Islam: Is it inherently Evil?

[newanimal]

this interview with elite Dutch banker Ron Bernhard who , though not addressing 9/11 directly, exposes
how the world really works at the top. Which explains how such things as false flags i.e. 9/11, are not only possible, but are the m.o. of the day.

 

[Tisme]

The owner wanted to redevelop apparently:

 

[basilio]

That's interesting Tisme.

Your first post after New Animal raises the question of whether 9/11 was some sort of false flag operation was to dismiss the videos as "probably CIA supported fabrications" to dissuade other would be terrorists.

12 hours later your highlighting a clip which puts Mossad and Zionists as the brains and muscle behind 9/11 and the architects of a world wide plot to impose a New World Order. That is certainly a very stinky cat on the table.

 

[newanimal]

When investigating a crime scene, strict procedures need to be carried out. The crime scene needs to preserved to gather evidence. There are a lot of science and physics aspects to some crimes. How much more so regarding the crime of the century 9/11. Yet it was arranged to have what remained of the rubble, steel, etc. rushed off in a hurry. Why is that? The remaining steel was hurried away to China when it was not cost effective at that time. Many aspects of this crime regarding science and physics remain unanswered. But there are other important aspect to a crime to investigate as well.
Motive and Precedence. Who benefits?
Did Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria benefit?
Hardly, they got the crap bombed out of em. How many innocent men, women and children have been murdered as result? How many orphaned?
Since that door has been cracked open with above posts, the "stinky cat" as Basilio puts it, anyone want to take a stab?
Motive?
Precedence (a pattern of similar false flags historically)?
Who Benefits?

 

[SirRumpole]

Who benefits?

I'd tend to go with Bellenuit's post regarding Occam's Razor. There are so many what if's in the conspiracy case versus the pretty straightforward terrorist explanation that one has to go for the simplest explanation. If there were conspirators its highly likely that the truth would have come out somehow given that a lot of people would have had to be in on the act.

 

[basilio]

I'd tend to go with Bellenuit's post regarding Occam's Razor. There are so many what if's in the conspiracy case versus the pretty straightforward terrorist explanation that one has to go for the simplest explanation. If there were conspirators its highly likely that the truth would have come out somehow given that a lot of people would have had to be in on the act.

I think Luutzu offered an idea that has merit. Basically "leaving the back door open" to allow a terrorist attack and then take full advantage of the outcome.
But really we can hypothesise forever on what ifs. I don't believe the public has the full story on who, how why ect. re 9/11. I suppose what we do know is that after 9/11 the US started wars in Afganistan and Iraq that have destroyed nations and imposed US economic and political influence in the Middle East. It has also been the opportunity to extend US government control over its population through the Homeland Security Act and associated measures.

 

[newanimal]

"I'd tend to go with Bellenuit's post regarding Occam's Razor"

Occams razor does not apply here. Occams razor is a 'problem solving principle'.
This is not "problem solving". This is "CRIME solving"
And a pretty big one at that, where 3000 people were murdered. And you'd better be damn sure you get the CORRECT answer, not the 'simplest' most convenient answer, leave no stone unturned, before you decide to go murder hundreds of thousands more innocent people in a far away land.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think Luutzu offered an idea that has merit. Basically "leaving the back door open" to allow a terrorist attack and then take full advantage of the outcome.

Yes that is more plausible but almost impossible to prove unless someone fesses up.

However, the First Gulf war in defence of Kuwait may well have been the seed for 911, not that I don't think it was unwarranted, but it was seen an intrusion by the West into Middle East affairs and therefore created a lot of angst in certain people.

Nothing ever happens without consequences.

 

[SirRumpole]

Occams razor does not apply here. Occams razor is a 'problem solving principle'.

No, the problem is whether it was a conspiracy or a terrorist attack. Occam's Razor holds.

 

[newanimal]

No, the problem is whether it was a conspiracy or a terrorist attack. Occam's Razor holds.

Obviously it was a conspiracy, the question is who did the conspiring.
This took a great deal of organization and planning ahead of time to say the least. This was no random suicide bombing.

 

[newanimal]

So... "Occams razor" would be a conspirators best friend. Since the 'patsy' or 'patsies' the conspirators have set up would simplest and unfettered conclusion to arrive to. Why consider all those other anomalies and discrepancies. It just complicates thing too much.

 

[basilio]

"I'd tend to go with Bellenuit's post regarding Occam's Razor"

Occams razor does not apply here. Occams razor is a 'problem solving principle'.
This is not "problem solving". This is "CRIME solving"
And a pretty big one at that, where 3000 people were murdered. And you'd better be damn sure you get the CORRECT answer, not the 'simplest' most convenient answer, leave no stone unturned, before you decide to go murder hundreds of thousands more innocent people in a far away land.

Good points here. I think the principle of making sure one gets the correct answer vs the simplest, most convienient one is telling. I'm not convinced this was the case in 9/11.

There are plenty of examples where political or social expediency means that people are fitted up for crimes. In many cases there is often just the need to be seen as finding a perp. And almost anyone will do if one can make the charge stick and not get blowback.

For what it's worth there is a 9/11 Myths Wiki that attempts to dissect many of the claims made around the incident.

The web is full of sites covering various conspiracy theories. Many seem well-researched, and appear to have plenty of detailed documentation to prove their claims. But are they really true?

We don’t know, but one good way to start is by checking a few claims for yourself. We tried that with a number of 9/11 sites, with surprising results. Many of the “facts” we read were distorted, or simply wrong. Quotes were routinely taken out of context. Relevant information was often ignored. And much of this could be discovered with a minimum of online research.

Whatever you believe about 9/11, the spreading of false claims helps no-one, and we’d like to play a small part in revealing some of them. We’re not about debunking entire conspiracies, then, but will use this site to zoom in on what we think are the more dubious stories, revealing the misquotes, the distortions, the inaccuracies that are so common online.

But does this make us an authority? No. If we’ve an overall message here, it’s check things for yourself. Don’t trust a site just because it’s telling you what you want to believe. Don’t believe us without evaluating our arguments and checking the references we provide, either (we’re as likely to make mistakes as anyone else). Look into the claims yourself, discover both sides of the argument, and make your own mind up. The truth deserves nothing less.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

[Tisme]

That's interesting Tisme.

Your first post after New Animal raises the question of whether 9/11 was some sort of false flag operation was to dismiss the videos as "probably CIA supported fabrications" to dissuade other would be terrorists.

12 hours later your highlighting a clip which puts Mossad and Zionists as the brains and muscle behind 9/11 and the architects of a world wide plot to impose a New World Order. That is certainly a very stinky cat on the table.

Yes I am happy to present contrary views to my own, if only to highlight the stupidity of trying to make hindsight science out of serendipity.

 

[bellenuit]

One can only despair when dealing with the conspiracy theorists. Huge doubts are cast on the possibility of certain actions having occurred (a partially trained pilot flying into a tower, planes going at certain speeds, etc. etc.), when rudimentary research shows that those are entirely possible and not even remotely out of the ordinary. On the other hand credence is given to the most insane alternative possibilities such as the planes were holographs and the tower explosions synchronised with the holograph. Just looking at the latter. Watch any video of controlled demolitions and you will see just a flash at the source of each charge. You do not see a huge burst of flame engulfing several floors of the building. What you saw in Rumpole's video was about 7,000 gallons of aviation fuel exploding (assuming the 767-200 was just under half full). Look at videos of fuel tankers exploding and that is exactly what those explosions look like.

So if the plane sightings were just holographs, how did they get about 7,000 gallons of fuel (aviation or other explosive types) to about the 80th floor of the South Tower. Did 7 people each make 1,000 trips carrying a gallon can of fuel each to the 80th floor? The capacity of a fuel tanker is about 8,000 gallons. So was there a fuel tanker in the basement or on the street below with a constant stream of 'plotters' loading up gasoline cans and bringing them to the 80th floor? And presumably they didn't just pour it on the ground of the 80th floor as that would be obvious to everyone and would simply seep down through the building. So they would have left them in the gasoline cans so that when they had finished their task there were 7,000 full gasoline cans in various parts of 80th floor. And all this was done in a building with extremely high security (remember the Twin Towers had been attacked previously) and being a financial centre with traders working on all world markets would have plenty of people in the building at all times.

This is the type of nonsense that the conspiracy theorists come up with to justify their theories and it seems many people just gullibly swallow their versions without a shred of skepticism, while at the same time nod their heads in agreement with suggestions that partly trained pilots couldn't fly a plane into a building protruding 70 or more floors above the adjacent south Manhattan skyline in perfect weather conditions. Remember the terrorists didn't have to take off as that was already done by the pilots, they just needed to guide the plane once hijacked and they had ample training for that. The training schools in Florida confirmed that they seemed only interested in learning the techniques of flying the plane once airborne, not in take-off or landing procedures.

This is only one of their nonsense concoctions. Everyone of their alternative theories has as much holes in them as the holograph theory above.

I certainly don't intend to get further into this debate as I know the types of minds I am dealing. They live in a different reality and are beyond persuasion. There are the type of people that Alex Jones feeds with his conspiracies and they just lap them up.

 

[luutzu]

I think Luutzu offered an idea that has merit. Basically "leaving the back door open" to allow a terrorist attack and then take full advantage of the outcome.
But really we can hypothesise forever on what ifs. I don't believe the public has the full story on who, how why ect. re 9/11. I suppose what we do know is that after 9/11 the US started wars in Afganistan and Iraq that have destroyed nations and imposed US economic and political influence in the Middle East. It has also been the opportunity to extend US government control over its population through the Homeland Security Act and associated measures.

Was watching a Howard Zinn's lecture a few days ago on nationalism, patriotism, national security and the need to study history etc.

He was referring to the points you raised there. That government lies, do not trust its people, are afraid of them and in carrying out "the national interest" i.e. war all over the place... without lying to the people or making them afraid, the people just wouldn't permit it.

Hence the need to study history so that we the people don't get suckered, let our fear be manipulated so that our treasuries are spent on weapons programs, on wars that destroy other people and their country.

Quite an amazing man that Howard Zinn.

There's an example he gave about Reagan scaring the American people into war with South America. That the American military have to stop the Nicaraguan militias or else they would march to Texas in a day.

Zinn joked that... Texas? Why the heck would the Nicaraguan want to go to Texas? And then what? Take a bus to Washington?

How we're taught to fear Islam and Muslims. Not so much fear terrorism because that's real enough. But be afraid or suspicious of any Muslim.

 

[newanimal]

Yes FEAR and TERROR is a very effective tool of manipulating the masses into supporting "preemptive" war agenda. Remember Bush jrs' "MUSHROOM CLOUD!!"? "Weapons of Mass Destruction" this list goes on. And so do false flags of lessor scale than 9/11. But they needed a big one to get us on board to pursue their ambitious agenda laid out in the document the neocons produced in 1992:

https://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_010603_pnac.html

BTW, PNAC is a document... their document... not a "theory"

 

[newanimal]

And as Ronald Bernard, the Dutch banker who worked his way to the top of the financial elite circles, discovered, manipulating populations perceptions and emotions is very easy to do. Just consider some of the closed minded responses in this thread. Did anyone actually view and listen through that clip? How about Hollywood insider filmaker Aaron Russo who met with one of the Rockefellers eleven months before 9/11? Just a few "nut cases" or CIA agents I suppose. Dismiss it all out of hand with out any further investigation. Too uncomfortable to deal with the 'cognitive dissonance' that arises when something challenges the 'world view' one has become accustomed to believe in for so long.
I'm not necessarily a fan of Alex Jones for various reasons, but much of his info is spot on and simply fact. If a guy in China tells me the sky is blue, or a guy in France the same thing, it doesn't matter from where or from whom the info came. The sky is blue.

"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance" --Albert Einstein

 

[newanimal]

and what does a former head of state of Italy know... surely another "nut job".
and what the hell is Project Gladio? huh??


9/11: Ex. Italian President – Mossad And CIA Did 9/11 !

Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga

• “The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.”
  Major Pierre-Henri Bunel – Al Qaeda, The Database
  –
• 9/11 as an inside job. It was planned by the Illuminist shadow government and executed by CIA and Mossad ! The governments of the world know this but play along. They play along because if they don’t, Al CIAda will launch terror strikes against their countries. And American forces will be at their door steps to ‘liberate them from terrorists’! With the full control of the western MSM, the Illuminists wield the enormous powers of brain washing! And who can stand against the military might of the sole super power?
  –
  Italy Ex-President – CIA And Mossad Ran 9-11
  By the Staff of American Free Press
  Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga, who revealed the existence of Operation Gladio, has told Italy’s oldest and most widely read newspaper that the 9-11 terrorist attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad, and that this was common knowledge among global intelligence agencies.
  –
  In what translates awkwardly into English, Cossiga told the newspaper Corriere della Sera:”All the [intelligence services] of America and Europe know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the Mossad, with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part in Iraq [and] Afghanistan.”
  –
  Cossiga was elected president of the Italian Senate in July 1983 before winning a landslide election to become president of the country in 1985, and he remained until 1992. Cossiga’s tendency to be outspoken upset the Italian political establishment, and he was forced to resign after revealing the existence of, and his part in setting up, Operation Gladio. This was a rogue intelligence network under NATO auspices that carried out bombings across Europe in the 1960s, 1970s and ’80s.
  –
  Gladio’s specialty was to carry out what they termed “false flag” operations-terror attacks that were blamed on their domestic and geopolitical opposition. In March 2001, Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony, “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”
  –
  Cossiga first expressed his doubts about 9-11 in 2001, and is quoted by 9-11 researcher Webster Tarpley saying “The mastermind of the attack must have been a sophisticated mind, provided with ample means not only to recruit fanatic kamikazes, but also highly specialized personnel. I add one thing: it could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and flight security personnel.”
  –
  Coming from a widely respected former head of state, Cossiga’s assertion that the 9-11 attacks were an inside job and that this is common knowledge among global intelligence agencies is illuminating. It is one more eye-opening confirmation that has not been mentioned by America’s propaganda machine in print or on TV. Nevertheless, because of his experience and status in the world, Cossiga cannot be discounted as a crackpot.
  –

 

[SirRumpole]

Nevertheless, because of his experience and status in the world, Cossiga cannot be discounted as a crackpot.

Cossiga suffered from bi-polar disorder and depression, so his statements should be taken with a few grains of salt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Cossiga

 

[basilio]

10 Nefarious Conspiracies Proven True
FlameHorse May 2, 2013


Share5K
Stumble221K
Tweet
+164
Share1
Shares 226K
Conspiracy theorists believe in a lot of crackpot ideas and deserve their reputation as an amusing distraction, but once in awhile, they get one right, and just one is all it would have ever taken to keep the rest of the theories going forever. Below are ten American conspiracies that are no longer theories, but proven true, no matter how absurdly unbelievable you may find them.


2
Domestic Terrorism

Theory: The U. S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Plan to Terrorize the U. S. Populace

The Joint Chiefs are the 5 generals and admirals in charge of the 5 branches of the U. S military. In 1962, those men were George Decker (Army), David Shoup (Marines), Georg Anderson, Jr. (Navy), Curtis LeMay (Air Force), and Edwin Roland (Coast Guard), along with a few others, all chaired by Lyman Lemnitzer (Army). The entire board of the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed, drafted, and agreed on a plan to concoct a casus belli for war against Communist Cuba, under Fidel Castro. Their collective motive was to reduce the constant threat of Communist encroachment into the Western Hemisphere, per the Monroe Doctrine.

This plan was named Operation Northwoods, and entailed the most impossibly indifferent cruelty ever envisioned by a government against its own people. In order to sway public sentiment in favor of the war, the Joint Chiefs planned to bomb high pedestrian-traffic areas in major American cities, including Miami, New York, Washington, D. C., and possibly Chicago and Los Angeles; to frame U. S. citizens for these bombings; to shoot innocent, unarmed civilians on the streets in full view of hundreds of witnesses; to napalm military and merchant vessels in port, while people were aboard; to sink vessels carrying Cuban refugees bound for Florida; to hijack planes for ransom.

Not only did every single member of the Joint Chiefs sign his approval of this plan, they then sent it to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara for his approval, and then to President Kennedy. McNamara claimed years later never to have seen it, but that he would have rejected it. Kennedy, however, did receive it, and promptly called a meeting of the Joint Chiefs, in which he threatened, with severe profanity, to court martial and incarcerate every one of them. The President cannot actually do this, but can order the Congress and military branches to do so, and in these circumstances, they most certainly would have. But Kennedy decided that it would cause irreparable disrespect around the world for the U. S. military. He did remove Lemnitzer from his position as Chairman and assign him as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, not much of a demotion.

Theorists claim that the military may have had a hand in Kennedy’s assassination because of his blistering rebuke of the Joint Chiefs. This, however, remains unproven.

http://listverse.com/2013/05/02/10-nefarious-conspiracies-proven-true/