9/11 3ABEPA!

[Conspirator]

Odgovorio sam ti ispod. Pošto ovo nije prvi slučaj da neki novinar off the record ima mišljenje da nešto nije baš sasvim u redu sa zvaničnom verzijom, moj zaključak je da očigledno postoji nekakva autocenzura. Pretpostavljam da glavni razlog leži u tome što afirmativnim pisanjem o teorijama zavere i prihvatanjem da su neki argumenti truthera validni postaješ meta i ludak po defaultu.Da li je ovo bolji odgovor?

Edited October 5, 2010 by Conspirator

[Marvin (Paranoid Android)]

Ne. Vidi, završio sam ja ovde. Trebalo je da završim čim su počele nebuloze o streljaju putnika, korisnije bih proveo vreme u razgovoru s Jehovinim svedocima. Uglavnom, što sam hteo da uradim ovo popodne, to sam i uradio, od mene dovoljno. A ti burazeru udri, jako do samog kraja.

[Conspirator]

Dobro. Uživaj

[Sestre Bronte]

what was the role of the mainstream media on 9/11?

BK je preneo bez blekauta direktan udar drugog aviona u kulu.

[ObiW]

Ne. Vidi, završio sam ja ovde. Trebalo je da završim čim su počele nebuloze o streljaju putnika, korisnije bih proveo vreme u razgovoru s Jehovinim svedocima.

Speaking of which... proveštili su se Jehovini svedoci. Jako. Sad su uspeli da ubace knjižicu kroz vrata, ne znam kako im je pošlo za rukom. A kada čitaš njihove uradke u prvih nekoliko stranica ne možeš da provališ da su to oni. No pred kraj postaje jasno o čemu se radi. Jedan članak mi je ostavio dojam. Priča ide o Japancima i njihovom brzom vozu. Primetili su da je vazdušni udar prilikom ulaska u tunel mnogo jak i da izaziva vrrrlo glasnu buku sa druge strane tunela. Tu se jedan bistar Japanac setio da postoji ptica kojoj specifičan kljun omogućuje da dubolo zaroni u baru i ulovi ribe/žabu ili šta već. I Japanac je uradio ono što Japanci najbolje rade: prekopirao dizajn tog kljuna na lokomotivu, i vazdušni udar je spao na prihvatljivi nivo. Članak se završava rečima "a coincidence or intelligent design? You decide".

[Caligula]

Nego, sta je bilo sa onim taksijem? I meni je cudno da mu je sajbna otisla a hauba nigde ogrebana. Kako su to oni sposobni da osmisle ovu nenadjebivu zaveru a da ni taksi ne umeju da srede kako valja? Koji je od one sestorice (rece Shmeling da je bilo nekoliko operativaca) lupao macolom po soferci?Treba mu odbiti od plate.

[Sestre Bronte]

Mali muzički intermeco, dok obe strane bespoštedno preturaju po internet izvorima:

Even before the Twin Towers had collapsed, it was a matter of consensus among the conspiracy community that those accused of the attack - Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda - could not have been the culprits. Despite concerted effort,

THE MAD REVISIONIST

was unable to come up with a single reasonable, rational explanation as to why religious fundamentalists would want to crash themselves and plane-loads full of people into crowded office buildings, and, further to the principles of revisionist methodology, if it doesn't make sense to us personally, it didn't happen.

Given the conclusive nature of this evidence, we decided that it was our responsibility as citizens and historians (along with one electrical engineer) to find out who was really responsible so that justice could be done. And considering the seriousness of the crime, we resolved to devote a full year of concerted pondering towards revealing who it was that had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to commit this heinous act. Naturally, our first suspicion was directed against the most obvious suspect: Sweden. It has long been known by revisionist researchers that the people of Sweden define themselves as Swedish, as opposed to all other people who are non-Swedish and therefore considered, by implication, inferior with regards to whatever qualities make someone Swedish. And even though this division of the world between Swedes and non-Swedes is based to a large extent simply on whether someone has been born in Sweden or to Swedish parents, the world has been strangely silent and reticent about this obviously racist criteria for inclusion. Besides, any people who would produce sweet mustard must be capable of any depravity. However, unable to attribute any specific motive to Sweden, our attention was directed against the only country that did have a clear and obvious reason to stage an attack on the United States in precisely this manner:

Canada.

Means, motive, and opportunity. Canada was very nearby, and could easily infiltrate operatives across the border. Their efficient state apparatus was much better equipped to pull off an operation of this magnitude than a group of terrorists half a world away. But what's more, it has long been known that Canada suffers under a debilitating inferiority complex, one that could easily have led to a virulent hostility against the very targets that were attacked on September 11. Take a look at the

CN Tower

. Why would they build such a big, long, hard, rigid monstrosity? What purpose does it serve other than to give New York State the finger from across the lake? Canadians seem to take great pride in the fact that theirs is

the largest tower in the world

. What, then, would they be expected to feel about other structures in other countries whose sizes are a cause of distinction? Of course, the World Trade Centre comes to mind, as does the Pentagon, which, with over 3.7 million square feet of space, is the world's largest office building.

It has been speculated that the fourth plane, which went down over Pennsylvania, had been targeted at the White House. Researchers at

THE MAD REVISIONIST

are divided as to the plausibility of this scenario. On one hand, the White House could well have been chosen as powerful symbolic exp

ression of Canadian superiority, seeing as the Canadians already burned it down once before during the War of 1812. However, our air-photo expert, Mr. Jim Sphere, has concluded that the true trajectory of the fourth plane shows it heading in the direction of Chicago - most likely aimed at the Sears Tower.

*

Several otherwise incomprehensible aspects of this affair suddenly become clear once Canadian complicity in the attacks is understood. There was, for example, much concern expressed in Canada when George Bush, thanking numerous countries for their assistance in the aftermath of the tragedies, neglected to mention Canada. Was this merely an oversight, or a subtle hint that the CIA had already uncovered evidence of Canadian involvement? And what about that "friendly fire" incident in Afghanistan? An accident? Or did our boys, contrary to the instructions of their government (always quick to pander to the interests of "our most reliable ally to the north"), finally decide to engage the True Enemy? Furthermore, it is important to note that not a single Canadian was killed in the September 11 attacks. This is no lie. Indeed, this highly suspicious fact - obscured by the controlled media - is undeniable, as someone has posted it on the web and called it undeniable (see above), but it can also be verified by a simple look at the lists of the victims of the World Trade Centre and Pentagon disasters.

Not a single one of the names on any of those lists is identifiably Canadian.

Obviously, then, Canadians working at the World Trade Centre were warned in advance to call in sick that morning. Naturally, they never bothered to tell any of their non-Canadian co-workers, indicating the contempt that Canadians have for non-Canadian life. What can we conclude from all of this? Well, I do know one thing. If I were the President of Malaysia (and I hope to be some day), I would be very concerned about the possibility of Canadian designs on the Petronas Towers.

* Though Mr. Sphere acknowledges that this is not, in fact, what the evidence shows, the evidence in question was doctored by CSIS. In support of this claim, Jim is offering a cash reward to anyone who can prove that he is not, in fact, an air-photo expert. Those seeking to claim this reward can direct their inquiries to a post office box that we're not going to check anyway, so don't bother.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Zugurosh

[Al-Khwarizmi]

Hajde, molim te, (ne ložim, ne ironišem, nisam sarkastičan), očito je da poseduješ o ovome mnogo više (sa)znanja od običnog prolaznika na ovoj temi poput mene, napiši svojim rečima - onako kako ti razumeš i kako si shvatio na osnovu svega što si pročitao i video, ukratko u par rečenica - šta je uzrok rušenja WTC7? Zaista bih ti bio zahvalan.

Zaključak i FEMA i NIST istrage je da je glavni uzrok požar koji je besneo u zgradi satima. Nekoliko sati pre pada, vatrogasci su povučeni iz zgrade, kad je bilo jasno da požar ne mogu da stave pod kontrolu. Pominjala su se i oštećenja nastala ogromnim komadima bliznakinja dok su se rušile, ali, koliko se sećam, zaključak je da to nije bilo od presudnog značaja. Edited October 5, 2010 by Al-Khwarizmi

[Caligula]

Zaključak i FEMA i NIST istrage je da je glavni uzrok požar koji je besneo u zgradi satima. Nekoliko sati pre pada, vatrogasci su povučeni iz zgrade, kad je bilo jasno da požar ne mogu da stave pod kontrolu. Pominjala su se i oštećenja nastala ogromnim komadima bliznakinja dok su se rušile, ali, koliko se sećam, zaključak je da to nije bilo od presudnog značaja.

Jeeeeste, ahaaaa, verujemo ti.Marvinu medalju za stalozenost, smirenost i razloznost, plus jos vecu kontramedalju za losu procenu sagovornika. Zaverizam nije logicka zamka, zaverizam je poremecaj u misljenju. Nema te logike koju ce takav mozak da sazvace na pravi nacin.btw, mene je na temi dotukao Shmeling konstatacijom da je u citavu akciju umesano pet-sest mastermajndova i desetak operativaca. Sto je manje od devetnaest terorista. Koji Shmeling je u pravu, nikada necemo saznati. Edited October 5, 2010 by CowBoy

[henrik larsson]

Ogavan si.

[Caligula]

Ogavan si.

Znam.btw, hatori se zeza.

[henrik larsson]

Mjok, govorim o tom ciničnom podjebavanju s strane. Laički onelineri i to. Ne znam ništa al ću da se poserem. Taj fazon.

[ObiW]

Nego, sta je bilo sa onim taksijem? I meni je cudno da mu je sajbna otisla a hauba nigde ogrebana. Kako su to oni sposobni da osmisle ovu nenadjebivu zaveru a da ni taksi ne umeju da srede kako valja? Koji je od one sestorice (rece Shmeling da je bilo nekoliko operativaca) lupao macolom po soferci?Treba mu odbiti od plate.

Macolom je lupao isti lik koji je odgovoran za ovo:

[Caligula]

Mjok, govorim o tom ciničnom podjebavanju s strane. Laički onelineri i to. Ne znam ništa al ću da se poserem. Taj fazon.

Ja ne znam nista? Na ovoj temi? Ja?Bemmu Henriche, kako je drugacije moguce (Marvin doduse pokusao) ucestvovati na ovom topiku? Biti ... ozbiljan?Uvazavati sagovornika? Od kada se 11/9 dogodio, ja nisam video nijednog pristalicu teorije zavere koji postuje inteligenciju sagovornika sa druge strane.Autizam, prijatelju. Nijedan vernik nije preobracen za sve ove godine.@Obiw: pogledaj haubu. Dakle, jedan nesrecni konj od petsto kilograma napravio je vise stete nego bandera od dve tone katapultirana avionskim krilom. Edited October 5, 2010 by CowBoy

[henrik larsson]

Ko što rekoh, nisam vernik. Ne zastupam ni jednu ni drugu stranu. Niti sam stručan, niti sam opsesivno zainteresovan. Samo tu i tamo sumnjam.A ti slobodno nastavi.