quote:

Originally posted by mndeg Why was Pearl Harbor allowed to be bombed even when the japanese code was cracked long before? this is completely false. if you aren't willing to talk facts, this is pointless. a complete waste of time. it's like trying to argue jesus exists because you say he speaks to you and "God is good".

Pearl Harbor goes to prove you're wrong!!! What the fuck, seriously you must be delusional!

Why would we want to go attack ourselves when there is an obvious group of people willing to do it for us?

The clear failure of intelligence up to this point and whether or not it was allowed to happen is a far more believable conspiracy than one that involves us doing it ourselves. Its the same as Pearl Harbor.

I believe that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen, to use it as a pretext for entering into war with Japan. Same with 9/11, even more so with the evidence that the Bush administration wanted to pin it on Iraq first. Inaction is usually far more destructive than action in the intelligence and warfare world.

And stop with the god insults, you are the one that is on the wrong side there. We are presenting facts based on clear scientific method, while you spout the tellings of individuals with little to no real experience in any relevant field of information.

They are your messiah for your fucked view on reality.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby I believe that Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen, to use it as a pretext for entering into war with Japan.

and you'd be wrong.

___________________

debunking 9/11 deebunking http://www.brianrwright.com/Coffee_...1_Debunking.htm

LOL. and they refuse to participate in open public debate. I gotta try to find the debunking 9/11 debunking debunking now. It all seems to end after the debunking debunking though.

http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/156656686X

___________________

soulful/latin/deep house + jazz

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN and you'd be wrong.

I don't think there was any conscious allowance, but I think that things that could have been implemented were not and the US was at a weakened state of defense when the Japanese attack occurred.

Most historians will agree with me on that.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby I don't think there was any conscious allowance, but I think that things that could have been implemented were not and the US was at a weakened state of defense when the Japanese attack occurred. Most historians will agree with me on that.

ok, fair enough. but what we can also agree upon is that had the US known that an attack on pearl harbour was imminent, they wouldn't have sent their fleet elsewhere and let the remnants take huge casualties.

___________________

quote:

1. "19 Arab hijackers"? They cannot fly Cessnas credibly; there are no airport videos of them boarding the alleged planes (minus the one purported to be one of the hijackers, taken in Maine, which we are to take on trust was his previous "connecting flight"; they use boxcutters to overpower cockpit crews successfully on all four flights; no console lockout commands are used by any of those four cockpit crews; these "hijackers" successfully navigate (in three instances) across hundreds of miles of tightly-controlled airspace to their selected targets (was FAA still supplying them navigational assistance?); they perform spot-on crashes into buildings that seasoned commercial aircraft pilots have difficulty duplicating on simulators; one of their passports survives the impact-inferno of the WTC complex. Oh sure. 2. "Four hijacked planes"? Two of the planes according to Bureau of Transportation statistics were unscheduled to fly that day; two more were not decommissioned until four years later. Two of the planes left no human remains and no debris field (according to credible eyewitness testimony at the time); the Shanksville plane left an empty hole as the official crash site while the Pentagon plane left no trace of damage from its two wingmounted six-ton engines on the outer wall of the Pentagon; the aluminum wings of the Pentagon plane survived impact with several highway lightposts knocking them down, then those same wings "folded up" and left no marks on the outer wall of the Pentagon - while both the WTC planes' aluminum wings ripped through steel like hot knives through butter; the SSDI (Social Security Death Index) shows odd discrepancies - (only a small percentage of those passengers on board are indicated as deceased); the extensive video documentation from numerous angles and cameras of the Pentagon plane that would support the official theory - ALL sequestered immediately on 911 (omitting the Fantastic Five Frames); not ONE successful NORAD interception of the planes; black boxes that we're first told are recovered and then are told were not recovered; air traffic controllers gagged (like the FDNY and NY police personnel); air traffic control tapes destroyed? Oh sure. 3. "Gravity-driven collapse"? Not one steel and concrete skyscraper in the history of the world - before or since 911 - has collapsed completely from fire or plane impact. Not one steel and concrete skyscraper in the history of the world - before or since 911 - has collapsed completely, symmetrically, at free-fall (or near-free fall) speed - without controlled demolition. Not one steel and concrete skyscraper in the history of the world - before or since 911 - has been reported by hundreds of eyewitnesses to be shaken by numerous explosions before "gravity-driven collapse". And all that molten metal that persisted at WTC ground zero for WEEKS after the collapse - natural by-product of "gravity-driven collapse"? The "gravity-driven collapse" theory of WTC 7 that NIST described as one of "extremely low probability" (bureaucracy-speak for: "A snowball's chance in h-ll")? Oh sure. 4. "Official 911 committee's investigation"? Philip Zelikow (whose pre-911 academic training in political science centered on the use and misuse of history to create "public presumption", "public myth" - ideas *assumed* to be true by a citizenry but *not known* to be true to further political agendas) was appointed executive director of the official 911 committee's investigation out of all the pool of available federal talent. Of course extracts from Zelikow's 1998 article Catastrophic Terrorism from the prestigious magazine Foreign Affairs are available online, in which Zelikow argues that had the 1993 WTC bombing succeeded it would have been a "Pearl Harbor" leading to a US fascist police state waging endless war. Zelikow's assertion mirrors that of the 2000 PNAC document, Rebuilding America's Defenses: "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", which itself echoes Zbigniew Brzezinski's assertion in his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard: "The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor" (pages 24-25 of that book). The official 911 report itself has been documented by Professor David Ray Griffin to contain roughly (at last count) 115 lies or distortions; Kean and Hamilton themselves (chair and vice-chair of the official 911 committee report) state in their book, Without Precedent, that they were consistently denied access to evidence and lied to by administration officials to such an extent that they considered bringing criminal charges against them; US Representative Max Cleland resigned from the official 911 committee for that very reason; the 911 committee's investigation was blocked and delayed by the Bush administration until all WTC steel had been shipped off to China and melted down into toaster ovens. And the committee's report makes not one single reference to the complete, symmetrical, free-fall collapse of WTC 7.

Look at both sides of the Pearl Harbor story. This one seems pretty neutral, just the facts http://www.antiwar.com/orig2/stinnett1.html

___________________

soulful/latin/deep house + jazz

any piece of information that uses david ray griffin as a source has never and will never be considered "neutral" by anyone with a brain and/or education.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN ok, fair enough. but what we can also agree upon is that had the US known that an attack on pearl harbour was imminent, they wouldn't have sent their fleet elsewhere and let the remnants take huge casualties.

To some degree that occurred. The Japanese were hoping to get the carriers while in port, knowing that carriers were more than likely going to be the new flag ships in naval combat. The US had their carriers out on maneuvers during the time leading up to and during the attack.

Had the Japanese got the carriers... I doubt you'd be living in Australia right now.

Of course if the Japanese hadn't attacked at all the world might be a very different place as well.

quote:

Originally posted by mndeg Look at both sides of the Pearl Harbor story. This one seems pretty neutral, just the facts http://www.antiwar.com/orig2/stinnett1.html

Watch any video of the collapses of the two main towers and you will see that the collapses begin at the points of impact or just below and that the buildings lower floors remain motionless until pancaking floors above them reach that level.

You know why a lot of this was never seen before? This is the first time in history that a nearly fully loaded wide body jet airliner traveling at near cruising speed has hit the side of a building with as unique a building design as the world trade centers.

Most buildings have internal structures that re-enforce the floors. The WTC had no such internal structure beyond the center elevator columns. As soon as one floor collapsed onto the floor below it was all over. Obviously the floor below the first collapsed floor couldnt support it, so then two floors fell onto the third, and then three onto the fourth, and it grew.

Not this pancake collapse shit again...




Pancakes or Explosives? Questions Remain About WTC Collapse

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Not this pancake collapse shit again... Pancakes or Explosives? Questions Remain About WTC Collapse

FFS IT DIDNT MELT WE GOT THAT! No one is saying anything melted, and if they are they are more stupid than the conspiracy theory people.

The thing is it didn't need to melt, it only had to be hot enough to weaken the super structure enough for the force of gravity to weaken the connecting structures on the exoskeleton and the elevator column. Thats all.

The pan-cake theory is the most widely recognized, the most widely researched and the one almost 100% to be true. It is also easily identifiable by the video of the collapse.

How else do you explain the videos of the collapse? Everything below the collapsing bit stays still till the avalanche reaches those sections.

That video is crap too, they take things out of context. If I remember correctly when they talk about the floors being able to handle that gravity with the fire, that was not taking into account that a lot of the flame retardant had been blown off by the crash and explosion, and that a huge chunk of the structure had been blown away by the jet crash.

Once again, I just do not understand why you guys have to choose the most complex and crazy way for things to happen.

I am now presenting my theory thats much more realistic. The CIA or some other covert agency infiltrated the al Queda network and recruited these men to carry out these attacks.

There. You don't have to solve for anything else. No crazy magic, no thermite, no planted explosives, no missiles on commercial air-liners. Nothing.

You have just good old HUMANINT doing what it does best: Recruiting patsies to carry out wet work that no one wants their hands tied to.

Last edited by Joss Weatherby on Feb-16-2009 at 19:25