9/11 Mysteries

"First off let me state that I thought 9/11 Truthers were "crazy" in the claims they made. It wasn't until I saw an Alex Jones video no it and did the wtc7 research that flags started going off in my head."

I'm not suggesting that you or anybody else is somehow brainwashed or incapable of critical thinking (not that you said those things either). Just to be clear, what I am suggesting is that you guys are ignoring some pretty basic facts and questions. In some cases, such being persuaded by the Alex Jones video, you're basing your conception of the truth on a piece of media that somebody has produced specifically to lead you to the conclusion you now hold. Alex Jones videos aren't arbitrary, unbiased documentations of fact - they're making a very specific argument, and as such they ignore, distort, and mispresent things to make their point appear stronger.

I actually enjoy Michael Moore for his humor and gusto, but they guys reporting and investigating is crap. I say this as an avowed liberal and longtime Bush critic that agrees with most of Moore's points - but I still know he's blowing a lot of smoke.

It seems that fans of Jones and all the other 9/11 conspiracy cottage industry people don't apply any standards or burden of proof. One such very popular video from the conspiracy industry (and it is an industry, there are hundreds of books, websites, videos - people really do make money from selling conspiracy ideas, and if you don't believe that, then I fail to see how you are willing ot believe our own government killed thousands of its citizens on purpose on the off chance that it would drum up publiuc support for Iraq) is called 'Loose Change,' and has been so hiliriously debunked and shown to be shoddily constructed and deceitful that it amazes me that people still take any of this stuff seriously. I suggest watching 'Loose Change,' after which I'll direct you to the frame by frame debunking guide - the film covers most of the conspiracy angles that have been mentioned so far.

The fact that conspiracists call themselves the "truth movement" is very annoying to me. These people aren't interested in the truth. If they were, they would conduct solid and exhaustive research with objectivity in mind. They are not searching for any kind of truth, they are manipulating facts and information in any way possible in order to substantiate a conspiracy which they already believe exists. That has nothing to do with any kind of truth.

"However, how would a simple fire cause the building to collapse perfectly at free-fall speeds?"

The whole 'free fall speeds' stuff is straight out of the conspiracy stuff. Simply put (and I'll include a link), it has been shown repeatedly that the building was structurally different and much different in terms of size than those around it, and was significantly weakened by falling debris and mulptiple very hot fires. It didn't free fall, nor did it come down in a fashion consistent with controlled demolition. There are hundreds of quotes from emergency personel and others that day that could literally see the building sagging and slumping from the structural stress it was under - hence the evacuation of the building and the area around, fortunately resulting in casualties. The conspiracy sites offer none of this information.

Please, have a look at this:
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

Go towards the bottom where they walk through step-by-step why the idea that it fell "symetrically" like a controlled demolition is patently false. Most of the page also addresses in far greater detail the oft-cited "Silverstein" angle of the conspiracy. The information takes what conspiracists say, and progressively shows how it is misrepresenting by omission and distortion what actually happened in order to support their idea.

In addition - this goes back to my earlier question. There is numerous data on this event. Why has not one engineer stood up and said "yep - controlled demolition right there?" Or a controlled demolitione expert for that matter.

Not one person with actual expertise can look at the same evidence that conspiracy advocates say is plain as day and come to the same conclusion that they do? Is every engineer on the planet, every demolitions guy, in on the conspiracy as well? Please ask yourself these questions. The simple answer is that engineers and experts think the 'controlled demolition' idea is nuts and the conspiracy theories do not hold up to scrutiny from people that actually know what they're talking about.

"Also, why, days before the attacks were there something like millions of dollars in purchases in air liner stock(or something like this)? Also, Larry Silverstein happened to, that year, buy a major increase on his insurance for WTC7?"

http://www.911myths.com/html/put_options.html

This link will thoroughly explain the comletely erroneous idea that forknowledge somehow manifested in the markets. And non that note, think about this is in real world terms for a moment: so thousands of airline company stockholders got some kind of secret email or warning that air travel was going to tank out for a while? How come all airline stocks didn't take a hit? How come tourism and hotel stocks didn't slump in accordance with restricted travel? And really, with all these additional folks being warned, what is our conspiracy size up to now? More than hundreds of thousands? The slightest amount of critical thinking just lays this stuff to waste.

And for the Silverstein thing (whatever your source was about "re-insuring is just plain wrong): http://www.911myths.com/html/windfall.html

It's interesting to note that Silverstein, as a typically stingy billionare, wanted to insure the towers for much less than he ended up doing and had to compromise with his financeers to a higher amount. Like I said before, its hilarious that conspiracy forumlators think that insurance and properties worth billions of dollars is really worth it for the owners to just destroy for a payout. That's not how money works on a large scale - its frankyl a little ridiculous that they even put this accross.

Why would he go to the trouble of securing the deal, and then turn around and agree to destroy his material holdings? A man with his experience (or really any experience) would know that his finances would then be tied up in disputes, lawsuits, and rebuilding efforts for years, over the course of which he could have made much more borrowing and investing against his actual holdings. Insurers don't just handle people a check for a few billion dollars and tell them best of luck. This is not how the real world works.

"Supposedly Alex Jones predicted 9/11 right before it happened, although I don't know as I have only been recently turned on by his stuff."

I'm sure he said he did. What a genius - why didn't he try harder to warn us then? This is the same guy who suggested Bohemian Grove was the height of some eveil one-world cult when in fact its just a bunch of wealthy old geezers, musicians and professors getting loaded out in the redwoods and putting on plays.

You can also find quotes from this guy after the Patriot Act Reknewal stating that we would be living under a facist police state inside of six months. Yet somehow, democracy continues despite his, uh, expertise. I realize you enjoy the guy's videos, but I find him to be a joke. His work is entirely dependent on fear, hystrionics, and misrepresentation of facts to support his ideas. Interestingly, this is the kind of BS he accuses pretty much everybody else of employing.

"Personally, I don't want 9/11 to have been caused by governments. Alex Jones has stated he WANTS to be wrong about his assertions."

If he really believes that, then why doesn't he do some closer investigating himself? Nearly all the so-called "evidence" he presents in his video is debunked emperically all over the web, and he offers no real substantial evidence for his theory besides the usual coincidence, distortion, circumstantial insinuation, etc. If he wishes he were, wrong, he's not trying very hard to find out if that's actually the case.

It's easy to make a few bucks from selling people a massive and sinister government conspiracy and making them feel as if their privelage to some special and secret knowledge in an "us against them" struggle of valiance with a corrupt system. It's not so easy to make money by admitting the facts of the truth - which are absolutely overwhelming in every respect - which is that we suffered a terrible terrorist attack in which many people died, and it was partly due to our own policy and intelligence failings. Hard to make a really nifty internet video out of that one, let alone attract hits for your conspiracy website.

"I'll take a look at that thermite website, I skimmed it and it looks very noteworthy. Too bad some independant website doesn't put an explanation by one side and the rebuttal by the other. That'd make everything nice and easy."

Thanks for keeping an open mind. Nearly all of the debunking websites directly address the claims made on conspiracy websites, videos, articles, etc. Conspiracy stuff feeds off each other, so at this point they all pretty much say the same thing. The debunkers are responding directly to conspiracy ideas, and explain them in detail while showing that they're false or dishonest. In this sense, any debunking website is going to have both sides of the story.

I have yet to come accross a conspiracy website that does things in this fashion - for the most party they suggest that debunkers and anybody that questions the conspiracy are in on it, neo-conservative bastards, or otherwise out to get them. Not much in the way of facts though. Including the rebuttal of the Popular Science article - which admittedly attacks the most whacky conspiracy theories, but nonetheless was not fundamentally disproved in any way.

Here are some interesting videos which also show a bomb going off:
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/video_true_lies_of_911.htm

Oh man . . . c'mon. These videos are exactly the kind of drivel I'm talking about. They're actually more poorly done than most of the junk out there and make such a weak case that I'm suprised that these are the ones you chose to post - nice to see they hawking that Terrostorm video right underneath them as well).

These videos had me chuckling with how fully it filled the usual cliches with these things Imagine . . . [screen fades in from black - several evil-ish sounding quotes from government officials - ominous conspiracy music plays in the background]. I have to say, after about 30 sec I almost stopped watching as the video stated that 'on the morning of September the 11th a 757 jetliner crashed into the world trade center 1- OR DID IT?' That's right folks, the video suggests there might not have even been a plane, but then immediately goes on to offer no no discussion or proof of this whatsoever. It's hard to keep an open mind when watching something so poorly done and disjointed.

The remainder of the video consists of clips of various people talking about explosions. As I mentioned before, no timecode or locationd ata is given for any of them. Now, we've already discussed explosions, and you can read more about them here: http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm

Why people find it even mildly interesting or even surprising that there were explosions heard at various points during the day is beyond me. So fas the mysterious 'van' that found its way into some news reports - I actually remember watching these at the time. As soon as it was apparent that these were attacks and not a horrible accident (meaning after the second towers was hit), reports about suspicious activity and terrorists were flooding in. Those of us watching that day will also probably remember that there were reports coming in of terrorist Jiihad soldiers on the streets, terrorists vans in New York and Chicago, and various other suspicious activities. The scene was one of chaos, confusion, and fear.

I didn't watch the second video, but I gather that it's about the Pentagon. This one has been more hilariously debunked than most anything, but I won't bother to include a link as I get the feeling you're not actually reading any of this, and the other fellow seems to have given up entirely.

Let me just say reiterate that there isn't one single tiny molecule of evidence of any kind of conspiracy in that first video - just some scary music and a bunch of contextless media clips from scared people taken that day.

How does this refute any of my questions about the size, intricacy, and difficulty of this plot? How does it refute my questions about no credible engineers in the world demonstrating that the controlled demolition theory is plausible (while many papers have been written, peer-reviewed by unbiased experts, and published), demonstrating the contrary?

That video, cliched as it is in presentation, fulfills the ultimate cliche. It provides no evidence nor a complete view of what happened. It's just a bunch of clips strung together with scary music in the background. It offers no analysis or hard information - just some news clips from a lot of scared and confused people who didn't know exactly what was happening at the time. I gather you're a college student - I can't honestly believe you find this level of stuff convincing in any way in terms of critical thinking.

As always, my previous questions still stand.

In hindsight, it's so easy to see that what happened on 9/11 was a pre-planned domestic operation, that claims to the contrary are just downright sili. sili! I'm sorry, but I just don't understand how people can cling to the most irrational arguments when trying to justify the official myth. There are so many legitimate scientific questions surrounding what happened on that day, it's ridiculous. Yet they all go completely unanswered. Especially anything concerning the 3 building collapses, something that's unprecedented in the history of the world. Ever single credentialed person who's come forward to counter the official bunk- and there are many of them- has lost their job and had their reputation destroyed. Purposefully destroyed. Few others are brave enough to come forward in fear of being targeted and having the same thing happen to them.

Different standards- much lower standards- of truth and the law are being applied to 9/11 compared with any other crime or event. That's why this problem exists. If 9/11 were treated as any other crime- war crime or otherwise- then the truth would be known by now. Unfortunately, people's emotions are clouding their judgement, the truth is being willfully supressed and a fucked up/controlled media complex is constantly fueling the fire and propagating the myth. Yet, despite all this, the truth will eventually be known. This is because WAY too many people are affected by this coverup. It isn't just a simple assassination, which affects really only the person killed and their family. This affects nearly 3000 people and their families. And the families are still fighting for the truth. Every day.

I'm done. There are so many sites which detail all this stuff scientifically, I don't even know where to start. I guess just head to a (scientifically vetted) site like http://911research.wtc7.net/ and start reading. There's a lot of bullshit and disinformation out there, too. Don't fall for it.

stridge said:

Oh man . . . c'mon. These videos are exactly the kind of drivel I'm talking about. They're actually more poorly done than most of the junk out there and make such a weak case that I'm suprised that these are the ones you chose to post - nice to see they hawking that Terrostorm video right underneath them as well).

These videos had me chuckling with how fully it filled the usual cliches with these things Imagine . . . [screen fades in from black - several evil-ish sounding quotes from government officials - ominous conspiracy music plays in the background]. I have to say, after about 30 sec I almost stopped watching as the video stated that 'on the morning of September the 11th a 757 jetliner crashed into the world trade center 1- OR DID IT?' That's right folks, the video suggests there might not have even been a plane, but then immediately goes on to offer no no discussion or proof of this whatsoever. It's hard to keep an open mind when watching something so poorly done and disjointed.

The remainder of the video consists of clips of various people talking about explosions. As I mentioned before, no timecode or locationd ata is given for any of them. Now, we've already discussed explosions, and you can read more about them here: http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm

Why people find it even mildly interesting or even surprising that there were explosions heard at various points during the day is beyond me. So fas the mysterious 'van' that found its way into some news reports - I actually remember watching these at the time. As soon as it was apparent that these were attacks and not a horrible accident (meaning after the second towers was hit), reports about suspicious activity and terrorists were flooding in. Those of us watching that day will also probably remember that there were reports coming in of terrorist Jiihad soldiers on the streets, terrorists vans in New York and Chicago, and various other suspicious activities. The scene was one of chaos, confusion, and fear.

I didn't watch the second video, but I gather that it's about the Pentagon. This one has been more hilariously debunked than most anything, but I won't bother to include a link as I get the feeling you're not actually reading any of this, and the other fellow seems to have given up entirely.

Let me just say reiterate that there isn't one single tiny molecule of evidence of any kind of conspiracy in that first video - just some scary music and a bunch of contextless media clips from scared people taken that day.

How does this refute any of my questions about the size, intricacy, and difficulty of this plot? How does it refute my questions about no credible engineers in the world demonstrating that the controlled demolition theory is plausible (while many papers have been written, peer-reviewed by unbiased experts, and published), demonstrating the contrary?

That video, cliched as it is in presentation, fulfills the ultimate cliche. It provides no evidence nor a complete view of what happened. It's just a bunch of clips strung together with scary music in the background. It offers no analysis or hard information - just some news clips from a lot of scared and confused people who didn't know exactly what was happening at the time. I gather you're a college student - I can't honestly believe you find this level of stuff convincing in any way in terms of critical thinking.

As always, my previous questions still stand.

Click to expand...

I don't see why it'd take even hundred of people to pull this off. Just takes time with a few talented people in the know(CIA is known for this stuff).

There are WAY too many coincidences and red flags for me to ever believe the government conspiracy theory.

"I don't see why it'd take even hundred of people to pull this off. Just takes time with a few talented people in the know(CIA is known for this stuff)."

A few hundred? To steal the planes, train pilots, plant the demolitons in the buildings, tip off all the business interests, commit fraud with Larry Silverstein and is insurers (who, by the way, would have investigated any chance of fraud harder thany anybody as they're not likely to want to pay - and guess what, yep, they found nothing), all the police and firefighters you guys claim were in on it, all the people that handled all teh creative accounting and billing for the expenses of planning, manpower, and materials, all the consultants, experts, contractors, etc - plus all the people that work closely with them, family members, and however else. Then there are the thousands of people that work for NIST, FEMA, the NSA, Congress, and all the other government agencies that have conducted thorough reviews and research into 9/11. Yep, they're all on the take as well.

Sure guys, it was just a few sneaky CIA agents. That's all it took to arrange and pull off this whole thing and fool the entire world for the last six years. But somehow, a bunch of anonymous internet quacks have cracked the case, which is made all the more amazing by the fact that they can't present one credible peice of evidence for their argument. This goes beyond lack of critical thinking to lack of any thinking in general.

And, there isn't one receipt anywhere, one meme, one email, fax, check carbon, sticky note, nothing? I really can't say it anymore clearly and my questions are being didged rather than answered, so I guess I'll quit asking them - but they still stand.

"There are WAY too many coincidences and red flags for me to ever believe the government conspiracy theory."

Like what? If you take 15 minutes and investigate the other side of the many 'red flags' that the conspiracy sites have sold you on, you'll find that there is clear and well-documented explanation for anything you can think of. Put, as I now see, you're on the conspiracy bandwagon.

It seems some people really enjoy believing that a conspiracy was in place, and no matter how solid the evidence to the contrary (in the this case a veritable mountain of evidence), they refuse to acknowledge the possiblity that it was just a boring old terrorist attack. After all the links, information, and questions I've put forth, if you still just think the fact that is "seems fishy" to you is a strong burden of proof, then I give up.

Good old reality and solid investigation just can't compete with ominous videos and scary music I guess.

"In hindsight, it's so easy to see that what happened on 9/11 was a pre-planned domestic operation, that claims to the contrary are just downright sili."

This is a little disappointing - always thought your posts were pretty intelligent and rational. Show me anything that you think is downright "sili" and we can discuss why you think this is the case.

"Ever single credentialed person who's come forward to counter the official bunk- and there are many of them- has lost their job and had their reputation destroyed. Purposefully destroyed. Few others are brave enough to come forward in fear of being targeted and having the same thing happen to them."

Got any proof of this? Who are these "credentialed people?" How is the conspiracy suppressing the people that have since retired, or don't care about losing their jobs? There isn't one person that wanted to come clean about a planned murder of several thousand American citizens and the enormous cover-up?

"Different standards- much lower standards- of truth and the law are being applied to 9/11 compared with any other crime or event. That's why this problem exists."

Really? Explain to me how higher standards are being applied by the conspiracy crowd. So far as I can tell, conspiracy advocates have the lowest standards I've ever seen (some of the reserach wouldn't cut it on a junior high science project), and often information seems to have been deliberately ommitted/not considered in their arguements. How are the standards of the real investigation so low exactly? Why aren't other people complaining about this except the internet conspiracy crowd?

"Yet, despite all this, the truth will eventually be known. This is because WAY too many people are affected by this coverup. It isn't just a simple assassination, which affects really only the person killed and their family. This affects nearly 3000 people and their families. And the families are still fighting for the truth. Every day."

Again, I'm not aware of any contingent of victim's families that believe their loved ones were the victim of a government conspiracy. It's been six years - nobody has uncovered anything?

I do know that some of the members of the "9/11 Truth Movement" (I feel grossed out even typing that) regularly protest at ground zero during memorials and other activities, and they also showed up at premiers of Flight 93 all over the country to protest and hand out literature, even at screenings where victims families were present. There was an article in the NY Times around then discussing how annoyed the families were at the NY premier to have conspiracy people getting in their faces and shouting that they need to "demand the truth."

There is plenty of scientific and well reserached info on the 9/11 myths out there - start by looking at these two sites. None of your companions in conspiracy-snooping seemed to bother to take a look at ANYTHING I linked, so maybe you'll prove to have a little bit more or an open mind, although I get the feeling you enjoy the conspiracy mongering as well.

http://www.debunking911.com/
http://www.debunk911myths.org/

The following link is a scene by scene examination of one of the most popular 9/11 conspiracy videos (there are many to choose from). The video covers all the most up to date and most frequently sited 9/11 conspiracy ideas, and the guide meticulously addresses all the information they present - I found it very enlightening

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

One thing I've noticed about the 9/11 conspiracy cult (and it is cultish, if you don't believe me look up cult and take a look at the whole 'truth movement') is that they're unconditional believers. That is, much like Christian philosophy, when anything that doesn't jove with their ideas, contradicts their beliefs, or they simply can't explain rolls around, they just shake their heads and say "it's the huge and evil government - they can do anything." What a cop out.

It's also interesting that the entire 9/11 thing seems to be most interesting to and propigated by younger males. This isn't a widespread thing in society by any means. It's primarily young men in their late teens and twenties (and Charlie Sheen, who is mentally in that age range so we'll count him as well), and primarily internet based. The people involved generally have zero expertise, experience, or investigative knowledge besides what they see and swap on the internet, and yet they feel their evidence is rock solid. It's almost bizarre in a sense, and as I've said before, rather offensive in some ways.

Frankly, I just hate to see people buying into any kind of horseshit - which the 9/11 conspiracy most certainly is.

I'll also add that people like Noam Chomsky - a guy a lot smarter than any of us - think that the idea of conspiracy is stupid.

stridge said:

"In hindsight, it's so easy to see that what happened on 9/11 was a pre-planned domestic operation, that claims to the contrary are just downright sili."

This is a little disappointing - always thought your posts were pretty intelligent and rational.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm disappointed too. < I only wish the official story contained even a hint of logic within it, so I could buy into it.

stridge said:

Show me anything that you think is downright "sili" and we can discuss why you think this is the case.

Click to expand...

Okay. You know what I consider "sili"? How the official story that holds that 2 planes, weighing less than a combined 400 tons in all, brought down 3 steel-framed skyscrapers weighing in excess of a combined 600 THOUSAND tons in all- with one of the skyscrapers not even being hit by a plane. Sorry, but I just won't buy it- particularly given the total absence of any evidence which proves it to be the case. The only thing the government has ever brought to the table is the NIST collapse hypothesis. Not a theory (which is backed by evidence). Not a law. Just a hypothesis, backed only by a closed computer model which was endlessly tweaked and massaged to "prove" the official concoction of lies. But you're certainly free to believe it, if you want.

stridge said:

"Ever single credentialed person who's come forward to counter the official bunk- and there are many of them- has lost their job and had their reputation destroyed. Purposefully destroyed. Few others are brave enough to come forward in fear of being targeted and having the same thing happen to them."

Got any proof of this? Who are these "credentialed people?"

Click to expand...

Ummm... Professor Steven Jones? Kevin Ryan? Those are just two quick names off the top of my head. But there are many, many others.

stridge said:

How is the conspiracy suppressing the people that have since retired, or don't care about losing their jobs? There isn't one person that wanted to come clean about a planned murder of several thousand American citizens and the enormous cover-up?

Click to expand...

This is ridiculous. Ask yourself: how many lives (foreign or domestic) have US covert operations cost over the years? Then ask yourself: how many people have come forward exposing the worst of the worst of these operations over the years? I'll help you: you can't even use all the fingers on one hand to count them. Better yet, ask yourself: what kind of protection do whistleblowers get for exposing such crimes? What whistleblower has ever personally benefited from exposing a high (government) crime? Why don't you go ask Daniel Ellsberg or Bunny Greenhouse? No, all they get in return is a lost job, lost house, lost credit, lost marriage, lost life. Even a nice little indictment, if they're lucky. What a sweet deal! I'm gonna go blow the whistle on something right now!

stridge said:

"Different standards- much lower standards- of truth and the law are being applied to 9/11 compared with any other crime or event. That's why this problem exists."

Really? Explain to me how higher standards are being applied by the conspiracy crowd. So far as I can tell, conspiracy advocates have the lowest standards I've ever seen (some of the reserach wouldn't cut it on a junior high science project), and often information seems to have been deliberately ommitted/not considered in their arguements. How are the standards of the real investigation so low exactly? Why aren't other people complaining about this except the internet conspiracy crowd?

Click to expand...

Nice. Real nice. You're lumping all the "conspiracy theorists" under one umbrella and demeaning them all under the lowest common denominator. Some jackasses claiming to be 9/11 skeptics swear that aliens using "space beams" destroyed the World Trade Center. Others are convinced that the whole thing was an elaborate illusion, formed by using CGI and holograms. I guess then, using your logic, EVERY 9/11 skeptic automatically subscribes to these insane hypotheses because all 9/11 skeptics, as you imply, are united in their beliefs. What a joke!!! And here I was, expecting to have a decent argument/conversation with someone here about this. You just took it down a few notches. Very, VERY disappointing.

stridge said:

"Yet, despite all this, the truth will eventually be known. This is because WAY too many people are affected by this coverup. It isn't just a simple assassination, which affects really only the person killed and their family. This affects nearly 3000 people and their families. And the families are still fighting for the truth. Every day."

Again, I'm not aware of any contingent of victim's families that believe their loved ones were the victim of a government conspiracy. It's been six years - nobody has uncovered anything?

Click to expand...

I guess you really aren't aware of these things because if you were, you would've heard of these people- http://www.911independentcommission.org/
They even made a movie about it. But who cares, right?

stridge said:

I do know that some of the members of the "9/11 Truth Movement" (I feel grossed out even typing that) regularly protest at ground zero during memorials and other activities, and they also showed up at premiers of Flight 93 all over the country to protest and hand out literature, even at screenings where victims families were present. There was an article in the NY Times around then discussing how annoyed the families were at the NY premier to have conspiracy people getting in their faces and shouting that they need to "demand the truth."

Click to expand...

I know. I believe everything reported by the mainstream media, too.

stridge said:

There is plenty of scientific and well reserached info on the 9/11 myths out there - start by looking at these two sites. None of your companions in conspiracy-snooping seemed to bother to take a look at ANYTHING I linked, so maybe you'll prove to have a little bit more or an open mind, although I get the feeling you enjoy the conspiracy mongering as well.

http://www.debunking911.com/
http://www.debunk911myths.org/

The following link is a scene by scene examination of one of the most popular 9/11 conspiracy videos (there are many to choose from). The video covers all the most up to date and most frequently sited 9/11 conspiracy ideas, and the guide meticulously addresses all the information they present - I found it very enlightening

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

Click to expand...

lol
You gotta love those sites! I mean, they really have some big balls to support all sorts of ideas about what happened on 9/11 that even the government won't touch. Don't believe me? Take a quick look at the two debunking sites above. Then read the NIST reports, presentations and Q&A over at http://wtc.nist.gov
It's really amazing of the kind of stuff they come up with, especially regarding WTC 7. They still even support the WTC truss theory of collapse, which was abandoned long ago by the government. Unbelievable! I guess that's what happens when the shills get desperate. Try this debunking site instead.

About the Loose Change guide, here's an even better one.

stridge said:

One thing I've noticed about the 9/11 conspiracy cult (and it is cultish, if you don't believe me look up cult and take a look at the whole 'truth movement') is that they're unconditional believers. That is, much like Christian philosophy, when anything that doesn't jove with their ideas, contradicts their beliefs, or they simply can't explain rolls around, they just shake their heads and say "it's the huge and evil government - they can do anything." What a cop out.

Click to expand...

There you go again! You just can't help but lump everyone together under one umbrella, all using the lowest common denominator, can you? Tell me, stridge: am I an unconditional believer, too?

stridge said:

It's also interesting that the entire 9/11 thing seems to be most interesting to and propigated by younger males. This isn't a widespread thing in society by any means. It's primarily young men in their late teens and twenties (and Charlie Sheen, who is mentally in that age range so we'll count him as well), and primarily internet based.

Click to expand...

Fucking tell me about it! The greatest propagator of all of the "entire 9/11 thing", David Ray Griffin, is clearly a 20-something trapped inside the body of a 67 year old man. The same thing applies to all the ex-government officials who propagate the same nonsense, right?

stridge said:

The people involved generally have zero expertise, experience, or investigative knowledge besides what they see and swap on the internet, and yet they feel their evidence is rock solid. It's almost bizarre in a sense, and as I've said before, rather offensive in some ways.

Click to expand...

I know. Steven Jones, the credentialed idiot that he is, actually had the gall to write a scientific paper and start up his own website using the scientific method. But, as we all know, in a post-9/11 world if anyone with a PhD ever says anything, their word is not to be questioned by anyone of lesser credentials. "The People" don't know shit anymore, right? Whoever gave them the right to question authority?! Oh wait... it's a little thing called the fucking constitution. Remember that? Obviously, you don't.

And I'm with ya on the offensive intrusions by 9/11 skeptics in all this, sticking their noses where they don't belong. I'm all for banning whatever is deemed "upsetting" or "offensive" by "people", especially during any kind of criminal investigation or prosecution. Yeah, that's it!

stridge said:

Frankly, I just hate to see people buying into any kind of horseshit - which the 9/11 conspiracy most certainly is.

Click to expand...

Absolutely smack, bang on! 19 Muslim extremists who "hate America and our freedoms" overwhelmed NORAD, the FAA, the DOD, the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, the Secret Service and the multi-trillion dollar military apparatus of the most powerful nation in the history of the planet, with box cutters, taking down 3 skyscrapers with 2 planes and impacting the most heavily defended building on the face of the earth with another- all without ever being intercepted, let alone shot down, by any of the hundreds of military jets stationed throughout their flight paths. The mother of all conspiracy theories. Horseshit, I tell you!

stridge said:

I'll also add that people like Noam Chomsky - a guy a lot smarter than any of us - think that the idea of conspiracy is stupid.

Click to expand...

Gotta love ole Noam!

I'm sorry man but the whole thing doesn't fit. Every site that I've ever read or anything I've ever watched online just seems like a bunch of scared and paranoid people out to find something in everything. I'm not one to take what the mainstream media says at all but this underground conspircay theory stuff is just going a bit too far out for me to go along with.

This is a very good reply, but I unfortunately don't have time to go through it point by point or thoroughly check out any of the links for a while, but a few things that I can respond to quickly are:

"Okay. You know what I consider "sili"? How the official story that holds that 2 planes, weighing less than a combined 400 tons in all, brought down 3 steel-framed skyscrapers weighing in excess of a combined 600 THOUSAND tons in all- with one of the skyscrapers not even being hit by a plane."

Look, the towers coming down from the damage caused by the planes and the collapse of WT7 are the easiest conspiracy stuff to debunk of all. Search around to some debunking sites - there are peer-reviewed, academically creditied papers written by experts that explain this. It seems crazy to me that a whirling metal blade can a make a helicopter fly - that doesn't mean that it doesn't actually work by physics instead of magic (or controlled demolition in your case).

Here is the link to a website (on one of the sites that you blow off - but it just contains links so don't freak out) that contains numerous papers written by *ghasp* actual experts in engineering and structural collapse. These people are credited experts in structure science, and I feel they're better qualified to explain it you than I am. Of course, if you think a bunch of engineering nerds from MIT and Northwestern are part of big brother's monster conspiracy as well, then I guess this won't go far (just kidding, I hope) . . . http://www.debunking911.com/paper.htm

"Ummm... Professor Steven Jones? Kevin Ryan? Those are just two quick names off the top of my head. But there are many, many others."

And on that note . . . http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm

For those that don't care to check out the link, the venerated Dr. Jones (Indiana?) has no expertise whatsoever in structural engineering or collapse. He actually deals with nuclear physics, so I assume he's fairly intelligent (although he does teach at BYU, so, uh, he likely believes he's also going to be moving to his own solar system to play cards with Joseph Smith after he dies or whatever that whole deal is), but he has no real ability to comment on one of the largest and most complicated structure collapses in history. His paper about the subject was ridiculed by his peers in his own department for containing shoddy and unsubstantiated research (guess they're in on the conspiracy too, damn this thing is huge!).

If Kevin Ryan is who I think he is, then he's a young guy that worked in a water standards testing department or something and basically had no qualifications to comment on the collapse/conspiracy either, as he dealth with neither. He lost his job for writing public letters implicating his employers in a cover-up if I'm remembering correctly.

So before I think you said that there were lots and lots of they really credible guys standing up all over the the place to blow the lid off this thing, these aren't really the best examples. I'll look up old Kevin to be sure when I have more time.

"This is ridiculous. Ask yourself: how many lives (foreign or domestic) have US covert operations cost over the years? Then ask yourself: how many people have come forward exposing the worst of the worst of these operations over the years? I'll help you: you can't even use all the fingers on one hand to count them. Better yet, ask yourself: what kind of protection do whistleblowers get for exposing such crimes? What whistleblower has ever personally benefited from exposing a high (government) crime? Why don't you go ask Daniel Ellsberg or Bunny Greenhouse? No, all they get in return is a lost job, lost house, lost credit, lost marriage, lost life. Even a nice little indictment, if they're lucky. What a sweet deal! I'm gonna go blow the whistle on something right now! "

Uh, I don't know, how many lives? Isn't the point of covert ops that they're covert. I'm just joking there, but basically what you're suggesting here is the "men in black" type idea that if you take a stand against the government, you'll have your bank account erased and they'll pay you a visit in the middle of the night.

Frankly, the completely unsubstantiated idea that government goons will come after you if you tell the truth or bring evidence forward isn't really going to cut it for me. The two examples you mention are nice in that you bothered to list something at all, but also problematic as they don't fit. Ellsberg, as I recall, actually took those papers illegaly and it was rather scandalous. I respect the guy for what he did in a lot of ways, but there was going to be some fallout from dispatching a thousands of pages of classified documents about a current war to the NY Times. Greenhouse was the victim of some nasty, good 'ol boy backbiting for calling attention to the honey deal they had going with the government.

It's unfortunate, but the fact that she got unfairly knocked at work because she called attention to some fairly standard bullshit no-bid arrangements with the government really necessarily equates to the thousands of people remaining in silence even as they're complicit with a planned murder of thousands of their own citizens?

Sorry guy, once again this is no kind of proof, nor is it actually too convincing. It's a better try than most though.

"Nice. Real nice. You're lumping all the "conspiracy theorists" under one umbrella and demeaning them all under the lowest common denominator"

You're right about this, I shouldn't do that. Some are definately more qualified candidates for the tin foil hat than others. When you see it from my persepective, however, controlled demolition and government collusion are dman near as whacky as space aliens and holograms, so I'm prone to generalize when talking about conspiracists.

To be fair, for anybody reading, there is a pretty large number of different conspiracy theories about 9/11, and lots of them don't agree and even bicker with each other. Fascinating in some ways, but this is the case for most other conspiracy theories as well so its not unique.

"Very, VERY disappointing."

Geez, sorry . . .

"I guess you really aren't aware of these things because if you were, you would've heard of these people- http://www.911independent . . . "

There's no way to say this without being trite, but from what I could see from the link, there are twelve people listed as group members there.

Your statement seemed to suggest (and maype I misinterpreted) that its a common thing amongst the thousands and thousands of family members of 9/11 victims to buy into the "truth movement" idea. As I said, there was an article in the NY Times a while back about how annoyed some of them were with it, but that doesn't mean that's the majoirty feeling either.

I'd say the majority probably has no opinion/awareness of the conspiracy thing, and if they were introduced to it they wouldn't be any more or less likely than anybody else to be sold on the conspiracy angle. My guess is they really don't care all that much because they lost somebody they loved a short while ago and it probably seems rather trivial whether there was signifigant amounts of berrillium in the tower wreckage.

"I know, I believe everything reported by the mainstream media too."

Uh-oh, we got a media conspiracist here too! I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but seriously, how am I going to debate you if you think the media AND the government, and ostensibly over other institution is on some sinister plot against all the normal folks out there. Like I said, then its like arguing with a dogmatically religious person.

"Why is this like this then?"

"Because God said so."

"But that doesn't explain this contradiction."

"God is mysterious"

"But that makes no sense!"

"We can't understand God."

See what I'm getting at? If the fall back is ever-grander and more intricate conspiracies, then I should quit right now, and you should nail the door shut and oil up the 12 gauge, because eventually you're going to be the only one left who's not in on it.

On that note, things like public appearance and direct quotes from people, plus pictures, in the most widely read newspaper on the planet, plus information you can find on conspiracy websites where they brag about showing up to the premeirs, doesn't really add up to a strong case that the NY Times was just pulling this one out of their asses. But believe as you like . . .

"You gotta love those sites! I mean, they really have some big balls to support all sorts of ideas about what happened on 9/11 that even the government won't touch. Don't believe me? Take a quick look at the two debunking sites above. Then read the NIST reports, presentations and Q&A over at http://wtc.nist.gov
It's really amazing of the kind of stuff they come up with, especially regarding WTC 7. They still even support the WTC truss theory of collapse, which was abandoned long ago by the government. Unbelievable! I guess that's what happens when the shills get desperate. Try this debunking site instead.

About the Loose Change guide, here's an even better one."

Don't have time to examine the links now, but I will, so I'll hold my comments until I can give them a fair shake.

One thing though, are you suggesting you've actually read the NIST report? That thing is 10,000 fucking pages long. Who in the government abandoned the truss thing? What does NIST say? Is that they're up to date position? Are you taking this stuff from direct sources or repeating stuff from conspiracy blogs and websites? Inquiring minds want to know . . .

If the government doesn't care and was in on the whole thing anyways, why are they spending mroe time and effort and deviating from the NIST data? What do they say that the government won't touch exactly? I haven't seen as much of this as you apparently, but I'd be curious to know some specifics here.

"Fucking tell me about it! The greatest propagator of all of the "entire 9/11 thing", David Ray Griffin, is clearly a 20-something trapped inside the body of a 67 year old"

Now you're putting words in my mouth fella. I said mostly and generally, never said all. I never really said it was the demographic of the leaders, but rather the people most interested and taken with the whole conspiracy thing. Not to call steretypes, and it seems you're much more wrapped up in the whole conspiracy world than I am, but do you notice lots and lots of women around on the boards and blogs? Mothers with children? More older guys than younger guys? I don't know this to be a fact, but you seem objective on some things, and I think you'd agree that there's some general commonalities of who this conspiracy stuff really hits home with (and don reply "yeah, intelligent and observent truthseekers" and then slap on a smileface - it's just too easy).

It certainly doesn't seem to have universal appeal amongst everyone. Two common draws are a few older men that hate and despise the government for various reasons, and younger guys who are intensley paranoid and buy into the whole "new world order" fear that has been circulating around for decades. They're probably the same kind of person in different stages of their life you ask me.

"And I'm with ya on the offensive intrusions by 9/11 skeptics in all this, sticking their noses where they don't belong. I'm all for banning whatever is deemed "upsetting" or "offensive" by "people", especially during any kind of criminal investigation or prosecution. Yeah, that's it!"

Never said they weren't fully within their rights to look into it - I'm as big a proponent of free speech and information as you'll find. In fact sonny, I've worked for the ACLU in my day and focused on Constitutional issues in my government studies as an undergrad while being advised by one of the greatest living and most published scholars of civil liberties. So don't give me all that junk.

There are thing that I find offensive about the "truth movement" (such as calling themselves a 'truth' organization in the first place when so many are clearly not interested in real explanations, as you yourself mentioned), such as the protesting, the loud, crass tactics, the shoddy research, and the suggestion by some, even on this thread, that firefighters and police had knowledge of what was coming and let their fellow public servents rush to their deaths anyway. I think you could see how that's insulting to some.

And frankly, as somebody who has also worked for and around the government and Washington, I know most of the people that work for the government are good and decent civil servents and burearucrats that work long hard hours at difficult jobs and don't make nearly as much money doing it as they could in the private sector, because they believe in public service and our collective values. Wishy washy as that may be, it tends to piss me off when a punch of angry crackpot anonymous internet conspiracy mongers start suggesting that thousands of these people are cowardly monsters complicit in the murder of thousands of innocents. The "us against them" mentality towards the government doesn't shown keen awareness or healthy skepticism, it shows a serious naivety about how the government acutally operates and the people that make it function. Go intern on the Hill for a summer and tell me if you still think that the country is crawling with ominous government "operatives."

"Absolutely smack, bang on! 19 Muslim extremists who "hate America and our freedoms" overwhelmed NORAD, the FAA, the DOD, the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, the Secret Service and the multi-trillion dollar military apparatus of the most powerful nation in the history of the planet, with box cutters, taking down 3 skyscrapers with 2 planes and impacting the most heavily d . . . "

Well obviously you haven't looked into this. Most heavily defended building? What you talkin' about. Hundreds of jets? What are we on cold war red alert here? Not even close - have a look at this, then talk to me:

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/index.php?title=NORAD

Goes through and explains in detail exactly what our defense capability and options were with the planes.

So far as duping the CIA and the FBI, and why not? Stuff slips past out intelligence all the time, and if you'll take a look the failings of 9/11 caused a massive investigation and paradigm shift on how intelligence is managed and filtered. We dropped the ball, things happened because of it.

So far as Arabs with box cutters - I always hear this, I don't get it. Did the people on the planes really know that's all they actaully had? How do you think terrified people are prone to react in that kind of situation? Certainly the pilots and stewardesses are told to do nothing, and the average person is going to sit tight and pray for dear life. The hijackers didn't plan and execute this whole scheme themselves, they just carried out the final leg of a very crafty and complicated terrorist attack that turned out to be the largest and most shocking in modern history. Not so improbable sounding when you portray the situation a little more accurately.

"Gotta love ole Noam!"

Ohh boy. Well, if you actually also buy into this kind of conspiracy, then this 9/11 stuff is just small potatoes for you. If you want to keep debating these points, I'm more than happy too as well, but this is some wild stuff.

I'll check your links when I have time to actually look over them - meanwhile I'll be with my Jewish banker friends plotting to take control of the UN and overthrow the government so we can unite the planet once and for all under our iron fist of globalism.

No offense, but the whole 'gatekeepers of the left' thing is about the dumbest crap around. It's just a way for the hardcore conspiracy nuts can dismiss any liberal and leftist thinkers that aren't willing to buy into their stuff as tools of whatever this supposed massive global plot. Guess what, this conspiracy and many, many different evolutions of it have been around for a pretty long time, and nothing seems to really be happening. If there is a conspiracy of this kind around, I wouldn't worry because the people pulling the strings seem to be pretty shitty at getting things done.

millionman said:

I'm sorry man but the whole thing doesn't fit. Every site that I've ever read or anything I've ever watched online just seems like a bunch of scared and paranoid people out to find something in everything. I'm not one to take what the mainstream media says at all but this underground conspircay theory stuff is just going a bit too far out for me to go along with.

Click to expand...

"something in everything" - Well put. Like I keep saying, the people that believe in this stuff really WANT to believe in it. So basically they're not too terribly hard to convince. I have a theory that it's sort of the fun of fantasy emersion, like that Warcraft game or something similar, but I have a feeling that comes across as offensive to our conspiracy friends (or Warcraft fans). But maybe you understand my comparison.

I also think there's some appeal in the idea that by believing in a conspiracy, you're become privy to some special or secret knowledge, and some folks enjoy the feeling of having "figured out" all the dark machinations and secretive plots around them.

Either way, I don't see a preponderence of clear thinking associated with conspiracies. Also, and this in no way applies to anybody I've been arguing with here, but a hell of a lot of these things have some kind of anti-semitic angle to them. I'm not Jewish myself, but it's quite troubling to see how often the Jews crop up in all these collective fears about world domination and evil plans for the general public. For instance, and I could never really substantiate this, but I really doubt that Larry Silverstein would be focused on and fussed over the way he is by some conspiracy advocates if his name was Larry Smith.

Baraka -

i'm glad u took the effort to post coz you're markedly more proficient at sayin' your piece than i am.

Stridge -

i really am trying hard to locate a link or two for that paper Donny scribbled... i've sent a couple of emails and touch wood i'll get some joy... But i read it years ago.

as i said before 9/11 isn't really what nags me, nor does 7/7, its always guna be the aftermath of the governments strategic program.

motivation? who stands to gain? this is what you should ask yourself objectively.

i'm a terrorist, i live in afganistan. i've been trained by Osama et al, and i hate the west, moreover America coz they have freedom.

me and my cronies are guna hijack 4 planes on american turf and crash them into symbols of liberty and it will fuck them over big time.

- what's guna happen after that boss?

- ummm, duno... nothin' we'll be good... job done we win.

- ain't they got an army an that?

- nah, fuck it. they won't do shit.

- but won't they invade with fighter jets, tanks, helicoptors etc, and wage a no holds barred war on the infidels in the name of vengence, and bomb the shit out of us and our neighbours, killing our friends and families and then they'll pilfer our oil or indircectly industrialize the region and it comes back full circle anyways, and they fucking stay forever in the name of peace, but what they really want is to bring western control and law to the middle east and succure the assets that dwell there.

- we've got 3 rocket launchers and this pile of guns... that'll see 'em off.


you speak of logic, reason, rationale, this is what doesn't make sense. the route of the cause, where it would have all begun. dot. in the mind of the Taliban "masterminds" that loathe America. why would they assult America in this fashion? when clearly they would have chewed on the notion of repercussion... why would they do this? to instill "terror" in the American people because they are free, they have liberty.

thats what we're sold and i won't buy it coz it does not make sense. at all.

the flip side is what America have gained from this scenario, moreover the 'military industrial complex'?

the conspiracy sites can be total bullshit, i know this. but i think that you think that debunking is fact because its debunking something.

again i'll provide this link http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm coz i'm sure you didn't read it last time. please scroll down to 5/6 of the page and read the evaluation of what FEMA state must of happened to WTC7. FEMA are debunked... "you must agree, it is absurd?"


keep pushing

Ummm....these are the same people that think blowing yourself up in the name of Allah is the greatest and highest honor. Do these sound like people who would use logic or ever think about repercussions?

millionman said:

Ummm....these are the same people that think blowing yourself up in the name of Allah is the greatest and highest honor. Do these sound like people who would use logic or ever think about repercussions?

Click to expand...

just an idea to trim down these mega posts i think if this debate continues we should pose a question and then have it answered from all that so wish too? just an idea... coz its easy to tune out by the deluge of words and we can refine a more focused attention to one topic.

million man -

the conspiracy angle runs like this: the Bush family/republicians and the Bin Ladens, particular Osama Bin Laden, have a 20 year business relationship involving the drug trade(opium) and oil. it is well documented via google and is public knowledge(no conspiracy here)

when 9/11 struck the media(good old media) pummled us with Osama video spitting proclaimations of hate to the west, Jihad this, Allah that, over and over again. when you hadn't seen him for a week, sure as hell there he'd be spitting again.

prior to 9/11 when did we really see these images circulated? were they the first?

if you lean toward the conspiracy perception, then this is merely a show, calculated and undergone almost to a script.
it is a perfect tool to imbed religion into the affray because you can't hold something that doesn't exist physically to account.

'God is a thought that makes crooked all that is straight'

the western world jump on the wagon of hate and announce that all Muslims are fuckin' booloo, and the Karan is a book of death, they want to fuckin' kill us all... CUNTS!!!

where is this proof? admittedly there are Muslims that want to kill all americans, Brits now, but thats coz we ransacked their territory for what would have been the base deeds of an absolute minority, and persist to fuck them year after year. I'D DO THE SAME - I'D FIGHT AND HATE.

millionman said:

Ummm....these are the same people that think blowing yourself up in the name of Allah is the greatest and highest honor. Do these sound like people who would use logic or ever think about repercussions?

Click to expand...

just an idea to trim down these mega posts i think if this debate continues we should pose a question and then have it answered from all that so wish too? just an idea... coz its easy to tune out by the deluge of words and we can refine a more focused attention to one topic.

million man -

the conspiracy angle runs like this: the Bush family/republicians and the Bin Ladens, particular Osama Bin Laden, have a 20 year business relationship involving the drug trade(opium) and oil. it is well documented via google and is public knowledge(no conspiracy here)

when 9/11 struck the media(good old media) pummled us with Osama videos spitting proclaimations of hate to the west, Jihad this, Allah that, over and over again. when you hadn't seen him for a week, sure as hell there he'd be spitting again.

prior to 9/11 when did we really see these images circulated?

if you lean toward the conspiracy perception, then this is merely a show, calculated and undergone almost to a script. Osama is fulfilling his duties, his side of the deal.

it is a perfect tool to imbed religion into the affray because you can't hold something that doesn't exist physically to account.

'God is a thought that makes crooked all that is straight'

the western world jump on the wagon of hate and announce that all Muslims are fuckin' booloo, and the Karan is a book of death, they want to fuckin' kill us all... CUNTS!!!

where is this proof? admittedly there are Muslims that want to kill all americans, Brits now, but thats coz we ransacked their territory for what would have been the base deeds of an absolute minority, and persist to fuck them year after year. I'D DO THE SAME - I'D FIGHT AND HATE.

the Bin Ladens and Bush's have iron clad ties. Osama is the poster boy, he's done his job, he's free. Saddam stopped doing what he was told, he's gone.
not that i think the Bush administration could ever "whack" a Bin Laden, they are far to powerfull.

it falls into place more often than not. that's why i don't buy the shit. nothing is clear cut, but theres way to much smoke.


keep pushing

The governments of the world are a big joke and is full of hypocracy. It seems the reason all this insanity keeps going on is because people grow up thinking "it's just another part of life." If people thought how I think then all this government corruption, etc, would end pretty soon.

I'm glad to hear Ron Paul is running for president.

"i really am trying hard to locate a link or two for that paper Donny scribbled... i've sent a couple of emails and touch wood i'll get some joy... But i read it years ago."

Looking forward to it. I'm actually very curious to read anything that you guys feel offers solid and definitive proof of conspiracy. Hearsay and coincidence are one thing - I'm waiting to see some solid evidence of this massive conspiracy that is concrete.

"as i said before 9/11 isn't really what nags me, nor does 7/7, its always guna be the aftermath of the governments strategic program."

The biggsest problem that I have with your comments is that you suggest that the Muslim revisionist/extremist contingent is isolated to one particular state entity. These people are religous terrorists, so they're not beholden to a single state. In fact, although the de facto funder and headman of Al Qaeda (at the time, not anymore in all likelihood) was Bin Laden, this doesn't attribute the nationatilites of the origin of the terrorists.

All the terrorist hijackers are Sauidis, as I recall, and they were not acting in any nationalist or state compacity. They were operating under an anti-American Jiihad order from their extremist leaders. They weren't worried about any kind of state reprisal from the US. Saudi Arabia is actually our financial and by proxy diplomatic partner, and their government strongly disparages the attacks and Bin Laden, who was exiled from his own family for his activites. Terrorist groups like Bin Laden's former organization are rougue entites - they don't operate with state support and approval, tacitly or publicly, and their actions were not conducted with consideration to Afghanistan or any other nation.

"we should pose a question and then have it answered from all that "

Brilliant idea. If you go back and review my previous posts, I've asked several direct questions that have only, and I say this in a 'lack of better words' manner, half-assed replies.

I have asked a lot of direct and basic questions about basic logistics of the conspiracy - so far they have just been brushed off or ignored entirely.

Please feel free to restate your own questions> I'll reply and then expect an answer to my own.

"he conspiracy angle runs like this: the Bush family/republicians and the Bin Ladens, particular Osama Bin Laden, have a 20 year business relationship involving the drug trade(opium) and oil. it is well documented via google and is public knowledge(no conspiracy here)"

The Saudies are actually some of the biggest investors in the US (as well as many others) economy. Over a trillion dollars as I understand it. The Bin Laden family comprises thousands of individuals, many of whom hace been friends and business partners with prominent American busienssman and politicians over the years. This is no secret information and is widely publicized in American and international press.

Saudi Arabia is a massively wealthy nation, and the Biin Ladens are a highly important family among them. Osama Bin Laden is a relatively minor figure in teh family that has been exiled for his extremist and anti-west viewpoints and actions. He's a black sheep, so to speak. These are cosmopolitan and wealthy figures, and I think you undertand that they naturally watch the bottom line above all other considerations. You would then probably also understand that a Muslim splinter sect extremist like Osama, who actively terrorizes theiir most lucratuve business and trading partner is not a welcome person in the international finance structure. Believe me, nobody wants terrorism less than the elite Saudi ruling familes. Terrorism is bad for business, and after the events on 9/11, they were forced to withdrawl from billions of dollars of very successful and active investments with US partners.

"where is this proof? admittedly there are Muslims that want to kill all americans, Brits now, but thats coz we ransacked their territory for what would have been the base deeds of an absolute minority, and persist to fuck them year after year. I'D DO THE SAME - I'D FIGHT AND HATE."

Not postive what you're getting at with these comments (may be that famous American/British language barrier - I admit that the Kingdom speaks it a great deal better). This seems retroactive. A small sect of Muslim extremists had hard anti-Western sentiments before 9/11, and this produced the terrorist attacks. Most Americans, at the least the ones that bother to read and stay informed, know that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people that don't condone terrorist activity.

That being said, and to address your other comments as well as repeat millionman's point - religious terrorists aren't rational people. Religious fanaticism produces violence and intolerence no matter where in the world ot from what denomitation it originates. Terrorism isn't rational.

Frighteningly, Bin Laden has been quoted as saying that he hopes terrorist actions will bankrupt the US by spiraling us into a never-ending conflict with regional eastern powers, a scenario in which we can never actually win. His strategy so far seems to be working. To me, that is far more scary than the conspiracy viewpoint.

stridge -

evidence? you haven't provided any concrete eveidence yourself, and it is offensive when you state that they're half assed replies? thats why we're talking conspiracy. if you could and have, then we can all go home(debunking is not austere... it is not fact)

you - The biggsest problem that I have with your comments is that you suggest that the Muslim revisionist/extremist contingent is isolated to one particular state entity. These people are religous terrorists, so they're not beholden to a single state. In fact, although the de facto funder and headman of Al Qaeda (at the time, not anymore in all likelihood) was Bin Laden, this doesn't attribute the nationatilites of the origin of the terrorists.

i don't understand this. but my view point is that Bin Laden is the head of Al Qaeda or Al-CIAda. i'm not selective, Bin Laden has the right skin colour for the Job.

saudi's? and how are they doing reprisal wise considering the nationality of the "hijackers". just fine as i recall. won't be invading there thats for sure.
yet Saddam's country is invaded because of Saddam and the Bathe party...
double standards me thinks. or is there something else afoot?

Bin Laden - American capitalist connection doesn't mean shit. i'm talking about the Bush - Bin Laden direct link.

you - Not postive what you're getting at with these comments (may be that famous American/British language barrier - I admit that the Kingdom speaks it a great deal better). This seems retroactive. A small sect of Muslim extremists had hard anti-Western sentiments before 9/11, and this produced the terrorist attacks. Most Americans, at the least the ones that bother to read and stay informed, know that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people that don't condone terrorist activity.

not sure what you quite mean again here? im talking about the insurgence, the new breed of Afgani's, Iraq's(and indeed others) that defend their country; just their country, they have no prior politic bent. i said that if a foreign entity stomped all over my nation then i would fight them off, and i would hate them.
just a note: plenty of Iraq's welcomed the occupation to dethrown Saddam and the bathe party. but then they wanted them to fuck off.
additionally the Afganistan war was like 2 weeks. how? because it was a staged war to get boots on to the middle east turf.

how can war bankrupt the US? the military and oil monsters run America, they're loving it. its the tax payer that gets fucked and thats just dandy, after all eradiction off the middle class is pretty damn high on the Bush administrations hands.
and don't worry about war bankrupting America and fucking the dollar. you can do that yourselves. federal reserve, privately owned. the people that print the money, nobody to question or monitor their ongoings... nah, you've got it covered your end, don't worry about the war.

plain question you should have asked yourself beforeyou spoke of the above. why would America fight a war that could possibly bankrupt its self? you wouldn't would you. you fight for something, and its seldom peace my friend.

ok my question - as i said at the top there is no solid fact here on either sides. nonetheless you feel that your NIST, FEMA etc reports are fact, and thats fine. but what has been served up at http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm is THE FEMA report on what went down in WTC7.
its debunking the debunking, which must pull on your curiosity srings because you're fond of bedunking.
if you don't wana read it all thats fine, coz its long, but please scroll down to 5/6 of the page and read the evaluation of what FEMA state must of happened to WTC7. FEMA are debunked... "you must agree, it is absurd?"

again i ask a simple question. do you think that WTC7 was a controlled demolition?


keep pushing

Stridge -

i remembered the name of the paper: Rebuilding America's Defenses. by the think tank Project for the New American Century.

extract - pg.50.top-left http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
http://www.newamericancentury.org/index.html

Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a
new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and
industrial policy will shape the pace and
content of transformation as much as the
requirements of current missions.

click statements of principles and see who's on board -

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

and a trace more turse -

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/meacher_war_on_terror_bogus.htm

the military industrial complex's unprecedented gains are no strike of good fortune, its profiteerings to the definition.

when i read this i was like 20... and the whole court smelt of fish. where you at?


keep pushing

Hey Reber - sorry if I offended you - a poor choice of words on my part.

Ican't reply in much detail right now, busy with travel and work.

Thanks for linking the paper, I actually came accross it a while ago while reading some stuff about all of this.

One thing to consider on the paper is that it was written in order to advocate more funding for military technological and weapons development in order to keep us one step ahead of the competition. In short they wanted new weapons systems and lots more money for the defense budget because the PNAC group believes that this is the base of international hegemony.

The war in Iraq and the Afghanistan operations are essentially bankrupting us and stalling any strong new techological development and funding. We can't even afford to outfit our soldiers and vehicles with proper armoring at this point.

So why would the neocon Cheney crowd manipulate intelligence and take advantage of public sentiment after 9/11 to get into Iraq? Because they're arrogant and didn't do their homework - they thought we'd win easily and at a fraction of the cost. They're not happy about what's happening over there as it has seriously weakened our international position and military strength.

Also, this is the same thing as old Larry Silverstein. How is it that these men are so smart that they can plan the massive and elaborate conspiracy that you claim is behind 9/11, but they're so stupid that they intentionally told the world what they were up to in a publicly available paper that was diely distributed by a well known think tank? They're arrogant, but not retarded.

The quote about Pearl Harbor is out of context and is hardly a smoking gun. It was an honest appraisal of what the econ and defense gurus thought would take to really catalyze some serious military ramp ups for the country.

Doesn't mean they intentionally plotted to kill thousands of their fellow citizens and compromise our entire national security.

Just food for thought, I'll reply to the other points when I have more time to look at them closely.