• NSA talking points document: "Just mention 9/11"
    78 replies, posted
[QUOTE=adnzzzzZ;42711263]This is exactly what anyone said about someone who thought the government had the privacy invading capabilities that we now know they do. It's actually exactly the same argument. Looking back now, all the crazy conspiracy theorists were right. That doesn't mean anything about 9/11 is right, but given how related both subjects are it isn't out of the question to at least QUESTION the validity of the given reports and of the conspiracy theories. If you're paying attention at all to the leaks, you'd realize that his has been happening for over a decade, so they were able to keep it a secret for that long at least.[/QUOTE] The difference is that one is a speculated capability that was never out of the question and was never contradicted by public evidence. While the other is a conspiracy that ignores all available evidence and the testimonies of experts in the relevant fields in favor of wild amateur speculation by college students. There is a world of difference between the two. Let's also totally ignore that we know of the NSA operations because of a leaker who felt that the NSA's actions were unjustified, whereas despite the incredible number of people needed to pull off a conspiracy on 9/11 and despite the deaths of thousands of Americans and untold damage [I]not one person[/I] has come forward on account of their conscience. The reveal of NSA operations doesn't lend credence to 9/11 conspiracy theories any more than the Air Force revealing the newest stealth fighter lends credence to allegations of the military using flying saucers.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42705814]do you guys in other countries have an equivalent of 9/11? like do you guys ever watch political debates on tv in london and somebody goes "hey what about that one time the americans didn't want the stamp tax" and suddenly gets everyone to support them?[/QUOTE] I can't remember Breivik being mentioned once during the election campaign this year in Norway.
[QUOTE=catbarf;42711380] While the other is a conspiracy that ignores all available evidence and the testimonies of experts in the relevant fields in favor of wild amateur speculation by college students. [/QUOTE] I agree that there is some ignoring going on on one side, but there's also some ignoring going on from people who don't believe it. On the video above, how to explain the very nicely timed and profitable trades that happened just before the attacks? The information was out that something was going to happen. And "wild amateur speculation" is how intelligence works (although without the amateur part :p). Analysts basically read a bunch of information (you can do it with news) and try to connect the dots based on the information they have access to. Something like this: [URL]http://www.reddit.com/r/anotherarchive/comments/1h12ah/archive/[/URL] [QUOTE=catbarf;42711380] There is a world of difference between the two. Let's also totally ignore that we know of the NSA operations because of a leaker who felt that the NSA's actions were unjustified, whereas despite the incredible number of people needed to pull off a conspiracy on 9/11 and despite the deaths of thousands of Americans and untold damage [I]not one person[/I] has come forward on account of their conscience. [/QUOTE] Yea, I kind of agree here. But this depends on how such an operation would be carried out. It depends on how many people were in on it. If it was a considerably low number then it's no surprise it hasn't happened. Like I mentioned before, the NSA managed to keep it a secret that they could watch everything for a LONG time before it was widely spread, and there were less than 10 leakers in total. Comparatively, assuming it was an inside job, the number of people who were in on it is probably magnitudes lower than the number of people who had access to the information Snowden had. Don't underestimate the power that having enough money and leading relatively careless and comfortable life has on people. [QUOTE=catbarf;42711380] The reveal of NSA operations doesn't lend credence to 9/11 conspiracy theories any more than the Air Force revealing the newest stealth fighter lends credence to allegations of the military using flying saucers. [/QUOTE] Yea because the fact that in mid-2008 oil was at it's peak price doesn't lead to 3 months later the market crashing. Just because you can't see a link between two events (because you don't have enough information) doesn't mean there isn't one.
[QUOTE=adnzzzzZ;42711523]Just because you can't see a link between two events (because you don't have enough information) doesn't mean there isn't one.[/quote] hmmmm
What I find funniest about conspiracy theories about the US government trying to get more power is that the US government has had it this entire time. Objectively speaking, the United States is the most massive and influential country in the world, and the US government is literally the single most powerful body on the planet. They already represent the largest force in the world market, have a military that is more highly funded than essentially every other nation combined, and they are in no danger of losing this status at any point in the foreseeable future. They don't need big shady conspiracy theories, because they already have a firm enough grip on their position to milk it for longer than any of us will be alive. What more is there to gain from such wacky tactics? Do you imagine that they'd like to hook us up to the Matrix so they can rule over the world twice over, or something? The US government isn't some Orwellian monster bent on world domination; they're just stupid, petty, and greedy. Shit like the NSA goes down not because some shady dude in a volcano lair is tenting his fingers at the end of a long mahogany table, but because a rotund little capitalist of suspect moral fiber saw a chance to land a fat government contract by picking at our fears, and lined the right pockets to make it happen. The government doesn't control the weather-- they just take advantage of it to try and convince everybody to buy cloud insurance.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;42711648]What I find funniest about conspiracy theories about the US government trying to get more power is that the US government has had it this entire time. Objectively speaking, the United States is the most massive and influential country in the world, and the US government is literally the single most powerful body on the planet. They already represent the largest force in the world market, have a military that is more highly funded than essentially every other nation combined, and they are in no danger of losing this status at any point in the foreseeable future. They don't need big shady conspiracy theories, because they already have a firm enough grip on their position to milk it forever. What more is there to gain from such wacky tactics? Do you imagine that they'd like to hook us up to the Matrix so they can rule over the world twice over, or something? The US government isn't some Orwellian monster bent on world domination; they're just stupid, petty, and greedy. Shit like the NSA goes down not because some shady dude in a volcano lair is tenting his fingers at the end of a long mahogany table, but because a rotund little capitalist of suspect moral fiber saw a chance to land a fat government contract by picking at our fears, and lined the right pockets to make it happen. The government doesn't control the weather-- they just take advantage of it to try and convince everybody to buy cloud insurance.[/QUOTE] Plus, there is the simple clause that applies to all these situations - Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.
[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;42709111]The terrorists won. They won so much they wouldn´t have thought they could win even if you made a telephone call back before 9/11 and told them directly. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Doom14;42710901]Yeah, terrorists won alright. They made a global superpower basically do a shitting backflip onto it's own dick with some scare tactics.[/QUOTE] Do you guys realize you're basically restating the old 'terrorists hate us for our freedoms' nonsense? Some guy with an AK in backwoods Afghanistan doesn't give two shits how you feel about your government. Groups like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban haven't been fighting to make Americans give up their rights (and in doing so funnel even more money into fighting terrorism), they've been fighting to try to convince Americans to give up and go home and stop interfering in the Middle East. You may notice they haven't exactly done a spectacular job at that.
[QUOTE=adnzzzzZ;42711523]Yea because the fact that in mid-2008 oil was at it's peak price doesn't lead to 3 months later the market crashing. Just because you can't see a link between two events (because you don't have enough information) doesn't mean there isn't one.[/QUOTE]Making excessively loose associations is sign of schizophrenia, you know. Specifically, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derailment_%28thought_disorder%29]derailment.[/url]
[QUOTE=catbarf;42711380]The difference is that one is a speculated capability that was never out of the question and was never contradicted by public evidence. While the other is a conspiracy that ignores all available evidence and the testimonies of experts in the relevant fields in favor of wild amateur speculation by college students. There is a world of difference between the two. Let's also totally ignore that we know of the NSA operations because of a leaker who felt that the NSA's actions were unjustified, whereas despite the incredible number of people needed to pull off a conspiracy on 9/11 and despite the deaths of thousands of Americans and untold damage [I]not one person[/I] has come forward on account of their conscience. The reveal of NSA operations doesn't lend credence to 9/11 conspiracy theories any more than the Air Force revealing the newest stealth fighter lends credence to allegations of the military using flying saucers.[/QUOTE] But substantial evidence beyond merely leaving information supports that the collapse of building seven was planned. I'm not the tin foil hat conspirator that would pull the inside job card, but there's no coincidence in that.
[QUOTE=RikohZX;42706424]To be fair, the Red Scare was a circumstance of paranoia and aggression towards Stalin, communism and socialism in general, a byproduct of America in a competitive arms race with Russia out of fear that Russia might become a deadly superpower willing to throw its weight around and cause trouble for everyone. While we had close calls, Stalin's actions causing many tragedies in Russia and other countries, and probably numerous dead spies on both sides, the Red Scare and the Cold War surrounding it didn't ever go into full-blown chaos in a deathly carnage unleashed upon a populated city like 9/11 did. I'm not sure if i'm phrasing it entirely right, but what i'm trying to say is that the Red Scare formed political and social policies out of paranoia that was partially founded, partially just everyone being dicks to eachother. 9/11, as much as it's overused even today by the politicians and the media to get their way, had a far more sudden impact on the U.S. when nearly 3,000 end up dead from a handful of extremists deciding to organize and terrorize people. The government, to a degree, does have the right to try and prevent further circumstances like that from happening, but obviously if things like the Boston Bombings still occur despite all the information the NSA and CIA get daily on pretty much every single person they need to know about (and they [i]had[/i] info on the bombers, but some idiot basically shirked it off), then obviously they're not doing a very good job about it nor very responsible with the information.[/QUOTE] Dude. Korea, Vietnam, all of the conflicts of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and who knows where else are all direct resullts of the "red scare" because these proxy wars were held to fight the "communist danger". [editline]31st October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=SuddenImpact;42709111]The terrorists won. They won so much they wouldn´t have thought they could win even if you made a telephone call back before 9/11 and told them directly. Just mentioning 9/11 makes american shit their pants. You want to win the war on terror? Then understand why they did it and how you take away their resources. And that resource is fear. And more war just ends up enducing more fear which leads the people on their side.[/QUOTE] Basically deal with it like Norway did with Breivik.
[QUOTE=Killuah;42712700]Korea, Vietnam, all of the conflicts of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and who knows where else are all direct resullts of the "red scare" because these proxy wars were held to fight the "communist danger.[/QUOTE] Thus the 'many tragedies in Russia and other countries' bit. Something occurring on the homefront tends to hit people a lot harder than "FIGHTIN' THE DIRTY COMMIES" across the seas where the average citizen may or may not care, aside from factors like Vietnam which was its own little clusterfuck of both immorality as well as the media being dickwads due to new advances in technology.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;42712494]Making excessively loose associations is sign of schizophrenia, you know. Specifically, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derailment_%28thought_disorder%29]derailment.[/url][/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_analysis#Induction:_seeking_causality[/url] There's nothing excessively loose about associating oil prices and market crashes. The world runs on oil and it's to be expected that when people can't buy it anymore there will be some consequences. Look at that peak. :c [IMG]http://img.bfpublishing.com/rp%209.20.10-5.PNG[/IMG] Anyway, regarding the thread at hand, it's not a loose association at all to go from "entity wants more control and power" to "entity will do lots of things to achieve its goals, including harming people". It's a matter of finding proof that either aids that argument or disproves it. There are points of information that aid it and there are points of information that don't, so it's a matter of assessing the trustworthiness of who produced the information. I'm willing to go with publicly available sources than hidden ones, so there you have it.
I'm not as irritated with governments being spied on than things like 60,000,000 phone calls in Spain being tracked and virtually every means of communication in the U.S. being monitored at the same time. When you're influencing corporations and websites to allow backdoor access for broad and over-reaching motives then I think that's crossing a few lines. The apparent "Goal", while admirable, is probably not the real reason at all, and there are certainly less controversial ways of going about it.
Hey everyone, get a load of Michael Moore over here
[QUOTE=breakyourfac;42713860]Hey everyone, get a load of Michael Moore over here[/QUOTE] -snipNEVERMIND-
I was talking about the conspiracy theorist, not you
Guys guys guys How about a holy way on terrorism [editline]31st October 2013[/editline] I'd do like, field trips from all over europe to Jerusalem to fight them terrorists
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.