The Ultimate Con

[Rufus_1611]

You guys need to stay away from those sites that present actual facts. That's not fair on a conspiracy thread.:BangHead:

They don't seem to be too interested in "facts". I had tried to read the first document in the interests of giving it a fair shake and the first 10 pages of it, Mr. Roberts seemed less concerned with facts then he does with ad hominem and hyperbole. Here's some of the highlights...

Abby Scott and Ray Rivera made a funny video based on some of these en-counters, which captures a bit of the lunacy of the “Truthers:”

When I’m around the Truthers I often have the refrain of the old song “She’s More to be Pitied Than Censured” running around in my head:

She is more to be pitied than censured,
She is more to be helped than despised.
She is only a lassie who ventured
On life's stormy path, ill-advised.

They are the most delusional people I have ever met, and their delusions are dangerous.

They are repulsed by evidence like a vampire is by a cross.

Because these creeps have the nerve to call themselves a "truth movement."

Because it's difficult for people who were more seriously af-fected by the attacks (than I was) to debate the creeps with dignity.

Because the creeps make it necessary to defend the people who would enter the maws of hell to save them.

A good example of what a grandstanding, braying jackass Jones is can be seen in a video shot in New York...

Harassing people who may be asked to put their lives on the line so that Alex Jones can remain free to make a public jackass of himself.

Talk about the kettle and the black thing...

In the hands of this Hyperion of hyperbole, a “bullhorn” truly lives up to its name.

Perhaps, somewhere down the line he gets to business but to me, the first 10 pages was but a poorly written emotional rant, intended to assassinate character and do everything but focus on facts.

 

[Hopeful]

Poncho, thank you for answering my question directly; I've been away and just now getting back to this thread to check it out, and still haven't had time to research any of this further.

Two things: Other than the website with the OP video, do you recommend any sites that proffer the conspiracy theory, as you see it? Also, do I understand you right that you are saying that the "conspiracy theory" is NOT a theory that someone else has about an alternative explanation about 9/11....but, rather, the GOVERNMENT is the one that has produced an imaginary conspiracy theory about the arabs attacking America with planes--that no planes were involved and the arab/muslim angle is a myth? Like I said, I've been living under a rock for awhile, but I have not heard that before at all.

Thanks.

Poncho, you may have missed this post, so I thought I'd try again. If you have time to answer, I would greatly appreciate it. I am wanting to examine this issue from all angles. Thanks!

 

[KenH]

I am not ready to buy into the idea that our federal government was involved in a conspiracy(I think it was more a matter of incompetence) but there are a lot of unanswered questions and people should be able to ask questions on this board composed of fellow Christian posters without being put down.

 

[Hopeful]

I am not ready to buy into the idea that our federal government was involved in a conspiracy(I think it was more a matter of incompetence) but there are a lot of unanswered questions and people should be able to ask questions on this board composed of fellow Christian posters without being put down.

KenH, I sincerely hope I have not offended by asking the questions I have. Since you posted directly after my post, I wanted to make sure. I really AM asking questions of "both sides", so that I can learn about this from all viewpoints. There is so much I've missed in the way of news over these many months.

 

[KenH]

No, Hopeful, my comments were not directed at you at all. I think you and I can both be classified as people who have questions about what happened on 9/11/2001 and want answers.

 

[poncho]

Originally Posted by Hopeful
Poncho, thank you for answering my question directly; I've been away and just now getting back to this thread to check it out, and still haven't had time to research any of this further.

Two things: Other than the website with the OP video, do you recommend any sites that proffer the conspiracy theory, as you see it? Also, do I understand you right that you are saying that the "conspiracy theory" is NOT a theory that someone else has about an alternative explanation about 9/11....but, rather, the GOVERNMENT is the one that has produced an imaginary conspiracy theory about the arabs attacking America with planes--that no planes were involved and the arab/muslim angle is a myth? Like I said, I've been living under a rock for awhile, but I have not heard that before at all.

Thanks.

Poncho, you may have missed this post, so I thought I'd try again. If you have time to answer, I would greatly appreciate it. I am wanting to examine this issue from all angles. Thanks!

Sorry. had a busy day yesterday.

Where would you get the idea that no planes were used or that no arabs were involved? Angles, myths? I don't know about these kinds of things. There are others on the board that seem more qualified to comment on such things than I. I'd rather just deal in what can be documented.

I've never said there were no planes used or there were no arabs involved. People who say that kind of thing are the same ones who try to debunk all the facts that they don't want to face by calling myself and others who question the "official conspiracy theory" nutcases and wackos or they are deliberately "throwing garbage in the groceries" in order to spoil them all.

In other words they'll try and tie way-out wacky stuff like little green men and black helicopters filled with beings from a time warp and whatnot with real evidence in an attempt to discredit any and all evidence they're afraid others may look at seriously. It's an old warn out ploy, to borrow a phrase from one of my good friends here on BB "thinking people' can see right through it.

Tim2 has given us some good links to look at that claim to debunk everything the "truthers", "wackos", "creeps", "braying jackasses", "conspiracy theorists", etc., etc. have claimed. I suggest you have a close look at them. Then pick up a copy of David Ray Griffin's "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" and read it. Then you decide who has their facts straight and who doesn't. (while you're waiting for DRG's book to arrive read the book reviews at Amazon) :smilewinkgrin:

Ken, if the federal government can be accused of being involved in 9/11 at all it would be because of it's attempts at covering up and dodging a real investigation into what actually happened and who was responsible. I'd call that complicity but, I don't believe the federal government was "behind it all" as some would have you believe I believe. I don't buy into the ineptitude excuse either...governments always say "Oops, we're so dumb shame on us" but we can fix it, all we need is more money, more power, and more control, over and over and over. It's like listening to a skipping CD. And they always get more money more power and more control. If being inept paid ordinary citizens as well as it's paid our government then I'd suggest we all run down and sign up for ineptitude classes right away so we can all start profiting from being incompetent too.

 

[Hopeful]

The conspiracy theory is that 19 arabs, 15 of them Saudis conspired together and attacked the United States of America using planes as weapons. This of course has never been proven (beyond the theory) despite the fact that the government has grabbed massive amounts of power and control, reduced our liberties, grown twice it's size, put us closer to financial ruin and launched two invasions and occupations in Afghanistan and Iraq, opening a third front in Somalia while alienating much of the world against us and coming up with the "legal reasoning" of a "unitary decidership" in the USA all based on this one still unproven conspiracy theory.

You asked where I came up with the question I asked you--it is a result of your post I've quoted above--The way you phrased this, it sounded to me like you were saying that what I would call the generally-accepted account of 9/11 (that the WTC towers and the Pentagon were attacked with planes hijacked by arabs) IS the conspiracy that you are referring to. And what I see in the OP video, this is apparently the opinion held by the makers of the video. Since I did not know anyone questioned this account of the events of that day--indeed, I thought that Osama Bin Ladin and company had proudly claimed responsibility-- this OP video is "news" to me, and I'm genuinely researching this to understand it from all sides.

It appears that others on the BB are of the opinion that the actual "conspiracy theory" is that held by the proponents of the OP video. I am merely trying to understand the debate. I hope I did not misrepresent what you were saying.

Thank you for the book reference. It looks as if I have my homework cut out for me!

 

[poncho]

You asked where I came up with the question I asked you--it is a result of your post I've quoted above--The way you phrased this, it sounded to me like you were saying that what I would call the generally-accepted account of 9/11 (that the WTC towers and the Pentagon were attacked with planes hijacked by arabs) IS the conspiracy that you are referring to.

That's the "official" conspiracy theory. Or the government theory that "19 arabs 15 of them Saudis" conspired together to attack the United States. This is the conspiracy theory that those who say they don't believe in conspiracy theories believe in. It's kind of confusing to me too. Sorry.

And what I see in the OP video, this is apparently the opinion held by the makers of the video. Since I did not know anyone questioned this account of the events of that day--indeed, I thought that Osama Bin Ladin and company had proudly claimed responsibility-- this OP video is "news" to me, and I'm genuinely researching this to understand it from all sides

.

Well, someone who looked a bit like Bin Laden claimed responsibility. The fat right handed Bin Laden. The real Bin Laden was skinny, tall, sickly and left handed. And I myself believe he died a while ago and so stopped making videos all together. But he still manages to show up every time the government's poll numbers drop, support for the wars takes a dive or the media is trying to scare us into being submissive and in compliance with the governments "new rules". Video and audio can be easily morphed these days, think Forrest Gump. Or click here... When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing. The FBI has admitted it has [FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]"No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"[/FONT]It's only assumed that Bin Laden was connected to 9/11. Look at all that's happened since, we've invaded two countries, the government has doubled in size and grabbed powers it once only dared dreamed of, repealed habeas corpus and due process now "serves at the pleasure of the president" to mention just a few things and all based on an assumption.

It appears that others on the BB are of the opinion that the actual "conspiracy theory" is that held by the proponents of the OP video. I am merely trying to understand the debate. I hope I did not misrepresent what you were saying.

That's true enough. Most of the folks that get called conspiracy theorists have more questions than theory. Yet, people still love to demand that I or anyone who has questions about the official theory prove "my" wordlwide conspiracy theory in one post or less here. They know I can't do that and I know I can't do it...anymore than they can prove that "19 arabs 15 of them Saudis" attacked the United States on 9/11/01 if they had all ten pages of a thread all to themselves.

The "debate" seems to be more about who's a nutcase and who ain't than facts and evidence. Usually it breaks down into some form of name calling. That's what "thinking people" do I guess.

Thank you for the book reference. It looks as if I have my homework cut out for me!

No problem.

 

[carpro]

I am not ready to buy into the idea that our federal government was involved in a conspiracy....

But it was. It had to be.

Don't you realize Bush and Cheney planned the whole thing?

They had explosives planted in both towers and building 7, hired suicide pilots, and had a missile fired at the Pentagon.

All of this just so they could start a phony war, the first step to taking over the world.

 

[Rufus_1611]

But it was. It had to be.

Don't you realize Bush and Cheney planned the whole thing?

They had explosives planted in both towers and building 7, hired suicide pilots, and had a missile fired at the Pentagon.

All of this just so they could start a phony war, the first step to taking over the world.

hmmm...Some of what you said here is a bit outlandish but you've given me food for thought. You may be on to something here.

 

[carpro]

hmmm...Some of what you said here is a bit outlandish but you've given me food for thought. You may be on to something here.

Just trying to get into the spirit of the game. :thumbs:

 

[poncho]

hmmm...Some of what you said here is a bit outlandish but you've given me food for thought. You may be on to something here.

C'mon now Rufus you know the federal government would never even think of doing anything so horrible to it's own people. Only a real nutcase would suggest such a thing. Shame on you Carpro, you need to talk to someone about these strange thoughts you're having!

 

[Ed Edwards]

C'mon now Rufus you know the federal government would never even think of doing anything so horrible to it's own people. Only a real nutcase would suggest such a thing. Shame on you Carpro, you need to talk to someone about these strange thoughts you're having!

That source says:

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

It is the duty of the Military to give possible options to the
Defense secretary. It is the duty of the civilian leadership
to do the right thing (i.e. give eithical options)

 

[poncho]

That source says:


It is the duty of the Military to give possible options to the
Defense secretary. It is the duty of the civilian leadership
to do the right thing (i.e. give eithical options)

If that's the case then I'd say we're in big trouble Ed. The civilian leadership of late doesn't seem to be guided all that much by ethical considerations. I didn't know it was the duty of the U.S. military to plan on killing some citizens in order to influence others. That's a new one to me. But you may be right.

No comment about the possible similarities of Operation Northwoods and 9/11?

 

[Hopeful]

No comment about the possible similarities of Operation Northwoods and 9/11?

I realize that post was not directed at me, but I wanted to comment. I had never heard of "Operation Northwoods" til the links you provided. I've spent an hour or so, so far, just researching THAT. From what I've seen so far, this is undisputed fact. The article I read with particular interest was dated May of 2001. It is sad, scary, and EERILY like 9/11.

That said, I'm still reading. I don't WANT to believe that anyone in any position of power in the U.S. could/would do anything remotely like this. However, since the posts on this BB seem sincere (on BOTH sides, BTW) and the "agenda" I'm assuming to be one grounded in God-honoring concern for this lost world, I do not discount anyone's (here on the BB) point of view on this, regardless of what I "want" to believe. But I don't blindly believe talking heads (of any political stripe), and I don't like the vitriole that comes from ALL camps on these issues surrounding 9/11 (I'm not making the comment about vitriole about anyone here--I'm talking about the media-world and political leaders).

Anyway, like I said, I'm still reading.....with an open mind....and a heart open to a Godly understanding of it all.....

 

[poncho]

I realize that post was not directed at me, but I wanted to comment. I had never heard of "Operation Northwoods" til the links you provided. I've spent an hour or so, so far, just researching THAT. From what I've seen so far, this is undisputed fact. The article I read with particular interest was dated May of 2001. It is sad, scary, and EERILY like 9/11.

That said, I'm still reading. I don't WANT to believe that anyone in any position of power in the U.S. could/would do anything remotely like this. However, since the posts on this BB seem sincere (on BOTH sides, BTW) and the "agenda" I'm assuming to be one grounded in God-honoring concern for this lost world, I do not discount anyone's (here on the BB) point of view on this, regardless of what I "want" to believe. But I don't blindly believe talking heads (of any political stripe), and I don't like the vitriole that comes from ALL camps on these issues surrounding 9/11 (I'm not making the comment about vitriole about anyone here--I'm talking about the media-world and political leaders).

Anyway, like I said, I'm still reading.....with an open mind....and a heart open to a Godly understanding of it all.....

I understand, and don't worry about offending me I've had just about everything thrown at me on BB and I'm still here with my quirky sense of humor intact. :smilewinkgrin:

BTW, you may find this site interesting as there is a wealth of information here, mostly from declassified documents. The Northwoods Document can be found there as well as the 9/11 Source Books. and others...like the CIA's Operation TPAJAX, a flase flag terror campaign designed and carried out to overthrow the Iranian government in 1953 and many other countries since. The government's use of false flag terrorism to influence foreign populations is nothing new. It's almost standard practice..."over there", so why anyone would be unreceptive to or totally reject the idea that factions within our own government may use it on it's own population is beyond my powers of comprehension. Especially since most would probably agree that the government is almost saturated in self serving coruption. Well, there are a few hardcore nationalists and super patriotic flag wavers that cannot bring themselves to admit this and try to blame it on one side or the other...using the false left vs right paradigm.

Perhaps the biggest hidden reason people don’t make the paranoid shift is that knowledge brings responsibility. If we acknowledge that an inner circle of ruling elites controls the world’s most powerful military and intelligence system; controls the international banking system; controls the most effective and far-reaching propaganda network in history; controls all three branches of government in the world’s only superpower; and controls the technology that counts the people’s votes, we might be then forced to conclude that we don’t live in a particularly democratic system. And then voting and making contributions and trying to stay informed wouldn’t be enough. Because then the duty of citizenship would go beyond serving as a loyal opposition, to serving as a “loyal resistance” -- like the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War, except that in this case the resistance to fascism would be on the side of the national ideals, rather than the government; and a violent insurgency would not only play into the empire’s hands, it would be doomed from the start.

A second major reason people won’t make the paranoid shift is that they are too fundamentally decent. They can’t believe that the elected leaders of our country, the people they’ve been taught through 12 years of public school to admire and trust, are capable of sending young American soldiers to their deaths and slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians, just to satisfy their greed -- especially when they’re so rich in the first place. Besides, America is good, and the media are liberal and overly critical.

Third, people don’t want to look like fools. Being a “conspiracy theorist” is like being a creationist. The educated opinion of eminent experts on every TV and radio network is that any discussion of “oil” being a motivation for the US invasion of Iraq is just out of bounds, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a “conspiracy theorist.” We can trust the integrity of our ‘no-bid” contracting in Iraq, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a “conspiracy theorist.” Of course, people sometimes make mistakes, but our military and intelligence community did the best they could on and before September 11, and anybody who thinks otherwise is a “conspiracy theorist.”

And Ed, I always thought it was the duty of the U.S. military to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, when did it's duty change to planning the killings of some citizens in order to influence others?

 

[DQuixote]

And Ed, I always thought it was the duty of the U.S. military to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, when did it's duty change to planning the killings of some citizens in order to influence others?

More garbage. Poncho, you need to get out more. Darkened rooms with a computer and conspiracy goblins is not healthy. Go sell this prattle in conspiracy chat rooms. God-fearing Christian folk gather here. If posters spent as much time in prayer as they do following your quoted sources, the world would be a better place. Take the next exit out of here.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Poncho:

And Ed, I always thought it was the duty of the U.S. military to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, when did it's duty change to planning the killings of some citizens in order to influence others?

Ah I see you are maintaining your weight by
the frequent exercise: Jumping to Conclusions.

It is the "duty of the U.S. military to protect
and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies
foreigh and DOMESTIC". It's duty has NOT
changed. It is the duty of high level Officers
(those with Stars /and Naval Equivalents/) to
provide the civilian leadership with summaries
of capabilities and to get the capabilities that
the civilian leaders request. The reason that the
Generals (and Admirals) are to
provide the civilian leadership with summaries
of capabilities is so the civilian leadership can decide
what to do AS IS THEIR DUTY.
Needless to say, the civilian leadership will
be judged on how good their duty was done.

IMHO nobody should ever know the military/intel options of
capabilities requested by the civilian leadership
or the ones not selected for implimentation by the
civilain leadership. It confuses most people who
can't tell the difference (for example) between plans for making
concentration camps, if needed, and countries that
are full of concentration camps. (I remember in thee 1970s when
there was a popular "USgovur'ment Concentration Camp
Conspiracy /CCC/": one of the concentration camps was near
El Reno, west of Oklahoma City. I checked it out.
It was a field where the federal government makes a few
bucks by leasing it out for cattle to graze upon.
There is a BIG difference between US concentrations camps
with hunderds of cattle grazing and Foreign concentration
camps where thousands of people are housed & mistreated.
In the 1970s and early 1980s I was into the Conspiracy theory
mode, but mistaken notions like this got me out of it.)

Anyway, I agree: the Al'quadi conspiracy to get the USofA's
goat is the ultimate con.

 

[Ed Edwards]

More garbage. Poncho, you need to get out more. Darkened rooms with a computer and conspiracy goblins is not healthy. Go sell this prattle in conspiracy chat rooms. God-fearing Christian folk gather here. If posters spent as much time in prayer as they do following your quoted sources, the world would be a better place. Take the next exit out of here.

Amen, Brother DQuixote -- You are so RIGHT ON :thumbs:

 

[Ed Edwards]

Poncho:

And Ed, I always thought it was the duty of the U.S. military to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, when did it's duty change to planning the killings of some citizens in order to influence others?

Ah I see you are maintaining your weight by
the frequent exercise: Jumping to Conclusions.

It is the "duty of the U.S. military to protect
and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies
foreigh and DOMESTIC". It's duty has NOT
changed. It is the duty of high level Officers
(those with Stars /and Naval Equivalents/) to
provide the civilian leadership with summaries
of capabilities and to get the capabilities that
the civilian leaders request. The reason that the
Generals (and Admirals) are to
provide the civilian leadership with summaries
of capabilities is so the civilian leadership can decide
what to do AS IS THEIR DUTY.
Needless to say, the civilian leadership will
be judged on how good their duty was done.

IMHO nobody should ever know the military/intel options of
capabilities requested by the civilian leadership
or the ones not selected for implimentation by the
civilain leadership. It confuses most people who
can't tell the difference (for example)
between planning a conspiracy and planning a conspiracy
that one can commit. for example, if I get in a conspiracy
to nuke Los Vagas - i have no capability of carrying it
out (PERIOD). I don't even know anybody would
or could do it -- 'would do' is far different from 'could do'.
Both elements HAVE to be present for a conspiracy
to be meaningful. From 1964 to about 1990 the US and
Soviet Union had the capability of destroying all life
(some say only life forms higher than insects) on earth.
But neither one of them had the desire (would) to do so.

Anyway, I agree: the Al'quadi conspiracy to get the USofA's
goat is the ultimate con.