September 11 2001 Conspiracy Thread

  On 9/14/2010 at 11:13 PM, Awepittance said:

 

  On 9/12/2010 at 2:08 PM, Richy said:

The war on terror isn't about frightening people, although some wish to use it for that exact purpose. It's about defeating those who seek to destroy us.

 

wow

edit: Awe, thank you for taking the time to type your messages, you're the only one in this thread who is caring to at least "try" and provide everyone with the most level-headed perspective on the matters.

I remember so many terror alerts during the election in '04.. And whne people are in fear they run to the leader.

I dont think Bin Laden is in a cave somewhere either. Probably in a palace in SAudi Arabia on a dialysis machine. Cared for 24/7

  On 9/14/2010 at 11:49 PM, karmakramer said:

It truly is amazing Awepittance. It all comes down to human nature though and our fear of being accused of stupidity. Logical questions though are a sign of intelligence in my opinion, and the questions that have been rasied in some of the links you have provided are logical and they deserve answers.

that's the beauty of conspiracy theory culture though, it's a perfect way to distract attention from real corruption (and real questions), which typically aren't as sexy as youtube videos with scary music and charts containing assertions posed as 'facts'

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:10 PM, TwiddleBot said:

  On 9/14/2010 at 11:49 PM, karmakramer said:

It truly is amazing Awepittance. It all comes down to human nature though and our fear of being accused of stupidity. Logical questions though are a sign of intelligence in my opinion, and the questions that have been rasied in some of the links you have provided are logical and they deserve answers.

 

that's the beauty of conspiracy theory culture though, it's a perfect way to distract attention from real corruption (and real questions), which typically aren't as sexy as youtube videos with scary music and charts containing assertions posed as 'facts'

Isn't what you just posted a conspiracy theory? I mean you're implying you know factually that conspiracy theory culture distracts attention away from real corruption... meaning you know what this real corruption would be...? Correct me if I'm mistaken here.

Also because something is posted on youtube, means it has no merit? Exactly where does one find videos with these "real questions" and "real" facts. Also does scary music negate authenticity? I'm not saying you can't be correct, but it seems you are assuming things as false just on the basis of some pretty broad specifications.

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:17 PM, karmakramer said:

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:10 PM, TwiddleBot said:

  On 9/14/2010 at 11:49 PM, karmakramer said:

It truly is amazing Awepittance. It all comes down to human nature though and our fear of being accused of stupidity. Logical questions though are a sign of intelligence in my opinion, and the questions that have been rasied in some of the links you have provided are logical and they deserve answers.

 

that's the beauty of conspiracy theory culture though, it's a perfect way to distract attention from real corruption (and real questions), which typically aren't as sexy as youtube videos with scary music and charts containing assertions posed as 'facts'

 

Isn't what you just posted a conspiracy theory? I mean you're implying you know factually that conspiracy theory culture distracts attention away from real corruption... meaning you know what this real corruption would be...? Correct me if I'm mistaken here.

 

Also because something is posted on youtube, means it has no merit? Exactly where does one find videos with these "real questions" and "real" facts. Also does scary music negate authenticity? I'm not saying you can't be correct, but it seems you are assuming things as false just on the basis of some pretty broad specifications.

I jest, but I have a strange sense of humor, so let me rephrase. There are good, informed questions without answers, and there are questions that are easily refuted with five minutes of googling (like the building collapsing at near-freefall speed for example). So, no, I don't think there's a 'conspiracy' here other than that I just think that the public perception of conspiracy theory culture as mentally deficient is a convenience that can be used by the corrupt to take away attention from genuine whistle-blowing and legitimate questioning.

In terms of youtube.. why are people who claim to be so critical of the media typically the first to accept without question youtube videos that follow every propaganda trick in the book? It's because they are desperate for answers. Finding out what really happened takes hard work with little chance of payoff, much digging to find, if you can find it at all, ever. History is written by the victors and reality and information are constantly twisted according to people's perspectives and personal agendas. You won't find 'truth' on youtube, just opinions presented as facts.

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:36 PM, TwiddleBot said:

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:17 PM, karmakramer said:

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:10 PM, TwiddleBot said:

  On 9/14/2010 at 11:49 PM, karmakramer said:

It truly is amazing Awepittance. It all comes down to human nature though and our fear of being accused of stupidity. Logical questions though are a sign of intelligence in my opinion, and the questions that have been rasied in some of the links you have provided are logical and they deserve answers.

 

that's the beauty of conspiracy theory culture though, it's a perfect way to distract attention from real corruption (and real questions), which typically aren't as sexy as youtube videos with scary music and charts containing assertions posed as 'facts'

 

Isn't what you just posted a conspiracy theory? I mean you're implying you know factually that conspiracy theory culture distracts attention away from real corruption... meaning you know what this real corruption would be...? Correct me if I'm mistaken here.

 

Also because something is posted on youtube, means it has no merit? Exactly where does one find videos with these "real questions" and "real" facts. Also does scary music negate authenticity? I'm not saying you can't be correct, but it seems you are assuming things as false just on the basis of some pretty broad specifications.

 

I jest, but I have a strange sense of humor, so let me rephrase. There are real questions that deserve answers, and there are questions invented by attention-whores and tinfoil hats that are easily refuted with five minutes of googling (like the building collapsing at near-freefall speed for example). So, no, I don't think there's a 'conspiracy' here other than that I just think that the public perception of conspiracy theory culture as mentally deficient is a convenience that can be used by the corrupt to take away attention from genuine whistle-blowing and legitimate questioning.

 

In terms of youtube.. why are people who claim to be so critical of the media typically the first to accept without question youtube videos that follow every propaganda trick in the book? It's because they are desperate for certainty. Finding out what really happened takes hard work with little chance of payoff, much digging to find, if you can find it at all, ever. History is written by the victors and reality and information are constantly twisted according to people's perspectives and personal agendas. You won't find 'truth' on youtube, just opinions presented as facts.

So basically you have to be Scooby Doo to figure this shit out? I see more of what you are getting at, but I think its possible genuine truth can be in the form of a youtube video. It's simply a website that hosts any video... unless you are saying all videos are propaganda (which is obviously false) then I'm not sure your argument really holds much weight. The image on the previous page, brings up a lot of interesting questions... are you saying you have the answers to those questions, or that one could find the answers to those questions in five minutes? The Jersey Girls (wives who lost their husbands) spent years of their lives trying to get answers, I'd hope they would have tried google at some point in their search. Unless you are saying that the 70% of the questions that they did not get answers for were just complete bullshit. Which is plausible, but again, I'd be nice to have some facts to back up your acquisations... remember the burden of proof is on you, when you take a stance saying 9/11 was not a conspiracy. My stance is simply, I do not know, but I'm open to both sides. I don't just accept the Governments "facts" because they have been shown to lie blatantly in the past.

shit ton of grammatical errors there, sorry, very sleepy

anyone who believes the official story is uninformed, retarded or a government shill (only half joking)

it's just too damn fishy this whole 9/11 thing

and yes there are lots of idiotic tin foil hats with silly theories and crappy youtube collages

ITS THE JUICE lol

History clearly shows us governments are well capable of attacking there own to achieve their "higher goal". So I wouldn't be surprised if they had something to do with it.

maybe the truth will reveal itself in 50+ years when nobody cares anymore

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:48 PM, karmakramer said:

So basically you have to be Scooby Doo to figure this shit out?

It's more about admitting that we will never get all the answers, especially with large-scale historical events. For example, do any of us really know the complete picture of what happened in the Cultural Revolution?

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:48 PM, karmakramer said:

I see more of what you are getting at, but I think its possible genuine truth can be in the form of a youtube video. It's simply a website that hosts any video... unless you are saying all videos are propaganda (which is obviously false)

No, I said exactly what I said. The vast majority, actually all of the conspiracy videos I have seen on youtube use classic propaganda techniques.

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:48 PM, karmakramer said:

The image on the previous page, brings up a lot of interesting questions... are you saying you have the answers to those questions, or that one could find the answers to those questions in five minutes?

No, I'm saying that some of those 'facts' or 'questions' are based on incorrect assumptions and ignorance and are invalid to begin with. They 'beg the question'. More on this later.

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:48 PM, karmakramer said:

remember the burden of proof is on you, when you take a stance saying 9/11 was not a conspiracy.

Where did I say that there was no conspiracy behind 9/11? Also, burden of proof is about proving that something exists, not that it doesn't. Otherwise we mightaswell bring back the public witch hunts.

  On 9/15/2010 at 3:48 PM, karmakramer said:

My stance is simply, I do not know, but I'm open to both sides. I don't just accept the Governments "facts" because they have been shown to lie blatantly in the past.

I'm open to everything as well and I certainly don't think the government has given us the 'truth' of the matter. But questions based on a complete ignorance of engineering (like the assertions made about how the building fell, and how it was supposed to fall) are pretty easy to refute for example. Such questions have little value in getting at 'truth'. It's sort of like technically incompetent people claiming to know everything about computers.

There's nothing wrong with being open-minded, but critical thinking is always a good thing. Otherwise nobody will take conspiracy theorists seriously, ever.

okay, i agree and satisfied with convo... continue chaos

  On 9/13/2010 at 1:47 AM, troon said:

true power does (outside this dimensional universe) - earthly power does not, although sometimes it leads us to believe that it does.

bliss is not exactly what we should be looking for right now though - if we're worth our salt and we really know the truth then what is right

and necessary becomes more important then our own temporal wants and well being - often times though grace does come when we do the work that we are expected to do down here

so like if a giant meteor was blazing towards earth we should stop having orgies and destroy it with gnostic mind bullets?

thanks twiddlebot for not including the word twat in your critique, much appreciated

but i want you to clarify something, when you say 'the vast majority, all of the conspiracy videos i've seen' i'm guessing you're including movies like Fahrenheit 9/11 and other political documentaries as well? those rely on the same 'techniques' you are referring to, and i think it's irresponsible and unfair to lump all of these videos together and say they are all propaganda. It's also lazy to lump anything together that questions the 9/11 official story as 'conspiracy videos'. It would be interesting to see you tear down a movie like 9/11 press for truth, i would be willing to bet you find it very difficult.

  On 9/15/2010 at 4:08 PM, TwiddleBot said:

 

No, I'm saying that some of those 'facts' or 'questions' are based on incorrect assumptions and ignorance and are invalid to begin with. They 'beg the question'. More on this later.

 

 

i would love for you to be more specific, which facts/questions/assumptions/etc do you find invalid to begin with? You seem like an intelligent person who doesn't just want to bash us all for being 'conspiracy theorists' so forgive me if i want some more elaboration.

How many pages is there going to be

  On 9/15/2010 at 9:42 PM, Craig Anderson said:

How many pages is there going to be

you don't have to ride a thread out 'til completion. just click here General Banter

  On 9/15/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 9/15/2010 at 4:08 PM, TwiddleBot said:

 

No, I'm saying that some of those 'facts' or 'questions' are based on incorrect assumptions and ignorance and are invalid to begin with. They 'beg the question'. More on this later.

 

 

 

i would love for you to be more specific, which facts/questions/assumptions/etc do you find invalid to begin with? You seem like an intelligent person who doesn't just want to bash us all for being 'conspiracy theorists' so forgive me if i want some more elaboration.

Absolutely not bashing or lumping anyone together in group X.. that would kind of go against the spirit of what I'm arguing..

Well I thought I had actually provided an example already. An example of an assertion posed as a fact is this: 'The only way the collapse can be explained is by controlled demolition.' Even if you decide to disagree with the explanations, this is already a false assertion: there are tons of websites and explanations put out by engineers countering this and they go to great detail to explain why, as well as countering the assertion that it fell at near free-fall speed (it did not, you can clearly see debris in the video falling much faster than the building, and it took much longer to fall than most conspiracy theories claim, as they merely show the building vanishing in a cloud of debris, and claim that is when it disappeared, when it in fact kept on going for a while after). I'm too tired and lazy to provide links because quite frankly google is your friend, and this isn't even really the point of the argument. The point is that mainstream pop conspiracy theories seem to fetishize interpretations of video footage and apophenia and assume that correlation=causation and x=y therefore z with absolute certainty where certainty is impossible.

Meanwhile there are much more interesting things to pick at, as you and others have pointed out, clearly there were a lot of things amiss that day. It's not absolute proof that there was a government conspiracy before, during, or after the event, although it sure seems to me that the administration clearly took advantage of the event in every way possible.

Assuming that the buildings fell because of something to do with a conspiracy dating back to ancient Mesopotamia on the other hand, way to go and create a caricature of a conspiracy theorist as a nutcase, hence my rather dry joke that conspiracy theorists are really government agents working deliberately to demonize any inquiry.

  On 9/15/2010 at 10:04 PM, TwiddleBot said:

  On 9/15/2010 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 9/15/2010 at 4:08 PM, TwiddleBot said:

 

No, I'm saying that some of those 'facts' or 'questions' are based on incorrect assumptions and ignorance and are invalid to begin with. They 'beg the question'. More on this later.

 

 

 

i would love for you to be more specific, which facts/questions/assumptions/etc do you find invalid to begin with? You seem like an intelligent person who doesn't just want to bash us all for being 'conspiracy theorists' so forgive me if i want some more elaboration.

 

Absolutely not bashing or lumping anyone together in group X.. that would kind of go against the spirit of what I'm arguing..

 

Well I thought I had actually provided an example already. An example of an assertion posed as a fact is this: 'The only way the collapse can be explained is by controlled demolition.' Even if you decide to disagree with the explanations, this is already a false assertion: there are tons of websites and explanations put out by engineers countering this and they go to great detail to explain why, as well as countering the assertion that it fell at near free-fall speed (it did not, you can clearly see debris in the video falling much faster than the building, and it took much longer to fall than most conspiracy theories claim, as they merely show the building vanishing in a cloud of debris, and claim that is when it disappeared, when it in fact kept on going for a while after). I'm too tired and lazy to provide links because quite frankly google is your friend, and this isn't even really the point of the argument. The point is that mainstream pop conspiracy theories seem to fetishize interpretations of video footage and apophenia and assume that correlation=causation and x=y therefore z with absolute certainty where certainty is impossible.

 

Meanwhile there are much more interesting things to pick at, as you and others have pointed out, clearly there were a lot of things amiss that day. It's not absolute proof that there was a government conspiracy before, during, or after the event, although it sure seems to me that the administration clearly took advantage of the event in every way possible.

 

Assuming that the buildings fell because of something to do with a conspiracy dating back to ancient Mesopotamia on the other hand, way to go and create a caricature of a conspiracy theorist as a nutcase, hence my rather dry joke that conspiracy theorists are really government agents working deliberately to demonize any inquiry.

I'll agree with you mostly about controlled demolition, while i do find some aspects of it extremely convincing (building 7 and how it fell) i feel like discussing it is pointless. Interpreting grainy video footage can eventually become for some people like reading tea leaves. The free fall speed thing is exaggerated on both sides, debunker people try to claim the building took 20 seconds to fall, which clearly it did not, conspiracy theorists say it fell in exactly free fall speed which is not the case.

the best proof i've provided in this thread is that there was a conspiracy after the fact to coverup how much foreknowledge they had (reasons are up for interpretation) There was a conceited effort for every key player in the administration to downplay significantly the specificity of the 'bin laden determined to attack in US with planes' memo. I think this alone is pretty damaging. There are people who are so reflexively against anything 'conspiratorial' that they will dismiss this out of hand and call me a twat for believing it.

okay okay i did it. sorry guys.

remember AMTHRAX?? do u you think the usa goverment did it or did the drugs company. either way some 1 wanted to move amthrax medicine

  On 9/15/2010 at 11:18 PM, sup said:

remember AMTHRAX?? do u you think the usa goverment did it or did the drugs company. either way some 1 wanted to move amthrax medicine

how old are you?

  On 9/15/2010 at 10:57 PM, Awepittance said:

I'll agree with you mostly about controlled demolition, while i do find some aspects of it extremely convincing (building 7 and how it fell) i feel like discussing it is pointless. Interpreting grainy video footage can eventually become for some people like reading tea leaves. The free fall speed thing is exaggerated on both sides, debunker people try to claim the building took 20 seconds to fall, which clearly it did not, conspiracy theorists say it fell in exactly free fall speed which is not the case.

exactly, given the information at hand, one can debate things in circles for hours. i remain open to theorizing but i can however, given the consistency and content of the explanations available, assume that some hypotheses are far more probable than others and some far less probable than others. i'm less inclined to swallow any particular pill on the subject whole.

ill take the anthrax question seriously even though it seems sarcastic

well the anthrax case funnily enough was an inside job, and even the US government has admitted so. The anthrax came from a very secure bioweapons lab in maryland. Bruce Ivins a man who committed suicide was scapegoated as being a 'lone nut' who sent out the anthrax. No explanation was ever given as to why he pretended to be an Arab terrorist and why the government hyped up the 'al qaeda is behind the anthrax' for several years. they even tried to link it to Saddam for a while, remember when Colin Powell held up the vial at the UN?

the anthrax case is a slam dunk of government involvement (at the very least 1 government official). It has been very successfully brushed under the rug as a news story. 9/11 alone was a shock to america but it was localized, it took the threat of anthrax landing at your own doorstep to really put the fear in people. I remember even my mom was afraid to get the mail. That is when 9/11 became directly personal for everybody

greenwald writes a great series of articles about these 'attacks' http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2008/08/05/anthrax

, on a side note i've also provided proof in this thread that the administration lied about NOT knowing this kind of specific terrorist attack was a possibility. We were running NORAD drills with mock hijacked airliners who's targets were the world trade center, pentagon and whitehouse months before 9/11. Did Bush and company have no knowledge of this preparation? Seems highly unlikely

after the 1993 word trade center bombing it was widely known even among fiction writers like Tom Clancey that the next big attack on the horizon was going to be some kind of commercial airline missile attack on a famous landmark.

On the anthrax subject - you're saying/implying Bruce Ivins was told to do it by the govt., and that pressure caused him to take his own life? Or, he was actually murdered and covered up to look as a suicide?

Why couldn't he have been a lone nut who tried to frame Al Qaeda for reasons of his own?

Edit: I seem to recall him spelling stuff wrong on the envelopes, weren't his attempts to pose as an Islamic extremist pretty laughable? You'd think if the govt. was behind it they'd want it to look more convincing...

  On 9/15/2010 at 11:38 PM, triachus said:

LOL , Belgian humor