Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
24. I grant you a lot of it is nonsense, but there are some troubling
Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:00 AM
Dec 2011

questions made all the more troubling by the silencing of the questions in the official account.

For example, I always say "Follow the money." I remember there were stories in the days that followed 9-11 about a huge surge in option trading in the stocks of United and American Airlines in the days immediately before 9-11. Specifically, the purchase of 'put options' (essentially, bets that the price of a share will go down). I have often wondered if the options trades were based on advance information of the attacks and have never seen any follow-up done in the official investigation. Who were those traders, what did they know and when did they know it?

David Ray Griffin has called for a new investigation, convened by an independent authority, and unraveling the thread of the options trades might lead to some surprising discoveries.

I don't have an answer to your question, but one has to look at the evidence teddy51 Dec 2011 #1
The cracking of the Enigma Code was not leaked until the 1970s after it was offiically announced. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #2
And that allso goes for the capture of a German sub with the enignama machien zeemike Dec 2011 #28
If you were asked to participate in either operation, what would you do? cpwm17 Dec 2011 #29
Well that is a fair question and a fair point. zeemike Dec 2011 #30
There's no way that there's the expertise to pull it off cpwm17 Dec 2011 #31
Well then how does the mob and other organized crime do it? zeemike Dec 2011 #32
Since mob informers are the key to most police investigations hack89 Feb 2012 #39
But that is because their are police and law enforcement. zeemike Feb 2012 #40
You are naive if you believe that. zeemike Feb 2012 #41
you would have to be a sociopath BobbyBoring Feb 2012 #37
Well I would know only what I needed to know to do my part of the plan zeemike Feb 2012 #46
You've been watching too many movies Confusious Feb 2012 #43
And you perhaps not enough history. zeemike Feb 2012 #45
Nope, not me Confusious Feb 2012 #47
Well I never saw it in the movies zeemike Feb 2012 #49
do I detect some contempt from you about people that you consider CTers? Confusious Feb 2012 #50
Do you know what disinformation is? zeemike Feb 2012 #53
So you're spreading disinformation? Confusious Feb 2012 #55
Well it is astounding to me that people can buy that . zeemike Feb 2012 #56
"that is just basic science" William Seger Feb 2012 #57
The first frame is before the impact.of the head shot. zeemike Feb 2012 #59
Nope William Seger Feb 2012 #61
No that is the frame where the bullet struck zeemike Feb 2012 #64
Utter nonsense William Seger Feb 2012 #68
Well look this is not nonsense zeemike Feb 2012 #69
If the Zapruder film is REALLY what made you believe that Oswald didn't shoot JFK, William Seger Feb 2012 #71
You mean to tell me zeemike Feb 2012 #72
in what sense do you "see" that? OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #73
Because if the bullet did not strike in 312 zeemike Feb 2012 #74
didn't you just say yourself... OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #75
Well let me try again to explain. zeemike Feb 2012 #76
OK, let's think about this OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #77
Some good points zeemike Feb 2012 #78
meh OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #79
Well how about we just declare you the winner zeemike Feb 2012 #80
This is NOT a "small point" William Seger Feb 2012 #81
Now this is how you control the discussion... zeemike Feb 2012 #84
yo, if you're so free from fear, get the heck out of fetal position OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #82
We are discussing it on your terms. zeemike Feb 2012 #83
jeepers OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #85
Again we are back to math. zeemike Feb 2012 #86
so you don't think the head changes position from 312 to 313? OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #87
Well let me try to be clear. zeemike Feb 2012 #89
well, no OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #91
Really? zeemike Feb 2012 #95
"And you cannot explain that backward movement with any thing that makes sense" William Seger Feb 2012 #97
Well you can't prove a negative zeemike Feb 2012 #100
Another myth. Actually, it IS sometimes possible to prove a negative William Seger Feb 2012 #105
This is getting kinda bizarre William Seger Feb 2012 #93
OK...so the ejected material is several feet away zeemike Feb 2012 #96
In other words, you've got nothing William Seger Feb 2012 #98
Now with the ridicule. zeemike Feb 2012 #101
Your theory is all assumption and no fact. zappaman Feb 2012 #102
The facts presented is what we see in the film. zeemike Feb 2012 #107
Here's what's ridiculous about it, by the way William Seger Feb 2012 #108
No that is not what I said. zeemike Feb 2012 #109
"The shutter on frame 313 was open for 1/30 of a second" zappaman Feb 2012 #110
Frames per second is different from shutter speed. zeemike Feb 2012 #115
The camera's manual says a nominal 16 fps and 1/35th sec exposure William Seger Feb 2012 #119
Well thanks for looking that up zeemike Feb 2012 #120
WTF? William Seger Feb 2012 #112
No sir the shutter speed is all that is relevant. zeemike Feb 2012 #116
I seriously doubt that a timeline is going to unconfuse you, but let's try: William Seger Feb 2012 #118
I get what you are claiming. zeemike Feb 2012 #121
So you have no explanation for the forward head snap William Seger Feb 2012 #122
Can't let it end when you say inertia is imaginary physics zeemike Feb 2012 #123
No, it's your claimed "DELAY due to inertia" that's imaginary William Seger Feb 2012 #124
Well I can't compete with that zeemike Feb 2012 #125
Hopeless William Seger Feb 2012 #126
You are right it is hopeless zeemike Feb 2012 #127
This may be the most ridiculous thing I've read about the JFK assassination in some time. zappaman Feb 2012 #99
there is only one reason I am still here zeemike Feb 2012 #103
"this is like a case study in how debunking CTs work" William Seger Feb 2012 #106
it's kind of hilarious-- if a "conspiracy theorist" had presented this as proof he'd be laughed at. NoMoreWarNow Apr 2012 #137
It's motion blur caused by camera motion William Seger Apr 2012 #139
that may be, but your data is still inconclusive NoMoreWarNow Apr 2012 #141
Neither William Seger Apr 2012 #142
Frame 313 is not an instant, it is a duration. And during that duration the head may have travelled eomer Feb 2012 #88
OK, where does that get us? OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #90
Back to square one. eomer Feb 2012 #92
See gif in post #93. There was no forward motion before frame 312 William Seger Feb 2012 #94
"square one" was trash talk about "the power of fear" OnTheOtherHand Feb 2012 #104
Well, you've just proved my point Confusious Feb 2012 #58
I want to listen and have been listening. zeemike Feb 2012 #60
I've seen IN PLANE SITE zappaman Feb 2012 #62
Well a 757 is consistent with what I saw zeemike Feb 2012 #66
Really Confusious Feb 2012 #63
You present questions that are easy to answer zeemike Feb 2012 #65
Well if you make up stuff Confusious Feb 2012 #67
Well I don't have all the answers...and no one could zeemike Feb 2012 #70
Two other things Confusious Feb 2012 #51
Have you seen the original movie The Day The Earth Stood Still? zeemike Feb 2012 #54
A brief visit to one secure in their findings..... AlwaysQuestion Apr 2012 #132
Well thanks for that vote of confidence. zeemike Apr 2012 #133
Jeez, what a pantload William Seger Apr 2012 #134
Do you believe? AlwaysQuestion Apr 2012 #136
Ohmygawd, do you actually READ what I write? William Seger Apr 2012 #138
Then why the cover up? tblue Dec 2011 #3
Plenty of reasons for a coverup without positing guilt in the 9/11 attack Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #6
I remember people telling me.... lib2DaBone Dec 2011 #4
We have no idea what happened to that drone hack89 Dec 2011 #19
Regardless of what happened to that drone, there's no connection to 9-11 cpwm17 Dec 2011 #20
You seem to ignore terrafirma Dec 2011 #27
You need to read "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters," Peace Patriot Dec 2011 #5
That's the problem with EVERY conspiracy theory RZM Dec 2011 #7
But if the conspirators know that someone will eventually talk.... Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #9
Exactly RZM Dec 2011 #10
Not quite. You miss the point. Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #11
Of course there have been conspiracies RZM Dec 2011 #12
Compelling evidence? You want it; you got it. Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #13
Wow. Ed Asner and some random blogger RZM Dec 2011 #14
15 unnatural deaths within a year! Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #15
Nope zappaman Dec 2011 #16
You mean like the 9/11 Commission conspiracy to not talk about Building 7 in their Report? Richard Charnin Dec 2011 #8
The 9/11 Commission Report was not meant to be an exhaustive examination of all aspects Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #17
theories Tunkamerica Dec 2011 #18
You're conflating and collapsing all conspiracy theories into a single monolith (npi), coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #21
Truthers rarely correct other truthers when they promote total nonsense cpwm17 Dec 2011 #23
I grant you a lot of it is nonsense, but there are some troubling coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #24
The put options on United and American were explained. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #25
Thank you for that. At some point, I am going to have to make time coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #26
Oh, please. You believe THAT? Remember Me Dec 2011 #33
Thanks for your opinion. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #34
Yeah, you'd think Remember Me Dec 2011 #35
One major airline (Ansett Australia) was folding at the time KDLarsen Dec 2011 #36
"So it is fair to criticize almost all truthers for any truther nonsense." ocpagu Apr 2012 #140
It's called COMPARTMENTALIZATION, dude! Uranus Needs Men Dec 2011 #22
I want to know who is behind the Unwarranted Apostrophe Conspiracy. Codeine Feb 2012 #38
Hasn't stopped the UK libodem Feb 2012 #42
It had to be hundreds but couldn't have been hundreds? Why couldn't it have been a few or a dozen? eomer Feb 2012 #44
What would the scenario be in which only a few know? Ohio Joe Feb 2012 #48
That would be the scenario in which only a few were part of the consipiracy. eomer Feb 2012 #52
... which really just demonstrates the pointlessness of idle speculation. William Seger Feb 2012 #114
Leads that the "investigation" didn't follow; additional parties surely were involved. eomer Feb 2012 #117
WT7 didn't have enough damage to fall like that in my opinion deadinsider Feb 2012 #111
"Damage" was not the reason for WTC7's collapse William Seger Feb 2012 #113
Heck, we might as well argue here too right? cbrer Feb 2012 #128
Nope William Seger Feb 2012 #129
That actually cbrer Feb 2012 #130
NIST simulation deadinsider May 2012 #144
Finally getting back 2 u... deadinsider May 2012 #145
Oh, well, nothing else going on around here, so... William Seger Jun 2012 #146
The steel portions of the Madrid tower collapsed due to fire. hack89 Apr 2012 #135
People who haven't mastered the difference between plural and possessive... JackRiddler Apr 2012 #131
911? dukie Apr 2012 #143
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»Here is the problem with ...»Reply #24