Ok, there were some complaints concerning the last poll of the WTC Collapses. I think the biggest issue was that there wasn't an option for people who weren't unsure. It's also possible that some people aren't sure whether the towers were taken down by controlled demolition in order to manipulate war or for some other reason. Finally, it doesn't take into account that some people think that the government didn't 'make it happen', but rather 'let it happen'. I figure I might as well do the poll for all of 9/11. If you choose other, or if the option you chose doesn't quite cover how you feel about it, please elaborate. I'd like this to be a public poll, I'll see if I can manage it.
9/11 Poll
- Thread starter scott3x
- Start date
- Status
It's still not quite right scott, for example:
How comes it's always "The Government" that is responsible? Crooks, Conmen and other assorted navvies know full well that the ones that manage to get away with it the most are those that "Infiltrate the System". This means you can have such crooks in the Government and the Police that aren't actually working on the authority of the Government but as their own Crime Gang.
In fact this was one of the points in the JFK Assassination, some thought that it was setup internally "By the Government". However there were people in Government jobs known to be in societies (That incidentally weren't secret) that often stated that their president of the time as "a N****r loving commy pinko" (That's of course paraphrased)
You just have to look to World Events or Politics and you'll often see there are people that openly don't like "Who" is in government and they might well grind their axes while in a government job.
A conspiracy involving a government, usually means the government has actually be left out.
How comes it's always "The Government" that is responsible? Crooks, Conmen and other assorted navvies know full well that the ones that manage to get away with it the most are those that "Infiltrate the System". This means you can have such crooks in the Government and the Police that aren't actually working on the authority of the Government but as their own Crime Gang.
In fact this was one of the points in the JFK Assassination, some thought that it was setup internally "By the Government". However there were people in Government jobs known to be in societies (That incidentally weren't secret) that often stated that their president of the time as "a N****r loving commy pinko" (That's of course paraphrased)
You just have to look to World Events or Politics and you'll often see there are people that openly don't like "Who" is in government and they might well grind their axes while in a government job.
A conspiracy involving a government, usually means the government has actually be left out.
(Elements of the Government)
that would be Bush and his crime family correct?
that would be Bush and his crime family correct?
That's what I meant. Do you have a method that would perhaps make my meaning more clear?
Well, I guess the real thing is, what constitutes elements within a government? As far as I'm concerned, a rogue government official is still an element of government. But perhaps it would be better to put it that way- as in RGE (Rogue Government Elements)? I think I know where you're going and if so, I agree. If 9/11 did have let it happen/made it happen elements to it, most government people knew absolutely nothing about it. However, a few key people not only knew, but let it/made it happen. I'm for the made it happen, but I think it'd be nice to know how many people think that perhaps the government let some of the events on 9/11 happen as well.
Last edited:
Well, Marvin Bush -was- part of the 9/11 security apparatus and George Bush himself seems to have made a few gaffes that perhaps had to do with knowledge of what really happened (his reference to explosives once I think). And a lot of other things (why in hell did Bush keep on reading 'my pet goat' when this stuff was happening, for instance).
However, what I -really- don't want is to have people not pick the option because they happen to think that Bush and his family had nothing to do with it. I think the strongest point is how the WTC buildings fell; that is, via controlled demolition. If they fell via controlled demolition, I think it's safe to say that it had to be either 'let it happen' or 'made it happen'. Why? Because the terrorists had to get -inside- the building to set that up well before the planes crashed into them.
Tony Szamboti
Registered Senior Member
Right. I agree and believe it is erroneous to blame "the government" for things like the JFK assassination or 911. The more appropriate way to look at those who would have commited these crimes is as criminal elements who have infiltrated the government and used their positions to destroy evidence and cover up the crimes.
The depressing part is that these elements seem to infiltrate governments with astonishing regularity. And some of those elements may include presidents themselves, as I would argue was the case in the 'let it happen' way of seeing things regarding Pearl Harbor. I can believe that George Bush Jr. may have let it happen, but I really can't see him as behind the whole thing- I think that type of thing is more suited to his father, who was, after all, head of the CIA for some time and who, it has been argued, may well have been behind the assasination attempt on Reagan in order to get to the white house a little earlier then scheduled.
Tony Szamboti
Registered Senior Member
Yes, these type of people do seem to get in power with astonishing regularity. Here is a short clip of somebody I believe to be one of these types, Dick Cheney, at the Council on Foreign Relations admitting he never told people in Wyoming he was a director of the CFR when he was running for Congress.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbnpN07J_zg
Below is a link to a 1 minute 11 second clip of Jack Ruby generally discussing the people behind the Kennedy assassination and specifically Lyndon Johnson.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-177236594543303&hl=en
I generally don't put Pearl harbor in the same boat as 911 and the assassinations of the 1960s, although I do believe FDR let it happen. The criminals running Japan and Germany were trying to dominate the world and there was a danger for all of humanity. You can hold FDR accountable but I don't believe the motives behind what he did were selfish and on the same level as the make it happen scenarios of 911 and the assassinations of the 1960s.
Last edited:
An interesting video.
Tony Szamboti said:
I can go for that. Nevertheless, I still think it wasn't something that should have been done. What I find rather annoying is that many people to this day still believe that Roosevelt had nothing to do with the events that happened that day. I guess I can only hope that 50+ years from now, people don't still buy the official story concerning 9/11 and/or another tragedy of this nature occurs.
Nods.. all these groups/societies.. layers within layers. The secret talks Cheney had with his oil buddies that took place before 9/11... so much info, so little time, laugh
.
Fucking..i did it...I admit! I planned the whole damn thing! Just to confuse Scott.
Fucking..i did it...I admit! I planned the whole damn thing! Just to confuse Scott.
Very funny Mac
.Looks like everyone's got a sense of humour today
. I admit that I once believed in that organization. I went beyond "The Da Vinci Code", to its main source, Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Later, I found out what wikipedia documents concerning the organization:In the 1960s, Plantard created a fictitious history for that organization, describing it as a secret society founded in the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1099, which preserves the bloodlines of the Merovingian dynasty.[2] This myth was expanded upon and popularized by the 1982 controversial book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,[1] and later claimed as factual in the preface of the 2003 conspiracy fiction novel The Da Vinci Code.[3]
After becoming a cause célèbre from the late 1960s to the 1980s, the mythical Priory of Sion was exposed as a ludibrium created by Plantard as a framework for his false pretention to the French throne.[4] Evidence presented in support of its historical existence and activities before 1956 was discovered to have been forged and then planted in various locations around France by Plantard and his accomplices. Nevertheless, many conspiracy theorists persist in believing that the Priory of Sion is an age-old cabal which acts as a power behind the throne while concealing a subversive secret.[5]
The Priory of Sion myth has been exhaustively debunked by journalists and scholars as one of the great hoaxes of the 20th century.[6]
Now compare this to an article from 60 minutes on the Skull and Bones secret society:
Skull And Bones - Secret Yale Society Includes America's Power Elite
Wikipedia also has a good entry on them. Here's a sample:
In the 2004 U.S. Presidential election, both the Democratic and Republican nominees were members. George W. Bush writes in his autobiography, "[In my] senior year I joined Skull and Bones, a secret society; so secret, I can't say anything more."[3] When asked what it meant that he and Bush were both Bonesmen, former Presidential candidate John Kerry said, "Not much because it's a secret."[4][5] In October, 1942, the US government (under America's Trading with the Enemy Act) seized a bank, the Union Banking Corporation and three shipping companies owned and operated by four members of Skull and Bones; Prescott Bush, Averell Harriman, E. Roland Harriman and Knight Wolley. The seizure was given a "classified" status until 2002 and thus had no effect on the subsequent elections and appointments of Averell Harriman or Prescott Bush to high government offices.[6][7]
By no means am I implying that Skull and Bones is the only powerful secret society. Nor am I implying that they were by default the prime movers in 9/11. There are certainly other powerful organizations, such as the Bilderberg Group. Nevertheless, there is certainly evidence that 9/11 was played rather close to the hip; the fact that Marvin Bush, George W. Bush's brother, played an important role in the twin towers' security prior to 9/11, is certainly suggestive.
whether or not the united states government is directly involved in the events of 9/11 isnt the whole story.. we know for a fact that it was the falt of the government and the people, because without us training and supporting Al Queda in the 90's they would have never gotten set up with the equipment to be able to support and atack of that scale.. our government trained them. we were the enablers.
While there is plenty of evidence that Bin Laden was aided by the CIA for quite some time, there is also a fair amount of evidence that Bin Laden had little if anything to do with 9/11. He even stated so himself, requiring an imitation Bin Laden to "confess" that he did it. In any case, Bin Laden's death has been reported many times since 9/11, as wikipedia points out. The same can't be said for those who likely took a part within the U.S. government. One man who apparently had foreknowledge of 9/11 was jailed, while others have claimed to have heard things and came forward anonymously after the fact.
Is that like regular Bin Laden...but with only half the fat and calories?
"Tastes just like regular Bin Laden..without all the guilt."
yAWN.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
Let it be known, 9/11 was perpetuated by powerful ideologues in the White House to further their goal of occupation of sovereign Muslim nations and the exploitation of their resources.
scott3x said:
Is that like regular Bin Laden...but with only half the fat and calories?
"Tastes just like regular Bin Laden..without all the guilt."
More like twice the calories. Take a look at the full story if you like:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/osamatape.html
- Status