RELIGION AND 9-11

Somebody, somewhere, deserves the highest award given for brilliant planning
and manipulation. The award should be given to whomever planned the events
of 9-11 and then so brilliantly manipulated Americans into believing that
nineteen "Arab terrorists" pulled the whole thing off. This notion of
nineteen "Arab terrorists" is absurd, of course, to anyone with any critical
thinking skills. Unfortunately, and apparently, that doesn't apply to very
many Americans. Most of these same Americans also happen to be religious.
It's not a coincidence.

Those who adhere to religious doctrine agree to a mandatory forfeiture of
all critical thinking skills the moment they climb aboard the Holy Wagon.
It's not an option with religion, because you cannot accept religion as
truth and still retain the courage to question it. If you disagree with
that, you're a perfect example.

How does religion have anything to do with 9-11? Religion itself isn't the
point - it's the mindset of religious people, who have allowed themselves to
believe a doctrine which their subconscious mind tells them is ludicrous.
The official version of 9-11 says that nineteen "Arab terrorists" planned,
financed, and executed the most improbable event in American history, all by
themselves. This is beyond ludicrous. Who are perhaps the most ardent
believers in Bush's official story of 9-11? Religious people, because they
have been conditioned to believe the impossible, so long as an authority
figure tells them it's true, which John Kaminski mentions in this article.

Nobody with critical thinking skills can possibly believe the official story
of 9-11, especially with the mountain of contradictory evidence readily
available to everyone. The same is true of religion. That's the whole
problem with so many Americans. They have been raised to believe whatever
comes out of the mouth of the guy up front in the church. He wears a fancy
robe, sometimes with a pretty sash or a big hat, and he is obviously in
charge of the church - from childhood, they are conditioned to tremble at
his voice. In such an environment, it doesn't take long to eventually erase
any inclination to question the authority figure. Toss in a few even bigger
authority figures, such as a Jesus, a God, and some disciples, and how dare
you question authority?

It's actually quite brilliant, to be honest about it. My own opinion is that
the Roman leader Constantine recognized the enormous potential for crowd
control which is inherent in religion, and he utilized it to perfection.
When he proclaimed Christianity to be the official religion of Rome, he
effectively sentenced the minds of his people to death. This is no trivial
matter, at a time when Rome was the most dominant nation in the known world.
Most of the population was uneducated beyond knowing not to defy the
emporer. How many generations would it take before everyone was gone from
the pre-Constantine "Christianity" days? Not very many, and then you'd be
left with fresh generations to program from birth. It's brilliant, and it
worked.

The problem is not religion as a whole. The problem, again, is the
conditioning program that is religion. With religion, minds are closed to a
genuine search for truth. Minds are caged like simple animals, to be fed by
their handlers. Having the courage to question religion means eternity in
some burning dungeon of torture and punishment. Being raised from childhood
with this mentality being forced upon them, religious people simply no
longer have the ability to question. It almost warrants pity, if the
consequences weren't so devastating in today's world.

Flashback to 9-11: four passenger planes are hijacked simultaneously, with
no response from an air defense system that is known for its jumpy
preparedness. In the past, a single hijacking anywhere in America would have
resulted instantly in at least some semblence of response. On this day,
however, four airplanes are hijacked and left to do as they please,
untouched and unchallenged. Three of these planes are allowed to proceed
through the most heavily-guarded airspace in the world. Two of them are left
free to continue their course into the World Trade Center towers, being
flown with a skill far above even the most experienced fighter pilots. The
towers subsequently crumble exactly as a building does in a controlled
demolition, even when burning jet fuel gets nowhere near hot enough to melt
the steel of the towers. A third hijacked airplane supposedly crashes into
the Pentagon, but leaves no sign of something as large as a passenger jet
having done the damage.

Does any of this raise even a single question? Apparently not, as most
Americans simply believe that nineteen "Arab terrorists" did it. No
questions, no investigation, no doubts. It's just so much easier to blame
people who we don't understand at all. Different religion, different
culture, different everything, and they live on the other side of the world,
so we don't even have to blame them to their faces. Besides, our president
said they did it, so there you go.

America's response? Go to Afghanistan, bomb it into submission, and install
a powerless puppet regime. The poppy fields, which the Taliban had all but
eradicated, are replanted with vigour and encouragement, ensuring a healthy
supply of heroin on the market. Next, go to Iraq, completely destroy its
infrastructure, drop uranium bombs everywhere so future generations can die,
too, kill multitudes of young Americans, maim the rest, teach them how to
torture prisoners and enjoy it, and take control of Iraq's oil as we sit by
and watch looters pillage and destroy irreplaceable ancient historical
artifacts. But that oil supply is safe.

Bush blamed, ummm....well, he blamed somebody, generally categorized as "the
terrorists". Since then, Americans have given it no more thought. Bush said
"the terrorists" did it, so that's all there is to it. If you disagree, you
are accused of aiding "the terrorists" (a concept that defies all logic).
Americans are more than happy to say they support the troops, but they don't
even understand why the troops are in Iraq. Neither do the troops. The
accepted slogan is "to defend our freedom". Defend our freedom from whom?
Iraqis? Defend our freedom from the Iraqi military that had no weapons of
mass destruction? Defend our freedom from the Iraqis in general, who had
been starved for a decade with sanctions? Protecting our freedom from whom?
People who don't even understand the who/what/why of 9-11 are suddenly
afraid for their precious freedoms. That's insane, but insanely typical. And
they protest the war in Iraq, but they don't protest the whitewashing of
9-11 by this administration. Screw the war in Iraq - your country was
attacked in cold blood, and somebody very nearby had a hand in it.

When a vast majority of a population has already been dutifully programmed
by religion, and thereby stripped of its ability to question and use
critical thought, an event such as 9-11 is a godsend (no pun intended) to
any powerful group that would use such an event to further its agenda. Who
profits from the war in Afghanistan? Who profits from the war in Iraq? Who
profits more than Israel if we topple Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, etc?
And the question that preceeds them all: who profits from 9-11 itself? These
are questions that demand answers and accountability, but they are questions
not being asked.

Religion set the stage for using 9-11 to further an agenda, and whomever
organized 9-11 recognized that fact. Brilliant in its depravity, this group
of planners realized how easy it is to manipulate religious people who
already willingly adhere to irrational and disproven dogma. The brilliance
was in using their own religious trinkets and icons in the charade. There
should be an award given to whoever concocted the idea of wrapping Bush
around a Bible to further the agenda.

Is religion to blame for 9-11? Absolutely not. Are the people who refuse to
question 9-11 to blame for it? Absolutely, because people who refuse to
question something, regardless of its glaring irrationality, encourage it to
continue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought provoking opinion piece. You know my stance on 9/11 which I'm always willing to debate. No one seems to question the "official" story even though it's so rife with contradictory evidence and blatant lies.

What is the source for this article? I'd like to know who the author is
thanks

if that piece couldnt be any more biased if it tried

im far from religious, but if you think the people or sites that write this garbage dont have some type of agenda, the very same agendas you want to believe the american government has against you

Author: Steven A. Hass

http://www.tvnewslies.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=1076

The flip side of blind religious devotion is blind paranoid delusion.

Keep that in mind, my friend.

Who cares about bias. Just investigate what happened that day, do a little searching and you'll find that the official story is a lie. That's all I ask. Your always so quick to go off topic with your posts. How about questioning the supposive facts regarding the largest terrorist attack on this country. Have you ever wondered why we never see video of a plane crashing into the Pentagon even though multiple cameras filmed it? Have you ever wondered why only 3 "hi-jackers" were ever shown boarding the doomed flights? Have you ever questioned why Willy Brown, Aschcroft, Rumsfeld stopped flying commercial jets or were told not to fly to NY on 9/11? Have you ever stopped to think why there was never an investigation into the GIANT insider trading of put options with American and United Airlines. Do you even care? Maybe not, I don't know, but I sure as hell do.

What's paranoid or delusional about what I'm posting? The official story is a joke, I'm sure you can even realize this. So what is so wrong with wanting honest answers? You have owner of WTC complexes say the building was imploded on 9/11. You have an official FEMA report saying it was brought down by fire. That is contradictory, then begin looking at the rest of the day, specifically NORAD's response and you start noticing many holes.

http://www.theskyiscrape.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9673&highlight=

here, those "stories" of yours have already been debunked in this thread, but you even admit in your posts there you would never believe anything that the government says, so honestly, before you call someone close minded, get a door jam for your mind's door

We've been through this before. There are plenty of questions, but you are NOT providing honest answers either. You are presenting the ravings of a paranoid lunatic who might happen to be right about one or two of his dozens of baseless assertions.

Um, no. They haven't been. Why don't you read that PM piece. They didn't cover anything regarding the statement made by Silverstein (Owner of WTC's) and the FEMA report. They didn't cover the warnings to Willy Brown, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld. They covered the most absurd theories regarding the events of 9/11. Also that piece of written by the Cousin of Cheritoff. Not to say it's completely bullshit, cause some of those debunking myths to indeed debunk some theories but it's a typical straw man piece.

As well, read what I wrote, before you think I'm close minded:

Ok, so what do you think he may be right about? We'll start there.

OK.

I think there is question about the identity of the hijackers and the number of them. I still believe that there were approzimately 15-25 of them, and that they were Arabs. I think he mischaracterizes the gov't position by saying that they planned and financed this by themselves. I don't think the gov't claims that. They were clearly led by someone higher up who had a financing network to carry this out.

I also instantly took exception with his statement that no one with critical thinking skills can believe the official story. I don't believe the whole official story, but my critical thinking skills are strong enough to see that this guy is a government-hating, religion-hating paranoid. And that's coming from PunkDavid. He states that religion itself is not the problem, buut he makes it plain that he thinks that unthinking devotion to authority is a key element of all religion. It is not. He is just trying to be PC by not calling out fundamentalist Christians, who are obviously the intended target of his ire. By being falsely inclusive, he hurts his credibility as a speaker of uncorrupted truth.

He then goes on to insinuate that the US government was complicitous in the hijacking, the lack of air force response, and the demolition of the towers. Firstly, I've seen several scientific reports that say that that much jet fuel burning for that long could indeed melt steel. Secondly, the paranoids always give the government too much credit for its omniscience and omnipresence and I think that one of the things that 9/11 and its aftermath and related wars and monitoring of communications and all that have shown is that the government is not a smart or watchful as most people would imagine. They are vulnerable, and they are in many ways incompetent behind the gleaming facade they put up.

Once you bite into claim that the US gov't orchestrated 9/11 so they could start a war in the Middle East, you enter into a bizarro world where any and all claims of govt lies become possible and it becomes increasingly difficult to tell reality from paranoia.

--PunkDavid

This is what I posted last week in response to one of your questions. My, how prescient.

Did you just refer to yourself the third person? "Jimmy doesn't like that!"

Why do you think this? Especially more then the supposive 19? If you've never seen them getting on those planes, and have never seen a flight manifesto of those responsible for the hijackings listed? What evidence do you have to back up this claim?



Even though some of the hi-jackers had been trained at San Diego's Naval Accademy? This doesn't strike you as overly suspicous? Not to mention the Pakistani ISI transfered 100,000 to Atta days before the attacks. Then this same Pakistani ISI member is meeting with high up Government officials on 9/11. Why is the money man for Atta meeting with our Government?



Well, Cheritoff, author of the PM piece says that jet fuel could never have melted steel, ever. This has been confirmed to him by many well known and respected Firefighting magazines. What reports did you read that said jet fuel can melt steel? They were only burning for less then 2 hours. Just look at the Mardid Spain buildig it burned for days and at much hotter temperatures.



Well, when the Joint Cheifs decide the day before 9/11 to not have a meeting in lower Manhatten due to a security risk. It seems a bit obvious that certain people in the Government knew something was comming. Not to mention Richard Cheney and the control he had over NORAD and the shoot down orders that would be given in such an event. He took it from the Generals and into his hands with a letter to Rumsfeld months prior to 9/11. As well the many military exercies being run on 9/11 to crash planes into buildings in the DC area. Also Echelon picking up the many stock put options on Airlines which it monitors closely for such an event such as a terrorist attack.

This is the type of debate I've been wanting to have on here PD, and I respect you for actually taking this seriously and not trying to divert and go off topic with random statements. Going to do some yard work, but will return for a response latter today. Maybe more can ask legitimate questions about what happened and we can have an honest open debate similar to your last post.

IEB!

I will tell you where to find all of the answers to the questions you are seeking.

First of all, though, you need to infiltrate the "Skull and Bones" secret society. Once inside, you will need to infiltrate the "secret sociey" within that secret society. There will be the men that make every decision in this world and play us all like the little pawns that we are.

The majority of our Presidents are members in a "secret society".

Spooky huh?

The "No Homers Club"?

When I was substituting at a local catholic high school some time back, one of the students drew a brilliant sketch of the two towers and many many persons rising from the towers acsending into the sky, where an image of Christ was drawn with arms outstretched and sunbeams shown through the clowds and the dust. That is about as close of a relationship as I have ever considered, and the sketch brought tears to ones eyes in a positive way.

have you seen them NOT get on the airplanes?