does this seem plausible?



Hypnospin

New Member
Apr 10, 2005
823
0
0
if this is the best explanation, based on cause and effect factors, that the 9/11 attacks could have indeed resulted in the aftermath that ensued, then i am beginning to seriously doubt the whole story of the attack.

www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_1253.shtml

the evidence does not now and cannot ever rule out intentional destruction, controlled demolition and bomb detonations.

far too many inconsistencies are taken for granted, too many laws of physics are ignored to come to any other conclusion.

bush looking for the perpetrators is perhaps as valid as oj simpson looking for the real killers.

the ones who would have us believe it all came down as the mythology reported by the press are the real conspiracy theorists, based on their flawed reasoning in the face of the physical evidence.
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
Hypnospin said:
if this is the best explanation, based on cause and effect factors, that the 9/11 attacks could have indeed resulted in the aftermath that ensued, then i am beginning to seriously doubt the whole story of the attack.

www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_1253.shtml

the evidence does not now and cannot ever rule out intentional destruction, controlled demolition and bomb detonations.

far too many inconsistencies are taken for granted, too many laws of physics are ignored to come to any other conclusion.

bush looking for the perpetrators is perhaps as valid as oj simpson looking for the real killers.

the ones who would have us believe it all came down as the mythology reported by the press are the real conspiracy theorists, based on their flawed reasoning in the face of the physical evidence.


Your link doesn't appear to work.
I tried it and got nothing.
 

Hypnospin

New Member
Apr 10, 2005
823
0
0
funny how these links are an iffy proposition, i double check each one i post to make sure they connect.

anyway, you may go to
www.thenewamerican.com
and look for the specific article regarding the offering of said explainations that attempt to cover the numerous ongoing inconsistencies and just plain seemingly impossible 9/11 stories that are being presented by the media as unchallenged fact.

p.s. although i offer these links as a means to for a source for critical study, i do not necessarily support or endorse the above site in any way.

interesting, though, to see they do contain "dissent from the right" to use a generalization to describe even these "conservative extremists" pulling their heads out from mindless partisan lock step on certain issues...

limerickman said:
Your link doesn't appear to work.
I tried it and got nothing.
 

steve

Administrator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2001
5,284
392
83
Hypnospin said:
funny how these links are an iffy proposition, i double check each one i post to make sure they connect.
The link you posted worked for me, maybe they had server problems when lim checked?
 

Wurm

New Member
Aug 6, 2004
2,202
0
0
Hypnospin -

Have I not discussed similar topics about the official lies about 9/11 many times here, or at least tried to bring a greater awareness to the problems/inconsistancies that you cite, only to be told that I was a whacked-out "conspiracy theorist"??

What in the hell is the greater public waiting for? Perhaps it's the mere impossibilty of considering that one's gov't truly HAS lied to you, and in a very heinous way?

Meanwhile, many in the the US continue with their comfortable illusion as propagated by the Bush/Neo Con thugs.

This is all quite pathological.
 

Hypnospin

New Member
Apr 10, 2005
823
0
0
you certainly have brought these issues to light, and with great detail.
and yes, the result has included your being labled as you mention.

i just thought i would examine what is offered from the perspective of those who are swallowing the lot, those who are convinced that the official line is true, how can they possibly conclude all is as presented by their trusty teles?

what struck me here, is that given rather lame attempts
(from such as www.thenewamerican.com)
at explaining away the numerous inconsistencies with reality that whole 9/11 scenario as commonly presented by the commercial media exhibits, one has to wonder,
-is that the best that can be offered, 'cause it sure doesn't track
-as for those who would hold that the entire scenario as presented by the commercial media is true, are they not the real "conspiracy theorists?"

regarding the pathology involved, i think back to the patty hearst trial, she got off with a defense based upon her being a victim of delusion caused by the "stockholm syndrome"
www.geocities.com/kidhistory/trauma/stockhol.htm
i have often thought the going along with influences such as the bush junta by society has parallels with the concept of the stockolm syndrome.

by any means at hand, esp. by exploiting the so-called news media, the bush terror campaign has indeed relied upon the brainwash of a good portion of the populus for further support of their agenda.


Wurm said:
Hypnospin -

Have I not discussed similar topics about the official lies about 9/11 many times here, or at least tried to bring a greater awareness to the problems/inconsistancies that you cite, only to be told that I was a whacked-out "conspiracy theorist"??

What in the hell is the greater public waiting for? Perhaps it's the mere impossibilty of considering that one's gov't truly HAS lied to you, and in a very heinous way?

Meanwhile, many in the the US continue with their comfortable illusion as propagated by the Bush/Neo Con thugs.

This is all quite pathological.
 

Similar threads