The 9/11 conspiracy/denial debunking kit

[Fox Mccloud]

And your point about the Taliban conspiring with OBL to hide him from the US also assumes that he's the ringleader of the shadowy World conspiracy of p-ed off terrorists' that someone else suggested.

Xenocrates, you know it really helps to have an attention span exceeding the 30 to 60 second range when one leaves thae facts unnoticed and unnattended to.

A minor but a huge distinction between what you say now as opposed to the reality of what happened and what is happening and what you said before contrasted with what you say now leaving the context and substance of the facts unnattended to.

I have not suggested that I or anyone else should believe there is a world Islamic conspiracy to take over the west. I have denied that any such conspiracy exists. Yet you continue to pretend to confuse the words "terror groups" and "conspiracy". That was your wording that you wrote on the first page for your first response.

See here for the first mention of a "shadowy Islamic conspiracy against the west".

I am not so easily impressed by this really quite childish attempt at misinformation and willful misinterpretation of my posts and the obfuscation of recent truths through a diliberate misinformation attempt that is so easily seen through by one merely reading this thread.

Take GB's watch stolen In Kosovo as an example - if they lied about something as trivial as that what won't they lie about?

Yet another botched disinformation attempt by Xenocrates seeking to replace inconvenient truth with a fantasy that has no basis in reality or what has happened. First of all, the alleged stolen watch incident happened in Albania, not Kosovo. I can actually overlook such falsehood as that as an honest mistake. Yet, what is dishonest is the allegation that Bush's watch was stolen. This is yet another lie as Bush's watch was not really stolen at all. It is yet another lie by the anti-American demagogs you listen to.

See here for proof

that is all

 

[Xenocrates]

Xenocrates, you know it really helps to have an attention span exceeding the 30 to 60 second range when one leaves thae facts unnoticed and unnattended to.

A minor but a huge distinction between what you say now as opposed to the reality of what happened and what is happening and what you said before contrasted with what you say now leaving the context and substance of the facts unnattended to.

I have not suggested that I or anyone else should believe there is a world Islamic conspiracy to take over the west. I have denied that any such conspiracy exists. Yet you continue to pretend to confuse the words "terror groups" and "conspiracy". That was your wording that you wrote on the first page for your first response.

See here for the first mention of a "shadowy Islamic conspiracy against the west".

I am not so easily impressed by this really quite childish attempt at misinformation and willful misinterpretation of my posts and the obfuscation of recent truths through a diliberate misinformation attempt that is so easily seen through by one merely reading this thread.



Yet another botched disinformation attempt by Xenocrates seeking to replace inconvenient truth with a fantasy that has no basis in reality or what has happened. First of all, the alleged stolen watch incident happened in Albania, not Kosovo. I can actually overlook such falsehood as that as an honest mistake. Yet, what is dishonest is the allegation that Bush's watch was stolen. This is yet another lie as Bush's watch was not really stolen at all. It is yet another lie by the anti-American demagogs you listen to.

See here for proof

that is all

Childish attempt at disinfo or that I haven't been following the saga of Mr B's watch as carefully as you. You're right about the watch. Someone tried to steal it and then he put it in his pocket. The story that his watch was picked up and handed back by the US embassy later was put out to remove blame from his hosts. I can see that now. So you are right and I am wrong. This is the third way - don't be dogmatic and don't argue with people as if they are someone else. FYI - I am not Rosie O'Donnel (or whatever her name is).

I didn't accuse YOU of putting out anti-Muslim conspiracy theories but at various times many people in the US and UK Governments. Why so defensive?

Any group that acts in secret against the interest of others is a conspiracy by definition. Of course a terror group is a conspiracy.

Nice sermon BTW.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Childish attempt at disinfo or that I haven't been following the saga of Mr B's watch as carefully as you.

I found that video that I linked to as soon as the first accuasations against the Albanians regarding the watch saga were made. After that, I forgot all about it until you brought it up just now.

I didn't accuse YOU of putting out anti-Muslim conspiracy theories but at various times many people in the US and UK Governments. Why so defensive?

Oh, is that the mysterious "someone else"? I thought you refered to someone on this thread. My bad.

Any group that acts in secret against the interest of others is a conspiracy by definition. Of course a terror group is a conspiracy.

Really, then does that mean you are a denier of the very existence of terror groups then? As you said that people who believe in a "shadowy Islamic conspiracy" are on the same level as the 9/11 "truthers" and thus they must believe something that doesn't exist?

 

[Xenocrates]

I found that video that I linked to as soon as the first accuasations against the Albanians regarding the watch saga were made. After that, I forgot all about it until you brought it up just now.

Oh, is that the mysterious "someone else"? I thought you refered to someone on this thread. My bad.

Really, then does that mean you are a denier of the very existence of terror groups then? As you said that people who believe in a "shadowy Islamic conspiracy" are on the same level as the 9/11 "truthers" and thus they must believe something that doesn't exist?

Yeah I remember the Mr B watch thread but it got closed before I could pop in to make my jokes.

My point about conspiracies is that humans are conspiratorial animals. Much of human history is group on group action. Even that restaurant you ate you lunch at - conspiracy. That badminton club you joined - conspiracy. That's what they are; just people acting in secret against others. Every business is a conspiracy.

One man's 'terror group' is another man's banana company. I don't accept that the application of the label makes a conspiracy a non-conspiracy.

I also don't accept that 'truthers' are a group. There are many reasons for doubting official conspiracy theories so to apply the same label to everyone is pretty pointless. But I would generalise a little and say that it's respect for authority that differentiates the 'truthers' from the 'non-truthers'. The strange this is that 'non-truthers' generally have no respect for authority either except when it comes to events like 9/11 when they find it from somewhere. Hence my watch example (which turned out to be the poorest choice possible ) It's a psychology that I can't understand.

Anyway, it's after 5AM so goodnight.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Really, then does that mean you are a denier of the very existence of terror groups then? As you said that people who believe in a "shadowy Islamic conspiracy" are on the same level as the 9/11 "truthers" and thus they must believe something that doesn't exist?

In one discussion with Xenocrates, I referred to the crazy conspiracy theories leveled against the illuminati and the Jews. He asked why I didn't include Al-Queda in that list....

That's what they are; just people acting in secret against others. Every business is a conspiracy.

What's really funny is when one takes the example of coworkers hiding the truth that a freezer is broken, means that hundreds or thousands of people will hide the truth about the murder of 3,000 of their neighbors.

 

[Xenocrates]

In one discussion with Xenocrates, I referred to the crazy conspiracy theories leveled against the illuminati and the Jews. He asked why I didn't include Al-Queda in that list....

What's really funny is when one takes the example of coworkers hiding the truth that a freezer is broken, means that hundreds or thousands of people will hide the truth about the murder of 3,000 of their neighbors.

Don't tease me bro.

• IMO Al Q (as originally stated - as an organisation and not as it's stated now - as a network, which is meaningless) is as crazy a conspiracy theory as the Masters of the Universe hiding inside the hollow Earth (Agharta).
  
• Isn't that what happened in the holocaust? To deny that people will hide the truth about nasty things as well as trivial things is to deny the possibility of the holocaust. I wouldn't normally pull the old 'conspiracy denial = holocaust denial' stunt but I think you've earnt it. Didn't Stanley Milgram prove that subservience to authority commonly trumps integrity? And wasn't the holocaust the reason why he decided to look at this?

PS: that's twice on this thread that someone's mentioned cow-orkers !

Anyway, I wish this came down to the evidence but Bam, Brennan and many others and I tried that but what it boils down to is 'if my sources are correct then I'm correct and if yours are correct then you are'. If there is a difference it's that I don't have a position on this except to say that I require a very much higher degree of proof than most of the non-truthers before I use that difficult word 'believe'. If 'my' sources are bogus then I won't lose any sleep because to me, trying to hypothesise about this stuff is just an intellectual exercise - like sudoku. I have no expectation that any of us here will every 'know' what happened.

If someone asks "are you a 9/11 truther" the only respectable reply is "of course, I'm an everything truther, aren't you?"

 

[JerichoHill]

Actually, no. Xeno, you do realize that if 9/11 was an inside job then the wiring of the towers started during Clinton's tenure, well before Bush was even the Republican nominee...unless you feel that two WTC towers could be wired at night and out of sight faster than the world's largest controlled demolition which was 1/4 the size and took nine months.

 

[Xenocrates]

I'm not sure about that Jericho, but even if it is true when there are hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) at stake people tend to put in more effort - that's capitalism! At a guess I would say that, if there were explosives, they were remotely detonated (no wires).

Also, there's a story that goes like this: corners were cut on the construction of the TT's and they were corroding. They would have to be demolished pretty soon anyway, with all of the stripping of asbestos and other toxic chemicals and evacuation that it entails - at great cost. According to this line of reasoning a false flag demo would satisfy PNAC's desire for a new pearl harbour and save an awful lot of money effort and embarrassment at the same time.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_corrosion.html

There was a 1989 meeting and the folks at the architectural firm Emory Roth, the project architect that took over after the design architects completed the conceptual drawings that had their office, records, plans and specs seized - were told that the $5.6 billion "take it down, rebuild it" project was cancelled and in about "10-12 years" they would "blow it up and start over". Consider that - and consider that NYC and the US Govt could not stand the global embarrassment of being so stupid or negligent that they did not consider the effects of galvanic corrosion on the superstructure. That is structural design 101 in architectural school and why they want architects to take physics and chemistry for Christ's sake. I did.

According to this line of reasoning two of the strongest motivations for conspiracies - money and avoidance of embarrassment - are convergent.

But of course I don't know whether this is true.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_corrosion.html



According to this line of reasoning two of the strongest motivations for conspiracies - money and avoidance of embarrassment - are convergent.

But of course I don't know whether this is true.

Indeed, this is your best post yet.

Also on this website:

An encyclopedia for the alter-reality moonbat fantasy world they reside in -- I'm going to have some fun reading this.

The 2004 US Elections:
The Mother of all Vote Frauds -- with a nice Stalin quote illustrating just who they are.

The 7/7 London Bombings:
How to Set Up a Patsy

Fake Al Qaeda

Osama bin Laden:
A dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government

Lastly, they have a link to this "documentary":

http://freedomtofascism.com/downloads/dvd.html

This website is typical of the moon bat network the 9/11 truthers buy into, as well as the many other radical far-left liberal zealots of the alter-reality moon bat network. Yet it is to me, and hopefully to the rest of this webforum a mere illustration of a fictional fantasy world where many moonbats find their refuge from reality.

that is all

 

[Elrohir]

Fox - don't forget that Kennedy was assassinated because he wanted to do away with the Fed!!

The private bankers of the Federal Reserve: Creating Wars for Fun and Profit
On June 4, 1963, presidential order EO 11110 authorised the president to issue currency. Kennedy ordered the US Treasury to print $4 billion worth of "United States Notes" backed incidentally by US bullion reserves, to replace Federal Reserve Notes, which were backed by nothing, so he could end the Federal Reserve System and the control it gave international bankers over the US government and its citizens. Kennedy’s strategy to bring US troops home from Vietnam by the end of 1965, combined with the removal of the Fed’s control of the US money supply would have killed the profits of this private bank. Literally as Kennedy’s dollars went into circulation he was assassinated in Dallas.

And don't forget the talk about how the "Bolshevik Jews" committed genocide in Ukraine during the 1930's!

Lest We Forget the Real Holocaust and It’s Bolshevik Jewish Perpetrators! The Ukrainian Holocaust of 1932-33
This article illustrates a point I have previously made about "The" Holocaust.
......

Yet another hilariously inaccurate Truther site full of conspiracy theories. Xenocrates, either you didn't examine your source - which is a serious no-no, especially considering how obviously kooky this website is - or you don't have a problem with this sort of garbage. Which is it?

Maybe I'll start paying attention to 9/11 conspiracy theories when someone who isn't connected in some way with Holocaust denial or trivialization, or other wacky conspiracy theories steps foward. But in my book, as soon as a site starts ranting about Zionism or the Jews and banks, it's pretty much a safe bet that it's trash.

 

[Bamspeedy]

I'm not sure about that Jericho, but even if it is true when there are hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) at stake people tend to put in more effort - that's capitalism! At a guess I would say that, if there were explosives, they were remotely detonated (no wires).

Also, there's a story that goes like this: corners were cut on the construction of the TT's and they were corroding. They would have to be demolished pretty soon anyway, with all of the stripping of asbestos and other toxic chemicals and evacuation that it entails - at great cost. According to this line of reasoning a false flag demo would satisfy PNAC's desire for a new pearl harbour and save an awful lot of money effort and embarrassment at the same time.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_corrosion.html



According to this line of reasoning two of the strongest motivations for conspiracies - money and avoidance of embarrassment - are convergent.

But of course I don't know whether this is true.

Did you bother to research who the heck this Karl Schwarz is?

Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC

Karl W. B. Schwarz President, Chief Executive Officer

His business address is a P.O. Box office, and he consists of 1/3 of his entire workforce. He's also ran a bogus company that had it's charter revoked by the State of Arkansas.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/who-is-karl-schwarz.html

 

[JerichoHill]

I'm not sure about that Jericho, but even if it is true when there are hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) at stake people tend to put in more effort - that's capitalism! At a guess I would say that, if there were explosives, they were remotely detonated (no wires).e.

come on dude. The world's largest controlled demolition took 9 months to complete with crews working 24 hours a day , on a building 1/4th the size.

If you're going to say it was a controlled demo, HOW can you say you would not be sure that something 4 times as complicated with at best 1/3 the time per day that this benchmark project took, would take less than 9 months to complete?

HUH?

 

[BasketCase]

If some day, we are proven wrong, I have no idea what I would say.

This is the part the conspiracy theorists keep skipping.

They say the hole in the side of the Pentagon looked too small to have been caused by a jet plane. But they did not prove it.

They say those puffs of expelled air from the sides of the Twin Towers, below the impact points, appeared to be squibs or bursts from explosives. But they have to prove that those were squibs. And they have not.

They say burning jet fuel isn't hot enough to melt steel. And in fact they're right. But what they have to prove is that burning jet fuel won't weaken a skyscraper enough to cause a collapse. They failed to prove this too. And, they're wrong. Consider: at the temperature of burning jet fuel, structural steel loses about half of its strength. The rest is easy.

And this goes on ad nauseum. Their half-baked ideas are full of could-have-been's, but contain no actual proof.

 

[Xenocrates]

Did you bother to research who the heck this Karl Schwarz is?

His business address is a P.O. Box office, and he consists of 1/3 of his entire workforce. He's also ran a bogus company that had it's charter revoked by the State of Arkansas.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/who-is-karl-schwarz.html

Before answering that point, I'll charge my cavalry through the gap that has opened in your lines.

@Basketcase re: Pentagon crash - what are your thoughts on this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gU94lNCrxdY

@ Bamscully re: one for you -

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,,1036687,00.html

@ Jericho re: similarly -

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml

"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted.

@last but not least Fox (if you've still got any patience for this topic ) -

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/anthraxmissingarmylab.html

 

[JerichoHill]

Xeno,

How does missing money make up for the fact that they simply didnt have enough time.

Again, I ask:

The world's largest controlled demolition took 9 months to complete with crews working 24 hours a day , on a building 1/4th the size.

If you're going to say it was a controlled demo, HOW can you say you would not be sure that something 4 times as complicated with at best 1/3 the time per day that this benchmark project took, would take less than 9 months to complete?

The one thing money can't do is change time. You cannot wire the building during the business day That leaves 8 hours a day. WTC is 4x larger than the most recent and largest controlled demo.

Posting a cutesy article on government waste is not proof of a controlled demo.

 

[woody60707]

Before answering that point, I'll charge my cavalry through the gap that has opened in your lines.

@Basketcase re: Pentagon crash - what are your thoughts on this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gU94lNCrxdY

I didn't look at the rest, because you striked out with the 1st link. Your expert is a few shy of a 6 pack.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine

He [Stubblebine] is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a strong supporter of the Stargate Project.

This guy is a nut.

LOL Btw, being that you love links look this guy who talks about Stubblebine. Start watching the clip at 7:00.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6308228560462155344

 

[Fox Mccloud]

Fox - don't forget that Kennedy was assassinated because he wanted to do away with the Fed!!



And don't forget the talk about how the "Bolshevik Jews" committed genocide in Ukraine during the 1930's!


Yet another hilariously inaccurate Truther site full of conspiracy theories. Xenocrates, either you didn't examine your source - which is a serious no-no, especially considering how obviously kooky this website is - or you don't have a problem with this sort of garbage. Which is it?

Sorry, Elrohir. I really wanted to post more links in my original post but my computer crashed. It's a crappy old computer I have to put up with and I can't afford a new one. I have now posted a few more links that I think go well in showing what this website is really about.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

@ Bamscully re: one for you -

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,,1036687,00.html

Allow me to answer this one, Bamspeedy.

A google search of less then five minuets debunks it with your own source.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1038478,00.html

 

[Bamspeedy]

Allow me to answer this one, Bamspeedy.

A google search of less then five minuets debunks it with your own source.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1038478,00.html

Thanks for saving me the work, I was just going to ignore it, as most of what he said has already been out there, and Xeno was just doing the usual smoke and mirrors trick (Just throw a bunch of accusations out there, regardless of the source and hope people fall for it or give up).

His information, he said, "comes from the collection of data that I have been doing meticulously. It comes from websites across the world."

So a politician gets suckered into the conspiracy sites, big whoop. While some of what he said is fact (but doesn't really prove anything as it is just circumstantial evidence), other parts of it isn't true except in the world of the conspiracy theorists.

Before answering that point, I'll charge my cavalry through the gap that has opened in your lines.

What, are you going to say that since Bush has lied, we can't trust him? Fair enough, I haven't and won't be quoting him. Just because people have come to the same conclusion as him, doesn't mean "they are accepting Bush's story like sheep". It still doesn't change the fact that your 'expert' is at best a man who isn't all there in the head and has severely bloated his resume, or at worst he is a con man (like when he issued a press release stating his new bogus company he set up was going to buy this corporation for $800 million when all he had for real assets was his 3-man computer store with net sales of $0.8 million/year ).

 

[BasketCase]

@Basketcase re: Pentagon crash - what are your thoughts on this?

Very straightforward, Xeno: the hole in the side of the Pentagon is the same size as the MAIN BODY of the plane. Further, the impact area that got damaged by the impact is much LARGER than the main body of the plane.

When Stubblebine objects that the hole is too small, he includes the wingspan. And that video you linked does the same: it insists on making superimpositions of plane onto Pentagon that include the wings.


Now, let me tell you what's going to happen to the wings on impact. It's already known that the plane bounced off the ground before it hit the Pentagon. So the body has now slowed down--but the wings have not. They want to keep going, and the only thing slowing them down is the points where the wings are mounted to the body.

So, the wings bend inwards and snap off. Suppose the wreckage of the wings went through the same hole the main body did?

Or, since the wings are mounted to the base of the plane, maybe (in fact probably) the wings did hit the ground. What happened at this point? Did the wings simply hit the front of the building? If you'll take another look at the Pentagon just after impact, the damaged area is a LOT wider than just the central hole. So it's entirely possible the wings DID hit the building. In which case the wings would do considerably less damage than the body, which is exactly what we see. Or did the wings bounce into the air and hit some other part of the Pentagon? Or did they disintegrate completely, into flying chunks that buried themselves in the face of the building?


You see? I can come up with plenty of could-have-beens to counter yours, or Stubblebine's, or anybody else's. Stubblebine's could-have-been is therefore not enough.

He needs to prove what DID happen. Not could. DID.