Could The Nefarious Hand Of Antifa Be...
News1 min ago
9-11
Does anyone believe that the factual evidence against the alleged story that we are being told about 9/11 (that it was Osama Bin Laden's terrorist group that blew up the WTC 1, 2 and 7, a part of the pentagon and some poor farmer's field in pennesylvania? Because I've been looking into it and there's alot of evidence that doesn't match up so my mind is suggesting foul play on the part of the american government and leaders etc
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by RLM89. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
so seeking the truth dishonors the dead, eh? That is the most backward statement that I would want to hear (repeatedly) come from anyone claiming to be a rational being.
I don't know what happended on 9/11 for sure; I don't think we ever will. Five years though is a blink in the eyes of history. If we think this over - we're sadly mistaken. I haven't studied too much in the realm of revolution beginnings, but I confidently assert that it takes a spark to light the torch.
Spark1: the quick and efficient dissemination of information (logically seperated from propaganda). Check1: the internet
Spark2: a transfer in presiding power and therefore the prevailing adenda at which is trying to be met.
Check2: GW out of office - Dem's in.
Spark3: a generation of well-educated youth.
Check3: gen y taking over the ranks of the baby-boom
...just some possible scenarios
I don't know what happended on 9/11 for sure; I don't think we ever will. Five years though is a blink in the eyes of history. If we think this over - we're sadly mistaken. I haven't studied too much in the realm of revolution beginnings, but I confidently assert that it takes a spark to light the torch.
Spark1: the quick and efficient dissemination of information (logically seperated from propaganda). Check1: the internet
Spark2: a transfer in presiding power and therefore the prevailing adenda at which is trying to be met.
Check2: GW out of office - Dem's in.
Spark3: a generation of well-educated youth.
Check3: gen y taking over the ranks of the baby-boom
...just some possible scenarios
I don't think it is or does...it's all relative. Who is to say who is "right." As well, there are "experts" (i.e. academic professors from accredited universities in the US) that are coming forth to refute some of the claims that we have been led to belive.
http://www.news.wisc.edu/12701.html
http://www.news.wisc.edu/12701.html
Maybe you can answer the question that your fellow believers in a CT surrounding 9/11 have repeatedly failed to do.
Why, if the "evidence" trotted out in support of a CT is soo compelling, have the 1,000s upon 1,000s upon 1,000s of qualified architects, structural engineers, metallurgists, demolition experts etc around the globe not come forward crying out that this is a conspiracy?
Is it because they are disinterested? (unlikely)
Is it because they are part of the conspiracy? or maybe they have been blackmailed or silenced or bribed?
Is it because they dont have access to this same evidence? (unlikely... the videos and points mentioned have been in the public domain for 5 years now)
No, its because they have seen this evidence, and have dismissed it as conjecture,misunderstanding of basic science, malacious spin or just plain wrong.
Mr. Barrett is very lucky in having understanding employers.In the absence of any incontravertible proof , to continue to assert the involvement of the US Govt in the murder of close to 3000 of its own citizens on its own soil as part of some grand conspiracy is wrong, and does dishonour the dead.
Why, if the "evidence" trotted out in support of a CT is soo compelling, have the 1,000s upon 1,000s upon 1,000s of qualified architects, structural engineers, metallurgists, demolition experts etc around the globe not come forward crying out that this is a conspiracy?
Is it because they are disinterested? (unlikely)
Is it because they are part of the conspiracy? or maybe they have been blackmailed or silenced or bribed?
Is it because they dont have access to this same evidence? (unlikely... the videos and points mentioned have been in the public domain for 5 years now)
No, its because they have seen this evidence, and have dismissed it as conjecture,misunderstanding of basic science, malacious spin or just plain wrong.
Mr. Barrett is very lucky in having understanding employers.In the absence of any incontravertible proof , to continue to assert the involvement of the US Govt in the murder of close to 3000 of its own citizens on its own soil as part of some grand conspiracy is wrong, and does dishonour the dead.
No it doesn't. Emotion still plays a huge part, as evidenced by some people not wanting to "dishonor the dead." It should have nothing to do with those vicitimized. It has all to do with who knows what, who is saying what and why they are (or are not) saying it.
I question your assertion that there are 1000's upon 1000's, etc... of experts who have conducted in depth analyses of 9/11 - as inferred by your opinion. No - this has not been done before. This initiative is still waiting for something to "spark" it (see example above).
I question your assertion that there are 1000's upon 1000's, etc... of experts who have conducted in depth analyses of 9/11 - as inferred by your opinion. No - this has not been done before. This initiative is still waiting for something to "spark" it (see example above).
I need to correct myself...the 9/11 report of course was conducted - though by whom? It was by a government controlled panel of investigators - claiming to be non-parisan. Non-partisan is one thing (not on the left or the right), but what agenda is trying to be met, and with what intention, is another thing (and not wanting to lose your job is another).
In regard to this report (I read extensively at least the first quarter of it...it was a big volume), the overview of the flight targeting the Pentagon failed to clearly answer some questions exactly being put forth by these so called wacky conspiracy theories - of which with some I don't agree either. A clear picture of all the events surrounding, and leading, to 9/11 is far from complete. Whose tired of it yet?Some are, some aren't.
In regard to this report (I read extensively at least the first quarter of it...it was a big volume), the overview of the flight targeting the Pentagon failed to clearly answer some questions exactly being put forth by these so called wacky conspiracy theories - of which with some I don't agree either. A clear picture of all the events surrounding, and leading, to 9/11 is far from complete. Whose tired of it yet?Some are, some aren't.
You misunderstand me... I didnt mean that 1000s of reports have been produced . What I meant was that there are in the world 1,000's upon 1,000's of qualified experts in all the relevant areas. (architects, structural engineers, mechanical engineers, physicists, demolition experts, fire safety officers etcetc)
The information (both the official reports and those produced by those who believe in a conspiracy) is widely available on the Internet and other mass media. All of these qualified individuals (and faculties and companies etc) would likely have an interest and have an opinion. So, how come we dont have 1000's upon 1000's of these qualified experts coming forward and clamouring that its a conspiracy, that we need another review etc? The reason is that in their judgement there is no case to answer, and that the official explanations more than adequately satisfy the circumstances.
Occams razor seems conspicously absent where conspiracies are concerned.
The information (both the official reports and those produced by those who believe in a conspiracy) is widely available on the Internet and other mass media. All of these qualified individuals (and faculties and companies etc) would likely have an interest and have an opinion. So, how come we dont have 1000's upon 1000's of these qualified experts coming forward and clamouring that its a conspiracy, that we need another review etc? The reason is that in their judgement there is no case to answer, and that the official explanations more than adequately satisfy the circumstances.
Occams razor seems conspicously absent where conspiracies are concerned.
those are well thought out points....but consider...who in their right mind wants to challenge the authority of the US gov't? Do you not see senator after senator stepping down from office, or not running for the next election, strictly because there has been some controversial issue they find it easier to not even confront?
You're right - essentially anyone and everyone has the means of access to the general overview of 9/11. But we need to really think about this. Do you think, in any capacity, anyone and everyone is willing to challenge US authority just because "things don't add up" or "the pieces don't fit togther" in the 9/11 dynamics?
Look at what happens to those who even try...take the example of the US professor I cited above. I recently saw him be lambasted by a pair of CNN analysts on primetime television. And that was just based on what he wanted to teach in the classroom - not what he did teach or what it produced in the students. He was literally called a "nut job." I don't think his years of highly educated training taught him to become a nut job.
This is why we don't see 1000's of reports. It's not because people do not question 9/11, it's because they don't see the ends justifying the means.
You're right - essentially anyone and everyone has the means of access to the general overview of 9/11. But we need to really think about this. Do you think, in any capacity, anyone and everyone is willing to challenge US authority just because "things don't add up" or "the pieces don't fit togther" in the 9/11 dynamics?
Look at what happens to those who even try...take the example of the US professor I cited above. I recently saw him be lambasted by a pair of CNN analysts on primetime television. And that was just based on what he wanted to teach in the classroom - not what he did teach or what it produced in the students. He was literally called a "nut job." I don't think his years of highly educated training taught him to become a nut job.
This is why we don't see 1000's of reports. It's not because people do not question 9/11, it's because they don't see the ends justifying the means.
