Pudding Time
Banned
So what's more rational and logical about it?
9/11 Attacks -- TOO CREEPY!
- Thread starter Dodge_Sniper
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
So what's more rational and logical about it?
-
105Replies
-
2KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Which side is rational? You decide:
a) It's generally accepted (i.e., by most media publications, whatever their political leanings) that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Muslim terrorists.
b) they had the means, opportunity and motive to do it.
c) This brand of terrorism has occurred around the world: Madrid, Bali, Pakistan, etc. Or do you believe the Americans did those ones as well?
d) Given all this... why wouldn't there be an eventual terrorist strike within US territory?
Or, on the flipside:
a) this belief, and the propogation thereof, is generally (not exclusively, of course) the domain of conspiracy theorists. The guys who believe in aliens, faked moon landing, etc. I know who I'd believe out of Time Magazine, and Johnny the uni student.
b) I haven't really heard a clear explanation of WHY the US would want to destroy their own world trade center and kill hundreds of their own civilians. If they did as an excuse to go to Iraq (which, frankly, they didn't really need in the end), why didn't they fake some kind of 'missile attack' from the Iraqi government, for example? thus giving them a far more direct excuse to attack Iraq.
c) If it was a directive from the USA government, who was in on it? Was it Bush's masterplan (come on, Bush?), the entire Republican party, the CIA, or what? How would you get so many people to remain quiet about it? Remembering you live in a country that allows you to freely debate this very topic at this moment, on the internet, or in person. It just doesn't add up.
That, in my opinion, is what is more logical about my stance.
a) It's generally accepted (i.e., by most media publications, whatever their political leanings) that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Muslim terrorists.
b) they had the means, opportunity and motive to do it.
c) This brand of terrorism has occurred around the world: Madrid, Bali, Pakistan, etc. Or do you believe the Americans did those ones as well?
d) Given all this... why wouldn't there be an eventual terrorist strike within US territory?
Or, on the flipside:
a) this belief, and the propogation thereof, is generally (not exclusively, of course) the domain of conspiracy theorists. The guys who believe in aliens, faked moon landing, etc. I know who I'd believe out of Time Magazine, and Johnny the uni student.
b) I haven't really heard a clear explanation of WHY the US would want to destroy their own world trade center and kill hundreds of their own civilians. If they did as an excuse to go to Iraq (which, frankly, they didn't really need in the end), why didn't they fake some kind of 'missile attack' from the Iraqi government, for example? thus giving them a far more direct excuse to attack Iraq.
c) If it was a directive from the USA government, who was in on it? Was it Bush's masterplan (come on, Bush?), the entire Republican party, the CIA, or what? How would you get so many people to remain quiet about it? Remembering you live in a country that allows you to freely debate this very topic at this moment, on the internet, or in person. It just doesn't add up.
That, in my opinion, is what is more logical about my stance.
Pudding Time
Banned
Cool... Still nothing solid enough to sway me off the fence..
Pudding Time
Banned
south park got old about a decade ago
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Nah, they actually get progressively better imo
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members