Unanswered 9/11 questions

visual said:

Looked up Disingenous,which I take means false.
Function: adjective
: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness : CALCULATING

Because I know you love dictionaries,and will probably quibble the meaning I attributed to the word,heres the proper usage.

USAGE NOTE The meaning of disingenuous has been shifting about lately, as if people were unsure of its proper meaning. Generally, it means “insincere” and often seems to be a synonym of cynical or calculating. Not surprisingly, the word is used often in political contexts, as in It is both insensitive and disingenuous for the White House to describe its aid package and the proposal to eliminate the federal payment as “tough love.” This use of the word is accepted by 94 percent of the Usage Panel. Most Panelists also accept the extended meaning relating to less reproachable behavior. Fully 88 percent accept disingenuous with the meaning “playfully insincere, faux-naïf,” as in the example “I don't have a clue about late Beethoven!” he said. The remark seemed disingenuous, coming from one of the world's foremost concert pianists. Sometimes disingenuous is used as a synonym for naive, as if the dis– prefix functioned as an intensive (as it does in certain words like disannul) rather than as a negative element. This usage does not find much admiration among Panelists, however. Seventy-five percent do not accept it in the phrase a disingenuous tourist who falls prey to stereotypical con artists.

Click to expand...

Yes I have fallen for this shifting meaning.

My bad. Thank you for pointing it out.

Yet clearly what you claim isn`t true.
You can question Israel actions,all you like.But Lebanon is not bombed from top to bottom or left to right.

Click to expand...

Yes it was. It wasn't just the south that was bombed. Everywhere was bombed.

visual said:

Wayne,
re-read your comment and tell me you have`nt made a personal attack,
from what I gather I`m incapable,illogical,and unable to sustain an argument therefore quick to anger,presumably because of all of the above.
You withdraw first.
And thanks Rub,as he said ,I`m also disingenous.
Not personal!
You have run this argument as though everything you believe is fact,wheres I`ve been reading both sides of the story ,and making my judgement accordingly.

Click to expand...

OK I'm big enough to cop the ad hominem criticism.

But if you look carefully. Most of my posts are questions, rather than statement of fact. Whereas in fact, it is you who has been caught using erroneous information and stating it as fact (the ambulance)

My point about 911 remains a series of questions that require answers. Nowhere have I stated a definitive view of who is responsible or precisly what happened. There is way too much misinformation about.

I strongly hold that the official version is demostrabley a fabrication, or a massive cover up. I want answers and so to a lot of people.

Re Lebanon: I have consistently said there are no white hats. I cannot be more balanced than that. My point has always been that Israel is cut from the same cloth as Hezbollah. Both are terrorists. The fact that one is now a recognised state does not justify terrorism even if our sycophantic politicians have been instructed to believe so.

Sure be critical of Lebanon and Hezbollah. But by any standard of fairness and decency, we must apply the same standards to Israel.

That is my point.

Wayne,you are not satisfied with the findings on 9/11 because you don`t trust America,you have made this claim before,yes?

The abulance is a hoax ,a missile hits an ambulance yet it`s not blown to smithereens,how come whole buildings are reduced to ruin with supposedly the same missiles?

Rafa hiszbollah has been caught out many times,in one of my links they are clearly shown shopping for photogenic corpses so they can shock us all into thinking that they are the victims.

That I read at least two journalists have had to resign thanks to the bloggers who have been able to disprove their stories.

Journalists who write the stories that you are relying on are symphatetic to hizbollah,of course they are sticking to their stories,however if you read the original story with the confirmation ,details important details are changed.

At the end of the day hizbollah are terorrists, Israel isn`t ,regardless of how much some people might dislike it`s existence.

I am trying to balance these claims with stories available to all,sure theres two sides to every story,but I don`t believe that America would bomb her own people and I don`t believe that parents would choose to keep their children in a war zone,unless they are prepared to sacrifice them,or unless they are forced to keep them there.

If you truly want to get both sides you can read the same stuff I read,why believe only what you want to believe, by the way I haven`t had to google these links I have read them in major Australian newspapers,again availble to all.

Reading the same story from different perspectives helps me to decipher what eventually makes sense.And thats why I find unwavering points of view debatable.

visual said:

Wayne,you are not satisfied with the findings on 9/11 because you don`t trust America,you have made this claim before,yes?

Click to expand...

I am not satisfied with the 911 findings because they do not logically stack up. I do not trust any government. Governments have consistently demonstrated their capacity to lie, from statistical numbers, children overboard, election promises, implementation of GST etc etc etc etc

visual said:

The abulance is a hoax ,a missile hits an ambulance yet it`s not blown to smithereens,how come whole buildings are reduced to ruin with supposedly the same missiles?

Rafa hiszbollah has been caught out many times,in one of my links they are clearly shown shopping for photogenic corpses so they can shock us all into thinking that they are the victims.

That I read at least two journalists have had to resign thanks to the bloggers who have been able to disprove their stories.

Click to expand...

I don't know the full details of this incident so am not qualified to comment. It is irellevant however, because all sides indulge in propaganda. Hezbollah is no exception, Israel is no exception. It is one incident amongst a million.

visual said:

Journalists who write the stories that you are relying on are symphatetic to hizbollah,of course they are sticking to their stories,however if you read the original story with the confirmation ,details important details are changed.

Click to expand...

A stunning conclusion. If you recall, I posted websites sympathetic to both sides. www.aljazeera.com and www.debka.com I read both viewpoints, I don't rely on one viewpoint at all. I will thank you not to reach conclusions for which you have no evidence/

visual said:

At the end of the day hizbollah are terorrists, Israel isn`t ,regardless of how much some people might dislike it`s existence.

Click to expand...

I profoundly disagree that Israel is not a terrorist state. Israel was founded upon terrorism. Begin even proudley embraced terrorism and claimed to be the original terrorist. Do your history.

visual said:

I am trying to balance these claims with stories available to all,sure theres two sides to every story,but I don`t believe that America would bomb her own people and I don`t believe that parents would choose to keep their children in a war zone,unless they are prepared to sacrifice them,or unless they are forced to keep them there.

Click to expand...

Is this a belief based upon ALL available facts, or simply what is comfortable for you to believe?

visual said:

If you truly want to get both sides you can read the same stuff I read,why believe only what you want to believe, by the way I haven`t had to google these links I have read them in major Australian newspapers,again availble to all.

Click to expand...

You are getting a very narrow world view from the major dailies. The ownership of these are concentrated in only a few hands. I'm sure the German public trusted their major news sources in 1933-39.

I'm sure various other present day populations trust their majors dailies... such as Iran, Belarus, and Venezuala

visual said:

Reading the same story from different perspectives helps me to decipher what eventually makes sense.And thats why I find unwavering points of view debatable.

Click to expand...

In the end you have been unable to answer one of my questions about the topic at hand. That says a lot to me.

FYI

A look at Zionist terrorism in the ME

http://www.wrmea.com/jews_for_justice/terrorism.html

Cheers

Wayne,once again with the personal assumptions.
That somehow falls short of your own intellect.

You keep comparing free nations with dictatorships,you and I might disagree but neither of us is in danger of losing our heads.

Our politicians as much as we dislike them and with good cause get elected freely,iran for example relies on the religious leaders to give the ok,as to who can run,hence whats his face getting elected .

Young people knew that who ever got elected was not going to represent them and made the mistake of not voting.They felt the choice they had was no choice at all and got sidetracked,

Israel is a terorrist nation,and there again thats your opinion many people don`t agree,even Egypt recognices it.

As for believeing what is comfortable to me how do you draw your conclusions ,by what makes you feel comfortable!Yes!

I watch documentaries and I read exstensively but once again you doubt that because I disagree with you.

For example recently I learned that that mosque that is considered the 3rd holiest site in islam,only became the 3rd holiest yesterday!by that I mean not very long ago,I found that out by researching why they thought it was so important to them.

I don`t know why we both have agree with each other.

visual said:

Israel is a terorrist nation,and there again thats your opinion many people don`t agree,even Egypt recognices it.

Click to expand...

Political expediency

Read the link I posted

:band

visual said:

Journalists who write the stories that you are relying on are symphatetic to hizbollah,of course they are sticking to their stories,

Click to expand...

The editor of The Australian certainly isn't an Hizbollah sympathiser!!! If he is reading this he would tear his hair out!

But he is willing to look at the facts when they are present.

There is a lot of fiction circulating on the Internet.... You can't judge one story to be more authentic than another just because you happen to agree with it.

I've given this topic a fair looksie, downloaded about 60 gig of documentaries in the last 2 years, a large portion of this has been related to the american empire.. cbf debating it if anyone is really interested ill mail them some dvds..
__________________

As for lebanon this is an awesome clip where galloway shreds a sky reporter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Wdwk1dp-uU

Rafa said:

The editor of The Australian certainly isn't an Hizbollah sympathiser!!! If he is reading this he would tear his hair out!

But he is willing to look at the facts when they are present.

There is a lot of fiction circulating on the Internet.... You can't judge one story to be more authentic than another just because you happen to agree with it.

Click to expand...

Rafa,you speak with certainty,how do you know?

Visual

Could I ask you to just take several steps back, remove yourself from the present heated argument, and simply say why you feel so convinced that you should take the side of the Israelis?

That's the first question.

The second is regarding the establishment of Israel after the end of WWII in what was essentially Palestine's own territory. I wonder how you would feel if, given there might in the future be some global conflict resulting in some nation being essentially "homeless". Let's say this would not have occurred as a result of any misdeeds of the nation concerned. So the United Nations (if they were able to get their thoughts together which is another question entirely) decides that the people of said nation should henceforth make their home on the east coast of Australia. Those of us living in the designated area in Australia have no say in this.

Are we going to feel ever so slightly resentful at being intruded upon by a group of people with whom we have nothing in common and indeed whose culture, traditions and religion are in conflict with our own? Isn't this situation likely to breed ill-will on both sides?

Julia

Rafa said:

The editor of The Australian certainly isn't an Hizbollah sympathiser!!! If he is reading this he would tear his hair out!

But he is willing to look at the facts when they are present.

There is a lot of fiction circulating on the Internet.... You can't judge one story to be more authentic than another just because you happen to agree with it.

Click to expand...

Rafa,this is what I`m talking about,why change the details of the story,if he in fact got it right in the first place,
from a columinst ,Herald sun

The Australian is going after Foreign Minister Alexander Downer for saying the story of Israel firing a rocket through the roof of a Lebanese ambulance was a hoax.

Today its Beirut reporter Martin Chulov checks again with his original source. This is Chulov’s story today:


Ambulance driver Qassem Shalim was closing the doors of the ambulance when the vehicle was hit. ``I am sure the missile was fired from a drone. The blue light was flashing on our roof, the red cross was clear and there was a light on the Lebanese Red Cross flag above me. Everything I said happened did happen,’’ he told The Australian in Beirut.

Everything he said happened did happen?

But this is how Shalim described the event in Chulov’s original story on July 26:


One of the Israeli rockets pierced the centre of the large red cross marked on the roof of one of the ambulances, as if it was used as a target…

The convoy was struck by two rockets fired from an Apache helicopter, just before midnight, severely injuring all six people on board…

In another ward, Qasin Shalin, the driver of the first ambulance, and the only one of six people to have escaped with light injuries, sat upright in bed, surrounded by the orange-clad men of Lebanon’s Red Cross, who have come to be known as the country’s bravest civil servants…

Mr Shalin was spared more serious injuries by the armoured vest he was wearing and the driver’s canopy that protected him from a direct hit.

He remembers nothing after the flash and bang of the missile then the crunch of the crash as his ambulance veered off road.

A helicoptor has become a drone. The man at the wheel becomes the man at the back of the ambulance. A moving ambulance becomes a stationary one.

And still no explanation how a rocket fired through the roof of his ambulance leaves a neatly machined hole right where the ventilation cover used to be, and then ... vanishes. No scorch marks. No sign of an explosion. No hole in the floor.

Nor does Shalin explain how the injuries he suffered on his face, requiring huge bandages, left not a scab or scar when he was filmed six days later with his face uncovered. Very odd.

UPDATE. Tony Eastley does no better when he tries on the ABC’s AM program to explain the inexplicable to Alexander Downer:

It may have been like some, much of the ordinance, it didn’t actually explode when it pierced the vehicle. So you still stand by what you said?

Julia said:

Visual

Could I ask you to just take several steps back, remove yourself from the present heated argument, and simply say why you feel so convinced that you should take the side of the Israelis?

That's the first question.

The second is regarding the establishment of Israel after the end of WWII in what was essentially Palestine's own territory. I wonder how you would feel if, given there might in the future be some global conflict resulting in some nation being essentially "homeless". Let's say this would not have occurred as a result of any misdeeds of the nation concerned. So the United Nations (if they were able to get their thoughts together which is another question entirely) decides that the people of said nation should henceforth make their home on the east coast of Australia. Those of us living in the designated area in Australia have no say in this.

Are we going to feel ever so slightly resentful at being intruded upon by a group of people with whom we have nothing in common and indeed whose culture, traditions and religion are in conflict with our own? Isn't this situation likely to breed ill-will on both sides?

Julia

Click to expand...

Julia,
so many articles have been shown to at least be misleading or outright hoaxes.Wether Israel is right or wrong is not the point,but why the misleading information certainty to do with this story.Why can we not accept the fact that a lot of what we are seeing is in fact not facts as they happened.

To me this type of behaviour says more about the people who are spreading this type of information than about anything else.

Julia,the second part of your question I have to get to later.

Visual,

You might detect a certain apathy about the staged "photo opportunities".

Why?

Because it is just a normal thing during a war for the beligerents to stage manage the information that is released. They all do it.

It it right? Of course not! But it happens all the time. Most of what you know as "history" about previous wars is pure bunkum. The victors version of the story, glorified for their own benefit.

However your outrage is misplaced and does not negate in any way the number of civilians who were killed or had their homes destroyed.

Try to keep in mind the big picture, rather than getting caught up in propaganda.

The view Of Amnesty International

http://www.amnesty.org/

Here is a map of air strikes reported up until 22 July (about halfway through the conflict)

As is plain, they are all over the whole country

Okay I really really don't want to get started on this whole 9/11 conspiracy thing....there were certainly many unanswered questions to do with that day, but not many of the ones put forward here are worth asking as they are almost all myths.

Just thought I would point out something REALLY EASY TO CHECK:

Verse 9:11 of the Quran states:

"But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge."

nothing to do with eagles, nothing to do with sons of Arabia, nothing to do with the WTC...

Also it's worth checking the wikipedia on the 9/11 conspiracies, they provide many answers to a lot of the most common questions - a little bit of simple research goes a long way.

Some of the questions that do need to be answered involve FEMA and their movements....but that's another bag of cats I don't want to put my hand in at the moment because I really can't be bothered.

Since this is the 9?11 thread and not Israel, lets keep it on topic.

Wayne watch these videos:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsWZHKIg3Cs&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsn4JA450iA&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr-BRjSWxLg&mode=related&search=
this one has a tune to it listen to the lyrics carefully

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTEeYuDCOk0&mode=related&search=
The panel questions and answers are enlightening