You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bin Laden book No Easy Day 'contradicts official account'
- Thread starter Carl Dowd
- Start date
Firstly - how can anyone confirm the specific members from team six were involved? What about the supporting forces involved? The government is killing its T1 SF like they are so easy to replace yet they let all the support involved in the op live?
All of the WTC conspiracy theories have been debunked by scientists and engineers:
WTC Disaster Study
But I suppose they are all government stooges?
I've got flight hours. I've got hours in an FAA approved flight training simulator and let me tell you it is EASY as hell to fly a jet into a structure as prominent as the WTC and Pentagon. On the days involved visibility was infinite any muppet who could grasp the concept of up, down, left, right and faster could have parked a plane on them.
BUT - they were not amateur pilots - they actually qualified as far as having IFR ratings. And they bought hours on commercial simulators to prepare. And they were not at sea level.
Cover ups? You are telling us that a government that has had every major thing it's ever been involved in leaks yet the biggest conspiracy of our time they have kept under wraps?
If the Bush administration was guilty of anything it was letting it happen to facilitate their ends.
I'd suggest you get your facts right before bleating on about the big conspiracies.
Absolutely question the authorities - but when you get answers you don't like what will you do? You will say people are towing the line. You will say they are government stooges. You will say "But someone saw a missile fly into the Pentagon!" - well some people in NY said they saw the second tower get hit by a missile - and that was one of the most recorded events in human history by both national media and civilians alike and each and every bit of footage shows a commercial airliner.
The thing about conspiracy theorists is irony. You will go on and on about everyone having an open mind when yours is one of the most closed of all. It's not that there is a conspiracy; it's that you WANT there to be a conspiracy.
I actually believed everything i had been told until 05 when I discovered that the story that it didn't happen like we were told came across as being more credible than the official story.
Couple that with the 9/11 commision report that omitted as much int as they possibly could including WTC7. They didn't even mention that building 7 existed let alone dropped in freefall in 6.5 secs.
There are so many things wrong with the official story but as long as ppl like you deny that there's anything even remotely fishy going on they don't need to even try to make an effort to dupe the public.
If you can't see the wood for the trees that's your problem not mine.
The onus is on you to support and verify the government's account. Go on then- I'm waiting.
Like every great conspiracy theorist you neglect to respond to the reports made by the scientific and engineering community.
Everyone knows there are unanswered questions about 9/11. I know there are unanswered questions about 9/11. The difference between me and conspiracy theorists is I have an open mind and objectivity and conspiracy theorists have already come to a conclusion that no amount of evidence could ever influence because any evidence is fabricated. Anyone who speaks out is a government stooge.
As soon as you get someone asking questions about your theory or putting facts to you that do not match your version of reality you resort to the typical "I can't talk to you, so I am out".
And actually, the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. You have pointed us to some stuff that has been rebuked (hence me giving you some links to look at). I must point out though that unanswered questions do not make evidence.
So show me evidence. Show me facts. Show me something which can be substantiated. YOU are the person making the claim, not me.
What chessnut was that, by the way?
Also, you know the best conspiracy theory I ever heard? That governments spawn conspiracy theories to keep the population speculating on how far they would go. To distract idiots who see shadows in every corner from looking at the real stuff going on in front of them.
As for 9/11 - most of the unanswered questions can be answered by the notion of the intelligence failure - or dismissal by the many agencies involved who did not take the bin Laden threat seriously for years before.
The conspiracy theory behind that that has credibility is as I mentioned previously; someone did finally put the dots together, passed it up the chain and the top of that chain decided it was in its interests to allow the attack to take place. Some got tipped off and what was, was.
So please, evidence. Not conspiracy theory websites full of quotes taken out of context, parts of quotes lacking context, information which has and can be debunked by anyone with knowledge in that area (like me and the planes thing).
Everyone knows there are unanswered questions about 9/11. I know there are unanswered questions about 9/11. The difference between me and conspiracy theorists is I have an open mind and objectivity and conspiracy theorists have already come to a conclusion that no amount of evidence could ever influence because any evidence is fabricated. Anyone who speaks out is a government stooge.
As soon as you get someone asking questions about your theory or putting facts to you that do not match your version of reality you resort to the typical "I can't talk to you, so I am out".
And actually, the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. You have pointed us to some stuff that has been rebuked (hence me giving you some links to look at). I must point out though that unanswered questions do not make evidence.
So show me evidence. Show me facts. Show me something which can be substantiated. YOU are the person making the claim, not me.
What chessnut was that, by the way?
Also, you know the best conspiracy theory I ever heard? That governments spawn conspiracy theories to keep the population speculating on how far they would go. To distract idiots who see shadows in every corner from looking at the real stuff going on in front of them.
As for 9/11 - most of the unanswered questions can be answered by the notion of the intelligence failure - or dismissal by the many agencies involved who did not take the bin Laden threat seriously for years before.
The conspiracy theory behind that that has credibility is as I mentioned previously; someone did finally put the dots together, passed it up the chain and the top of that chain decided it was in its interests to allow the attack to take place. Some got tipped off and what was, was.
So please, evidence. Not conspiracy theory websites full of quotes taken out of context, parts of quotes lacking context, information which has and can be debunked by anyone with knowledge in that area (like me and the planes thing).
I couldn't be arsed to even read that report.
It was probably made by a company/person who at first questioned the event, was threatened with their job, then decided to change their minds.. Lab Director Kevin R. Ryan Fired for Questioning Official 9/11 Story - Associated Press
I could talk you to death on this subject and so won't bore you mate.
Int failures doesn't really cover "Odigo prior warnings", "Able Danger", Hijackers training on US bases" or "Salam Bin Laden meeting Bush Sr "on the morning of 9/11 but as it's the official cover then you believe it.
We will never, never know the truth but the combat indicators are all there for a text-book false flag.
I've investigated both sides of the equation to weigh up the options and see which is the more credible story.
I and millions of others have no reason to ever trust the media/ governments again but if you can't cope without them then crack on.
Your cry for evidence is just a "straw-man arguement" as there is no evidence either way to support or contradict the official conspiracy theory- is there?
It was probably made by a company/person who at first questioned the event, was threatened with their job, then decided to change their minds.. Lab Director Kevin R. Ryan Fired for Questioning Official 9/11 Story - Associated Press
I could talk you to death on this subject and so won't bore you mate.
Int failures doesn't really cover "Odigo prior warnings", "Able Danger", Hijackers training on US bases" or "Salam Bin Laden meeting Bush Sr "on the morning of 9/11 but as it's the official cover then you believe it.
We will never, never know the truth but the combat indicators are all there for a text-book false flag.
I've investigated both sides of the equation to weigh up the options and see which is the more credible story.
I and millions of others have no reason to ever trust the media/ governments again but if you can't cope without them then crack on.
Your cry for evidence is just a "straw-man arguement" as there is no evidence either way to support or contradict the official conspiracy theory- is there?
My ignorance is certainly not willful.
It has took years of study, experience and much research to reach this level of ignorance.
But still I find myself an ocean behind your own.
and for your information Baco-foil is one of the few producers of mind meld defence not owned by or that the governments and banks, don't have an interest in. (I am surprised you didn't know that)
Just because something is unknown or not proven does not automatically prove its a conspiracy.
It just means it's unknown, undiscovered at this point.
Sources of evidence are some times questionable, such as from an eye witness.
I have found that they will often over time extrapolate or create a back story to try rationalise what they think they have seen.
just as CCTV footage without sound or the circumstances that lead up to an accident/incident can be interpreted in many way, along with the angle and clarity of view.
often science and physics finds it initially hard to explain incidents, especially if they are not common place, such as a steel framed building enduring 1000s of degrees of heat from aviation fuel. not common place I am sure you'd agree.
But hey if the conspiracy theory gig keeps you occupied and you have a reserve of Baco-foil, well whats the harm.
It has took years of study, experience and much research to reach this level of ignorance.
But still I find myself an ocean behind your own.
and for your information Baco-foil is one of the few producers of mind meld defence not owned by or that the governments and banks, don't have an interest in. (I am surprised you didn't know that)
Just because something is unknown or not proven does not automatically prove its a conspiracy.
It just means it's unknown, undiscovered at this point.
Sources of evidence are some times questionable, such as from an eye witness.
I have found that they will often over time extrapolate or create a back story to try rationalise what they think they have seen.
just as CCTV footage without sound or the circumstances that lead up to an accident/incident can be interpreted in many way, along with the angle and clarity of view.
often science and physics finds it initially hard to explain incidents, especially if they are not common place, such as a steel framed building enduring 1000s of degrees of heat from aviation fuel. not common place I am sure you'd agree.
But hey if the conspiracy theory gig keeps you occupied and you have a reserve of Baco-foil, well whats the harm.
Last edited:
Come on; you just did everything in that first sentence you accuse me of and I said you would do.
You completely closed yourself off to anything that may undermine your desire for there to be a conspiracy theory.
That website is the National Institute of Standards and Technology. And its report takes information from sources across the technical spectrum.
Four things:
Strawman argument is misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack. I did not do that.
Secondly you are merely criticising me personally in order to detract from the criticism toward your version of the 'truth' - that is both a logical fallacy and bordering on ad hominem.
Thirdly: Telling me millions do not trust the government or media is appealing to the masses - jumping on the band wagon and is another logical fallacy.
Fourthly: You are also a hypocrite. Since you just asked me to present evidence of a claim that is not actually mine (which I provided but you just refused point blank to look at) and now you rubbish me for asking the same of you?
Take a look in the mirror.
It does not matter how much weighing up you do you clearly have a monsterous non-objective bias toward what you want to be the truth. I have put facts in front of you and you could not be bothered to look. You are dismissing anything which undermines your belief - exactly like I said before and you proved.
Don't ask me to be objective when you do not have a shred of objectivity in you on the matter.
You completely closed yourself off to anything that may undermine your desire for there to be a conspiracy theory.
That website is the National Institute of Standards and Technology. And its report takes information from sources across the technical spectrum.
Four things:
Strawman argument is misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack. I did not do that.
Secondly you are merely criticising me personally in order to detract from the criticism toward your version of the 'truth' - that is both a logical fallacy and bordering on ad hominem.
Thirdly: Telling me millions do not trust the government or media is appealing to the masses - jumping on the band wagon and is another logical fallacy.
Fourthly: You are also a hypocrite. Since you just asked me to present evidence of a claim that is not actually mine (which I provided but you just refused point blank to look at) and now you rubbish me for asking the same of you?
Take a look in the mirror.
It does not matter how much weighing up you do you clearly have a monsterous non-objective bias toward what you want to be the truth. I have put facts in front of you and you could not be bothered to look. You are dismissing anything which undermines your belief - exactly like I said before and you proved.
Don't ask me to be objective when you do not have a shred of objectivity in you on the matter.
maximuszx12
Longterm Registered User
This one should keep you deep in thoughtlessness Gareth......
... 'The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist'!
Let us know how you get on with it.
max
... 'The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist'!
Let us know how you get on with it.
max
OK I did look at that link in the end and surprisingly enough I wasn't surprised by it's content.
Your initial request for int that a high number of SEALs from Team6 getting offed should have been confirmed by my earlier post but you just ignored that and moved onto other topics then when I give you links to those topics you move on again etc ad nauseum...
On the subject of closing off your mind to other POVs I think you're very good at it.- I've already explained that I've held both views since the event and the most plausible is not the official one. I've given you lots of things to google and research but obviously one has to be barking not to believe the official line and if you start going down that road what will your peers think of you?
I do realise that it's probably a lot easier for you to believe the official line on this and not explore anything outside the box. You aren't alone and it's a comfort thing -down to the way your head works so don't worry about it.
It's been over a decade since that event and if you haven't entertained both viewpoints yet then don't let me stop you believing what you want. Afterall it's supposed to be a free society that we live in and the fact that the same excuse is used everytime to rid countries of anti-US democratically elected presidents is just a coincidence and has nothing to do with a conspiracy as that's what the media tell us too and they don't lie.
We could go round and round in circles for a long time over this- I am receptive to other's views as I've been there and know the propaganda and how hard it is to "want" to see through it.
Jet fuel and melting steel is easy to disprove and all you needed to do was read my above post which obviously wasn't done. Avgas is a hydro-carbon and wouldn't get anywhere hot enough to melt steel otherwise all cookers would have a short life-time.
Or flying big jets at full whack at a bit above sea level and not having the wings rip off as air is a lot thicker down here that it would be at 37,000ft. But of course you know that 'cos you're an expert on avionics ( I'm not but have spent the time to research lots about accoustics and vibration to see if the official story could work- it didn't).
Thanks for that quote from "The usual suspects" Max that means exactly what it says and is not cryptic or overly difficult to understand although you must realise it works in both directions- both for and against both view points.
Anyhow, i think we should just get back to CD's post on how we're being constantly lied to about the Bin story.
Your initial request for int that a high number of SEALs from Team6 getting offed should have been confirmed by my earlier post but you just ignored that and moved onto other topics then when I give you links to those topics you move on again etc ad nauseum...
On the subject of closing off your mind to other POVs I think you're very good at it.- I've already explained that I've held both views since the event and the most plausible is not the official one. I've given you lots of things to google and research but obviously one has to be barking not to believe the official line and if you start going down that road what will your peers think of you?
I do realise that it's probably a lot easier for you to believe the official line on this and not explore anything outside the box. You aren't alone and it's a comfort thing -down to the way your head works so don't worry about it.
It's been over a decade since that event and if you haven't entertained both viewpoints yet then don't let me stop you believing what you want. Afterall it's supposed to be a free society that we live in and the fact that the same excuse is used everytime to rid countries of anti-US democratically elected presidents is just a coincidence and has nothing to do with a conspiracy as that's what the media tell us too and they don't lie.
We could go round and round in circles for a long time over this- I am receptive to other's views as I've been there and know the propaganda and how hard it is to "want" to see through it.
Jet fuel and melting steel is easy to disprove and all you needed to do was read my above post which obviously wasn't done. Avgas is a hydro-carbon and wouldn't get anywhere hot enough to melt steel otherwise all cookers would have a short life-time.
Or flying big jets at full whack at a bit above sea level and not having the wings rip off as air is a lot thicker down here that it would be at 37,000ft. But of course you know that 'cos you're an expert on avionics ( I'm not but have spent the time to research lots about accoustics and vibration to see if the official story could work- it didn't).
Thanks for that quote from "The usual suspects" Max that means exactly what it says and is not cryptic or overly difficult to understand although you must realise it works in both directions- both for and against both view points.
Anyhow, i think we should just get back to CD's post on how we're being constantly lied to about the Bin story.
maximuszx12
Longterm Registered User
Thanks for that quote from "The usual suspects" Max that means exactly what it says and is not cryptic or overly difficult to understand although you must realise it works in both directions- both for and against both view points.
Q) ^^^^^^^^^^^ Enlighten me with your pov and keen intellect?
TNF
max
Q) ^^^^^^^^^^^ Enlighten me with your pov and keen intellect?
TNF
max
Last edited:
OK I did look at that link in the end and surprisingly enough I wasn't surprised by it's content.
Your initial request for int that a high number of SEALs from Team6 getting offed should have been confirmed by my earlier post but you just ignored that and moved onto other topics then when I give you links to those topics you move on again etc ad nauseum...
On the subject of closing off your mind to other POVs I think you're very good at it.- I've already explained that I've held both views since the event and the most plausible is not the official one. I've given you lots of things to google and research but obviously one has to be barking not to believe the official line and if you start going down that road what will your peers think of you?
I do realise that it's probably a lot easier for you to believe the official line on this and not explore anything outside the box. You aren't alone and it's a comfort thing -down to the way your head works so don't worry about it.
It's been over a decade since that event and if you haven't entertained both viewpoints yet then don't let me stop you believing what you want. Afterall it's supposed to be a free society that we live in and the fact that the same excuse is used everytime to rid countries of anti-US democratically elected presidents is just a coincidence and has nothing to do with a conspiracy as that's what the media tell us too and they don't lie.
We could go round and round in circles for a long time over this- I am receptive to other's views as I've been there and know the propaganda and how hard it is to "want" to see through it.
Jet fuel and melting steel is easy to disprove and all you needed to do was read my above post which obviously wasn't done. Avgas is a hydro-carbon and wouldn't get anywhere hot enough to melt steel otherwise all cookers would have a short life-time.
Or flying big jets at full whack at a bit above sea level and not having the wings rip off as air is a lot thicker down here that it would be at 37,000ft. But of course you know that 'cos you're an expert on avionics ( I'm not but have spent the time to research lots about accoustics and vibration to see if the official story could work- it didn't).
Thanks for that quote from "The usual suspects" Max that means exactly what it says and is not cryptic or overly difficult to understand although you must realise it works in both directions- both for and against both view points.
Anyhow, i think we should just get back to CD's post on how we're being constantly lied to about the Bin story.
I did not ignore it - I asked how it could be verified that the individuals were all killed when those on the team who carried out the op were not openly named. I also asked about the support provided to the bin Laden hit - the pilots, door gunners and the like who were there. Are they all dead too? How do we know?
Stop with the open minded crap. That is the first resort argument of the conspiracy theorist and as useless and valid as "You must have faith" when debating the absurdity of religion. I am a lot more open minded than you believe - you only accuse me of that to discredit me and my views. This is an ad hominem attack and yet another logical fallacy.
Just because I have looked at information - a lot of it actually - and chosen to believe something different from you does not make me closed minded. I have a very open mind. YOU do not.
You still, after having said you have looked at the information I provided you with simply cast it off as being "what you expected" - precisely as I expected you too as stated earlier. Predictable much?
I am an expert on avionics am I? That is another ad hominem attack and a straw man arguement as well as putting words into my mouth. Those aircraft are built with something called tolerances in mind. You might have noticed that the wings did in fact not rip off. Now go and ask ANY commercial jetliner engineer about those tolerances and you might find yet another answer you do not like.
Just like the one about jet fuel, the contents off those offices, the dangers of using the lightweight but easy to fail trusses used to build the WTC and how much structural strength only one peice needs to lose to cause a CASCADE. For ****s sake get a grip.
You are embarrassing yourself with massive assumptions about things you can find about about with a little research yourself. But you won't because that means facing information that destroys the view of facts you want to be true compared to what is true.
Again, present me with evidence that is not "evidence" based upon assumptions or absences of something, misconstrued quotes of whatever else. Show me PEER reviewed evidence that passes the burden of proof. Like that which I passed to you. Or provided my own experience and understanding (direct evidence, statement made by an individual which can be substantiated under scrutiny).
Evidence is not "a million people do it so it's right".
Statistically; one in ten thousand people have paedophilic tendencies. There are nearly seven billion people in the world - that makes SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND paedophiles knocking about the place. Does that justify it? It is easy to find solace in numbers. That does not make any of them right though.
Last edited:
You know what - just don't bother.
You do not want to be proven wrong so you won't be no matter what peer reviewed, substantiated facts are put in front of you.
You do not know as much as you think and you have swallowed the crap whole.
Stop wasting my time.
You do not want to be proven wrong so you won't be no matter what peer reviewed, substantiated facts are put in front of you.
You do not know as much as you think and you have swallowed the crap whole.
Stop wasting my time.
Last edited:
Haha ,well that's me standing corrected.
And doesnt matter who do something like this...it's only a great shit, that's all!
LiveLeak.com - Reality Check: Did the FBI know about Boston bombing beforehand?
This is from Fox and in place of the FBI you can insert any int service you'd like.
This is what I mean about how they set patterns in their operations.
How many arrests under the anti-terrorism legislation in the UK have we seen over the yrs?
This act can cover anything the police want it to and has been abused beyond belief.
Terrorism arrests rose 60% in year building up to Olympics | UK news | guardian.co.uk
They need us afraid and compliant otherwise they can't impose their Orwellian regime over us.
This is not conspiracy- it's fact.
Without old Bin to be used to start it all off we wouldn't be anywhere near this point in society.
Obviously this will be "debunked" in the time it takes me to get down to the shops to buy more baco-foil.
This is from Fox and in place of the FBI you can insert any int service you'd like.
This is what I mean about how they set patterns in their operations.
How many arrests under the anti-terrorism legislation in the UK have we seen over the yrs?
This act can cover anything the police want it to and has been abused beyond belief.
Terrorism arrests rose 60% in year building up to Olympics | UK news | guardian.co.uk
They need us afraid and compliant otherwise they can't impose their Orwellian regime over us.
This is not conspiracy- it's fact.
Without old Bin to be used to start it all off we wouldn't be anywhere near this point in society.
Obviously this will be "debunked" in the time it takes me to get down to the shops to buy more baco-foil.
"Avgas is a hydro-carbon and wouldn't get anywhere hot enough to melt steel otherwise all cookers would have a......."
Mystery solved….who the fcuk filled a Boeing 767 with piston engine Avgas instead of jet/turbine engine Jet A1 fuel?!
All this time and dozens of theories and we shoulda been looking at the smug Shell attendant!
Mystery solved….who the fcuk filled a Boeing 767 with piston engine Avgas instead of jet/turbine engine Jet A1 fuel?!
All this time and dozens of theories and we shoulda been looking at the smug Shell attendant!
Nightflyer- I'm in total agreement with you on that. There's been a non-disclosure form that we all had to sign before any SD/SF training could even begin in the UK forces. I know for a fact that it's been in since '98 and means you can't write any tales about what you've done/seen/heard etc while performing with any of those units.
I'm always surprised by the amount of books the ex-USSF knock out and the fact that such a non-disclosure order is not apparent.
They must get their books examined by the upper-echelons though before they can be published and this is where it gets really bizarre especially with all the Bin books that are now out and none of the "stories" marry-up with what was supposed to have gone down in Abbottabad.
The official account is just supposed to be believed as there was no footage or indeed ,evidence, of any kind to corroborate anything.
How are we supposed to believe that the SF of the country with the biggest military budget in the history of military budgets forgot to ensure that their men had the means (an omnipresent helmet-cam) to accurately catalogue the take-down of the "evilest man in the world?"
And then they "dumped him in the sea" before any 3rd party could verify anything.
Then Obama's plunging public-opinion suddenly sky-rocketed, Hurray!
Sceptical??- You really ought to be!
I'm always surprised by the amount of books the ex-USSF knock out and the fact that such a non-disclosure order is not apparent.
They must get their books examined by the upper-echelons though before they can be published and this is where it gets really bizarre especially with all the Bin books that are now out and none of the "stories" marry-up with what was supposed to have gone down in Abbottabad.
The official account is just supposed to be believed as there was no footage or indeed ,evidence, of any kind to corroborate anything.
How are we supposed to believe that the SF of the country with the biggest military budget in the history of military budgets forgot to ensure that their men had the means (an omnipresent helmet-cam) to accurately catalogue the take-down of the "evilest man in the world?"
And then they "dumped him in the sea" before any 3rd party could verify anything.
Then Obama's plunging public-opinion suddenly sky-rocketed, Hurray!
Sceptical??- You really ought to be!
This is an update on the ST6 Chinook event.
Make of it what you will..........
http://www.patriotnetdaily.com/2013...e-believe-someone-made-a-deal-with-the-enemy/
Make of it what you will..........
http://www.patriotnetdaily.com/2013...e-believe-someone-made-a-deal-with-the-enemy/
KingLeonidas
Longterm Registered User
"All this time and dozens of theories and we shoulda been looking at the smug Shell attendant! "
Hahahahahha! Good one.
KL
Hahahahahha! Good one.
KL