Could 9/11 have been an inside job?

[Erythritol]

Is this believable ?
lets see.
In same time ... LACK OF COMUNICANTION - ALL FIGHTERS SENT OUT SOMEWHERE ( anywhere except there ) - All Jewds who worked in twins sent out somewhere ( most of them said that they were sick or were on vacation )- regarding to USA and its power in comunication messages were unclear, radars mistook

All just in same time ?
I say phish no, When I gather these all together will tell me NO, for sure it was an inside job


Many dears died and its so sad. but if it was an inside job, then many more innocent people in Afghanistan died again, so as Iraq.
The excuse of attacking to Iraq was that Saddam can be a treat for all the world, ANTI-TERRORISM and these kinda staffs which all came out after september eleven.
Do if someone get murdered, the murder should be free ? should be relax all because the murderer is murdered ?!
as long as I know, the only government who used nuke weapons in a war was USA and hit japan in nakasai and Hiroshima, and caused millions people. now whats terror? were not they innocent people?
it happened after pearl harbor event, which is still doubtfull that if it was an inside job or not. and it may happen in future too.
They said it was a BIN's job, but who trained Bin was US, government.
watch Moor's movies and just see the DOCUMENTS he shows there.
even if you think its a disorder, watch the facts there. eleborations and evidences he will show you, then if you want still try no believe its disorder.

Uh...okay, first off...there weren't a lot of fighter planes sent out. I know this is hard to believe (especially with Bush as president), but America has cut back (at that time, anyway) on bases both abroad and in the United States. And the planes that were sent out were directed towards the Atlantic ocean because they thought the threat was coming from overseas. The fighter pilots were unaware that the threat was in fact coming from commercial airplanes.

Is it really THAT hard to believe that communications between government departments suck? I think you're honestly giving America too much credit. NORAD and the FAA confused flight 11 (the flight that hit the towers) with flight 77. They didn't really know what was going on. There were so many calls coming in and such a bombardment of information from all sides, that it was difficult to a) sift through the information b) determine what was correct information and what was misinformation and c) relay correct intelligence to whomever.

As for Saddam...he was not "murdered." He was given due process of the law and convicted by a court of law. The United States was not involved in his trial. Bringing up something that happened in 1945 is completely irrelevant. Not to mention, the circumstances surrounding the use of the nuclear weapons against Japan were completely different from what is happening now. The United States was involved in a war with Japan. The US asked them to surrender several times and eluded to having the atom bomb. When Japan refused several times, only then did we drop it. Was it right to drop it on civilians? No, I don't really think so. But everyone was completely unaware of the repercussions in terms of cancer from radiation, etc. The United States then gave Japan another chance to surrender. When they did not, we dropped the second bomb. This was, quite simply, to spare American lives. If America had not dropped the bombs, American ground troops would have had to invade Japan, thus leading to combat, more lives lost on both sides, etc. It was not "retribution" for Pearl Harbor. Truman deliberated for a long time on whether or not to drop the bomb, and he ultimately decided to because he wanted to end the war with as little lives lost as possible. Not dropping the bomb would have just dragged out the war even longer. And it didn't kill people in the millions. That's a bit dramatic. Estimates of fatalities from Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined are at appoximately 90,000 to 140,000. Was it right to drop it on civilians? I personally don't think so. But I don't think it was terrorism, and I don't think you can even compare that to 9/11.

...Pearl Harbor was not an inside job. At all. Just no.

As for Bin Laden being trained by the United States...okay, what of it? First off, that's a really contested claim. A lot of people, including a CNN journalist and adjunct professor who is known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden argue that its an urban legend. But say it's true that Bin Laden was trained by the CIA. You can't just present facts like that in a historical vacuum. If he was trained by the CIA, it was when the Soviet Union was still occupying Afghanistan. The Cold War was in full bloom. The United States was hellbent on bringing down the Soviet Union by any means necessary. This meant collaborating with Afghan fighters and training them to defeat the Soviet Union and eject them from Afghanistan. Bin Laden and the United States, at that time, had a shared enemy so they collaborated. How was the U.S. to know it would come back and bite them in the ass?

Like I said, Moore is great at presenting facts and giving you NO context to them or twisting statistics to support his argument.

 

[Lord Kaos]

K. I'm gonna tell this board creator it how it is in the simplist form I can muster, sence he obviously can't control his ADD for longer than 30 seconds.

These conspiracy theories are bulls#!t lies by people who just want to make up reasons to stop going to war, mainly by foul mouthed hippies.
Plus, you need your eyes checked, along with your head. 747! NOT A MILITARY PLANE. And even if it was a military plane, it would be for transport for that size, and planes like that don't shoot missles either. There's no reason.
And you need to keep your typing in check. Too much swearing and bullcrap, not enough spellcheck and facts.

 

[The Phantarch]

Oh how you go about with your head in a bucket.

Come on now, one week before 9/11 every counter terrorist function in America was shut down. On the morning of 9/11 Old Bush Snr was in a meeting with Osama's brother. After 9/11 the Bin Laden family were reserved flights back to Saudi Arabia.

Bush dumped the patriot act on congress who approved it without reading it and FBI agents were stationed in the most redundant of places.

Iraq was a perfect scapegoat, it had oil. Iraq had never threatened to nor ever harm America. You call this bullshit, you must be suffering from some kind of mental illness!

 

[Lord Kaos]

I may have mental disorders, but I know bullshit when I see it.

Suppose this ISN'T bs. Why would they ARRANGE war between two countries by killing off their own people? And no, The reason can't be oil. If this was over Oil, gas wouldn't be $2.65 a gallon, because we could've taken all the damn oil by force of arms and we'd defend it instead of actively hunting terrorists down.

 

[Shahab]

Common guys. Forget BULLSHIT.
I am agree with Phantarch.
USA attacked Iraq by Terrorism and Massive killer weapons. Then after they did not find anything there they did not get outa there.
Why is US army still in Iraq ? for make it secure? if its so why is still taking Iraq's oil ?
US can kill its own people because the government is going to be reacher than always and does not care about people too much. Sacreficing somethings for better things.
Nothing is more important than people's life and peace... but for human, not for a government like US government.
No one still explained why all the Jews were absent on the day ?
Is not that because they were warned about the attack ?
Who could warn them ? Bin ? no, for sure it can't be him,

 

[Erythritol]

Common guys. Forget BULLSHIT.
I am agree with Phantarch.
USA attacked Iraq by Terrorism and Massive killer weapons. Then after they did not find anything there they did not get outa there.
Why is US army still in Iraq ? for make it secure? if its so why is still taking Iraq's oil ?
US can kill its own people because the government is going to be reacher than always and does not care about people too much. Sacreficing somethings for better things.
Nothing is more important than people's life and peace... but for human, not for a government like US government.
No one still explained why all the Jews were absent on the day ?
Is not that because they were warned about the attack ?
Who could warn them ? Bin ? no, for sure it can't be him,

Dude, I don't know what the hell it is with you and the Jews. But hey, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and looked up the names of the victims of the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers. What did I find? *Gasp* Jewish names! LOTS of them! So there you go, Jews died in the Twin Towers.

As for the whole "why are we still there" thing....um, because the country of Iraq is a complete disaster? Saddam Hussein, sadly, was the one thing vaguely holding that country together. Yes, he was a dictator, but dictators tend to keep people in line. With him gone, sectarian violence has skyrocketed. It's an all out civil war. And honestly, it's in the United States' best interest to see that Iraq doesn't completely disintegrate. If a religious war between the Sunnis, the Shi'ites, and the Kurds were to occur...undoubtedly other middle eastern countries would be pulled into the fray. The United States does NOT want that to happen.

Let's remember that the middle eastern country boundaries, as we know them now, were arbitrarily created a century ago by European powers, mainly Britain. This meant that people who were not necessarily friendly towards each other were lumped together into countries. If Iraq dissolves into a civil war, the different groups may want to dissolve the country of Iraq altogether and create different countries for their different ethnic/religious groups. Oppressed factions in other middle eastern countries would follow that example. The result: a hell of a lot of civil war, violence, and unrest. Why would -anyone- want that? I think if we pulled out of Iraq now, it would be a disaster. It would be civil war.

And to put a freaking end to people saying "OMGZ WE KILLZED OUR OWN CITIZENZ FOR OIL!!111" here are some statistics for you:

The top sources of US crude oil imports for July 2007 were (in order):
Canada (1.797 million barrels per day)
Mexico (1.469 million barrels per day)
Saudi Arabia (1.434 million barrels per day)
Venezuela (1.167 million barrels per day)
Nigeria (0.890 million barrels per day)

Wait, what? Canada? You mean that huge country that IS RIGHT NEXT TO AMERICA? The one we have great relations with? And Mexico? Wait, that's on the other side of the United States. And U.S. relations with Mexico are pretty good too. So basically, we're surrounded by two huge countries with lots of oil. Yeah, it would make PERFECT sense for America to murder 3,000 of its own citizens to invade a country that doesn't even make it into the top five of U.S. oil import sources. Right.

 

[Shahab]

The top sources of US crude oil imports for July 2007 were (in order):
Canada (1.797 million barrels per day)
Mexico (1.469 million barrels per day)
Saudi Arabia (1.434 million barrels per day)
Venezuela (1.167 million barrels per day)
Nigeria (0.890 million barrels per day)

Wait, what? Canada? You mean that huge country that IS RIGHT NEXT TO AMERICA? The one we have great relations with? And Mexico? Wait, that's on the other side of the United States. And U.S. relations with Mexico are pretty good too. So basically, we're surrounded by two huge countries with lots of oil. Yeah, it would make PERFECT sense for America to murder 3,000 of its own citizens to invade a country that doesn't even make it into the top five of U.S. oil import sources. Right.

Where did you get those information.


Top Ten Oil Exporting Countries

* Saudi Arabia (8.73 million barrels per day)
* Russia (6.67)
* Norway (2.91)
* Iran (2.55)
* Venezuela (2.36)
* United Arab Emirates (2.33)
* Kuwait (2.20)
* Nigeria (2.19)
* Mexico (1.80)
* Algeria (1.68)

The following countries have strong reserves to compete effectively in global oil trade.
Greatest Oil Reserves by Country (2005)

* Saudi Arabia (262 billion barrels)
* Canada (179)
* Iran (126)
* Iraq (115)
* Kuwait (102)
* United Arab Emirates (98)
* Venezuela (77)
* Russia (60)
* Libya (39)
* Nigeria (35)

http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/top_ten_oil_countries

Iraq is fourth which can effect the world's economy.
Also USA is the top first oil importer
SA has good relations with USA so as Canada. Iran is not easy to beat so the next is Iraq.

 

[Link21]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Just like 9/11

 

[Erythritol]

Where did you get those information.


Top Ten Oil Exporting Countries

* Saudi Arabia (8.73 million barrels per day)
* Russia (6.67)
* Norway (2.91)
* Iran (2.55)
* Venezuela (2.36)
* United Arab Emirates (2.33)
* Kuwait (2.20)
* Nigeria (2.19)
* Mexico (1.80)
* Algeria (1.68)

The following countries have strong reserves to compete effectively in global oil trade.
Greatest Oil Reserves by Country (2005)

* Saudi Arabia (262 billion barrels)
* Canada (179)
* Iran (126)
* Iraq (115)
* Kuwait (102)
* United Arab Emirates (98)
* Venezuela (77)
* Russia (60)
* Libya (39)
* Nigeria (35)

http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/top_ten_oil_countries

Iraq is fourth which can effect the world's economy.
Also USA is the top first oil importer
SA has good relations with USA so as Canada. Iran is not easy to beat so the next is Iraq.

I got it from here:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/...ons/company_level_imports/current/import.html

It's a more up-to-date and reputable site, as it's the official Energy Information Administration website.

I'm trying to make the point that the United States isn't in such desperate need of oil that they would murder 3,000 of their own citizens in order to procure oil from Iraq. That makes absolutely no logical sense, as the U.S. has both Canada and Mexico, bordering nations with which they have very friendly relations, supplying them with large amounts of oil. If the United States needed oil, there would be a much simpler way to procure it. The fact is that, according to the EIA, Iraq doesn't even make the top five on the list of countries from which the U.S. imports oil.

Now, on to "Operation Northwoods." Link, you need to read that more carefully. It's not at all like 9/11. In case you didn't realize, 9/11 killed more than 3,000 United States civilians. This "Operation Northwoods" proposed scare tactics, not murder. There is a HUGE difference. From that article, it seems that the government wasn't overly concerned if some casualties occurred, but they were interested in avoiding them when possible. They talk about bombing unmanned ships and staging fake funerals. That's not the same as driving two 747 planes into two buildings full of civilians. Additionally, the political climate at the time that "Operation Northwoods" was proposed is very unlike the political climate pre-9/11. In 1962, the Cold War was in full swing. The United States was highly paranoid and wanted to contain communism by almost any means necessary. At that time, the United States considered any communist nation-- but especially the Soviet Union and Cuba-- a threat to the safety of America. There were regular nuclear bomb drills performed in schools across the United States. Before 9/11, the United States was not particularly concerned with the Middle East. There was the Gulf War, yes, but that was because Saddam invaded Kuwait. Saddam was viewed as a threat to the United States, but not the serious threat that communism was in the 1960s up until 1989. The United States was relatively sure that any weapons that Saddam potentially had (which, of course, we know now that he did not) did not have the technological capabilities to reach the United States. He was NEVER the threat that the Soviet Union and Cuba were. If you need proof of this, just look at the travel sanctions the United States placed (and still places) on Iraq and Cuba. United States citizens are forbidden from going to Cuba, unless they have a journalist visa, etc. Whether you have family in Cuba or not, you are forbidden from going there if you hold an American passport. Meanwhile, the United States has issued a travel warning on Iraq. This means American citizens can still travel to Iraq, they are just heavily advised not to do so.

So, in sum, you cannot compare your little 9/11 conspiracy to "Operation Northwoods." Why? Because you don't have a very good grasp of politics or political situations.

 

[Link21]

I got it from here:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/...ons/company_level_imports/current/import.html

It's a more up-to-date and reputable site, as it's the official Energy Information Administration website.

I'm trying to make the point that the United States isn't in such desperate need of oil that they would murder 3,000 of their own citizens in order to procure oil from Iraq. That makes absolutely no logical sense, as the U.S. has both Canada and Mexico, bordering nations with which they have very friendly relations, supplying them with large amounts of oil. If the United States needed oil, there would be a much simpler way to procure it. The fact is that, according to the EIA, Iraq doesn't even make the top five on the list of countries from which the U.S. imports oil.

Now, on to "Operation Northwoods." Link, you need to read that more carefully. It's not at all like 9/11. In case you didn't realize, 9/11 killed more than 3,000 United States civilians. This "Operation Northwoods" proposed scare tactics, not murder. There is a HUGE difference. From that article, it seems that the government wasn't overly concerned if some casualties occurred, but they were interested in avoiding them when possible. They talk about bombing unmanned ships and staging fake funerals. That's not the same as driving two 747 planes into two buildings full of civilians. Additionally, the political climate at the time that "Operation Northwoods" was proposed is very unlike the political climate pre-9/11. In 1962, the Cold War was in full swing. The United States was highly paranoid and wanted to contain communism by almost any means necessary. At that time, the United States considered any communist nation-- but especially the Soviet Union and Cuba-- a threat to the safety of America. There were regular nuclear bomb drills performed in schools across the United States. Before 9/11, the United States was not particularly concerned with the Middle East. There was the Gulf War, yes, but that was because Saddam invaded Kuwait. Saddam was viewed as a threat to the United States, but not the serious threat that communism was in the 1960s up until 1989. The United States was relatively sure that any weapons that Saddam potentially had (which, of course, we know now that he did not) did not have the technological capabilities to reach the United States. He was NEVER the threat that the Soviet Union and Cuba were. If you need proof of this, just look at the travel sanctions the United States placed (and still places) on Iraq and Cuba. United States citizens are forbidden from going to Cuba, unless they have a journalist visa, etc. Whether you have family in Cuba or not, you are forbidden from going there if you hold an American passport. Meanwhile, the United States has issued a travel warning on Iraq. This means American citizens can still travel to Iraq, they are just heavily advised not to do so.

So, in sum, you cannot compare your little 9/11 conspiracy to "Operation Northwoods." Why? Because you don't have a very good grasp of politics or political situations.

No sir I'm sorry, but I believe YOU should read it again. That document called for "ACTS OF TERRORISM AGAINST U.S. SOIL" - If JFK would have signed that and passed it, alot of innocent Americans would have been carelessly killed. This is History all over again, and 10 years from now, the truth will be reavealed.

The White House set explosives in the WTC buildings and set up the whole deal. If you've actually seen a real terrorist attack before, like London bombings, the plan is never executed the way they want it to be executed. (too many mistakes, bombs not going off, etc...) There is no way possible that a terrorist attack could be as well planed out and executed as the 9/11 incident.

There was no plane that hit the Pentagon. Only a missle that was shot at it. That's why the hole in the side of the Pentagon wasn't even big enough for a plane to fit, and furthermore, there are no videos or pictures of a plane hitting the Pentagon ANYWHERE...

OH, and one of the teenagers that was "supposedely" on one of the planes that hit the WTC, called his mom as the plane was being hijacked and said his FULL NAME. Why the hell would you call your mom and say your full name, "Hi mom! It's John Doe, our plane has been hijacked, you believe me..don't you mom?" That is obviously scripted.

The whole sittuation is way to fishy. And the truth is, you shouldn't even have to question whether or not it was an inside job. All you dumbasses say that it's unpatriotic to question your government, well the truth is, that it's unpatriotic to NOT question your government.

And what's this bullshit about Iraq not being in the top 5 oil providers??? What point were you trying to make there? Does that mean it's ok to ruthlessley attack their Country and steal the oil in the earth??? I don't think so.

 

[Erythritol]

No sir I'm sorry, but I believe YOU should read it again. That document called for "ACTS OF TERRORISM AGAINST U.S. SOIL" - If JFK would have signed that and passed it, alot of innocent Americans would have been carelessly killed. This is History all over again, and 10 years from now, the truth will be reavealed.

The White House set explosives in the WTC buildings and set up the whole deal. If you've actually seen a real terrorist attack before, like London bombings, the plan is never executed the way they want it to be executed. (too many mistakes, bombs not going off, etc...) There is no way possible that a terrorist attack could be as well planed out and executed as the 9/11 incident.

There was no plane that hit the Pentagon. Only a missle that was shot at it. That's why the hole in the side of the Pentagon wasn't even big enough for a plane to fit, and furthermore, there are no videos or pictures of a plane hitting the Pentagon ANYWHERE...

OH, and one of the teenagers that was "supposedely" on one of the planes that hit the WTC, called his mom as the plane was being hijacked and said his FULL NAME. Why the hell would you call your mom and say your full name, "Hi mom! It's John Doe, our plane has been hijacked, you believe me..don't you mom?" That is obviously scripted.

The whole sittuation is way to fishy. And the truth is, you shouldn't even have to question whether or not it was an inside job. All you dumbasses say that it's unpatriotic to question your government, well the truth is, that it's unpatriotic to NOT question your government.

And what's this bullshit about Iraq not being in the top 5 oil providers??? What point were you trying to make there? Does that mean it's ok to ruthlessley attack their Country and steal the oil in the earth??? I don't think so.

Oh. my. God. You need....a government class or something. First off, don't insinuate I'm some hardcore republican who thinks that criticizing the United States is unpatriotic. I hate the current administration; I don't think they could be doing a worse job. But I have a reasonable head on my shoulders, and I have an extremely good grasp of how politics and the government works.

Terrorism does not automatically mean that someone is going to die or something is going to be blown up. You do get that, right? Terrorism is "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes." Hijacking a plane is terrorism. Does that mean the plane has to be blown up for it to count? No. This "Operation Northwoods," from the article you supplied, sounded like it was going to be very meticulously staged to use minimal violence and cause as few casualties as possible. You don't need to kill people to cause widespread panic. 9/11 killed a LOT of people. If the government were hell-bent on inflicting panic, there are ways that are just as effective that don't require murdering 3,000 citizens.

Anyway, I like that you completely ignored my little history lesson on the Cold War. Never mind the fact that 9/11 and Operation Northwoods are completely unlike each other (both in scope, potential/actual casualties, and in the political climate at the time); this obscure plan from 1962 that was never actually enacted proves that the United States government was behind 9/11!!!!

There is no way that 9/11 could have been pulled off by the terrorists? Umm...are you AWARE of the kind of funding these people have? This is their life. They train for these so-called jihads. Are they maniacal? You bet they are. Are they well trained and good at planning and following directions? Yes. The people who actually pulled off 9/11 (not the U.S. government) are pretty good at what they do. Guerrilla tactics really work, especially surprise attacks.

The point I was trying to make about Iraq not being a top 5 United States oil provider was that we weren't in such desperate need of oil that the United States was not in such desperate need of oil that they would go and attack their own citizens in order to invade a small middle eastern country and thus take the needed oil. As for the whole "ruthlessly attack a country and rip the oil out of the ground" thing: get over yourself and read a book or newspaper or something. Saddam's regime had it coming. Let's not pretend this guy was made of rainbows and sunshine. He was guilty of massive human rights violations, including a little thing called, um, genocide. Was the Iraq war handled well? Hell no. Did the United States have any idea what they were getting themselves into? Again, no. But obviously we aren't getting too much oil out of it if Iraq doesn't even crack the top five list of countries providing the United States oil, eh? So what's all this about stealing their oil? Why do we need to steal their oil when we obviously have enough from friendly countries like Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia? Hmm? Iraq doesn't even HAVE that much oil compared to the countries I just named.

Your little conspiracy theory is sort of falling to pieces. There needs to be a substantial reason that the United States would murder over 3,000 of their own citizens. I've pretty much disproved all of your "reasons." Though I have noticed that a majority of the people who believe in this ridiculous theory aren't exactly well informed when it comes to governmental affairs....

 

[The Phantarch]

Stuff and nonsense:

Bush being paid billions by the Bin Ladens, do you think that he'd risk losing that kind of money by actually hunting down Osama Bin-Laden? I don't think that it's likely. Face it the 'all powerful' U.S. military couldn't hunt him down because they were sent to the most redundant of locations before the invasion of Iraq for its vast oil resources securing both the continuing funds of the Bin Ladens and the vast sums dollars accumilated through Iraq, two birds with one stone.

 

[Erythritol]

Stuff and nonsense:

Bush being paid billions by the Bin Ladens, do you think that he'd risk losing that kind of money by actually hunting down Osama Bin-Laden? I don't think that it's likely. Face it the 'all powerful' U.S. military couldn't hunt him down because they were sent to the most redundant of locations before the invasion of Iraq for its vast oil resources securing both the continuing funds of the Bin Ladens and the vast sums dollars accumilated through Iraq, two birds with one stone.

Bush is *personally* being paid billions by the Bin Ladens? Cite that with a relevant source of information. (And so help me God, if you say Michael Moore....) Otherwise, it's just you making things up. Also, Bin Laden doesn't really have ties with his family anymore. The Saudi government stripped him of his citizenship, and his family officially disowned him in 1994. It's a rather ignorant assumption on your part to think that because he is part of Al Qaeda, his entire family must be. They're just very wealthy because their company is one of the largest construction companies in the Islamic world. It's bad luck for them that one of the MANY members of the bin Laden family happens to be a terrorist.

Have you ever seen the middle eastern country side? Do you know about the vast networks of caves there? The United States military is powerful because of its advanced technology. All of that advanced technology means NOTHING when you are searching for someone who is hiding in a cave. You can have the most impressive arsenal in the world; it doesn't mean shit if you can't find your enemy. Also, as proved in Vietnam and now in Iraq, guerrilla tactics are HIGHLY effective against America's army. Utilizing Afghanistan's natural obstacles (caves, mountains, etc) to his advantage is very clever of Bin Laden. He basically has home advantage; he knows the middle east way better than any American could hope to. So, yeah, it's not terribly surprising that he's difficult to find. Unless the United States gets a magic crystal ball, they're going to continue having difficulty finding him.

As for the vast amount of money being accumulated in Iraq...do you have any sort of realistic notion of how much this war is costing? This war is, in fact, driving the United States deeper into debt. The United States is LOSING money in this war: Congress has already appropriated approximately $430 billion for military operations, reconstruction and related programs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Juuuuust fyi.

 

[Scarlet]

Umm, okay well I do not have a very good grasp on politics such as Erythritol. One thing I will say....I'm rather shocked that some people actual believe these silly little theories that were made up by people such as Michael Moore. They're just little conspiracy theories. Moore just blabber bullshit out of his mouth and makes things up. There are many things in history that have conspiracy theories. Anything can have a crazy conspiracy theory.

 

[The Phantarch]

Umm, okay well I do not have a very good grasp on politics such as Erythritol. One thing I will say....I'm rather shocked that some people actual believe these silly little theories that were made up by people such as Michael Moore. They're just little conspiracy theories. Moore just blabber bullshit out of his mouth and makes things up. There are many things in history that have conspiracy theories. Anything can have a crazy conspiracy theory.

No I know TBTB conspiracy theories (an acronym of 'too bizzare to believe' for those outside of the ring of conspiricy theorists)
I have read several articles aside from seeing Moore's "Farenheit 9/11" which all confirm it I will gather the titles of books and website addresses and I will post them later. Anyway to just dismiss what someone says without looking into it is definitely the sign of a narrow minded dupe. No offense.

 

[Scarlet]

No I know TBTB conspiracy theories (an acronym of 'too bizzare to believe' for those outside of the ring of conspiricy theorists)
I have read several articles aside from seeing Moore's "Farenheit 9/11" which all confirm it I will gather the titles of books and website addresses and I will post them later. Anyway to just dismiss what someone says without looking into it is definitely the sign of a narrow minded dupe. No offense.

Really? You thought the Bin Ladens were paying George Bush millions? Don't call me 'narrow minded' because I don't listen to Michael Moore's or any other unreliable source. Anyone can make some bullshit up and say: "Ohhh yeah 9/11 is somehow related to George Bush and uhh here are statistical facts." You can't believe every statical facts, and sources that assume these silly 'inside jobs'.

I think Eryhritol would know a lot more than you since she is majoring in International and Government affairs don't you think?

Really, I would like to know these sources you're mentioning.

 

[Erythritol]

No I know TBTB conspiracy theories (an acronym of 'too bizzare to believe' for those outside of the ring of conspiricy theorists)
I have read several articles aside from seeing Moore's "Farenheit 9/11" which all confirm it I will gather the titles of books and website addresses and I will post them later. Anyway to just dismiss what someone says without looking into it is definitely the sign of a narrow minded dupe. No offense.

Oh god, I just love it when bored little teenagers see Michael Moore's "documentary," do a little google research, and then decide that they're experts in politics and the middle east. It really entertains me.

If you have absolutely no understanding of American politics or the middle east, and have no concept of recent American political history, I guess you could believe 9/11 was an inside job. Hmmm....

But yes, by all means, just completely ignore every relevant fact that I have presented in previous posts from actual RELIABLE sources that disprove your pathetic theory. You know, the facts that don't rely on grainy images THAT TOTALLY PROVE THAT THE PLANE WAS A JET FIGHTER AND NOT A 747 LOL!!!111

 

[Mugen]

I hate topics based on heresy, nothing can really be proved, one side will always say US did it to themselves, the other that it was a terrorist attack, Erythritol I think you're just wasting your words here, I'm telling you this cause I see your debating skills and your knowledge. You'll never prove it to these guys.<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

 

[The Phantarch]

Oh god, I just love it when bored little teenagers see Michael Moore's "documentary," do a little google research, and then decide that they're experts in politics and the middle east. It really entertains me.

If you have absolutely no understanding of American politics or the middle east, and have no concept of recent American political history, I guess you could believe 9/11 was an inside job. Hmmm....

But yes, by all means, just completely ignore every relevant fact that I have presented in previous posts from actual RELIABLE sources that disprove your pathetic theory. You know, the facts that don't rely on grainy images THAT TOTALLY PROVE THAT THE PLANE WAS A JET FIGHTER AND NOT A 747 LOL!!!111

In that case, tell me why every counter-terrorist function in America was shut down 1 week before the incident! Also explain why the patriot act was jumped on congress at a time when they wouldn't actually bother to read it. Explain why bottled breast milk for babies weren't allowed on planes but lighters and matches were!

Reliable sources do not come from right wing twats!

Really? You thought the Bin Ladens were paying George Bush millions? Don't call me 'narrow minded' because I don't listen to Michael Moore's or any other unreliable source. Anyone can make some bullshit up and say: "Ohhh yeah 9/11 is somehow related to George Bush and uhh here are statistical facts." You can't believe every statical facts, and sources that assume these silly 'inside jobs'.

I think Eryhritol would know a lot more than you since she is majoring in International and Government affairs don't you think?

Really, I would like to know these sources you're mentioning.

Honestly, why do I bother? I bet you don't know the first thing about politics. In which case you'll likely dismiss my other sources as BS as well cos you are obviously incapable of seeing fault in the man who said "I know that human beings and fish can live in perfect harmony". The other major source is www.hereinreality.com and various links from it. There are also books I've got but it will take a while to dig them out. I'm an avid reader, see. However to finally dismiss your accusations of my arguments lacking in verisimilitude, look at the questions I asked above. Terrorism wasn't a major concern for Bush even when the patriot act was laid down. It was a facade that apparently you like so many other right wing Americans have fallen for, line, hook and sinker.


To close the case you either admit that this was an inside job or (relating back to the point about the counter-terrorist functions of America being shut down regarding it as a "Phony issue") You admit that the U.S. Law is in the hands of incompetents.

 

[Mitsuki]

Alright guys, calm down, please. I know this is a debatable topic and both sides must understand that. No name callings, please, or any other insults, whatsoever. You guys are both doing a great job showing your side of the arguments...so let's keep it at that and respect each other's views. We are not here to outsmart each other - it's just a matter of laying your facts/opinions down, challenging the other side, and discussing it in a polite manner.