Perdue engineers debunk 9/11 conspiracy

[Dense]

It's painfully obvious that whether or not there is some huge conspiracy, the US government is not putting forth everything that they know about this situation. There are numerous examples of why that is true, and it is the groundwork for any and all conspiracy theories. The main problem with trying to discover the truth about the 9/11 situation is that the interested parties have created such a mass propaganda against the thought of conspiracies that the answers will never fully come out. You have two very large groups of people: Group A who are fed on the propaganda and buy into the bullshit about there being nothing under the surface, and Group B who theory-craft about what might have happened, and then add facts or purported facts to their proof when they fit, rather than taking all of the facts and coming up with a conclusion. True cognitive minds are far too scared to commit reputational suicide by going on the record about any of the inconsistencies reported, and there is far too much cover-up propaganda for anyone to get a clear picture of all of the inconsistencies and facts of what really transpired.

The point of debate should not be to "win" an argument, but to discover the most amount of information about a certain subject or occurance, and in this case, everyone is far too concerned with "being right." I have to admit that it's painful to read all of the misinformation and speculation being passed as fact, from both the conspiracy-laden-stories, and the propaganda-backed-bullshit.

In my compilation of knowledge on the subject, I found several things to be fascinating about both the events that happened, and the incongruity of the reports in the aftermath. The mysteries between the two can create quite large gaps in compatibility. I have a few sources that I really liked because of the neutrality of the information. The http://www.wtc7.net is the best, and there is also a full-length movie documentary about the Pentagon incident called Hidden In Plane Sight that I found mildly entertaining, and a bit informational. Some of that information is here: http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/news/20 ... omment.php

[guartz]

Enkidu, and all I'm trying to say is that the official story is bogus. I agree with Dense, none of the American intelligentsia ever mentioned what they think happened on 911, because all we can do is speculate. From Noam chomsky to Tariq Ali to Adam Curtis...however, they all agree that the bush administration benefited from the attack. This does not mean we should accept the official story and anybody who disagrees is a nutcase.

[Septimus]

Enkidu, and all I'm trying to say is that the official story is bogus. I agree with Dense, none of the American intelligentsia ever mentioned what they think happened on 911, because all we can do is speculate.

I think that planes hit buildings.

From Noam chomsky to Tariq Ali to Adam Curtis...however, they all agree that the bush administration benefited from the attack

Wait, you mean that politicians will use tragedy to further their own agenda?! Someone call up Rudy Gulianni on his Never-Forget-That-I-Was-Mayor-During-9-11-mobile and let him know this is going on!

This does not mean we should accept the official story and anybody who disagrees is a nutcase.

It's time for the big, scary truth. People want to believe that 9-11 was a conspiracy because they don't want to believe that something that horrible could happen without a big conspiracy. A handful of nutcases got on a few planes and landed a devastating blow against our nation. Truth be told, there was almost no way it could have been prevented by the FBI, CIA, or other law enforcement agencies because they kept such a low profile. But people want an Illuminati to blame, they don't want to accept that so few people could cause such massive destruction, so they look at random shit that doesn't really matter and create elaborate fantasies around them. Then they spread their fairy tales across the internet where the connect with other people who embellish these stories of awe into even larger more fantastical myths. All because they don't want to accept that fact that the world is a scary place and 3/4ths of the world hates us.

My opinion about Bush is fairly well known, and although his administration certainly capitalized on what happened during 9-11, I honestly doubt that they could have caused it.

[MF Perm]

Truth be told, there was almost no way it could have been prevented by the FBI, CIA, or other law enforcement agencies because they kept such a low profile.

There is actually evidence that there were tip offs and leads to the FBI, CIA, and local police forces regarding some of the men that were disregarded or improperly communicated and lost in certain channels.

I remember hearing about it when Tenet came out with his book basically trying to say those mishaps weren't his fault and he doesn't blame his men.

I also thought that's what a portion of the 9/11 Commission was about, to investigate the intelligence communities errors regarding this and to correct it.

[Norelco]

Truth be told, there was almost no way it could have been prevented by the FBI, CIA, or other law enforcement agencies because they kept such a low profile.

There is actually evidence that there were tip offs and leads to the FBI, CIA, and local police forces regarding some of the men that were disregarded or improperly communicated and lost in certain channels.

I remember hearing about it when Tenet came out with his book basically trying to say those mishaps weren't his fault and he doesn't blame his men.

I also thought that's what a portion of the 9/11 Commission was about, to investigate the intelligence communities errors regarding this and to correct it.

I agree. There's proof that people knew something was up and that nothing was done about it.

[Ivve]

Truth be told, there was almost no way it could have been prevented by the FBI, CIA, or other law enforcement agencies because they kept such a low profile.

There is actually evidence that there were tip offs and leads to the FBI, CIA, and local police forces regarding some of the men that were disregarded or improperly communicated and lost in certain channels.

I remember hearing about it when Tenet came out with his book basically trying to say those mishaps weren't his fault and he doesn't blame his men.

I also thought that's what a portion of the 9/11 Commission was about, to investigate the intelligence communities errors regarding this and to correct it.

I agree. There's proof that people knew something was up and that nothing was done about it.

Do you work for the government? I know I certainly don't. Just because they do not release every detail of every investigation for the general public to read does not necessarily mean they are covering something up for malicious reasons. They could have been gathering more intelligence and simply failed to get exactly what they needed before the attacks happened. The information that they have about additional explosions, or notes on inconsistencies could be something that needs to be kept classified for the time being as we continue to pursue those connected to Al'Qaeda or other extremist organizations. Just in case you haven't noticed, the war in Iraq and the war on terror, however bullshit they may be, are still going on. Since these two events are connected, I don't believe we can have full disclosure on one until the other ends. (Assuming, of course, that the extremist elements in Iraq are indeed connected to those who were behind 9-11, as we have been led to believe.) Considering I have a loved one serving in Iraq right now, I don't really give half a fuck about possible secondary explosions and explaining blah blah blah inconsistencies if there's a possibility that it could show our hand and allow those responsible to continue to elude capture and consequences. Important part italicized.

Even then, if we continue to pursue this (fruitless) war on terrorism after we bring our troops home from Iraq, they may not feel that it's safe to release certain information for some time. The truth will eventually come out. It always does. It all comes down to whether or not you trust their judgment in terms of timing. I personally believe that many people working for the government have years of experience, much more education and training than I do, and much more firsthand intelligence and are able to make much better decisions than I am.

Listen to yourselves. "There was proof something was up and nothing was done about it." In case you haven't been paying attention for the last few years, bad shit happens when people act on incomplete intelligence. So either you want them to jump on the very first sign of foreboding and possibly make really stupid rash decisions, or you want them to wait, investigate, and possibly not find out about events in time to stop them. Personally, I would rather wait and investigate.

[MF Perm]

Hey don't get me wrong, I'm not for conspiracy here, all I'm saying is there was a great margin of error and this could have been prevented were it not for the highlighted errors within the intelligence community.

Would the information have stopped it? We'll never know. In hindsight it's looking like it could have been prevented. Does it mean this was pre-planned or a conspiracy? Doubtful. But I hardly think solely questioning the issues the intelligence community had with the information they came across and it being neglected or discarded hardly fits into a conspiracy theory more than it's just plain bad communication and management.

http://www.thememoryhole.com/911/911-preventable.htm

I understand your frustration man but, the information is clearly there.

[Ivve]

Hey don't get me wrong, I'm not for conspiracy here, all I'm saying is there was a great margin of error and this could have been prevented were it not for the highlighted errors within the intelligence community.

Would the information have stopped it? We'll never know. In hindsight it's looking like it could have been prevented. Does it mean this was pre-planned or a conspiracy? Doubtful. But I hardly think solely questioning the issues the intelligence community had with the information they came across and it being neglected or discarded hardly fits into a conspiracy theory more than it's just plain bad communication and management.

http://www.thememoryhole.com/911/911-preventable.htm

I understand your frustration man but, the information is clearly there.

Yes, I believe it was definitely a gross mismanagement error. Not one of them says that we could have predicted exactly where or when it was going to happen, simply that we had information that may have led us to the perpetrators if we'd followed up on it properly. That's still a far, far cry from "knew every detail of Bin Laden's plan, and ignored the situation completely, knowing that it would cost thousands of people their lives as an excuse to start a war."

I do not believe that higher-ups like the president and the VP were sitting around on September 10th saying to one another, "You know, I wonder if Bin Laden's plan to fly planes into the WTC towers and Pentagon tomorrow ever got set up properly." I believe it's more likely that the only people who were still paying attention to terrorist activity were the people who were investigating the "hard targets" they say they had. They just worked too slowly and underestimated the urgency of the situation. Was that a huge error? In hindsight, yes. We have yet to pinpoint the exact reasons that they failed to catch these people in time. Perhaps when that is uncovered, then we can apply it to future situations and avoid these sort of situations in the future.

However! In this case, acting preemptively was a good idea. In another very very well publicized case, WMDs in Iraq, acting preemptively was a bad idea. Hindsight is 20/20, and it's easy to sit here now and say "Yes, these people should have done X thing," when at the time it was probably a much less black-and-white issue. We jumped quickly into another situation, without proper investigation, without proper intelligence, and look what happened. That would not have happened in the situation of the people who hijacked the planes on 9/11, but again, hindsight is 20/20. It's not possible to predict with any kind of reasonable certainty what will happen when you act without all the facts. I think it was the very human error of underestimating our enemy, and underestimating the seriousness of the situation. That is regrettable.

It's just frustrating now to see armchair strategists, with all the hard facts laid out before them, act as though they are just the height of enlightenment. We don't know what information the government may be withholding or why. However, in this case, we already know there was an error made on the part of our government. Covering up bombs in the WTC to disguise the fact that they fucked up and didn't research their shit fast enough is pointless, because we already know that. From that point, you have to make the decision to either believe that they have just cause to withhold some information, or that they are withholding information because it implicates their involvement in the attacks. I don't see that there is any other possible option. I don't see that there is another option that makes sense.

[Norelco]

I don't think there was a conspiracy, I just know I've seen news reports and shows were several FBI and CIA agents said they had reliable information on something like this was going to happen and have informed their superiors and it got lost in the system or ignored.

[guartz]

However! In this case, acting preemptively was a good idea. In another very very well publicized case, WMDs in Iraq, acting preemptively was a bad idea.

Dude... preemptively arresting people and tightening security to prevent a possible crime is okay. Invading a country that cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars is not okay. War is last resort, no? How can you even compare the two?

[Ivve]

However! In this case, acting preemptively was a good idea. In another very very well publicized case, WMDs in Iraq, acting preemptively was a bad idea.

Dude... preemptively arresting people and tightening security to prevent a possible crime is okay. Invading a country that cost thousands of lives and billions of dollars is not okay. War is last resort, no? How can you even compare the two?

We invaded because we believed, from the incomplete information that we had, that we were at the point of last resort. We believed, or at least were told, that not only did they for sure have WMDs, but also that we had been directly threatened with those WMDs. That seems like an urgent situation that requires immediate attention and immediate action. From what I remember, we sent inspectors into the country before attacking at all, and those people were turned away multiple times. Could we have continued to pursue answers in a diplomatic way? Perhaps. Would the American public have been as forgiving if the president was perceived to have allowed another attack on us on our own soil? Not likely. I think the decision was motivated in part by politics and wishing to maintain approval by the citizens, in part by opportunism, and in part by lack of complete and correct intelligence. That last part became blatantly fucking obvious when we got there and then turned up some lolblueprints.

Do I support the war in Iraq? Fuck no. I do feel that it was a decision rushed into (in part) by the mentality that we need to act fast before they act on us. I don't, however, feel as though the government intentionally lied to me. I feel like we have some fucking retards at the highest levels that are making decisions they have no business making. I don't feel like they're intentionally making shitty decisions to benefit themselves, just because I don't think they're capable of looking that far into the future. We didn't even have a goddamned post-war plan.

[guartz]

It's time for the big, scary truth. People want to believe that 9-11 was a conspiracy because they don't want to believe that something that horrible could happen without a big conspiracy.

There is no base for this statement. In fact, quite the opposite is true when dealing with human psychology. People when faced with a disaster will tend to think positively in order to escape the harsh reality. If you read Victor E Frankl's Man's Search For Meaning, you'd see the perfect example of such a phenomenon. In his book, during the holocaust when jews were lined up for the gas chamber, he noticed that they all knew what was coming, but refused to believe that it was true.

A handful of nutcases got on a few planes and landed a devastating blow against our nation.

Actually they weren't deranged or mad, they knew what they were doing and it was their way of petitioning for very specific grievances. Besides, the attack itself on our economy/way of life wasn't that successful until George Bush took us to war and introduced things like Patriot Act and removed habeas corpus. The way America reacted cost us more then any terrorist attack could ever. Look, after 9/11 the world was crying with us... we had the sympathy and support of almost every nation. Then ol' georgie stepped up and fucked it all up, and now America is hated virtually everywhere.

[Ivve]

A handful of nutcases got on a few planes and landed a devastating blow against our nation.

Actually they weren't deranged or mad, they knew what they were doing and it was their way of petitioning for very specific grievances. Besides, the attack itself on our economy/way of life wasn't that successful until George Bush took us to war and introduced things like Patriot Act and removed habeas corpus. The way America reacted cost us more then any terrorist attack could ever. Look, after 9/11 the world was crying with us... we had the sympathy and support of almost every nation. Then ol' georgie stepped up and fucked it all up, and now America is hated virtually everywhere.

People who think that they are justified in killing thousands of people to prove a point are not deranged or mad? That's news to me.

[guartz]

We invaded because we believed, from the incomplete information that we had, that we were at the point of last resort.

Ivve, there is very significant proof that Bush administration manipulated the evidence to take us to war. It doesn't matter what "we" believe at that time. The question is, what did Dick and Bush believe.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fusea ... =886009156

[Octavious]

Yea, last time i checked, the murder of over 1,000 innocent lives constitues a deranged person :O

edit: Did he just link to myspace to prove a point? lol

[guartz]

Yea, last time i checked, the murder of over 1,000 innocent lives constitues a deranged person :O

edit: Did he just link to myspace to prove a point? lol

But the murder of 600,000+ innocent lives is building democracy? I'm just trying to catch your frame of thought here.

the myspace link is to a video of a congressional testimonial of CIA intelligence.

[Octavious]

I'm not following your 600,000+ Lives murdered, did I miss something? Oh, and I don't support the war , if your going to ask. I'm simply saying 1,000 innocent lives is constitued as pretty sick. As far as democracy, I don't feel like arguing my stance on democracy, lol, it works for the most part so I don't mind it...however we could always go to lolphailcommunism.

[guartz]

I'm not following your 600,000+ Lives murdered, did I miss something? Oh, and I don't support the war , if your going to ask. I'm simply saying 1,000 innocent lives is constitued as pretty sick. As far as democracy, I don't feel like arguing my stance on democracy, lol, it works for the most part so I don't mind it...however we could always go to lolphailcommunism.

600k + is home(HOW) many civilians died in Iraq.

But we were messing with middle east way before that, from Egypt to Iran to Syria to Palestine. Those Arabs didn't attack us because they are loonies, it's a wrong thing to believe.

edit: durr grammar...

[Ivve]

But the murder of 600,000+ innocent lives is building democracy? I'm just trying to catch your frame of thought here.

No, you're not trying to catch my frame of thought. You're trying to push anti-Bush propaganda on a group of people who already don't support Bush, so it's really not a sensical effort. I've said many, many times that I don't support the war effort and that it was a mistake. I'm done even trying to talk to you. If you've managed to overlook my effort to connect the alarmist thought processes "WE SHOULDA ACTED IMMEDIATELY TO STOP 9-11" and "WE SHOULD ACT IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT WMD ATTACKS," then there's really nothing left for me to say.

My only point has been, when you act without all the facts, you fuck up. Whether it's on a large scale or a small scale is completely irrelevent. When you act without all the facts, you fuck up.

Those arabs didn't attack us because they are loonies, it's a wrong thing to believe.

Believing that attacking civilians purposely is ever justified is a wrong thing to believe. We have consistently pursued the extremists and the non-civvie bad guys in Iraq. Do you have some myspace links to show government plans to firebomb Iraqi orphanages and halfway houses for abused women, too?

[guartz]

If you've managed to overlook my effort to connect the alarmist thought processes "WE SHOULDA ACTED IMMEDIATELY TO STOP 9-11" and "WE SHOULD ACT IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT WMD ATTACKS," then there's really nothing left for me to say.

Dude, the alarmist mentality was artificially created. The people of America didn't even know where Iraq was until
the executive branch started the mass fear mongering propaganda of saddam and WMD... The video from myspace shows clearly, according to the testimonial of those CIA agents, there was NO evidence showing that saddam had WMD...