[Cog]

OMG the Saudis have turned into 911 truthers. This is internet derp level entertainment and chuckles.

[onlooker]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wor ... ama-again/
Here P, is an article of how supposedly a Congressional report has been sequestered ie. classified that would reveal connections that were uncovered that existed between the hijackers and Saudi Arabia. Haha, all this makes me laugh, because the real connections that should be uncovered are those that lead to and between the US and everything that happened. This is just bait and switch or distraction material to take people off the scent of US involvement. I am saying all this living here in US maybe I should just shut up.

[onlooker]

P, one could show Cog video evidence of US involvement and he still would refuse to believe. None so blind as those who do not wish to see.

[Cog]

What I believe is the Twin towers were brought down by 19 highjackers, most of which were Saudi nationals who were trained and funded by Al-Queda. There might have been some involvement, at some level, by the members of the Saudi government. Although the Saudi government involvement has not been proven. I do not believe the US government had any role in the 911 bombing except the incompetence of US intelligence to catch it before it happened. That is what the evidence points to so far.

Everything else is conspiracy theories and wackiness. Nano-thermite, controlled demolition, etc is a bunch of froth and nonsense. No one is ever going to accept climate change and peak oil when you ally yourself with all this craziness. Might as well deny the moon landings while you are at it.

[ennui2]

Great, Cog isn't a tinfoiler. I guess everyone has SOME redeeming value. Here's your cookie.



Now promise not to lynch Obama and I'll give you another one.

[onlooker]

"Great, Cog isn't a tinfoiler." Well, Ennui, you seem to have some generic bias against any idea you perceive to be "tinfoil". I would suggest that this implies you have aversion to any ideas which tend to disorganize your orderly view of the world. As you consistently simply dismiss 911 without attempting to refute it with credible countering information.

[Cog]

There have already been several credible government reports in the aftermath of 911 pointing out what happened and what intelligence failures occurred that allowed it to happen. I've read the congressional report for the intelligence failures and the NIST report on how the buildings collapsed. I have seen no refutation of those reports by those who believe in some massive conspiracy.

Just like the people who claim the moon landings were faked. They make videos, the certainly talk a lot, but the evidence we landed on the moon is overwhelming.

[onlooker]

Have you gone Cog to 911truth.org and done some research there? When and if you do get back to me. Curious to know you assessment of all the info there.

[Cog]

If seen enough of the 911 truther 'information" to last a lifetime. In the immediate aftermath of any disaster, attack, crisis, you have media and public officials transmitting all sorts of incorrect information. 911 truthers grab onto those statements and try to make a conspiracy out of it months and years down the road. Let's face most people are stupid. Even more so during a crisis.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '
')Well, Ennui, you seem to have some generic bias against any idea you perceive to be "tinfoil".

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '
')Well, Ennui, you seem to have some generic bias against any idea you perceive to be "tinfoil".

[onlooker]

Absolutely true Tanada. That is why nothing can take the place of sound factual empirically arrived at data. This kind of data is much less open to critique than other more subjective data like you guessed it perceived tinfoil data.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', 'A')bsolutely true Tanada. That is why nothing can take the place of sound factual empirically arrived at data. This kind of data is much less open to critique than other more subjective data like you guessed it perceived tinfoil data.

[onlooker]

Yes I do remember I was born in 62. I have always been a sci-fi buff, and really was into the original Star Trek why do I think you were also T. Yes lots of fuss with Chariots of the Gods. Again can we find any unimpeachable evidence that either confirms or discounts that we were visited by Aliens in our remote past. I do not think so. Does that necessarily mean its tinfoil. To mean tinfoil implies a belief in something which is truly far fetched and without any sound basis for this belief.

[SeaGypsy]

Onlooker, everyone is humouring you, we have been over every excruciating detail & reached various positions years ago. If you read back here over the 9/11 threads, it becomes pretty clear. I'm on the 'new iinvestigation' team

[onlooker]

I do not know about that Sea, I think two on this thread stubbornly do not wish to even entertain the explosive truth. Oh well, let them live in ignorance.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '
')It is the way human brains work, if an idea seems out there but agrees with your own opinion you will see it as being possible even if you think it is unlikely. A person who does not have your same bias will see the exact same theory and say it is "tinfoil" way too far out to be worth considering.

[onlooker]

"War of the Worlds for the 21st century." Speaking of this it reminds me of what an incredible trick you could say, H.G. Wells played on the American public back then. The entire narration was done via Radio on Sunday, October 30, 1938, it was done "The first two-thirds of the one-hour broadcast was presented as a series of simulated news bulletins, which suggested an actual alien invasion by Martians was currently in progress. Compounding the issue was the fact that the Mercury Theatre on the Air was a sustaining show without commercial interruptions, adding to the program's realism." So that other than a short introductory disclaimer that it was NOT real, the rest seemed very real to Americans especially ones believing in the possibility of little green men with bad intentions. Well it caused panic. Because the broadcast was unsponsored, Welles and company could schedule breaks at will rather than arranging them around advertisements. As a result, the only notices that the broadcast was fictional came at the start of the broadcast and about 40 and 55 minutes into it. Also, contributing was the real life drama of the prelude to our entrance into WWII. However, those who have studied this incident claim that the Hysteria was actually not so universal and pronounced. Just thought I would talk about this as somewhat connected to this thread and it was an interesting incident