Xian Saint

These days I reserve replying only to posts that I feel passionate about and this is a topic that I have given much consideration to, especially lately with all the school shootings. First off, without turning this into a moral and/or religous debate (which are not allowed for obvious reasons) I think a lot of how a person replies to a dangerous and potentially deadly situation is based on their own philosophy on life and their own morals/ethics. There is clearly a divide between those who would fight for their saftey and the safety of others and those who would turn a cheek and/or do nothing. In my opinion, the only thing you did wrong was you didn't run the man over. I know that sounds harsh and yes I am being slightly sarcastic, but in reality, although you may have prevented this one situation, the sad truth is it will likely happen again. Regarding your girlfriend's comments (again, not to sound too harsh) I guarantee you that if she ever found herself in a bad situation (and they happen just walking down the street or parking your car at the mall), she WOULD want someone to get involved. If everytime a perpetrator of violence walked into a school or a public place or even someone's home and they were challenged by an individual or group of people who were willing to risk their life to subdue the person we would see a decrease in these vicious attacks. In two words, Lets Roll. You did the right thing...without a doubt. P.S. I don't think enough can be said for responsible gun ownership and concealed carry weapon permits, but that's a whole 'nother topic.

Many may wonder why we continue to discuss this thread...and many probably wonder why Calius (and a few others) believe what they do...for most of us our mind is made up...but...BUT... A recent poll showed that like 36 percent of Americans believe the government was involved with or at least knew and didn't stop the attacks of 9/11. 36 Percent. ZOINKS! I don't claim to understand how or why...and really IMHO it's kind of sad that so many people think that...but next time you start criticizing Calius for being a little paranoid...there are many others that believe it too. Personally, I think if anything it continues to show how corrupt the media is. Come on, how hard is it to really "manipulate" a poll to reflect the data you want and then you misrepresent the data to express your point of view. I mean, too a certain extent I believe the government knew there was a "pending credible threat" and didn't do enough to stop it...but I sure don't believe the involvement was anymore than that. Anyways...go easy on Calius...he remains a true professional as he debates this topic...he's taken some pretty stern questioning and keeps coming back for more.

Fair enough...and I believe it was a "genuine response" - we've been debating this far too long...I know you weren't being sarcastic or flippant. What do I think of OBL and his role in 9/11...? I would agree with the President that he is an Islamic Fascist (one who supports oppressive, dictatorial control)...As far as his role in 9/11, I don't think he was the "mastermind" but I do think he was actively involved in and had knowledge of the events, planning and preparation leading up to the execution of the events of 9/11, as well as a number of other terrorists attacks. He is a serious threat, a terrorist in the truest sense, a person that would have no problems ordering your or my death but probably too weak physically to do it himself. I've always said (or so I thought I did) that my opinion of 9/11 was the only thing the government was guilty of was not doing enough to prevent the attack but that as far as the attacks, they were carried out by the 19 terrorists and 4 airplanes (2 WTC 1 Pentagon and 1 destined for WH or other high value target). I guess the reason I ask this question of you is because your investigative journalistic nature is inspiring but yet I am perplexed at how all of the research always seems to lead you down a road shrouded in conspiracy. I've yet to hear any talk about the tons of information posted on terrorists websites and other media sources - Al Jazeera (sp?) etc that claim responsibility for many of these attacks. I've never heard you mention your thoughts on the validity and accuracy of all the information on the terrorists...so I'm hoping you can provide some details on how you think they're involved in this and if they're a credible threat or the fall guy for the government who is blaming everything on them.

@Calius, Who is Osama Bin Laden and what was his role in 9/11?

I don't play AA - but for those that do...I read in the Navy Times they're releasing AA: SF Overwatch 24 hours prior to the worldwide release...(yeah right). Anyways...I checked the links and looks like you can download the parts (total weighs in just over 2 gig) now. http://www.navytimes.com/content/static/games/gameguide.htm

HAH...I knew you wouldn't "live with it"...heh heh... I'm no Super Bob (where is he when you need him)...but this is what I think... The Master Boot Record (MBR) is created when the disk is partitioned. The MBR contains a small amount of executable code called the master boot code, the disk signature, and the partition table for the disk. At the end of the MBR is a 2-byte structure called a signature word or end of sector marker, which is always set to 0x55AA. A signature word also marks the end of an extended boot record (EBR) and the boot sector. When you start a computer from the hard disk, the system BIOS code identifies the startup disk and reads the MBR. The master boot code in the MBR searches for the active, primary partition on the hard disk. Occasionally the MBR can become corrupted. This can be caused by human error, hardware problems, power fluctuations, viruses, and other factors. Note • You can also use the Recovery Console to rewrite the MBR to resolve a corrupted MBR on a startup disk. Process of fixing seems fairly easy...boot to Windows CD, type R for Recovery, logon (normally just hit enter unless you have password), type FIXMBR, confirm, reboot...voila. Sounds simple...then again, what do I know... *DISCLAIMER* Use at your own risk.

Hey bro... Not sure of your setup as far as number of drives and such and how you plan to boot...but I don't know if ignoring it is the right answer...let me explain why...or at least why I didn't like this answer... I dual boot two drives...both with XP...one is a junk drive and the other is setup for optimum performance...(i.e. the latest drivers and only the games I play often). That way, I can install demos and freeware on my junk drive and not fragment the drive and/or clutter the registry of my game drive. Well, I had a similar problem to yours...I would boot to my junk drive F: and my game drive would show up as C:...so if I install a program it would try and load it on my C and not my F...which is exactly what I didn't want to happen... I think it has something to do with the MBR...and I had heard that you could fix it by booting to your OS CD and selecting repair but I didn't do that...I went into admin tools/computer management/disk management (or something like that)...tinkered around in there and somehow got it working... Now, whatever drive I boot to shows up as the C drive...and I can tell the difference between my game and junk drive by their name (which never changes). I probably confused you even more...hope not tho...heh heh.

My own theory is that most of the conspiracy theorists (except for the real nut jobs) don't even believe what they are saying but are otherwise inspired by fame and fortune to publish this nonsense because the media will jump all over it, every time. Although I wasn't alive during the timeframe (and I'm fairly seasoned...heh heh), I've read and studied an era where the media was about reporting the truth...they had integrity and weren't out for their own fame or blindly supporting their political party. Nowadays I don't think it is that way...it's more about who can get the story with the most shock and awe...whether it's true or not is irrelevant. Just look at the "enhanced pictures" and the woman who claims she lost everything - twice that was interviewed by journalists during Israel's latest conflict. Fake. Look at Dan Rather's report on George Bush's military service. Fake. Another perfect example (in the U.S.) that doesn't relate to 9/11 and conspiracies in general but shows how screwed up the media is was the Jon Benet Ramsey "supposed" killer...the media was all over the story and blew most of it out of proportion until they figured out they all had been duped...when was the last time they've mentioned it since? Wasn't it Hitler that said if you tell a lie long enough... The media is corrupt...

@Calius specifically - but for all to ponder, Curious about your thoughts on how the media and all of their biases are involved with the corruption of the world...is the media in the pocket of those truly in power...? The reason I ask is when Fahrenheit 9/11 came out...there was minor discord over the movie which has proven to have verifiable flaws and inaccurate data, yet the movie was still praised by many. Now, there is a new series called Path to 9/11 which spotlights the blunders made by the administrations of Clinton (8 years) and Bush (8 months) leading up to 9/11. From what I've read and heard, the Path to 9/11 series is totally unbiased and provides a truly independent (if that's even possible) perspective of all of the shortcomings that occurred during both administrations...well obviously since Clinton was in office for much longer, a lot of people on that side of the fence are up in arms over it and calling for the network to boycott the show. Now, this treads close to a "political discussion" but I think it's more of a history lesson... Regardless...I'm not concerned with the politics behind it...I'm concerned with the media bias in this instance (and many others). In summary, you have a truly biased and politically slanted film that gets praised and you have a neutral yet honest film that gets ridiculed and boycotted... If the media's job is to report the facts...why is there such concern over this...they have to be involved somehow, or so one would imagine... Thoughts?

@dickie - actually...the conversation started out as the U.S. government and Israel were the masterminds behind 9/11 and it has somehow migrated into a discussion about a broad spectrum of other conspiracy theories and topics...WMDs in Iraq being the latest... @all - Interesting news today...video showing OBL with some of the 9/11 hijackers just prior to 9/11. I guess as we near the anniversay of 9/11 2001...the CIA has to throw the conspiracy theorists a bone for them to pick apart and criticize...

@Calius - hey bro...I wanted to clarify...my post may have seemed a tad harsh and a bit of a poke in the eye...that truly wasn't my intention...I opened with what I meant as a bit o' humor...the whole stress thing and then turning around and saying we're all naive. That was all to "lighten the mood". Regret if that is not the way it was taken... When I say I like you...I truly mean that...you're a very interesting person and although I don't agree with most of what you say...I still very much enjoy debating it with you because of your spot on netiquette. Anyway...the real point of view I guess I was trying to make is there are so many examples of potential threats from the enemy, we (not you, not me, but all of us) need to be very careful to not let the government, the media and anybody else out there to distract us from a very real threat from a group (that I would wager most of us are not a part of) that would have us all eliminated.

@calius - I like you...I really do...you stick to your guns in the thick of it and never waiver from your point of view - even when it seems like everyone else is against you. But I gotta wonder...are you at all concerned about your health. Your stress level and blood pressure have to be off the charts. I mean, you're "looking here looking there, looking behind you, trusting nothing and no one". Somebody's gonna walk up behind you and go "Boo!" and you're gonna jump out of your skin. Surely you're not as paranoid as your posts make it sound. (I know, I know...you're thinking "surely everyone posting here isn't as naive as their posts make them sound.") Anyway...I agree with WK completely - in fact I was coming here to post the same thing...I wanted to see how the conspiracy theorists put a spin on this...sounds like they already are. So, let me get this straight, because there was a foiled terrorist threat before using this tactic, that somehow means that the government has its hands wrapped all around it in a conspiracy...makes perfect sense to me. You know those terrorists, they never use the same tactic more than once...all the IEDs we see in Iraq, that's the government planting them to make it look like the terrorists are doing it. So while we're at it...let's hear the "truth" about the 11 Egyptian college students that came to the USA and are no where near where they were suppose to be...or perhaps the inside story on the 2 men found in Ohio being held on terror charges. Yep, good ole Osama Sabhi Abulhassan and Ali Houssaiky have been taken into custody...but I'm sure they're just some of those innocent Americans that are having their rights "ripped away". @Calius - In looking with one eye at all the facts and the other eye on whatever else it is you look at, does it ever cross your mind that perhaps these are legitimate threats being carried out by radical Islamic fundamentalists that want to eliminate EVERYBODY that isn't a follower of their religious doctrine. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you're not a Muslim, so I'm pretty sure that you would be included in this group. How does that play into the big scheme of things?

@jchung - we obviously have different opinions of conspiracy - conspiracy theory but overall I think we share the same overall perspective on the fundamental question so who cares about the rest, right...heh heh. Amen! I think we are all waiting for this...the only reason I keep coming back...LOL.

@jchung - Well then, I guess it comes down to a matter of definition. You choose to use the word conspiracy...and I choose to use conspiracy theory...each has a totally different meaning that supports our different point of views. I personally think this sparring of the small details has gotten us sidetracked from the fundamental question of this whole thread, so I'll ask the question...give you my response and see where you stand...because I really don't know what you think, especially with the broad definition of the word conspiracy that you choose to use... It's my assumption that the 9/11 thread ultimately asks if the government was behind and/or involved with the 9/11 attacks (fully or partially). If so, why? (If people that replied in this topic would just go on record and post their actual perspective instead of "well there are some that think..." it would be very helpful to debate this topic) My answer is that the government was involved inasmuch that they knew there was a significant imminent threat, that it potentially involved aircraft and suicide hijackers and that the government, especially key intelligence agencies, were neglectful in taking appropriate action to warn the public. The government was not involved with carrying out or allowing this attack to be carried out. BTW - I'm in no way trying to change your mind or opinion of the matter...just trying to understand it and whether you actually think the government is involved with the nature of these events and if it was for sinister purposes. Evolution - now there is a conspiracy theory...

I'm a little disappointed that out of all the really interesting issues mentioned...we're going to get hung up on some minute points... You say the government already knew the effects of radiation BEFORE testing on US citizens. They already admitted to this. Are you kidding...we still to this day don't know everything there is to know about the short term / long term effects of radiation exposure. Look at Chernobyl...more people die in the United States of cancer from smoking then how many actually died as a result of this accident. The "experts" projected numbers much worse then what we actually encountered - and were surprised with the results. The 2005 report prepared by the Chernobyl Forum, led by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and World Health Organization (WHO), attributed 56 direct deaths (47 accident workers, and nine children with thyroid cancer), and estimated that as many as 9000 people among the approximately 6.6 million most highly exposed, may die from some form of cancer (one of the induced diseases). Nearly 20 years after the disaster, according to the Chernobyl Forum, none of the expected increase in leukemia or solid cancer has been found in the population, nor of the solid cancers. Anyway, for the sake of the arguement, I pretty much agree with everything you said about the nuclear test in the Marshall Islands...at least as far as the testing and objectives they were trying to achieve...what I don't understand is how this is a conspiracy theory...perhaps you can explain that...