Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

9/11 a conspiracy?

Flavour said:
i thought all along the hologram thing was made up by the mods to take the piss out of Jazz... i thought the same about the lizards until i discovered david icke was a real person... hahahah!!!!! that's hilarious!!! :D:D:D
Click to expand...

I think the hologram idea was invented by, or at least promulgated by David Shayler the ex-MI5 operative. He was trying to promote a book at the time though. All's fair in love and publishing.
 
I don't believe that holograms were used on 9/11, and have never stated so. I think it was drone planes.

All I've said about the holograms is that the idea might not quite be so 'out there' as it first appears and that the technology could well exist.
 
Jazzz said:
I don't believe that holograms were used on 9/11, and have never stated so. I think it was drone planes.
Click to expand...
What remarkable technology did they use to make all the real passenger planes disappear without trace (and without a single soul on the planet noticing a thing)? And what technology did they use to perfectly fake intimate phone calls from those on the plane? And where did these remarkable, eye-witness foolin' planes suddenly appear from? And how come no one noticed them being launched?
Jazzz said:
All I've said about the holograms is that the idea might not quite be so 'out there' as it first appears and that the technology could well exist.
Click to expand...
Only in the sci fi fantasy book set in the year 2012 that you mistook for a real army manual.
 
And more to the point, were or were not these "drones" piloted by shape-shifting pink lizards, that's what I want to know. :p
 
In answer to the thread's question, yes it was. Who did the conspiring is what is open to question. But it was a conspiracy, that then turned into action. Theory and planning converted into practice.

The official story is a fabrication.

LIHOP is very difficult to believe, far far too many people required to be in on the act.

Staggering incompetence by the biggest empire the world's ever seen seems too far out to accept. And if it was this, then you sure would have expected a few people to have been brought to book for their irresponsibility in protecting america.

No, the most likely scenario is MIHOP. Only those members of PNAC need have been involved. A quiet word with obl or any other CIA operative out there in saudi/pakistan/afghanistan and just let them all get on with the whole plan and execution of the plan. No missiles needed, no explosives, none of all that stuff that is termed under 'conspiracy guff'.
 
fela fan said:
Staggering incompetence by the biggest empire the world's ever seen seems too far out to accept.
Click to expand...
Of course! Because America never, ever makes hugely costly and embarrassing cock ups as a result of incompetence, misunderstandings and a lack of communication, does it fela?!

Oh, hang on....
 
editor said:
Of course! Because America never, ever makes hugely costly and embarrassing cock ups as a result of incompetence, misunderstandings and a lack of communication, does it fela?!

Oh, hang on....
Click to expand...

Editor, for a journalist you make some pretty staggering leaps of meaning.

I never said that, nor even implied it, but nevertheless you have created this connection.

Of course they've been incompetent, friendly fire is one of their specialities.

However, the massive levels of incompetence displayed before and during 911 are on a scale that i believe impossible from the world's arch hegemony, the world's biggest and most impregnable empire history has thrown up.

Of all the possible scenarios, this seems just simply the most unlikely.
 
Martin1 said:
The one thing (for me personally) that points to a cover up more than anything else was the collapse of building "WTC 7" which sustained very minor damage, but still managed to collapse. Several other surrounding buildings suffered far worse damage and still stood. I can't make sense of that one aspect, other than cover-up.
Click to expand...
Not according to the firemen who are recorded as having concerns about it collapsing to the degree that they pulled their men out. There are recorded quotes stating that a third of the south wall was holed and there was a major blaze throughout the building.
 
Jazzz said:
Indeed, WTC6 actually stood between the twin towers and WTC7 yet remained standing (although completely gutted by fire).
Click to expand...
And WTC was considerably lower than WTC 1, 2 and 7
 
fela fan said:
In answer to the thread's question, yes it was. Who did the conspiring is what is open to question. But it was a conspiracy, that then turned into action. Theory and planning converted into practice.

The official story is a fabrication.

LIHOP is very difficult to believe, far far too many people required to be in on the act.

Staggering incompetence by the biggest empire the world's ever seen seems too far out to accept. And if it was this, then you sure would have expected a few people to have been brought to book for their irresponsibility in protecting america.

No, the most likely scenario is MIHOP. Only those members of PNAC need have been involved. A quiet word with obl or any other CIA operative out there in saudi/pakistan/afghanistan and just let them all get on with the whole plan and execution of the plan. No missiles needed, no explosives, none of all that stuff that is termed under 'conspiracy guff'.
Click to expand...
This is only true if you disregard LIHBA. The idea that you can have a quiet word with OBL or anyone else and precipitate an event like this a few months or years down the line is quite fancifiul. It's more likely that AQ is just pissed off with the US attitude to Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
fela fan said:
Editor, for a journalist you make some pretty staggering leaps of meaning.
Click to expand...
Hypocrisy-o-Meter emits large 'Star Trek'-like flashes of white sparks as the needle accelerates into a red 'overload' reading.
 
MikeMcc said:
This is only true if you disregard LIHBA. The idea that you can have a quiet word with OBL or anyone else and precipitate an event like this a few months or years down the line is quite fancifiul. It's more likely that AQ is just pissed off with the US attitude to Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Mike, let it happen by accident.

'let' implies a conscious allowing of something to happen.

'accident' implies something that happens outside of a conscious will for it to happen.

I therefore suggest that letting something happen by accident is an oxymoron, is something that is not really possible.

But either way, what you say has its merits. That's the bloody trouble with the whole thing.

And if a few yanks were involved in the planning of it all, then this is the singular reason they could get away with it. The speculation so outweighs everything else.
 
editor said:
Hypocrisy-o-Meter emits large 'Star Trek'-like flashes of white sparks as the needle accelerates into a red 'overload' reading.
Click to expand...

You've done it again.

You've run away from the argument, knowing full well you've lost it.
 
I'm no expert on any of this but I wouldn't be surprised if WTC-7 WAS demolished deliberately cos it was full of 'sensitive' documents etc.

That the other buildings were taken down by the airliners seems pretty well beyond dispute amongst the reality-based community, though.

e2a - it also wouldn't surprise me if there was a perfectly innocent explanation for WTC-7, though, it's just that I haven't seen a convincing 'de-bunking' - yet!
 
fela fan said:
You've run away from the argument, knowing full well you've lost it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, what "argument" was that then? I must have missed that.

You've just posted up a load of the usual vague, fact-free, evidence-unsupported conjecture along the lines of, "America's so brilliant and clever they can't make big mistakes, ever." And I tore that claim apart.

As for the rest of your mumblings, there's nothing of substance in there whatsoever, just a load of ill- informed personal opinion.
 
fela fan said:
Mike, let it happen by accident.

'let' implies a conscious allowing of something to happen.

'accident' implies something that happens outside of a conscious will for it to happen.

I therefore suggest that letting something happen by accident is an oxymoron, is something that is not really possible.

But either way, what you say has its merits. That's the bloody trouble with the whole thing.

And if a few yanks were involved in the planning of it all, then this is the singular reason they could get away with it. The speculation so outweighs everything else.
Click to expand...
Let it happen by accident means just that, it happened through mis-judgement and mstakes in handling and gathering intelligence information. 'Let' does not necessarily imply intent, it can also include acts of omission.

If a person fails to close a gate properly and an animal escapes, that person 'let' the animal out, but did not necessarily intend to do so.
 
8ball said:
I'm no expert on any of this but I wouldn't be surprised if WTC-7 WAS demolished deliberately cos it was full of 'sensitive' documents etc.

That the other buildings were taken down by the airliners seems pretty well beyond dispute amongst the reality-based community, though.

e2a - it also wouldn't surprise me if there was a perfectly innocent explanation for WTC-7, though, it's just that I haven't seen a convincing 'de-bunking' - yet!
Click to expand...
There's a few good ones around. Check out http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm But the idea they'd destroy a building rather than buy a few shredders is frankly, stupid ;)
 
fela fan said:
:D :D

Yer a lightweight in debate editor. There's no getting away from it. The funny thing is that you think you're good at it.
Click to expand...

In the view of you and your ilk, someone's only "good" at debate if they agree with you.
 
Well, let's see:

- instead of stemming the abuse he actively promotes it, even when unprovoked!!!:eek: [and he is a MOD, FFS...:rolleyes:]

- he's accusing others of not understanding the subject matter, i.e. of believing in stuff just because someone wrote it on the net, whilst he himself backs it up by something someone else wrote on the subject - with no proof whatsoever but that person claims something has "no grounds and no proof whatsoever" and so that is much more cool and "in", 'cause he's "cynical"... errrmmm... 'scuze me: "critical"...:rolleyes:

- so, what gives him the right to judge? Well, he knows who's the authority....:rolleyes: And how do we knwo that he deserved that "authority"?!? Guess... :D
 
Oh cripes, now i remember you!

You're missing out on a lot of history here. Plus you have no idea how much research has been done on the issue. By Jazzz, none, he just regurgitates crap from prisonplanet, by those that try to point out why Jazzz is talking crap, lots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
If the US govt organised 9/11 in order to justify a war in Afghanistran...
Replies
12
Views
37K
Citizen66
C
Maggot
  • Locked
9/11 The Conspiracy Files
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
212
Views
11K
editor
editor
Dillinger4
'9/11 Truth Movement' and Academia
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
537
Views
29K
kyser_soze
K
DrRingDing
  • Locked
Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job
15 16 17 18 19
Replies
543
Views
34K
FridgeMagnet
FridgeMagnet
friedaweed
  • Poll
So 9-11. Who really did it?
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
Crispy
Crispy
Back
Top Bottom