Another hard question

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Another hard question; From the new guy
Topic Started: May 1 2009, 07:38 AM (488 Views)
asaf-a	May 1 2009, 07:38 AM Post #1
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09	Hi. After failing to just put it out in a simple chain of event, i'll ask you another question about the conspiracy. The theory is already out, and it can be used against America and espically the Bush administration by many many people. Bush could have been put to blame by Chavez, by Iran, by Iraqis, by Bush haters, by Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Democrats and Osama Bin-Laden himself. Yet the only people who seem to drop those charges are you guys. And more, the theories didn't start quickly in 2001, it started few years later. If the collapse of the WTC and the plane in Shanksville and the Pentagon strike was so suspecious, why engineers and air crash investigators didn't speak, instead it came from a group of 23 year old guys making a movie about 9/11 (Loose Change). But that leads me to my hard question: Why would Barack Obama, now as president, keep the secret about 9/11?
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09


Miragememories	May 1 2009, 09:13 AM Post #2
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08	asaf-a "Hi. After failing to just put it out in a simple chain of event, i'll ask you another question about the conspiracy. The theory is already out, and it can be used against America and espically the Bush administration by many many people. Bush could have been put to blame by Chavez, by Iran, by Iraqis, by Bush haters, by Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Democrats and Osama Bin-Laden himself. Yet the only people who seem to drop those charges are you guys. And more, the theories didn't start quickly in 2001, it started few years later. If the collapse of the WTC and the plane in Shanksville and the Pentagon strike was so suspecious, why engineers and air crash investigators didn't speak, instead it came from a group of 23 year old guys making a movie about 9/11 (Loose Change). But that leads me to my hard question: Why would Barack Obama, now as president, keep the secret about 9/11?" What proof do you have that "theories" first occurred a few years after 9/11? I've read many case histories where serious doubt about the developing 9/11 official story was strong from the very beginning! I'm still looking for your hard question? Who do you believe was going to report any 9/11 accusations that might have been made by " Chavez, by Iran, by Iraqis, by Bush haters, by Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Democrats and Osama Bin-Laden himself." ?? Certainly not the MEDIA. Again the question of "why engineers and air crash investigators didn't speak"? They have spoken. The MEDIA, controlled by the same sort of people who created the current economic crisis, have been instructed to "stand down" when it comes to serious investigative journalism about 9/11. Unless you look to the internet, everything about 9/11 has been explained to the satisfaction of the MEDIA CEOs. Barack Obama appears to be on record as wishing to look forward while ignoring the sins of the past. Hopefully, he'll change his mind in response to a public backlash. MM Edited by Miragememories, May 1 2009, 12:14 PM.
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08


JFK	May 1 2009, 09:44 AM Post #3
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	asaf-a May 1 2009, 07:38 AM And more, the theories didn't start quickly in 2001, it started few years later. That is incorrect. There is a paper on the net written by a scholar which questions the official story of the events of 9/11. This paper wes written on either 9/15/2001 or 9/21/2001. Unfortunately I have misplaced the link due to a fried motherboard and OS reinstall here. As soon as I find it I will post it in it's entirety once again.
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


asaf-a	May 1 2009, 11:36 AM Post #4
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09	Miragememories May 1 2009, 09:13 AM asaf-a "Hi. After failing to just put it out in a simple chain of event, i'll ask you another question about the conspiracy. The theory is already out, and it can be used against America and espically the Bush administration by many many people. Bush could have been put to blame by Chavez, by Iran, by Iraqis, by Bush haters, by Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Democrats and Osama Bin-Laden himself. Yet the only people who seem to drop those charges are you guys. And more, the theories didn't start quickly in 2001, it started few years later. If the collapse of the WTC and the plane in Shanksville and the Pentagon strike was so suspecious, why engineers and air crash investigators didn't speak, instead it came from a group of 23 year old guys making a movie about 9/11 (Loose Change). But that leads me to my hard question: Why would Barack Obama, now as president, keep the secret about 9/11?" What proof do you have that "theories" first occurred a few years after 9/11? I've read a many case histories where serious doubt about the developing 9/11 official story was strong from the very beginning! I'm still looking for your hard question? Who do you believe was going to report any 9/11 accusations that might have been made by " Chavez, by Iran, by Iraqis, by Bush haters, by Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Democrats and Osama Bin-Laden himself." ?? Certainly not the MEDIA. Again the question of "why engineers and air crash investigators didn't speak"? They have spoken. The MEDIA, controlled by the same sort of people who created the current economic crisis, have been instructed to "stand down" when it comes to serious investigative journalism about 9/11. Unless you look to the internet, everything about 9/11 has been explained to the satisfaction of the MEDIA CEOs. Barack Obama appears to be on record as wishing to look forward while ignoring the sins of the past. Hopefully, he'll change his mind in response to a public backlash. MM Ok, there were theories close to the actual date of the attack, i didn't know that and this is acceptable. But i mentiond a list which can be way bigger of people with intrests to reveal the conspiracy, they are not part of the US media which i belive you can agree is the only media the conspirators can control, so how come we havn't heard such acusations from anti-american media? Why havn't we heard this acusations from Cuban media or North Korean media or Irani media. I mean c'mon, Iran has done anything (even deny the holocaust) and still even they don't accuse America of 9/11 fraud. Chavez has called Bush a satan, he has no intrest in sparing him from "compliments". And Osama Bin-Laden, well, you could debate the issue of did 9/11 do good for him and his organization, but i belive that if i was accused of bringing down the twin-towers and i was innocent, i would have said i'm not guilty, yet he admits it (in many tapes, not just the one that is on Loose Change) Barack Obama has no intrest in supporting Bush, actully during the elections he could have used the conspiracy theory against McCain as a Bush supporter so he has an intrest to reveal any type of shit on Bush, like he does now with the torture. So do you tell me Obama is willing to reveal dirt on Bush like turtore that was done in the CIA, but he would spare him from the 9/11 fraud? It dosen't make any sense.
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09


Lin Kuei	May 1 2009, 11:53 AM Post #5
Posts: 1,312 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07	asaf-a May 1 2009, 11:36 AM So do you tell me Obama is willing to reveal dirt on Bush like turtore that was done in the CIA, but he would spare him from the 9/11 fraud? It dosen't make any sense. Do you think Obama and Bush work for different people? They don't. Obama has no say in what goes on. 9/11 wasn't done by Bush. But it benefited the powerful interest groups Bush (and Obama) work for. The real power structure of government is very different to what the public perceives as the frontmen of politics. That's why the hard questions don't get asked by those who we think should be asking. Edited by Lin Kuei, May 1 2009, 11:55 AM.
Posts: 1,312 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07


Miragememories	May 1 2009, 12:14 PM Post #6
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08	asaf-a "But i mentiond a list which can be way bigger of people with intrests to reveal the conspiracy, they are not part of the US media which i belive you can agree is the only media the conspirators can control, so how come we havn't heard such acusations from anti-american media? Why havn't we heard this acusations from Cuban media or North Korean media or Irani media." When was the last time (outside of the internet), you had the opportunity to see regular news coverage from Cuba, Iran and North Korea? The Western MEDIA, outside of the internet, effectively control what gets seen and heard by the majority of the public. MM Edited by Miragememories, May 1 2009, 01:17 PM.
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08


asaf-a	May 1 2009, 01:09 PM Post #7
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09	So do you suggest that the Cuban and North Korean people know that 9/11 was an inside job and that their media publishes it and we don't know it because we watch western media? It's not just about the media anyways, Iran for example is a member of the UN. There are engineers and air-crash investigators in Iran and in North Korea and in Cuba, they don't seem to speak against the offical 9/11 story. The consensus you guys hold is that experts here can't talk because the media is controled by the government and that's why they don't show truthers on TV (even though they do). What about experts in other countries that hate America?
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09


Miragememories	May 1 2009, 01:32 PM Post #8
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08	asaf-a "So do you suggest that the Cuban and North Korean people know that 9/11 was an inside job and that their media publishes it and we don't know it because we watch western media? It's not just about the media anyways, Iran for example is a member of the UN. There are engineers and air-crash investigators in Iran and in North Korea and in Cuba, they don't seem to speak against the offical 9/11 story. The consensus you guys hold is that experts here can't talk because the media is controled by the government and that's why they don't show truthers on TV (even though they do). What about experts in other countries that hate America?" I have no idea what has been reported by the Cuban and North Korean MEDIA. IT IS very much about MEDIA. The public give much weight to what the MEDIA tells them. You don't have to go to North Korea and Cuba seeking technical professionals who are speaking out against the official 9/11 story. The experts here can talk, but only the internet will listen. What part of my statement; "The MEDIA* controlled by the same sort of people who created the current economic crisis, have been instructed to "stand down" when it comes to serious investigative journalism about 9/11.", says "controlled by the government"? It's difficult to believe you are really as naive as you portray yourself asaf-a*. MM
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08


asaf-a	May 1 2009, 02:51 PM Post #9
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09	Miragememories May 1 2009, 01:32 PM asaf-a "So do you suggest that the Cuban and North Korean people know that 9/11 was an inside job and that their media publishes it and we don't know it because we watch western media? It's not just about the media anyways, Iran for example is a member of the UN. There are engineers and air-crash investigators in Iran and in North Korea and in Cuba, they don't seem to speak against the offical 9/11 story. The consensus you guys hold is that experts here can't talk because the media is controled by the government and that's why they don't show truthers on TV (even though they do). What about experts in other countries that hate America?" I have no idea what has been reported by the Cuban and North Korean MEDIA. IT IS very much about MEDIA. The public give much weight to what the MEDIA tells them. You don't have to go to North Korea and Cuba seeking technical professionals who are speaking out against the official 9/11 story. The experts here can talk, but only the internet will listen. What part of my statement; "The MEDIA* controlled by the same sort of people who created the current economic crisis, have been instructed to "stand down" when it comes to serious investigative journalism about 9/11.", says "controlled by the government"? It's difficult to believe you are really as naive as you portray yourself asaf-a*. MM As i said, it's not only the media where you can see other countries reactions to 9/11. There are international conventions held by the UN where Iran is hosted, there are meetings of the arab league which are preety much open for western media etc... So let's take a step back, according to you the western media does steps to not investigate 9/11? is that correct? If yes, well then there's alot of media around the world, and if 9/11 really was so blantly suspicous, it would have no limit holding it back from reporting these suspecions. Same thing about the experts, in your country it is obvious why if 9/11 was an inside job, people would a deterent from speaking about it. But what holds back from Cuban/Iranians/Iraqis/Pakistanis/Afghanis/Saudis/Koreans/Russians experts to have a concesus that wtc was brought down by controlled demolition? Why are they so quite about it? Now for the Americans expert i have to admit that i only heard about 'scholars for truth' from the mouth of a debunker that said they are all experts in philosophy and stuff so they're bogus, but i want to hear your side as well.
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09


Paul Tassopulos	May 1 2009, 04:20 PM Post #10
Artists for 9/11 Truth Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #975 Joined: 12/18/08	JFK May 1 2009, 09:44 AM Unfortunately I have misplaced the link due to a fried motherboard and OS reinstall here. Go for Fedora 10, JFK!!!! It's Radical! Duel Boot! edit to add : or Ubuntu!....or one of the other ones!!! I'm sure they're good too! Edited by Paul Tassopulos, May 1 2009, 05:56 PM.



JFK	May 1 2009, 05:58 PM Post #11
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Paul Tassopulos May 1 2009, 04:20 PM JFK May 1 2009, 09:44 AM Unfortunately I have misplaced the link due to a fried motherboard and OS reinstall here. Go for Fedora 10, JFK!!!! It's Radical! Duel Boot! This old HP I resurected now boots from DOS ( SCSI ), Win 98 SE ( SCSI ), Win XP home ( IDE ), and Win XP pro ( IDE ) via boot menus. I couldn't get it to boot via USB flash stick though. < scratches head > I salvaged everything but the motherboard and video card, which had TV in and out... The CPU survived and is running fine and the memory is useless to me without a board to plug it in to... I miss my 1.5 Gb of RDRAM, running on 256Kb of sdram on this board and it just isn't enough for how I am accustomed to doing what I do. I will check out that Fedora 10 for the even older backup machine I am in the process of building. < rant mode on > Six fricken spare/salvaged 3 1/2" floppy drives and not a one of them work. < rant mode off > http://www.bootdisks.us/windows-98/13/windows-98-bootable-cd-images.html < wipes brow - floppyless machine. >
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


Paul Tassopulos	May 1 2009, 06:10 PM Post #12
Artists for 9/11 Truth Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #975 Joined: 12/18/08	Xubuntu might be the way to go for that older machine. I haven't tried it, but I bet it's good. wikipedia Xubuntu is often used on older computers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xubuntu http://www.xubuntu.org/ and gftp http://gftp.seul.org/screenshots.html



JFK	May 1 2009, 06:51 PM Post #13
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Paul Tassopulos May 1 2009, 06:10 PM Xubuntu might be the way to go for that older machine. I haven't tried it, but I bet it's good. wikipedia Xubuntu is often used on older computers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xubuntu http://www.xubuntu.org/ and gftp http://gftp.seul.org/screenshots.html It won't work Paul, that requires 128 MB of ram to run... That older machine only has 96 Mb. It will run on this machine though...
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


Paul Tassopulos	May 1 2009, 07:02 PM Post #14
Artists for 9/11 Truth Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #975 Joined: 12/18/08	Oh. I see. You gotta get some more ram in there. It's like $10! http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2000170147%204024&name=%240%20-%20%241



Paul Tassopulos	May 1 2009, 07:45 PM Post #15
Artists for 9/11 Truth Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #975 Joined: 12/18/08	I'm building this now. It's going to be good I think. Really good Antec hardware, good Asus motherboard, 3.16 GHz chip, 8 gigs Corsair ram. Edited by Paul Tassopulos, May 1 2009, 07:46 PM.



JFK	May 1 2009, 07:56 PM Post #16
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Thanks for the link Paul. That is fine for this machine as the manual states it will handle 1.5 Gb total ( 3x512Mb PC 133 SDRAM ) and unofficially it will support 3 Gb ( 3x1Gb ) according to a HP geek at one of the tech forums. The "older" machine however ( according to it's manual ) will only handle 768 Mb total ( 3x256 PC 100 SDRAM ) If I am going to be buying RAM I am going to max both systems.... 3 1/2 Gb worth as I can move this 256 Mb to the other machine.
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


JFK	May 1 2009, 07:58 PM Post #17
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Paul Tassopulos May 1 2009, 07:45 PM I'm building this now. It's going to be good I think. Really good Antec hardware, good Asus motherboard, 3.16 GHz chip, 8 gigs Corsair ram. <---- with envy.
Posts: 4,225 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


Paul Tassopulos	May 1 2009, 08:20 PM Post #18
Artists for 9/11 Truth Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #975 Joined: 12/18/08	JFK May 1 2009, 07:58 PM <---- with envy. Well, I hope I can make half as good use of it as I see you making with your computers here. asaf-a, apologies. Didn't mean to highjack your thread here. It seems as though your looking for some sort of representive of this site or Loose Change to address you here. That's not me. Also, I really don't know the answer to your questions. We'll get there. I'm sure. Edited by Paul Tassopulos, May 1 2009, 08:23 PM.



asaf-a	May 2 2009, 05:38 AM Post #19
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09	Paul Tassopulos May 1 2009, 08:20 PM JFK May 1 2009, 07:58 PM <---- with envy. Well, I hope I can make half as good use of it as I see you making with your computers here. asaf-a, apologies. Didn't mean to highjack your thread here. It seems as though your looking for some sort of representive of this site or Loose Change to address you here. That's not me. Also, I really don't know the answer to your questions. We'll get there. I'm sure. I am not looking for any representetive for anything, don't really know how you got there.
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09


Miragememories	May 2 2009, 08:25 AM Post #20
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08	asaf-a "As i said, it's not only the media where you can see other countries reactions to 9/11. There are international conventions held by the UN where Iran is hosted, there are meetings of the arab league which are preety much open for western media etc... So let's take a step back, according to you the western media does steps to not investigate 9/11? is that correct? If yes, well then there's alot of media around the world, and if 9/11 really was so blantly suspicous, it would have no limit holding it back from reporting these suspecions. Same thing about the experts, in your country it is obvious why if 9/11 was an inside job, people would a deterent from speaking about it. But what holds back from Cuban/Iranians/Iraqis/Pakistanis/Afghanis/Saudis/Koreans/Russians experts to have a concesus that wtc was brought down by controlled demolition? Why are they so quite about it? Now for the Americans expert i have to admit that i only heard about 'scholars for truth' from the mouth of a debunker that said they are all experts in philosophy and stuff so they're bogus, but i want to hear your side as well." You really need to proofread before you post asaf-a. Not only do typos make it more difficult to comprehend your posts, they convey a lack of respect for the subject you are addressing. Yes, the reality experienced by those living in the western hemisphere is that our MEDIA avoid any serious reportage that might undermine the official story. In the rest of the world, there has been some quality MEDIA exposure but not so much that the western MEDIA have felt compelled to carry those stories. You keep wondering why the "rest of the world" isn't heard. The biggest single reason is that for the most part, they get ignored. When it's said that corporate control over the MEDIA keeps the truth from reaching the masses, it's important to keep in mind that these large corporations are multi-national and so is their sphere of influence. If you want to make up your own mind about the credibility of 'experts' and 'professionals' organizations like Scholars for 9/11 Truth http://stj911.org/ or Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth http://www.ae911truth.org/ Go visit their sites. There is a wealth of information there and you can decide whether or not they apply sufficient rigor to their investigations. MM
Posts: 759 Group: Members Member #40 Joined: 01/15/08


asaf-a	May 2 2009, 12:10 PM Post #21
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09	Miragememories May 2 2009, 08:25 AM asaf-a "As i said, it's not only the media where you can see other countries reactions to 9/11. There are international conventions held by the UN where Iran is hosted, there are meetings of the arab league which are preety much open for western media etc... So let's take a step back, according to you the western media does steps to not investigate 9/11? is that correct? If yes, well then there's alot of media around the world, and if 9/11 really was so blantly suspicous, it would have no limit holding it back from reporting these suspecions. Same thing about the experts, in your country it is obvious why if 9/11 was an inside job, people would a deterent from speaking about it. But what holds back from Cuban/Iranians/Iraqis/Pakistanis/Afghanis/Saudis/Koreans/Russians experts to have a concesus that wtc was brought down by controlled demolition? Why are they so quite about it? Now for the Americans expert i have to admit that i only heard about 'scholars for truth' from the mouth of a debunker that said they are all experts in philosophy and stuff so they're bogus, but i want to hear your side as well." You really need to proofread before you post asaf-a. Not only do typos make it more difficult to comprehend your posts, they convey a lack of respect for the subject you are addressing. Yes, the reality experienced by those living in the western hemisphere is that our MEDIA avoid any serious reportage that might undermine the official story. In the rest of the world, there has been some quality MEDIA exposure but not so much that the western MEDIA have felt compelled to carry those stories. You keep wondering why the "rest of the world" isn't heard. The biggest single reason is that for the most part, they get ignored. When it's said that corporate control over the MEDIA keeps the truth from reaching the masses, it's important to keep in mind that these large corporations are multi-national and so is their sphere of influence. If you want to make up your own mind about the credibility of 'experts' and 'professionals' organizations like Scholars for 9/11 Truth http://stj911.org/ or Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth http://www.ae911truth.org/ Go visit their sites. There is a wealth of information there and you can decide whether or not they apply sufficient rigor to their investigations. MM Sorry for the typos, English is not my native language. There hasn't been any serious research on non western media. Nothing holds back the investigators and experts in those countries from seeing the obvious flaws in the offical version of the wtc collapse and the pentagon strike etc... So if the offical explanations are untrue, every country which is not the United States of America, should have no problem of holding a consensus that wtc was brought down by CD, and that no commercial plane crashed at Shanksville, and a missile hit the Pentagon. Are you saying that it is what people think outside of the US but the western media silences it?
Posts: 40 Group: Members Member #1,103 Joined: 03/27/09


Lin Kuei	May 2 2009, 12:35 PM Post #22
Posts: 1,312 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07	moved to skeptic's section
Posts: 1,312 Group: Admins Member #5 Joined: 12/22/07


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic »