The Great American Conspiracy Theory

ConQueso™ · 11-18-2005, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

While a strong case has been made on this, I just can't fathom that to be possible. key leaders of the government conspiring to to attack their own people? I mean...If that sort of stuff is true and could be proven then you'd have the entire white house staff and key republican leadership swinging from the gallows after being convicted of high treason. I mean don't get me wrong, I don't like the war, I don't like the President, and I don't like the policies of the current republican leadership. However, I don't honestly believe they could commit such heinous crimes.

leaders throughout all of time have done exactly this. men in power will do a lot of crazy ****.

(that's not to say that i believe they did this stuff to the WTC...i just don't think it's out of the realm of possibility)

wingfanjim · 11-18-2005, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

I agree. But could you see them thinking that the lives of a few thousand Americans are nothing in comparison to the lives that could be shattered when we run out of oil?

yes...but two wrongs don't make a right. conspiring to murder 3,000+ of your own people and then lieing about it and the reasons for going to war which has cost another 2,000+ lives is NOT the way to do it. If it's true, I want them swinging from a rope.

wingfanjim · 11-18-2005, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConWhore™

leaders throughout all of time have done exactly this. men in power will do a lot of crazy ****.

(that's not to say that i believe they did this stuff to the WTC...i just don't think it's out of the realm of possibility)

Well there is the same theory about FDR and Pearl Harbor. Also, ironically, the movie JFK was on TV this week and that one sorta makes you think about stuff that took place during that too. I'm not saying it ISN'T possible. I'm just saying it isn't probable.

Feckweed · 11-18-2005, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

yes...but two wrongs don't make a right. conspiring to murder 3,000+ of your own people and then lieing about it and the reasons for going to war which has cost another 2,000+ lives is NOT the way to do it. If it's true, I want them swinging from a rope.

If Dubya is as corrupt and evil as portrayed by the liberals on this board, please explain why he wouldn't have invaded solely on SH's incompliance with the UN sanctions? If it's about money, why cripple the economy with such an attack?

chachi · 11-18-2005, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

So then by your logic, the Pentago was also rigged with explosives in case something similar happened to that plane. Got it

I don't know, but there is a very stron case to be made that it was not a 767 that hit the pentagon.

simple measuring and photo observation can show this.

The reason the Pentagon was hit is simple.... Imagine you live in an apartment building and are a thief. You rob three apartments, then your own. Why did you rob your own?

chachi · 11-18-2005, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

If Dubya is as corrupt and evil as portrayed by the liberals on this board, please explain why he wouldn't have invaded solely on SH's incompliance with the UN sanctions? If it's about money, why cripple the economy with such an attack?

Rally public support. Get the Patriot Act passed. Get Congress backing...

ConQueso™ · 11-18-2005, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

If Dubya is as corrupt and evil as portrayed by the liberals on this board, please explain why he wouldn't have invaded solely on SH's incompliance with the UN sanctions? If it's about money, why cripple the economy with such an attack?

following this logic...GWB would need the support of the entire nation...the country was really divided before 9/11 and he would need an event like that to be able to do anything he wanted.

(again...just following the logic)

wingfanjim · 11-18-2005, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

If Dubya is as corrupt and evil as portrayed by the liberals on this board, please explain why he wouldn't have invaded solely on SH's incompliance with the UN sanctions? If it's about money, why cripple the economy with such an attack?

isn't that what he did? That was the pretext for invasion. Weapons of mass distruction and Saddam's incompliance. That's the reason i remember him using back before the war started. The story has switched a few times since then but that was the original reason.

Feckweed · 11-18-2005, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

Rally public support. Get the Patriot Act passed. Get Congress backing...

What does the Patriot Act have to do with Iraq?

Feckweed · 11-18-2005, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wingfanjim

isn't that what he did? That was the pretext for invasion. Weapons of mass distruction and Saddam's incompliance. That's the reason i remember him using back before the war started. The story has switched a few times since then but that was the original reason.

Exactly. And that has nothing to do with AQ and 9-11, so a conspiracy such as that is not logical here

Feckweed · 11-18-2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConWhore™

following this logic...GWB would need the support of the entire nation...the country was really divided before 9/11 and he would need an event like that to be able to do anything he wanted.

(again...just following the logic)

no, he would just have needed the support of Congress.

To put it another way, no 9-11 attack then no troops in Afghanistan, more for Iraq

ConQueso™ · 11-18-2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

What does the Patriot Act have to do with Iraq?

Patriot Act would allow the govt. to scare the crap out of dissenters.

ruining the economy would allow for GWB to pass tax breaks for his friends. (or at least get more of them...to make them permanent)

chachi · 11-18-2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

What does the Patriot Act have to do with Iraq?

It doesn't. It has to do with controlling the citzenry (sp?). Iraq is not the only or even primary reason for "the New Pearl Harbor" as they call it.

In response to your other post: He would not have gotten congresional or public support for Iraq without 9-11.

msufan · 11-18-2005, 11:50 AM

Adding another topic: We have prisoners who are being kept indefinitely in foreign prisons but never charged with any crime. Is it because they know too much?

ConQueso™ · 11-18-2005, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

no, he would just have needed the support of Congress.

To put it another way, no 9-11 attack then no troops in Afghanistan, more for Iraq

No...after the 2000 election this country was really divided...i don't think you get any of that stuff forced through congress.

The democrats only voted for his policies because of 9/11

chachi · 11-18-2005, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

Adding another topic: We have prisoners who are being kept indefinitely in foreign prisons but never charged with any crime. Is it because they know too much?

Who knows.

Feckweed · 11-18-2005, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConWhore™

No...after the 2000 election this country was really divided...i don't think you get any of that stuff forced through congress.

The democrats only voted for his policies because of 9/11

Not really, the reasons they cited go back prior to 9-11, so you have no way of knowing whether or not it would have occured.

Plus, I'm sure if they only took out 1 target ( say just the towers ), you'd get the same reaction. But I forgot, the evil gov't enjoys killing their own citizens, thus the reason for 4 simultaneous attacks

ConQueso™ · 11-18-2005, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

Not really, the reasons they cited go back prior to 9-11, so you have no way of knowing whether or not it would have occured.

Plus, I'm sure if they only took out 1 target ( say just the towers ), you'd get the same reaction. But I forgot, the evil gov't enjoys killing their own citizens, thus the reason for 4 simultaneous attacks

Hey...i'm not saying it's a conspiracy....i'm just saying that these are reasons for why it could be.

i don't really know if it's a master plan...but i do think that evidence (or lack thereof) suggests we need more investigation into why the towers fell down.

chachi · 11-18-2005, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

Not really, the reasons they cited go back prior to 9-11, so you have no way of knowing whether or not it would have occured.
Plus, I'm sure if they only took out 1 target ( say just the towers ), you'd get the same reaction. But I forgot, the evil gov't enjoys killing their own citizens, thus the reason for 4 simultaneous attacks

Do you remember how Popular Mechanics came out with this article?

9/11: Debunking The Myths

PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

Now, most of the Anmerican Public SWEARS by this. The main anti-"conspiracy" evidence to most.

Do you know who wrote this article?

GUESS.

Benjamin Chertoff... Now, does that name look familiar to you? It should... He has a cousin with a VERY vested interest in this being the "Official Story".

Do you know who this cousin is?

chachi · 11-18-2005, 12:01 PM

...he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new (at the time) Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

I am sure this is just a big coinky-dink though.

msufan · 11-18-2005, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

I think they are. I think that a small, fearful American minority is so vocal in labeling something a "conspiracy theory" that the 50-80% of people who actually see the facts for what they are do not want to admit it.

If we are dumb and wrong please explain any of this:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

I just read that entire thing and I am sold. There were explosives involved.

Feckweed · 11-18-2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSU_CIO

Do you remember how Popular Mechanics came out with this article?

9/11: Debunking The Myths

PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

Now, most of the Anmerican Public SWEARS by this. The main anti-"conspiracy" evidence to most.

Do you know who wrote this article?

GUESS.

Benjamin Chertoff... Now, does that name look familiar to you? It should... He has a cousin with a VERY vested interest in this being the "Official Story".

Do you know who this cousin is?

OK CIO, then if you believe this was a conspiracy, then you have no problem with Bin Laden not being captured, seeing as he's not really a threat to our homeland. Correct?

msufan · 11-18-2005, 12:07 PM

This does explain everything as you start to connect the dots. For the longest time, Bush's actions would frustrate me. Why do we keep these prisoners without giving them a fair trial? Why don't we have a clear timeline for getting out of Iraq? Why did the anthrax thing just suddenly stop? Why is the 9/11 info so incomplete?

It all does make sense when you look at it in a different light.

msufan · 11-18-2005, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

OK CIO, then if you believe this was a conspiracy, then you have no problem with Bin Laden not being captured, seeing as he's not really a threat to our homeland. Correct?

If this is a conspiracy, then the government definitely has no interest in capturing Bin Laden, as he is worth more to them alive.

As far as my PERSONAL views, even though you directed this at CIO, I have a problem with ALL of it.

chachi · 11-18-2005, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ****weed

OK CIO, then if you believe this was a conspiracy, then you have no problem with Bin Laden not being captured, seeing as he's not really a threat to our homeland. Correct?

I do not believe that in Laden could have done this without help from within our borders if he did it at all. I would like to see him captured so that maybe he could be questioned, but would that really matter? It is not like we would ever hear the truth.