File: bring your own tinfoil hat.swf-(6.41 MB, 320x180, Other)
[_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)16:21:52 No.

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)19:04:36 No.

  This is interesting if any of it is true, though I doubt it

>> [_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)19:05:37 No.

  3 buildings with 2 planes? I thought it was 4 planes and one crashed in a field in PA or something

>> [_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)19:07:33 No.

  >>3138211
  Yeah one of my Professors was friends with Todd Beamer

>> [_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)19:27:47 No.

  Yeah, and you can still get pregnant from swallowing.

>> [_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)22:01:31 No.

  >>3138153
  I mean there's no doubt that the government is full of shit but bin Laden was a son of
  billionaire and graduate of economic university so money source should be obvious. Also I don't
  think it's that hard to hide from the US military being a skilled soldier living on different
  continent.

>> [_] Anonymous 08/25/16(Thu)22:58:43 No.

  Let's say, hypothetically, you're Dick Cheney, and you wanna start a war in Iraq and,
  simultaneously, take care of a audit that's supposed to reveal a 'missing 2.3 trillion dollars.'

  You can
  A) Engage in a massive operation to hire actors to pretend to stage hijackings of planes(?), rig
  several buildings with explosives with the intent of detonating them after they get hit by said
  planes to ensure they fall down, because getting hit by planes isn't enough, they have to fall
  down for some reason (??), destroy a massive portion of your country's own defense infrastructure
  in an attempt to take out a few rooms in a building(???), before finally pinning the attack on
  some guy in Afghanistan/Pakistan and then later spending a whole *year* trying to somehow draw
  ties between this guy in a cave and some dictator in a completely different country, who is the
  guy you actually want to overthrow(????)

  Or... OR:

  You could plant a small bomb in the Pentagon, say Bin Ladin funded the attack, and then just
  straight up plant chemical weapons in Iraq if you want to go after Saddam as well. There is zero
  reason to have to deal with planes, building demolition, any of that shit. Why... just why?

  How the fuck is the U.S. govt. simultaneously capable of orchestrating this massively complex
  deception operation with such success that the majority of people fall for it, and yet
  simultaneously so completely stupid that they decide to come up with this needlessly complicated,
  expensive plan that's so full of holes any idiot with a youtube account can expose them?

>> [_] Anonymous 08/26/16(Fri)00:00:51 No.

  >>3138305
  thats just not how command structures work

  boss says "solve problem x"
  now this dude is the boss to some other dude
  sub-boss says "solve proble y"
  and that underfunded sub-boss uses a combination of doing nothing and doing something bad to not
  go over budget.

  its like when they didnt tell churchill they were relaying ultra intel to the soviets, when
  infact it was siphoned directly from bletchley park. solved the problem. was far more damaging
  than the boss asked for. history books didnt care, for like 50 years.

>> [_] Anonymous 08/26/16(Fri)00:28:28 No.

  >>3138328
  The idea of this flash is to say that an attempt by terrorist groups to launch the 9/11 attacks
  is based on ridiculous premises, but if you accept that you have to then jump on board with
  accepting an even more ridiculous premise that the govt. attempted this over complicated plan,
  managed to pull it off and yet was simultaneously so incompetent that it left massive gaps in its
  story.

  9/11 conspiracy theories fail to understand that pretty much any alternative method for
  accomplishing the 'goals' of the conspiracy (bringing a nation to war, eliminating jeopardizing
  financial documents, drumming up support for extra govt. powers,) would have been less convoluted.

  It's like the exact opposite of occam's razor; Take an event, come up with the most convoluted
  explanation you can think of, then when faced with evidence of a different interpretation of
  events, continue to add more complexity to the explanation in order to justify the initial
  position.

  This isn't exactly a comment directed against you, I don't think you're a 9/11 conspiracy
  theorist, but rather just trying to point out a hole in my example. It's more of a rant against
  the logic that goes into these 9/11 theories in general.