to believe some if not all of the 9/11 conspiracy theories

[mrsunreasonable]

NOTE: This is not meant to be offensive and if you suffered as a result of 9/11 you have my deepest sympathies it was a terrible event however it was caused.

Having watched a few documentaries on the conspiracy theories I am partially if not completely convinced all was not as it seemed. The fact that many witnesses that saw/heard things that didn't tie in with the official version have since died in suspicious circumstances doesn't help!

mrsunreasonable - I was the one who mentioned Holocaust Denial. Holocaust denial comes in many forms and it is rarely if ever 'the holocaust never happened'. It normally takes the form of 'Hitler never planned / intended to annihilate Jews', '6 million people did not die - it was only X thousand', 'Aushwitz was a POW camp, not a death camp', 'There were no gas chambers', 'Anne Frank is fictional character' etc etc etc. Just distortion of the truth in the service of anti-semitism and justification of extreme right wing political viewpoints.

Personally I don't see why you would need to manufacture shit to throw at Bush - the man implemented and oversaw some of the worst policies and events in recent history: Hurricane Katrina, Guantanamo Bay, Rendition Flights, Halliburton, Invasion of Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction. You don't NEED to make it up.

This is so disrespectful to start a debate about a conspiracy theory on the remembrance day of such a tragedy. Today should be about thinking of the loss of lives.

Pull this thread and if necessary start the discussion on another date. it feels wrong.

Just came on to say what SGB just said. I find it in rl too. Completely rational, sane, intelligent people actually believing it.

Apart from anything else, in a time when there are more opportunities than ever for whistle-blowers to have an outlet (and monetary reward), why has not one single person out of the THOUSANDS who would have had to have been involved ever come forward with their story???

Sorry - just to add he clearly didn't 'implement' Hurricane Katrina etc - bad use of language - he was responsible for the tragedies arising.

The other thing is, one of the main conspiracy theorists about 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings here believes he is Jesus!! I means seriously, that is someone's idea of a credible source?!?!

x-posted with eagle, in fact, who said it better.

IMO, conspiracy theories are created by those who are too frightened to contemplate the fact that not everything is organised and controlled. To accept that the US government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks is less terrifying for some than the idea that others did it and that they weren't detected in their planning and execution. If a government is suspected of organising something of this nature, people seem to think it's because of their ability to hush things up etc, which some find more reassuring than the idea of a group of people managing to slip through all official controls.

Face reality. This was an unspeakable, heartbreaking act of unchecked terrorism. Awful, terrible and unimaginable things DO happen. Governments do not control everything.

And, for what it's worth, I think this thread is inappropriate, given the current date.

If one of the planes was shot down over a field, as had been reported as a possibility during the crisis, it may have been the best option and caused the fewest casualties. I prefer to believe that the pasengers on that plane were heroic and sacrificed their lives for others.

Idon't think it's 'inappropriate' to discuss a newsworthy major event that happened nearly a decade ago. It's not like the thread is full of posters going 'Bwhahaha the capitalist US running dogs deserved it'.

I seem to recall reading that there may have been a few fuckups in US intelligence shortly before the event, maybe a few warning signs were disregarded, but that reminds me of a (probably apocryphal as have heard it attributed to a variety of terrorist organisations) comment made to some or other member of the intelligence services regarding the way in which governments are sometimes lucky in catching terrorists before an atrocity - 'Yes, but you have to be lucky all the time. We only have to be lucky the once.'

I've read a few conspiracy theories on this subjuct. Supposedly GB 1st had previous with Bin Laden before he turned into an extremist. It was about oil/money etc. He vowed to get Bin Laden back on whatever it was they fell out over. I can't say I believe it but then you never really know do you. Even The Times and BBC have ran stories on this Times story

shrug I'm pretty well educated in the pharma business. Feel free to talk about tinfoil hats but the FDA, for one have been involved in some very serious pharmaceutical cover-ups where lives have been lost over a long period of time and they could and should have stepped in and stopped it. Billions in compensation have been paid when they've been found out. Similar incidents have happened in farming, environmental pollution and so on.

I don't think the US government 'did it' but at the same time, I think it's ridiculously naive to just assume that the lives of the public are worth more to politicians than money. It's simply not true.

Why the blind faith in them? Really? You trust George Bush's government?

I don't believe any particular conspiracy theory, I just notice there's a lot of evidence that things aren't quite what they seem and a lot of that evidence is coming from very knowledgeable professionals.

Would someone like to explain WHY if the government were doing the right thing, the Bin Ladens were rounded up and shipped out so quickly? Surely if the government suspected Bin Laden, the right thing to do would be to detain everyone who might know him, not to offer his nearest and dearest official protection?

And what about Building 7? Seriously. Something funny happened there. No steel framed skyscraper has ever fallen before due to fire damage and Building 7 was barely damaged.

Csd you're very articulate. I don't really buy it except for the "something a bit funny went on somehow" feeling I have. I do think you are spot on about corporate cover ups and abuse. Your comment on naivete is quite right. How rational and hardheaded people contrive to be so trusting is astonishing. I suppose there is a certain amount of wilfulness involved.

People would be surprised at the sorts of professionals and well informed people who do believe things were not as they seemed.

For me: it's interesting but a bit pointless. Don't trust any of them anyway and nothing productive will ever come of such theories.

The idea that the Pentagon was not hit by a commercial plane is ridiculous - like expat, I know several people, colleagues, who watched the plane hit the building from the windows of our office in DC.

People from all walks of life, all backgrounds, saw it happen. Many articles have been written debunking that specific conspiracy theory - do you really believe that all these people have somehow been blackmailed to lie? Why would they all accept to do so?

I think the timing is highly appropriate. Which day would be better? I'm sorry that clearly people are offended by it, but I'm not sure how to ameliorate that aspect.

Obviously nobody affected by it would want there to be a thread at all, of course they wouldn't, it hurts to think about - but it is an important issue IMO, and if channel four can do it, why can't we?

When you say 'conspiracy theories' I am tempted to question which ones you refer to - the ones that Al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11 are the most dubious in my opinion.

But many people seem to have little trouble believing those.

People have tried to testify about the events but have been silenced, according to some reports - killed in plane crashes at the extreme, or kept under gagging orders since 2002.

Thermate was found in samples from ground zero which cannot come from any other source than thermite explosive.

The towers were shut down the weekend prior to the attacks, electrical systems were down, alarms and locks were non operative. Witnesses say there were many, many workers going in and out of the buildings.

Tower 7 was brought down by controlled demolition - little doubt about that. They lied about that - so why not about the other two?

Various nefarious schemes and plots such as took place in Vietnam many years back have been covered up at the time only to come out much later, when everyone has cooled down a little and the motive has been fulfilled.

The US govt has form.

I don't believe a word of the official version.

Plus, basically I don't believe it's possible for a building to fall down at freefall speed without something to abstract the resistance from the lower floors.

How exactly does steel just break into little pieces all the way down, instantly, when huge majority of it has not been exposed to anything higher than room temperature? Only the top bit got hot, briefly, when the fuel exploded - but this didn't cause a long lasting fire.

In fact in the second tower most of it was vapourised instantly outside of the building. And this one fell first.

Whatw as left burning was paper, desks, usual office stuff. For less than an hour. That isn't going to melt steel columns 100 floors down. Is it?

Watch them squirm

Question 12 is very amusing in particular. Avoiding the question, much?

and your structural engineering expertise is...

you 'don't believe' - oh arf indeed

"Plus, basically I don't believe it's possible for a building to fall down at freefall speed without something to abstract the resistance from the lower floors."

Jesus, do people do O Level Physics these days?

Yes, ivy, so all those people who saw it fly into the building are just making it up?

Of course they are not making it up, it is the consipisey that is a load of croaking shit - they show a video you can't even make out whats happening? why, cos they don't have any realy evidence that it is a consiresey. They talk about a body in a closet in the tower it is all sick really when people make up things in their minds and then look for evidence and spread lies about things that happened.

but expat why are you asking me this question?
not really sure what you are trying to get at?

Ivy, is the second paragraph of that post yours? Because it is not mine and as a result it makes your post very confusing.

Reading back, I believe I asked you that question because you have been quoting others in your posts without quotation marks, which can come across as certain remarks belonging to you.

this is how a controlled exlosion works count the seconds after you hear the push of the button.

Kaloki why don't you explain instead of scoffing randomly? It makes you look at bit nerdy otherwise. I'd be interested to read anything you've got to say which isn't just (snort).

Actually, I think SGB sums it up quite well.

'Jesus, do people do O Level Physics these days?'

The sad thing is, tokyo, you don't even need that to have the basic level of understanding it takes to comprehend the collapse of the two towers.

'Surely if the government suspected Bin Laden, the right thing to do would be to detain everyone who might know him, not to offer his nearest and dearest official protection?'

Under what grounds? Let's just throw all types of random people in jail on account of people they might know. What if these associates live in another country? Let's force the government to detain them! Yes, that's it! There's an Al-Queda operative on every corner.

W.T.F.

I didn't quote anyone in any of the posts, - apart from your quote and then I highlighted the question you asked, it isn't unclear as I wasn't quoting anyone and writing what I thught

THIS here is what I wrote ...go to 1.22 in that pentagon shot - I watch three times and failed to see the plane in full - please if they wanted to show properly they could put it into slow motion to show far more - whay havn't they if the consprisey have nothing to hide?

I think it is clear that I beleive they are not being clear in the tape and therefore the consipisey is croak

Eye witness accounts are notoriously unreliable.