Quick question

Static · #1 (**permalink**) 01-27-2008, 01:03 AM

Would it be detrimental to a politicians career to admit that they believe the official report of 911 is not accurate or even totally false?

simple enough.

rightwinger · 01-27-2008, 01:05 AM

Depends on what they say, and how they say it I suppose.

But, my short answer would be yes. And I believe with good reason.

Questioning the government response, the incompetence, intelligence failures and whatnot...have at it.

Start suggesting that it wasn't committed by Al-Queda, and you will lose a lot of people. And rightfully so.

If you're going to try and use that, as a basis for an argument of why these politicians aren't coming forward....you will lose me, because there is no proof of that. Not saying you would, but it's a common conspiracy tactic I've seen.

Static · 01-27-2008, 03:18 AM

I've seen a few politicians sort of hint at the idea that they don't buy the official version, like Ron Paul for example, he thinks there should be a better investigation. I just wanted to point out that there are a ton of different reasons the movement hasn't expanded to more people, this clearly being one of them.

**Brother of Yeshua** · 01-27-2008, 09:24 AM

What if (as I do) you believe it was committed by Al Quada agents, but believe that there is potential for members of our government to be a part of that organization, or helped it along by ignoring crucial intel?

I do not think this is out of the range of possibility. I have been told time and time again, if you want to know the motivation in politics, follow the money. When you realize that the same people running the Fed are the same people running the rest of the world, the picture starts to become clearer, or at least for me.

Revolutions are financed by the elite all the time. Hell, we provide 3 times as much support to Arab nations than we do Israel, and then we say "oh poor Israel we need to help them." Maybe if we'd just get the fuck out we'd solve those problems, or at least let these nations be free to attempt to solve them on their own. (I know RP has said something similar to this, but I also wrote a similar paper to this in 2002, long before I even knew who he was).

Is it so far out of the range of possibility that someone in our government (or a few people) got paid by their rich buddies to keep their mouths shut while these same rich buddies paid some thugs in burkas to fly planes into our buildings? This does not involve controlled demolitions, thermate, un-dead hijackers, or any of the other things that so many have a problem with. This is believable to me and also explains a lot of the security gaps and bizarre governmental policies that are creeping out.

And frankly if this is the case, my eyes of skepticism turn directly towards every single person affiliated in any way with the PNAC and CFR to start with. Not that I believe that every single person there is in on it. Far from it. But those would be the 2 groups I'd start interrogating.

rightwinger · 01-27-2008, 09:41 AM

Quote:

I just wanted to point out that there are a ton of different reasons the movement hasn't expanded to more people, this clearly being one of them.

I think it has a lot more to do with the validity of the claims they make.

Quote:

What if (as I do) you believe it was committed by Al Quada agents, but believe that there is potential for members of our government to be a part of that organization, or helped it along by ignoring crucial intel?

I would call you crazy.

Quote:

When you realize that the same people running the Fed are the same people running the rest of the world,

The Jews? Ben Bernanke?

And how does one "realize" this?

Quote:

Is it so far out of the range of possibility that someone in our government (or a few people) got paid by their rich buddies to keep their mouths shut while these same rich buddies paid some thugs in burkas to fly planes into our buildings?

The problem is, there is no proof for it. It's mindless conspiracy bull shit.

And yes. It actually is hard for me to believe that.

**Brother of Yeshua** · 01-27-2008, 09:49 AM

If you think there's no proof, you're either not looking or you're way too comfortable and trusting of this monolithic government America has created.

EDIT: I should replace the word "proof" with "evidence," if you want to get technical about it. Which I'm sure you do.

**Ristaron** · 01-27-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Static

Would it be detrimental to a politicians career to admit that they believe the official report of 911 is not accurate or even totally false?

simple enough.

Overall, probably. Right now most people consider it "anti-American" to question the belief that 9/11 was an act of terrorism (from outside forces... by all means it was an act of terrorism, just 99% more likely from the Bush administration itself).

Yes, there is a growing movement of smart people who find the 9/11 commission report to be as fanciful as a 1st-grader's excuse for why he didn't do his homework, but so far it only constitutes a small portion of the population.

I mean, even Ron Paul is getting harsh criticism, and he is only proposing that the U.S. brought it upon themselves by having the outrageous foreign policy they currently maintain.

Man, it's difficult to remember which pronouns to use when posting here. Most of you are residents of the U.S., whereas I'm Canadian, so I can't say "we", and it's simply impolite to say "you" when generalizing this kind of thing.

rightwinger · 01-27-2008, 06:32 PM

Quote:

If you think there's no proof, you're either not looking or you're way too comfortable and trusting of this monolithic government America has created.

Or I've looked into the claims of the truth movement....and came to the conclusion that they are completely full of shit. That's what I've done.

Quote:

EDIT: I should replace the word "proof" with "evidence," if you want to get technical about it. Which I'm sure you do.

There is no evidence of an inside job.

Quote:

Overall, probably. Right now most people consider it "anti-American" to question the belief that 9/11 was an act of terrorism (from outside forces... by all means it was an act of terrorism, just 99% more likely from the Bush administration itself).

99%?? You sure about that? What gives you that number?

I don't consider it "anti-American". I consider believing in the truth movement to be "anti-logic" and "anti-free thinking".

**Brother of Yeshua** · 01-27-2008, 07:26 PM

I apologize, my last comment was referring to the widespread government corruption. I've seen the corruption long before I ever questioned 9/11 (which btw I didn't even start doing until about 2004, based on evidence I found on my own seperate from any "truth movement" that led me into seeking an answer to my question). That was what my point in the post was.

2 Terabytes of missing white house emails.

Our president and VP refusing to testify separately or under oath in front of the 9/11 commission.

Destroyed CIA tapes

To name a few things (a couple I've already mentioned which you avoided in rebutting my argument). I don't see how there is no evidence of CORRUPTION (at the very least) and this corruption leads me to suspect that there's an enemy within our ranks.

I apologize if it was unclear what I meant. I just feel that you are blindly defending the government against any assault. I've never tried to force the whole 9/11 thing down anyone's throat. Only raise my questions, concerns and opinions. I'm pretty open to facts. However, most of your arguments are just telling me I'm full of shit or crazy or whatever else helps you ignore any legitimate points made.

If you want to pledge your loyalty to these gangsters in Washington, have fun. I don't want a thing to do with the majority of them, other than voting them out of office.

rightwinger · 01-27-2008, 07:55 PM

Quote:

2 Terabytes of missing white house emails.

Can I get a link to this?

Quote:

Destroyed CIA tapes

Again...link. I believe I know to what you are referring.

Quote:

I apologize if it was unclear what I meant. I just feel that you are blindly defending the government against any assault

What makes you think I'm blindly defending the government?

Quote:

However, most of your arguments are just telling me I'm full of shit or crazy or whatever else helps you ignore any legitimate points made.

No. I believe I've stuck to the facts pretty well. If I get out of line, point it out and I'll apologize. If you want me to clarify something I will. If you want me to further back up my arguments...I will.

Quote:

If you want to pledge your loyalty to these gangsters in Washington, have fun

This gets tiresome. I do not pledge loyalty to anyone. I just don't believe 9-11 was an inside job, and I base this belief on the evidence.

Do you know how many times I've been told "Well, you just believe EVERYTHING the government tells you huh??" or "You're a shill" or any number of these things? Too many times to count. Why? All you know is that I don't believe the government was in on 9-11....and I have read up on the subject. It's not like I'm ignorant.