Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Stormfront

12346

Comments

  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    The odd thing with 9/11 is that they ignored all the warnings they were given.

    And isn't there something saying Jets should be fully fuel on takeoff incase they have to divert to a different airport for whatever reason?

    Edit: How did a stormfront topic get to here? :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    9/11 is far too easy to construct conspiricies about.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    I saw a video on the nert as well that debunks all these things quite well. Theres loads if you look. Its just a pointless debate to get into really - conspiracy fans see everything as part of the conspiracy.

    Would you accept the possibility that the highest echelons were deliberately slack in dealing with the situation considering they'd been given prior warning of the attacks...perhaps even deliberately allowing them to go ahead? It seems very suspicious the attacks occured just as the US was entering an era where their oil supplies were running low....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Haha. Why does it always come down to oil. Jesus :lol:

    oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why do you think?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Because oil multinationals are evil and want to eat our babies?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah, that's exactly it. It has nothing to do with the fact THAT EVERY INDUSTRY ON THE PLANET RELIES WHOLLY ON HOW MUCH OIL WE HAVE.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    Haha. Why does it always come down to oil. Jesus :lol:

    oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil

    so what does it boil down to...democracy spreading, liberty :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes but IRAQ IS PUMPING OUT A MILLION LESS BARRELS OF OIL A DAY SINCE THE INVASION OMFG LOLOL!!!!1111oneone


    Its all about power. Oil was never running low. People see that some in the Bush administration have links, see Iraq has oil and do a little sum 1 + 1 that must = 3! Oh yay we can now go on a nice demo and denounce them as evil multinationals!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    so what does it boil down to...democracy spreading, liberty :lol:


    You clearly have the memory of a fish. Read clandestine's posts on neoconservatism in the neo-con thread.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    Its all about power. Oil was never running low. People see that some in the Bush administration have links, see Iraq has oil and do a little sum 1 + 1 that must = 3! Oh yay we can now go on a nice demo and denounce them as evil multinationals!

    power?...why would you want to spend hundreds of billions of dollars invading a middle east country, seriously, if there wasn't anything in return...and oil was never running low?...is it water, is there an infinite source, and with further demand from developing countries, oil is in need more than ever...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    You clearly have the memory of a fish. Read clandestine's posts on neoconservatism in the neo-con thread.

    why, you joked about the oil view, i joked about the democracy view, doesn't matter if it's real or not.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    oh ok sorry thought you were being serious
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Its hardly any stretch of rational to accept that the required charges could have been placed by those involved in the planning of 911, quite plausibly as early as 1993 after the first bombing of the WTC. Any number of opportunities to insert teams posing as construction inspectors or routine servicemen after hours when noone would be on hand to know what was being done.

    Given that the owner of the building (as anyone would know if they actually bothered to read the substantial collated evidence provided in my first link) is on record (that's recorded evidence) saying issuing the order to "pull" the buildings, any legitimate investigation (should we ever obtain one with the overwhelming sheepish apathy which pervades this issue) would rightly begin with him. Also of telling note is the massive insurance winfall the destruction of the towers netted to the owner and his business cohorts.

    What astounds me is that people spend more time asking "where did the plane go?" then considering how simple it would be for those who could orchestrate such a tactically complicated multiple false flag operation to have simply diverted the plane(s) elsewhere or fly them into the ocean.

    Do not forget that 5 simultaneous military air exercises were also curiously scheduled for that very day, exercises involving (of all scenarios) the hijacking of planes for use as weapons (known as Tripod II). Remote guided planes were in fact used and are used by our military for such exercises. Thus the very plausible possibility was the diversion of the passenger planes to remote locations from where the passengers were offloaded and grouped onto the one flight that was hailed as a victory for the passengers (the one which evidence more rightly suggests was successfully shot down over Pennsylvania).

    None of those who raise the "where is the plane?" question seem critically capable of asking equally whether UA or AA fleet audits were ever conducted to verify how many planes they had nationwide both before and after 911 (another glaring oversight requiring true investigation). Its not in dispute that planes hit the WTC, just which planes? (given the aerial maneuvres, most unlikely any flown by pilots whose own instructors swore affidavits to their inability to fly even a piper cub).

    Any intended operation on that day is far more plausible coming from our own military/intelligence establishment than hijackers (many of whom in fact turned up alive and well in other countries). It's all about bait and switch and the compliance of a non-investigatory media to repeat the official line enough that it becomes a filter through which the preponderance of public perception is thenceforth maintained (as we see so repeatedly here).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    Yes but IRAQ IS PUMPING OUT A MILLION LESS BARRELS OF OIL A DAY SINCE THE INVASION OMFG LOLOL!!!!1111oneone


    Its all about power. Oil was never running low. People see that some in the Bush administration have links, see Iraq has oil and do a little sum 1 + 1 that must = 3! Oh yay we can now go on a nice demo and denounce them as evil multinationals!

    America's oil supplies are seriously declining and pose a serious risk to their future prosperity, i'm 99% certain that's fact.

    Power over whom? What makes Iraq such a target? I wouldn't be surprised if the US deliberately armed Saddam Hussein along with Al-Queda in the calculated hope they'd eventually bite the hand that once fed them, thus creating an excuse to move into the Middle East and plunder that which they desire - oil.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Say it was all a conspiracy... What happened to the people inside the so called planes which weren't really there?
    I mean, what about the people phoning from their mobile phones? Why should a plane strike to the ground, if people weren't really in it, but rather someone sent from the government?
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Dear Wendy wrote:
    Say it was all a conspiracy... What happened to the people inside the so called planes which weren't really there?
    I mean, what about the people phoning from their mobile phones? Why should a plane strike to the ground, if people weren't really in it, but rather someone sent from the government?

    Indeed.

    I doubt any government would forceably kill a bunch of civilians as a coverup for such a thing. They'd just use cargo planes or something.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    I doubt any government would forceably kill a bunch of civilians as a coverup for such a thing. They'd just use cargo planes or something.

    Why?

    They "forcibly killed" all the people in the buildings, what's a few more to the tally?

    LOok at the tens of thousands they've killed in Iraq: just because they're our government doesn't mean that they wouldn't kill us.

    Personally I do think that the theories have some truth in them. The Government did know what they were planning- Clinton had told the BUsh team long before it happened. I don't think Bush ordered it, or the GOvernment did it, but I do think that they knew it was coming and did nothing to prevent it. Bush didn't actively kill those people, but I strongly suspect that he and his government could have saved them but chose not to for political reasons. I think Bush decided that the political and financial gain they could make was worth more than the lives of 4,000 people.

    After all, they believed it about Iraqis, why should it be any different just because it was Americans getting killed?
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Yeah, they knew about it, but as far as I can see they thought "We're America, we're so big, NO ONE would attack us!". And they did. Then they saw an opportunity to invade the middle east without getting internationally slagged off for starting wars for no reason.

    Hence, it worked to their advantage really.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some people give too much credit to the US Govt agencies.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And far too many naively underestimate the extent of their abilities.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And far too many naively underestimate the extent of their abilities.

    Clearly they are not very good though, if you can find so many holes.

    Tell me, do you think that the moon landings were faked too?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    I think Bush decided that the political and financial gain they could make was worth more than the lives of 4,000 people.

    After all, they believed it about Iraqis, why should it be any different just because it was Americans getting killed?

    Racists have a much easier time dehumanizing people from other continents. It wouldn't be hard for the folks of the Bush administration to look at 4,000 Americans and see people, and look at 4,000 some Iraqi's and see something entirely different.

    I do agree with you though, the people who run the White House are too intelegent to ignore and be unaware of all the intel the Clinton administration had piled up on Osama.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Tell me, do you think that the moon landings were faked too?

    I know that wasn't directed at me but was just in a discussion about this recently. At least part of the landings were faked, there is footage of them faking it. But i wouldn't go so far as to say the whole thing is counterfeit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No MoK, I dont think they were faked and no the ability to find holes has no bearing when with media compliance the bulk of the research undertaken can be kept from any legitimate mandated investigation with judicial remit. One need examine how many, like yourself, refuse to even consider the absence of any proof that was shown for the official coverstory to which you so obviously subscribe, regardless of the repeated exposure of the lies of this cabal.

    Manufactured consent serves to keep enough of the public content not to bother looking beyond what the mainstream media reports and sufficient numbers of others vocally shouting down those who do to ensure that the admin avoids facing indictment and forced handover of all materials currently withheld from investigation.

    Even the "official" Congressional investigation (whitewash) only obtained a quarter of the materials it demanded and nothing was pressed to the public concerning that stonewalling.

    Sorry, but if anything is a conspiracy theory its the coverstory.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    Yes but IRAQ IS PUMPING OUT A MILLION LESS BARRELS OF OIL A DAY SINCE THE INVASION OMFG LOLOL!!!!1111oneone


    Its all about power. Oil was never running low. People see that some in the Bush administration have links, see Iraq has oil and do a little sum 1 + 1 that must = 3! Oh yay we can now go on a nice demo and denounce them as evil multinationals!
    :rolleyes: It is getting millions less because the oil industry is price gouging; they did the same thing back in 1973. Not that I'm complaining, it's about time the gas prices rose in the U.S. (no more Hummers!).


    Oil doesn't need to be running low for multinational corporations to want to have direct control over the supply.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The threat of peak oil at present isnt that its running low, merely that it isn't increasing as is our global consumption, which means ultimately that it will begin to deline in availability. The entire PNAC agenda and its clearly defined Mid-Asian targets for conquest are rooted in that awareness and desire to be the power that dictates to all other regions the terms by which it will receive access to that oil in decades to come.

    A myopic agenda that is sure to lead to world war once again, certainly when China (if not India as well) ramps up its global military reach and decides to push Washington off its perch in the region.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A myopic agenda that is sure to lead to world war once again, certainly when China (if not India as well) ramps up its global military reach and decides to push Washington off its perch in the region.

    is that a distinct possibility and if so, how long?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some analysts predict within the 40 years or so. Id say anywhere from 40 to 60 years. Hopefully ill be long in my grave by that time.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some analysts predict within the 40 years or so. Id say anywhere from 40 to 60 years. Hopefully ill be long in my grave by that time.

    lol you'd need to be if we get dragged into something like that again...as for alternative energy resources, what plans if any does the US have for meeting the huge demand for energy...
Sign In or Register to comment.