Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Earl who wrote (9288)	12/14/2004 1:35:07 PM
From: LPS5	Respond to of 20039

[V]arious explanations for what happened on 9/11...fall into three categories[:] 1. Those where there is enough evidence to prove true. 2. Those where there is enough evidence to prove false. 3. Those where there isn't enough evidence to prove either true or false. Interesting comment. Regarding your first category for explanations, how much evidence is "enough...to prove [a theory] true"? And, which of the so-called theories do you place in that category? e

To: Don Earl who wrote (9288)	12/14/2004 2:08:34 PM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

9/11 is probably the easiest major conspiracy I've ever been able to disect. Mainly, because the official story is so implausible, the actions of our government officials regarding 9/11 are highly suspect, and the lies and shifting rationales that have been provided since 9/11 also cast doubt on their version of events. I mean, the offical version of events in laughable, you have to look at alternative explanations for that day to make sense. Now, how far one wants to take the 9/11 conspiracy is a whole other matter. But, there's no doubt that there are so many things that happened around 9/11 that beg to be explained in an alternative way. A recent article I read in Paranoia Magazine (for real paranoiamagazine.com raised an interesting question regarding the potential for a 9/11 conspiracy. To scamble military planes to intercept a commercial aircraft that has lost radio contact and/or is off course does not require an official order from high up in the government (it is a routine operation that has been done many times over the years). However, not to scramble planes under the same circumstances (what happened on 9/11/01) requires a stand down or similiar order from high up. Now, since we know planes were not scrambles in a timely manner, it leads one to conclude that there was indeed a stand down order issued by someone and a conspiracy that requires further investigation.

To: Don Earl who wrote (9288)	12/14/2004 3:04:45 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20039

Don > I can't help but wonder if while being critical of the official story, an almost religious willingness to believe anything that isn't official, as a matter of faith, isn't doing some very real damage in researchers capacity to remain objective I can't speak for others but, for me, the official story doesn't work -- it doesn't do justice to the observable "facts", as I see them. It isn't a matter of non-belief, or principle, it's about not being able to intellectually satisfy myself with what I have been told. I have always been a "free thinker" and I have an independent view on most subjects, ranging from politics to religion to investment, as I am sure you do. A great deal of what exists in life eg history, world affairs, astronomy, economics, psychology, one has to take on faith simply because one doesn't have enough "tools" to prove anything one way or another. I imagine it is how one feels about/understands these uncertain / immeasurable aspects which determines one's view on life itself. Put differently, it is one's subjectivity which determines one's objectivity. For me, what happened on 9-11 is not a matter one can take on faith. It is too important and relevant to the world in which I live to simply accept what I have been told and be done with it. In fact, it is even more important than that because I don't believe what I have been told and I am therefore forced to mistrust the one who told me the story. Like a sore finger, my thoughts pain me. Indeed, the conclusion which I have come to, that the US government was involved in what occurred, upsets me. I wish I had not come to that conclusion and I could go on as before -- but I can't. The world has changed and I must change with it.