under_believer

Joined

• started 118 topics
• posted 1,767 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by under_believer

• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  LIHOP is a whole other thread, and I think it's hard to prove that one as well. I think it has more to do with incompetence than anything else.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  > Who signed into being the Department of Homeland Security?
  
  Well, Congress put together legislation mandating it, and then Bush signed it. I think that's the point you're missing. Congress makes the law, the Executive branch enforces the law. Bush ultimately administers the DHS, but he does so under the authority of Congress, who act under the authority of the American people.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  > Again, Northwoods doesn't prove anything about 9/11 - I have
  > no problem with that. But in light of this document becoming
  > public, it shows that a precedence existed dating back to the
  > 1960's, at least.
  
  I'm not sure what your point is in bringing up Northwoods in reference to 9/11, then. If you're arguing that it lends more credence to the idea that 9/11 could have been a conspiracy, well, that's logically equivalent to saying "because people have the ability to conspire, conspiracies must exist." I won't disagree with that proposition, but it's a leap from there to "because people have the ability to conspire, 9/11 must have been a conspiracy," which is, I think, what our defeated and erstwhile friend was arguing.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  Jourles said:
  > Why didn't they immediately put into place the strict measures that we have to endure today when we fly?
  
  The TSA and the associated policies and practices that exist are an enormous Rube Goldberg device, which cost billions of dollars and has thousands of employees. They couldn't immediately put that into place even if they were a competent administration, which they're not.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  Jourles, don't buy into it. It's a false correlation. Yes, Northwoods existed. But it was never implemented, because it was a terrible idea and wouldn't have worked.
  
  Your question was "what would stop another administration from doing the same?" I assume you mean "planning a Northwoods-like operation to create a casus belli against Iraq." The answer is, nothing would stop them from planning one. But reality would very likely prevent them from implementing it.
  
  Northwoods does not constitute proof that 9/11 was a conspiracy.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  I have to retract my previous statement. I have read about Northwoods, that's the Cuban thing.
  
  That has absolutely no bearing on the current discussion. The fact that Northwoods existed doesn't constitute evidence that 9/11 was a conspiracy concocted by... someone... to provide a casus belli against Iraq.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  I may or may not read it, but I'm not going to have attention diverted from the subject at hand by someone (needproof) asking me if I read it, saying I can't talk until I do (which would have been the likely response), and failing to address my questions.
  
  I want to know why needproof thinks this, and how needproof squares their belief in this with those two questions.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  > Who are you, if you had a braincell it would probably die of
  > loneliness - as a good person in my life once said, 'never try
  > to argue with an idiot' - for that reason, I am out of this one
  > folks.
  
  As expected. You met capable opposition, were unable to deal with it, made a parting shot, and fled.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  I'm not going to move on until you answer my questions. If you had answers, you'd give them. You wouldn't hold them back in some kind of "ANSWER MY QUESTION FIRST" game. Without answers to those two questions, the entire conspiracy theory falls apart. They are pivotal to it all working out. You need to answer them in a credible, logical way or you don't have a conspiracy.
  
  Your question for me was "Have you checked out the Northwoods document?"
  
  The answer is no, and I'm not going to either. I'm engaging you here on actual points and questions about your theories. It's lazy for you to just tell me to go read something. If you want to bring up specific points out of your document and ask me questions about them, that's okay, but I'm not going to be given a reading assignment by someone too lazy to demonstrate their understanding of the issues.
  
  You're just trying to deflect attention away from those deal-breaking questions you can't answer and refuse to think about.
• 
  75

  9/11 Pentagon video released, shows explosion and no plane

  by What-A-Coincidence in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as shown on cnn: no plane on video from hotelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atj5sute0oq.

  no big plane aa77 on pentagon videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fjdamiffi.

  removing evidence and witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjejip_47tq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  under_believer

  WAC: YOU shut up. No, YOU shut up. No, YOU shut up. :)
  
  
  needproof:
  The first question you failed to answer is WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PLANES AND PEOPLE. Saying "GOD KNOWS" and "OUR GOVERNMENT HAS KILLED PEOPLE" doesn't cut it. Do you deny that thousands of New Yorkers saw planes fly into the towers? It's on video after all. What about the Pentagon plane and people? What happened to them? There's no question they flew to the Pentagon, it's all on air traffic control. Did they pull up, fly over, and land somewhere and all the people were killed? And WHY?
  
  Why would they blow up the pentagon with a bomb, and go through an elaborate and risky scheme to do something else with the plane, when they were going to just fly planes into the WTC anyways? What would possibly be their motive for that? How could they possibly gain from faking a plane crash in one place, but going ahead and performing a plane crash elsewhere?
  
  The second question you failed to even acknowledge was why haven't there been leaks. How could it be kept secret all this time? You seem to think that a few people were in on it and that is it. However you realize that hundreds or thousands of people from all manner of federal and civilian capacities would have to be in on 9/11, right? This isn't something that like four guys in a conference room could pull off.