadow government knows this and benefits from it. I would not agree with you though, that the intial planning for such an operation did not occur during the Clinton era. Bill and Hillary are most certainly part of the secret government and even Bill got warnings as early as 1997 about Al Quidas' intentions and did nothing.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
As far as taking leaps from special interests having some influence, to them being all powerful- well if I saw evidence of this it'd be helpful. I don't automatically assume that secret societies are sinister, or that being elite means one has ill will towards their countrymen. If the Rothschilds, Bilderbergs, members of the CFR, etc... were indeed up to no good, why is their existence even known? Wouldn't it be better if the unsuspecting masses had no idea about them? I'm more concerned about ideological differences than in club memberships.

Their existence is known simply because they have been around for a very long time. I beg to differ, "Wouldn't it be better if the unsuspecting masses had no idea about them?" Yes it would and that is actually the case. Go ask 10 random people if they know about the NWO, Rothschilds, Bilderbergs, members of the CFR, and I would bet probably 80% would have no knowledge of such things. Thus there is no revolt (as of yet) and their agenda makes progress unhindered.

reply to post by percievedreality


I don't think that because we have a 2 party system, that has anything to do with whether someone is liberal or conservative. We could have a 10 party system, and people would be liberal or conservative. What we do have is a system where you pick the party/candidate that's closest to your views. The problem only exists if there isn't a candidate that is close to your views whether those views are liberal or conservative. I'm still failing to see how a government would think that itself or the country would be better off in a state of war. You don't need to be at war to protect technology or resources. You may be at war if your access to resources is threatened, but that wasn't the case prior to or even after 9/11.
I know a lot of folks will say that it's all about profiteering. How many people are actually getting filthy rich is my question? How much do you think weapons designers/builders make? How much does the average oil company employee make? How much have politicians made over their base salary. The numbers of folks who have made $$$$ is pretty small, compared to the numbers that would've been involved in conducting a staged attack on the US. Have all the employees, both civilian and government been paid off?

Originally posted by percievedreality


Their existence is known simply because they have been around for a very long time. I beg to differ, "Wouldn't it be better if the unsuspecting masses had no idea about them?" Yes it would and that is actually the case. Go ask 10 random people if they know about the NWO, Rothschilds, Bilderbergs, members of the CFR, and I would bet probably 80% would have no knowledge of such things. Thus there is no revolt (as of yet) and their agenda makes progress unhindered.

Being that their existence is known-albeit not commonly spoken about in day to day conversation, would it not stand to reason that if they were indeed up to sinister plots, that somebody(not CTers) might be interested in what exactly that might be?

reply to post by BlueRaja


No, they have not all been "paid off", as you suggest. For most, they never even realized that what they were doing (on the job) was actually a small part of a much larger devious plan or deception. So, no, they would not have been asking for a pay off to keep quiet. Those that (maybe) did were most likely removed from position and depending on their stubborness, probably killed. Also, understand that I was not talking about going to war to protect all those things I previously mentioned, in the sense that they already belonged to us. I meant going to war to TAKE these things away from others and ADD them to what is already owned and controlled by us.

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Being that their existence is known-albeit not commonly spoken about in day to day conversation, would it not stand to reason that if they were indeed up to sinister plots, that somebody(not CTers) might be interested in what exactly that might be?

Yes, most definetly so. However, these people ARE CTers, because if they believe this kind of thing then they are labeled as such, by the politicians, the media, colleages, etc. Just like our divided Congress, or our divided nation of citizens (liberal vs conservative) we ALL have no power to change their agenda without getting together in a mass coup to do so. As long as we are divided, this is not going to happen and the NWO is just fine with that.

[edit on 27-2-2008 by percievedreality]

reply to post by percievedreality


How much oil have we "taken" or kept others from having? I don't buy the conspiracy was so compartmentalized that nobody could possibly know if they were part of some plot. We aren't talking about folks without GEDs working in highly technical fields. These would've been experienced folks, that would notice things out of the ordinary, even in a training excercise.
I also know that the more complicated the plan, the more likely something's not gonna go as planned. I'm supposed to believe that they got it right on their first attempt, without any mistakes or anyone the wiser? Even brilliant military strategists can have a bad day, if luck isn't on their side.

reply to post by percievedreality


I was thinking more along the lines of the FBI, Attorney General, IRS, etc..or are all of these agencies merely NWO tools down to the last man?

I like to think that the "burden of proof" ultimately rests on the person(s) to whom it matters. That is, I can tell you all kinds of crazy stories, and if I don't care if you believe me or not, then I'm not going to work too hard to convince you. But for some reason it sticks in your craw that I might be lying, then it might be up to you to prove me wrong.

Of course, not caring doesn't make my stories any more true, but it doesn't matter as long as I don't care. I could be in a different spot if it mattered whether you believed me. Then I'd have to either put up or shut up.

It's like in any relationship. The one who cares the least always has the most power.

[edit on 27-2-2008 by Nohup]

Originally posted by BlueRaja

How much oil have we "taken" or kept others from having? I don't buy the conspiracy was so compartmentalized that nobody could possibly know if they were part of some plot. We aren't talking about folks without GEDs working in highly technical fields. These would've been experienced folks, that would notice things out of the ordinary, even in a training excercise.

I also know that the more complicated the plan, the more likely something's not gonna go as planned. I'm supposed to believe that they got it right on their first attempt, without any mistakes or anyone the wiser? Even brilliant military strategists can have a bad day, if luck isn't on their side.

I don't know how you realistically expect me to answer your first question. I have no idea. That is just it, to them it wasn't out of the ordinary, they were doing their job that morning introducing 50 or so false radar blips, ordering fighter jets to Canadian airspace, etc. How do you know what is out of the ordinary when you are running war game scenarios where your job is to introduce confusion and false info??? It was all part of the war game that was being played that day, how were they to know it was not a game, but real?

As to your second paragraph, things did not go as planned. The Shanksville plane never made it to its intended target of WTC7, it was delayed on takeoff and had to be shot down because they had already showed great incompetence with the first three planes. They had to do it, they knew that they couldn't allow it to get there at that point, hours after the others had already hit there targets. So there was a limit to what they thought the people would believe! But what do you know, they still dropped the building and blamed it on structural damage (and fires) from the other WTCs. That was easier to sell to the people than another plan coming unhindered from Pennsylvania back to NY after it was already clear that we were under attack. Liquid metal was videotaped pouring out of windows before the buildings fell! Things did not go as planned. That is why us CTers continue on. There were definite signs (mistakes, IMO) that made it out of suppression and made us question the events that they say took place that day.