TerrorStorm: Free movie

[M.Dancer]

I'm new here....is there a conspiracy forum or a tinfoil hat forum where threads like this should be?

[Wilber]

GostHacked

To begin with the fighters were sent up at air traffic control's request to have a look at Stewart's aircraft to try to find out why it was not responding and off course, not to shoot it down. They followed until it ran out of fuel and crashed on its own.

Until 9/11 there had been no case of a civil airliner being hijacked and deliberately crashed with the intent of killing people on the ground. Civil aircraft are monitored and controlled by civil air traffic control, not the military. There is no reason or need for the military to even know why they were there unless they were somehow violating designated military airspace or unless the civil agency had notified them and requested their assistance. Bearing this in mind, you are assuming that someone would have had to get fighters airborne within minutes of being notified and within just a few more minutes make the decision to pull the trigger on airliners full of civilians without actually knowing what was going on. Also assuming they were notified in time to even get them there. That's a big stretch IMO.

[August1991]

Thoughts ?

I don't trust an administration so rife with incompetents, idealogues and flat out idiots has the capacity for pulling off a "inside job" of the magnitude of 9-11.

Clearly, Bush hired smart people to do all this for him. Maybe the children of the crew that organized the "moon landing".

----

Why is it the American left that always seems to see conspiracy theories? Oil companies, arms manufacturers, large corporations, "rich powerful interests" always seem to be up to nefarious no-good.

On the American right, any conspiracy theories seem to concern the threat of foreigners. The red scare in the 1950s may have been extreme but then it turns out that Alger Hiss really was a spy.

Then again, Watergate was rich in conspiracy theories of all sorts - both left and right. Maybe it's part of human nature.

[PolyNewbie]

Clearly, Bush hired smart people to do all this for him. Maybe the children of the crew that organized the "moon landing".

I think they faked the moon landings too. The best doc on this is A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon. Lots of funny stuff in there.

[PolyNewbie]

Largest Swiss Paper Asks if Bush Was Behind 911

[Michael Hardner]

It's very sad how much traction this conspiracy garbage gets. It's a warning sign to all of us that our institutions are under deep suspicion.

Thanks, BD, for doing a good job of addressing the points raised.

[killjoy]

How could an Administration orchestrate a fantastic and nebulous plot such as 9/11 and yet during the chaotic early months of the invasion of Iraq they couldn't even plant a little sarin or mustard gas, or even a little yellow cake?

Honestly which one of those 'missions' would be easier to achieve? 9/11 or the planting of a few WMD to justify to the American people their reason for invasion? They couldn't, or wouldn't?

"A skeptic needs to see in order to believe,"

A theorist needs to believe before they can see."

.

[M.Dancer]

The movie Terrorstorm shows documented mainstream history of terror attacks on US as admittedly faked by the establishment.

The movie puts forth evidence of the London 7/7 bombings being an inside job and the 911 attacks as being an inside job.

You can watch this for free at

See Terrorstorm http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...287038493668253

Better Copy: http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/47201/...storm_115M.html

Thoughts ?

The domain of nutbars, tin foil hat folk and those who make a very good living from the fringes

[GostHacked]

GostHacked

To begin with the fighters were sent up at air traffic control's request to have a look at Stewart's aircraft to try to find out why it was not responding and off course, not to shoot it down. They followed until it ran out of fuel and crashed on its own.

Until 9/11 there had been no case of a civil airliner being hijacked and deliberately crashed with the intent of killing people on the ground. Civil aircraft are monitored and controlled by civil air traffic control, not the military. There is no reason or need for the military to even know why they were there unless they were somehow violating designated military airspace or unless the civil agency had notified them and requested their assistance. Bearing this in mind, you are assuming that someone would have had to get fighters airborne within minutes of being notified and within just a few more minutes make the decision to pull the trigger on airliners full of civilians without actually knowing what was going on. Also assuming they were notified in time to even get them there. That's a big stretch IMO.

Saying they had not thought of planes crashing into buildings is a bit naive. Or else we would not have beacons on tall structures for planes to actually see and avoid them. So if the possibility of an accident is there, (the reason for the beacons) it can be assumed that someone would purposly fly into them. I'd hope the intelligence services paid to protect us would already have taken this into account. OK not EVERYTHING can be considered, but something major like airliners into buildings, does not seem much of a stretch in the imagination.

Civil aircraft are monitored by civilians, and the military. the FAA has a direct link to the military/Pentagon officials and can ask for scrambled jets without much authorization. They do not need any kind of high end approval for these incidents. Since exercises were going on that day, regarding planes flying into buildings. you say it was not considered at all? (Also there were exercises going on in London during the transit bombings) The probability of exercises going on the same day as a terrorist attack (and it skyrockets even more once you take the London bombings into consideration) is way to high to consider a coincidence.

[Michael Hardner]

The probability of exercises going on the same day as a terrorist attack (and it skyrockets even more once you take the London bombings into consideration) is way to high to consider a coincidence.

In order for you to say that, you'd have to know how many exercises happen a year, and how many days they last for. It's easy to scour all the myriad events that happen on the day of a disaster and come up with a handful of oddities.

If you try to attribute those oddities to some kind of government planned conspiracy, you will need to find a clear motive to justify the enormous risk involved. Almost all of the 9/11 conspiracies fail that test.

[Charles Anthony]

Is anybody open to the possibility that it was a conspiracy involving some Americans OTHER than the government?

[Michael Hardner]

Is anybody open to the possibility that it was a conspiracy involving some Americans OTHER than the government?

What would their motive be ?

[GostHacked]

Is anybody open to the possibility that it was a conspiracy involving some Americans OTHER than the government?

What would their motive be ?

Bringing 'Freedom' to the rest of the world.

[Charles Anthony]

Is anybody open to the possibility that it was a conspiracy involving some Americans OTHER than the government?

What would their motive be ?

Who cares?? The event has already taken place. I am questioning the possibility of origin not motive.

Bringing 'Freedom' to the rest of the world.

I am being serious.

The true motive has no bearing on the origin. The people who flew the plane were not super-human.

Nevertheless, there are many possible answers to the question of a domestic motive. Here are some:

1) anything

2) the same motive as that of the people who did it, whatever that was (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

3) the same motive as that of Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

4) mental illness (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

5) possession by the Devil (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

I can think of a lot more reasonable ones but my original answer: "Who cares?" is the best because most arguments AGAINST some sort of conspiracy keep asking for a motive. A possible motive is irrelevant because not every action must be rational.

The chances of ABSOLUTELY NO American being complicit in the demolition of the World Trade Center exists but so do the chances of AT LEAST ONE American being part of it.

[PolyNewbie]

Best copy of TerrorStorm available for watching on google is at:

TerrorStorm

[GostHacked]

Is anybody open to the possibility that it was a conspiracy involving some Americans OTHER than the government?

What would their motive be ?

Who cares?? The event has already taken place. I am questioning the possibility of origin not motive.

Bringing 'Freedom' to the rest of the world.

I am being serious.

The true motive has no bearing on the origin. The people who flew the plane were not super-human.

Nevertheless, there are many possible answers to the question of a domestic motive. Here are some:

1) anything

2) the same motive as that of the people who did it, whatever that was (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

3) the same motive as that of Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

4) mental illness (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

5) possession by the Devil (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

I can think of a lot more reasonable ones but my original answer: "Who cares?" is the best because most arguments AGAINST some sort of conspiracy keep asking for a motive. A possible motive is irrelevant because not every action must be rational.

The chances of ABSOLUTELY NO American being complicit in the demolition of the World Trade Center exists but so do the chances of AT LEAST ONE American being part of it.

Hard to answer that in a few short lines. So I would direct you to The Powers of Nightmares - The Rise of the Politics of Fear (2004) By Adam Curtis 3 part series on the rise of terrorism and how the government uses it to it's advantage. The documentary is put together really well. Highly sugested.

[Michael Hardner]

The government uses everything to its advantage, as arguably people do as well. Do they cause it, though ?

Now back to Charles:

Who cares?? The event has already taken place. I am questioning the possibility of origin not motive.

I am being serious.

The true motive has no bearing on the origin. The people who flew the plane were not super-human.

Nevertheless, there are many possible answers to the question of a domestic motive. Here are some:

1) anything

2) the same motive as that of the people who did it, whatever that was (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

3) the same motive as that of Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

4) mental illness (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

5) possession by the Devil (ergo, my first answer: "Who cares?")

I can think of a lot more reasonable ones but my original answer: "Who cares?" is the best because most arguments AGAINST some sort of conspiracy keep asking for a motive. A possible motive is irrelevant because not every action must be rational.

The chances of ABSOLUTELY NO American being complicit in the demolition of the World Trade Center exists but so do the chances of AT LEAST ONE American being part of it.

When reconstructing a crime, knowing a motive helps frame the investigation, I believe.

If you want to explore the chances of an American non-Islamist (I assume this is what we're speaking of) 'helping' on the day, let's take motives 3,4, and 5.

4) 5) Mental Illness/Possession by the Devil

A person who is affected in these ways cannot be counted above in times of stress, so it's unlikely the plotters would approach such a person for assistance in the plot.

3) McVeigh/White Supremecist/Some Kind of non-Islamist Axe to Grind

This is far a more likely scenario than above, but the questions start to pop up:

Why would the plotters trust such a person with their plot ? How could they be sure he/she would join in, indeed that they wouldn't tell authorities ?

How would they make contact with such a person ?

Why did this person need to be a non-Islamist American and not an Islamist American ? What was their role ?

[Argus]

The only worth of this thread is it gets kooks to self-identify.

I wonder what it is about people who cling to ridiculous conspiracy theories which have little or no supporting evidence, while dismissing mountains of contrary evidence. Some people still insist the Holocaust was a myth, and their motivation, at least, is generally pretty clear: they hate Jews.

I think the motivation of people propogating these absurd 911 conspiracies is similar: they hate America and Americans.

In both cases they don't like the fact people in the world might sympathize with those they despise, so they do their best to discredit a historical event, despite all evidence to the contrary, painfully stretching science to its limits, quoting nut jobs around the world in support, and ignoring all logic.

George Bush and others, all of them filthy rich, immensely powerful, with little to gain but their lives to lose, involved themselves in a massive conspiracy in order to do what again? To make some corporations richer? Uhmmm, okay. Sure sounds logical to me. They engaged in this conspiracy on behalf of the military-industrial complex, which was not, btw, suffering overmuch from neglect, and in no danger of being threatened by an outbreak of world peace. And despite the immense national trauma the attack brought about non of the little people involved had a guilt attack and told anyone.

And they attacked the World Trade Centre because..... because....it was full of rich Republicans!?

Wouldn't they have gotten just as good an effect by dropping an airliner into a football stadium in one of the red states? At least then they'd be targeting godless liberals and not disrupting the New York Stock Exchange.

Nope. Sorry. Makes no sense. It's like Bill Gates robbing a bank. He can't spend the money he already has! Rich people seldom collude in crimes which can get them executed by their own government. They don't need a piddling few extra million enough to risk it.

Anyone who really believes the Americans took down the WTC is in serious need of an education - or counselling.

[Michael Hardner]

Anyone who really believes the Americans took down the WTC is in serious need of an education

Argus - that's what some of us are doing here. I think it's important to bring people in from the fringes to a common area of engagement...

[Argus]

Anyone who really believes the Americans took down the WTC is in serious need of an education

Argus - that's what some of us are doing here. I think it's important to bring people in from the fringes to a common area of engagement...

Won't work.

When I said education, I was referring to the illiterate hoardes in the third world who believe the Americans or "Jews" did it. I guess I was also referring to the out of touch here. For example, a lovely young thing whose world revolves around fashion and reality television. It took me about a minute and a half to get her to realize the silliness of such a belief.

But what do you do with university educated people who will argue long and hard, ignoring all evidence to the contrary, that Elvis blew up the World Trade Centre?

Such people are not in need of education, but psychiatric help.

[Charles Anthony]

When reconstructing a crime, knowing a motive helps frame the investigation, I believe.

Your choice of the word "frame" could not be better. I agree.

4) 5) Mental Illness/Possession by the Devil

A person who is affected in these ways cannot be counted above in times of stress, so it's unlikely the plotters would approach such a person for assistance in the plot.

Are you kidding?? That is the problem with making too many assumptions or starting off with motive: not everything must be logical.

Why would the plotters trust such a person with their plot ? How could they be sure he/she would join in, indeed that they wouldn't tell authorities ?

Those questions are ridiculous. The event already took place. Those questions must have been asked of the FOREIGN participants too and guess what?? they obviously managed to pull it off.

How would they make contact with such a person ?

Why did this person need to be a non-Islamist American and not an Islamist American ? What was their role ?

Those questions are useless because they do not need to be answered. The answers to those questions do not eliminate the possibility that there was an inside connection.

But what do you do with university educated people who will argue long and hard, ignoring all evidence to the contrary, that Elvis blew up the World Trade Centre?

Now, you have crossed the line. Where were YOU in August1977?

Never touch The King. Never.

[Michael Hardner]

Are you kidding?? That is the problem with making too many assumptions or starting off with motive: not everything must be logical.

Those questions are ridiculous. The event already took place. Those questions must have been asked of the FOREIGN participants too and guess what?? they obviously managed to pull it off.

Those questions are useless because they do not need to be answered. The answers to those questions do not eliminate the possibility that there was an inside connection.

Now, you have crossed the line. Where were YOU in August1977?

Never touch The King. Never.

Oh, ok. It was Elvis.

[GostHacked]

At the same time it is hard to convince someone that somehow the US government had a hand in the 9/11 attacks. I will tell you this, I live in Ottawa and I talk to people all the time about it. 60% or more *rough guess here) think that the US government let it happen, or helped it happen. Mind you less than 50% of those think that the WTC was a controlled demolition. Some of the facts and events that may help out the story are ignored by MSM and the blind sheep among our population (ok don't wanna get all Alex Jones on you)

I have watched alot of video. At first I was thinking no way. Why would someone do that? How would somoene do that? I was skeptical at first about these theories. But after constantly stacking it up to the official story, the official story falls short. I have even gathered video from people in BY that were near the towers when they fell. Interesting home video of one guy on the 36th floor of his apt about 5 to 10 blocks from the WTC site on that day. Interesting stuff.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-67...duration%3Along

This is another 'Loose Change' type of film, but takes into account some of the more recent happenings. Alot of those news artilces I do recall. Then again, I am looking at this stuff on almost a daily basis. However I am not that stupid as to believe that the planes where holograms. No those had to be the real deal, real planes flying into those real buildings. There are alot of outragous claims about 9/11. Some don't jive with even the likes of me .

IF a guy comes at you on a plane with nothing but a simple box cutter, what do you do?

When I said education, I was referring to the illiterate hoardes in the third world who believe the Americans or "Jews" did it. I guess I was also referring to the out of touch here. For example, a lovely young thing whose world revolves around fashion and reality television. It took me about a minute and a half to get her to realize the silliness of such a belief.

Fashion designers and reality TV show junkies tend to be really shallow people and have an attention span of a peanut. They don't take much out of there time to look at the real world when there is so much glamour and partying going on. I would not waste any time convincing her of anything.

I had a pal last year tell me I was nuts. Now he is not so sure, and I have not given anything for him to look at since then. He comes up to me recently and says I am not as crazy as he thought. He is not 100% convinced, but I can tell he is starting to question the official story as well.

[Michael Hardner]

Most of the people who get convinced of these theories (such as the perfectly insane controlled demolition theory) do so because they get single-point information from a website, or video.

If you read criticisms of 'Loose Change', you will see that their explanations are completely faulty, to the point of irresponsibility. These people are also hypocrites, as they accuse officials of covering up information and denying facts, which this is what they themselves do.

[Argus]

When I said education, I was referring to the illiterate hoardes in the third world who believe the Americans or "Jews" did it. I guess I was also referring to the out of touch here. For example, a lovely young thing whose world revolves around fashion and reality television. It took me about a minute and a half to get her to realize the silliness of such a belief.

Fashion designers and reality TV show junkies tend to be really shallow people and have an attention span of a peanut. They don't take much out of there time to look at the real world when there is so much glamour and partying going on.

Yes. And they constitute most of your "believers". Just substitute "video games" for "fashion shows", and "hockey games" for "reality tv".

But at least, when you pour a little reality and logic onto them it kick-starts their minds into actually considering things so that they can realize how silly their belief was.

Then there's people so fixated, so obsessed on these conspiracy theories that they're like mesianic religious nutbars, where faith alone is sufficient to ward off truth, logic and science.

You know - people like you.