9-11, what happened at the pentagon?

That was REALLY FUNNY TC!! Hahahahah!

Joopin', what you said, similar to what I was trying to say. But don't get me started on the French. Crimmeny, the Frogs calling out the US on a conspiracy is like the fat kid nobody picked for park football talking smack to Jerry Rice. The frogs need to just shut the hell up and continue being the short-bus riders on the free world.

Tug, many good points indeed.

Again, I think that movie is baloney, but I don't think there's anything wrong with being suspicious. Being suspicious made us Americans rebel against our British suppressors. It's who we are.
 
Well since we're on this topic...

I am very skeptical of this particular conspiracy theory as well, but consipiracy theories do tend to abound when so many things just don't add up. And there are a lot of things that happened around 9/11 that simply do not add up. And many of them do smell as though a more sinister truth is being withheld.

One of the most bothersome is the five Israelis who were photographed celebrating and filming with as the attacks happed. Once a suspicious citizen spotted them, they were called in arrested and later arrested. Police found $4700 in cash, a couple of foreign passports and a pair of box cutters like the ones used by the hijackers. Those five were later deported to Israel and are free. This, unlike conspiracy theories, is based on fact and as profiled by 20/20 a few months after the attack. Much of the media attention paid to this matter came to an abrupt end shortly thereafter and without conclusion.

Then there are a number of other factors...even those included in the 9/11 commission report such as the odd stand-down of defensive attack aircraft during crticial moments at the beginning of the attack.

...and on and on.

My point is, we, as a country shouldn't be so quick to react as though everything that questions the veracity of the generally proposed-truth or which sheds a bit of skepticism on the "powers that be" as anti-American or soft-on-terrorist logic. Quite the contrary...I think many of the people who look for and want answers to fundamental and very serious disconnects are those who care most about this nation and its defense. Many are unwilling to be blinded by the official line when the official line does not connect with the facts.

As for those people that died? Ask their families. The 9/11 families have pursued many of these answers but have been stonewalled time and time again and, to this day, many very basic questions remain unanswered. It took a public outcry before Bush reversed and permitted establishment of the 9/11 commission--finally created given the demand of the families and subsequent public pressure--but even then the commission was given a suspiciously limited investigation scope. Given that this was the worst attack on American soil, why wouldn't we want to know about everything that went wrong...and I do mean everything. Classification? Nope, the more sensitive findings could have remained classified.

Questions like these leave people, including myself with an uneasy feeling about many of the "official" stories. Yes our government does some things that are secret, but we should not get so complacent such that we trust the government to do the right thing or assume that we don't know something or if things don't make sense, and just write it off as though government officials are just protecting us and that ultimately they're doing the right thing. Don't take this personally but, but that's the sort of logic that will do more harm to this country than a couple of dozen hijackers ever could.

Just as the the Twin Towers seemed like infallable near-permanent structures to casual passerbys on September 10th 2001, seemingly powerful countries as big as the USA can become undermined or quietly usurped in a very short period of time. As long as recorded history has existed there have been great powers that, in their heyday, also seemed infallable.

...Now, before anyone jumps to ridiculous conclusions with knee-jerk reactions to the following...READ and THINK. If you disagree fine, but disagree based on LOGIC and not flag waving generalities...

But there are potent lessons from as recent as in the in the 1930's pre-Nazi era Germany. The public attitude was one of in the country largely gave way to allow excessive abuse of public protections and ultimately to the Germany of the 1940's that is very much reviled...and deservedly so.

"During the 1920's and early 1930's Germany was unstable socially economically and politically. The governments were more often in a state of disarray than not, the populace was disillusioned and scared, and the Great Wall Street stock market crash of 1923 saw the economy crumble before the population's eyes. These unfavourable factors combined to create a nation of precarious stature, a country which was looking for a savior....Once in power, Hitler was able to manipulate the minds and hearts of this disenchanted nation towards anything, once trust was gain. This is how normal people came to accept the horrific acts of manipulation, marginalization, and finally murder....". German citizens who disagreed (often logically) with the course that Germany was beginning to take were often branded as unpatriotic, the enemy, weak, etc.

This is not propaganda or spin, this is documented history. I have no intention of suggesting our president is like Hitler, but there are many, many parallels in public attitudes and trends that anyone who truly cares about this country should at least be wary of.

- "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

And for God's sakes, don't take this as anti-Americanism or anti-Defense or anti-Semitism, anti-Mom & Apple pie, anti-Family, anti-God, etc. That's what so many Germans did in the 1930's. Instead...

* Consider it critical thought or logic and healthy skepticism of misleading pieces that keeps our government in check and which help to maintain this country as the strong republic that it has been for so long, or...

* Consider this an apolitical warning for Americans to start TRULY THINKING FOR YOURSELVES and stop basing major decisions about the future of this beloved country on SLOGANS, CATCH PHRASES, SPIN and RHETORIC of the team (or party) that you happen to associate with.

Whew, I got that off my chest. :)
 

Special_K, not bad man... I agree. Personally, I think it has become "Shiek" to have the knee jerk reaction. It's become "Shiek" to claim those who are critical of government are anti-american.

My point is, we, as a country shouldn't be so quick to react as though everything that questions the veracity of the generally proposed-truth or which sheds a bit of skepticism on the "powers that be" as anti-American or soft-on-terrorist logic. Quite the contrary...I think many of the people who look for and want answers to fundamental and very serious disconnects are those who care most about this nation and its defense. Many are unwilling to be blinded by the official line when the official line does not connect with the facts.

Very eloquent. To the point and a bit poetic. :D

Like I said before, I think it's heathy to question things. I also think it's healthy to make informed opinions.

Good thread.
 
Special_K said:
Once in power, Hitler was able to manipulate the minds and hearts of this disenchanted nation towards anything, once trust was gain. This is how normal people came to accept the horrific acts of manipulation, marginalization, and finally murder....". German citizens who disagreed (often logically) with the course that Germany was beginning to take were often branded as unpatriotic, the enemy, weak, etc.

This is not propaganda or spin, this is documented history. I have no intention of suggesting our president is like Hitler, but there are many, many parallels in public attitudes and trends that anyone who truly cares about this country should at least be wary of.
I think that is exactly what you were suggesting.

Unlike Nazi Germany, you can disagree here. In Germany you would not have been branded anything, you would have been killed. No one will harm you for speaking your mind here.

I don't think you are unpatriotic, I think you are a democrat.
 
I have a close friend that works at the Pentagon, and his wife works for a daycare that keeps the children of the Pentagon workers. Mark was out of his office that morning, and I'm glad for that. His office took a direct hit, and he lost 10 members of his personal staff. Lynda was outside with a group of 5 and 6 year olds when the plane flew over. She said it was low enough she could see the faces in the windows. Those kids watched as the plane slammed into the building where there mommies and daddies worked. The people that write that kind of propaganda should be shot.
 

Thank you Sparky. I don't know if they should be shot, but they definately should not be encouraged.
 
TwistedCopper said:
I think that is exactly what you were suggesting.

Unlike Nazi Germany, you can disagree here. In Germany you would not have been branded anything, you would have been killed. No one will harm you for speaking your mind here.

I don't think you are unpatriotic, I think you are a democrat.


There it goes...exactly my point. If you say certain things you're suddenly branded a member of the opposing party...in this case, a Democrat. Afterall, the term Democrat is a more palatable, polite term than the implicit but more direct terms "enemy" or "foe". The reality is, I could vote Republican just as easily as I could vote Democrat. I also commonly vote a mixed ticket...and not mixed by one or two exceptions.

But to imagine that someone can think independently in this day and age!! OMG!!! Independent thought??? Naaaawww, it couldn't be!!! They're really just a Democrat.

Sure I use 1920's-1930's (i.e. <u>PRE-NAZI</u>) Germany as an example since it is the most recent, more commonly known and easiest to cite instance. But there are many other parallels to nations that ended up on a similarly self-destructive course. There are enough parallels out there that if you did a little of your own independent research (i.e. I don't have to point you to any propaganda) with some objectivity you just might be a little surprised.

So instead of stating that I'm a Democrat, how about making a few points on why the parallels that DO exist have no applicability to this nation today.

...or you can state that the parallels don't exist--although that could be disproven very quickly.
 
Oil Pressure?

I didn't "state" you are a Democrat, I wrote that I "Think" you are a Democrat. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

"Independent thought" you say, I say not at all. There are many who hold your views. Most of them Democrats. This, and reading many of your other posts, leads me to believe that there is a strong possibility you are a Democrat. Did I say this is a bad thing? No. Did I put you down? No.

Would it bother you to be called a Democrat? It seemed to have bothered you.

Are you a democrat?

You referred to the Dems as the "opposing party". Opposed to what? My party? I don't have one.

I hold beliefs that neither major political party will support, often both of them talk the talk, but when it comes to crunch time neither walk the walk.

We can compare our government or our country with any in history and find similarities and differences. I don't need to do research, as I am well aware of the direction to which your discussion is going. My personal beliefs are that they are irrelevant. This day we live in is like no other, and while it is fascinating to look for coincidences with history, it is somewhat trivial. Any parallels that exist have differences as well. Apparently letting that be known triggered a self defense mechanism in you.

I did find it amusing like to assume my motives and my thoughts:
"They've got to be lying...they're really a Democrat."

I never called you a liar, I believe you are honestly expressing your veiws which you feel to be true. There's nothing wrong with that, but you sir, are the one who is jumping to conclusions and getting ired, not me.
 

The strangest part, it the reason I posted was to point out the paradox of making a reference comparing our governments and then saying that you're not trying to compare them.

Then I wanted to point out that I didn't think it made you unpatriotic to question.

The democrat reference was just my observation, but it's strange how it had you skipping over my other points to make me justify that observation.
 
Twisted: The Democrat reference didn't bother me so much as the appearance that I had to be "either or" did. I only spoke on one topic (9/11) and some parallels, the Democratic (and Republican) platforms are much more broad than that so my feeling was that it's very premature and almost reactive to think I'm a Democrat based on those statements.

As for the "lying" statement, I did reread and edit that out...even before you posted, so touche' on that point.

I skipped over the other points (e.g. Hitler) because I didn't want to become bogged down in that...although I did indirectly underscore that my reference was to Pre-Nazi (i.e. no one was shot or killed for their opinions in that era...just branded as unpatriotic and weak). Not branded as unpatriotic and weak by you, but that's the tendency these days (along with allegations of binary logic).

Do all parallels mean we're going to end up in the same situaiton? No. But when you have enough of them (i.e. more than a one-time anomaly or coicidence) do you heed it as a warning rather than categorically dismiss them? I would hope so.

FYI, I have a few close friends with whom I disagree on these issues from time to time...the funny part is we're still close friends. This is my way of saying: If I ran across you on the trail and you needed a tow...I wouldn't drive off and laugh, I'd still give you a tow...I'd just use my cheaper tow strap. :) Only kidding.
 
Special_K said:
Do all parallels mean we're going to end up in the same situaiton? No. But when you have enough of them (i.e. more than a one-time anomaly or coicidence) do you heed it as a warning rather than categorically dismiss them? I would hope so.
Agreed. I still think the comparison is a stretch.

FYI, I have a few close friends with whom I disagree on these issues from time to time...the funny part is we're still close friends. This is my way of saying: If I ran across you on the trail and you needed a tow...I wouldn't drive off and laugh, I'd still give you a tow...I'd just use my cheaper tow strap. :) Only kidding.

I'll bring my own strap :lol:
 

hahahaha...I'm not involved in this one!!! What a couple of troublemakers... Heehehehehe :mrgreen:
 
Yep, I just cause trouble whereever I go. :lol: But I did forget one other little thing though...and possibly the biggest element that makes conspiracy theories abound regading 9/11. In a few words:

PNAC - Project for the New American Century

If you're unfamiliar with this organization...it was an organization started in in the mid-late 90's and espoused a certain philosophy of American foreign policy. It's list of members even then now reads like a "who's who" of the current administration.

This is a page from the site. Scroll to the bottom to see the initial members...

PNAC Statement of Principals

The statement of principals may not sound bad though they tend to smack just a little (not a lot) of empirialism. But that's not all...

This group developed a partiuclar document in September 2000 which detailed a foreign policy philosophy/agenda. The document is titled <u>"Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century"</u>. Like the Statement of Principles, many parts of this document taken individually and at at face value seem very noble--in fact, I can even agree with a lot of the individual statements and sections. But, on the whole, this document tends to come across as much more empirialistic...at times bordering on a philosophy that smacks of world domination.

NOW, check out the document itself. In particular, Page 51, 1st Full Paragraph:

Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century

If you had trouble following the link, the text reads:
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

And a less substantial but notable phrase at the end of the paragraph:
"Thus, this report advocates a two-stage process of change – transition and transformation – over the coming decades."

This was in some media outlets for a minute but only came up as a blip. Given this, it should be at least a little understandable how some people might be a bit suspicious when you take this in combination with all the other strange events surrounding 9/11. As for me, I'm not ready to definitely say there was some sort of conspiracy, but I don't feel comfortable enough to rule it out--as hideous as that thought may be.

There. That's all. I promise I won't keep this thread going...unless someone specifically asks me to. :wink:
 

Most of the people I see who try to play up these "questions" are the same people who, with all of their might, spent eight years trying to label anyone who had "questions" about Clinton as a whacked-out conspiracy theorist. I guess as long as anything but a liberal is in the white house, it's hip to be suspicious of your government. But this isn't in anyway political or partisan :lol: yeah right.


Jet.....missile.....bomb....I don't really care as long as the people who did it die.
 
Jersey Jeeper needed as guide

Project for the New American Century = Project for a NEW WORLD ORDER :shock:

It's the Illuminati I tell ya! Note Dave Thomas' name was omitted to protect their leader's anonymity.

:lol:
 
PNAC is just another reason I am proud to be a Democrat! This is some of the most anit~American scary stuff that I have ever read! Sad thing is it is not set up by a group outside the counrty that hates us, these are american born and educated forlk of the highest level. The only non surprise is the fact that they are republicans. tug
 

Big Jeep Little Jeep

That document is perhaps the most arrogant thing I have ever seen.

Tug, Things like the PNAC is why I am not a Republican, but there are many reasons why I am not a democrat as well. I used to be a Democrat, but the party is so damn clouded with single issue special interest groups that they serve no main common goal anymore.

Damn I'm mad about the state this country is in.

Ok, so...

The Republicans want to rule the world.

The Democrats want the world to rule us.

Where does that leave the Constitution?

Man do we need a new political party or what?!?!?!?!?

Honestly folks, I joked in the above post, but this kind of insanity makes me glad we have checks and balances. Problem is I don't trust either side.
 
Back
Top