Historian Dr. Daniele Ganser: "911 - What is the so called 'war on terror' really?" (Cologne, 06 Nov 2017)


(John Wilson) #22

If any one ever refers to me by using the CIA Term 'Conspiracy Theorist then be prepared for an epic intellectual exchange whereupon I will take you to task in detail. That being said, I completely agree with Alex’s assessment. It is a Zero Sum Game. There is nothing to be (politically) gained by raising this issue in any public forums.

However, within our own forums, I believe that we ought to be a bit more forthcoming and frank with each other. I say, no matter what we may think in private, it would be overwhelmingly suicidal to ‘make it’ a public issue.

Insofar as the published reports & articles above - including the assessments made by my fellow Pirate Party members (as to fire). I reject the lot it - with the deepest respect to all.


(Andrew Downing) #23

These forums are public.
Anybody with internet access can read this.


(Laura) #24

Unless I am entirely mistaken, I believe the military base in Pine Gap is key infrastructure for mass surveillance in the global “war on terror”. From memory it was Snowden’s docs which proved this fact. Pre-Snowden it was dismissed as conspiracy theory or nuts. Data collected here is used to kill people without them ever being captured, charged or sentenced. Including young children and people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I am sure that as Pirates, most of us are aware of these realities.

If you ask me, questions like “Why are we at war?” are entirely relevant to Australia’s international politics, and thus Party discussion.
I will not refrain from asking uncomfortable questions related to Australia’s participation in overseas wars, no matter how taboo they are in society. People’s lives are at stake.

People research this topic of 9/11 “Was it fire or explosives?” not because it is “fun”, or “historical”, but because it is highly relevant to current affairs.

I myself do not know the truth of the matter, I have not done a scientific computer model of the collapse myself, and all models that are out there, including the NIST ones, have not to my knowledge been peer-reviewed.

Nevertheless I will only stop quoting engineers who actually are qualified to answer some of the technical questions raised above, as soon as people stop calling their work conspiracy theories. They are scientists and engineers who have every right to make up their own mind about how skyscrapers collapse without being pressured by government narrative.
I for one will be watching how this progresses: http://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/

http://ine.uaf.edu/media/92355/wtc7_hulseystatement_20180327.pdf

It is interesting to me that questions aimed at the official US-government narrative are often labelled conspiracy theories even as the official story describes a conspiracy between terrorists to attack the American people. I’m not saying the official story is entirely wrong, I just think it raises some questions and would like to understand why we are in perpetual war for it.

Is it really that controversial to say that we might not fully understand 9/11?


(John Wilson) #25

Then you will note that I have not raised this matter nor elaborated on it.


(Laura) #26

agreed.

agreed. But are you aware of the origin of the Gulf State kingdoms and the history of the political and trade relationships between the UK, the US and eg the Saudis?

yes but one does not always exclude the other. In the case of Afghanistan it is often the local politicians and their friends and family members who benefit from corrupt trade deals along with the foreign corporations the deals are made with. but you’ve already seen my post with the interview about kleptocracies:

agreed.

Hope your show went well. If there is a published recording I’d like to know, as I didn’t get up at 4am Europe time to listen to the radio.

Sorry folks for getting a bit defensive before. I’m just a bit allergic to the term conspiracy theories. I’ve witnessed first hand the damaging effects that term can have unfairly on someone’s reputation, although in a different context.
I really don’t want to focus on how the WTC came down, but rather on how to end these perpetual wars, or at least Australia’s involvement in them.


(Adel Fazel) #27

"I think the 9/11 conspiracy saga is a complete waste of time and energy in the pursuit of a pointless delusion. Occam’s razor dictates here, in my opinion. There was clearly stated intent and motive by al-Qaeda prior to the attack. ",

  1. please provide reference for: “was clearly stated intent and motive by al-Qaeda prior to the attack”.
  2. assuming it is true, does it make them definitely the culprit?
  3. assuming above is false, that is Al-Qaeda were not the culprit, does it make it an internal job?
  4. which authority has assessed who was the culprit?

“The US did not steal Iraqi oil when in occupation”, that is rather odd statement. Not sure what does it mean? Can you clarify? You mean, Iraqi people, per person got larger share of oil money? US multinationals were not given full access to oil?
Have you or any person that you know of audited any of your statement?

  • insulting others and stating how much you believe in a statement and how stupid your opponents are is not a scientific way of getting your point across.