'Conspiraloons' in the ascendancy?

[editor]

Sorry, but I don't argue with drunks.

I'm sober as a judge so could you tell me the plots he was directly involved with that killed millions of people, please.

Oh, and earlier on you deemed it pertinent to bring up the fact that Olsen remarried a year after his wife died. Why do you think that is relevant to the conspiracy argument, please?

 

[Pickman's model]

Why do you think that is relevant to the conspiracy argument, please?

he knew 9/11 was coming and so was lining up a new wife?

 

[kyser_soze]

That's not the same thing at all. You're talking about a transaction, the communication of information. The point at hand concerns a sentiment, the experiencing of an emotion.

Depends on the motivation for saying it. It's possible to act concerned about someone's wellbeing while having a personal ulterior motive that leaves the concern evaporating the instant the ulterior goal is fulfilled.

Journalists are adept at this - professing to really care about the person in front of them's problems with their primary motivating factor being the value of the story.

 

[Beanburger]

he knew 9/11 was coming and so was lining up a new wife?

Perhaps he'd insured his original wife!

 

[8den]

Sorry, but I don't argue with drunks.

Wriggle, wriggle wriggle.

Thats nice. Are you accusing me of being drunk? Based on? Is this the same quality of evidence you have against Olson directly planning mass murder?

 

[phildwyer]

I'm sober as a judge so could you tell me the plots he was directly involved with that killed millions of people, please.

Sure. The plot to illegally fund the Contras, and the plot to illegally place George W. Bush in the White House.

 

[Pickman's model]

Sure. The plot to illegally fund the Contras, and the plot to illegally place George W. Bush in the White House.

which of those killed millions of people?

 

[phildwyer]

Are you accusing me of being drunk?

Well spotted.

Based on?

The incoherent and illiterate raging abuse you've been posting up here all night.

Now, if you take my advice you'll go to bed.

 

[phildwyer]

which of those killed millions of people?

Both of them.

 

[8den]

Sure. The plot to illegally fund the Contras, and the plot to illegally place George W. Bush in the White House.

Phil thats fucking pathetic.

Remember you said

he has been directly involved in plots that have killed millions of people, not thousands. No-one should forget that, or forgive him.

He was Regan's lawyer during the Iran Contra hearings. How's that directly involved?

And he was Dubya's lawyer in Gore V Bush. How is that direct involvement with the murder of anyone? It's like saying Irving Kanarek's was "directly"
involved in the Manson murders.

This is fucking idiotic and insane.

 

[8den]

Well spotted.



The incoherent and illiterate raging abuse you've been posting up here all night.

Now, if you take my advice you'll go to bed.

Oh piss Phil, this is nothing less than shoddy ad hominems. You've been caught out on telling outrageous offensive lies and getting called on.

I'd fuck off Dwyer and go to bed, if I were you.

 

[editor]

Both of them.

Could you elaborate on his "direct involvement" with the deaths of these "millions" please, and detail the areas in which he took total control of the decision process in these matters?

 

[phildwyer]

He was Regan's lawyer during the Iran Contra hearings. How's that directly involved?

Can you believe this guy?

Anyway, to those of you are are both sober and sane: I'm logging off in a minute. I agree that Ted Olson's proven mendacity does not necessarily support the conspiracy theories about 9/11, so maybe it's not a proper subject for this thread. I do however recommend that you read up about him--he's among the more despicable of the Bush crew, which is really saying something.

Later all...

 

[8den]

Could you elaborate on his "direct involvement" with the deaths of these "millions" please, and detail the areas in which he took total control of the decision process in these matters?

Apparently Cheney took him aside on the steps of the supreme court in 2000 and told him

"Right Oslon, you need to win this one for us, because after a terrorist attack next year, we're going to launch a couple of illegal wars on the back of it".

Ted rose up and looked Cheney in the eye and said "Okay boss, but only if I have direct logistical control over troops, and the civilian policy in the warzone".

 

[phildwyer]

Could you elaborate on his "direct involvement" with the deaths of these "millions" please, and detail the areas in which he took total control of the decision process in these matters?

I didn't see this before I posted my last message.

As you know, and as everyone can see, I didn't say he "took total control of the decision process" in funding the Contras or getting Bush into the White House. He was however directly involved in both these plots, as I said. No-one would dispute that, not even him. Especially not him.

Do you now want to argue that these plots did not result in the death of millions of people?

 

[8den]

Can you believe this guy?

Anyway, to those of you are are both sober and sane: I'm logging off in a minute. I agree that Ted Olson's proven mendacity does not necessarily support the conspiracy theories about 9/11, so maybe it's not a proper subject for this thread. I do however recommend that you read up about him--he's among the more despicable of the Bush crew, which is really saying something.

Later all...

Yeah. I heard he actually personally led negotiations with Hezbollah, and learned to fly just so he could personally co ordinate the flights to the Contra.

 

[8den]

I didn't see this before I posted my last message.

As you know, and as everyone can see, I didn't say he "took total control of the decision process" in funding the Contras or getting Bush into the White House. He was however directly involved in both these plots, as I said. No-one would dispute that, not even him. Especially not him.

Do you now want to argue that these plots did not result in the death of millions of people?

WRIGGLE.

Shall I remind you of what you said; and how you emphasised it;

he has been directly involved in plots that have killed millions of people, not thousands. No-one should forget that, or forgive him.

Shall we look at the meaning of the word "directly"? Yes kids lets

.
1. In a direct line or manner; straight: The road runs directly north.
2. Without anyone or anything intervening: directly responsible.
3. Exactly or totally: directly opposite.
4. At once; instantly: Leave directly.
5. Candidly; frankly: answered very directly.
6. Chiefly Southern U.S. In a little while; shortly: He'll be coming directly.

He was one of the hundreds of lawyers involved in Bush V Gore. That doesn't make him directly responsible for the war that happened two years later.

He defended Regan during the Iran Contra hearings. That doesn't mean he organised sales of weapons to Iran.

This is just laughable Phil. Laughable.

 

[editor]

As you know, and as everyone can see, I didn't say he "took total control of the decision process" in funding the Contras or getting Bush into the White House. He was however directly involved in both these plots, as I said. No-one would dispute that, not even him. Especially not him.

Piss weak stuff, Phil. You may as well be arguing that the tea maker, or the office supplies clerk were also equally culpable.

Why did you bring up Olsen's remarriage by the way?

 

[Jazzz]

Being 'dissatisfied' with the investigation DOES NOT add up to support for your lunatic theories about faked calls, holographic planes, talking terriers, invisible explosives and the rest of the evidence free garbage you post up here - and it is supremely dishonest and disrespectful to try and suggest that it does.

Not one of those quotes supports your conspiracy claims about faked calls, so why did you post them here?

Well clearly many of them are considering that it may have been an inside job, so I guess they are not simply accepting the very soft evidence of phone calls as proving zip.

I mean look at yourself editor - you are holding up the words of a Bush crony as being your best shining evidence that all was fine and dandy with 9/11. Do you not see the incredible coincidence, that such a crucial report just happened to come from someone so close to our famously idiotic president?

It's extraordinary!

And the argument that you and others put is not a logical one - because logic will dictate that reported phone calls are just not hard evidence at all - but simply an emotional appeal. "it's the last words of someone about to die, so the story must be true".

Now here's the question of REAL hard evidence concerning flight 77, quotes from the site earlier.

 

[Jazzz]

Major General Stubblebine

A chap who has spoken out publicly this year.

General Stubblebine: I am Major General Albert Stubblebine. I am retired Army Major-General. In my last assignment -- my last command -- I was responsible for all of the Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world. I had responsibility for the Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence. They all belonged to me, in my last assignment. …

I was supposed to find out what the enemy was doing, before the enemy did it so that we could take action against the enemy. That's Intelligence, OK, before the fact. So, we always -- always -- rely not on a single piece of data, before we make a statement, but on multiple and the more pieces of data that you have that correlate, the better you know exactly what is going on. …

So I have had a lot of experience looking at photographs. I have looked at many, many different kinds of photographs, from many, many different platforms on many, many different countries, around the world.

Interviewer: OK. So on September the 11th, in 2001, what hit the Pentagon?

General Stubblebine: I don't know exactly what hit it, but I do know, from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane.

Interviewer: What made you believe that?

General Stubblebine: Well, for one thing, if you look at the hole that was made in the Pentagon, the nose penetrated far enough so that there should have been wing marks on the walls of the Pentagon. I have been unable to find those wing marks. So where were they? Did this vessel -- vehicle, or whatever it was -- have wings? Apparently not, because if it had had wings, they would have made marks on the side of the Pentagon.

One person counteracted my theory, and said, "Oh, you've got it all wrong. And the reason that it's wrong is that as the airplane came across, one wing tipped down and hit the ground and broke off." I said, "Fine, that's possible, one wing could have broken off." But if I understand airplanes correctly, most airplanes have two wings. I haven't met an airplane with only one wing. So where was the mark for the second wing? OK, one broke off -- there should have been a mark for the second wing. I could not find that in any of the photographs that I've analyzed. Now I've been very careful to not say what went in there. Why? Because you don't have that evidence. …

I did -- I've never believed that it was an airplane since I've looked at the photographs. Up until the time I looked at the photographs, I accepted what was being said. After I looked at it -- NO WAY!

Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career. Member, Military Intelligence Hall of Fame. source

 

[Jazzz]

This for me is perhaps the strongest objection to the official theory. Why did all the usual laws of aircraft accident investigation fail on 9/11? My bold

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view.

Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.

 

[claphamboy]

And the argument that you and others put is not a logical one - because logic will dictate that reported phone calls are just not hard evidence at all - but simply an emotional appeal.

The arguments that everyone else makes are not logical?

Now I know you are taking the fucking piss, nothing you have posted is fucking logical.

How do you sleep at night? I mean, with *them* coming to get you/me/everyone, how do you sleep?

You fucking delusional twat.

 

[editor]

This for me is perhaps the strongest objection to the official theory. Why did all the usual laws of aircraft accident investigation fail on 9/11? My bold

Funny how these people are almost always retired, isn't it?

More importantly, if "all the usual laws of aircraft accident investigation" indeed failed so dramatically on 9/11, why aren't there thousands of currently employed accident investigators all lining up to complain about such a bad job being done?

Why is that, do you think? Or are they all in on it as well or being kept quiet by The Man?

 

[8den]

A chap who has spoken out publicly this year.



Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career. Member, Military Intelligence Hall of Fame. source

He retired 30 years ago, and is most infamous in the men who stare at goats, was big into psychic weapons bullshit.

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view.

I'm sorry is he fucking retarded. Can you name one air crash in the past fifty years, where the wreckage was put on public display?

Would you like the list of agencies and emergency services that were in Shanksville, and at the Pentagon?

Volunteer fire fighters from three counties rushed to both crash sites, and spend weeks there painfully going through the wreckage, finding body parts and working with crash investigators, and the FBI.

Are all these hundreds of people in on the conspiracy you fucking loon?

 

[editor]

Oh, I see that the pilot has gone on record saying that all the investigators were in on the plot too! He also thinks the planes were switched (and the passengers all sent off to be slaughtered presumably) and missile pods invisibly mounted on the fake planes were used to blow up the towers.

Shame he hasn't got a scrap of evidence to back any of this insane shit up, but that's par for the course with these people.

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged...

I said to them, "At the present
time, it matters very little, what the purpose of that large object is---
what really matters is that by regulation, one would never see such
equipment that does not belong on a FAA Part 121, scheduled airliner,
therefore, that aircraft has been switched enroute with the authentic
Flight 175."

I can't be fucked to post up the source because I don't want to help promote these nutcases. Feel free to Google.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

WRIGGLE.

Shall I remind you of what you said; and how you emphasised it;



Shall we look at the meaning of the word "directly"? Yes kids lets



He was one of the hundreds of lawyers involved in Bush V Gore. That doesn't make him directly responsible for the war that happened two years later.

He defended Regan during the Iran Contra hearings. That doesn't mean he organised sales of weapons to Iran.

This is just laughable Phil. Laughable.

He has been directly involved in plots

................

 

[8den]

Oh, I see that the pilot has gone on record saying that all the investigators were in on the plot too! He also thinks the planes were switched (and the passengers all sent off to be slaughtered presumably) and missile pods invisibly mounted on the fake planes were used to blow up the towers.

Shame he hasn't got a scrap of evidence to back any of this insane shit up, but that's par for the course with these people.
I can't be fucked to post up the source because I don't want to help promote these nutcases. Feel free to Google.

I guess he's just ignoring the bit that it flew so low over at 8 lane highway at rush hour, that it clipped lamposts, and something to ignore.

 

[Jazzz]

Funny how these people are almost always retired, isn't it?

More importantly, if "all the usual laws of aircraft accident investigation" indeed failed so dramatically on 9/11, why aren't there thousands of currently employed accident investigators all lining up to complain about such a bad job being done?

Why is that, do you think? Or are they all in on it as well or being kept quiet by The Man?

I think you answer your own question. You must have an independent income to come out freely with this stuff. Otherwise you risk losing your job. That's why retired experts are featuring prominently. And also why they are worth paying attention to - they are speaking freely unmotived by employment pressures.

 

[free spirit]

I think you answer your own question. You must have an independent income to come out freely with this stuff. Otherwise you risk losing your job. That's why retired experts are featuring prominently. And also why they are worth paying attention to - they are speaking freely unmotived by employment pressures.

tbf as well, they're also much more likely to have the time and inclination to spend time voluntarily 'investigating' stuff, so it's not a massive surprise if retired experts get more involved in stuff like this.

 

[Jazzz]

He retired 30 years ago, and is most infamous in the men who stare at goats, was big into psychic weapons bullshit.

I was wondering how long it would take for that to be mentioned.

I'm sorry is he fucking retarded. Can you name one air crash in the past fifty years, where the wreckage was put on public display?

Nice twist. It's not about 'putting it on display'. Let's have a look at the most recent one, the crash of Air France flight 447 over the Atlantic.

Initially they found some debris. So what did they do?

Brazilian Air Force Colonel Jorge Amaral said, "the plan now is to focus our efforts to collect the debris and try to identify if they belong or not to the Air France plane,"

“We can’t really say this is part of the airplane. The command center needs to have at least one piece of the debris with a serial number to confirm that it belongs to the airplane,” he added. source

and the first debris didn't match up. So they kept looking, and eventually got it, spread over a forty-mile area. And amaral says again

Investigators planned to focus their efforts on finding serial numbers on some of the objects, Amaral said, to ensure that they came from the Air France plane. source

And when they did first match up a serial number, it was reported

It's not rocket science.

So where are the 9/11 serial numbers?