theworldofdreams.com

Cecil wrote:Also, do your admins usually encourage such flames?

Sorry, I get bored sometimes

Drocket wrote:Bush's oil buddies have wanted to build a pipeline across Afganistan for quite a while now, but the Taliban refused to go along with the deal. Thats why Bush spent so much time kissing up to them the first year he was in office. When they still refused, he simply moved on to plan B: take what he wants by force.

I agree that oil was a factor in the Afganistan/Iraq wars, but I don't think it was the main one.

Top Pentagon officials cancel 9-11 travel plans the day before.

Of course. They knew something was up.

So are you saying that you think there is a conspiracy then, one not relating to Zionism at all?

2 Israeli office workers near the WTC recieved detailed warnings 2 hours before the attack.

Proof? And please don't point me to the long-winded, incomprehensible gobbly-gook that you linked to before, or Google searches that simply bring up more of the same.

Scepticism is good of course.
Here is a link for you with the proof:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages ... emNo=77744
Notice it is on a Jewish news site.

FBI hold these men as 9-11 suspects, but they are eventually deported.

Could it be that they had nothing to do with the attack? No, of course not. Its a conspiracy.

The fact that their boss also up and disappeared leaving a hundred customers' belongings in locked storage is odd.
Why were the Zionist terrorists caught red handed in Mexico released when they were obviously up to no good? Someone with a lot of power pulling strings I think.

It think it would have been a bit suspicious for the hijackers to take their car with them as carry-on luggage.

Ever heard of a taxi? People sophisticated enough to pull off that operation would surely consider using a taxi to avoid leaving clues and wasting resources. Unless they wanted to make it look like some else did it that is.

It is unlikely that the sophisticated perpatrators of 9-11 would bother using fake IDs that point blame on their own people.

The entire POINT of terrorist activity is to spread a message (stop doing X or we'll blow you up when you're least expecting it.) If no one knows who commited the terrorist act, there's no message attached to it, making the whole thing moot.

By definition terrorism is using violence to coerce society/policy. If you consider history, terrorism is more effective at generating sympathy for the victim than admiration for the aggressor. Who benefited most from the aftermath of 9-11? Surely not Arabs.

Palestinian suicide bombers hardly qualify as terrorists by definition. For every Israeli killed 10 palestinians are killed in retaliation. Suicide bombing is simply the only way the can fight against totally superior forces.

High profile terrorism like 9-11 is something far different and more sophisticated I think.

In January India arrests 11 arab preachers boarding a flight on suspicion that the are hijackers. It turns out however that they were actually Israeli nationals and are eventually released.

Could it be that it was simply a misunderstanding? No wait, that's right, its a conspiracy.

These people were not only dressed as, but actually claimed that they were muslim preachers. It was their passports that showed they were really Israelis.
The article also described that Tel Aviv "exerted considerable pressure" on Delhi to secure their release and said "It appeared that they could be working for a sensitive organization in Israel and were on a mission to Bangladesh," the official said.

Bush claimed he thought the first impact was due to pilot incompetance. When informed about the second impact he continues to read to kids a story about a little goat.

Bush being dense and incompetent - who woulda thunk it?

at the very least he should never have been president, but I don't think you give him enough credit. But even if he was completely brain dead all the very intelligent people with him must have known what was going on.

German intelligence suggest a conspiracy, ?The planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement?to hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes and within one hour, to drive them into their targets, with complicated flight maneuvers,? said von Bülow in the Tagesspiegel interview. ?This is unthinkable, without years of support from state intelligence services." He also suggest brainwashing/propaganda in the US.

They practiced on Microsoft Fight Simulator. Didn't you hear?

please take this seriously

Boston airport security was handled by Huntleigh USA which is owned by Israeli companies. They are being sued for gross negligence.

Israeli security companies benefiting from increased demand after 9-11.

Aren't these a tad contradictory?

Not if you consider there might be more than just one Israeli security company.

WTC engineer calls collapse of WTC unbelievable. WTC was designed to withstand airplane impact.

Intended to withstand impact from small commuter planes that might crash by accident, not major commercial transport jets deliberately steered into them.

That is not what the WTC construction manager said. Read this:
http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_22_ ... _expl.html

The total collapse of WTC 1, WTC 2, AND WTC 7 (which was never even hit by a plane!) were all perfectly symmetrical and methodical. The three straight down collapses were all identical in appearance to well engineered, controlled implosions.

If someone managed to rig the buildings to implode, why precisely would they bother with the planes?

Without the planes it wouldn't have been a suicide attack. As it is there would be no remaining suspects or evidence to look for. That way the media can quickly give us the cooked up identities of 20 Saudis without anyway to verify it.

Another reason might be to draw suspicion away from those who were supposed to be guarding the WTC on the ground.

Also, relatively few people work in the WTC but many people fly. 9-11 threatens people more directly with planes.

And it was very dramatic seeing the plane collision. People would expect bombs to all go off at once but that wouldn't give news crews time to get the explosion on film or such a spectacular display.

Later Van suddenly flip flops his appraisal

Because he realizes he's wrong? No wait, that's right, its a conspiracy.

You seem to reject something on the mere grounds that it is a conspiracy. Read the article and you will see an extreme change in his position.

Fire fighters and journalists report a bomb or explosions going off before the collapse.

There certainly wouldn't be any explosions going on in a building struck by a plane and buring our of control, right?

Not coming from floors far below the fire that was well contained by the engineering design.

According to FOX news...

That right there's enough to discredit any following statement. "Fox news reports that the sky is blue" would have me double-checking.

Yeah, I've thought that for a long while. But considering that FOX later self sensored the series I think they must have accidently let some truth slip by.


You're getting bored already? But, you didn't address all the numerous other stories of Israel terrorists being being caught, and the fact that the FBI is still accusing living men of being the hijackers.

Oops, I made a mistake.

Scepticism is good of course.
Here is a link for you with the proof:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages ... emNo=77744
Notice it is on a Jewish news site.

The article I linked to doesn't say that two workers were Israeli themselves necessarily. The company itself is known to be Israeli though so there's a good chance:
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/8471_893851

Needless to say though, I don't think Osama Bin Ladin would have had the courtesy to warn an Israeli company.

Anonymous wrote:So are you saying that you think there is a conspiracy then, one not relating to Zionism at all?

No, mostly just incompetence. There were major, major, major warnings that something big was going to happen, and several high-ranking government officials completely dropped the ball (which is why Bush has fought so hard to keep any investigations from doing their job.) Still, they had a good indication that SOMETHING was up, even if they didn't know what.

Scepticism is good of course.
Here is a link for you with the proof:

Referring mostly to the second link you provided: Even that report says that the IM didn't have any details, just a vague warning that 'something' was going on. And as I said, at that point, it was far from a secret that something going going on.

The fact that their boss also up and disappeared leaving a hundred customers' belongings in locked storage is odd.

Someone taking the money and running never happens.

Why were the Zionist terrorists caught red handed in Mexico released when they were obviously up to no good? Someone with a lot of power pulling strings I think.

Proof that they were 'caught red handed'?

Ever heard of a taxi? People sophisticated enough to pull off that operation would surely consider using a taxi to avoid leaving clues and wasting resources. Unless they wanted to make it look like some else did it that is.

They were going to blow themselves up. Why exactly should they worry about their car? As for leaving clues, again, they WANT people to know who they are and what they did.

By definition terrorism is using violence to coerce society/policy.

Its hard to coerce people to do something when they don't know what it is that they're supposed to do.

If you consider history, terrorism is more effective at generating sympathy for the victim than admiration for the aggressor. Who benefited most from the aftermath of 9-11? Surely not Arabs.

Actually, its worked out pretty well for them, I think. After the US invaded Afganistan looking for Bin Laden, the fundimentalists made a lot of progress pushing Middle-Eastern governments towards their own viewpoints. Now that Hussein is out of the way, they're in an even better position to control the region.

These people were not only dressed as, but actually claimed that they were muslim preachers. It was their passports that showed they were really Israelis.
The article also described that Tel Aviv "exerted considerable pressure" on Delhi to secure their release and said "It appeared that they could be working for a sensitive organization in Israel and were on a mission to Bangladesh," the official said.

Ok, so perhaps they were Israeli spies. And yes, of course Israel has spies - every government does, in some way, shape or form. That doesn't mean that they were up to anything 'wrong', or anti-US or anything. Who knows, maybe they were on a mission to infiltrate Al-Qaeda.

at the very least he should never have been president, but I don't think you give him enough credit. But even if he was completely brain dead all the very intelligent people with him must have known what was going on.

They weren't with him. They figured he could handle reading a story about a goat to children by himself.

That is not what the WTC construction manager said.

And that's not what the original designer of the WTC says:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/Dail ... 20912.html

The American Society of Civil Engineers report on the collapse essentially said that they don't think its even POSSIBLE to design a building that could have survived the event, and that they're in fact not sure how they managed to remain standing so long:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

Another reason might be to draw suspicion away from those who were supposed to be guarding the WTC on the ground.

The number of people who fly is small compared to the number of people who live or work in or near large buildings.

And it was very dramatic seeing the plane collision. People would expect bombs to all go off at once but that wouldn't give news crews time to get the explosion on film or such a spectacular display.

You blow up one, wait 20 minutes, then blow up the other one.

Another interesting question: If you're going to blow up the building, why would you set it to so neatly implode? Wouldn't it have been a lot more damaging and impressive if they had toppled over sideways? And if that's not enough, it would have helped prevented the sort of suspicion that you have about the way it collapsed.

Not coming from floors far below the fire that was well contained by the engineering design.

A thousand gallons of burning jet fuel are a tad hard to contain.

Hey, look at it this way, Sharon isn't doing anything we didn't do to the Native Americans.

Was many thousands of gallons of jp4 involved in that fire. while the buildings withstood the impact alright that kind of intense heat spread evenly over an entire floor would provide more than sufficient calories to soften the steel frame of the building. once the first floor squished it would become a domino effect very quickly.
nothing mystical or hard to explain about the towers coming down that i can see.

Ok, I have a bit more free time, so I'll rip apart another part of your conspiracy theory...

"Ringleader" Mohammed Atta described as timid, shy, goody-two-shoes mama's boy by his German ex-roommates. Having lost his passport he was an easy
victim for identity theft.

Though Atta spoke German, the person who enrolled in flight school in his name was unable to respond to a trainer's German small talk.

Atta's devastated, affluent parents claim the recieved a phone call from Atta on Sept 12. So what happened to the real Mohammed Atta? To quote his grief stricken father: "Ask Mossad!".

You asked me why I dislike conspiracy theories? The above is pretty much the reason: Conspiracy theories invariable rely on the conspiracists being idiot-savants. They successfully pull off horribly complicated and sophisticated actions, then make massive, truly stupid mistakes on everything else.

Just think about the series of events you've outlined above. They stole Atta's passport several years in advance. Then, while he was still living, they enroled a fake Atta in a flight school. That's rife with problems right there: It would certainly be a bad blow to the conspiracy if the real Atta would happen to, say, buy a car in Montana on the day he's supposedly in flight school in Florida. Either way, though, there's going to be records of where the real Atta was, whether he was attending school or had a job, and people are going to know him. Even if you say that he was kidnapped to prevent these sort of problems, then how did he manage to make a phonecall on the 12th? Surely they would have killed him on the 11th.

The whole scenario simply doesn't make sense. How hard would it have been for the conspiracists to simply find 20 single Arabs a few months before 9-11, blow their brains out, then steal their passports off their corpses? Of considering that the conspiracists supposedly have control of the US government, how hard would it be to sneak someone in to Immigration and print out some fake passports? That way, you can make up any sort of background for them you want and not have to worry about reality contradicting it. You don't even have to worry about people figuring out that the background is fake: you can just say that Al-Qaeda must have set it up to help them get into the country.

It simply requires WAY too large of a leap of faith to believe the conspiracy theory version of events.

I think "guest" needs to:

1. Move to Montana
2. Get a little cabin in the woods
3. Buy tons of guns
4. Go to secret conspiracy meetings with the other nuts that live in cabins in the woods in Montana.
5. Wear a tinfoil hat so the government can't read his thoughts.

(could a moderator erase my two posts above that are exactly like this one? The board really messed up for me or something and I got logged and then my post posted twice lmao. Thanks.)

I think Guest (a.k.a. "Consiparacy Lyl") needs to pay another visit to his pyschiatrist and tell him about the dozen or so conspiracy theories he's come up with this year alone. Seriously, people that are just itching to hear the latest conspiracy theory (or to come up with one of their one like Lyl did so often here) HAVE TO have some mental problems. I dunno maybe they were abused by their parents when there were children or have some trust issues. Maybe they just dislike authority (of any kind) and are always looking for ways to place the blame for their problems/failures in life on the people with authority over them (the psychological term I believe is "projection?").

After all, what's more comforting, to face the ugly facts of life--that you are middle-aged already and are still a lifeless loser who spends a great deal of time doing nothing but looking up conspiracy theories on the web--or to pretend you've made some great, life-changing discovery that the entire world would benefit in listening to you?

Lyl, best advice I can give you, get a life. Seriously.

alright guys lets just drop it. I will not give my full out american supported opinion to this nut case...uh i mean person in fear of upseting drocket but let me just say you mind is full of mislead ignorant...shall we say dribble for lack of a word that wont get me into trouble. *looks at drocket for approvel* and really buddy if drocket feels the site should be blocked or banned or what not that is what happens. go cry to someone else about it because talking against a gm here doesnt get you anywhere except on a list of not respected people.

Elwen Dragonfire

*edited in* Here here joram. You just read my mind

Joram Lionheart wrote:After all, what's more comforting, to face the ugly facts of life--that you are middle-aged already and are still a lifeless loser who spends a great deal of time doing nothing but looking up conspiracy theories on the web--or to pretend you've made some great, life-changing discovery that the entire world would benefit in listening to you?

And you spend your time playing video games.

I think there's actually a good-sized connection there. Life is complicated and messy. 95% of it is mundane and utterly boring: people going to work everyday and trying to do what they have to in order to get home in time to watch a rerun of the Simpsons. The other 5% is completely random, unpredictable, and usually horrible: the earthquake that kills hundreds, the guy who falls asleep at the wheel and plows into a school bus, the heart attack that cuts down a good man in the prime of his life leaving his wife and three children to fend for themselves.

Life is yucky, and people deal with it in different ways. A lot of people spend their time looking for reasons for why things happen - thats why religeon, horoscopes and conspiracy theories exist. Others spend their free time retreating into fantasy worlds where good an evil are clearly defined and the just always prevail in the end. There's actually a lot of similarities between the two methods.

Who's to say which method of dealing with reality is actually the best...

Drocket wrote:Who's to say which method of dealing with reality is actually the best...

What is this "reality" you speak of?

Drocket wrote:And you spend your time playing video games.

And this too is an utterly pointless use of my time. But at least I don't go around claiming Zionists are going to cause World War III or something. I'm sorry, life might be tough, but that still doesn't give me the right to go spreading false rumours (potentially dangerous too) just to satisfy my egocentric drives. Once you start believing your own garbage then you're in for some serious $@#%!

There is a fine line between harmless hobbie and obessive compulsive behaviour. UO too can become a way to forget about your problems and "escape" into a fantasy world. Heck, when I was in HS and I had a bad day, all I had to do was log in talk with my friends for a while and forget about how sucky life was. Of course, this did me NO GOOD because I kept putting away those issues that I needed to deal with. I got some pretty bad grades in my last year of HS because I spent more time getting away to this non-existent fantasy world and not dealing with my very real problems in rl.

From what you are saying it sounds like Lyl's drug used to be WoD. His new addiction is to look up conspiracy theories on the web. Yeah, great improvement! Keep it up, loser. Great good it's going to do you 20 years down the road (if you don't feel like committing suicide before then, which I gurantee you will!)

Life is yucky, and people deal with it in different ways.

Or fail to deal with it at all. In this case, looking up conspiracy theories on the web is not going to help you to become a better person anymore than spending 7 days a week hunting trolls in Shame will. You have trust issues? How on earth is thinking up fantastic, evil-plots-to-take-over-the-world going to help you deal with those issues? It's not dealing. It's called taking a pill to get rid of the symptoms and ignore the disease that is killing you.

A lot of people spend their time looking for reasons for why things happen - thats why religeon, horoscopes and conspiracy theories exist.

Drocket, if you honestly believe I'm Christian because that's just my way of "dealing" with reality then you couldn't have a more contemptible conception of me. If I wanted a religion to help me "deal," Christianity wouldn't even make it to my top 5. There are tons of (false) religions out there that promise you the world at very little cost or personal commitment. There's a lot of things I could choose to believe about the supernatural that do not require me to obey the laws of any god or to go to church every weekend and follow through with all the other "motions." Heck, if I just wanted to deal I probably wouldn't even need a religion. I can just tell myself whatever I want to hear and whatever feels good (and there are certainly millions of people that do this).

I'm a Christian because I believe, period. I believe not because I tell myself every morning should believe, or because I really really want to believe (volitionism?). I believe because I have experienced things in my life that I could not even begin to explain away with mere scientific rationale. I have personal experiences that serve as my "proof" that my faith is not in vain, and that my religion isn't just another happy, feel-good human philosophy. If I had not seen what I've seen, felt what I've felt, and experienced what I have experienced I would have no solid ground on which to place my faith on.

I don't want to preach to you about the joy that it is to be a believer but there is no way conspiracy theories and horoscopes could possible do what my religion has done for me. It doesn't just help me to "deal." It does a lot more than that. God is a active character in my life and if he was not so, I would have not justifiable reason to believe any of the things I believe. I dare anyone to show me how conspiracy theories and horoscopes can help you get out of a deep, life-threatening depression, or give you real peace and comfort after the loss of a loved one, or save your life from that deadly car crash that by all objective accounts should have left you dead. If conspiracy theories and horoscopes can explain to you the mysteries of the universe and give you a sense of purpose and meaning in life, then by all means conspire away.

Others spend their free time retreating into fantasy worlds where good an evil are clearly defined and the just always prevail in the end. There's actually a lot of similarities between the two methods.

And good and evil are not clearly defined in the real world? I dunno about you but I have no problem watching a news program and be able to tell which events are from the devil and which are from God, so to speak. If that makes me a little bit too much like President Bush then so be it. For all his flaws, at least he is sure what he believes in.

Who's to say which method of dealing with reality is actually the best...

I'd say the almighty creator and maker of the universe (and mankind), but that probably doesn't mean much to you. I know "the way, the truth, and the life." Do you?

Joram Lionheart wrote:Drocket, if you honestly believe I'm Christian because that's just my way of "dealing" with reality then you couldn't have a more contemptible conception of me. If I wanted a religion to help me "deal," Christianity wouldn't even make it to my top 5.

But there are a whole lot of people who do choose those easy, feel-good religions, and seriously, probably a good 90% of so-called 'Christian' churches fall into that group. I've attended a lot of different churches in my life, and the theology of most of them boil down to 'go to church once a week (make sure you bring your tithing!) and do whatever the hell you want the rest of the week. Congratulations, you're going to Heaven, and everyone who's done you wrong is going to burn in hell for all enternity!

Don't misunderstand me: this isn't a criticism of Christianity in general. I've also had the opportunity to attend a few (too few, unfortunately) good churches. Active churches. Churches that make a difference in the lives of the people who attend them and the community around them. Churches that are actually willing to tell the congregation that they'll need to do a bit more than sleep in a pew for 90 minutes a week to get into heaven.

An active church is an amazing thing, but I have definitely found them to be the exception, not the rule. Most churches barely make the effort to go through the motions. And it really is a shame, because there's so much more that they could be and do. The part of me that's more deeply religious has sometimes wondered if they whole thing isn't a spiritual trap, set to catch the lazy with easy assurances of redeption.

Anyway, getting back the original point: There are, without a doubt, no matter what you convitions are, a lot of people who DO use religion as an 'easy-out' for all their problems.

And good and evil are not clearly defined in the real world?

Actions are usually pretty easily classifiably as good and evil. People are far more complicated. I've seen seemingly good people do truly awful things, and I've seen good attributes in people that I thought were scum. People far too often do the wrong things for the right reasons and the right thing for the wrong reasons for us, as mere humans, to be able to judge them.

Drocket wrote:But there are a whole lot of people who do choose those easy, feel-good religions, and seriously, probably a good 90% of so-called 'Christian' churches fall into that group.

Unfortunately, this is very true. And this is in no short measure due to the defective doctrinal teachings these denominations hold and impart to their members. The modern trend in Christianity seems to be make Christianity a religion that suits your comfortable, middle-class lifestyle as opposed to have your lifestyle change to fit your religion. I call this mass-marketed Christianity. The religion for the masses. The religion for the American consumer, who by the way, is always right.

It is funny that we happen to be talking about this because just today I was reminded of a verse in 2 Timothy that speaks of a time "when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear" (2 Tim 4:3). The context of that verse indicates that the author is speaking of false teachers in the Christian church itself, not outside.

Many so-called Christians denominations are ready and waiting to scratch that itch--to teach people a happy, feel-good Christianity that promises them the world at no or very little cost. "In my denomination, you don't have to follow any rules or do anything you don't want to do--that's legalism. All that matters is that you have love in your heart." They misuse Godly love to justify their allpermissive theology, and as a blank cheque to buy for themselves a delicious chunk of self-serving hedonism, and entertain their pleasure-seeking indulgences and practices.

Boy were Bible writers correct when they spoke of 'the days to come.' These so-called Christian denominations do a greater evil to the Church of Christ than all the Islamic radicals in the world combined!

I've attended a lot of different churches in my life, and the theology of most of them boil down to 'go to church once a week (make sure you bring your tithing!) and do whatever the hell you want the rest of the week. Congratulations, you're going to Heaven, and everyone who's done you wrong is going to burn in hell for all enternity!

Oh man, have I heard those preachers on TV give people the 60-second speech before the commercial break on how your monetary contribution will gurantee you the grace of God. As if they controlled the will of God or had a monopoly on the gifts of the Spirit.

Churches that are actually willing to tell the congregation that they'll need to do a bit more than sleep in a pew for 90 minutes a week to get into heaven.

Well, it's not so much about what you do as it is who you do it for. You can engage in all the 'good works' you can think of from youth to old age, but that in no way will that gurantee you either salvation or a happy, fulfilling life. Unfortunately, there are also those who bother going through all the motions, follow the 'rules' by the letter, and do all the things they're supposed to do, but never really give their lives to Christ [this is a big problem in my denomination that
Church leaders are always working hard to prevent].

It's a lot easier to have the appearence of righteousness than it is to have righteousness (i.e. God) in your heart, to paraphrase a well-known bible verse. One cannot be too careful in trying not to get caught in that vicious mentality of "I must do such-n-such in order for God to love me." Well, God already loves you; now all you have to worry about is to love God more than yourself, and the good works will flow naturally and without much effort.

The part of me that's more deeply religious has sometimes wondered if they whole thing isn't a spiritual trap, set to catch the lazy with easy assurances of redeption.

You hit it right on the mark, D. It is PRECISELY what you say, "a spiritual deception."

Actions are usually pretty easily classifiably as good and evil. People are far more complicated. I've seen seemingly good people do truly awful things, and I've seen good attributes in people that I thought were scum. People far too often do the wrong things for the right reasons and the right thing for the wrong reasons for us, as mere humans, to be able to judge them.

Again, very true. I can confidently say I can judge the sin but not the sinner, and I'm thankful that God does not require me to do so either (specially those outside the Church). Judging people is the Judge's prerogative, and I'm not that judge. From here follows the 'turn-the-other-cheek' theology Christ taught. Humans cannot judge other humans because they do not know the heart (i.e. motives) like God does. If you kill those that kill then you are already making judgments that are not yours to make. I don't want to get into a whole discussion on capital punishment so I better stop here.