Paid Members DJ Kris Posted September 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 12, 2011 Out of interest, is there anyone out there who accepts the official 9/11 story but believes that the JFK assassination was an inside job? I accept the official 9/11 story, however I find something out of place with JFK. I watched a documentary a little while ago, which I believe showed new footage and it appeared to show 2 men in suits running away from the grassy knoll area. I also always found something not quite right with Lee Harvey Oswald being the killer. I'll be honest I can't remember what my main issue is with him, it's been a while since I properly looked at it, but I certainly find the fact he was bumped off a little convinient. Â If any one knows of a good documentary on the JFK assisination, I'd be very interested in watching it and I suppose since I'm in the mood I'll give some 9/11 docs a watch. Â I think that people on both sides of the 9/11 fence are guilty of that. Look at how many people openly admit that they accept the official story of events without considering any form of independent research. But why would they not accept it? This is where I've always taken issue with conspiracy theorists. I worry for the sanity of anyone who goes through life assuming anything and everything is a lie. I like to think someone is being honest unless I have a reason to disbelieve what they are telling me. Many people won't question the 9/11 official story because they have no reason to do some. Why question something that makes so much more sense than any other theory? Â How can you pretend to crash a plane into the Pentagon when surely there would be so many people about to say it didn't happen? How can you very quickly make it look like there was a plane crash there without anyone noticing? Â Didn't Al qaeda take responsibility anyway? Â To answer your first question, yes absolutely I can. Definitely. But I also believe it would be easier for an internal U.S. agency to perpetrate the atrocities of 9/11 than an external enemy of the Americans. I accept that that isn't a popular belief around these parts. But how do you think it would be easier? In what way? See the way I look at it, an internal operation such as this would involve more people and a far greater level of secrecy that an external attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Surf Digby Posted September 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 12, 2011 http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm  Here you go. Pretty much everything you ever wanted to know about the JFK assasination. I'm pretty sure that site has a link to a video of a conspiracy theorist demonstrating how Oswald couldn't have been the gunman, and accidently proving that it was perfectly feasable afterall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 As far as 9/11 goes I suppose the most believable (not saying I do) conspiracy theory is the US government had a tip off it was going to happen but did nothing to stop it. Again not saying I believe that but I wouldn't be very shocked if it ever officially came out they did know.  Wasn't there also conspiracy theories that the US government knew about Pearl Harbor in advance but did nothing as it was the best way to get the US citizens behind them getting into the war I'd say that this is probably the most believable "conspiracy theory" out there on the 9/11 subject.  It would make sense, especially if the US were looking to get rid of Saddam, to go down that road in order to gain support for such an action. The truth is, weapons of mass destruction were touted as the reasons for invading Iraq and removing Saddam, yet nothing was ever said when nothing was found.  They basically went into Iraq, removed Saddam and killed his sons with no acceptable reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrorshow Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 There's yet to be shown any evidence that not every truther is a loon or that any people at all credibly believe the inside job/evil global elite stories. Â In your opinion! By your definition anyone who questions the official 9/11 story instantly loses any credibility they may have had, regardless of their maturity, sincerity, background or education. You aren't willing to listen to, tolerate or consider for even a single moment a shred of the evidence that exists that contradicts or questions aspects of the offical 9/11 story because anyone who asks such questions must by your definition be a nut. Â In all of this "independent research" by supposedly credible scientists pointing to internal conspiracy, is any of it actually verified by the scientific method and peer review? Â The best way I can answer that is by saying that experienced, credible professionals that number in their thousands; who are experts and specialists in such fields as engineering and architecture have conducted research and concluded that several aspects of the offical 9/11 story are spurious and that the manner in which the buildings collapsed can't have been caused by the factors reported in the offical 9/11 story. It should also be noted that even the official reports have been unable to explain some of the aspects of the building's collapses, describing such things as the corrosion of steel beams as very unusual events with no clear explanation for the source of the corrosion. Â Or is it just a load of Bad Science shite they're peddling because it gets them money and/or attention from nutters? Â I think it's fair to argue that any professional who adheres to the belief that the offical 9/11 story isn't all it's cracked up to be is actually risking the loss of far more than they might potentially gain. People have put their careers and reputations on the line to pursue what they believe in, despite ridicule and derision from many who won't even spend five minutes listening to what they have to say. Â Nobody's arguing this, though, are they? Â I'm glad that we can agree that governments on occasion lie to those who have elected them, those who they are meant to serve and deliberately obfuscate important facts. That's a good enough reason imo to question the events of 9/11, particularly as we've seen how the U.S. government and her allies have used 9/11 to their significant advantage over the last decade. Â Â If they were that powerful, why couldn't they fly a plane into building 7 or fake the WMDs in Iraq as well? Â They didn't need WTC 7 to be hit by a plane. Until now they've got away with it going down as a result of fire as per the offical FEMA and NIST reports. How many examples can you find of steel-frame high-rise buildings that have been ravaged by severe fires collapsing as a result of said fires? As for faking WMD's in Iraq, they've to date got away with not having had to plant any evidence to justify the invasion. Most people don't care and many of those who do are labelled loons by a majority of people. That's where a lot of their power lies. In our apathy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrorshow Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The main thing of the JFK assassination is that as far as conspiracy theories go it's doable. 1 guy, 1 gun, 1 victim. When you look at the scale of something of 9/11 something like that is far far more complex it's almost unthinkable. Â So you're saying that the problem with 9/11 being an inside job is purely logistical in nature and that you're potentially prepared to believe that if someone had enough to gain from killing thousands of innocent people they'd be content to do it as a calculated gamble if they were absolutely convinced that they could get away with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendal mint cake Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Anyone watch the 3 hour live special on controversial tv last night? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrorshow Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Anyone watch the 3 hour live special on controversial tv last night? Â IIRC, Duane said a couple of days ago that he intended to watch it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big mickey Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So you're saying that the problem with 9/11 being an inside job is purely logistical in nature and that you're potentially prepared to believe that if someone had enough to gain from killing thousands of innocent people they'd be content to do it as a calculated gamble if they were absolutely convinced that they could get away with it? Â Well our governments have sent us into war and ended & ruined many lives through it, so it's safe to say they don't mind gambling with people's lives. However yes, I think something on the scale of 9/11 was far too big to pull off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendal mint cake Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I had 2 of my texts shown on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted September 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 12, 2011 The best way I can answer that is by saying that experienced, credible professionals that number in their thousands; who are experts and specialists in such fields as engineering and architecture have conducted research and concluded that several aspects of the offical 9/11 story are spurious and that the manner in which the buildings collapsed can't have been caused by the factors reported in the offical 9/11 story. It should also be noted that even the official reports have been unable to explain some of the aspects of the building's collapses, describing such things as the corrosion of steel beams as very unusual events with no clear explanation for the source of the corrosion. Â Â Examples please bud. So I can answer the specific points as the steel beams stuff that I have read in the past has never mentioned corrosion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrorshow Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think something on the scale of 9/11 was far too big to pull off. Â Just to clarify, are you saying that you believe the actual physical events of 9/11 would be too big as an inside job to pull off, or just a subsequent cover up of said events? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrorshow Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I had 2 of my texts shown on it. Â Care to elaborate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big mickey Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Just to clarify, are you saying that you believe the actual physical events of 9/11 would be too big as an inside job to pull off, or just a subsequent cover up of said events? Both really, the man power, time and covert logistics of doing it and doing it without detection before & after the fact seems impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrorshow Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Examples please bud. So I can answer the specific points as the steel beams stuff that I have read in the past has never mentioned corrosion.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_t...rformance_study  http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted September 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 12, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_t...rformance_study http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf   http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...de-center#steel   Done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.