Quote
rrmoderator
Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda was responsible.

Any other explanation of 9-11 is a cruel and crazed conspiracy theory.

Sorry RR, I must object to claims being made with no base in truth.

Can you prove YOUR conspiracy theory? ;O)

And at the same time prove the Madrid and London bombings were al-queda?

To have seen the planes hit the towers is not what is being investigated here - it is the group/sect/cult that may or may not be responsible for this tragedy. I'm afraid you post sounds more emotive than logical.

Why is any other explanation of 9-11 cruel and crazed? - even if it is true?

Do you often believe things with no [b:dda3c22a2a]firm evidence[/b:dda3c22a2a]? This surprises me with your honourable record RR. Personally I'm sitting on the fence, I just know that the Madrid and London bombings stick of set-up, just as much as 11/9 does. I for one would like to know the truth before jumping to rash decisions and blowing other countries up. Cults are dangerous things.

The US govt offical 'ommision' has less science than the phyics involved in the collapse. Indeed - it ignores tower 7's collapse entirely. Al-Queda's 'claim' of responsiblity has never been proven and, in fact, only the US govt believes it (out of the UN), and recieved it. Al-Jazzera certainly believed it to be a fake - and they are as anti Al-Queda as you, me or Saddam was.

RR - I try to only deal in facts, not conspiracies!

Your last post is a flame for those who disagree with your/US govt response to 11/9. Some of us question, some accept propaganda unthinkingly.

Neither side has [b:dda3c22a2a]firm[/b:dda3c22a2a] evidence, one way or another. The only facts I have found which are checkable and quantifiable is the physics behind the THREE towers collapse, and the fact that the FBI are not classing it as an Al-Queda organised attack. (i have already posted a link to the FBI site, please check for yourselves).

The physics involved here is not a conspiracy theory. It may be a conspiracy, but is certainly NOT a theory though.

I would also postulate that this is [b:dda3c22a2a]not[/b:dda3c22a2a] a political discussion, this is about the effect of various groups/sects on a civillian population. It involves politics sure, but most things do.

The US govt certainly got rid of all evidence quickly enough to make sure any suggestions can only be consipary theories - which in itself is cultish to do.

Honestly the CURRENT US govt, with its ties to cults such as 'Skull and Bones' and the PNAC, is certainly looking like a sect/cult to me. Would love to hear arguments against that. Its only a small step from a military junta to a cult - look at N. Korea.

Anyway, unless further conspiracy theories, such as the al-queada connection, are raised I'm ducking out of this thread. Americans seem to have a different set of information than the rest of the world and are unwilling to share it.

What you have just stated is essentiall an outline for a conspiracy theory.

Implying that the US government participated in any way, shape or form in 9-11 is ridiculous and not supported by any credible researcher, national intelligence network, news service report (e.g. Reuters, BBC, AP etc.).

There is no meaningful evidence to suppor this theory.

If you are against President Bush or the US for political reasons fine.

But don't try to turn 9-11 into something it was not and spin some conspiracy.

9-11 was a terrorist act and the murder of more than 3,0000 people.

This isn't a flame it's a fact.

And posting conspiracy theories on this message board is not what the board is all about.

Again, there are other boards for political debates, politics etc.

This board does not include those subjects.

With all due respect...

Quote
rrmoderator
What you have just stated is essentiall an outline for a conspiracy theory.

Yes, as I mentioned, certain 'players' have positioned it that, without any viable amount of evidence, one way or another, any position held is now a consiparcy theory. We are both holding 'theories'. The word 'conspiracy' has a different meaning to the phrase 'conspiracy theory'. I have noticed that you are offering no evidence to prove that ours is only theory. A lack of evidence is what makes a theory.... You do use an emotive arguement (having seen it)... this is how LGATs validate themselves and their beliefs.

Quote
rrmoderator
Implying that the US government participated in any way, shape or form in 9-11 is ridiculous and not supported by any serious researcher, news service or report.

Are you suggesting that the US govt had no play in pearl harbour?

Are you suggesting that the US govt had no play in the first attack on WTC in the early 90's?

Are you suggesting that noam chomsky, jean baudrillard, john pilger, and michael albert are not 'serious' or crediable? I believe they had a little bit more credibilty that any fox presenter or other corporate media lapdog.

Please visit [www.zmag.org] for more 'serious' reports than I could do justice for.

Quote
rrmoderator
There is no meaningful evidence to suppor this theory.

Have you read all the literature by and about the Project for the New American Century? I question your ability to make such a bold claim.

Quote
rrmoderator
If you are against President Bush or the US for political reasons fine.

Not against Bush per se, he just happens to be a member of the 'Skull and Bones' and his brother Jeb a signature of the Project for the New American Century. I am not against the US people in any way. I ask for evidence of that claim.

Quote

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official... - Theodore Roosevelt

Quote

I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that. - Britney Spears

I am still amazed and upset that British soldiers have died due to false evidence presented by the US govt. - and I hope you respect that British people died in 11/9 and, for the US, afghan and iraq.

And if you can join the dots between 11/9, afghan and iraq, without resorting to conspiracy theory, I will eat more than my words.

Quote
rrmoderator
But don't try to turn 9-11 into something it was not and spin some conspiracy.

Thats what I'm trying to stop. 9-11 was not and should not be about attacking 2 3rd world countries illegally. And you say I'm spinning it?!

Tell that to Bush:

Quote

I'm a war President! - GW Bush

Quote

We wage a war to save civilization itself. We did not seek it. But, we will fight it. And we will prevail. - GW Bush

Quote

We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. - GW Bush

Quote

Every nation in every region now has a decision to make ... Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists - GW Bushh

These are all post 9/11 quotes. I believe that the implied reason for the 2 wars WAS 9/11, at least at one point in the propaganda/spin. These are not even anti-bush - I am merely looking at facts rr, or the lack there of. Disinformation by western governments is the same tactic as used in cults to confuse and disorientate their 'willing' followers. Apply that to the UK or US with corporate media. You say I'm spinning a conspiracy?! What do you do to religions then with your sites? One mans freedom is anothers prison.

My source for these quotes include a very interesting site, which raises why this discussion IS valid here. I will quote the site and post a link.

Quote

It's been often remarked that George W. Bush uses coded language to appeal to a religious constituency. For example, Bush's statement that 'Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists' is a direct borrowing from the words of Jesus as reported in Luke 11:23: 'He that is not with me is against me.'" Lambert, February 18, 2004

I would love this quote to start a fresh thread - to do with the possibilty of a religious right infiltration into us politics...

This is from [url="[url]http://www.sourcewatch.org/[/url]]Source Watch[/url], a site that, whilst not perfect, is certainly trying to address an imbalance, much like I see this and a the other RR sites doing. And is certainly as 'creditable' as this site is in its field. I hope you can spend some time investigating these two great sources (Zmag and sourcewatch).

[quote rrmoderator]9-11 was a terrorist act and the murder of more than 3,0000 people.[/quote]

You have no arguement from me there - whats the point?

[quote rrmoderator]This isn't a flame it's a fact.[/quote]

Opinion more than fact rr, c'mon!

[quote rrmoderator]And posting conspiracy theories on this message board is not what the board is all about.[/quote]

mjr40 has said this, as have I, we are NOT discussing a theory here. conspiracy YES. cults are conspiracies themselves, so what are you getting at? Are you going to deny the physics involved? Have you even looked at that link or the many other sites which examine the 9/11 commission report? Have you even read any of that commission? And I don't mean Fox or CNN's pre-approved govt interpretations.

[quote rrmoderator]Again, there are other boards for political debates, politics etc.[/quote]

Again, I am attempting to stop this being political. As with ANY subject, it does stray into politics, but that does not make it political.

Are you denying us the right to examine political peoples affiliation to cults and sects?

[quote rrmoderator]This board does not include those subjects.[/quote]

So it doesnt include group coercion tactics?
It doesn't investigate groups that depend on unproven physics? (scientology, MKP)

RR - you explain how this doesn't involve coercion tactics, and please enlighten me as to how the towers collapsed as they did. Then I will accept that the US govt really was just more incompetent than Afghanistan.

Cults make their followers believe in imaginary/built-up threats from 'non-believers'. I am right, yes? Then follow this, with that logic in mind:

So the 'threat' of the 'mighty' Iraq....... How come the US is the only country to feel threatened by a tiny country, thousands of miles away, with little to no military power? I hear your papers, like ours, are convincing us that the 'mighty' venezuala' is preparing to... erm what? Give their people better schools and hospitals?! C'mon rr - are you saying I am spinning more than the US govt?!

This conversation is not political, though it touches on political issues. It is also often one persons 'theoretical' (though, as with all threads here, it will often drift that way), but of course, you may offer your opinion! Just expect a more detailed response back, and not as a flame, but to counter an arguement based on theory. You just disclaim the physics. Well, my god is more real than you god. That is the same logic rr ;o)

[quote]Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it. - Noam Chomsky[/quote]

both links are us based sites btw!

Please cite a news service (e.g. Reuters, AP, BBC etc.), which have reported that the US government was somehow involved in 9-11.

FYI--No such report exists.

No. I don't regard Noam Chomsky as a credible news source on this subject. Chomsky offers his opinions.

And I really don't want to waste much time on this.

Again, this board is not for collecting conspiracy theories and related links.

There is plenty of hard news and related links relevant to the subject of cults, controversial groups and movements.

Let's stick with that, since that is what this board is all about.

Though brainwashing does relate at times to terroists, for example Osama bin Laden's trainging camps and recruits.

The families of captured terroists often sound much like the families of cult members.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Quote
rrmoderator
No. I don't regard Noam Chomsky as a credible news source on this subject. Chomsky offers opinions.

Oh rr. And you offer what here exactly?!

An opinon that chomsky only offers opinons. No evidence? Thats pretty basic.

But i guess you read that about chomsky in a newspaper, or saw it on fox.

Guess you have never actually read 'manufacturing consent' or any other of his WELL REFERENCED (to official UN and US documents) books. Lets all swallow the new york times/fox chill pill. As hicks said "go back to sleep america"

Guess you won't take into account other countries governmental and news sources then. Do a quick check on the bbc, or al-jazeera - but i guess they are not creditable. And what of Baudrillard?! And Pilger?! Pilger especially you should hold in high regard - he has been paramount in drawing attention to atrocities in the west bank, all for newspapers.

Quote
rrmoderator
Again, this board is not for collecting conspiracy theories and related links.

Yes it is:

[www.vandruff.com]

you posted that yourself.

I quote from the main page:

Quote

"We are asking God that you may see things, as it were, from his point of view by being given spiritual insight and understanding,.. and that you may bring joy to his heart by bearing genuine Christian fruit, and that your knowledge of God may grow yet deeper."

I wouldn't call that a credible source by your own standards, as you use against chomsky. Chomsky has researched for YEARS and uses FACTS, this religious couple use GOD. Hmmmm. Pot calling the kettle black is it?

Quote
rrmoderator
There is plenty of hard news and related links relevant to the subject of cults, controversial groups and movements.

If there was rr these sites wouldn't be necessary - are you arguing yourself out of existence?

So you only trust corporate news sources?! Have you ever researched that? Thats pretty narrow-minded as a basis for study. I could give you pages of examples of corporate news lies.

Do you believe that cults have not infultrated news sources?! rr - are you being serious here? News sources are in no way more valid than either of the two sources I provided - in fact, taking economic factors into account (if you are able to), then news sources are distinctly LESS reliable.

Have you seen or read 'necessary illusions' (chomsky)? Have you seen the more recent outfoxed? Outfoxed is certainly NOT conspiracy, it is about media manipulation of a country, using only extracts from news - ring any bells?! Hard to find in the US I'm told.

You discount government records and un records - so where do you think the news SELECT and PROCESS their news from? Do you still entertain a notion of investigative journalism? Do you think after all the court cases that US media WANT to research cults?! Do you know (you probably do actually) how much that would cost?!

And the press of the rest of the world? Do you ever read news from around the world?!

Quote
rrmoderator
Though brainwashing does relate at times to terroists, for example Osama bin Laden's trainging camps and recruits.

Regretably you do not offer a definition of terrorist. I don't believe there is evidence of the IRA used these techniques. But then, the US saw the IRA as freedom fighters. Oh, but then it did Al-queda when it formed it!

Quote
rrmoderator
The families of captured terroists often sound much like the families of cult members.

See [www.culteducation.com]

I read it a while ago - you forget I research!

Please give me some respect rr - first, that was written only one month after the event. One can only imagine how emotional the author must have been. I wouldn't say that was in the best mind frame to write a balanced study would it now?

That you use that particular bush quote is laughable. I mean, how simplistic is that view? That you use a quote from Jack Straw that he himself very quickly seemed to regret saying.

You say:

Quote

Bin Laden increasingly saw himself on a religious mission and Afghanistan eventually became his focus

I'm not going to argue, except you don't seem to source that opinion.

But erm, isn't GW Bush, you quote the guy above, isn't it he who believes that God spoke to him and told him he would be american president? What is the difference? Except for nationality? They both believe they are on a higher purpose.

I honestly am starting to see bush as under mind control - he displays disturbed, confused and incoherant speech certainly!

On the topic of bush, as your article seems to indicate him as some 'higher power', you do realise that I could very easily use both sets of findings of destructive cults and fill beneath headers quotes by GW bush showing him as part of a 'destuctive cult'?
And all the quotes would be from the media. I really am shocked at your blinkers to sources. To say Chomsky is only offering opinions is incrediably naive and egotistical. I don't think he has been right all the time, but if I need to know a certain UN decision (FACT), would I trust the new york times or chomsky more? Who has more to loose or gain?

A moderator here believes that the media has no negative intentions, nor effects on himself or his society. That sounds like brainwashing to me. Is this board infact existing merely to LIMIT the peoples ability to realise truths?
How can a cult be found unless someone questions? Do YOU trust the media to question? I believe this topic gets to the heart of that issue.
Did anyone here find out much from the media about the cult they were investigating? Nope, didn't think so, but hey - this whole site is junk and propaganda because it isn't in a corporate media page.

RR seems to think I and mjr40 are talking out of somewhere we shouldn't be. But who's offering factual evidence? and who is promoting a conspiracy theory?
But then, I believe we disagree with the term 'fact'.

I'm leaving this topic. This is obviously a kangaroo court. Just shocked at the attitude and blinkers. To argue against science with emotion is not what I expected here at all.

RU?ing:

Read the previous posts.

Please don't spam the board with conspiracy junk.

Quote
rrmoderator
Though brainwashing does relate at times to terroists, for example Osama bin Laden's trainging camps and recruits. The families of captured terroists often sound much like the families of cult members.

Yes, the radical Muslim elements are very cult-like, and as a true cult benchmark, will destroy those who leave Islam.

As for other 911/cult aspects, there are many interesting cult connections to those spreading 911 disinformation. I would label 911 disinformation as follows: controlled demolitions, no plane hit pentagon, WTC7, "holograms", the Jews did it. Plus many more. This is not to say I buy the gov's line either, there are many fishy aspects to 911, which is why a cloud of disinformation must be maintained by the wealthy AQ sympathizers who unfortunately own much of our economy.

As for the cult links to the 911 disinfo field...

1. John Gray financed a bogus "911 Truth" conference in Toronto. Aside from being a former number two man for the Maharishi cult, he was also business partners with Adnan Khashoggi, a former follower of the Maharaji cult along with Imelda Marcos. Khashoggi was also part of the Golden Chain document found in Bosnia listing AQ's financial backers/extortion victims.

2. Byron Belitsos. Major 911 disinfo player, allegedly involved with Urantia cult.

3. Richard Heinberg. "Peak Oil" conspiracy theorist popular in 911 circles. Former member of Emmissaries of Light cult of Glen Ivy Hot Springs, CA. Emmissaries of Light also spawned Jack Twyman, who is currently active in the "Indigo Children" cult movement.

4. Webster Tarpley. 911 Conspiracy theorist, longtime member of Lyndon Larouche cult. Stealth nazi.

5. Anthony Hilder. 911 conspiracy theorist, longtime Nazi, holocaust denier.

I could go on all day...

thanks, Mr. Ross, for the truly heroic effort. Your site is an embarrassment of riches.

If I may be so bold as to raise a few salient points:

- Objects falling at the rate of acceleration due to gravity is proven fact of Newtonian physics. Here it is being applied to the North Tower:
[www.archive.org]

- No steel framed strucuture before or after 9/11 has ever went into freefall collapse due to fire

- The only way a building can go into freefall collapse is via a controlled demolition from high explosives

- 99% of the steel from the World Trade Center was shipped to China to be melted down, thus destroying crcuial evidence

- 9/11, bin Laden and Al Qaeda have been continually used to induce fear in the population to launch wars and stifle dissent. Inducing fear are standard practices of mind-control cults

- While al Qaeda is a cult to be sure, many questions remain as to how they are financed. They get money from Saudi Arabia, which has many business ties to American oil companies and the US military-industrial complex. It can be posited that al Qaeda is kept going so as to keep the American people in a state of fear of an external enemy so that we will continually fund the oil/military/industrial complex. Maintaining an external enemy is a standard practice of mind control cults.

- UPI and The Washington Times are owned by the Unification Church, a large mind control cult. Thus even large news organizations can fall victim to cultic control.

- Not allowing questions or dissent by using thought-stopping speech are standard practices of mind control cults, ie: "You are for us or against us"

- Cultic psychology can be used at a national level, where information is strictly controlled, leaders rule without outside input, use fear to control the populace and brand dissenters as the enemy

- "Naturally, the common people don't want war ... but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." [Hermann Goering]

Quote
rrmoderator
There is no meaningful evidence to suppor this theory.

This is an excellent paper by a physics professor that looks at the materials science involved:
ABSTRACT
In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.
[www.physics.byu.edu]