|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:56 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
[quote="mindmetoo"]
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| You say that you agree that there are plenty of questions out there that are not being asked by the media, yet you say you have no real questions on this matter. |
There are many questions to be asked in biochemistry but I don't have any.
| Quote: |
| That would seem to go against you participating in this thread, would it not? |
Have you studied biochemistry? Do you take an active interest in biochemistry?
| Quote: |
| My only question is what is your hypothesis about 9/11. People who think the government is behind 9/11 (directly or by commission), I think are in error and I would like to debate. |
Here's a pretty good one:
[url]
http://www.hermes-press.com/unthinkable.htm#3[/url]
In a nutshell, elements in the pentagon (and cheney) knew about the attacks, and did enough to let them happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Quote: |
Omari Number 2
Mr. Al-Omari, a pilot with Saudi Airlines, walked into the US embassy in Jeddah to demand why he was being reported as a dead hijacker in the American media.
"Abdul Aziz Al-Omari is a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines" - BBC 23rd September 2001
"A pilot with Saudi Airlines, was astonished to find himself accused of hijacking � as well as being dead � and has visited the US consulate in Jeddah to demand an explanation." - Independent 17th September 2001
This Al-Omari lives with his wife and four children in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. |
It's like saying "John Smith was one of the terrorists." "But there's still a John Smith out there so how could he be dead!" Or as the telegraph reports, some were using stolen IDs. If someone steals your passport, uses it to get a rental car, and crashes and burns and the government says "John Smith" was the driver and you later turn up alive with a passport missing from your sock drawer, this doesn't mean you were the guy who crashed and burned in the car, does it?
Weak. |
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/9-11/9-11_hijackers_still_alive.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
http://www.prisonplanet.com/fbi_denies_mix_up_of_911_terrorists.htm
OK but why this then?
http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/2373_comment.php
Even after the above has appeared in the world's media the FBI has made no attempt to alter its web-sites which clearly list the wrong names, wrong photos, wrong identities and probably wrong nationalities of the real hijackers.
Given that the hijackers (if there were any) were clearly using false identities, why has the FBI never attempted to find out the hijackers true identities? Why does the FBI seem totally disinterested in apprehending the real culprits? This lack of action from one of our "trusted" government departments is very close to treason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| Have you studied biochemistry? Do you take an active interest in biochemistry? |
No. But if someone on Dave's tried to claim something I know from my understanding of biochem that seemed wrong, I'd like to find out more about the person's reasons and debate them if I did not find their reasons compelling.
| Quote: |
| In a nutshell, elements in the pentagon (and cheney) knew about the attacks, and did enough to let them happen. |
Okay! Thank you.
Now the questions you pose seem to me to be as easily explained by a government covering ass (and using the tragedy post hoc to advance an agenda). You seem to believe they are evidence for a government that had prior knowledge and let it happen. Yes? How do you eliminate the possibility the "smoke" is a result of sleeping cover ass and make the most of it (heretofore the SCAMMIt hypothesis)? Or how do you show that the questions are more strongly answered by the Let It Transpire and Grab the Oil Arabs Land (heretofore the LITGOAL hypothesis)?
(Sorry your hypothesis doesn't have as neat an acronym, feel free to invent a better one.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is only one way to ever get any closer to answering your question, and that is to have a new investigation that is free from government interferance and would have have the power to look at all the pertinent information.
I know the likelyhood of this is about as much as George W. Bush suddenly declaring his unabashed love for Michael Moore, but there's always hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
There is only one way to ever get any closer to answering your question, and that is to have a new investigation that is free from government interferance and would have have the power to look at all the pertinent information.
I know the likelyhood of this is about as much as George W. Bush suddenly declaring his unabashed love for Michael Moore, but there's always hope. |
I am all for a new invesigation just as long as 9-11 conspiracy people are billed for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
By and large, the people asking for the investigation have already paid for a lot of the research that has been done....setting up websites, conferences, etc.
I am sure that there would be many willing to pay for an independant investigation if there were some guarantee that it were possilbe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
There is only one way to ever get any closer to answering your question, and that is to have a new investigation that is free from government interferance and would have have the power to look at all the pertinent information.
I know the likelyhood of this is about as much as George W. Bush suddenly declaring his unabashed love for Michael Moore, but there's always hope. |
I would suggest if there was and the findings didn't match your belief, you would still find a way to call the investigation flawed. When a belief is based upon a conspiracy involving powerful government figures who will stop at nothing to cover up, it's pretty hard, no, to produce any investigation that's going to sink this rubber ducky. A couple examples:
Roswell: The GAO (these are the people who smoke out massive government/military misspending, tough cookies and straight shooters IMHO) did an investigation at the behest of the critics. Clinton issued a presidential order releasing anyone involved from any secrecy oaths. The findings came out in favor of what the skeptics have been saying. It was a balloon train from project mogul. Did the ufo crowd go "ah, okay thanks!" No.
Face on Mars: NASA's Mars Orbiter made imaging the face priority one, at the behest of the face on mars crowd. Scientists who waited for years to get started on research were bumped down the line by a group that felt science is done peeing your pants in public. Okay, fine. So NASA imaged the face. It didn't look like a face. Did that make the face people go "ah, okay, we were wrong! Thanks!" No. They variously claimed the raw data was cooked or NASA actually dropped a nuclear bomb at the site to cover up. Jesus.
Now, in science, when there are two groups with competing hypothesises, each side believes the data supports their hypothesis, they eventually get together and do the definitive study. Each side agrees to live with the results. It's important to note if you want to maintain any cred in science, the one thing you don't do is post hoc claim the study you helped designed was flawed.
So there is a group of parents that claim vaccines cause autism. Jenny Mccarthy is one of late. They're called The Mercury Militia for their belief that thimerosal (a mercury) in vaccines causes autism. Many studies have shown the mercury doesn't cause autism. Recently, the medical community decided to run a study in conjunction with a leading figure in the Mercury Militia. Both sides agreed this would be a definitive test. And guess what? The test came out negative. No effect. But wouldn't you know it, the woman from the Mercury Militia who helped design the study and agreed the protocols were fair decried the test post hoc.
So, how would the Troobies be any different in this case? They know in the heart of hearts the "truth". They know the government will stop at nothing, nothing to hide whatever they think the government is hiding. So, what, have half the panel comprised of Troobies? And if the findings are negative? The Troobies were brain washed, threatened, duped, whatever.
"have have the power to look at all the pertinent information"
Here's an example. How do they know they've seen ALL? Why maybe the smoking gun document was hidden in a bunker at the south pole?
Now I've articulated some exact pieces of evidence that would convince me I'm wrong. What are two or three exact pieces of evidence that would convince you you are wrong? If you can't articulate that, then ask yourself why. A hypothesis that can't be explicitly falsified is a poor, poor hypothesis and gets no attention in rational circles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another strawman argument.
Thanks for the grammar lesson by the way, I do make mistakes.
As you posted yesterday, the FBI really doesn't know the true identities of some of the 19 hijackers:
Like you said, "It's like looking for John Smith". So you are admitting that the story we've been fed up till now has it's flaws.
So I ask you this:
Since it has been shown that some of the perported hijackers are cases of mistaken identity (through stolen passports etc),
What do you think are the chances that any of the supposed hijackers on the list are in fact the real perps involved? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mm2, you keep comparing this with things that have no precedent, like Aliens landing. This has many, many precedents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
| Another strawman argument. |
I made a lot of arguments. Which part? And what is your correct position?
| Quote: |
| Thanks for the grammar lesson by the way, I do make mistakes. |
I was just quoting you to make a point about desire to see ALL. I didn't in fact notice any error.
| Quote: |
| Like you said, "It's like looking for John Smith". So you are admitting that the story we've been fed up till now has it's flaws. |
I've been saying that all along. I hold to the SCAMMIt hypothesis (sleeping/cover ass/make the most of it). What's yours, BTW. I think I've asked you to put your nickel down. The OP did eventually.
| Quote: |
Since it has been shown that some of the perported hijackers are cases of mistaken identity (through stolen passports etc),
What do you think are the chances that any of the supposed hijackers on the list are in fact the real perps involved? |
'
Lets say that all wisely chose to use fake IDs. This way there could be no retribution against their families. How would that change anything? And supposedly the FBI has been dragging its heels. How does this lend credence to your hypothesis and not mine? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My only hypothesis is that there is a glaring NEED for a renewed investigation, an open, honest and public one.
Of course not everyone will be satisfied, but if at least some of the lingering questions would be addressed it should prove helpful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
| My only hypothesis is that there is a glaring NEED for a renewed investigation, an open, honest and public one. |
So you have no problem with the hypothesis that the government was asleep at the switch, has been trying to cover ass, and used the tragedy to advance its get Saddam/get his oil/get the government more powers agenda?
If someone suggested that, you would see no evidence contradictory? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't say that. I have plenty of problems with what was or was not done prior to, during and after 911.
I just don't think jumping to conclusions at this point is helpful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
I didn't say that. I have plenty of problems with what was or was not done prior to, during and after 911.
I just don't think jumping to conclusions at this point is helpful. |
So if you can't say you have no problem with my SCAMMIt hypothesis, then clearly there must be something you think is not consistent with SCAMMIt?
It really would be much easier to debate if you put your nickel down. I don't think anyone is so link happy if they don't have a rather firm hypothesis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^evidence you asked for is in the thread titled "Evidence for an alternative hypothesis:......."
Give it a read. Let me know what your opinion is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
