predicting? dude it had already happened like five times, to that building. once by bin laden. the bombs just kept getting found or not detonating.
they didn't even need to master the present tense to know this shit was happening, much less "predict" shit.
but also thinthread, so you know for a fact them knowing was only a matter of desire. they had none.
im not sure what counts as 'inside' but that's not even a point of concention. the owner wanted the building gone (it was about to cost him a LOT of money, it was insured, and people tried to blow it up a lot), the american signals intelligence had it (they had turned the machine off like a year earlier, literally because it wasn't expensive or corrupt enough), human intelligence had people LITERALLY CALLING THEM and saying 'uh, hey, I don't know who to report this to, but this guy who just took a flight class and didn't care about landing? he said some stuff about blowing up these specific buildings.(plus some probably racist xenophobic shit because they were americans and what proper red blooded american passes up an opportunity to say something unabashedly racist?)' and the guy who ordered it was a family friend of the president at the time. it was definitely "inside".
the only question is whether it was a 'job', the intention of it. a lot of people would say that doesn't matter. im not sure I would agree with them, but where exactly do you draw the line between incompetence and malevolence, especially in such a large structure when there's so much of both going in so many directions with so many influences and levels of management muddying everything? is anything intentional in such a system? and if not, then we must look at the function of the system, at what its 'job' is, and find there was absolutely none tasked to prevent this eventuality, despite robust knowledge and no small amount of theorizing, and when that 0 systems tasked with making it not happen lined up with several that caused the WTC attack, there you fucking go. they didn't even have to be much. some trashy geek who sent a friend's kid with a pocket knife, an asshole rich dude literally trying to burn a building down for the insurance money in what must be the actual oldest cliche in the book
so 9/11 was definitely an 'inside job' for any value of 'inside' and 'job' I can think of.
so 9/11 was definitely an ‘inside job’ for any value of ‘inside’ and ‘job’ I can think of.
If this was indeed intentionally let to happen and not just a case of oversight, it wouldn't be what most of the "9/11 was an inside job" people are saying. Idk how much interaction you've had with them, but they believe it was controlled demolition, and some believe there weren't even any planes that crashed into the building at all, although that is more rare. But yeah, when people say it was an inside job, 9/10 times they mean someone literally planted explosives to blow them up, and out of those, 9/10 times it has something to do with Jews. So allow me to be very skeptical of anyone who says they're a 9/11 truther.
I used to post in a small forum where there was a number of these kinds of people around, because it had an extremely lax moderation stance, and I lurked a bit at 4chan and 8chan and whatever just to see what the fuck is going on there. Nazis don't like the status quo. So they don't really have an issue taking stuff that's wrong with it and twisting them into a horribly perverted narrative.
I'm not sure what you mean by the last sentence, but I said that most 9/11 truthers saying 9/11 is an inside job aren't saying what you are saying, and you should be very skeptical of all of them.
right, fascists start with "X is wrong" which is usually a true statement, if based on very oversimplified shit, and then say "because Y" which is a little absurd or stupid, "so we must do Z", where "Z" is literally always "exterminate the jews and kneel before your god emperor" unless they're zionists, in which case it gets weird but all that's changed is the names of groups.
and im saying that's not necessarily a reason to not point out that X is wrong
predicting? dude it had already happened like five times, to that building. once by bin laden. the bombs just kept getting found or not detonating.
they didn't even need to master the present tense to know this shit was happening, much less "predict" shit.
but also thinthread, so you know for a fact them knowing was only a matter of desire. they had none.
im not sure what counts as 'inside' but that's not even a point of concention. the owner wanted the building gone (it was about to cost him a LOT of money, it was insured, and people tried to blow it up a lot), the american signals intelligence had it (they had turned the machine off like a year earlier, literally because it wasn't expensive or corrupt enough), human intelligence had people LITERALLY CALLING THEM and saying 'uh, hey, I don't know who to report this to, but this guy who just took a flight class and didn't care about landing? he said some stuff about blowing up these specific buildings.(plus some probably racist xenophobic shit because they were americans and what proper red blooded american passes up an opportunity to say something unabashedly racist?)' and the guy who ordered it was a family friend of the president at the time. it was definitely "inside".
the only question is whether it was a 'job', the intention of it. a lot of people would say that doesn't matter. im not sure I would agree with them, but where exactly do you draw the line between incompetence and malevolence, especially in such a large structure when there's so much of both going in so many directions with so many influences and levels of management muddying everything? is anything intentional in such a system? and if not, then we must look at the function of the system, at what its 'job' is, and find there was absolutely none tasked to prevent this eventuality, despite robust knowledge and no small amount of theorizing, and when that 0 systems tasked with making it not happen lined up with several that caused the WTC attack, there you fucking go. they didn't even have to be much. some trashy geek who sent a friend's kid with a pocket knife, an asshole rich dude literally trying to burn a building down for the insurance money in what must be the actual oldest cliche in the book
so 9/11 was definitely an 'inside job' for any value of 'inside' and 'job' I can think of.
If this was indeed intentionally let to happen and not just a case of oversight, it wouldn't be what most of the "9/11 was an inside job" people are saying. Idk how much interaction you've had with them, but they believe it was controlled demolition, and some believe there weren't even any planes that crashed into the building at all, although that is more rare. But yeah, when people say it was an inside job, 9/10 times they mean someone literally planted explosives to blow them up, and out of those, 9/10 times it has something to do with Jews. So allow me to be very skeptical of anyone who says they're a 9/11 truther.
okay so you're saying literal nazis are closer to correct than libs, but they use that as an excuse to be literal nazis, so...
god its fucked up but i see no flaws in how you got there.
I used to post in a small forum where there was a number of these kinds of people around, because it had an extremely lax moderation stance, and I lurked a bit at 4chan and 8chan and whatever just to see what the fuck is going on there. Nazis don't like the status quo. So they don't really have an issue taking stuff that's wrong with it and twisting them into a horribly perverted narrative.
that is kind of the whole thing of reactionaries.
you're saying we shouldn't take away their excuses because...???
I'm not sure what you mean by the last sentence, but I said that most 9/11 truthers saying 9/11 is an inside job aren't saying what you are saying, and you should be very skeptical of all of them.
right, fascists start with "X is wrong" which is usually a true statement, if based on very oversimplified shit, and then say "because Y" which is a little absurd or stupid, "so we must do Z", where "Z" is literally always "exterminate the jews and kneel before your god emperor" unless they're zionists, in which case it gets weird but all that's changed is the names of groups.
and im saying that's not necessarily a reason to not point out that X is wrong