Quote Originally Posted by mfqr
What I said there had nothing to do with saying "you cannot prove me wrong." I said, "that doesn't mean there wasn't a conspiracy." So I'm not sure how you came up with that response.
mfqr, I mean no disrespect, but you have totally missed many of my points. Logically, saying you cannot prove me wrong is tantamount to saying you can't prove there wasn't a [fill-in-the-blank]. They are both arguments based on the same logic. That is how I came up with that response.

After 9/11 we got into two different wars, with two different countries. Although, the whole thing was marked as the "War on Terror." Operation: Iraqi Freedom is a part of that. In fact, you can prove that to yourself by watching what reasoning George Bush gave to go to Iraq. I can tell you two of them: Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction" (which have not been found yet), and he was "harboring terrorists." Of course, there was no proof in any of those given.
[...]
Yes. In fact I've heard many times that W and his crew were looking for a way to invade Iraq before the attacks took place. W was mad at Saddam for the assassination plot against Bush Sr.

So when the 9/11 attacks came they provided something that W/Cheney, etc. used as an excuse to invade. But this is a far cry from saying our government orchestrated the attacks.




To me it's pretty obvious, that even if nobody in connection with our country conspired to make 9/11 happen, that it was severely taken advantage of... and not in *our* best interest.
Yes. But this has nothing to do with conspiracy. This is well known by the entire rest of the world. We were attacked, then our government used the attacks as an excuse to go attack Iraq and Afghanistan.

[...] or if there were mini-nukes blasted in the towers [...]
LOL. Give me a break. Anyone with a geiger counter could answer that one.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I have not come up with my own theories. But I am 100% sure that there was a conspiracy.
Yes, you are a conspiracy theorist. The term conspiracy theorist doesn't have to mean that you are the one who came up with the theories.. espousing them is enough.

I admire people who are 100% sure of anything. Always leaves room for seeing things from a different perspective :wtf:

You just need to do the research, and I think it then becomes very clear.
I have suffered through my fair share of conspiracy "documentaries", movies, and articles. From Roswell to the moon landings, from the various JFK plots to the illuminati. I have seen many things about 9/11 and they all reek of the same sensationalist crap that all the other ones do. They lack fundamental credibility. They start from false pretenses. They are made to sell, because the conspiracy theory contingent is a reliable source of "believers" and will buy into anything that is mistrustful of any sort of established authority.

I have seen nothing in any of these "sources" that cannot be explained with some more, um, rational thoughts.

What I believe is that the US government actually works with al-Qaeda, especially Osama Bin Laden. We actually fund terrorism. If you read the book I posted, you will see why, and how.
But your not a conspiracy theorist :thumbsup:

Seriously, there are many things that our government has done over the years that come back to haunt us. Dealing with Bin Laden in the 1980's (or whenever it was) is one of those things. Just like all of the mess that we created in Central America. Our government is good at screwing with the world without any fore site into what the consequences will ultimately be. That doesn't mean that we are still actively engaged with Bin Laden. It simply means we are paying for our past mistakes.

If you did not know, our government (who supplied the official story) is authority.
That has got to be at least the 3rd time you assume that I'm a complete dumb shit. Ooooooh... our government is an authority. Thanks for setting me straight on that one.

I would have to disagree with you on the Afghanistan part. Invading Afghanistan had no legitimacy, because there was never proof that our so-called "enemy" was actually there. They just said they were, and used that to go there. Neither of the wars have any legitimate reasons. In fact, war itself is very hard to legitimize.
Yes, war is hard to legitimize. And no, I didn't think we should be going into Iraq at the time that we did. I didn't (and don't) think that going into Afghanistan the way we did was the right thing to do either. I am, for the most part, a pacifist.

The only times I think that our country should be sending troops anywhere is when not sending them would result in even more loss. I agreed with Clinton sending in troops to Somalia. I also think that something needed to be done in Afghanistan, even before the attacks. I know it wasn't big in the news here in the states, but the Taliban had been becoming increasingly (and alarmingly) repressive throughout the second half of the 90s. They were bad shit, and they were turning Afghanistan into an extremist producing country. Bad things were starting to come out of there.


Talk about being selective. I thought conspiracy theorist nuts were the only ones who didn't look at the other side? I guess you were wrong.
Wow. Go back and read what I said based on your original quote. You said, essentially, "read this book or die." To which I say, "no thanks." Because you are being ridiculous. You can't tell people to do something you want them to do or die and expect to have a positive reaction.

Unless you are a terrorist :thumbsup:

Grow