A Question of Motive

reply to post by Yankee451


The best expose of the motives of the mass murdering psychopaths is laid out in the writings of Dr. Griffin.
Que bono works for me.

Defense & War Spending Equal 94% Of All Federal Income Tax Revenues

People went cockeyed when Eisenhower warned the nation about the "Military Industrial Complex" but as the District of Criminals rob what they can, while they still can, most of the nation takes Ike's words to gospel now.

Disapproval of Congress has hit an all time record high of 84% according to a Gallup poll released August 16.

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

Can't disagree more.

911 is the tool we can use to expose institutional corruption and lawlessness.

As long as most people can believe airliners can destroy buildings 2000 times their own mass in less than 2 hours how can you explain motives to them? And who says all of the people involved had the same motive?

I just think it is pointless to argue vague psychological stuff when you can't nail down the solid material.

psik

reply to post by psikeyhackr

As long as most people can believe airliners can destroy buildings 2000 times their own mass in less than 2 hours how can you explain motives to them? And who says all of the people involved had the same motive?

If you've read the articles, they make it clear the motivations were myriad. The Military had their motivations, Silverstein had his, Cantor Fitsgerald had theirs, the Bush clan had theirs, etc.

I just think it is pointless to argue vague psychological stuff when you can't nail down the solid material.

There's nothing vague about leaders performing psychotic acts, and in that context, I find acts like 911 are easier understood. But in the context of this thread, there is no mention of psychological stuff, vague or otherwise. If you're referring to my Psychos thread, I'm happy to discuss it there.

reply to post by beijingyank


Thanks for the response, yeah I used to read David Ray Griffin's work back in the day when I still identified with this "Truth" group or that.

....before I went "rogue"...

I used to quote him and so forth, but now I think he's subtly supporting the concept of exotic weapons being used, and I'm sure that with an operation of this magnitude, only tried and true conventional means would have been used.

I haven't read him in a while, but if he's still as "mainstream" as before, I'd have to say he's probably controlled opposition too, like Rense, Alex Jones, Steven Jones, Jim Fetzer, et al.

Saying such things tends to ruffle feathers; that's my two cents, but I've been wrong before. Won't be the last time.

Would you listen to yourselves?

You have all these people concocting and executing some exotic plan to destroy these buildings and keep it a secret. Whether it’s for profit or revenge.

But these same people can’t plant a few WMDs to justify kicking Sadams butt?

You need to rethink the capabilities of the people at the top.

Originally posted by samkent
Would you listen to yourselves?

You have all these people concocting and executing some exotic plan to destroy these buildings and keep it a secret. Whether it’s for profit or revenge.

But these same people can’t plant a few WMDs to justify kicking Sadams butt?

You need to rethink the capabilities of the people at the top.

Hi, and thanks for the response.

Can you elaborate on what you mean and where in the articles they were concocting something?

Apparently, you are easier convinced there was no foul play. If all it takes is a lack of planted evidence to surmise these guys are telling the truth, what's to keep them from knowing as much? Have they admitted error and "uninvaded"?

Seems they could be as sloppy as they wanted, knowing the credulity of the average American detective. All they'd need is a corrupt media...but we don't have that here, do we?

originally posted by: ExPostFacto
reply to post by Yankee451

 

Wasn't ENRON files also destroyed in the WTC attacks? I heard some rumor a while back that the evidence was destroyed.

Late 2001 was “the height of the investigation into Enron, so very likely some of Enron’s SEC filings were destroyed when World Trade Center 7 came down.
Although a toss up as to whether Enron's auditor, Arthur Andersen, who was found guilty in a United States District Court of illegally destroying documents relevant to the SEC investigation destroyed the most..?

Bush also claimed that he was not close to now-convicted Enron founder Ken Lay.

2006?? The man who paid many of the biggest bills for George Bush's political ascent, Enron founder Kenneth Lay, was found guilty of conspiracy and fraud almost five years after his dirty dealings created the greatest corporate scandal in what will be remembered as an era of corporate crime.

In the past, the White House has resisted requests for information about its dealings with the energy industry.

The General Accounting Office, the investigative and auditing arm of Congress, threatened to sue Cheney after he declined to turn over documents about his meetings with Enron and others interested in the energy policy he was developing.
After the Sept. 11 attacks, GAO said the effort to get Cheney's records was no longer a priority.

Enron alumni also filled prominent slots in the Bush administration.
The president's chief economic adviser, Larry Lindsey, and the top trade negotiator, Robert Zoellick, both served as advisers to the company.
Secretary of the Army Thomas White was an Enron executive before joining the administration.
When he assumed the Army post, White was forced to sell more than $25 million in Enron stock, according to a financial disclosure form he filed.

When Vice President Dick Cheney drafted a new energy policy, he met with Lay and other Enron executives. Enron was reportedly the only company to be granted such a meeting.

(Kennyboy is no longer alive) also (Bush snr went to his funeral - but said nothing)
sorry for this being so lengthy..

a reply to: ExPostFacto

Sure was.. (but head office was Houston, Texas)

There is the $2.3 Trillion also misappropriated the day before the world changed.... Maybe Dov Zakheim should create a post, tell us what he thinks happened.

a reply to: ExPostFacto

sure was.. (HO in Texas though)
Enron's auditor, Arthur Andersen, was also found guilty in a United States District Court of illegally destroying documents relevant to the SEC investigation, which then voided its license to audit public companies.

(So yes files were destroyed.. oneway or another)

Motive...
Greed fulfills the answer to that question.

Those who are really greedy, will suffer for their actions.

Life always balances out.

a reply to: slatesteam

Except there was not 2.3 trillion misappropriated the day before 9/11. Old news.

a reply to: cheery1

I never thought this 3 year old post of mine would resurface

Of course, I never thought I would still be on ATS.

a reply to: ExPostFacto

Nothing disappears LOL!!!
Re: ATS (nor I)
I have managed to stay away from debating on the "web" (or "NET" similar thing) since the Marvie Marama (isael/Palastine) illegal piracy incident.
The urge returned.. Though too late it looks like the 911 threads have gone a bit quiet.

originally posted by: Yankee451
How can any of you 911 sleuths continue to investigate 911 without knowing the most likely motive?

Before we bicker about “how” it occurred, we should be talking about “why” it occurred. 911 appears to have been intended to:

1. Destroy evidence of institutional lawlessness in government, finance, military and business.
2. Silence investigations into the above.
3. Demolish the white elephants known as the Twin Towers.
4. Provide pretext for world war and hegemony in the guise of the Global War on Terrorism.
5. Allow the continuation of a culture of plunder and corruption

Now how does any of the above benefit al Qaeda?

Yes. Motive is a very good question to ponder. And with an event like 9/11, it's almost an overwhelming thing to try to wrap your mind around.

You have to ask yourself if this was "an inside job" what could possibly motivate such a thing?

When I started to really think about this, I had a number of possibilities in mind. Many of them kind of fall through when you start to really ask yourself if the necessary conspirators for something like 9/11 to be an inside job would really be motivated by something so seemingly petty.

I thought about things like insurance money and perhaps a desire to get rid of the buildings or whatever. They just don't seem to rise to the level that would drive people to mass murder on such a scale.

I eventually came to the conclusion that what I believe would have to be the most likely motive is some kind of updated totalitarianism.

Why have totalitarian governments historically failed? Because they were visible. People knew they were there. People knew they were being oppressed. As soon as people realize they're being deliberately oppressed by a tyrannical government, they will start to resist/protest/whatever. No matter how limited the protest, it will eventually have an effect.

A logical conclusion would be that if you want to institute something like a totalitarian system that will last, it needs some kind of a stealth feature that obscures it's true nature from the common people.

So what would they do? They'd want people to at least believe the government was always doing the right thing. Even if it is ruling with an iron fist, if people believe it is necessary, they will not resist.

I believe that IF 9/11 was an inside job, it was primarily intended to scare the hell out of everyone. And honestly. When you watch that footage, who can say it isn't terrifying?

And what was the most obvious consequence? I think it can realistically be said that freedom pretty much died that day. Even the features of American freedom that didn't immediately die instantly started to wither and become vulnerable to chipping away kinds of legal attacks. And we're still seeing the legal repercussions every day. Anytime a question of individual liberty comes up anywhere, 9/11 is there, lingering in the air like some kind of stench you can't get rid of.

I can remember that people immediately started to make crazy excuses for the worst invasions upon freedom imaginable. It wasn't too bad at first but you can really see what that has done to our culture now all these years later. The resistance to the concept of Big Brother has collapsed just like those buildings. I mean, for god's sake there's a TV show called "Big Brother" and people worship it!

As a total newbie to this topic, I realise this may seem random, but I have a question:

For those that believe 9/11 was an inside job, is it true that oil has now been debunked/dismissed as one of the previous possible motives?