The Illuminati and other Conspiracy Theories thread

[Scaff]

First of all I object to your subtext.

I didn't use a subtext. I straight out said you are using the source in a missleading manner.

at the very least must raise at least a smattering of a red flag or don't you trust the members of NIST?

I've already explained this, you simply ignored it:

"The obstructions were quite clearly said to relate to people wanting to appear to have acted too slowly or been ineffective; not as you are suggesting as part of a wider conspiracy to hide the 'truth' (and given your posting history the inference behind that is clear)."

Your opinion that I have posted something misleading deliberately, is an insult, as I would never do that(it also answers a question you posed many months ago).

Never do that? You have a track history of using sources misleadingly and for citing sources that are themselves utterly missleading. The entire thread is evidence of that

A different perpetrator responsible you say.

No I don't say. You inferred based on misrepresenting a source.

Since the commission was never set-up to find a perpetrator, then I would find unlikely that they would find anyone responsible.

I didn't say they did. I said you attempted to infer that via the use of selective quoting and misrepresentation.

Is the 9/11 report a statement of true facts, supposition or political document rather than scientific, that the nub and requires that we should look at other points of view, and NOT accept it as fact, unless of course you agree with it and don't want dissenting arguments.

No one but you is presenting it as fact, not even the reports present themselves as facts. Its presented as the most probable sequences of events based on the evidence available and supported used a range of models.

This is clear in every single part of the NIST investigation papers:
https://www.nist.gov/engineering-la...ist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation

You say

Nice quote-mining, just remove the following sentance that would have made your next question utterly redundant.

Hmm a cascade failure. That means that one part of a system failed and as such this led to a reduction the the integrity of the structure causing other failures which then subsequently exaggerated the destruction causing it to collapse. Yes?

As I said (and you removed):

"That is the most probable sequence of events based on all available evidence and supported by repeated and numerous models."

 

[Dotini]

Did 9/11 lead to Iraq and the quagmire of endless war and migration that we endure today and undoubtedly will endure for the foreseeable future? Yes. Was it key, integral and indispensable to historical reality as we know it today? Yes. So it's easy to see why it cannot be questioned or doubted, as our current reality is founded upon it more so than any other historical event.

Can the Gulf of Tonkin incident which lead to 55,000 American lives lost in Vietnam be questioned today? Yes, because nobody really cares and it doesn't matter anymore. It's yesterday's history. And it doesn't hurt that the National Security Agency reported many decades after the fact that the incidents consisted mainly of the US Navy firing off a few shots.

Can the assassination of JFK so poorly investigated by the Warren Commission be questioned today? Yes, because nobody really cares and it barely matters anymore. It's yesterday's history. And it doesn't hurt that the official CIA historian has recently conceded that pertinent information had been withheld from the Commission and later from the congressional investigation, and that the CIA had undisclosed relationships with Cuban dissident organizations and Lee Harvey Oswald.

IMO when the time comes, many decades into the future, when war in the Middle East, Islamic terrorism and Muslim immigration are no more than muddled memories in the minds of grandfathers - and the NSA says its okay - then it will be okay to discuss 9/11. But not before.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Did 9/11 lead to Iraq and the quagmire of endless war and migration that we endure today and undoubtedly will endure for the foreseeable future? Yes. Was it key, integral and indispensable to historical reality as we know it today? Yes. So it's easy to see why it cannot be questioned or doubted, as our current reality is founded upon it more so than any other historical event.

It can be questioned and doubted, it's just that's there very good evidence to suggest that things were what they appeared to be. There isn't very good evidence to suggest they weren't.

I'd strongly disagree that "our current reality is founded upon it more so than any other historical event", to take that view would (imo) be blinkered and borderline-obsessive.

Can the Gulf of Tonkin incident which lead to 55,000 American lives lost in Vietnam be questioned today? Yes, because nobody really cares and it doesn't matter anymore. It's yesterday's history. And it doesn't hurt that the National Security Agency reported many decades after the fact that the incidents consisted mainly of the US Navy firing off a few shots.

It can equally be questioned, and it was only 50-60 years ago. That might be half the age of parts of America but it's recent history in the scheme of things.

Can the assassination of JFK so poorly investigated by the Warren Commission be questioned today? Yes, because nobody really cares and it barely matters anymore. It's yesterday's history. And it doesn't hurt that the official CIA historian has recently conceded that pertinent information had been withheld from the Commission and later from the congressional investigation, and that the CIA had undisclosed relationships with Cuban dissident organizations and Lee Harvey Oswald.

Guess what? It can be questioned like any other event. Source on the withheld info?

IMO when the time comes, many decades into the future, when war in the Middle East, Islamic terrorism and Muslim immigration are no more than muddled memories in the minds of grandfathers - and the NSA says its okay - then it will be okay to discuss 9/11. But not before.

We can discuss it now - it's simply that the quality of conspiratorial evidence has been mind-numbingly facile.

 

[Dotini]

Source on the withheld info?

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...tion-john-mccone-warren-commission-cia-213197


Back in day when Vietnam and JFK were recent events, you were an idiot to subject yourself to the ardent debunkers protecting history as it was then understood.

True then, true now. Only an idiot masochist wants to discuss 9/11 as a conspiracy of any sort.

 

[BobK]

Did 9/11 lead to Iraq and the quagmire of endless war and migration that we endure today and undoubtedly will endure for the foreseeable future? Yes.

Agreed.

Was it key, integral and indispensable to historical reality as we know it today? Yes.

Err, not so much.

You're saying that "Iraq and the quagmire of endless war and migration that we endure today" was a direct result of 9/11 and that 9/11 was the sole or primary cause of this.

Actually 9/11 was a milestone on a road we were following anyway. Certainly contributory, but the odds are pretty good that we'd be here where we are anyway. The timing may be different, but still the same result.

So it's easy to see why it cannot be questioned or doubted, as our current reality is founded upon it more so than any other historical event.

Only if one subscribes to the bizarre theory that the situation today was thought desirable by the "ruling elite" or whoever your conspiracy theory holds responsible, and 9/11 was deliberately engineered to arrive at today's situation.

The only person in this thread that's saying it cannot be questioned is you.

I think we're willing to discuss it, but give us some credible evidence that there's something to discuss.

 

[Scaff]

'We cannot question this', say a man in a thread questioning it.

It can be questioned, it has been questioned, it continues to be questioned.

However many people seem to forget that in questioning it, these alternate views need to be supported.

Or is what you are saying that you should be able to question it without providing sound evidence but it still be given the same weight as that which is supported by sound evidence?

 

[Dotini]

I have direct first person experience with "Israeli art students" peddling "art" in downtown Seattle in the years prior to 9/11. Some of these guys were arrested in a burglary of the Federal Building in Seattle. I have direct first person experience of US Navy gunboats furiously patrolling the vicinity of Sub Base Kitsap on Hood Canal in front of my fishing cabin in the months and weeks prior to 9/11. I have direct first person experience of the crescent moon opposed by a nearby star a la the Islamic symbol on the morning of 9/11/01.

Other than these personal impressions, I will provide no further evidence or comment on the subject of 9/11 conspiracy, as I have previously stated. Despite the facts that I have climbed (roped) hundreds of mountains, raced cars and karts at 155mph, ridden a motorcycle from Seattle to Yellowstone at 128mph on backroads, played chess with a master and crossed swords with a fencing master, I wish to dispel any suspicion that I am an idiot masochist. Accordingly, I will have no further remark on 9/11 until authorized by new, credible governmentally released evidence, as has been done in the Tonkin Gulf and JFK conspiracies.

On the subject of the JFK assassination, I can provide you with the names of the principle assassin and his CIA enablers, should you be interested and ask politely.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No the first Gulf War led to Iraq, and it could be argued that supplying a nation with Stinger Missiles to push back the Russian, helped stir the pot for Afghanistan. Once again, as I said 3 pages ago, 9/11 didn't suddenly become the battle cry point, the U.S. was well on its way to war and was already doing anti-terrorist military operations for years.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I have direct first person evidence with "Israeli art students" peddling "art" in downtown Seattle in the years prior to 9/11. Some of these guys were arrested in a burglary of the Federal Building in Seattle. I have direct first person experience of US Navy gunboats furiously patrolling the vicinity of Sub Base Kitsap on Hood Canal in front of my fishing cabin in the months and weeks prior to 9/11. I have direct first person experience of the crescent moon opposed by a nearby star a la the Islamic symbol on the morning of 9/11/01.

Other than these personal impressions, I will provide no further evidence or comment on the subject of 9/11 conspiracy, as I have perviously averred. Despite the facts that I have climbed (roped) hundreds of mountains, raced cars and karts at 155mph, ridden a motorcycle from Seattle to Yellowstone at 128mph on backroads, played chess with a master and crossed swords with a fencing master, I wish to dispel any suspicion that I am an idiot masochist. Accordingly, I will have no further remark on 9/11 until authorized by new, credible governmentally released evidence, as has been done in the Tonkin Gulf and JFK conspiracies.

I give up. Your apparently-successful audition to be the Milk Tray Man is fascinating and I have no doubt that you'll soon be the star of an eponymous aftershave... but what does all of that have to do with the price of fish?

On the subject of the JFK assassination, I can provide you with the names of the principle assassin and his CIA enablers, should you be interested and ask politely.

According to the de-classified report you linked earlier it was Lee Harvey Oswald... despite your quote-mining that suggest some altogether more nefarious/beautiful/necessary/grand/defining* lie.

*Delete as applicable, alternative superfluence may be available

 

[Dotini]

Note: I will not take questions without at least the pretense of sincerity or real interest.


Here's a nice, new juicy conspiracy to enjoy!

John McCain: “So I repeat again, the senator from Kentucky is now working for Vladimir Putin.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...d-paul-is-now-working-for-vladimir-putin.html

...or, if this is more interesting:

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-...ations/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/ufo.html


The Work Of A Nation. The Center of Intelligence.

CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90
A Die-Hard Issue

 

[BobK]

I have direct first person experience with "Israeli art students" peddling "art" in downtown Seattle in the years prior to 9/11. Some of these guys were arrested in a burglary of the Federal Building in Seattle. I have direct first person experience of US Navy gunboats furiously patrolling the vicinity of Sub Base Kitsap on Hood Canal in front of my fishing cabin in the months and weeks prior to 9/11. I have direct first person experience of the crescent moon opposed by a nearby star a la the Islamic symbol on the morning of 9/11/01.

Other than these personal impressions, I will provide no further evidence or comment on the subject of 9/11 conspiracy, as I have perviously averred.

Wait, what? Those things you listed are somehow evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy?!?

Despite the facts that I have climbed (roped) hundreds of mountains, raced cars and karts at 155mph, ridden a motorcycle from Seattle to Yellowstone at 128mph on backroads, played chess with a master and crossed swords with a fencing master, I wish to dispel any suspicion that I am an idiot masochist.

No one is calling you a masochist or an idiot. Credulous, maybe, perhaps gullible even, but idiot masochist, no.

 

[Dotini]

Wait, what? Those things you listed are somehow evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy?!?

I attempted to make it clear these were personal impressions (of unusual events at the time which, unbidden, raised hairs of apprehension on the back of my neck). Everyone knew there was going to be an(other) Islamic terror attack, and sure enough there was. I saw the Islamic symbol in the sky as I mounted my motorcycle to ride to work at Boeing, Renton plant. I felt a shiver of fear and apprehension as I recognized the cosmic symbolism. As soon as I fired up my monitor and checked the news prior to starting work, there indeed was the WTC burning. Reality was altered. Life has not been the same since. This was the perfect justification for war on terrorist Islam, and everyone in the office instantly knew that. Only a child or an idiot could not know. The revenge attack on Afghanistan was almost immediate. Allegations of al Qaeda affiliation and WMDs were made against Saddam Hussein, and Iraq was promptly attacked in due course. The war powers act granted to Bush (still on the books?) were based directly on the required response to 9/11, and the war goes on despite the death of a million Muslims including Saddam and bin Laden. Trump's stated goal is to rid the planet of Islamic terrorists. Millions more Muslim deaths are needed, and they will not be enough. The war is perpetual.

When one has worked for a lifetime with the tools of life and death, be it rope and ice axe, pistol and shotgun, race car and motorcycle, one hopefully acquires a healthy sense of material reality and the fragility of mortal life. But along the way I had an unsought encounter which ultimately affected me in a spiritual way. Perhaps I've become a philosophical dualist. Perhaps there is a cosmic struggle between light and dark, good and evil, in which the human being is chattel. Granted freedom of will, the human is responsible for the choice, but must discern between them.

 

[BobK]

Ah. Heavenly portents. Makes perfect sense.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Ah. Heavenly portents. Makes perfect sense.

Reminds me of the incredible insights I used to get from too much beer/weed.

 

[Scaff]

I attempted to make it clear these were personal impressions (of unusual events at the time which, unbidden, raised hairs of apprehension on the back of my neck). Everyone knew there was going to be an(other) Islamic terror attack, and sure enough there was. I saw the Islamic symbol in the sky as I mounted my motorcycle to ride to work at Boeing, Renton plant. I felt a shiver of fear and apprehension as I recognized the cosmic symbolism. As soon as I fired up my monitor and checked the news prior to starting work, there indeed was the WTC burning. Reality was altered. Life has not been the same since. This was the perfect justification for war on terrorist Islam, and everyone in the office instantly knew that. Only a child or an idiot could not know. The revenge attack on Afghanistan was almost immediate. Allegations of al Qaeda affiliation and WMDs were made against Saddam Hussein, and Iraq was promptly attacked in due course. The war powers act granted to Bush (still on the books?) were based directly on the required response to 9/11, and the war goes on despite the death of a million Muslims including Saddam and bin Laden. Trump's stated goal is to rid the planet of Islamic terrorists. Millions more Muslim deaths are needed, and they will not be enough. The war is perpetual.

When one has worked for a lifetime with the tools of life and death, be it rope and ice axe, pistol and shotgun, race car and motorcycle, one hopefully acquires a healthy sense of material reality and the fragility of mortal life. But along the way I had an unsought encounter which ultimately affected me in a spiritual way. Perhaps I've become a philosophical dualist. Perhaps there is a cosmic struggle between light and dark, good and evil, in which the human being is chattel. Granted freedom of will, the human is responsible for the choice, but must discern between them.

9/11 was an inside job because of false pattern recognition!

 

[Dotini]

Perhaps it was false pattern recognition which killed 42 Muslims in this Mosque, mostly civilians?

Airstrike Against Mosque in Northwest Syria Kills 42, Mostly Civilians
Unclear Who Carried Out Strike in al-Jineh
by Jason Ditz, March 16, 2017

An airstrike from an as-yet-unidentified aircraft targeted a mosque in the village of al-Jineh, in the westernmost part of northern Syria’s Aleppo Province, killing at least 42 people, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The slain were mostly civilians.
http://news.antiwar.com/2017/03/16/...in-northwest-syria-kills-42-mostly-civilians/

US Central Command said it would investigate reports over 40 civilians were killed when a mosque was struck in a raid it carried out on an Al-Qaeda meeting in northern Syria (AFP Photo/HO)


Beirut (AFP) - The US military says it carried out an air strike in northern Syria against an Al-Qaeda target, but denies deliberately targeting a mosque where at least 42 people were killed according to an independent monitor.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-claims-deadly-syria-strike-denies-targeting-mosque-042036776.html

 

[Famine]

Wrong thread.

Ah. Heavenly portents. Makes perfect sense.

Reminds me of the incredible insights I used to get from too much beer/weed.

9/11 was an inside job because of false pattern recognition!

I, for one, have never seen a crescent moon in the sky except before false flag Islamic terrorist events.

 

[Scaff]

Perhaps it was false pattern recognition which killed 42 Muslims in this Mosque, mostly civilians?

Only if you're claiming to have seen a sign in the sky forewarning of it.

 

[Dotini]

I'm claiming the deaths of millions of Muslims is justified only by a ginned up war.

The Global War on Terror (GWOT) has no better justification than the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was justified by the Tonkin Gulf incident.

 

[Imari]

I will provide no further evidence or comment on the subject of 9/11 conspiracy...Despite the facts that I have climbed (roped) hundreds of mountains, raced cars and karts at 155mph, ridden a motorcycle from Seattle to Yellowstone at 128mph on backroads, played chess with a master and crossed swords with a fencing master...

I've got nothing, but I'd sure like to brag about the irrelevant facts of my life in the hope that you'll accept my word as some sort of authority.

Just stop it. You know better than this. If you have actual evidence that things untoward went on, then share it. Otherwise you're just another bloke on the internet who can't quite get his tin foil hat to fit right.

Everyone knew there was going to be an(other) Islamic terror attack, and sure enough there was.

Which is about as controversial as predicting that there will be another comet that passes close to the earth. And sure enough, eventually there was.

I'm claiming the deaths of millions of Muslims is justified only by a ginned up war.

The Global War on Terror (GWOT) has no better justification than the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was justified by the Tonkin Gulf incident.

You really should read up on the history of the Middle East and groups like Al Qaeda. You'd find it informative. The roots of those wars was started decades before 9/11.

You have this desire to point the finger at one thing and say "THIS IS WHAT CAUSED ALL OF THIS", whereas the reality is far, far more complex and while any one straw may be labelled as the one that broke the camel's back, there was a whole bunch of far less obvious events that put the world in a state where that could be a tipping point.

Lift up your eyes and see the greater picture of what was and is going on in the world, and perhaps you'll be less attached to any one event as the ultimate trigger for wars and conflict. Because that just ain't how it works. We didn't get WW1 because some dude in a car got shot. That was merely the most obvious trigger for events that had been lining up for years.

 

[Dotini]

I'm claiming the deaths of millions of Muslims is justified only by a ginned up war.

The Global War on Terror (GWOT) has no better justification than the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was justified by the Tonkin Gulf incident.

I'm quoting this in order to reemphasize it. It's so true that it needn't be posted in the conspiracy thread, but should properly be in the America thread or the middle east thread. For those with eyes to see, there is no mention of a single causative trigger for GWOT. I'm leaving 9/11 behind as a minor detail to focus on the bigger picture.

However, in the case of the Vietnam War the ultimate congressional justification in law was the Tonkin Gulf incident.The history of US involvement in Vietnam went back many years before that.

The ultimate congressional justifications in law for the extraordinary powers granted to GW Bush for GWOT did stem from from a series of terror attacks on the US, although the involvement of the US in the middle east goes back many decades. The deals made between Roosevelt and King Faisal for petroleum was a prominent stick in the sand. The presence of US troops in Arabia was a factor compounding and motivating to extremists there as was the US tilt towards Israel.

In the case of WWI, the series of interlocking treaties requiring many countries to become involved should war come to one was a serious compounding factor.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm quoting this in order to reemphasize it. It's so true that it needn't be posted in the conspiracy thread, but should properly be in the America thread or the middle east thread. For those with eyes to see, there is no mention of a single causative trigger for GWOT. I'm leaving 9/11 behind as a minor detail to focus on the bigger picture.

In the strict Boko Haram philosophy you can go back to American military action in the Middle-East as far back as the early 1800s for inspiration. You continue to maintain that 9/11 was a turning point, it really wasn't, if anything America was reaping a whirlwind by then.

However, in the case of the Vietnam War the ultimate congressional justification in law was the Tonkin Gulf incident.The history of US involvement in Vietnam went back many years before that.

Tonkin was 1964, as you say the US military involvement went way back before. In an era when the press was far easier to control and questions from the public were far easier to squash it seems highly likely (and in part proven) that the presentation of the Tonkin incident was deeply flawed. That's a subject for Media & Communications history as much as anything else... the only relevance of 9/11 is that it was one of the world's biggest shared-media events and that human communication keeps it in discussion.

The ultimate congressional justifications in law for the extraordinary powers granted to GW Bush for GWOT did stem from from a series of terror attacks on the US, although the involvement of the US in the middle east goes back many decades. The deals made between Roosevelt and King Faisal for petroleum was a prominent stick in the sand. The presence of US troops in Arabia was a factor compounding and motivating to extremists there as was the US tilt towards Israel.

Yes, but see my earlier comments, Boko involvement (including the US) goes way back from there.

In the case of WWI, the series of interlocking treaties requiring many countries to become involved should war come to one was a serious compounding factor.

Not for the US, they sold everything to everybody until their corporate freighters started being attacked by untersee-booten.

Your history is (mostly) very robust, there's no doubt about that, I just question whether showing nefarious intra-press doings by the US government (or any government) historically has anything to do with proving some kind of demolition conspiracy in 9/11. Unless your tack has changed and I missed it?

 

[Dotini]

Your history is (mostly) very robust, there's no doubt about that...your tack has changed and I missed it?

Maybe you missed this:

I'm leaving 9/11 behind as a minor detail to focus on the bigger picture.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Maybe you missed this:

No, I saw it, then I saw you say that "the GWOT has no greater justification than the Vietnam war". Earlier, if I may venture, it had no greater justification than that "necessary lie", 9/11. I remain confused as to what exactly you're getting at, and how it finds context in the Conspiracies thread.

Might just be me. I've had a cold afternoon staring at fragments of medieval masonry and went to the pub on the way home

 

[Dotini]

No, I saw it, then I saw you say that "the GWOT has no greater justification than the Vietnam war". Earlier, if I may venture, it had no greater justification than that "necessary lie", 9/11. I remain confused as to what exactly you're getting at, and how it finds context in the Conspiracies thread.

Might just be me. I've had a cold afternoon staring at fragments of medieval masonry and went to the pub on the way home

I'm simply sick of dealing with 9/11. I envy your personal access to medieval masonry. Can you explain the Newport Tower? Discussion of GWOT and Vietnam has no place in the conspiracies thread, I must conclude.

• 
• 
• 
• 

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm simply sick of dealing with 9/11. I envy your personal access to medieval masonry. Can you explain the Newport Tower? Discussion of GWOT and Vietnam has no place in the conspiracies thread, I must conclude.

• 
• 
• 
• 

Fascinating - I'd never heard of this!

My first thought was that it looks very like the Chesterton windmill (which I lived near as a child for about 6 years). The wiki seems to confirm that and gives a possible link between the Newport and the Chesterton sites via George Lawson (mill builder from around Chesterton who later moved to the New World and may well have continued to build/design mills) and Benedict Arnold, a businessman who became governor of Rhode Island and whose business in England would very likely have seen him travel the Fosse Way, and old Roman Road (now mostly the A5 ) from which the Chesterton mill is/was a visible landmark.

There is robust evidence for Vikingr expeditions to the Newport coastal areas and beyond but, to my mind, nothing about this structure is reminiscent of anything we know the Vikingr built. If they did build windmills (and some sagas hint that they did) they were very likely of a vertical style. There is a lack of archaeological evidence for habitation of the Newport Tower site before the 17th century, it is therefore highly unlikely that the Tower was built before that period.

Lime mortar evaluation supports this. In all the Tower is exactly what the historical evidence suggests; a 17th Century mill tower, likely modelled after the Chesterton Mill, England, later used as a munitions store and watchtower (possibly concurrently).

There's a good document at JSTOR if you have the permissions.

 

[BobK]

Can you explain the Newport Tower?

As it happens, he Newport Tower is just down the road from me a bit. What's to explain? It's the remains of a windmill built sometime in the 17th century.

There are, however, some tinfoil-hatters who insist it's considerably older in spite of things like analysis of the mortar and radiocarbon dating.

 

[Dotini]

As it happens, he Newport Tower is just down the road from me a bit. What's to explain? It's the remains of a windmill built sometime in the 17th century.

There are, however, some tinfoil-hatters who insist it's considerably older in spite of things like analysis of the mortar and radiocarbon dating.

What do the nutters say, Bob?

I've been aware of the tower for quite some time, and agree it's quite likely 17th century. It popped up recently with reference to Oak Island ("The Money Pit", ~17th century), Nova Scotia, another pleasant mystery to follow weekly on cable TV.

 

[BobK]

What do the nutters say, Bob?

Two off the top of my head are that it was built by Vikings and that it was built by the Chinese in the early fifteenth century. There are even more preposterous theories such as being built by Atlanteans but I'll leave it to others to find more information.

 

[Dotini]

Two off the top of my head are that it was built by Vikings and that it was built by the Chinese in the early fifteenth century. There are even more preposterous theories such as being built by Atlanteans but I'll leave it to others to find more information.

Recently a gilt 17th century British military uniform button was found at ~150 feet down in the Oak Island money pit. On the hypothesis the money pit was dug by the Royal Navy, some wag drew a line from a Knights Templar tower near to Scotland through the money pit and it hit the Newport Tower at the other terminus. Then he speculated the Newport Tower might be a geodetic marker guised as a Rosicrucian Temple built by freemasons under the direction of the Royal Navy. The Oak Island money pit has spawned many speculations!

edit:
There is a (in parts still existing) stone wall, many miles long, near to San Francisco which some have speculated to be of 15th century Chinese origin.