7 CIA agents killed by double agent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhineoshott

Yep.
Airplaines were the show. The stuff to get the fools hooked on.
This site goes into detail if you're interested. Do your own research. There are so many reasons showing how it was a controoled demolition that I can't even remember them all. Post what you learn if you like.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

---

and what say you about United Flight 93 where the pilots had their throats cut with box knives, paxs that tried to fight the terrorists ultimately crashing in PA killing everyone aboard where they were able to recover the CVR and flight data recorder.

I only ask because I knew Jason Dahl and his family...the captain of that flight.

I also watched it live on TV while sitting in 11th grade physics class, watched the 2nd plane hit tower 2, watched them collapse without secondary explosions.

It's true that the Government may have "benefited" from this, but it's just not the likely scenario. Occam's Razor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sniper7

and what say you about United Flight 93 where the pilots had their throats cut with box knives, paxs that tried to fight the terrorists ultimately crashing in PA killing everyone aboard where they were able to recover the CVR and flight data recorder.

I only ask because I knew Jason Dahl and his family...the captain of that flight.

I also watched it live on TV while sitting in 11th grade physics class, watched the 2nd plane hit tower 2, watched them collapse without secondary explosions.

---

Yeah, but none of that counts. These guys were top notch professionals (who can't even silence a few nutty conspiracy theorists).

I don't beleive nor disbeleive all the theories. Simply stating that when you look at what the government does and what they can do you have to beleive they "really" have your well being in mind...

Anyone remember agent orange?
The LSD experiments?
Electric shock treatments?

all for the well being of the citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

Yeah, but none of that counts. These guys were top notch professionals (who can't even silence a few nutty conspiracy theorists).

---

precisely...when I watch something happen with my own eyes I deem it to be completely true...especially since I don't do drugs and I wasn't drinking in class. And I highly doubt they would show an education film that shows LIVE on CNN about terrorists attacking the trade centers with heavily fueled commercial airliners.

Also, youtube the videos that are taken from live footage and tell me which one shows any type of a secondary explosion that caused either of the towers to collapse. I surely never saw one.
Did you also think that when a 150,000 airplane with probably 20,000-30,000 gallons of jet fuel (roughly 4500 gallons) might be able to do enough damage to supports throughout several floors to collapse the building...then once it gets started there is no way to stop it?

I just highly question the stability and the intelligence of anyone who truly believes a conspiracy theory as to 9/11

anyone explain why tower 7 that was not hit went down?

Were there this many conspiracy theories surrounding the federal buildings in Ohio? I know that there are some pretty hyped up theories, but I was too young at the time to hear about them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhineoshott

Do you really think "terrorists" brought down the towers? Look at the evidence.

---

LOL are you talking about the evidence that was presented by that little teenage prick who made loose change from shit he found on google?

The one that comes to mind is that McVeigh was a government experiment gone bad. and his qiuck capture execution and silencing of all those that know him covered the governments ass.

I read something that recently came to light (I think) about missing footage from security cameras, but I don't remember all the details. I think the Wikipage on that event covers some of that fishy stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graves

LOL are you talking about the evidence that was presented by that little teenage prick who made loose change from shit he found on google?

---

I am unfarmiliar with this incident. Please inform.

Always fishy stuff involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhineoshott

I am unfarmiliar with this incident. Please inform.

---

No you aren't. This one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sniper7

and what say you about United Flight 93 where the pilots had their throats cut with box knives, paxs that tried to fight the terrorists ultimately crashing in PA killing everyone aboard where they were able to recover the CVR and flight data recorder.

I only ask because I knew Jason Dahl and his family...the captain of that flight.

I also watched it live on TV while sitting in 11th grade physics class, watched the 2nd plane hit tower 2, watched them collapse without secondary explosions.

---

Which direction was 93 headed? I don't remember. Personally I believe it was meant for the Pentagon or WTC7. It didn't make it so they had to blow it up anyway. They have never provided any footage of an airplane hitting the pentagon. The Pentagon I'm sure had excelent surveliance that would have documented such an occurence.

All the footage I've ever seen has been from news cameras or privately filmed footage. There was probably a limited amount of camera footage of the Ft Hood shootings late last year as well, but how much have you seen? I haven't seen any, just like I don't expect the government to release security footage from Pentagon cameras.

Actually, the government was forced to release footage. You can see the plane (just barely) coming in low and fast from the right. The Frame speed is REALLY slow on this camera, it's a parking lot camer, so it sucks.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1622101.shtml

Perfect example. A parking lot security camera hardly reveals where cameras may be at the Pentagon.

And it is thet supposed Only footage realeased.
A gas station across the street was also supposed to have film, but it seemingly disappeared.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhineoshott

That's quite a statement there. Assuming you've done no research. Give me some logical reasons why I'm a doofus for holding to those beliefs. So far you're at 0! You act like as if have the upper ground already. Man up and give some reasons! You're the doofus for beleiving whatever is fed into your mouth for you to eat and repeat. Is the government your mommy that you trust? Is it beyond you're imagination for the government to tell a lie? You need to hold your toung and see what you're saying before you say it, like the rest of us well respected americans.

Fellow members of the board, Please pardon my indignant tone.

---

I'm not going to waste my time trying to debunk your crackpot theories. You have your mind made up.
I could print out all the voluminous info that has been used to debunk that crap, wrap it around a brick and smack you in the face with it and it still wouldn't change your mind.

Believe what you want to believe. I'll do the same. I don't think there were any conspiracies, extra explosives, cruise missiles, or psychic CIA whippoorwills. I do think 9/11 truthers are idiots, and I don't have to justify my opinion or prove anything to you. Deal with it.

Just as there seems to be folks that agree with you on this, I'd be willing to bet there are folks (quite possibly more of them) here that agree with me as well.

You think 9/11 was an inside job, go start your own thread about it and be indignant all you want.

Keep this one on topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elhuero

You think 9/11 was an inside job, go start your own thread about it and be indignant all you want.

Keep this one on topic.

---

This thread hasn't been on topic since page one. Speaking of which, I'm still waiting to hear what it would take for you to blow yourself up in a public place.

BOT,, the agents were killed by a Manchurian candidate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

This thread hasn't been on topic since page one. Speaking of which, I'm still waiting to hear what it would take for you to blow yourself up in a public place.

---

Well the answer to your question is nothing, because I'm not an insane islamobot.

what's the point of the question?

I never suggested that we use the jihaidi tactics against them in a literal manner and send americans to blow themselves up in markets.

I also never suggested that we carpet bomb cities. I used that in an facetious manner to illustrate that my opinion, that we should punish (nay, MURDER!) the poor innocent families of the poor innocent suicide bombers, is actually a more humane yet delightfully brutal alternative to wreaking mass destruction on thousands.

It's funny how folks are arguing with me like they think they have a chance in hell of painting me into a corner and getting me to change my view.

Some feel that there are things we shouldn't do to our enemies because we'd be "stooping to their level" and that would make us "no better than they are"

That's fine.

Like I told conspiracy man. Beleeve what you like.

Your opinion can be like our nations soft, kind heart.

And mine can be like our nation's foot.

In a boot.

Pressing down on their neck.

chew on this amigos. front page of CNN.

It compares our current war to what happened in the Philippines one hundred years ago. (a long time before we bombed dresden)

Talks about why we won then, and why the idea of political correctness, playing nice, and "we can't stoop to their level" is gonna lose the current one
for us.


http://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/201...s-not-vietnam/



juicy tidbits:


Filipino fighters deliberately sought to drag the war on with hit-and-run tactics that would turn the American public against the war, historians say. It was the classic guerilla strategy: Win by avoiding big, pitched battles and melt into the civilian population.

But the U.S. military responded to the guerilla strategy with a simple strategy of their own, some historians say: Kill them all.

Civilian casualties were not accidental, but intentional, says Lt. Col. Michael E. Silverman, an Iraq war veteran and a counterinsurgency training consultant for the U.S. Army.




and one comment by some guy named Sean:


The main differences between the current wars and those past ones we were able to win are the ROE. In the past the ROE were created with the pure intent to win. Todays ROE are designed to have as little collateral damage as possible and has nothing to do with the intent to win a war.

I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.

Look, I thought the made up story in The Usual Suspects about the maffia war was cool too, but in this situation I don't think it is really an effective tactic to get the result that you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhineoshott

Which direction was 93 headed? I don't remember. Personally I believe it was meant for the Pentagon or WTC7. It didn't make it so they had to blow it up anyway. They have never provided any footage of an airplane hitting the pentagon. The Pentagon I'm sure had excelent surveliance that would have documented such an occurence.

---

direction has nothing to do with it. that is unknown what they were going after...the whitehouse, who knows.

The pentagon never has and never will release footage because it would compromise the interior of the building. the only footage released was the parking lot security camera that had about a 1 frame per ten second rate on it which is damn near worthless.

Did you watch the attack live? I did and I can tell you airliners hit the building and they collapsed, not some weird conspiracy

I think there were 500,000,000 reasons for wtc 7 coming down and not some absurd .gov plot.

Pretty sure it was Bush's fault....

I think it is interesting that people see that there are things that don't immediately make sense (Tower 7 falling without being hit) and then jump straight to a conclusion that makes just as little, or even less sense (it was the US gov) than the original event.


Several terrorist sleeper cells infiltrate the country, remain dormant for years and years while they go through flight school to learn the basics of flying planes. They fly some planes straight into some buildings, some unexpected stuff happens (EVERYTHING is unexpected when something happens that has never happened before) and instead of reasoning that perhaps the terrorist sleeper cells ALSO infiltrated another common industry in America (demolition, building construction, etc) it is automatically assumed that the US gov is behind everything? That doesn't make sense.

Sorry if my interjections made that comment flow poorly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.

---

Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elhuero

Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.

---

Evidently not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elhuero

Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.

---

not for the extremists who think they will be showered with virgins.
the only way to get them is to show them if they do kill themselves in the name of allah they will get 20 Rosie O'Donnell. I bet we could all be friends then.[ROFL1]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sniper7

Did you watch the attack live? I did and I can tell you airliners hit the building and they collapsed, not some weird conspiracy

---

Yes I did watch live. The buildings fell about 40 minutes after the impact of the plane. Obviously the impact of the plane is not what brought it down. Scientifically it's impossible for kerosene/jet fuel to melt steel (What the building is made of). Experts insist that there was never any molten steel (since jet fuel cannot ever burn hot enough to melt steel). The towers fell at free fall speed. The "experts" hold to what they call the "pancake effect" as the only possible explanation for the total collapse of the building. It's where the outer trusses become detached from the core frame and stack as they fall. This obviously cannot happen at free fall speed since the falling objects would encounter at least some resistance. This leaves us with a big question as to what brought the buildings down.

SWEET i'm "conspiracy man" now!

You don't need to melt steel to compromise its strength enough to collapse under tremendous weight.

You do to achieve free-fall speed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

You don't need to melt steel to compromise its strength enough to collapse under tremendous weight.

---

Quote:

---

This leaves us with a big question as to what brought the buildings down.

---

Gravity...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.

Look, I thought the made up story in The Usual Suspects about the maffia war was cool too, but in this situation I don't think it is really an effective tactic to get the result that you want.

---

I find it interesting that nobody has disputed the links I posted.

Those that disagree with me can not deny that what I think should be done has a proven track record of working, unlike the koombaya crap that obama is going for.

Where are the revenge strikes from the Philippines, Japan, and Germany? Never happened.

That's what happens when you destroy the enemy's willingness to fight. The Japanese were suicidal as well, look what that got them.

That's because the suicide attack has always been a last ditch effort of a beaten enemy. If it was an effective military tactic, then our bombers in WWII would have sought targets to auger into after their payloads were dropped. It is a highly less effective combat tactic.

However, this less effective tactic becomes successful if your enemy says "Wow, they're suicidal. We can never stop that, might as well throw in the towel"

Which is exactly what anyone who disagrees is advocating.

The jihadis were able to change the course of the elections in Spain a few years ago with a couple of lives and some bombs on trains.

Buy pussing out, you hand them victory on a silver platter.

Plus, the "Elhuero doctrine" has the novelty of never having been tried yet in this conflict.

If it doesn't work we can always grovel for the forgiveness of our islamic overlords later. (well, at least you all can. by that point I'll be long dead, defending my freedom or executed as an infidel)

I find it sickening that our government has already thrown in the towel.

They don't even want to call it a war on terror anymore. Napolitano calls terrorism "man made disasters". They liken terrorism to hurricane or tornado, that cannot be not be stopped, only avoided and survived.

That, my friends, is bullshit. Pardon my french.

Patton is rolling over in his grave.

It doesn't matter to us what a radical's view on death or the afterlife is, if he's already dead.

I'll might not change any minds by stating my case, but I'm glad to see at least a couple of folks agree with me.

in closing, here's another link backing up my reasoning:

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/01/07/96634.html

that bitch is going to teach that to her children.

the lesson moms should be teaching their children in that part of the world is "Don't fuck with the U.S."

pardon my french.

I never read your link. I'll look at it when I get home probably. It's not that your idea can never be effective for any enemy, just that I don't think it will be effective for this particular enemy. When you say that Sadam paid families of suicide bombers, I seriously doubt he was "setting them up for life."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhineoshott

You do to achieve free-fall speed

---

start yer own thread




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v9...68c9eaa99d.gif

This is my thread bub, I'll debate both of you at the same time. Not right now though, I got busy at work and will have to pick this up later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elhuero

I find it interesting that nobody has disputed the links I posted.

Those that disagree with me can not deny that what I think should be done has a proven track record of working, unlike the koombaya crap that obama is going for.

---

Did you read your own link? Because it basically talks about the policy of attrition during the Philippine-American war and then goes on to list all the reasons why this policy wouldn't work in Afghanistan.