Was it possible to stop 9/11?

Doublemint said:

Yet even Trump predicted a year before 9/11 that Osama would make a huge entrance and we would wind up bombing Afghanistan looking for him in caves.

Thanks,
Ed

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dc3_1445539047#3di3mjQz6WLre7PC.99
“I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the Trade Center look like kids playing with firecrackers,” wrote Trump in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve. “No sensible analyst rejects this possibility, and plenty of them, like me, are not wondering if but when it will happen.”

“One day we’re told that a shadowy figure with no fixed address named Osama bin-Laden is public enemy number one, and U.S. jetfighters lay waste to his camp in Afghanistan,” The Donald wrote. “He escapes back under some rock, and a few news cycles later it’s on to a new enemy and new crisis.” -- Donald Trump, circa 2000​

Click to expand...

So, "hot air" Trump knew.... then why wasn't he at the Trade Towers that morning, with hundreds of hired men to evacuate the buildings and area? Ah...... He perhaps was one of millions who knew about terrorism and the possibility of attacks (who didn't know that before 9/11? Was there anyone on the planet who didn't know that?) but that's a LONG, LONG way from knowing about 9/11 (and choosing to do nothing to prevent it).

Look..... like "The Donald," everyone on the planet knew - and knows - that terrorists desire to create terror and the possibility of horrible attacks exists. It's why we go through all that at the airport, etc., etc. "The Donald" trying to puff up his ego to claim he TOO knew this is just "The Donald" being "The Donald." But this does not mean there was some US conspiracy that KNEW exactly what would happen - and either caused or welcomed it. That's quite a leap. And IMO, quite untenable. Even for uber-liberals who regard President Bush to be Satan incarnate and the US to be the "evil empire" that must be destroyed.



That's my opinion.....


- Josiah

bill1231 said:

The ones on the hijacked plane that crashed in Pa had courage

Click to expand...

Based on the official version of events didn't they know what had happened to the other planes and therefore probably figured they might as well go down fighting?

bill1231 said:

Yes and that took courage

Click to expand...

Sure, but choosing to fight and probably die instead of not fight and probably die is a very different proposition to choosing to fight and probably die instead of not fight and probably land in Cuba while negotiations for your release go on.

bill1231 said:

So you dont think they were heros? I know they were and at least in their minds they stood as much chance of surviving and taking the plane over as to crashing it.

Click to expand...

That's not what I said, I noted that facing a likely death is a more appealing option than facing a near-certain death. Facing a likely death when the option is facing a likely eventual release takes a lot more commitment. If they truly did know of the fate of the other three planes they really had nothing to lose by fighting back, which in turn requires less courage than fighting back when you very much have something to lose.

For myself if I knew that in all likelihood I was going to die that day I think I'd go down fighting. If I knew that in all likelihood I'd stay alive if I didn't rock the boat I'd think twice about doing something that would cause my likely demise. Maybe I'm just not a hero, or less of a hero.

bill1231 said:

What I can tell you is that noone knows until they are placed in a situation like that. No matter how much you think you might do something it is entirely possible that you wont if placed in a life and death situation

Click to expand...

Can't argue with that.

Doublemint said:

Of course it was possible.
There are SO many holes in this whole story the only thing that keeps it together is that people are afraid to even think to think outside of box.
We are becoming like USSR - afraid to question.
911 needs to be re-investigated.
I was there in 2001, in the office few miles away in Midtown Manhattan.

A disclaimer - no, I do not believe U.S. planned this thing ... but we certainly knew about it and did a major cover up of this whole thing.

Am I supposed to believe this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PySCa9wZdf8



Thanks,
Ed

Click to expand...

Thumbs up for the video posted.

I don't adopt the disclaimer. I do believe certain individuals and organizations were involved (from the US and elsewhere) in planning and organizing the "event". I also don't think one can look to and trust any "authority", such as a government organization to do the investigative work involved, come to a conclusion, then present it to the masses as "the real truth" in a neat little package that everyone will accept. Plenty of individuals from around the world, some working independently and some in groups, have dug up, investigated, and come to certain conclusions regarding the event that I find much more believable than anything mass media or the government has put forth. Some of these persons are experts in their relative fields, such as aviation, to take one example, and their views hold more weight as an authority in my mind than any assumed governmental "authority".

One of the problems (and this will always be a problem, I'm afraid) is the use and misuse of emotional manipulation to lead people, or bias them, for or against a certain position. The first question to ask with regard to any event that asks us to devote emotional energy to (as in sympathy, empathy etc) - is whether or not it is TRUE. Because if it is not, then it is a wicked manipulation designed for the purpose of deception.

This is true for calls to action as well. If a stranger tells me a sad story and asks me to pray for them - the mere act of getting on my knees and praying over the situation is an acknowledgement that I accept it as being true. I would do this for a good friend, or someone who I might not know well but who has shown in various ways that they are being genuine.

A good illustration of emotive manipulation done by media to further and cement certain conclusions about 911 can be seen in the following video:


The person who created it and the forum he hosts has a lot of eye-opening information. Not that I accept all of it without question - but to even consider some of the stuff one needs to put aside their emotional biases and just have a look at the data to see if what is being said could possibly considered true.

That is - if one is not afraid of being labeled a "conspiracy theorist" or "nut job" by those who do not care about facts or logic but only wish to make a certain narrative for their own purposes.

Interesting posts about emotional manipulation Stravinsk, and it got me thinking about a related issue of questions loaded with inherent but unstated assumptions that frequently get thrown around in any situation.

A question like "How should the government achieve (goal)?" prompts all sorts of responses about the assorted ways the government might raise the funding, overcome public objections, present the case in a positive light etc but all such responses miss the bias loaded into the question. Specifically, before asking how the government should achieve a goal it's perhaps worth asking whether the government should be doing it at all.