are you a "conspiracy theorist"?

[D. B. Doober]

I believe there's aliens....don't think there's any cover ups though. I don't think aliens are here but there's definitely life out there in the universe somewhere.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tzWc3Xl4B0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[HempKat]

I would like to point out that you said "generally accepted." That is nothing more than a collective opinion. That is not the "truth."

Laws are the best example of "collective opinions."

Nothing in life is static, and it can all change in the blink of an eye.

I say "generally accepted" because there are always those, like yourself, who will argue that a fact is not a fact, when the fact goes against their opinion. If I said "everyone excepts as fact" or the "universally accepted fact", then folks like yourself would likely pipe up and say "I don't accept it as fact".

Laws aren't collective opinions they are rules established by a majority and enforced on everyone within the jurisdiction of the governing body. They might be established based on collective opinions of what is good or bad, right or wrong, but the laws themselves are not opinions. They could also be described as social contracts in that whether you realize it or not when you go to a particular area with it's own unique set of laws or you choose to become apart of the community that the laws govern, you agree to be bound by those laws even if you don't agree with them or are not consciously aware of them. Since to say you don't agree with them or were unaware if not an accepted defense.

As for life, true, the only one constant in the universe is change. Yes it is possible that at some point in time one could discover something that causes everything to be re-examined. Until such time as such a thing is discovered the current understand is the established truth. For the most part though this doesn't happen. Just because something can conceivably happen does not mean it will. Most things that do end up changing because of reaching a new understanding, do so fairly quickly. It's because of this tendency that the expression "stands the test of time" came into being.

 

[HempKat]

You only need to study science to prove that they are indeed subjective.

What we considered fact 1,000 years ago is now not. What we considered fact even a couple of hundred years ago is not.

Fact is completely subjective. The "truth" changes every single day.

While there are examples that support what you are saying, it does not mean the conclusion you draw is universal. Some things that we knew 1000 years ago are still true. A thousand years ago the sky was blue, as it was 100 years ago and is today. Why it is blue however is what changes, perhaps 1000 years ago we believed it was painted that way by the gods with some heavenly paintbrush. A hundred years ago we knew it was because of the way light is refracted thru our atmosphere. Today we know along with how it is refracted it also depends on the cone cells in our eyes and one persons cone cells can be different from another's thereby causing that person to see the sky a slightly different color.

The proof that facts are not subjective is that while we believed different reasons why the sky is blue it was and still is blue. Yes in the future something could potentially change our atmosphere and thereby alter how the light is refracted causing the sky to no longer be blue. Until it does though, the fact is that the sky is blue.

And please spare me the nitpicking of how the sky isn't always blue, but also sometimes in some locations it is grey and other colors depending on weather and/or air quality conditions in a localized region. I only picked "the sky is blue" as a simple illustration of the point I'm making.

 

[bentom187]

Using debt as money is going according to plan.



20 Signs That The Global Economic Crisis Is Starting To Catch Fire

If you have been waiting for the "global economic crisis" to begin, just open up your eyes and look around. I know that most Americans tend to ignore what happens in the rest of the world because they consider it to be "irrelevant" to their daily lives, but the truth is that the massive economic problems that are currently sweeping across Europe, Asia and South America are going to be affecting all of us here in the U.S. very soon. Sadly, most of the big news organizations in this country seem to be more concerned about the fate of Justin Bieber's wax statue in Times Square than about the horrible financial nightmare that is gripping emerging markets all over the planet. After a brief period of relative calm, we are beginning to see signs of global financial instability that are unlike anything that we have witnessed since the financial crisis of 2008. As you will see below, the problems are not just isolated to a few countries. This is truly a global phenomenon.

Over the past few years, the Federal Reserve and other global central banks have inflated an unprecedented financial bubble with their reckless money printing. Much of this "hot money" poured into emerging markets all over the world. But now that the Federal Reserve has begun "tapering" quantitative easing, investors are taking this as a sign that the party is ending. Money is being pulled out of emerging markets all over the globe at a staggering pace and this is creating a tremendous amount of financial instability. In addition, the economic problems that have been steadily growing over the past few years in established economies throughout Europe and Asia just continue to escalate. The following are 20 signs that the global economic crisis is starting to catch fire...

#1 The unemployment rate in Greece has hit a brand new record high of 28 percent.

#2 The youth unemployment rate in Greece has hit a brand new record high of 64.1 percent.

#3 The percentage of bad loans in Italy is at an all-time record high.

#4 Italian industrial output declined again in December, and the Italian government is on the verge of collapse.

#5 The number of jobseekers in France has risen for 30 of the last 32 months, and at this point it has climbed to a new all-time record high.

#6 The total number of business failures in France in 2013 was even higher than in any year during the last financial crisis.

#7 It is being projected that housing prices in Spain will fall another 10 to 15 percent as their economic depression deepens.

#8 The economic and political turmoil in Turkey is spinning out of control. The government has resorted to blasting protesters with pepper spray and water cannons in a desperate attempt to restore order.

#9 It is being estimated that the inflation rate in Argentina is now over 40 percent, and the peso is absolutely collapsing.

#10 Gangs of armed bandits are roaming the streets in Venezuela as the economic chaos in that troubled nation continues to escalate.

#11 China appears to be very serious about deleveraging. The deflationary effects of this are going to be felt all over the planet. The following is an excerpt from Ambrose Evans-Pritchard's recent article entitled "World asleep as China tightens deflationary vice"...


China's Xi Jinping has cast the die. After weighing up the unappetising choice before him for a year, he has picked the lesser of two poisons.

The balance of evidence is that most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong aims to prick China's $24 trillion credit bubble early in his 10-year term, rather than putting off the day of reckoning for yet another cycle.

This may be well-advised for China, but the rest of the world seems remarkably nonchalant over the implications.

#12 There was a significant debt default by a coal company in China last Friday...


A high-yield investment product backed by a loan to a debt-ridden coal company failed to repay investors when it matured last Friday, state media reported on Wednesday, in the latest sign of financial stress in China's shadow bank sector.

#13 Japan's Nikkei stock index has already fallen by 14 percent so far in 2014. That is a massive decline in just a month and a half.

#14 Ukraine continues to fall apart financially...


The worsening political and economic circumstances in Ukraine has prompted the Fitch Ratings agency to downgrade Ukrainian debt from B to a pre–default level CCC. This is lower than Greece, and Fitch warns of future financial instability.

#15 The unemployment rate in Australia has risen to the highest level in more than 10 years.

#16 The central bank of India is in a panic over the way that Federal Reserve tapering is effecting their financial system.

#17 The effects of Federal Reserve tapering are also being felt in Thailand...


In the wake of the US Federal Reserve tapering, emerging economies with deteriorating macroeconomic figures or visible political instability are being punished by skittish markets. Thailand is drifting towards both these tendencies.

#18 One of Ghana's most prominent economists says that the economy of Ghana will crash by June if something dramatic is not done.

#19 Yet another banker has mysteriously died during the prime years of his life. That makes five "suspicious banker deaths" in just the past two weeks alone.

#20 The behavior of the U.S. stock market continues to parallel the behavior of the U.S. stock market in 1929.

Yes, things don't look good right now, but it is important to keep in mind that this is just the beginning.

This is just the leading edge of the next great financial storm.

The next two years (2014 and 2015) are going to represent a major "turning point" for the global economy. By the end of 2015, things are going to look far different than they do today.

None of the problems that caused the last financial crisis have been fixed. Global debt levels have grown by 30 percent since the last financial crisis, and the too big to fail banks in the United States are 37 percent larger than they were back then and their behavior has become even more reckless than before.

As a result, we are going to get to go through another "2008-style crisis", but I believe that this next wave is going to be even worse than the previous one.

So hold on tight and get ready. We are going to be in for quite a bumpy ride.

 

[bentom187]

Laws aren't collective opinions they are rules established by a majority and enforced on everyone within the jurisdiction of the governing body. They might be established based on collective opinions of what is good or bad, right or wrong, but the laws themselves are not opinions. They could also be described as social contracts in that whether you realize it or not when you go to a particular area with it's own unique set of laws or you choose to become apart of the community that the laws govern, you agree to be bound by those laws even if you don't agree with them or are not consciously aware of them. Since to say you don't agree with them or were unaware if not an accepted defense.

The rule of law is called fraud or mob rule. The mob consists of some 500+ people in the district of Columbia and yes those are their opinions. Social contracts are not contracts since they lack consent. Peoples existence is not their consent even if you draw imaginary lines around them. Sorry man the social contract is just a romantic term for the previously mentioned crimes which deny the existence of individual rights and reduces everything to granted privilege from the ruling mob.Yes that's the way things have been done for a long time but its always been illegitimate. It would be a evolutionary jump if we did away with it (the state) and promoted voluntary interactions as the way daily life should be conducted, I look forward to it.

When Did I Sign This 'Social Contract'?
[YOUTUBEIF]nTqEePlZiqk[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[candidly]

lol

 

[bentom187]

Got to love Lysander.

 

[HempKat]

I haven't made any such assumption.

Mental illness is rare.

There are far, far more so-called "conspiracy theorists" out there than people who are truly mentally ill.

Therefore those who accuse "conspiracy theorists" as a whole of being "mentally ill" are, statistically speaking, almost always wrong.

Sure you are because the assumption being discussed isn't whether the person's belief that conspiracy theorists are mentally ill is right or wrong but rather if they came to that conclusion because the government has said so. Most Conspiracy theorists claim to have discovered what they believe to be true because of the application of critical thinking skills and not accepting what they are told but investigating it for themselves and forming their own conclusions.

When you say someone who disagrees with you must be buying into the government hype, you're being totally dismissive of the possibility they also applied critical thinking skills, didn't just accept what they were told, investigated it themselves and drew their own conclusion. Since we are talking theories here we are talking opinions, not facts. If your conclusions were the only possible conclusion then it wouldn't be a conspiracy theory it would be a conspiracy or conspiracy fact. Also more people would be in agreement because more people then most conspiracy theorists believe, actually do think for themselves and don't just buy into what the media tells them.

What's the difference between "mentally ill" and "crazy"?

And why is a person "crazy" just because they believe something that is "obviously" wrong?

The difference between "mentally ill" and "crazy" is irrelevant because again that wasn't the point I was making. The point I was making is that just because some disagrees with a conspiracy theorist doesn't mean they believe what "the gubment, told them"

A person is not crazy just because they believe something is obviously wrong. If it's "obviously" wrong then that means everyone can and will see it is "obviously" wrong. The label of crazy usually doesn't start flying until a person sees something as obviously wrong that most everyone else sees as "obviously" right. If 99% of the people believed 9/11 was the resulted of an evil government conspiracy and only one percent believed it was the result of a terrorist attack then it would be those believing it was a terrorist that would be labeled as crazy.

It's like the old saying "If someone tells you that you have a tail like a cat you can dismiss them as being crazy but if 10 people tell you that you have a tail like a cat, you better turn around and look."

Most Americans believe a hell of a lot of things that are clearly, obviously wrong. Does that make most Americans "crazy"? Or simply misled?

Most Americans believe things are wrong because they are, our system of government was meant to be representative and yet day in and day out we see examples of how our government does not represent us. Most Americans want the economy to improve and for the government to find ways to put more Americans back to work in jobs sufficient to provide a living and pay taxes. Yet for the past 6 years our government has spent most of it's time in grid lock fighting over laws that have already been passed.

And I would say they are simply incorrect, or misinformed, and using faulty logic.

Why can't a person just be "wrong"? Why do they also have to be "crazy" or "mentally ill"?

What does it matter if a missile or a plane hit the Pentagon? Either way, it's irrelevant. The government is clearly behind 9/11. The actual means they used to perpetrate it is irrelevant. There is far, FAR more obvious holes in the government story than this irrelevant B.S. It's a red herring.



How do you determine the difference between "opinion and speculation" and "fact and evidence"? Especially in a society that is so full of lies that the entire "civilization" is built upon them? When almost every single thing that most people around you believe is literally a lie, or based upon lies, then why is it a surprise when many people are misled? Why is it a surprise that some people ("conspiracy theorists") refuse to believe the lies, and go searching for it elsewhere? Why is it a surprise when some of these people are misled into believing other lies?

There's a reason why lying was considered one of the seven deadly sins. Deceit destroys societies, slowly, insidiously.

How can you blame people for believing in aliens and lizard people and all this other nonsense, when these people are a) not particularly bright to begin with, but are smart enough to realize that b) the government and "leaders" of society are lying to them every single day?

These people go in search of truth, and it's hit or miss. They are sometimes led astray. Sometimes they get lost in the sea of lies and end up believing some nonsense. That doesn't make them "crazy" or "mentally ill." They are just lost souls in need of real leadership, and a real society that they can believe in, not one that lies to them at every turn.

I agree that just because someone believes the government fired a cruise missile at the Pentagon and then claimed it was terrorist with a jet airliner doesn't mean they are crazy. It easily could be because they were misled. What many conspiracy theorists tend to overlook is that if the main stream media can be misleading so too can the counter culture media. That humans are misleading is something intrinsic to the human experience because the human experience is limited to what the individual believes it to be. There is a woven rope bracelet that used to be a popular thing sold by locals in costal and Caribbean regions to tourists. It is often told in the sales pitch for these bracelets that is you wear one you'll never get bit by a shark, usually followed by the sales person displaying his and boasting about having worn it for years and was never once bitten. Now logically this is wrong because there is no reasonable explanation as to how wearing a rope bracelet would possibly deter a shark attack. So if the person heard that they would usually chuckle at the suggestion and maybe buy the bracelet because they felt the salesman's cleverness deserved a reward. What if someone however totally believed it just because of this one person saying so? What if they bought one because they often found themselves swimming in shark filled waters and wanted some protection? Let's say they go their their whole lives wearing this bracelet swimming around sharks and never once got bit and then retires from swimming in shark filled waters. For them the bracelet would have worked and so for them it's power would seem wholly believable. Even if in reality unbeknownst to him man people who bought these bracelets ended up getting bit but he never heard about it because nobody else ever believed in the bracelet's alleged power and therefore thought it worth mentioning. So is he crazy because he believes in this or was he misled? Lets say though that after he retired he decide to write a book about his good fortune at discovering this bracelet because he was constantly at risk of shark attack and how this bracelet allows people to survive. In doing research to find other examples though he discovers that there were in fact many bracelet wearers that did get attacked and even discovers that there is a website out there by the bracelet manufacturer that has a page instructing people that sell them to tell the shark story as a gimmick to sell them. If after that they still chose to believe that the bracelet somehow protected him then it would be fairer to say he was crazy.

Finally though, on this issue of calling someone "crazy" or "mentally ill" if they are a conspiracy theorist. I think you're making much ado about nothing. It's no more meaningful then a conspiracy theorist insisting someone is a weak minded fool brainwashed by the gubment or another form of the same thing, calling them sheeple. It's the kind of things people say in a debate, with no real qualifications to say so, just to get a dig in at the person they're arguing with. Nethier should be taken so literally as to be hurt or insulted by them because in so doing you give the person saying them exactly what they want.

 

[HempKat]

Yeah....well, I watched your video of the woman whistle blower. I am very supportive of whistle blowers, and feel that they are hero's for what they do. I believe that Snowden is a whistle blower and a hero. That being said, the information she gave in her talk was not to the level required to either confirm or deny the presence of chemtrails. It is a starting point. I forget what her job title is now, industrial something or other, but it certainly is not a profession that is based in finding answers to questions of this sort...she is involved in compliance, following the rules and such.

I forget what chemicals she mentioned were being used in these chemtrails, I think there were 2 she mentioned. Anyway, a natural question to ask, and one fairly easy to answer I would think, is, "how do these chemicals affect the human body, what conditions/diseases do they cause when ingested, and what has happened to the rate of these conditions/diseases over the years that chemtrails have been used?" Obviously, the rates of these health problems should be going up as the population is continually exposed to them. Why didn't she include such a basic and important piece of data in her talk? Not saying she did it intentionally, but it does point out that she is not the right person to be making any conclusions on this issue.

My next question regarding the chemtrail issue is, why arent' there hundreds of journalists all over such an important story? Do you think that most journalists aren't concerned about the health and well-being of themselves, their families and friends? Journalists are the people who know how to ask the right questions, know how to dig deep in dark places for answers, and the ones who make their livings doing so. Why the hell haven't reporters been all over this? And I'm talking about legit journalists, people who studied the craft at important colleges, who had to prove themselves as being one of the best in order to get admitted to colleges and universities that have strict entrance requirements. Don't send me to some sight where any joe blow with an agenda can start spewing data that is all over the map. And if you think that it's not important to have the smartest most talented people doing a job, then you aren't thinking clearly.

What! you say? The main stream media is bought and sold, and that's where all these degree holding journalists go to work. Anybody who works for the main stream media is therefore tainted, and cannot be trusted. Doesn't matter if these journalists have families and friends who would be hurt by the chemtrails....they will instead cow-tow to their corporate masters in these situations.

Pardon me for saying so...but that just sounds crazy to me.

The thing to me about the whole Chem Trail thing is, to what end? I've rarely heard anyone explaining why they're there just that they are there and the government is doing it. When I do hear them explain why it's usually to kill off the majority of the population, presumably so the rich can turn it into a paradise for themselves. Well setting aside both the short sightedness and the long range problems of that belief. Why go about such a dastardly and evil plot in such an open manner? A thing popping up in the news is the recent problems with bee colonies unexplainably dying off are being tied to common pesticides people buy and use at Home Depot and Lowe's. If the bees become extinct the effect that will have worldwide on the food chain/web will bring about human extinction within a few years. If you wanted to pull off something to wipe out the world so you can rebuild it. You would be likely to be more successful if you could get your victims to do it themselves all the while thinking they're doing something good for themselves (removing unwanted pests). Given the advances we have made in cloning and now that we have the Svalbard Global Seed Vault. It's conceivable that the one percent could conspire to wipe out mankind that way and then once the job was done they would clone some bees and plant the seed in the vault and reshape the world into what they want.

What's more likely to get noticed? Government planes forming criss cross patterns in the sky of mysterious and presumably toxic chemicals that are present for hours or normal everyday citizens and farmers using pesticides in their garden and fields?

I mean if mass killing is the endgame then the Chem Trail theory just seems like a pretty clumsy way to go about it.

 

[Stoner4Life]

I've said it before elsewhere & I'm gonna lay it on ya again.

When I check the mirror I'm lookin' to see if the part in my hair's straight, when you conspiracy theorists check the mirror it's to see if someone's comin' up behind you.


you guys are paranoid, and NOT in a carefully cautious kinda way, y'all are flat out paranoid in a 'they're all out to get me/us' kinda way.

You wake up & go to sleep wondering how the govt is lying to you and yet you're neither doing anything about it, nor can you. You take the words of complete strangers for FACT if they tell you that you're being lied to, I've NEVER heard a single one of you cast doubt on a single person you feel is on your side no matter how ridiculous their bullshit sounds.

pathetic.

"Look at the infrasonic undulations" <----- from a HAARP 'super storm' video. Ain't no such thing as infrasonic undulations but that didn't stop the narrator from trying to baffle the public w/more bullshit.......

 

[candidly]

I've said it before elsewhere & I'm gonna lay it on ya again.

When I check the mirror I'm lookin' to see if the part in my hair's straight, when you conspiracy theorists check the mirror it's to see if someone's comin' up behind you.

you guys are paranoid, and NOT in a carefully cautious kinda way, y'all are flat out paranoid in a 'they're all out to get me/us' kinda way.

They are out to get you.

You call me paranoid? I call you ignorant, and complacent. Both will get you killed before it's over with.

You wake up & go to sleep wondering how the govt is lying to you and yet you're neither doing anything about it, nor can you.

Bullshit. I'm doing something about it every day. But that doesn't matter, because what one person does in the grand scheme of things is irrelevant. We are standing on the verge of World War 3. There are concrete reasons for this. It will happen, and folks like you will be caught with your pants down....and be totally confused, saying "nobody could have seen this coming!"

You take the words of complete strangers for FACT if they tell you that you're being lied to, I've NEVER heard a single one of you cast doubt on a single person you feel is on your side no matter how ridiculous their bullshit sounds.

Then you need to start paying better attention.

"Look at the infrasonic undulations" <----- from a HAARP 'super storm' video. Ain't no such thing as infrasonic undulations but that didn't stop the narrator from trying to baffle the public w/more bullshit.......

Yeah, I saw that video....and it was bullshit.

OMG! Look at that. Did you see what I just did? I just "cast doubt on a single person I feel is on my side, because his bullshit sounded ridiculous." Amazing. Incredible. The thing you claim to have never seen, just happened right before your eyes. So what excuse will you think up next to explain it, and justify it to yourself so that you can go on continuing whatever bullshit it is you believe about who I am and what I think?

 

[bentom187]

...

A person is not crazy just because they believe something is obviously wrong. If it's "obviously" wrong then that means everyone can and will see it is "obviously" wrong.

Not so, the media warps a lot of minds but they don't make people commit an act physically. Murder is wrong but put a flag behind it ,dehumanize the target, say its for democracy or freedom and you will see this population cheer for the murder of millions or just not care and say its business as usual and theres no point in speaking out.

The label of crazy usually doesn't start flying until a person sees something as obviously wrong that most everyone else sees as "obviously" right.

Indeed.

Murder (as opposed to self defense) and slavery and theft is wrong, when its right you can call me all types of crazy, or government.

 

[HempKat]

We are well beyond crazy land. 9/11 is with out a doubt 100% staged event. If your on the fence about 9/11 then you will never understand the "Open Conspiracy". You have to understand that steel structured buildings cannot fall at near free fall speeds into their own footprint, its against the laws of nature. Having to explain this to people even though they can see the buildings collapsing with their own eyes is another subject entirely which I can go into depth about but we will keep it simple for now. Before there was controlled demolition you would need a wrecking ball to bring a building down by bashing it to pieces and use torches to cut steel beams out. With the advent of controlled demolition it was now possible for demolition experts to bring a building down safely with minimized risk to neighboring buildings. Precisely placed timed charges are detonated throughout a structure to weaken points in that structure which would cause the building to implode collapsing into its own footprint. Now that's exactly what happened on 9/11. Everyone knew it in their gut when they watched the events happening that day. We all waited for the news announcement of well placed charges inside the buildings. Months went by, then years, but still not a word about the blatantly obvious. Then they told us that fire caused the buildings to collapse. Here's a fact, WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 are the first steel structured buildings in the history of the world to collapse from fire and there hasn't been any since. Most people don't want to believe that reality, because that reality is the scariest reality there is. In order for you to understand what is going on from a fully conscious and educated perspective your must come to the conclusion that what you thought was reality is just a blind fold pulled over your eyes to keep your mind in a box.

Okay but what about this? Why is it always because the government wanted to create an excuse for war or some of the other motives that are commonly suggested? What if the whole thing with 9/11 had nothing to do with the conspiracy directly but rather exposed it. It is agreed that for a building to come done so cleanly requires certain key structural points to become weakened. What if those key structural points were built to less specifications then they're supposed to be? If those points fail because of explosives or other means the structure will still fall the same way. There is a verifiable history of companies exploiting government corruption in order to cut corners and pocket more money then to do things the right way. If that were true then if something happened that the building was supposed to be able to withstand but couldn't because of these corners being cut then it would look suspicious. What if in rationalizing to cut these corners the people involved reasoned that the safety measures in place to prevent this from happening accidentally were sufficient. Also that for anyone to do so deliberately would be so extremely unlikely that to safeguard against it was something they could probably get away with.

I'm sure when Halliburton and the other companies involved in the Deepwater Horizon disaster felt the corners it was discovered they cut, would be ones they would get away with. The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry as the old saying goes. Thing is, if that is what happen in the case of 9/11 then if one were to investigate it all the inspections and everything would be saying those buildings were safe even though they weren't because the corruption would be happening at the level of government regulating building codes. Just as the Deepwater Horizon accident happened even though the inspections for it conducted by the regulatory body governing them (The Minerals Management Service) had there safety record classified as "strong" and according to independent investigations "its record was so exemplary, according to MMS officials, that the rig was never on inspectors' informal 'watch list' for problem rigs". Wanna bet that the MMS inspectors aren't in Halliburton's back pocket? Point being if such activity and corruption can lead to major catastrophy there why is it so hard to believe it couldn't be true in the 9/11 case? If the government wanted to start major conflicts "we had to get involved in", in the Mid-east they could easily do it in a number of ways that wouldn't involved national embarrassment and disgrace and the death of 1000's of innocent, productive, tax paying citizens. For example, want to start a major conflict in almost any mid eastern country with Israel? Then just do a Black Ops mission that results in an attack on an Israeli military base and the theft of one or more nuclear weapons and make it look like whatever country you want Israel to go to war with was responsible. With many of those same countries you could also do it the same way by making it look like Israel made a major successful attack on them. Imagine if a black ops mission resulted in looking like the Israelis were trying to take out Iran's nuclear capabilities? You could do the same in Pakistan by making it look like India attacked them or in India by making it look like Pakistan attacked them. Any of those scenarios could trigger a war that the US would "have to get involved in" due to our relationships with those countries. So the idea we would attack our selves, kill innocent civilians and cripple the financial system which would hurt the ruling class the most seems quite far fetched.

Another more reasonable scenario is that the terrorist attack was even more severe then we've been allowed to know and that terrorists not only crashed the planes into the buildings but also successfully planted demolition charges in key places? That it's been covered up by government but out of embarrassment of just how incompetent they were, not as an excuse to start a war?

Another possibility while less likely is that in addition to the terrorist attack someone was attempting a major takedown of the financial world ala the plot by Tyler Durden in Fight Club. and it just happened to happen the same day as 9/11 and so became blamed on terrorism?

Yet another angle that could be a government conspiracy but different then the popular ones and in my opinion a bit more believable is that in the event of a terror or foreign attack on any of a number of key buildings throughout the country there are demolitions secretly planted to prevent sensitive things from falling into enemy hands and the conspiracy is to cover up that we do have contingencies that would kill innocent unsuspecting people under the right circumstances.

Point being that it's possible to come up with all sorts of scenarios that could be given in a believable way all because what the official version says just doesn't feel right. Doesn't mean any of them are true or that the official version is wrong. It's just a story that makes everything seem to make sense out of a senseless act.

 

[HempKat]

ok so someone tried to find an explanation to fit the facts, it doesn't negate anything i said regarding the many many once in a million occurrences that day. there is not one aspect of the official story that can not be questioned with great validity or even down right proved wrong.

In your opinion. I see a lot of holes in the theory you put forth. You, I believe said you didn't see evidence of the plane in the wreckage yet I saw it, both that day and here more recently looking on the internet thru Google. You say you don't see proof of the engines and yet I do see it, not relatively intact so as to be instantly recognizable but there none the less. Plus I see twisted pieces of wreckage, scattered about, that match the markings or have the company name stamped on them. For that crash to have been faked would mean that not only did they some how else put a hole in the building but also managed to scatter around the appropriate pieces of wreckage all during a time of day when the building is clearly visible by stalled rush hour traffic on a major 8 lane highway nearby. A big part of your theory would seem to assume that the Pentagon was built under similar standards as the WTC and so the plane crash should be more obvious by the shape of the damage as it was with the WTC. What if the reality though is that being a much shorter building and proportionally broader based and also a major strategic military target, much more so then the WTC, it is built to much different specifications so as to withstand more? Resulting in a plane crash looking more like a missile attack? I don't have the data readily available to analyze that and even if I did I don't begin to pretend I have the qualifications to accurately interpret such data, so I would need someone else to make such determinations and trust they were telling me the truth. I trust the same is true for you, or are you actually a structural engineer working for the military industrial complex and this is you blowing the whistle?

All to hide something from a pending investigation? If they're coming to look for evidence they don't have it yet, so why not just have some people put in some overtime in the shredding room and feed the result into a furnace and when they say "Where is the evidence?" respond with "What evidence?" You can't be charged of a crime without evidence. To needlessly damage the building and give the nation's headquarters of defense a black eye to hide what you can easily make vanish, evidence of what everyone knows is rampant in DC (corruption) just doesn't really sound reasonable.

 

[HempKat]

What I really want to know is this though, why do you guys keep starting these types of threads? At this point in time you're not really going to change anyone's minds. Right or wrong everyone already believes what they believe about JFK, The Moon landing, 9/11, etc. I see the same people patting each other on the back and reaffirming each others beliefs and the same people, myself included arguing the counterpoint. I don't see anyone making any concessions so why keep starting these threads, why keep doing the same things over and over again expecting different results, don't you know that's the popular definition of insanity? And you wonder why people say you're crazy?

 

[gaiusmarius]

In your opinion. I see a lot of holes in the theory you put forth. You, I believe said you didn't see evidence of the plane in the wreckage yet I saw it, both that day and here more recently looking on the internet thru Google. You say you don't see proof of the engines and yet I do see it, not relatively intact so as to be instantly recognizable but there none the less. Plus I see twisted pieces of wreckage, scattered about, that match the markings or have the company name stamped on them. For that crash to have been faked would mean that not only did they some how else put a hole in the building but also managed to scatter around the appropriate pieces of wreckage all during a time of day when the building is clearly visible by stalled rush hour traffic on a major 8 lane highway nearby. A big part of your theory would seem to assume that the Pentagon was built under similar standards as the WTC and so the plane crash should be more obvious by the shape of the damage as it was with the WTC. What if the reality though is that being a much shorter building and proportionally broader based and also a major strategic military target, much more so then the WTC, it is built to much different specifications so as to withstand more? Resulting in a plane crash looking more like a missile attack? I don't have the data readily available to analyze that and even if I did I don't begin to pretend I have the qualifications to accurately interpret such data, so I would need someone else to make such determinations and trust they were telling me the truth. I trust the same is true for you, or are you actually a structural engineer working for the military industrial complex and this is you blowing the whistle?

All to hide something from a pending investigation? If they're coming to look for evidence they don't have it yet, so why not just have some people put in some overtime in the shredding room and feed the result into a furnace and when they say "Where is the evidence?" respond with "What evidence?" You can't be charged of a crime without evidence. To needlessly damage the building and give the nation's headquarters of defense a black eye to hide what you can easily make vanish, evidence of what everyone knows is rampant in DC (corruption) just doesn't really sound reasonable.

thats a whole bunch of speculation that mostly doesnt' hold up. but like i said before, please link me to the pic you are talking about with the recognizable pieces of a 747, smashed or not, link them up for us. i'm pretty sure i know which pics you are talking about, but maybe you have found pics i never saw, so please share the pics that convince you that a 747 crashed into the side of the pentagon at ground level on the official flightpath.

as for the theory about 2 entities separately planning attacks on the same day, it's so ridiculous i don't believe you actually posted it, you know the odds of two independent groups planning and carrying out an attack on the same target on the same day.

also if there was structural problems with the building, you'd still not have seen the building falling into it's own foot print in such an even way. it should have happened gradually bit by bit with lower parts giving in as the top parts topple. also doesn't explain the pulverization of 80% of the mass of the building and contents. in fact non of your explanations fit all the facts.

again i don't pretend to know what exactly happened i just know that what we have been told happened officially is not possible for many many many reasons.

edited to add: the bit about getting rid of evidence is also so disingenuous, there are logs to sign when you go into evidence rooms and security etc. in fact the system is set up to make it impossible to destroy documents and evidence without them knowing who did it. to suggest they could just walk in to a federal evidence room or records room and destroy any files they please is such total bs that i can't believe you brought it to the table. no if you really wanted to get rid of some documents from official fed storage without getting caught, faking a terror attack sounds like plan, specially when you consider that the pentagon missile defense system was for some reason not working and all the cameras films were confiscated before anyone could see any of them, except for the 4 or 5 frames they released showing a big explosion and nothing else very definite.

why discuss it you ask? well i assume that people can be made to see reason, so i try and open their eyes, just like i always remain ready to open my eyes to things people show me. thats where we are different, i have not made up my mind beyond what i know, if someone showed me something that disproved it i'd be ready to change my mind. so no, i hope not everyone is so set in what they believe that they would close their eyes to the truth when shown it.

 

[candidly]

What I really want to know is this though, why do you guys keep starting these types of threads? At this point in time you're not really going to change anyone's minds.

Bullshit. Complete bullshit.....which is easy to see right through, if you'd just take one minute to think about it.

What kind of reaction would a thread like this gotten, on pretty much ANY web site.....5 years ago? Let alone 10 years ago?

10 years ago you'd be laughed out of the place by EVERYONE and called a lot worse names than conspiracy theorist.

Today a thread like this can be started, and like this one, find that a LOT of people are thinking the same way.

People's minds ARE changing. I have sat here and watched it happen. Others who have been alive a lot longer than me have seen the exact same thing, on a larger scale.

Right or wrong everyone already believes what they believe about JFK, The Moon landing, 9/11, etc.

Most people haven't even THOUGHT about most of this stuff.

10 years ago I had no clue about JFK, and would have laughed in someone's face and rolled my eyes if they claimed 9/11 was a U.S. government conspiracy. Just like all the other sheeple. The only difference between then and now is, I have been EDUCATED by all the countless people who keep the brush fires burning, even though people like you continually roll your eyes!

I see the same people patting each other on the back and reaffirming each others beliefs and the same people, myself included arguing the counterpoint.

Me too. And I also see other people who wouldn't have commented in years past, chiming in with their opinion. And I see people who would have laughed at "conspiracy theorists" in years past, changing their mind and coming around to our way of thinking. Let's face it: the course of history is shifting in the direction of truth. As it always does, and has.

And you wonder why people say you're crazy?

What makes you think anyone with a brain is worried about how they "look" to others who are ignorant? Especially when SO much is at stake?

 

[trichrider]

The thing to me about the whole Chem Trail thing is, to what end? I've rarely heard anyone explaining why they're there just that they are there and the government is doing it. When I do hear them explain why it's usually to kill off the majority of the population, presumably so the rich can turn it into a paradise for themselves. Well setting aside both the short sightedness and the long range problems of that belief. Why go about such a dastardly and evil plot in such an open manner? A thing popping up in the news is the recent problems with bee colonies unexplainably dying off are being tied to common pesticides people buy and use at Home Depot and Lowe's. If the bees become extinct the effect that will have worldwide on the food chain/web will bring about human extinction within a few years. If you wanted to pull off something to wipe out the world so you can rebuild it. You would be likely to be more successful if you could get your victims to do it themselves all the while thinking they're doing something good for themselves (removing unwanted pests). Given the advances we have made in cloning and now that we have the Svalbard Global Seed Vault. It's conceivable that the one percent could conspire to wipe out mankind that way and then once the job was done they would clone some bees and plant the seed in the vault and reshape the world into what they want.

What's more likely to get noticed? Government planes forming criss cross patterns in the sky of mysterious and presumably toxic chemicals that are present for hours or normal everyday citizens and farmers using pesticides in their garden and fields?

I mean if mass killing is the endgame then the Chem Trail theory just seems like a pretty clumsy way to go about it.

it isn't just killing. that would cancel their ticket...it's about spraying poisons into the air we breathe to make us ill and provide profit for their medical/pharmaceutical endeavors. enter obamacare guaranteeing everyone pays the principals. you must not have watched too closely this post:

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

I've said it before elsewhere & I'm gonna lay it on ya again.

When I check the mirror I'm lookin' to see if the part in my hair's straight, when you conspiracy theorists check the mirror it's to see if someone's comin' up behind you.


you guys are paranoid, and NOT in a carefully cautious kinda way, y'all are flat out paranoid in a 'they're all out to get me/us' kinda way.

You wake up & go to sleep wondering how the govt is lying to you and yet you're neither doing anything about it, nor can you. You take the words of complete strangers for FACT if they tell you that you're being lied to, I've NEVER heard a single one of you cast doubt on a single person you feel is on your side no matter how ridiculous their bullshit sounds.

pathetic.

"Look at the infrasonic undulations" <----- from a HAARP 'super storm' video. Ain't no such thing as infrasonic undulations but that didn't stop the narrator from trying to baffle the public w/more bullshit.......

this is just lazy eyes when looking at it this way....

Sources[edit]


A unique double bass reflex loudspeaker enclosure design intended to efficiently produce infrasonic frequencies ranging from 5 to 25 Hertz which traditional subwoofer designs are not readily capable of.


Infrasound sometimes results naturally from severe weather, surf,[6] lee waves, avalanches, earthquakes, volcanoes, bolides,[7] waterfalls, calving of icebergs, aurorae, meteors, lightning and upper-atmospheric lightning.[8] Nonlinear ocean wave interactions in ocean storms produce pervasive infrasound vibrations around 0.2 Hz, known as microbaroms.[9] According to the Infrasonics Program at the NOAA, infrasonic arrays can be used to locate avalanches in the Rocky Mountains, and to detect tornadoes on the high plains several minutes before they touch down.[10]
Infrasound also can be generated by human-made processes such as sonic booms and explosions (both chemical and nuclear), by machinery such as diesel engines and wind turbines and by specially designed mechanical transducers (industrial vibration tables) and large-scale subwoofer loudspeakers [11] such as rotary woofers. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization Preparatory Commission uses infrasound as one of its monitoring technologies, along with seismic, hydroacoustic, and atmospheric radionuclide monitoring. The largest infrasound ever recorded by the monitoring system was generated by the 2013 Chelyabinsk meteor.[12]
Whales, elephants,[13] hippopotamuses,[14] rhinoceros,[15][16] giraffes,[17] okapi,[18] and alligators are known to use infrasound to communicate over distances—up to hundreds of miles in the case of whales. In particular, the Sumatran Rhinoceros has been shown to produce sounds with frequencies as low as 3 Hz which have similarities with the song of the humpback whale.[16] The roar of the tiger contains infrasound of 18 Hz and lower,[19] and the purr of felines is reported to cover a range of 20 to 50 Hz.[20][21][22] It has also been suggested that migrating birds use naturally generated infrasound, from sources such as turbulent airflow over mountain ranges, as a navigational aid.[23] Elephants, in particular, produce infrasound waves that travel through solid ground and are sensed by other herds using their feet, although they may be separated by hundreds of kilometres.

un·du·la·tion

noun \ˌən-jə-ˈlā-shən, ˌən-dyə-, ˌən-də-\


Definition of UNDULATION
1
a : a rising and falling in waves
b : a wavelike motion to and fro in a fluid or elastic medium propagated continuously among its particles but with little or no permanent translation of the particles in the direction of the propagation : vibration

2
: the pulsation caused by the vibrating together of two tones not quite in unison

[(as in two frequencies being broadcast at slightly different times...)]

3
: a wavy appearance, outline, or form : waviness

.wcentral-link div.wcentral-link-content{ font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; padding: 0 5px 0 See undulation defined for kids » (...for you S4L)

infrasonic undulations would be the waveform of the infrasonic transmission of the HAARP facilities mentioned in the threads video by Rev Michele Hopkins(?)... again, lazy eye looking at what you want to see without any concept of physics or hydrodynamics. nice of you to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Okay but what about this? Why is it always because the government wanted to create an excuse for war or some of the other motives that are commonly suggested? What if the whole thing with 9/11 had nothing to do with the conspiracy directly but rather exposed it. It is agreed that for a building to come done so cleanly requires certain key structural points to become weakened. What if those key structural points were built to less specifications then they're supposed to be? If those points fail because of explosives or other means the structure will still fall the same way. There is a verifiable history of companies exploiting government corruption in order to cut corners and pocket more money then to do things the right way. If that were true then if something happened that the building was supposed to be able to withstand but couldn't because of these corners being cut then it would look suspicious. What if in rationalizing to cut these corners the people involved reasoned that the safety measures in place to prevent this from happening accidentally were sufficient. Also that for anyone to do so deliberately would be so extremely unlikely that to safeguard against it was something they could probably get away with.

I'm sure when Halliburton and the other companies involved in the Deepwater Horizon disaster felt the corners it was discovered they cut, would be ones they would get away with. The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry as the old saying goes. Thing is, if that is what happen in the case of 9/11 then if one were to investigate it all the inspections and everything would be saying those buildings were safe even though they weren't because the corruption would be happening at the level of government regulating building codes. Just as the Deepwater Horizon accident happened even though the inspections for it conducted by the regulatory body governing them (The Minerals Management Service) had there safety record classified as "strong" and according to independent investigations "its record was so exemplary, according to MMS officials, that the rig was never on inspectors' informal 'watch list' for problem rigs". Wanna bet that the MMS inspectors aren't in Halliburton's back pocket? Point being if such activity and corruption can lead to major catastrophy there why is it so hard to believe it couldn't be true in the 9/11 case? If the government wanted to start major conflicts "we had to get involved in", in the Mid-east they could easily do it in a number of ways that wouldn't involved national embarrassment and disgrace and the death of 1000's of innocent, productive, tax paying citizens. For example, want to start a major conflict in almost any mid eastern country with Israel? Then just do a Black Ops mission that results in an attack on an Israeli military base and the theft of one or more nuclear weapons and make it look like whatever country you want Israel to go to war with was responsible. With many of those same countries you could also do it the same way by making it look like Israel made a major successful attack on them. Imagine if a black ops mission resulted in looking like the Israelis were trying to take out Iran's nuclear capabilities? You could do the same in Pakistan by making it look like India attacked them or in India by making it look like Pakistan attacked them. Any of those scenarios could trigger a war that the US would "have to get involved in" due to our relationships with those countries. So the idea we would attack our selves, kill innocent civilians and cripple the financial system which would hurt the ruling class the most seems quite far fetched.

Another more reasonable scenario is that the terrorist attack was even more severe then we've been allowed to know and that terrorists not only crashed the planes into the buildings but also successfully planted demolition charges in key places? That it's been covered up by government but out of embarrassment of just how incompetent they were, not as an excuse to start a war?

Another possibility while less likely is that in addition to the terrorist attack someone was attempting a major takedown of the financial world ala the plot by Tyler Durden in Fight Club. and it just happened to happen the same day as 9/11 and so became blamed on terrorism?

Yet another angle that could be a government conspiracy but different then the popular ones and in my opinion a bit more believable is that in the event of a terror or foreign attack on any of a number of key buildings throughout the country there are demolitions secretly planted to prevent sensitive things from falling into enemy hands and the conspiracy is to cover up that we do have contingencies that would kill innocent unsuspecting people under the right circumstances.

Point being that it's possible to come up with all sorts of scenarios that could be given in a believable way all because what the official version says just doesn't feel right. Doesn't mean any of them are true or that the official version is wrong. It's just a story that makes everything seem to make sense out of a senseless act.

my version feels right, and it abides historical facts you must have over looked in your zeal to discredit.

In your opinion. I see a lot of holes in the theory you put forth. You, I believe said you didn't see evidence of the plane in the wreckage yet I saw it, both that day and here more recently looking on the internet thru Google. You say you don't see proof of the engines and yet I do see it, not relatively intact so as to be instantly recognizable but there none the less. Plus I see twisted pieces of wreckage, scattered about, that match the markings or have the company name stamped on them. For that crash to have been faked would mean that not only did they some how else put a hole in the building but also managed to scatter around the appropriate pieces of wreckage all during a time of day when the building is clearly visible by stalled rush hour traffic on a major 8 lane highway nearby. A big part of your theory would seem to assume that the Pentagon was built under similar standards as the WTC and so the plane crash should be more obvious by the shape of the damage as it was with the WTC. What if the reality though is that being a much shorter building and proportionally broader based and also a major strategic military target, much more so then the WTC, it is built to much different specifications so as to withstand more? Resulting in a plane crash looking more like a missile attack? I don't have the data readily available to analyze that and even if I did I don't begin to pretend I have the qualifications to accurately interpret such data, so I would need someone else to make such determinations and trust they were telling me the truth. I trust the same is true for you, or are you actually a structural engineer working for the military industrial complex and this is you blowing the whistle?

All to hide something from a pending investigation? If they're coming to look for evidence they don't have it yet, so why not just have some people put in some overtime in the shredding room and feed the result into a furnace and when they say "Where is the evidence?" respond with "What evidence?" You can't be charged of a crime without evidence. To needlessly damage the building and give the nation's headquarters of defense a black eye to hide what you can easily make vanish, evidence of what everyone knows is rampant in DC (corruption) just doesn't really sound reasonable.

please, again, bring and post your evidence supporting this outrageous misinformation. your attempt at obfuscation belies your education and exposes your biased opinion for what it is...

 

[Stoner4Life]

thats a whole bunch of speculation that mostly doesnt' hold up. but like i said before, please link me to the pic you are talking about with the recognizable pieces of a 747, smashed or not, link them up for us. i'm pretty sure i know which pics you are talking about, but maybe you have found pics i never saw, so please share the pics that convince you that a 747 crashed into the side of the pentagon at ground level on the official flightpath.

Flight 77 was a Boeing 757-223.

and instead of pics of that how about lining up all the surviving family members of the 59 innocent victims of that crash and you try convincing them that it was a missile strike and not the plane that their loved ones were on. I'd love to see that one.

and what happened to the 59 innocents? assassinated by the govt? where? how? or 59 people suddenly/randomly in fed witness protection? not.

and what about the insurance claim made by American Airlines for the loss of their plane? don't you think if this theory of a missile had any bite to it the insurance companies would be all over it to deny the claim. Or are they in on it too? And same goes for all the damage claims/wrongful death claims made.


The amount of people having to be involved in a conspiracy this HUGE would be astronomical, and not a single Snowden amongst them???

I don't believe that crap for a second.......

 

[candidly]

Flight 77 was a Boeing 757-223.

Who cares about the Pentagon plane? Forget the damn Pentagon plane. Assume it WAS a plane which crashed, and WAS piloted by hijackers. OK? Can we get past that? Now look at all the OTHER, MUCH MORE OBVIOUS flaws in the government's story, and let's have a real discussion. Building 7...explain THAT! Its collapse was reported on live TV 20 before it even happened....explain THAT! The government office that housed documentation of TRILLIONS of dollars in missing funds....was the exact target hit by the Pentagon plane. Explain that massive "coincidence!" The Navy Seals who "killed Bin Laden"....ALL of them died in a helicopter crash a couple months afterward. Explain THAT!

And we can go on, and on, and on, and on looking at really suspicious shit that goes back DECADES! And when we do that with an OPEN MIND, what we start to see is certain patterns beginning to emerge. You can latch on to one single detail and argue and debate that to the end of time, but that doesn't help you one bit in understanding the BIG picture!

Seriously, what is it about the "non conspiracy theorists" that makes you want to fight SO hard to defend lies? That makes you seemingly UNABLE to believe that the government is anything other than your buddy and friend, or at worst, a bunch of bumbling nincompoops who mean well and if they ever do anything evil, it's by accident? Why is it SO hard for you to understand and believe that there seriously evil, fucked up men pulling the strings behind our banks, government, corporations, etc who are wholly, completely in league with EVIL?

Operation Northwoods....explain THAT!