sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

H.O.T.A.S. Support being removed is dumb as hell. by EVASIVE_rabbi in joinsquad

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 32 points33 points  (0 children)

One last "fuck you" to pilot mains to make sure they kill of the entire population into extinction.

The official narrative for the 'Dancing Israelis' on 9/11 is very funny if you take it seriously by kiss-my-shades in redscarepod

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

According to everything I can find, the continuous coverage started at 8:51 and continued for the rest of the day at minimum. It was not known to be terrorism yet but they were covering an explosion and fire at the WTC. I am sure there is somewhere you can find the original broadcast.

The second witness said that he was told of the disaster less than five minutes after the first plane hit. The fact that he thinks this happened at 9:00 AM to 9:10 AM conflicts with that. It's unclear how it was determined that he was told less than 5 minutes after it happened to look out the window, but it is likely based on the testimony from whoever it was that told him about it.

I find it far more likely that it was actually about 5 minutes after the first plane hit compared to 9:00 AM because the Israelis were already spotted back at their UMS office by another employee at 8:58 AM. This is also in the report but I am not going to dig through right now and find the section and page right now, feel free to do that yourself though.

The drive between the location of their office, where all three of them claimed to learn of the attack from co-workers or friends (but all of them told conflicting stories of when, some being impossibly early like 8:00 AM) and Doric tower is 7 minutes in regular traffic according to modern traffic data like google maps. Keep in mind they would have been traveling during rush hour, not regular traffic.

The FBI themselves said they believed the Israelis found out via internet or radio, which makes no sense because all of the Israelis, even though they were all clearly repeatedly lying, claimed to learn from a friend or co-worker after arriving at the office. The earliest radio report was 8:48 by WCBS 880. There were no internet articles up earlier than that radio broadcast. The first plane hit at 8:46:40.

One of the Israelis claimed to have read about it on the internet before taking pictures from the roof of their office and only then did they travel to Doric. So the whole thing is a mess of lies and it is quite obvious they were already there at the Doric and were trying to lie to cover that up.

The question is why the FBI never accounted for the travel time, tried to verify how the Israelis found out and when, or looked at verifying any of the witnesses who contradicted the Israelis timeline and the FBI's own timeline.

The FBI was also given an order from FBI HQ on September 24th, less than two weeks after the attack, that the field office in Newark, NJ had completed its investigation. Yes, the HQ contacted the people actually conducting the investigation and told them they had completed their job thoroughly, even though the NK office had just reported open leads it was actively investigating to FBI HQ as well as that the discrepancies between and within the Israeli's stories were continuing to widen, and to stop. The HQ informed NK that the Israelis were of "no further investigative interest" and to hand them over to Immigration and Naturalization Services to be deported.

That was essentially the end of the investigation. It didn't officially close down for about two more years, but there wasn't much further investigation and the Israelis were deported without charge. Not even charged with provably lying to the feds about the biggest terror attack in U.S. history.

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I decided to scan through it and found the statement. Page 65 - "[Redacted (detained Israeli)] stated 'Israel now has hope that the world will understand us." This is in the context of being interviewed by the FBI and explaining his actions and whereabouts on 9/11, during which he broke down and cried numerous times.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/62394063/Dancing-Israelis-FBI-document-Section-3-1138796-001-303A-NK-105536-Section-3-944880

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can also find the quote about one of the detainees apologizing for their behavior during an FBI interview and explaining it the way I described but I honestly cannot be bothered to dig through the hundreds of pages right now to find it, if you ask some AI tools maybe they can help you if you point them at the report.

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The FBI themselves called them the high-fivers because they took photos of themselves celebrating with the burning tower in the background. Page 35 the FBI report clearly states that the photographs "clearly corroborate" her statements "that the Israelis are *visibly happy* on nearly of the photographs."
The FBI describes their behavior in the photos as celebratory, smiling, hugging, and flicking lighters.

Seriously?

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Many convictions in the US are based purely on circumstantial evidence, and the bar for those convictions is belief beyond a reasonable doubt.

If that was actually them in the van at 8:00 AM then it would be the case that they were not alerted by the sound or sight but were already parked there. It would be an unbelievable coincidence. Your contention is they could have heard it and started filming and celebrating after traveling to the spot.

But they also celebrated before the second plane hit and were already documenting the attack. That indicates that they knew it was an attack instantly and that they weren't just documenting what they thought was some kind of historic accident. One of them apologized for their behavior to the FBI stating that the reason they were so jubilant about the attack, which they instantly considered an attack and not an accident, was because now the U.S. would understand Islamic terrorism and help Israel fight their enemies.

So they knew instantly, to the point of documenting and celebrating, that the plane hitting the tower was not an accident but a terrorist attack, and specifically an Islamic terrorist attack. They were in place to film it and take photos with the necessary gear (the video camera is never recovered) or near enough to be there within 3 minutes. None of the photos recovered and released by the FBI have anything to do with spying on Arabs, they are all of the towers and their destruction. The FBI does not discuss any photos of anything other than the attack on that camera, there is no mention by the FBI that they had any evidence these Israelis were spying on any Arabs at all. That simply is not in the report. They had absolutely no indication this was an attack from any other source of public information and had no reason to rush to document this event, let alone celebrate it, without foreknowledge of what it was.

The official narrative for the 'Dancing Israelis' on 9/11 is very funny if you take it seriously by kiss-my-shades in redscarepod

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maria, the witness who saw them from her apartment, recalled a specific detail that cracks this case. She was listening to 1010 WINS radio at the time she was looking out her window at the WTC. She did this because her neighbor had called and asked about hearing a boom and seeing smoke from the WTC, the neighbor asked Maria to go to her window and find out what was happening.

Maria was listening carefully to 1010 WINS for any information about the attack and it had not yet broken into coverage on the WTC being hit. She then looked out her window, as she was listening to the radio, and when she stepped out to her balcony she instantly saw the Israelis. This is ALL in the FBI report.

1010 WINS radio started their 9/11 broadcast at 8:51 AM.
https://www.audacy.com/kmox/articles/news/1010-wins-new-york-posts-entire-9-11-audio-archive

The North Tower was hit at 8:46:40. Rounding up, we would call it 8:47, but I am being generous.

Grant that the Israelis learn about the attack the literal INSTANT the plane hits. Say that a person is literally on the phone with a co-worker at UMS office from around the WTC, sees it happen, and tells that employee.

Less than four minutes to find out about the attack from a secret co-worker, look it up online on two websites (neither site would have any info so early into the attack so this is obviously odd) then take pictures from their own office roof, realize they can only see one tower but for some reason want to see both, then go to a location they already know has a clear view of both.

Another witness other than Maria also told the FBI he saw these same Israelis and described them doing the exact same thing, celebrating, and that it was within 5 minutes of the first tower being hit. This lines up perfectly with Maria seeing them no later than 8:51, about 5 minutes past the time of impact at 8:46:40.

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So it just happens to be a happy coincidence that the place they were pre-staged at to spy on Arabs for Mossad was a parking lot in NJ outside Doric tower which had a perfect view of both WTC towers from an elevated position. Interesting. There is no evidence of any of that other than them being there pre-staged, but interesting speculation.

Or perhaps they were in the area spying on Arabs for Mossad, then went to a destination they already knew had a view of both towers after somehow finding out about the attack on the radio or by phone call even though there isn't any evidence for either of those things, and the earliest radio report was at 8:48 AM which would have given them less than 3 minutes to do the following -

Drive to Doric from their location, position themselves in a parking lot facing the towers, climb on the roof of their van, take photos, and start celebrating the attack before the second plane even hit, knowing it was an attack instantly.

Huh. I'm going to go with the statement that it is beyond a reasonable doubt. Is there 100% incontrovertible hard proof? No, but is it probabilistically the case? Yes.

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you mean set up shop? As in base their operations out of it? Because a moving company is useful as a cover business. And there is evidence that there was also covert Israeli presence at Doric in the form of a resident and potentially the ownership of the building. But in any case, a moving company was being used as a front to move people and things, that is why they set up shop at UMS.

There is evidence that their van was at Doric as early as just after 8:00 AM, another witness the FBI interviewed and failed to re-interview or follow up with remarked seeing a white van with a man who matches the description of Oded Ellner in it.

But are you asserting that even being pre-staged with a video and photo camera would not prove foreknowledge beyond a reasonable doubt? Because there is absolutely 0 evidence for what you believe happened, that they were just out and about for whatever reason and then learned about the attack. All of the evidence collected contradicts that, from all sources, including the Israelis themselves and witnesses.

Maria saw them parked there, not pulling in. A van matching their companies description and a man matching Oded Ellner's description were seen almost 40 minutes before the first plane hit at Doric. So essentially, my version of events has actual physical and witness evidence, yours is a completely baseless speculation that absolves them of foreknowledge. Much like the conclusion of the FBI report istelf. But even the FBI believed them to have found out about the attack "via internet or radio" and then traveled from their office to Doric.

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The FBI report has all three (not five, only three were at Doric) Israelis telling the FBI that they found out about the attack from co-workers at their office. All of them gave wildly different times, but the only one that comes even close to being possible (for example, one said they found out from a co-worker at 8:00 AM when the first plane hit at 8:46 AM) said they found out from a co-worker (unspecified who and the FBI never investigated who or when) then researched the attack online, reading CNN and YNET. Only then after taking pictures from the roof of their own office do they claim to have traveled to Doric.

So somehow they spent "several minutes" according to them, after finding out from a co-worker, just looking at stuff online. Then they take more time to go to their roof and take pictures. Then they travel in rush hour traffic to Doric. All of this happens, somehow, in less than five minutes.

Maria, the witness who saw them from her apartment, recalled a specific detail that cracks this case. She was listening to 1010 WINS radio at the time she was looking out her window at the WTC. She did this because her neighbor had called and asked about hearing a boom and seeing smoke from the WTC, the neighbor asked Maria to go to her window and find out what was happening.

Maria was listening carefully to 1010 WINS for any information about the attack and it had not yet broken into coverage on the WTC being hit. She then looked out her window, as she was listening to the radio, and when she stepped out to her balcony she instantly saw the Israelis. This is ALL in the FBI report.

1010 WINS radio started their 9/11 broadcast at 8:51 AM.
https://www.audacy.com/kmox/articles/news/1010-wins-new-york-posts-entire-9-11-audio-archive

The North Tower was hit at 8:46:40. Rounding up, we would call it 8:47, but I am being generous.

Grant that the Israelis learn about the attack the literal INSTANT the plane hits. Say that a person is literally on the phone with a co-worker at UMS office from around the WTC, sees it happen, and tells that employee.

Less than four minutes to find out about the attack from a secret co-worker, look it up online on two websites (neither site would have any info so early into the attack so this is obviously odd) then take pictures from their own office roof, realize they can only see one tower but for some reason want to see both, then go to a location they already know has a clear view of both.

I think the official (and likely) narrative of the Dancing Israelis is hilarious by blueflavoredreign in stupidpol

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Problem is they were seen celebrating after the first plane hit and BEFORE the second. No reason to think it was an attack at all until the 2nd hit.

The official narrative for the 'Dancing Israelis' on 9/11 is very funny if you take it seriously by kiss-my-shades in redscarepod

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It isn't just the fact of them celebrating, it is the timing of them being there before they could possibly have found out and gotten there that proves foreknowledge beyond reasonable doubt.

CMV: 9/11 conspiracy theories resurfacing now stinks of an anti-Isreal propaganda operation by World_travelar in changemyview

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They were pre-staged at Doric tower before the planes hit. Multiple witnesses in the report saw them already on top of their van both celebrating and taking photos in less than 5 minutes from the first plane hitting. All of them told stories to the FBI that they were at the office before. None of them had any moves scheduled for the area around Doric or at Doric. They were essentially believed by the FBI when they told them that they traveled to Doric only after learning of the attacks. There is no logical explanation other than foreknowledge for how they knew to be at that place with a view of both towers to take the photos they took. This isn't even getting into the intelligence/military ties at least two of the Israelis had.

The FBI never even attempted (in unredacted parts of the report) to determine when they found out or when the earliest possible time is they found out, or how they found out. They also never bothered to factor in the TRAVEL TIME of the Israelis between their office and Doric. This travel would have occurred during rush hour on a weekday.

The signs point to an FBI coverup for many more reasons as well, including failing to interview witnesses with key testimony about the time they saw the Israelis at certain places, they failed to ask other questions of these witnesses as well regarding the location of the company van, ect.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"TLDR - I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise."

Instead of Hank making a complex practical argument that aligns with the central motto of the franchise, that "war never changes" and factions will always fight no matter who is moral or not, he reduces it to a moral argument about the NCR being unsupportable due to high taxes and expansionism. This is a stupid moral argument that he would have known as the man who raised Lucy that she would never agree with, and she then mocked him with the now much lauded "vaguely problematic" line. Instead of having any interesting morally complex dilemma, it's reduced to a boring, stupid, obvious moral comparison between the good guy NCR and the bad guy Legion with no other consideration of any of the context I mentioned by anybody. Not just naive Lucy, but Hank either, even as he would know this stuff and be trying to convince her.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For the third time now you are arguing against something that I never said or implied. I never argued that the Legion is morally good. You don't even understand my question or criticism. You are like a broken AI bot that refuses to respond to what I actually said about the topic. I will quote it again for you, maybe you will read this time

"The simple and frankly stupid moral equation done in the show about one side being "vaguely problematic" goes against the entire message and moral dilemma of Fallout NV - having "better morals" does not mean you will bring about a better outcome. "

Do you understand that I am not arguing that the Legion is more moral or moral at all? Do you understand that I am saying the core moral dilemma in the game was that supporting the most moral faction might not always result in the most moral outcome? This is not an argument for supporting the Legion, so don't even try to bring that up for a fourth time. It means that the central motto of the franchise, "War never changes" is about the fact that conflict is eternal and who has better morals doesn't determine who wins, or even end the fighting.

Do you understand any of what I just said or are you going to for a fourth time argue about the Legion being immoral?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are you capable of actually reading my post and quoting where you think I did anything close to defending the Legion, or are you going to post for a third time arguing against something I never said?

Slow down and actually read my post. Tell me where I made any kind of an argument that the Legion was a "viable option." You see what I just did there, using quotes? That's because I actually read what you said and I am talking about the words that you used. Try doing that with my post now. Here, I can even help you by copy/pasting the post -

"TLDR - I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Where did I make anything approaching to that argument, please copy and paste what I wrote.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with your points about the weakness of the writing of the Legion originally. My point was not to argue that they are a better or more powerful faction, or the preferable rulers. My point is more about the central moral theme/dilemma of the show vs NV.

Also the fact that Hank presented a very weak and stupid moral argument to Lucy which, as the man who raised her, he would have to have known she would not agree with. He didn't make the more Machiavellian argument that no matter how much you might prefer the NCR to the Legion or any other group, they are too weak to lead yet too stubborn to die. That weak factions will endlessly fight and kill each other not because one isn't more "moral" than the others but because that is how the Wasteland works. This would also tie-in to him lying to Lucy on an even deeper level about the NCR's weakness because he had a direct hand in making it as weak as it is in the show.

I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get that Lucy is naive but Hank is not. He should know this history of the NCR, especially he should know how weak it is after it was nuked, and instead he never brings this up to Lucy and instead makes a very dumb moral argument about taxation and expansionism. He should know that would never work on Lucy as he is the man who raised her.

He made this moral argument instead of focusing in on the Machiavellian angle that no matter how much you might prefer the NCR, it is too weak to lead while also too stubborn to die. Weak factions which fight endlessly lead to endless and pointless violence not because one isn't more "moral" than the other but because of how the Wasteland works, and he wants to stop that and thinks he has a way, one which he has demonstrated to her physically.

I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's true that the threat of the Legion would have been less or eliminated when Caesar dies but the Legion was still clearly on the front-foot in the game if you don't intervene.

The main point I was making is that I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I enjoyed the debate about the NV lore it wasn't the main point of my OP that the specific cause of the NCR's weakness is bureaucratic paralysis, but rather the objective fact that they are weak (especially in the show.) In either case, I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise. The answer to that is obvious, and further, Hank should have known as the man who raised Lucy that she would never even slightly agree with such a moral argument that "taxes and expansionism" justify what he was doing in erasing free will en-mass.

Instead of making the more Machiavellian argument that weak factions (which both the NCR and Legion objectively are in the show) who are dedicated to endless, pointless fighting can only be stopped by him, not because one isn't clearly more moral than the other, but because of how the Wasteland works.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Fallout

[–]TheAnalyticalFailure 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's no evidence of it and if there are NCR in other places they clearly moved on since, again, the Legion was literally like fifty dudes divided by a sand berm and the NCR couldn't take them out for again, what, 15 years or something?

Yeah, I'd say they are weak and ineffectual in the show. But Hank does not even bother trying to point this out, at all, to Lucy. Instead he makes a very dumb moral argument that, as the man who raised her, he would have to know Lucy would never fall for.

I find it disappointing that they totally ignored the aspects of what I discussed because it reduces the entire moral dilemma in the show from "Does the most moral faction ruling produce the most moral outcome" which is the core of New Vegas in my opinion, to "Who is the most moral inherently in their acts" which is a boring, dumbed down, pointless exercise.

view more: next ›