[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still think that AQ did 9/11 you should be in adult day care.
Deucey--Simply not believing the planes/fires caused the bldgs to come down doesn't make you into an anti-govt freedom fighter anywhere other than in your mind. And the other side of it(meaning you're not some govt fanboy) is just as meaningless for believing they did. The only thing you're risking is a little social embarrassment lol. No cia hitters are coming for you--hell it's not even enough to get the local donut chompers interested.
T
No I agree with you on this point. I'm glad we can experience some shared reality. You will be cancelled and you home raided by the FBI if you speak politically relevant truths AND you reach a lot of people. But in my view even those people who have some notoriety and challenge the security state, like Scott Ritter whose house was just raided by the FBI and property seized, don't make any appreciable impact.
I saw some yards signs for Harris - Walz which was just their names dominated by a pic of a contented house cat. That is the absolute perfect yard sign for them. Whoever made that is on the same wavelength as me. It symbolizes so efficiently the choices people have, which is only to express how they feel about things, not to change things. The Democrats are the feminine party of weeping and cat ladies. They want to elect the party who builds the cages for the immigrant children and then cry about them, but only when the other party is in power. The Republicans should counter with a Trump - Vance sign with a pitbull on it.
I think you and I have touched basis on this point before about the limits of online politics. We are just having fun on the internet. We're not doing a damn thing here. This is Waiting for Godot.
I'm somewhat unique. You've never heard half the stuff I say. You can't cite where you have because it isn't out there, not even in the vastness of Google. I'm just a little ahead of the curve. But the amount I am ahead, admittedly, always seems to be shrinking. I will be eclipsed before long, no doubt.
Yes snowflake, you are unique and special, just like all the other truth seers and free thinkers out there.
Also, there are no gradations of uniqueness, it's a binary state. I might actually agree with you that you're unique, bit it's certainly not for the reasons you think.
So you are saying I understand high school physics? I think you should check with the braintrust and amend your statement. You wouldn't want to be outside the consensus.
So unique and free thinking that you need to steal my jokes to maintain your uniqueness, in fact.
Yes snowflake, you are unique and special, just like all the other truth seers and free thinkers out there.
Also, there are no gradations of uniqueness, it's a binary state. I might actually agree with you that you're unique, bit it's certainly not for the reasons you think.
A lot of times people really mean rare when they say unique. It's my decreasing rareness, or increasing commonness, that might concern you. I think we might just have too much information available to people such that the truth will eventually make it's way out from suppression. People will develop my opinions (or the opinions I hold), increasingly, through this organic process. But it's not certain that process won't be hijacked by the elites. We can clearly see that Google gives you what you are looking for less and less. I don't know who will win the battle of thought control vs. information proliferation. I might even give the edge to thought control given the current political stagnation. Plus we can see that over time, a smaller percentage of the population believes the JFK assassination was a government conspiracy. That could be because those who were alive at the time are dying off. And it might be that those who believe in a conspiracy there are much more well informed than in the past (to what effect?). It's an interesting case because the polling goes back many decades.
A lot of times people really mean rare when they say unique. It's my decreasing rareness, or increasing commonness, that might concern you. I think we might just have too much information available to people such that the truth will eventually make it's way out from suppression. People will develop my opinions (or the opinions I hold), increasingly, through this organic process. But it's not certain that process won't be hijacked by the eli
There's nothing particularly interesting about conspiracy theorists. They are typically either a) people who suffer from paranoia and/or psychotic delusions or b) people who are trying to make up for their intellectual inferiority by one-upping those more intelligent and/or educated via this one secret shortcut. You are quite obviously b) and quite possibly both.
Conspiracy theorists are indeed a dime a dozen, and their unifying characteristic is that they think they are the special enlightened ones that can see what no one else sees. What they fail to realize is everyone else saw that nonsense too, we just rejected it because evidence doesn't support it.
Sorry Deuces, you are no better/worse or different than your cohorts, Playbig or Luckbox. You all achieve the same level of ridiculousness.
So you are saying I understand high school physics? I think you should check with the braintrust and amend your statement. You wouldn't want to be outside the consensus.
Nope. I was talking about your perceptions. You know you do not understand beyond high school physics, so anything related to physics you think you understand must be high school level. I don’t know if you actually understand high school level stuff or just think you do as it never came up despite your claims it was all that was needed to understand the official story was wrong.
I never claimed to bat 1.0. I thought it would be too stupid for Russia to do. And the anti-NATO Left, who is infinitely better at predicting outcomes than the liberals, thought the same. There were some really strong arguments against the invasion happening. I hope the people who keep flirting with nuclear war with Russia are again accurate in their assessment, which I assume is that they won't launch on us.
If there were really strong arguments you never made them. You just called people who understood the region and situation much better than you kittens and rambled about Adam Schiff.
Yeah, let's not lose sight of the fact that in addition to all his delusional ramblings, Deuces has proved himself over and over again to be a liar and bad faith actor.
There's nothing particularly interesting about conspiracy theorists. They are typically either a) people who suffer from paranoia and/or psychotic delusions or b) people who are trying to make up for their intellectual inferiority by one-upping those more intelligent and/or educated via this one secret shortcut. You are quite obviously b) and quite possibly both.
Some conspiracies proved true and then it became "well those don't count because they were actually reasonable" except they were treated as conspiracies at the beginning.
The most important and less talked about in the last couple of decades is probably the Libor fixing conspiracy
https://www.tutor2u.net/economics/refere....
It's not enough of an argument to claim something is a "conspiracy theory".
Should stick to actual logic of the facts and so on of you want to debunk something (or not dignify silly arguments of answers)
Some conspiracies proved true and then it became "well those don't count because they were actually reasonable" except they were treated as conspiracies at the beginning.
The most important and less talked about in the last couple of decades is probably the Libor fixing conspiracy
Lol, you're putting Libor fixing on the same level as 9/11 or JFK and suchlike? Don't be silly. If someone told me about Libor fixing before it became public I would have just shrugged my shoulders and said "yeah, I can see that happening, makes sense". Try and understand the distinction between "alleged conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory" if you're going to contribute to a CT thread.
And there is no arguing logic or facts with people like Deuces and Playbig here. This thread provides ample evidence of that.
Lol, you're putting Libor fixing on the same level as 9/11 or JFK and suchlike? Don't be silly. If someone told me about Libor fixing before it became public I would have just shrugged my shoulders and said "yeah, I can see that happening, makes sense". Try and understand the distinction between "alleged conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory" if you're going to contribute to a CT thread.
And there is no arguing logic or facts with people like D
I am saying that "conspiracy theory" is an abused label which doesn't end a conversation.
I am not talking about jfk, 9/11 and other stuff here as you noticed because I believe it's a waste of time to do so
I am saying that "conspiracy theory" is an abused label which doesn't end a conversation.
I am not talking about jfk, 9/11 and other stuff here as you noticed because I believe it's a waste of time to do so
Ok but you're in the 9/11 conspiracy theory thread. The people being referred to as "conspiracy theorists" are 9/11 conspiracy theorists (well, Playbig believes literally every single conspiracy theory going, but that's a different point).
Ok but you're in the 9/11 conspiracy theory thread. The people being referred to as "conspiracy theorists" are 9/11 conspiracy theorists (well, Playbig believes literally every single conspiracy theory going, but that's a different point).
what do you think is more probable:
1) the official description of events up to that day, and that day, is true
2) there are significant lies which were given as truth about either events before that day and/or events that day?
do you think that there is at least a 50% chance that at least one of the following was true:
1) at least one the buildings was known to be targeted for a terrorist attack beforehand by at least a portion of American intelligence
2) a portion of American intelligence withhold information crucial to prevent the attack from happening at that scale that day
3) a portion of the American government had some involvement in the attack (which could have went astray from plans, but still they did organize some significant false flag for that day)
4) some American allied country had factual information about the attack which they withhold for whatever reason
5) the information we have on the purported perpetrators and/or the people who mandated the attack, is very incomplete and some crucial (to understand motive and interests) elements known to the American government today are still withhold from the public
6) the American government at some point in the aftermath covered/manipulated some crucial elements to build a narrative about the event different from what actually happened
?
would you consider harboring those doubts as being conspirational? do you think all the above statements are in the realm of 0.x% at most probability of being true?
what's a conspiracy theory? deuces, a Marxist whom I despise on many topics, as far as I can see only seeds doubts about the official narrative, and why the hell are we even supposed to even believe the official narrative to begin with?
maybe it's because I am Italian and we had like 6 if not more relevant domestic terrorist attacks in the 70s to 00s, and the government was involved in every one of them, and to this day we aren't sure what actually happened, but lol at ever believing the official narrative
Not reading all that, but can safely say that I think it's more likely that the official narrative is true on the following matters: planes were hijacked by terrorists and flown into targets on the ground causing the Twin Towers collapse and the damage to the Pentagon, one was retaken by passengers and crashed in PA, and I doubt that any intelligence agency knew about the attacks beforehand and withheld the information. Am I missing anything?
and it was a bunch of Saudis with some money and no other significant group organizing every step, who just went taking some flight lessons then boarded the planes? and the motive was america is the great Satan because bin laden said so?
no ulterior more complicated financial, economical motive? there was no trading in options of airlines stocks pre 9 11? or whatever happened was just random, or at most the group of normal wealth guys taking flight lessons trading on the side because ofc you are going to use that money when you are dead in the attack?
and it was a bunch of Saudis with some money and no other significant group organizing every step, who just went taking some flight lessons then boarded the planes? and the motive was america is the great Satan because bin laden said so?
no ulterior more complicated financial, economical motive? there was no trading in options of airlines stocks pre 9 11? or whatever happened was just random, or at most the group of normal wealth guys taking
Yes, I believe it was a bunch of terrorists, with the same motive as they have for blowing up embassies and the other dumb evil **** they do.
Anyway, if you have an alternate thesis, put it forward along with any supporting evidence you have. Your theory should not depend on my answers to your questions.
given it's your field, are you familiar with Poteshman (2006) accounting of trading activity in options pre 9/11 for puts specifically in airlines, which finds conclusive evidence of unusual volumes and open interest?
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/503...
and if we agree trading activity was unusual pre attack and it can't have been the suicidal terrorists themselves, aren't you curious who the **** he was and why the american government hasn't pursued with the full extent of their power?
given it's your field, are you familiar with Poteshman (2006) accounting of trading activity in options pre 9/11 for puts specifically in airlines, which finds conclusive evidence of unusual volumes and open interest?
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/503...
and if we agree trading activity was unusual pre attack and it can't have been the suicidal terrorists themselves, aren't you curious who the **** he was and why the american go
It's not my field. Sure, I'm curious. Is it enough to cast doubt on what happened? No. It might well mean that someone connected to the terrorists knew about it beforehand, sure.
Yes, I believe it was a bunch of terrorists, with the same motive as they have for blowing up embassies and the other dumb evil **** they do.
Anyway, if you have an alternate thesis, put it forward along with any supporting evidence you have. Your theory should not depend on my answers to your questions.
just them, 5, 10 or whatever they were, a small group no outside huge help no hetero-direction no guidance except perhaps from bin laden? no funding no strategizing no training before they reached American soil, 10 brave souls with a plan that magically happened to achieve what thousands if not more of haters of America with infinitely more resources than them never even dreamt of achieving
just them, 5, 10 or whatever they were, a small group no outside huge help no hetero-direction no guidance except perhaps from bin laden? no funding no strategizing no training before theory reached American soil, 10 brave souls with a plan that magically happened to achieve what thousands of not more of haters of America with infinitely more resources of them never even dreamt of achieving
Like I say, if you have a theory, put it forward with evidence. Otherwise all you're doing is saying "well, I have some fee fees that some mischief might be afoot".
Al Qaeda appears to have been a pretty well funded and organised group, so I don't know why you're saying it was a handful of people with no funding. And it's exactly a mystery how their plan worked is it? 1. Learn to fly planes. 2. Hijack planes. 3. Use them as missiles. None of it seems like brain surgery, plenty of people have learnt to fly planes before and plenty of people have hijacked planes before. The using them as missiles part was a creative touch.
