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.
Tags 9/11 conspiracies

Reply
Old 23rd May 2015, 04:50 PM   #81
Fonebone
persona non grata
 
Fonebone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 486
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
i.e. what is the single piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that 9/11 was "LIHOP" or "MIHOP" or otherwise did not transpire as said by the "official narrative"?

There's got to be something us debunkers/skeptics are missing. So have at it!
Smoking gun you say ?
Coming right up-
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...15#post7557115

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...15#post7557115
__________________
Truth, like the sun, allows itself to be obscured;
but, like the sun, only for a time __Bovee

Truth once elicited never dies -Bancroft

twoofers versus twidiots , twaitors , twusters and boil-thuckers
Fonebone 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 23rd May 2015, 05:01 PM   #82
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,401
My problem here is that there is no such thing as an open secret. By definition either something is secret or it's not. If it's a secret then relatively few people know about it, and don't discuss it on the internet, or in public with those not cleared to hear the secret.

There are things that the general public is unaware of, but that's due to laziness or lack of interest on their part. Our relationship with the Saudis is a prime example of something with a small library written by former public officials, CIA and State Department employees, and even Presidents of the United States that a painfully few Americans have bothered to bone up on. Another great example was the public in-fighting between the FBI and CIA in the late 1990s as the FBI probed the CIA for moles. This was in the papers a lot back then. At the same time there was a huge spat between the FBI and the US Ambassador to Yemen who was impeding their investigation into the Cole bombing.

All of that was in the news prior to 9-11, 2001. It was not a secret, and hence when the investigation showed that the FBI and CIA dropped their respective balls it was no surprise to anybody who'd bother to pay attention.

The only smoking guns point to Al Qaeda and that has not changed in 14 years.
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 23rd May 2015, 05:29 PM   #83
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
"Concrete core"?





Now we know the poe within you.

__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 23rd May 2015, 06:28 PM   #84
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,426
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
I'll call the blue sky a blue sky no matter who points it out. Only they keep calling the blue sky a rainstorm, no matter how much I give them the benefit of the doubt.
I haven't needed to use that aphorism recently.

ozeco41 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 23rd May 2015, 07:06 PM   #85
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
Originally Posted by 000063 View Post
Yeah, about that; why didn't the bad guys behind 9/11 just plant WMDs in Iraq?
,,or make the hijackers Iraqi and Afghani.
jaydeehess 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 23rd May 2015, 08:05 PM   #86
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,842
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post

Your gun appears to have exploded because it's barrel was filled with concrete.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 23rd May 2015, 09:42 PM   #87
Allen773
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 928
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
,,or make the hijackers Iraqi and Afghani.
Yeah, making 15 of the 19 hijackers Saudi was an oversight on Bush-Cheney's part.


"House of Bush, House of Saud." Oops.
Allen773 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 24th May 2015, 12:03 AM   #88
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,148
Originally Posted by Nick Terry View Post
Travis may be overly optimistic when he implies that conspiracy theories typically offer alternative explanations, however.
An interesting point, hinging on the definition of the word "offer". I think conspiracy theories typically offer, but do not provide, an alternative explanation, in the same way that a con artist offers the promise of future riches but the long term benefits never actually materialise.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 24th May 2015, 12:26 AM   #89
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,426
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
An interesting point, hinging on the definition of the word "offer". I think conspiracy theories typically offer, but do not provide, an alternative explanation, in the same way that a con artist offers the promise of future riches but the long term benefits never actually materialise.

Dave
Have you ever met a truther who understands the meanings of "explain", "reasoned" or "argument".

ozeco41 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 24th May 2015, 01:54 AM   #90
Jango
Graduate Poster
 
Jango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,688
Originally Posted by Nick Terry View Post
No, it's a decent enough description of the class of claims about 9/11, JFK, the moon landing, Sandy Hook, etc that are most frequently labelled 'conspiracy theories'.



It's far from perfect, but one thing it does, is distinguish between speculation immediately after events have happened, and contrarian claims made after enough evidence is in to support a widely accepted consensus about those events.

Travis may be overly optimistic when he implies that conspiracy theories typically offer alternative explanations, however.
"Decent enough"?

Decent enough is like a woman who is a 6.5 on the hotness scale. As I said, lousy standards.
Jango 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 24th May 2015, 04:00 AM   #91
Nick Terry
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,958
Originally Posted by Jango View Post
"Decent enough"?

Decent enough is like a woman who is a 6.5 on the hotness scale. As I said, lousy standards.
No, Travis does not have lousy standards when it comes to defining conspiracy theories.

He provided a very useful definition of a large category of conspiracy theories, event conspiracy theories - the proper criticism is that his definition wouldn't apply to meta-conspiracy theories, such as claims that the Illuminati have been orchestrating history from behind the scenes for centuries. An exam marker might praise Travis for his formulation but note that the definition didn't cover meta-conspiracy theories, the marker would not dismissively write 'lousy standards'.
__________________
Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard. A Critique of the Falsehoods of Mattogno, Graf and Kues.
(biggest ever skeptical debunking of conspiracy theorists; PDF available)

Everytime one asks you holocaust deniers for positive evidence you just put your finger in the ears, dance around and sing lalala - Kevin Silbstedt
Nick Terry 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 24th May 2015, 04:18 AM   #92
Jango
Graduate Poster
 
Jango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,688
Originally Posted by Nick Terry View Post
No, Travis does not have lousy standards when it comes to defining conspiracy theories.

He provided a very useful definition of a large category of conspiracy theories, event conspiracy theories - the proper criticism is that his definition wouldn't apply to meta-conspiracy theories, such as claims that the Illuminati have been orchestrating history from behind the scenes for centuries. An exam marker might praise Travis for his formulation but note that the definition didn't cover meta-conspiracy theories, the marker would not dismissively write 'lousy standards'.


Old Testament Version: "Decent enough"
New Testament Version: "Very useful"
Jango 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 24th May 2015, 05:25 AM   #93
Fonebone
persona non grata
 
Fonebone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 486
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
"Concrete core"?





Now we know the poe within you.

Here is what it boils down to DGM...
Oxford University Press...versus anonymous cucurbitas in
a forum.

Bonafides -Oxford University Press
http://www.sense.nl/gfx_content/docu...d_May_2009.pdf
[excerpt]
SENSE RANKING OF A
CADEMIC PUBLISHERS
For book publishers there is no internationally accepted system of ranking. Therefore, the SENSE
Research School has developed and approved its own ranking of scientific book publishers –
based on a list used by the research school CERES, which has been adjusted for SENSE in
close consultation with the SENSE community.
I refereed book publications:
A: Refereed book publications published by the world top of publishers
B: Refereed book publications published by the world’s semi-top of publishers
C: Refereed book publications published by other publishers
II non-refereed book publications
D: published for an academic public (professional publications)
E: mainly published for a non-academic (general) public
A-publishers (a few top-notch international publishers) – 4 credits per book chapter
Cambridge University Press
Columbia University Press
Harvard University Press
John’s Hopkins University Press
MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts
Oxford University Press
Princeton University Press
Stanford University Press
University of Chicago Press
Yale University Press




Anonymous cucurbita in a forum...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post10669396
Bonafides = ZERO

verdict...
__________________
Truth, like the sun, allows itself to be obscured;
but, like the sun, only for a time __Bovee

Truth once elicited never dies -Bancroft

twoofers versus twidiots , twaitors , twusters and boil-thuckers

Last edited by Fonebone; 24th May 2015 at 05:32 AM.
Fonebone 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 24th May 2015, 05:44 AM   #94
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,842
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
Here is what it boils down to DGM...
Oxford University Press...versus anonymous cucurbitas in
a forum.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6dc96e3f00.jpg
Bonafides -Oxford University Press
http://www.sense.nl/gfx_content/docu...d_May_2009.pdf
[excerpt]
SENSE RANKING OF A
CADEMIC PUBLISHERS
For book publishers there is no internationally accepted system of ranking. Therefore, the SENSE
Research School has developed and approved its own ranking of scientific book publishers –
based on a list used by the research school CERES, which has been adjusted for SENSE in
close consultation with the SENSE community.
I refereed book publications:
A: Refereed book publications published by the world top of publishers
B: Refereed book publications published by the world’s semi-top of publishers
C: Refereed book publications published by other publishers
II non-refereed book publications
D: published for an academic public (professional publications)
E: mainly published for a non-academic (general) public
A-publishers (a few top-notch international publishers) – 4 credits per book chapter
Cambridge University Press
Columbia University Press
Harvard University Press
John’s Hopkins University Press
MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts
Oxford University Press
Princeton University Press
Stanford University Press
University of Chicago Press
Yale University Press




Anonymous cucurbita in a forum...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post10669396
Bonafides = ZERO

verdict...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...f0db6534fb.gif
What it comes down too is you have no Idea how the buildings were actually constructed,
and the author of the book was mistaken Believing a myth, as dumb as the myth that Jhonny
Appleseed, went around planting apples because he loved, the taste of sweet apples.

Good way to prove the theory of truther brain rot, causes empty skulls with vast room for air
Storage.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 24th May 2015, 06:22 AM   #95
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
Here is what it boils down to DGM...
verdict...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...f0db6534fb.gif
Fair enough...

There are thousands of pictures of the towers during construction and after.

Pictures worth a thousand words, right?

I won't hold my breath.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 24th May 2015, 06:30 AM   #96
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arcadia, Greece
Posts: 23,822
What with concrete cores and angle-cut columns it's like we're in a time warp.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB 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 24th May 2015, 06:37 AM   #97
Nick Terry
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,958
Originally Posted by Jango View Post


Old Testament Version: "Decent enough"
New Testament Version: "Very useful"
Nope. In your cherrypicking and snipping you forgot what I actually wrote before:

Quote:
It's far from perfect, but one thing it does, is distinguish between speculation immediately after events have happened, and contrarian claims made after enough evidence is in to support a widely accepted consensus about those events.

Travis may be overly optimistic when he implies that conspiracy theories typically offer alternative explanations, however.
There are many decent enough works and statements which are also very useful, in that they provide starting points for refinement and further discussion.

Quote:
He provided a very useful definition of a large category of conspiracy theories, event conspiracy theories - the proper criticism is that his definition wouldn't apply to meta-conspiracy theories, such as claims that the Illuminati have been orchestrating history from behind the scenes for centuries. An exam marker might praise Travis for his formulation but note that the definition didn't cover meta-conspiracy theories, the marker would not dismissively write 'lousy standards'.
Clearly, you're uninterested in further sensible discussion and only want to carp, snipe and criticise unconstructively from the sidelines. Those behaviours would also, by the way, be noted in the ideal book-length treatment of conspiracy theories, because there are very, very few CTs who transcend such behaviour.
__________________
Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard. A Critique of the Falsehoods of Mattogno, Graf and Kues.
(biggest ever skeptical debunking of conspiracy theorists; PDF available)

Everytime one asks you holocaust deniers for positive evidence you just put your finger in the ears, dance around and sing lalala - Kevin Silbstedt
Nick Terry 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 24th May 2015, 06:39 AM   #98
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,842
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
What with concrete cores and angle-cut columns it's like we're in a time warp.
That is because Jonesofiles are stuck in 2001, can some one please point me to Dr. Paint
Chips impact studies that rule out the formation of causical factors, for Aluminum oxidation
Reactions in the fires please?
I seemed to have missed that Scientific article some where in the years of wasted worthless conversations.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 24th May 2015, 07:13 AM   #99
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,399
Ah...the days when we had smoking guns presented almost daily.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab 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 24th May 2015, 07:44 AM   #100
Animal
Master Poster
 
Animal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,094
Originally Posted by Jango View Post
"Decent enough"?

Decent enough is like a woman who is a 6.5 on the hotness scale. As I said, lousy standards.
6.5 to a yoooper is a 2 to the rest of the world.
Animal 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 24th May 2015, 08:33 AM   #101
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
Here is what it boils down to DGM...
Oxford University Press...versus anonymous cucurbitas in
a forum.

Anonymous cucurbita in a forum...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post10669396
Bonafides = ZERO

verdict...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...f0db6534fb.gif
..., calling forum posters dolts. Dolts got it right; Oxford University Press article got it wrong. dolts vs failed OU Press article, dolts win, placing OU Press below dolts in mental abilities. Who is the cucurbitas now...

Did you have to look up cucurbitas, to cloak dolt?
Taking a mistake from a book/article, and saying it is true, is nonsense. Simple research shows there is no concrete core. Simple research.
Quote mining a mistake, an error, for 13 years, ... the smoking gun of ... woo, verdict... failure at a skeptic's forum
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 24th May 2015 at 08:56 AM.
beachnut 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 24th May 2015, 09:03 AM   #102
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,386
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
Bonafides = ZERO
Put whatever faith you want in "bonafides." There is no secret or mystery to how the World Trade Center towers were constructed, and it was not with a reinforced concrete core. So your contest amounts to one clearly mistaken author against thousands of photographs and dozens of articles in popular magazines and trade journals of the time. It is upon that quite incontestable body of evidence that your anonymous "pumpkins" have based their statements.
JayUtah 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 24th May 2015, 11:18 AM   #103
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 19,785
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
Here is what it boils down to DGM...
Oxford University Press...versus anonymous cucurbitas in
a forum.
Wow, so what was that Oxford University author smoking when he wrote it?



Your course is clear, fonebone. Submit a request for clarification to Oxford.

Or demand a new investigation based on an outdated article.... Hmmm, tough choice.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 24th May 2015, 01:02 PM   #104
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
i.e. what is the single piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that 9/11 was "LIHOP" or "MIHOP" or otherwise did not transpire as said by the "official narrative"?

There's got to be something us debunkers/skeptics are missing. So have at it!
The single most important piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt that people in the US government deliberately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place is Defense Exhibit 939, entered into the Moussaoui trial on March 11, 2006. This one document proves that both the CIA and FBI HQ knew by July 23, 2001, that Mihdhar and Hazmi were going to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack and yet the CIA ordered their spy inside of the FBI HQ, Tom Wilshire, to effectively sabotage any and all FBI field investigations of these two al Qaeda terrorists by the FBI Cole bombing investigators.

The DOJ IG report documents that on August 22, 2001, FBI Agent Margaret Gillespie on August 22, 2001 provided information to FBI ITOS Deputy Chief, Tom Wilshire, and his assistant FBI IOS Agent Dina Corsi were inside of the US. Wilshire immediately knew these terrorists were inside of the US in order to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that would kill thousands of Americans, but in spite of this information both Corsi and Wilshire conspired to keep this horrific information secret from FBI Agent Steve Bongardt.

When Agent Steve Bongardt found out on August 28, 2001 that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US and knew immediately that they were here to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack and wanted to find them before they had time to carry out this attack, FBI Manager Tom Wilshire, FBI Agent Dina Corsi and her boss Rod Middleton ordered Bongardt to shut down his investigation even while knowing that by doing so would allow a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack to take place resulting in the murder of thousands of Americans. What is even more horrific is that when Corsi and Middleton shut down Bongardt's investigation of Midhar and Hazmi, Corsi already knew, according to the DOJ IG report, that these al Qaeda terrorists had take part in the planning of the Cole bombing and knew it was in fact a substantial Federal felony not to give this information to Bongardt and his investigation team

When this information went back to the CIA on August 22, 2001 and many people at the CIA including almost all of the CIA’s top managers also knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorists attack, they continued to allow their man at the FBI Tom Wilshire to sabotage the criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt knowing full well that this would allow this attack to take place and that thousands of Americans would be murdered in this horrific attack.

Last edited by paloalto; 24th May 2015 at 01:05 PM.
paloalto 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 24th May 2015, 01:14 PM   #105
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The single most important piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt that people in the US government deliberately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place is Defense Exhibit 939, entered into the Moussaoui trial on March 11, 2006. This one document proves that both the CIA and FBI HQ knew by July 23, 2001, that Mihdhar and Hazmi were going to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack and yet the CIA ordered their spy inside of the FBI HQ, Tom Wilshire, to effectively sabotage any and all FBI field investigations of these two al Qaeda terrorists by the FBI Cole bombing investigators.

The DOJ IG report documents that on August 22, 2001, FBI Agent Margaret Gillespie on August 22, 2001 provided information to FBI ITOS Deputy Chief, Tom Wilshire, and his assistant FBI IOS Agent Dina Corsi were inside of the US. Wilshire immediately knew these terrorists were inside of the US in order to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that would kill thousands of Americans, but in spite of this information both Corsi and Wilshire conspired to keep this horrific information secret from FBI Agent Steve Bongardt.

When Agent Steve Bongardt found out on August 28, 2001 that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US and knew immediately that they were here to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack and wanted to find them before they had time to carry out this attack, FBI Manager Tom Wilshire, FBI Agent Dina Corsi and her boss Rod Middleton ordered Bongardt to shut down his investigation even while knowing that by doing so would allow a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack to take place resulting in the murder of thousands of Americans. What is even more horrific is that when Corsi and Middleton shut down Bongardt's investigation of Midhar and Hazmi, Corsi already knew, according to the DOJ IG report, that these al Qaeda terrorists had take part in the planning of the Cole bombing and knew it was in fact a substantial Federal felony not to give this information to Bongardt and his investigation team

When this information went back to the CIA on August 22, 2001 and many people at the CIA including almost all of the CIA’s top managers also knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorists attack, they continued to allow their man at the FBI Tom Wilshire to sabotage the criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt knowing full well that this would allow this attack to take place and that thousands of Americans would be murdered in this horrific attack.
When are you going to get that hindsight eventual connected these dots?

Where is the proof they had actionable proof (and fully understood the scope of the plan) and what would that action be?

Is our best course to act swiftly and conclusively on all possible threats. This seems to be what you are advocating. Want to know how many Saudi nationals attended flight school in the US that were reported a "suspicious"?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 24th May 2015 at 01:21 PM.
DGM 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 24th May 2015, 01:59 PM   #106
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The single most important piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt that people in the US government deliberately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place. ...
Your conclusion, a smoking gun of your fantasy.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 24th May 2015 at 02:30 PM.
beachnut 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 24th May 2015, 02:03 PM   #107
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
When are you going to get that hindsight eventual connected these dots?

Where is the proof they had actionable proof (and fully understood the scope of the plan) and what would that action be?

Is our best course to act swiftly and conclusively on all possible threats. This seems to be what you are advocating. Want to know how many Saudi nationals attended flight school in the US that were reported a "suspicious"?
Please reread my post with even a modest semblance of reading comprehension. This post clearly shows it is not hind sight but information well ahead of the attacks on 9/11 that could have been used by the FBI to stop these attacks.

Where is my proof that they had actionable proof.?

I have already posted it all, again all I can add is go back and reread this post and my other posts with even a modest amount of reading comprehension. I have already provided copious proof that they had much actionable intelligence that could have been used to prevent the attacks on 9./11. They knew the names of the several of the very people who were going to take part in this attack almost three weeks before this attack took place. “FOR THE CHRIST SAKE”, how much more information did you need.

"Want to know how many Saudi nationals attended flight school in the US that were reported a "suspicious?"

No I don’t, you are just trying to obfuscate this issue that both the CIA and FBI had more than enough information that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11. Who cares how many Saudis were attending flight schools.

Both Mihdhar and Hazmi were known to be al Qaeda terrorists by the NSA, the CIA and FBI HQ connected to the east Africa Embassy attacks that had killed over 200 people including 12 Americas, and were directly connected to the planning of the Cole bombing.

In fact all the FBI HQ’s had to do was not shut down, with criminal actions, the FBI criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt, which they did even when they knew this would allow a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack that would result in the murder of thousands of Americas.
paloalto 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 24th May 2015, 02:05 PM   #108
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
One sentence proof of, and a smoking gun of fantasy. Keeps going off at random.


Yet another completely moronic post by old PISS AND VINEGER!

Last edited by paloalto; 24th May 2015 at 02:06 PM.
paloalto 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 24th May 2015, 02:10 PM   #109
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arcadia, Greece
Posts: 23,822
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Yet another completely moronic post by old PISS AND VINEGER!
Your case might be helped if you could spell.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB 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 24th May 2015, 02:12 PM   #110
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Please reread my post with even a modest semblance of reading comprehension..
I've read all your post and they are crystal clear as long as you live in a world after 9/11.

You have not shown that any of your "smoking gun" suspects had the intent to cause the events that transpired.

Show this or is your reading comprehension bordering on clairvoyant.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 24th May 2015 at 02:13 PM.
DGM 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 24th May 2015, 02:24 PM   #111
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
paloalto:

Please state your source for your data. I know it, it's your interpretation after the fact of information collected during the investigation.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't this mean the investigation was also privy to this information? Wouldn't that mean your stating information that was not hidden but, you take to mean a different thing?

Surely you don't think no one else picked up on the facts you single out?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 24th May 2015, 03:10 PM   #112
WilliamSeger
Illuminator
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,003
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The single most important piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt that people in the US government deliberately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place is Defense Exhibit 939, entered into the Moussaoui trial on March 11, 2006. This one document proves that both the CIA and FBI HQ knew by July 23, 2001, that Mihdhar and Hazmi were going to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack and yet the CIA ordered their spy inside of the FBI HQ, Tom Wilshire, to effectively sabotage any and all FBI field investigations of these two al Qaeda terrorists by the FBI Cole bombing investigators.
No, it does no such thing, and anyone tempted to believe it might can read it for themselves.

Characterizing your speculations in those terms does not make them a smoking gun. The thing that I find most disturbing about "truthers" is that they must occasionally get called up for jury duty.
WilliamSeger 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 24th May 2015, 03:26 PM   #113
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 19,785
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
No, it does no such thing, and anyone tempted to believe it might can read it for themselves.

Characterizing your speculations in those terms does not make them a smoking gun. The thing that I find most disturbing about "truthers" is that they must occasionally get called up for jury duty.
Wow, one more smoking gun looks more like a Blunt.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles

Last edited by LSSBB; 24th May 2015 at 03:27 PM.
LSSBB 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 24th May 2015, 03:30 PM   #114
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
. The thing that I find most disturbing about "truthers" is that they must occasionally get called up for jury duty.
There's very little chance of that. First, will they show up? Second, if they answer the standard questionnaire, they will be excluded before second call. If they lied well enough in the first questions, (not likely because the trip questions require thought to not be caught by them) they will not have the patience to sit this long in order to last past the counsel reviews.

The possibility of a "truth" supporter making a relevant contribution borders on impossible.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 25th May 2015, 06:10 PM   #115
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
paloalto:

Please state your source for your data. I know it, it's your interpretation after the fact of information collected during the investigation.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't this mean the investigation was also privy to this information? Wouldn't that mean your stating information that was not hidden but, you take to mean a different thing?

Surely you don't think no one else picked up on the facts you single out?
The source of my information is the following document and interviews:

The DOJ IG report on the intelligence at the FBI prior to 9/11, the Joint Inquiry Report on the attacks on 9/11, the book "Looming Towers", by Lawrence Wright, the Defense Exhibits entered into the Moussaoui trial, in particular DE 939, DE 650, DE 448, DE 682, the book State of Denial by Bob Woodward, the 9/11 Commission report, although this report was so heavily obfuscated it was almost impossible to use, the public hearings on Intelligence by the 9/11 Commission on April 13-14, 2004, the article in Harpers January 2007 by Ken Silverstein, "Meet the CIA Bagdad Chief”, Richard Blee, and numerous direct person to person interviews of FBI Agents involved in the investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi and the investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui. If you did not have all of these documents and knew every bit of information in all of these documents, you would never had had the information needed to put the entire account of 9/11 back together again.

Several other people did pick up some of the same aspects that I had found.

Lawrence Wright wrote about FBI Agent Ali Soufan and his assistant FBI Agent Steve Bongardt. This book won a Pulitzer prize. Wright is the only one that reported the request by Soufan to FBI Director Louis Freeh, in November 2000, requesting Freeh to contact the CIA and find out if the CIA had any information on Walid bin Attash, or any al Qaeda planning meeting in January, 2000 in southeast Asia. Freeh told Soufan that the CIA had none of this information. But page 181 of the 9/11 Commission report states that Freeh had been given the information by the CIA in January 2000, just 9-10 months earlier, that a important al Qaeda planning meeting was taking place in Kuala Lumpur in January 2000, and that Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were going to this meeting. The NSA had also given this information to Freeh in December 1999. Freeh had criminally sabotaged his own investigation of the Cole bombing but this information was inexplicably left out of Wrights book.

Kevin Fenton also wrote a book, "Disconnecting the Dots", that details much of the same information that I had have posted in this forum. Fenton claimed that Tenet and Black had not taken part in the criminal conspiracy at the CIA to withhold the Kuala Lumpur information from the FBI criminal investigators. But I was able to prove that it was the Yemen CIA station, the Pakistan CIA station, the CIA bin Laden unit that had criminally withheld this information from the FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, Ali Soufan and Steve Bongardt. Only Tenet and Black had the management breath that could have ordered these stations to withhold this information from the FBI Cole bombing investigators. In addition when the Kuala Lumpur photo of Walid bin Attash was positively identified by the Joint FBI/CIA source, this was done in secret, and this information was never given to the FBI Cole bombing investigators even though this proved that Mihdhar and Hazmi, who the CIA and FBI HQ knew they had been at the Kuala Lumpur meeting at the same time as Walid Bin Attash, were involved in the planning the Cole bombing. In addition in all of the CIA cables that had any mention of the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting, the identification of Walid bin Attash, and the fact that the CIA was sure after the Walid bin Attash identification that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing, were scrubbed clean of this information before these cables were sent to the FBI.

The book “The Eleventh Day”, also has much of the same information I have listed here although again the authors of the Eleventh Day said they had no information that Tenet and Black had criminally withheld information from the FBI. Again the information I had already posted proves that Tenet and Black had been directly behind the criminal actions to withhold this information.

The article in Salon, October 14, 2011, http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/insi...oubts_cia_911/, describes Richard Clarke’s information that not only had the CIA withheld information from him on Mihdhar and Hazmi, and the fact they were al Qaeda terrorists inside of the US that the CIA knew were here to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack, but the CIA also withheld this information from the FBI. The question raised by Clarke is “did the CIA withhold information from the FBI that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11”. While this article has new information about Clarke it also shows how even the insider Richard Clarke was still unaware of major aspects of what had happened prior to 9/11 that had allowed these attacks to take place. Clarks was unaware that the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi did actually go over to the FBI, but it went to Tom Wilshire, Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit, FBI IOS Agent Dina Corsi and her boss Rod Middleton. Wilshire knew by mid-May 2001, almost 4 months before 9/11, that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing, knew that Hazmi was already inside of the US and that Mihdhar had a multi-entry visa to join Hazmi in a al Qaeda terrorist attack that he and the CIA were aware was about to take place. Clarke was unaware that the FBI HQs Agent Dina Corsi was aware of this information on August 22, 2001, there weeks before 9/11 and that Rod Middleton even had the Walid bin Attash photo from Kuala Lumpur on August 30, 2001, two weeks prior to 9/11, direct photographic proof that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing. All three of these FBI managers and agents had more than enough information to have prevented the attacks on 9/11 but instead they ordered the investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt to be shut down, knowing full well that this would allow the attacks that they all had been warned about to take place. These FBI managers and the CIA senior managers all knew that their direct actions would result in the murder of thousands of Americans.
paloalto 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 25th May 2015, 06:37 PM   #116
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 593
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
No, it does no such thing, and anyone tempted to believe it might can read it for themselves.

Characterizing your speculations in those terms does not make them a smoking gun. The thing that I find most disturbing about "truthers" is that they must occasionally get called up for jury duty.
Defense Exhibits #939 is only one small aspect of the information on 9/11. This document shows that Wilshire clearly knew when Mihdhar and Hazmi were discovered inside of the US on August 22, 2001, less than one month after his July 23, 2001 email in this Defense Exhibit, back to his CIA managers, that they were here in order to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack that will kill thousands of American.

In his email back to his CIA mangers on July 5, 2001, see the DOJ IG report, Wilshire stated that the people at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting were connected to the warnings the CIA had been getting about a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US.

You have to read all of the documents I have referred to, in post #115, then aggregate them all, several thousand of pages in all, in order to fully understand what had taken place that had allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place. Without every one of these documents you would never have enough information to even begin to put the events on 9/11 back together again.
paloalto 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 25th May 2015, 07:10 PM   #117
WilliamSeger
Illuminator
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,003
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Defense Exhibits #939 is only one small aspect of the information on 9/11.
So, when you said what I quoted:

Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The single most important piece of conclusive evidence that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt that people in the US government deliberately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place is Defense Exhibit 939, entered into the Moussaoui trial on March 11, 2006. This one document proves that both the CIA and FBI HQ knew by July 23, 2001, that Mihdhar and Hazmi were going to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack and yet the CIA ordered their spy inside of the FBI HQ, Tom Wilshire, to effectively sabotage any and all FBI field investigations of these two al Qaeda terrorists by the FBI Cole bombing investigators
... you were embellishing your "smoking gun" and I need to read the rest of your embellishments to smell the smoke? When you accuse people of a crime, you need evidence, and your own repeated accusations of "criminal conspiracy" is not evidence.
WilliamSeger 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 25th May 2015, 07:49 PM   #118
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
... These FBI managers and the CIA senior managers all knew that their direct actions would result in the murder of thousands of Americans.
You keep posting an opinion, a fantasy. It appears you did not read the sources you have posted, and repeated numerous times.

Now I recall, you said this is your theory. I keep thinking you believe this is the truth. It is a theory.

Nevermind. This is not a smoking gun, it is a theory of what you think could be a smoking gun. Otherwise I could take this work, if true, team with a newspaper, and earn a Pulitzer... nearly four years ago...
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 25th May 2015 at 07:50 PM.
beachnut 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 26th May 2015, 12:05 PM   #119
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
Originally Posted by Fonebone View Post
Here is what it boils down to DGM...
Oxford University Press...versus anonymous cucurbitas in
a forum.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6dc96e3f00.jpg
Bonafides -Oxford University Press
http://www.sense.nl/gfx_content/docu...d_May_2009.pdf
[excerpt]
SENSE RANKING OF A
CADEMIC PUBLISHERS
For book publishers there is no internationally accepted system of ranking. Therefore, the SENSE
Research School has developed and approved its own ranking of scientific book publishers –
based on a list used by the research school CERES, which has been adjusted for SENSE in
close consultation with the SENSE community.
I refereed book publications:
A: Refereed book publications published by the world top of publishers
B: Refereed book publications published by the world’s semi-top of publishers
C: Refereed book publications published by other publishers
II non-refereed book publications
D: published for an academic public (professional publications)
E: mainly published for a non-academic (general) public
A-publishers (a few top-notch international publishers) – 4 credits per book chapter
Cambridge University Press
Columbia University Press
Harvard University Press
John’s Hopkins University Press
MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts
Oxford University Press
Princeton University Press
Stanford University Press
University of Chicago Press
Yale University Press




Anonymous cucurbita in a forum...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post10669396
Bonafides = ZERO

verdict...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...f0db6534fb.gif
Hmm, who to believe, Oxford press or the guys who designed and built the towers , and the construction diagrams?
Decisions, decisions.

Odd, none of them seems to have taken issue with either NIST,the ASCE, or this ABC news article that all describe to core as steel, 47 all steel columns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MY7BCXew0UI

Last edited by jaydeehess; 26th May 2015 at 12:47 PM.
jaydeehess 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 May 2015, 12:20 PM   #120
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,663
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
No, it does no such thing, and anyone tempted to believe it might can read it for themselves.

Characterizing your speculations in those terms does not make them a smoking gun. The thing that I find most disturbing about "truthers" is that they must occasionally get called up for jury duty.
I didn't see the term "horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack" used at any point at the link - I wonder where that term originated in reference to PA's smoking gun?
BStrong 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 11:17 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.