Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

703 replies

mrsunreasonable · 11/09/2010 15:00

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!

OP posts:
Appletrees · 12/09/2010 12:11

Cao, i haven't seen that, and you're wrong about what I think. Calm down.

Flighttattendant · 12/09/2010 12:14

Expat, I was talking about your wasting my time with pointless ('funny') links

I'm prepared to consider the other stuff you are saying but have you actually got a better step by step explanation of how a part of a building putting pressure on the remaining building would actually have the power to shear off the incredibly thick steel columns inside the core of the building, right down to the ground, into little pieces, considering these lower sections of column had not been exposed to any kind of heat?

That's the part I struggle with the most. Trusses, beams, floor pancaking I can totally accept but not the diagonal shearing of the central columns within the space of 9 and 11 seconds (NIST report)

CheekyLittleSox · 12/09/2010 12:16

Flighttattendant has a very good point.

Appletrees · 12/09/2010 12:18

"Don't be so stupid" REALLY doesn't work for me and I don't even believe this stuff.

happiestblonde · 12/09/2010 12:19

The Bin Ladens were shipped out because of oil links with GWB, Texas etc but also because they are not all mentalists. OBL is supposedly a pariah among his 52-odd cousins/siblings so I can sort of understand them being flown out immediately to prevent lynching - if one of us had a wayward sister who blew up a country I would imagine we would expect to leave pronto too.

Flighttattendant · 12/09/2010 12:19

I did consider maybe the steel was sheared into tiny bits when the building rocked on impact...however it returned to upright, and stodd for almost an hour before collapsing.

Was the outer framework holding it together during this hour? That's the only explanation I can think of. It seems highly unlikely.

squeaver · 12/09/2010 12:20

cheekylittlesox - I URGE you to read the Popular Mechanics article linked to earlier. here it is

CheekyLittleSox · 12/09/2010 12:21

If the building was just destroyed by the burning jet fuel then when it did ''collapse'' only the flooring would ahve pancaked, but steel beams that held it up right would still be erected, there is no explanation as to why they fell and no explanation as to why they were shattered into million and one pieces.

BrightLightBrightLight · 12/09/2010 12:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

electra · 12/09/2010 12:27

I haven't read the whole thread but to the poster who says to believe the conspiracy theories about 9/11 is like holocaust denial - that's utter crap. Holocaust deniers seek to dispute that many people were murdered - nobody says of 9/11 that thousands of people did not die.

Nobody is denying what a tragedy 9/11 was or that many. many people were killed, purposefully.

What people question is whether the government was completely truthful about the circumstances of the tragedy, and how it happened and why.

Why is is disrespectful to question the cause of the tragedy? Nobody is disputing that it happened!

electra · 12/09/2010 12:30

BTW - I do not have an opinion about the conspiracy theories and have not read much about them but think it's entirely reasonable of people to question a government and its motives.

Snorbs · 12/09/2010 12:30

A lot of the structural strength of the WTC buildings was in the outer columns rather than the core. When the trusses tying the outer columns to the core lost strength and sagged, the structural rigidity of the outer columns was gone.

The cores themselves were also heavily damaged at the impact floors and so once the structure started to fail the weight of the upper floors smashed through the damaged areas of the core.

At that point it was all over. As the upper floors fell they gained mass from the additional floors they collected as well as increasing velocity due to gravity. The momentum increased enormously and simply pulverised everything that was below.

CheekyLittleSox · 12/09/2010 12:31

squeaver
Most of that article if people covering their backs. After reading i still do not change my mind.

BaggedandTagged · 12/09/2010 12:32

I dont think it's disrespectful. I just find it amusing that so many people suddenly become experts in the properties of construction steel/ physics of explosions and are prepared to overlook the most likely explanation is favour of a much more unlikely explanation peddled by people who think that everything on the internet is the god sworn truth. Also, if there was any truth in these theories and the CIA are SO ruthless, dont these theorists think they might have met with a double tap by now.....or, dont tell me, the CIA are too afraid of arousing suspicion to do that.

Look how much money and time has been wasted over the whole bloody Princess Diana thing just because a few Diana-philes would rather believe in some plot than the simple fact that driving through a tunnel whilst slaloming papps when you've had a skinful predisposes you to crashing the car

CheekyLittleSox · 12/09/2010 12:35

I don't know what to believe but i do know my husband was wastching that live on TV when it became breaking news, the first and second reporter on the scene said Diana was alive and well and was fine. With an hour or so it was reported to be Diana is Dead, she died instantly.

No she didnt.

squeaver · 12/09/2010 12:35
CheekyLittleSox · 12/09/2010 12:36

Shake your head, reading some script isnt going to change my mind, if you get time have a look at the link posted on 9/11 mysteries video. and tell me what you think.

expatinscotland · 12/09/2010 12:38

PMSL.

Really and truly.

Flighttattendant · 12/09/2010 12:39

I'm not claiming to be an expert, B&T. Not at all. Are you? Why believe one story and not another?

You're believing the Govt version, I'm believing a different version. The only thing you have on your side in that respect is the mistaken idea that governments never lie.

Why is it more stupid of me to believe someone else's theory than that of the government? Both are unproveable, both are extremely odd.

I would like to add that I can understand people finding a thread about this distatseful on the anniversary of the event, but in return, I find it rather distasteful that the government doctrine (or conspiracy theory, however you might see it) is being held up as the truth on the day that saw the murder of all these poor people, when to me it looks like a bunch of outrageous lies.

I've no wish to offend. But I believe the folks that died deserve the truth to be known, whatever it might be. I don't have a definitive answer on this. But I need more answers and they are not forthcoming.

electra · 12/09/2010 12:40

BandT - I agree with that too. But I think that for me what I found strange was the war in Afghanistan that followed directly and then, of course Iraq. It seems very convenient that the Bush administration suddenly had an excuse to go around starting wars - but they did need a reason first. The reaction of 'let's invade Afghanistan' made little sense to me and did not add up at the time, I remember staring in disbelief at the television.

I also have a friend who works for the MOD and who said at the time that everyone knew the whole thing was about oil.

expatinscotland · 12/09/2010 12:40

I'm pretty sure one of the 7/7 bombers was Tony Blair's lovechild, too.

It's all been covered up, of course, but it was a revenge plot.

LouMacca · 12/09/2010 12:40

CLS - It has never been reported that Diana died instantly.

You obviously just like your conspiracy theories. I suppose man didn't walk on the moon either?

Appletrees · 12/09/2010 12:40

I find it amusing that so many people just accept everything they're told because it would be "stupid" not to. And I don't believe these stories: I just think there are odd circumstances about some of it. But some people's trust, to the point of mocking and abusing questioners, is quite incredible.

chibi · 12/09/2010 12:42

again, there's something a bit off here

links are offered to reputable sources debunking the myths, no one reads them

instead we get blind adherence to juicy stuff and people speculating as though this were a particularly gripping Corrie or Eastenders storyline

this isn't 'oooh steve mitchell's only gahn and burned dahn the vic!' this is thousands of people dying in horror, dying knowing that they were going to die

the conspiricists don't appear to give a shit about truth, especially if it gets in the way of a good story

i've said it elsewhere and i'll say it again, this is ghoulish

expatinscotland · 12/09/2010 12:42

'But I believe the folks that died deserve the truth to be known'

They're dead. They're no longer here to be involved in affairs on this Earth.

They were murdered by Al Queda terrorists.

That's not a theory put forward by the government. That's a fact. The hijackers had families, too, who acknowledge the actions of their children.

Swipe left for the next trending thread