This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at

Your Ad Here

Monday, September 19, 2011

An Interesting Analogy

I thought of a weird analogy.

Consider this "conspiracy theory".

There's no way that high-ranking US Federal government insiders would intentionally allow guns to be sold to Mexican gangsters. There's no way that policemen trying to arrest gun smugglers would be ordered to stand down.
Of course, this "conspiracy theory" is now Official Truth. This is the ATF "Operation Fast And Furious" scandal. The motivation was to create a crisis. This would lead to more laws restricting gun freedom, because Mexican gangsters were caught with guns made in the USA.

(Buying and selling and smuggling guns is not a real crime. That makes this scandal seem silly.)

Consider this "conspiracy theory".
There's no way that high-ranking US Federal government insiders would intentionally allow a large terrorist attack. There's no way that police who tried to prevent the terrorist attack would be ordered to stand down.
This is one variation of the "9/11 conspiracy theory". The motivation for allowing the attack is to create a crisis. This justifies expanding State power and taking away people's freedom.

I still mostly believe the "official explanation" for the WTC terrorist attack. It was a very disturbing analogy. Here are two similar ridiculous conspiracy theories. High-ranking State insiders allowed a crime so they could create a crisis and claim more power. The first story is definitely true. I mostly disbelieve the second one, but I'm not 100% sure.


dionysusal said...

>I mostly disbelieve the second one, but I'm not 100% sure.

Then you need to go back to elementary school. 3 steel-framed buildings of 267 total stories (110 + 110 + 47) cannot disintegrate by having 2 airplanes smack into them. The mass of the buildings dwarfs that of the airplanes, and burning jet fuel cannot melt or even significantly weaken steel. Get a clue.

Scott said...

I don't have a problem with gangsters having guns. Everyone should have them. The problem is that not enough people are armed. When everyone is armed, a lot of problems get solved.

Thinking that gangsters should not have guns leads to banning of guns. Hm, who else shouldn't have guns? The issue with gangsters is not that they shouldn't have guns, it's that they should be apprehended, arrested and executed when they commit crime.

Scott said...

Regarding Dionysusal's comment, my comments here are never ad hominem. However, since Mr. Dionysusal is USING an ad hominem argument ("go back to elementary school" meaning the person addressed is dumb) I will respond in kind and say he is obviously a "dumb ass retard".

The arguments have been around for years dealing with the melting point of steel beams. Burning jet fuel is below this temperature. However, it is above the temperature at which beams can be weakened. It's no longer a serious argument. People know it's not true.

FSK said...

I don't understand why people get angry, when I disagree with the "9/11 Truth Movement".

The overall conclusion, "The government monopoly is not legitimate.", is valid in either case.

Regarding the WTC, it was a really poorly designed building. That's one reason the terrorists targeted it multiple times. They knew it had structural flaws.

dionysusal said...


You accuse me of Ad Hominem, yet you’re guilty of Sidestepping, Equivocation, Ridicule, Card Stacking, Bluffing, Reductionism, Circumstantial Evidence, Extrapolation and Appeal to Authority. It is to laugh. Please go fall in a ditch.

Anonymous said...

explain the collapse of building 7

Anonymous said...

There was no jet fuel burning inside of WTC-7. After all, it was never hit by a plane. According to NIST, the fires in WTC-7 were fueled by office furnishings, and such fires can't possibly produce the kind of global, fully symmetrical structural collapse of a steel frame skyscraper the likes of which we witnessed on 9/11. It's simply impossible based on the known laws of physics. If WTC-7 truly did collapse due to fires and not explosives, it would have collapsed asymmetrically, or in a staggered manner over a much longer period of time. It wouldn't have come down all at once at near free fall speed into its own footprint demolition-style. The only thing that could have produced the collapse of WTC-7 was the employment of some type of explosive charge or incendiary device at key points in the structure. And wouldn't you know it? No official forensics investigation was ever attempted or completed at the World Trade Center, despite ubiquitous eyewitness testimony describing suspicious explosions inside all three buildings prior to their collapse.

It's simply common sense, folks. The truth is staring you right in the face yet you refuse to see it. This was a classic inside job, false flag operation that could have only been carried out by a state and/or state-sponsored entity. It's amazing that so many otherwise intelligent people are incapable of such basic deduction.

Cp. Smith said...

Building 7 was a controlled demolition. 7 contained a major intelligence station that was the centre point of US operations in Manhattan. The building was specifically "loaded" to be taken down, after evacuation was complete, in the event of a national emergency. Otherwise it would be the first place to be hit by invading forces, just as the Libyan rebels raided Gadaffi's secret papers first upon securing his stronghold.

There are other locations that we load as well. They are only taken down after they have been cleared out, or if there are clearly no people left alive in the building. This is simply good planning.

The twin towers were taken down by the planes. Yes, the jet fuel weakened the beams. The plane impacts were witnessed by thousands of people. The amount of fuel on board is an established fact. The materials science issues are not in dispute by any serious parties.

FSK said...

Why don't the police say "Yes, we destroyed building 7 on purpose. For buildings with sensitive documents inside, our policy is to destroy them whenever there's an emergency."?

Anonymous said...

FSK: "Why don't the police say "Yes, we destroyed building 7 on purpose. For buildings with sensitive documents inside, our policy is to destroy them whenever there's an emergency."?"

Because the entire 9/11 operation was set up to frame Muslims and certain portions of the Middle East that had, up until that point, been resistant to the whole New World Order, globalization agenda. It wouldn't have served the interests of the pro-Israel Zionists in our government to take credit for destroying a large New York City skyscraper when they already had an altogether different scapegoat in mind.

In any event, it wasn't a police-level decision to "pull" WTC-7. That decision was made at a much higher level.

Cp. Smith said...

Because the police are neither aware of nor involved in it, this deals with the intelligence and military, and is not unclassified.

gilliganscorner said...

Why do people feel the need to have 9/11 exposed when the fact governments are ruthless corrupt killing machines right in plain sight?

Bush invaded Iraq under proven false pretenses, kills thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and what happens?

He is free. He makes hundreds of thousands on the speech circuit, has schools, libraries, and roads named after him, and receives a pension.

Look at the Kennedy assassination. It's been what? Almost 50 years? And all those people spending time investigating and want the truth brought to light....and the results are?

Anonymous said...


I think the real question here is, why do you believe the official 9/11 story at all? Especially in light of these four glaring facts:

- Our corporate-controlled government has proved repeatedly that it lies about everything. Lying is standard operating procedure for our government.

- Our corporate-controlled media has proved that it will actively assist our corporate-controlled government in lying about everything. As such, the mainstream media is just the propaganda arm of our government.

- Numerous members of the 9/11 Commission went on record stating that they were either openly lied to or were prevented by our government from getting all the details of what actually took place on 9/11.

- Absolutely no forensics investigation was started or completed at the World Trade Center crime scene, despite the fact that it was the site of the largest, most devastating crime in U.S. history.

Can you rationally explain why you believe the official story? What piece of evidence seals it for you?

This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at