9/11 what really happened?

[Supervox]

Have just watched the complete vid - hmm, thought provoking in parts.

Let's face it, the CIA, FBI, MI5 & MI6 (yes Lyn, I'm well aware of what your REAL new job is ) Mossad, et al are all capable of 'arranging' for the mass murder of their own or others citizens for 'the greater good' !!

I personally don't think that there can be many reasonably intelligent people who still believe that GWB is actually running the U.S. - like most Presidents in the past he has a lot of markers to pay off to the people that got him elected - in his particular case way too many to ever pay off in only 8 years.

There are an awful lot of unanswered questions about 9/11 - most of which WILL never be or CAN never be answered, which just leaves speculation & theories.

Like a lot of people I have my own ideas - based on nothing more than internet 'surfing' & reading - certainly no hard facts - but let's just say they're not a million miles away from some of the stuff mentioned in the vid.

Originally Posted by Supervox

Have just watched the complete vid - hmm, thought provoking in parts.

Let's face it, the CIA, FBI, MI5 & MI6 (yes Lyn, I'm well aware of what your REAL new job is ) Mossad, et al are all capable of 'arranging' for the mass murder of their own or others citizens for 'the greater good' !!

Ok, taking a step back from the human tragedy of it could this have been done by the home intelligence services? Extremely unlikely. Because in a capitalist society like the US they would have placed a higher priority of preserving the businesses and institutions that operated from the WTC.

We all know the US economy is on borrowed time. The absolute worst thing that could have happened to it was the destruction and crippling of the one sector that would have provided much needed income. In fact the economy has suffered considerably post 9/11 to the point it is arguable that anyone in the US intelligence/CIA would ever have considered the total destruction of a vital trade centre as being for the 'greater good'.

In fact whoever did this knew full well that disrupting the US and western economies would hurt the US and the western nations far, far, far more than a few car park bombs or blowing up an embassy.

Originally Posted by Spiderman

This is why? What is why? that i got offended by something Lyn said and was mature enough to pm her and have a convo about it there so as not to bring bad feeling to the thread?

Just who are you to use my comments as a justification of your petty minded belief that these type of posts have no place here in IB?

I think that you sir are one of the biggest causes of bad feelings in threads that you dont like. If you didnt come in here to stir it up a bit with comments that you could have kept to yourself as they do nothing but antogonise, then there would be no bad feeling.

I merely informed Lyn that i found a comment offensive. And unlike some on this community i'm not one to throw my toys out the pram and ask for interesting debates to be locked cos i found something insulting.

I'm big enough and thick skinned enough to take what people have to say without thinking its a personal dig at me. I know its just sematecs sometimes.

My question to you is the same as Lyn's and the same as ive asked you before. WHY do you comment in topics you wish were not there? I have never posted in the MegaThread cos it holds no intrest to me. Its there for those who wanna partake of it, just like this thread is.

i'm just glad it was Razor who started this thread so you cant use your tired line of "its always X or Y or Z who post this stuff and nothing about bikes blah blah blah"
Razor watched a documentry (s)he found interesting and it clearly stimulated his thinking enough to want to see what others in this community think of it.

Your bike holds no intrest for me but you dont see me posting in things about your bike about it not being and SV and could we keep non SV related things to a minimum or offering / advising you to go find a forum more akin to your bike do you? No, cos i believe everyone has the right to post what they want as long as its inofensive to others in any personal way.

And if i find that subject matter uninteresting to me i go find something that i'd enjoy more.

For you to post the crap you post in threads you dont like is antagonistic at best and seriously childish at worst. I think we all know what you think of topics you dont like so do us all a favour and stop going on like a broken record. We got it the first 500 times you posted it elsewhere.

And as for your mates who say "well said" when they see you, well DUH!!! Thats why they are your mates. Cos they hold a similar view to you. I'm sure if you conducted a poll youd find a diffrent attitude.... presuming anyone bothered to respond to your thread apart from your mates that is.


....Just read that over and it sounded like i was knocking your mates, which i'm not. I'm simply saying we all hang with people who are similarly minded to us to a degree and of course share our views about certain things in life.
You wouldnt be mates with me for example cos we dont see eye to eye on things, so be it. But if you asked me the same question as you do you mates my answer would not be "well said" it would be the above.

And sometimes i think we need to hear what people who dont share our view on things have to say. I personaly find the other side of the fence's point of view interesting.

Anyway, lets move on and back to the thread.


Akbar... WTC7 was ordered to be pulled By Larry silverstein, yet it does not say that in the official 9/11 report. As you well know from the doc its because he had a very high insurance cover running on all the buildings.

And its just soooooooooo untidy to rebuild some of your buildings and not all of them, dahling

Ah, I see....

I never said I didn't find what was being said of interest, I just felt it was out of place. And I didn't say they were "mates" either, just people I have met off of the forum (I do meet and ride with a number of people wha actually like to get on a bike and take it out of London from time to time, rather than chat about it or discuss politics, but each to their own I guess).

Everyone can air a view unless you don't like what's said.... Pots and kettles mate....

I'll leave you wise folk to discuss the evils of the world and how to put it right, between the lot of you must have the brain power, I mean, you've got the US and western governments all sussed already. Maybe you should stand for office ?

.

[northwind]

Originally Posted by Jelster

Everyone can air a view unless you don't like what's said.... Pots and kettles mate....

Fair enough... But IMO the difference with this is that you're criticising threads for causing division, which causes division itself... Seems counterproductive to me.

Fair point too, I can see that point of view.....

.

Originally Posted by lynw

Ok, taking a step back from the human tragedy of it could this have been done by the home intelligence services? Extremely unlikely. Because in a capitalist society like the US they would have placed a higher priority of preserving the businesses and institutions that operated from the WTC.


In fact whoever did this knew full well that disrupting the US and western economies would hurt the US and the western nations far, far, far more than a few car park bombs or blowing up an embassy.

So the businesses and institutions don't still exist post 9/11?

Originally Posted by lynw

In fact whoever did this knew full well that disrupting the US and western economies would hurt the US and the western nations far, far, far more than a few car park bombs or blowing up an embassy.

Do you think they also knew that it would give the US new license to go invade where they like on a scale not seen since the Cold War?

Have people forgotten what happened in Central America under Reagan/Bush 1? Any country that did not do what it was told (usually on trade agreements) suddenly became a communist threat and had their governments replaced with one that suited US policy. Sounding familiar yet?

And didn't the US sponsor contras (lol, wouldn't they be called insurgents nowadays) in Nicaragua in one of the most destructive terror campaigns there has been?

But we wouldn't do anything like that surely, afterall, we're the west. Some people are kidding themselves, seriously.

To counter Lyn's point that America would never shoot it's self in it's own foot and so cause disruption to it's own economy, I am afraid that does not really hold water.

The industries that operated from the WTC were soon able to overcome the problems created by the incident. Furthermore there are commercial enterprises that have gained HUGELY on the back of what happened. I state the most obvious and that being the arms industry.

I do not think that I could ever be fully convinced that all of this was not America attacking America. A carefully formed plan with a wider objective in mind. To the greater degree I think the whole exercise was a success for those involved.

Originally Posted by akbarhussain

So the businesses and institutions don't still exist post 9/11?

Some do, some dont. However that still doesnt detract from the immense impact on the business itself from these events.

Where you work, could it cope easily with losing even a quarter of its staff, its premises, and its infrastructure and then continue to trade at its previous level in the aftermath? Also you have to consider the financial loss due to the lack of investor confidence within the US following the aftermath. The cost the the US economy was huge. While you can quantify the downturn in turnover for particular companies, you cant really quantify the cost in terms of putting investors off from investing in US companies, particularly the airlines.

The payroll services company for HMRC lost their head office in the refinery blast earlier this year. While it didnt lose any staff the loss of its premises and requirement to implement its disaster recovery plan has had knock on effects with errors cropping up and people not being paid properly.

Do you think they also knew that it would give the US new license to go invade where they like on a scale not seen since the Cold War?

Have people forgotten what happened in Central America under Reagan/Bush 1? Any country that did not do what it was told (usually on trade agreements) suddenly became a communist threat and had their governments replaced with one that suited US policy. Sounding familiar yet?

And didn't the US sponsor contras (lol, wouldn't they be called insurgents nowadays) in Nicaragua in one of the most destructive terror campaigns there has been?

But you answered your own point here. As you point out the US has always deemed itself to have a license to do what it likes - the bombing of Libya was a good example of that too. I dont think that whoever perpetrated 9/11 would have seen it that way. And neither do I see it as giving the US a new license or anything other than something they possibly already saw as their right to do.

But you answered your own point here. As you point out the US has always deemed itself to have a license to do what it likes

Lol @ answering my own point - so you think it is acceptable to invade a country because they wouldn't trade with you, and then dress it up as National security?

Yes, you arecorrect in saying that the US has always done what it wanted to. But previously, they weren't as likely to openly invade a country, rather get some locals to do it for them.

What you are seeing in Iraq is the testing of their new doctrine....... and they will use it again.

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by akbarhussain

Lol @ answering my own point - so you think it is acceptable to invade a country because they wouldn't trade with you, and then dress it up as National security?

Yes, you arecorrect in saying that the US has always done what it wanted to. But previously, they weren't as likely to openly invade a country, rather get some locals to do it for them.

What you are seeing in Iraq is the testing of their new doctrine....... and they will use it again.

Sadly i think this is one of the truest comments in all these pages and one we can all agree on.