ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 28th August 2019, 08:25 PM   #1
MrFliop
Thinker
 
MrFliop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 168
Bin’s role in 9/11 (according to the Commission Report)

1996: Bin meets with fellow Afghan war veteran Khalid Sheikh Mohammed(KSM) in Tora Bora. KSM asks Bin if his organization can provide money and operatives for his “planes operation” idea. Bin refuses.

Spring 1999: KSM meets with Bin again in Khandahar and asks him the same question. This time Bin agrees. They decide on targets.

1999-2000: Bin selects the operatives from his camps. They then go meet with KSM who becomes their supervisor. Bin also gives about $500,000 to KSM for the operation.

September 6,2001: Operative Ramzi Bin Al-Shibh tells Bin the date of the attacks. He flees to the mountains.

So, in sum: selecting the targets, selecting the operatives, financing the attack.

There, I saved you from reading 400 pages of the 9/11 Commission Report!

Last edited by MrFliop; 28th August 2019 at 08:30 PM.
MrFliop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th August 2019, 02:02 AM   #2
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 3,003
Not sure I get the point of this thread.
Those of us who know what happened will be familiar with this information.
The conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, range from those who do not accept Bin Laden's role at all, to those who don't even believe he existed. These people, as we have seen repeatedly, are impervious to facts, and won't accept this information.
Does that leave anyone else?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2019, 10:14 AM   #3
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
1996: Bin meets with fellow Afghan war veteran Khalid Sheikh Mohammed(KSM) in Tora Bora. KSM asks Bin if his organization can provide money and operatives for his “planes operation” idea. Bin refuses.

Spring 1999: KSM meets with Bin again in Khandahar and asks him the same question. This time Bin agrees. They decide on targets.

1999-2000: Bin selects the operatives from his camps. They then go meet with KSM who becomes their supervisor. Bin also gives about $500,000 to KSM for the operation.

September 6,2001: Operative Ramzi Bin Al-Shibh tells Bin the date of the attacks. He flees to the mountains.

So, in sum: selecting the targets, selecting the operatives, financing the attack.

There, I saved you from reading 400 pages of the 9/11 Commission Report!
This information should be taken with a grain of salt however as most of it came while the CIA tortured Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Khalid Sheikh Muhammed.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2019, 10:37 AM   #4
Venom
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 3,174
Is there any hard evidence bin Laden financed the attacks himself?

He no doubt had influence but how much.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2019, 09:42 AM   #5
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Is there any hard evidence bin Laden financed the attacks himself?

He no doubt had influence but how much.
He "supposedly" selected the pilot hijackers, as for financing the attacks that is unknown for now.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 03:27 AM   #6
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,951
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
He "supposedly" selected the pilot hijackers, as for financing the attacks that is unknown for now.
What was the actual cost to pull of 911?... air tickets... travel and living expenses... rent?
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 06:33 AM   #7
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
According to the 9/11 Commission the cost for pulling off this operation was approximately between $400,000 and $500,000. Take that with a grain if salt however.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 11:37 AM   #8
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,107
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
According to the 9/11 Commission the cost for pulling off this operation was approximately between $400,000 and $500,000. Take that with a grain if salt however.
Why?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 12:08 PM   #9
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Why should the report be trusted when it has omitted numerous instances relating to the attacks. Not to mention numerous Saudi links to the attacks and financial transactions relating to the 9/11 suspects who's interviews are redacted from public view.

Last edited by Adam Fitzgerald; 20th October 2019 at 12:18 PM.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 04:52 PM   #10
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,999
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
Why should the report be trusted when it has omitted numerous instances relating to the attacks. Not to mention numerous Saudi links to the attacks and financial transactions relating to the 9/11 suspects who's interviews are redacted from public view.
Were redacted from public view. Now public can view them:

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/do...s-to-911/2079/

Also these documents:

https://archive.org/details/10220530...Section1718496

https://archive.org/details/StateDep...t911Commission

https://archive.org/details/CIA911Binder1/page/n13

https://archive.org/details/20040113911MFRJamieGorelick

https://archive.org/details/IntelwireSourcebooks

Most of these have been available for over a year now so if there's a smoking gun of some kind, or some information which changes the known facts of 911 nobody has found it yet.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 08:19 PM   #11
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
The 28 pages are not fully unredacted. You also have redacted memorandums of two known Saudis who financially supported Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi....those two Saudis are Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2019, 08:21 PM   #12
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist.
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,756
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
Why should the report be trusted

And there it is.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 01:44 AM   #13
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,107
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
Why should the report be trusted when it has omitted numerous instances relating to the attacks. Not to mention numerous Saudi links to the attacks and financial transactions relating to the 9/11 suspects who's interviews are redacted from public view.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 03:01 AM   #14
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,797
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
What was the actual cost to pull of 911?... air tickets... travel and living expenses... rent?

... flying lessons ...
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 03:20 AM   #15
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,951
Originally Posted by dann View Post
... flying lessons ...
and air fares and out of pocket expenses
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 04:35 AM   #16
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,805
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
Why should the report be trusted when it has omitted numerous instances relating to the attacks. Not to mention numerous Saudi links to the attacks and financial transactions relating to the 9/11 suspects who's interviews are redacted from public view.
Why should it not be trusted?
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 06:58 AM   #17
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
I just gave two examples, plus the fact you have millions of documents which arent public plus the documents the commission were told not to follow up or properly investigate other matters.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 07:36 AM   #18
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,805
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
I just gave two examples, plus the fact you have millions of documents which arent public plus the documents the commission were told not to follow up or properly investigate other matters.
Link directive from any agency/personnel that indicates your allegation. Axxmann300 has linked many of the documents you say are not in the public record, perhaps you might consider altering your stance.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 07:46 AM   #19
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Link directive from any agency/personnel that indicates your allegation. Axxmann300 has linked many of the documents you say are not in the public record, perhaps you might consider altering your stance.
1. Commission members were told not to follow any Saudi links to the 9/11 attacks. There was also a CIA cover-up in regards to not sharing pertinent data with the FBI about Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi being inside the United States and al-Mihdhar having a multi-entry visa.


2. I never said Axxman's data was not public, i said, clearly no less, the memorandums regarding Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan (two Saudis who funded al-0Mihdhar and al-Hazmi) are not public, and that the 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry are partly redacted.

What is my "stance" do you think im making? Plus i cannot post links yet it seems.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 08:20 AM   #20
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,951
In hindsight it appears that there was a significant Saudi involvement whether or not it was a Saudi gov sponsor/official one is not clear (to me). There did seem to be an effort to protect and shield the Saudis directly after the attack. .. and they should not have been... In retrospect it looks very dodgey to say the least.

I doubt the Saudi monarchy would support an attack on USA directly. They do have a perverse interest and support of a radical form of Islam and the adherents seem to want to wage holy war... and consider the West "infidels" and satan. To me that is a troubling connection.... but not a direct on nor does that make SA a co-conspirator in the attacks.

Having said that SA is a disgusting excuse for a country and a human rights abuser which should be shunned by all nations.... and it would be were it not for their oil.... because they offer absolutely nothing else to the world community.
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 10:13 AM   #21
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,805
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
1. Commission members were told not to follow any Saudi links to the 9/11 attacks. There was also a CIA cover-up in regards to not sharing pertinent data with the FBI about Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi being inside the United States and al-Mihdhar having a multi-entry visa. Yes you stated the


2. I never said Axxman's data was not public, i said, clearly no less, the memorandums regarding Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan (two Saudis who funded al-0Mihdhar and al-Hazmi) are not public, and that the 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry are partly redacted.

What is my "stance" do you think im making? Plus i cannot post links yet it seems.
I asked you for a link that indicates the instruction to not follow up on any Saudi links to the attack, not another sentence that supports your position. Provide evidence.

Yes you stated your position on the reports, but did not know whether you had time to read all of the links.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 10:30 AM   #22
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
I asked you for a link that indicates the instruction to not follow up on any Saudi links to the attack, not another sentence that supports your position. Provide evidence.

Yes you stated your position on the reports, but did not know whether you had time to read all of the links.
I cannot post links yet. I am well read regarding what Axxman posted, i am a geo-political researcher on the events of 9/11. I have a Youtube account plus a 14 month long series which gives a historical narrative for 9/11 called "The Roads to 9/11".

From an article titled "CIA AND SAUDI ARABIA CONSPIRED TO KEEP 9/11 DETAILS SECRET, NEW BOOK SAYS" (Newsweek)

""Saudi intelligence has admitted that they knew who these two guys were," Andrew Maloney, an attorney for families, told Newsweek last week. "They knew they were Al-Qaeda the day they arrived in Los Angeles. So any notion from the Saudi government saying, 'Oh, we just help out all Saudis here' is false. They knew. And the CIA knew."

"In April, Maloney subpoenaed the FBI for documents on Thumairy and Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi spy in the U.S. who was also in contact with the hijackers. The bureau has not responded, so on September 11 he plans to file "a formal motion to compel the FBI" to produce the documents. His motion follows a sworn statement by Steven Moore, the FBI agent who headed the bureau's investigation into the hijacking of the plane that flew into the Pentagon, charging the 9/11 Commission with misleading the public when it said it "had not found evidence" of Saudi assistance to Hazmi and Mihdhar."

This is from another article from (Newsweek): Titled "THE SAUDI ROLE IN SEPT. 11 AND THE HIDDEN 9/11 REPORT PAGES"

"Likewise, Philip D. Zelikow, who was executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and has read the pages, thinks they should remains secret. Now a professor of history at the University of Virginia, Zelikow compared the 28 pages to grand jury testimony and raw police interviews—full of unproven facts, rumors and innuendo. If the government did decide to make them public, he said, "hundreds, if not thousands" of additional pages of interviews would also likely need to be declassified."

Meanwhile.....the real reason much information relating to the 28 pages and other documents from the 9/11 Commission remains classified is the following:

"Both the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama have refused to declassify the pages on grounds of national security. But critics, including members of Congress who have read the pages in the tightly guarded, underground room in the Capitol where they are held, say national security has nothing to do with it. U.S. officials, they charge, are trying to hide the double game that Saudi Arabia has long played with Washington, as both a close ally and petri dish for the world's most toxic brand of Islamic extremism."

Last edited by Adam Fitzgerald; 21st October 2019 at 10:45 AM.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 10:55 AM   #23
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,688
I think the stance to doubt any claims made by authorities should be the usual first nature of skeptics.

Reasonable doubts, of course.

When billion dollar agencies failed to prevent domestic terror incidents, costing almost 3,000 lives, and when it looks like there are parties behind these attacks that at the same time rank among the nation's top economic and strategic partners, it is not entirely far-fetched to allow that perhaps some folks in government are going to be less than entirely frank and forthcoming when it comes to investigating themselves and said allies.
Reasonable doubt.

Adam, you need 15 posts to be able to link.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 11:53 AM   #24
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist.
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,756
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
When billion dollar agencies failed to prevent domestic terror incidents, costing almost 3,000 lives, and when it looks like there are parties behind these attacks that at the same time rank among the nation's top economic and strategic partners, it is not entirely far-fetched to allow that perhaps some folks in government are going to be less than entirely frank and forthcoming when it comes to investigating themselves and said allies.
Reasonable doubt.

As a lawyer, let me just say that this is not reasonable doubt. Weaving a story from loose threads can be done by anybody:

I maintain that aliens took my wallet. I believe in aliens, and I've given money and my computer's unused time to find them. And, of course, there are many eyewitnesses who can testify that they've encountered aliens. It's not entirely far-fetched to allow that perhaps aliens took my wallet.

What's missing? Evidence. A train of suppositions is not evidence. It's just ... nothing.

Also, since we're not putting 9/11 on trial, reasonable doubt is the wrong standard of proof altogether. 9/11 can't go to jail. Nobody brought charges against September 11, 2001. Instead, weighing two separate stories is done by a preponderance of the evidence. And weighing at least 50.1% probable, the generally accepted account wins.

Even if you find one piece of evidence that says that 9/11 didn't happen according to the generally accepted account, that doesn't undo anything. It's just a little weight added to your scale. And the generally accepted account still outweighs it.

Get your burdens of proof straight - not just in this area but in life in general. It'll make everything easier for everybody.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 01:40 PM   #25
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,805
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
I cannot post links yet. I am well read regarding what Axxman posted, i am a geo-political researcher on the events of 9/11. I have a Youtube account plus a 14 month long series which gives a historical narrative for 9/11 called "The Roads to 9/11".

From an article titled "CIA AND SAUDI ARABIA CONSPIRED TO KEEP 9/11 DETAILS SECRET, NEW BOOK SAYS" (Newsweek)

""Saudi intelligence has admitted that they knew who these two guys were," Andrew Maloney, an attorney for families, told Newsweek last week. "They knew they were Al-Qaeda the day they arrived in Los Angeles. So any notion from the Saudi government saying, 'Oh, we just help out all Saudis here' is false. They knew. And the CIA knew."

"In April, Maloney subpoenaed the FBI for documents on Thumairy and Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi spy in the U.S. who was also in contact with the hijackers. The bureau has not responded, so on September 11 he plans to file "a formal motion to compel the FBI" to produce the documents. His motion follows a sworn statement by Steven Moore, the FBI agent who headed the bureau's investigation into the hijacking of the plane that flew into the Pentagon, charging the 9/11 Commission with misleading the public when it said it "had not found evidence" of Saudi assistance to Hazmi and Mihdhar."

This is from another article from (Newsweek): Titled "THE SAUDI ROLE IN SEPT. 11 AND THE HIDDEN 9/11 REPORT PAGES"

"Likewise, Philip D. Zelikow, who was executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and has read the pages, thinks they should remains secret. Now a professor of history at the University of Virginia, Zelikow compared the 28 pages to grand jury testimony and raw police interviews—full of unproven facts, rumors and innuendo. If the government did decide to make them public, he said, "hundreds, if not thousands" of additional pages of interviews would also likely need to be declassified."

Meanwhile.....the real reason much information relating to the 28 pages and other documents from the 9/11 Commission remains classified is the following:

"Both the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama have refused to declassify the pages on grounds of national security. But critics, including members of Congress who have read the pages in the tightly guarded, underground room in the Capitol where they are held, say national security has nothing to do with it. U.S. officials, they charge, are trying to hide the double game that Saudi Arabia has long played with Washington, as both a close ally and petri dish for the world's most toxic brand of Islamic extremism."
You should be able to post links after 12 posts.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 01:46 PM   #26
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,805
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I think the stance to doubt any claims made by authorities should be the usual first nature of skeptics.

Reasonable doubts, of course.

When billion dollar agencies failed to prevent domestic terror incidents, costing almost 3,000 lives, and when it looks like there are parties behind these attacks that at the same time rank among the nation's top economic and strategic partners, it is not entirely far-fetched to allow that perhaps some folks in government are going to be less than entirely frank and forthcoming when it comes to investigating themselves and said allies.
Reasonable doubt.

Adam, you need 15 posts to be able to link.
I thought it was 12, but I may be mistaken.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 01:58 PM   #27
MrFliop
Thinker
 
MrFliop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 168
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
I cannot post links yet. I am well read regarding what Axxman posted, i am a geo-political researcher on the events of 9/11. I have a Youtube account plus a 14 month long series which gives a historical narrative for 9/11 called "The Roads to 9/11".
Where can I find your series? It doesn’t show up when I search it on YouTube
MrFliop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 01:58 PM   #28
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,563
You can post links before then, too.

Consider:

example.com

Slap that in a browser, and pow! Good to go. Doesn't even require deleting spaces or changing characters or anything. Just omit the leading "http(s)://" and that's all it takes.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 02:20 PM   #29
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
Where can I find your series? It doesn’t show up when I search it on YouTube
You can view it from my YouTube channel under Adam Fitzgerald, its in the playlists section entitled "Roads to 9/11 Series".

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...TrAy9g-A9aaH-4
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 03:48 PM   #30
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,514
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald
According to the 9/11 Commission the cost for pulling off this operation was approximately between $400,000 and $500,000. Take that with a grain if salt however.

Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
Why?
Because it's taking the total cost (living expenses, etc.) and applying that to the operation. It's like taking my total living expenses and saying that is the cost of me posting on ISF.

What is relevant is the marginal expense; the cost of flight training, etc. which is much less.
Redwood is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2019, 04:45 PM   #31
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,933
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald
According to the 9/11 Commission the cost for pulling off this operation was approximately between $400,000 and $500,000. Take that with a grain if salt however.



Because it's taking the total cost (living expenses, etc.) and applying that to the operation. It's like taking my total living expenses and saying that is the cost of me posting on ISF.

What is relevant is the marginal expense; the cost of flight training, etc. which is much less.
The hijackers actually lived pretty frugally; one of Atta's last acts was to wire approximately $10,000 back to Bin-al-Shibh.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:44 AM   #32
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,933
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
You can view it from my YouTube channel under Adam Fitzgerald, its in the playlists section entitled "Roads to 9/11 Series".

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...TrAy9g-A9aaH-4
You have a 15-hour video series you'd like us to critique for you?

Give us the synopsis in 20 words or less.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:49 AM   #33
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
You have a 15-hour video series you'd like us to critique for you?

Give us the synopsis in 20 words or less.
I never asked for it to be critiqued in the first place. Dont know where you got that insinuation from. Someone asked to see it, thus i provided the link.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:31 AM   #34
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,951
It's obvious now... that SA is an incubator for radical Islam... which manifests itself in anti western terrorism such as 9/11, the attack of the Cole, Khboar towers, the various attacks in France and UK.

It's hard to know what the official SA policy is about this as there are many petri dishes of terrorism in mosques around the world. I imagine that there they are advocating jihad and are looking to destroy every other religion or ideology... in what they believe is holy war - jihad.

++++

The official account of 9/11 by USG and in the media did not drill down into the root causes of terrorism probably because it would identity a clash of civilizations - Radical Islam v other Abrahamic religion and maybe others.

The response was bone headed as it was actually not an attack in a war... but terrorism which has been around for ages... asymmetrical warfare. Our DOD is not equipped to defend against it or prosecute a war to vanguish radical Islam. And on top of that it would alienate other Moslems.

So intel was charged with ferreting them out... Yet still there is no legal policy to stop a crime that hasn't taken place.... unless a case for conspiracy can be made. That's a tough one considering how these operations work.... very low tech person to person... very little traceable planning or evidence of it.

They tried everything including torture to learn about the terrorists. But every attack in the ME only grows more... and the West hasn't infiltrated. ISIS and AQ are ruthless and barbaric and intimidate people into keeping their mouths shut by lopping off heads at the drop of a hat.

And then of course the MIC wants to cash out on weapons sales... and the DOD wants to use them... but terrorists don't do war. Terrorism is a continuing threat and one we have no way of defeating. Our efforts only grow more of them. But it has become perfectly transparent the the military we have and pay dearly for has no real mission. There will be no naval battles... or tank battles... only dropping bombs from the skies and drones... Western style terrorism.

We never had this discussion... and the DOD goes on along with terrorism.
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:43 AM   #35
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,857
Originally Posted by Adam Fitzgerald View Post
I never asked for it to be critiqued in the first place. Dont know where you got that insinuation from. Someone asked to see it, thus i provided the link.
Why don't you summarize the new evidence and original theories in your videos, I suspect that will take less than 20 words.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:18 AM   #36
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
Why don't you summarize the new evidence and original theories in your videos, I suspect that will take less than 20 words.
I never intended to make an argument for anything in the first place, and if i did, to present an argument in 20 words or less would be incomplete.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:48 AM   #37
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,951
Adam why don't you summarize what you think happened and who was responsible? If the official story was botched was it an intentional cover up?
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:55 PM   #38
Adam Fitzgerald
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
Adam why don't you summarize what you think happened and who was responsible? If the official story was botched was it an intentional cover up?
The basic premise is true. 4 planes were hijacked, by Arab terrorists who crashed those planes into the WTC, Pentagon and Shanksville.

There are many other anomalies which weren't properly investigated by the FBI or the two congressional inquires. There also is a cover-up of sorts regarding Saudi individuals who assisted at least two of the hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. But to put 9/11 in its fuller context i tried to do just that with my series involving Richard Cox. I cannot put that series in 20 words or less as stated by someone else before. One must have an understanding of how Middle East Foreign Policy, Intelligence Agencies and Religious Fundamentalism work to get a more broader understanding of the complexities which are the 9/11 attacks. But we have a public which have been manipulated in general regarding 9/11 due to frauds like Christopher Bollyn, Alex Jones, Barbara Honegger, Rebekah Roth and dull, erroneous documentaries like Loose Change and In Plane Site which propagate the fantastical scenarios of CGI planes and no plane impacts. But there is much more to the events of 9/11 that went either not investigated by the authorities or ignored completely. I dont think the 9/11 Commission was intentionally covering anything up, i dont think Phillip Zelikow should have been its director either since he has a close correspondence with the State Department (an entity whch was under said investigation), i just dont think some areas of 9/11 were investigated fully.

Last edited by Adam Fitzgerald; Yesterday at 12:58 PM.
Adam Fitzgerald is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:59 PM   #39
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 43,449
To the OP; who ever referred to bin Laden as “Bin”?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:20 PM   #40
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,688
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
As a lawyer, let me just say that this is not reasonable doubt. Weaving a story from loose threads can be done by anybody:
Urr... we are not in court here. We are on a skeptics' internet forum.

Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
I maintain that aliens took my wallet. I believe in aliens, and I've given money and my computer's unused time to find them. And, of course, there are many eyewitnesses who can testify that they've encountered aliens. It's not entirely far-fetched to allow that perhaps aliens took my wallet.

What's missing? Evidence. A train of suppositions is not evidence. It's just ... nothing.
What utter nonsense!
What's missing is a-priori likelihood.
Yes, aliens exist, but of te billion+wallets that at one time went missing, zero (0) so far were later determined to have been taken by aliens. So a-priori likelihood: Zero.
On the other hand, among the tens of thousands of instances where large organisations ****** up royally, about tens of thousands were later found to exhibit some degree of CYA and lies. So a-priori likelihood: Pretty close to 100%

So when a wallet is lost, it is not reasonable to take aliens into consideration.
When several billion-dollar agencies ****** up royally, it would be insanse NOT to doubt, with perfect reason, that no CYA occurred.

Or do you disagree with every single one of these assessments?

Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Also, since we're not putting 9/11 on trial, reasonable doubt is the wrong standard of proof altogether. 9/11 can't go to jail. Nobody brought charges against September 11, 2001. Instead, weighing two separate stories is done by a preponderance of the evidence. And weighing at least 50.1% probable, the generally accepted account wins.

Even if you find one piece of evidence that says that 9/11 didn't happen according to the generally accepted account, that doesn't undo anything. It's just a little weight added to your scale. And the generally accepted account still outweighs it.

Get your burdens of proof straight - not just in this area but in life in general. It'll make everything easier for everybody.
I have not the slightest idea how any of that has anything to do with anything I said previously


For the record: As Adam already explained, he does NOT dispute the "generally accepted account" - yes, Al Qaeda operatives exploited weaknesses in the US civil and military defenses, hijacked and crashed four airliners, and thus caused all the death and destruction seen on 9/11. He does not fantasize about any MIHOP or LIHOP ********.
What he says is: Agents of political and economical allies weren't scrutinized and stopped when it appeared they were up to little good, and after the fact, arses were covered.

(I do not agree with some of his speculation, or rather see it as much as speculation as you do)



About calling Adam a "Truther":
It would depend on what your definition of a "9/11 Truther" is, wouldn't it?
My definition is essentially: Someone who is essentially, systematically and stubbornly WRONG about 9/11.

Adam is not essentially, systematically and stubbornly WRONG about 9/11. He is essentially right about 9/11, and I have seen him on a positive learning curve in the last year or so.

Thus, he is NOT a Truther by MY definition.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; Yesterday at 01:22 PM.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.