Search forums

Forums

Export thread

9-11 Conspiracy

Dec 12, 2009#1

blotsfan

With this tv show about the 9-11 conspiracy on, I've been arguing about the conspiracy theories. I dunno, I think they're a load of shit, but I'm starting to think im in the minority. What do you guys thinK?

Dec 12, 2009#2

Krisken

I think that the planes hitting the towers caused structural damage on the support levels and caused the collapse. I've heard the theories, but for the most part I think it's people who want to believe in conspiracies. It's no better than the birther movement.

Dec 12, 2009#3

Troll

The biggest problem with these nuts is that when you present a logical argument or piece of evidence that contradicts the conspiracy, they simply claim *YOU* are part of the conspiracy and that all evidence is fake. It's circular logic at its finest.

Dec 12, 2009#4

Shegokigo

Dec 12, 2009#5

SpecialKO

A Troll said:
The biggest problem with these nuts is that when you present a logical argument or piece of evidence that contradicts the conspiracy, they simply claim *YOU* are part of the conspiracy and that all evidence is fake. It's circular logic at its finest.

Or they say, "because it's all part of THE PLAN!"

Dec 12, 2009#6

Bowielee

I dunno, I like X-files as much as the next guy, and I do believe there are conspiracies out there, but I'm healthily skeptical and look at both sides of the argument before making a judgement.

As to the 9/11 conspiracy, there's been so much back and forth and BOTH sides site such shakey sources that I've decided to just be glad it's over and move on.

Dec 12, 2009#7

Krisken

Bowielee said:
I dunno, I like X-files as much as the next guy, and I do believe there are conspiracies out there, but I'm healthily skeptical and look at both sides of the argument before making a judgement.

As to the 9/11 conspiracy, there's been so much back and forth and BOTH sides site such shakey sources that I've decided to just be glad it's over and move on.

That's pretty much how I feel on it. I really wish I had the education and knowledge on the science involved to make my own view on it. As it stands, it's hard to tell who is fudging their numbers to support their position.

Dec 12, 2009#8

Bowielee

I vote for a grue option.

Dec 12, 2009#9

Iaculus

Bowielee said:
I vote for a grue option.

Grues caused 9/11?

It all makes sense now...

Dec 12, 2009#10

strawman

Human brains are interesting things. They are designed to make connections, and I believe most conspiracy theorists are not unlike cargo cults.

They already believe the gov't is out to get them, so rather than looking at the evidence alone, they fit the evidence into their pre-conceived notions of the gov't, and *click* it all makes sense!

Dec 12, 2009#11

SpecialKO

stienman said:
cargo cults

I had no clue what these were, so I googled them.

That's really fascinating in a creepy kind of way.

Dec 12, 2009#12

fade

Shegokigo said:

I like to think I'm open-minded, mind you, but that film, as far as I watched it, was full of hypocritical psuedoscience and conjecture. It was nicely done as a propaganda piece, ironically. But the whole intro is based on scattered information that's just as likely to have meant a number of things. For instance, the idea of a hijacked plane as a missile was nothing new by any shot. Terrorists had been using our deep-seated fear of flying against us for a long while. On top of that, the WTC had actually been built with a plane strike in mind. Part of the reason for the steel skin structure was to transfer the force like a bulletproof vest. Then, there's a lot of conjecture about g-forces and stalling based on anecdotal statements from pilots who probably, despite experience, had never intentionally tried to drive an airplane into the ground on a deep spiral. Also, they cite these conservative groups talking about the morbid benefits of an attack on US soil. Whoopdedoo. Everybody knows that, especially a political party that historically does well when a war takes place while they're in power. I didn't make it there, but it looks like they were going to make the case that the buildings collapsed as though they were demolished. I've heard that one before, and again, I have to go right back to the steel skin structure. It pancaked among zones of weakness. Etc, etc.

Dec 12, 2009#13

Green_Lantern

my view of this, and I know is not the most "ideal", is quite simple:

If there is any kind of force that is strong enough to promote a conspiracy like the 9/11 who am *I* to try to chalenge it? I mean really, these conspiracy theorist are just nuts because, not only they suppose to believe in those things but they "try" to change things, like if there is any hope to have actual sucess against something so big.

You would have better luck trying to stop a storm using a spork (why a spork? Alliteration!)

Dec 12, 2009#14

Le Quack

The campus greens at my college had a top 9-11 conspiracy theorist come to the campus, and had them debate some random student that researched everything.

What I noticed is that the 9-11 theorist used debate tactics similar to Glenn Beck. The student that followed after the theorist destroyed all of his arguments with common knowledge and information that was available to the public

Dec 13, 2009#15

Bowielee

Le Quack said:
The campus greens at my college had a top 9-11 conspiracy theorist come to the campus, and had them debate some random student that researched everything.

What I noticed is that the 9-11 theorist used debate tactics similar to Glenn Beck. The student that followed after the theorist destroyed all of his arguments with common knowledge and information that was available to the public

That's how they get you... with their logic and information.... crafty bastards.

Dec 13, 2009#16

Philosopher B.

I think conspiracy theories are addictive for some people ... I came across this one whacko in a forum once. Bitch practically collected conspiracy theories. It's like, I can almost see believing in one, but not everything is a dad-blamed conspiracy.

Dec 13, 2009#17

The Lovely Boehner

who voted yes

Dec 13, 2009#18

RocketGirl

I really have next to no doubt that the actual event of 9-11 is what-you-see-is-what-you-get: planes hijacked, flown into buildings, buildings collapse. I'd have to see some REALLY compelling evidence to think otherwise.

It would not shock me to discover that the Shrubya Administration had learned of the impending attack and decided to let it happen in order to further their goals...but no part of me thinks that they otherwise had a hand in it.
And it wouldn't shock me to discover instead that they were caught completely flat-footed on this, either.
I could totally go both ways on that score.

That's as conspiracy-licious as I'm willing to go on 9-11.

Dec 13, 2009#19

Norris

I think conspiracy theories come about because of human skepticism. Yes, you read that right. There are tons of people out there that just can't wrap their minds around the idea that a healthy young president was murdered by a lone nut with a gun, that men using computers less powerful than modern toys made it to the moon and back, or that a bunch of dumb asses with box cutters could kill thousands and demolish skyscrapers. So, unable to believe the "official story", they start looking for a more "sensible" explanation...one that is big enough to fit the importance of the event. Once they've reached their conclusion, they feel like the only ones smart enough to "get it" and thus a conspiracy theory is born.

As far as 9/11 goes...which is more likely:
A shadowy government conspiracy remote controls two commercial airplanes they then fly into the Twin Towers. The Towers have secretly been rigged with charges or thermite or something that has been placed in such a way to be unnoticed but be in the right spots to demolish the buildings. Tower 7 of the World Trade Center has also been set up to be demolished but they don't bother with an airplane for that one. Meanwhile, they disappear a third airplane before firing a missile at the Pentagon. Before emergency crews or people with cameras show up, they scatter airplane parts around the grounds to make it APPEAR the missing plane hit it. Finally, they shoot down a fourth airliner that they had agents "hijack" to make it seem the people on the plane were heroes. Pin it all on some Muslims, and you've got yourself a war.

A shadowy terrorist conspiracy picks a group of young extremists for a daring attack on American soil. These young men take pilot lessons and all book airline tickets for the morning of 9/11. Using box cutters they brought aboard the plane, they threaten the plane's crew into giving them control of the airplane and then crash the plane into a set of targets in New York and Washington. On one airplane, the passengers fight back and manage to crash themselves harmlessly (to anyone not on the plane) into a field. This whole thing is carried off because no on realistically thought anyone would be crazy/evil enough to do such a thing.

There was a "conspiracy" on 9/11. It was just carried out by some homicidal religious whackjobs, not the CIA.

Dec 13, 2009#20

SpecialKO

I have no doubt that the Bush administration exploited post-9/11 to the very last possible way they could. It's kind of obvious after all.

My thought on what happened before, after reading bits of Richard Clarke's book, is that they knew about the threat, dismissed it as far-fetched or more likely to fail like the previous WTC bombing attempt, and assumed that then-current security procedures were sufficient, and that they would be able to use the occurrence to further their foreign policy direction.

In short, I think gross incompetence is what allowed the attack to happen, as opposed to any guided Machiavellian intent on the part of the administration.

Dec 13, 2009#21

Twitch

Someone tried to kill Nixon with a plane. Didn't work...

Dec 13, 2009#22

Kitty Sinatra

Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

The first baseman? How do you know Who voted yes?

Dec 13, 2009#23

Green_Lantern

Gruebeard;314633][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

The first baseman? How do you know Who voted yes?[/QUOTE]

Is Who a doctor?

Dec 13, 2009#24

The Lovely Boehner

all polls must be public. I must know who to ridicule

Dec 13, 2009#25

Twitch

Agreed

Dec 13, 2009#26

Kitty Sinatra

Well, I voted Yes.

'Cause, y'know, suicidal dudes funded by an evil organization to perform a dastardly deed is a conspiracy.

Dec 13, 2009#27

Krisken

Charlie Dont Surf said:
all polls must be public. I must know who to ridicule

I think you did it and are trying to divert.

Dec 13, 2009#28

The Lovely Boehner

Krisken;314677][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
all polls must be public. I must know who to ridicule

I think you did it and are trying to divert.

[/QUOTE]

look, the yes/no buttons are right next to each other.

Dec 13, 2009#29

Espy

Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

Ditto. I need to know who to ignore forever around here.

Dec 13, 2009#30

SpecialKO

Gruebeard;314633][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

The first baseman? How do you know Who voted yes?[/QUOTE]

Well, what's the guys name?

Dec 13, 2009#31

Krisken

TeKeo;314710][quote=Gruebeard;314633][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

The first baseman? How do you know Who voted yes?[/quote]

Well, what's the guys name?[/QUOTE]
How does What even play into it? I thought we were talking about Who!?!

Dec 13, 2009#32

SpecialKO

Krisken;314715][quote=TeKeo;314710][quote=Gruebeard;314633][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

The first baseman? How do you know Who voted yes?[/quote]

Well, what's the guys name?[/QUOTE]
How does What even play into it? I thought we were talking about Who!?![/QUOTE]

That's what I'm asking! Who's the one who voted yes?

Dec 13, 2009#33

RocketGirl

Green_Lantern;314668][quote=Gruebeard;314633][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

The first baseman? How do you know Who voted yes?[/quote]

Is Who a doctor?[/QUOTE]

No, it's Cindy Lou Who.

Dec 13, 2009#34

Kitty Sinatra

TeKeo;314723][quote=Krisken;314715][quote=TeKeo;314710][quote=Gruebeard;314633][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
who voted yes

Dec 13, 2009#35

SpecialKO

I don't know!

Dec 13, 2009#36

Kitty Sinatra

Third base!

Dec 16, 2009#37

North_Ranger

I simply and utterly despise all kinds, branches and varieties of conspiracy theorists. Healthy scepticism? That's okay in my books, and is absolutely necessary for any kind of reasonable debate and scientific discussion. Being a dick, trivializing death tolls, paranoia, inability to face facts... those people have a special level in hell. A level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theatres.

Dec 16, 2009#38

sixpackshaker

I voted yes, I do believe that a conspiracy lead to the collapse of the Twin Towers. A cabal of conspirators planned and executed a nearly perfect plan to hijack four airliners and crash them into symbols of America's wealth and power.

Dec 16, 2009#39

Green_Lantern

North_Ranger said:
I simply and utterly despise all kinds, branches and varieties of conspiracy theorists. Healthy scepticism? That's okay in my books, and is absolutely necessary for any kind of reasonable debate and scientific discussion. Being a dick, trivializing death tolls, paranoia, inability to face facts... those people have a special level in hell. A level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theatres.

Hey, that is offesive to child molesters.

Dec 16, 2009#40

Chibibar

I voted yes. I believe there is a possible conspiracy theory on the 9-11 attacks (my personal one), but until a "wing-nut" conspiracy theorist, I look from all possible angle and different views.

Dec 16, 2009#41

The Lovely Boehner

Chibibar said:
I voted yes. I believe there is a possible conspiracy theory on the 9-11 attacks (my personal one), but until a "wing-nut" conspiracy theorist, I look from all possible angle and different views.

What is your personal one?

Dec 16, 2009#42

Chibibar

Charlie Dont Surf;316218][quote=Chibibar said:
I voted yes. I believe there is a possible conspiracy theory on the 9-11 attacks (my personal one), but until a "wing-nut" conspiracy theorist, I look from all possible angle and different views.

What is your personal one?

[/QUOTE]

edit: unlike not until (stupid auto correct)

my personal one? I personally think it is pretty well organize attack to be orchestrated by some "leader" on dialysis. I think it was allow so the U.S. can attack and hopefully gain control of Iraq to get "cheaper" fuel.

Dec 16, 2009#43

SpecialKO

Chibibar;316224][quote=Charlie Dont Surf;316218][quote=Chibibar said:
I voted yes. I believe there is a possible conspiracy theory on the 9-11 attacks (my personal one), but until a \"wing-nut\" conspiracy theorist, I look from all possible angle and different views.

What is your personal one?

This is not a war about terror. This is a war on fuel crisis (it was getting too high and U.S. is trying to get cheaper fuel)

That is the premise of it anyways.

why do I think that?

How do you win an open land war against a terrorist? They might have a "base" to train from but these people comes from many walks of life. Some even natural citizens of the country they are attacking (England and U.S. are some of the examples) but I guess the old cold war and hit jobs are out of the question (take them out before they take you out)

having this "open war" and the news constantly follow/report about it, kinda give away our position. It is like saying we are going to pull out by X date, well, if I were the enemy, I'll lay low until they leave and start up again.[/QUOTE]

You really should read Cobra II. It has a lot of specifics addressing some of the things you're talking about, and the authors do their best not to accuse anyone of anything and just lay out some of what supposedly happened behind the scenes. They had ridiculous, but confirmed, levels of access in the Pentagon and with former admin officials. It's frightening.

Dec 16, 2009#44

Chibibar

TeKeo;316372][quote=Chibibar;316224][quote=Charlie Dont Surf;316218][quote=Chibibar said:
I voted yes. I believe there is a possible conspiracy theory on the 9-11 attacks (my personal one), but until a \"wing-nut\" conspiracy theorist, I look from all possible angle and different views.

What is your personal one?

From what you said, it is kinda scary that if some of my theory actually hold true (or at least on conspiracy level)

Dec 16, 2009#45

AshburnerX

There is actually some somewhat compelling evidence that a similar thing may have happened during the Pearl Harbor Attack. The gist of it is that the message warning them of the attack was purposely lost along the chain of command, in order to spur America into action against Germany and Japan (as the people in the US weren't exactly chomping at the bit to get into a war at that time.)

It sounds plausible, but I think that's something that's better lost to time at this point.

Dec 16, 2009#46

Chibibar

AshburnerX said:
There is actually some somewhat compelling evidence that a similar thing may have happened during the Pearl Harbor Attack. The gist of it is that the message warning them of the attack was purposely lost along the chain of command, in order to spur America into action against Germany and Japan (as the people in the US weren't exactly chomping at the bit to get into a war at that time.)

It sounds plausible, but I think that's something that's better lost to time at this point.

well I can understand (hindsight 20/20) that it is a good thing. Military power has grown A LOT since the world wars (both of them) and now we are a major superpower.

I just think that we, as a nation, SHOULD look into more alternative fuel now. We could have done it 10 years ago (California did have electric cars back then AND charging station) a lot of improvement have been made since then and people should look forward. (part of my theory that people who make money off oil want to continue making money in oil and thus............ result into this war)

The war is 8 years old now. We (the world really) fought a MAJOR war in 4 years, but this just prove that you can't fight terrorism with land war. Our brothers and sisters are fighting a battle with rules, while the enemies do not even care with the rules (at least the world wars most follow some rules)

When the U.S. try to "bend" the rules people get mad (like Gitmo prison) and when the SAME institution is being shut down and want to move the prisoner to U.S. soil, the same people get mad saying "we can't have terrorist on American soil" well DUH!! that is why we have gitmo at the first place...

Sometimes you can't please the public.

Dec 16, 2009#47

Kitty Sinatra

The major failing of the Pearl Harbor theory is the obvious truth: A competent defense against the Japanese attack would still have had the US entering the war on all fronts.

There was no reason to simply allow significant military assets get sunk. Indeed, what's really annoying about this conspiracy is that anyone wanting to get into the war would let their warmachines get destroyed before they could be put to use. No one with any intelligence gives their enemy a headstart to victory (and that's why Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, anyway - so the US wouldn't get the headstart)

Dec 16, 2009#48

Krisken

Chibibar said:
.

Sometimes you can't please the public.

That's just what Jesus said sir!

Dec 16, 2009#49

strawman

It boggles my mind that as intelligent a group of people as we have on this board, so many believe that 911 was a US conspiracy.

Dec 16, 2009#50

AshburnerX

stienman said:
It boggles my mind that as intelligent a group of people as we have on this board, so many believe that 911 was a US conspiracy.

1 out of 9 who actually took the poll is bad? I dare say that's better than the national average.

Dec 16, 2009#51

Kitty Sinatra

Who here has even said their Yes vote indicates a US conspiracy? I voted yes, but because I'm answering the question as written, not as intended.

Dec 16, 2009#52

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Chibibar;316386][quote=AshburnerX said:
There is actually some somewhat compelling evidence that a similar thing may have happened during the Pearl Harbor Attack. The gist of it is that the message warning them of the attack was purposely lost along the chain of command, in order to spur America into action against Germany and Japan (as the people in the US weren't exactly chomping at the bit to get into a war at that time.)

It sounds plausible, but I think that's something that's better lost to time at this point.

The war is 8 years old now. We (the world really) fought a MAJOR war in 4 years, but this just prove that you can't fight terrorism with land war. Our brothers and sisters are fighting a battle with rules, while the enemies do not even care with the rules (at least the world wars most follow some rules)

When the U.S. try to "bend" the rules people get mad (like Gitmo prison) and when the SAME institution is being shut down and want to move the prisoner to U.S. soil, the same people get mad saying "we can't have terrorist on American soil" well DUH!! that is why we have gitmo at the first place...

Sometimes you can't please the public.[/QUOTE]

If you go into any conflict involving bloodshed and expect mercy or quarter, then you are in for a nasty surprise.

Dec 16, 2009#53

RocketGirl

stienman said:
It boggles my mind that as intelligent a group of people as we have on this board, so many believe that 911 was a US conspiracy.

A bunch of foreigners armed with box cutters get on three planes and manage to fly two of them into buildings? Sounds like a conspiracy to me!

...it just wasn't a conspiracy beyond the obvious, is all.

Dec 16, 2009#54

Espy

RocketGirl;316480][quote=stienman said:
It boggles my mind that as intelligent a group of people as we have on this board, so many believe that 911 was a US conspiracy.

[/QUOTE]

Yeah. I think the poll question needs to be re-done. Most here assumed it referred to a US Government Conspiracy.

US Government Conspiracy
Outside Conspiracy
None

Dec 16, 2009#55

SpecialKO

Chibibar;316375][quote=TeKeo said:
You really should read Cobra II. It has a lot of specifics addressing some of the things you're talking about, and the authors do their best not to accuse anyone of anything and just lay out some of what supposedly happened behind the scenes. They had ridiculous, but confirmed, levels of access in the Pentagon and with former admin officials. It's frightening.

I will read it when I have a moment to sit down and do it. I hate to do long reading in burst

From what you said, it is kinda scary that if some of my theory actually hold true (or at least on conspiracy level)[/QUOTE]

It makes a plausible (the authors are careful about presenting evidence over drawing too many conclusions) case that going back to Iraq was a Bush Admin goal since before 9/11, and that Rumsfeld believed that a failed terrorist attack could provide the national impetus to go back. The authors do not seem to believe that Rumsfeld ever intended to help it along, just that he assumed the attack would fail, and they would be able to turn it into a big propaganda circus for going back.

It more or less matches what Richard Clarke claimed about what Rumsfeld and Cheney were pushing in the Cabinet, only it provides it mostly from what orders were being passed around in the Pentagon.

Dec 17, 2009#56

Soliloquy

Espy;316481][quote=RocketGirl;316480][quote=stienman said:
It boggles my mind that as intelligent a group of people as we have on this board, so many believe that 911 was a US conspiracy.

[/QUOTE]

Yeah. I think the poll question needs to be re-done. Most here assumed it referred to a US Government Conspiracy.

US Government Conspiracy
Outside Conspiracy
None[/QUOTE]

What exactly would the "none" option mean? That some guys just went for a joyride in a few airplanes, and crashed?

Dec 17, 2009#57

strawman

Espy;316481][quote=RocketGirl;316480][quote=stienman said:
It boggles my mind that as intelligent a group of people as we have on this board, so many believe that 911 was a US conspiracy.

[/quote]

Yeah. I think the poll question needs to be re-done. Most here assumed it referred to a US Government Conspiracy.

US Government Conspiracy
Outside Conspiracy
None[/QUOTE]

We could go a bit further:

* Gov't fully orchestrated attack and/or collapse
* Inbetween (not fully commision, but more than intentional omission)
* Gov't knew enough to stop attack, but chose to allow it
* inbetween (Didn't _choose_ but at least a few people had at least a date and the targets)
* Terrorist conspiracy (Gov't had enough info in hand, but no one pulled it together)
* Inbetween (Willfully ignorant - could have had enough info, but chose to dismiss too much)
* Terrorist conspiracy (Gov't didn't have enough info collected)

Dec 17, 2009#58

@Li3n

Suckers... everybody with half a brain knows that all the conspiracies on the internet are put there to distract us from the real conspiracy... the one involving an evil underground savage race of mole people!!!

Dec 17, 2009#59

Philosopher B.

Sheee-it! I knew those mole fuckers were up to something.

Dec 17, 2009#60

Bowielee

stienman said:
* Gov't knew enough to stop attack, but chose to allow it

This is as close as I can realistically see a US government conspiracy being involved, mostly based on the administration's reaction to it.

Dec 17, 2009#61

North_Ranger

I'm not worried about the mole people. The lizard men will surely eat them to extinction.

Dec 17, 2009#62

AshburnerX

North_Ranger said:
I'm not worried about the mole people. The lizard men will surely eat them to extinction.

Don't even joke about that... my friend LOVES David Icke and one of his big things is he believes that there is a race of Lizard People controlling humanity by mind control and that they can shape shift into people, taking over their lives. I'm starting to wonder if she's hanging out with these fringe people because of how bad her experiences with Authoritative figures have been in her life. It was one thing when she was simply a vaccine denier... on some level, I could understand that. But to believe in a guy who thinks Cancer is a fungus, denies AIDs is a problem, and thinks LIZARD PEOPLE ARE CONTROLLING THE PLANET?! *sigh* Why is she making it so hard for me...

Dec 17, 2009#63

North_Ranger

AshburnerX;316802][quote=North_Ranger said:
I'm not worried about the mole people. The lizard men will surely eat them to extinction.

For some people, it's a matter of mental stability. The human mind's most powerful abilities is the ability to make connections and generalizations of individual phenomena. When that goes haywire, well then you have some major problems.

Then there are people who are after the money. Like those people who keep making 2012 books. What the hell are they going to do with money if we're all gonna kick the bucket?

Then there's the ideologically driven kind. Anarchists, political radicals, and generally people who think there's some grand conspiracy going on. I've started to hate YouTube because when perusing a Schindler's List trailer I came to realize that there's still people out there who think there's "a global Zionist conspiracy" out there to kill/control the rest of us.

And then there's the people who buy into the bullshit of all the people above. Generally I would say it's a matter of intellectual laziness and hindsight gone awry.

Dec 17, 2009#64

Krisken

Bowielee;316697][quote=stienman said:
* Gov't knew enough to stop attack, but chose to allow it

This is as close as I can realistically see a US government conspiracy being involved, mostly based on the administration's reaction to it.[/QUOTE]
See, and I can't even go to this point.

The way I see it is like this-
They had information that a coordinated attack was planned for the day (we've seen images of file folders being carried by White House Officials which said just that), but for the most part it was blown off as implausibly unrealistic. I think the attacks succeeded because of outright negligence. President Bush looked utterly shocked when he got the news.

Now here is where people might think I'm being a conspiracy nut. A couple of people in that WH administration were more than happy to take advantage of the tragedy for political gain. Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Dick Armey, all people who have been around since the Nixon era. They even had Roger Ailes aiding them on the Fox news front along with Rupert Murdoch (who I think is just happy about the money, tbh).

I think George W. wanted to attack Iraq to show he could "win" where his father pulled back. I think advisors convinced him the best way to do that was to invent a connection between Iraq and the 9/11 tragedy. They all had different reasons for wanting to attack Iraq, though. No bid contracts ensured Cheney and Bush backers would get rich in the process of cleaning up after the war (Haliburton, Blackwater, KBR, etc) and George could have his victory as a war time president (mission accomplished).

So I'm sure I sound a little nutty. I think though that my conspiracy ideas about the U.S. government are pretty tame compared to some though. Besides, sometimes all we need to understand people is to see their greed.

Dec 17, 2009#65

Bowielee

Krisken;316819][quote=Bowielee;316697][quote=stienman said:
* Gov't knew enough to stop attack, but chose to allow it

This is as close as I can realistically see a US government conspiracy being involved, mostly based on the administration's reaction to it.[/quote]
See, and I can't even go to this point.

The way I see it is like this-
They had information that a coordinated attack was planned for the day (we've seen images of file folders being carried by White House Officials which said just that), but for the most part it was blown off as implausibly unrealistic. I think the attacks succeeded because of outright negligence. President Bush looked utterly shocked when he got the news.

Now here is where people might think I'm being a conspiracy nut. A couple of people in that WH administration were more than happy to take advantage of the tragedy for political gain. Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Dick Armey, all people who have been around since the Nixon era. They even had Roger Ailes aiding them on the Fox news front along with Rupert Murdoch (who I think is just happy about the money, tbh).

I think George W. wanted to attack Iraq to show he could "win" where his father pulled back. I think advisors convinced him the best way to do that was to invent a connection between Iraq and the 9/11 tragedy. They all had different reasons for wanting to attack Iraq, though. No bid contracts ensured Cheney and Bush backers would get rich in the process of cleaning up after the war (Haliburton, Blackwater, KBR, etc) and George could have his victory as a war time president (mission accomplished).

So I'm sure I sound a little nutty. I think though that my conspiracy ideas about the U.S. government are pretty tame compared to some though. Besides, sometimes all we need to understand people is to see their greed.[/QUOTE]

Really, it's not nutty at all, I think.

Whatever the reason for the success of the actual attack on 09/11, it was capitalized on in a big way by the most evil group of motherfuckers to hold power in US history.

Dec 17, 2009#66

AshburnerX

North_Ranger said:
Then there's the ideologically driven kind. Anarchists, political radicals, and generally people who think there's some grand conspiracy going on. I've started to hate YouTube because when perusing a Schindler's List trailer I came to realize that there's still people out there who think there's "a global Zionist conspiracy" out there to kill/control the rest of us.

There IS a Global Zionist Conspiracy. It's called "For the love of God, please stop blaming us for all the worlds problems and then trying to kill us for them." So far, it seems to be falling apart.

Dec 17, 2009#67

Iaculus

Bowielee;316836][quote=Krisken;316819][quote=Bowielee;316697][quote=stienman said:
* Gov't knew enough to stop attack, but chose to allow it

This is as close as I can realistically see a US government conspiracy being involved, mostly based on the administration's reaction to it.[/quote]
See, and I can't even go to this point.

The way I see it is like this-
They had information that a coordinated attack was planned for the day (we've seen images of file folders being carried by White House Officials which said just that), but for the most part it was blown off as implausibly unrealistic. I think the attacks succeeded because of outright negligence. President Bush looked utterly shocked when he got the news.

Now here is where people might think I'm being a conspiracy nut. A couple of people in that WH administration were more than happy to take advantage of the tragedy for political gain. Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Dick Armey, all people who have been around since the Nixon era. They even had Roger Ailes aiding them on the Fox news front along with Rupert Murdoch (who I think is just happy about the money, tbh).

I think George W. wanted to attack Iraq to show he could "win" where his father pulled back. I think advisors convinced him the best way to do that was to invent a connection between Iraq and the 9/11 tragedy. They all had different reasons for wanting to attack Iraq, though. No bid contracts ensured Cheney and Bush backers would get rich in the process of cleaning up after the war (Haliburton, Blackwater, KBR, etc) and George could have his victory as a war time president (mission accomplished).

So I'm sure I sound a little nutty. I think though that my conspiracy ideas about the U.S. government are pretty tame compared to some though. Besides, sometimes all we need to understand people is to see their greed.[/quote]

Really, it's not nutty at all, I think.

Whatever the reason for the success of the actual attack on 09/11, it was capitalized on in a big way by the most evil group of motherfuckers to hold power in US history.[/QUOTE]

General Thomas S. Power wants a word with you. His mentor, Curtis LeMay, a self-admitted war criminal, described him as a 'sadistic fascist'.

Seriously, there were some scary people running around in high office during the Cold War.

Dec 17, 2009#68

strawman

Bowielee said:
it was capitalized on in a big way by the most evil group of motherfuckers to hold power in US history.

Dec 17, 2009#69

sixpackshaker

stienman;316927][quote=Bowielee said:
it was capitalized on in a big way by the most evil group of motherfuckers to hold power in US history.

Clinton had just as big a desire to crack down on Iraq as Bush Sr and Bush Jr, but the opportunity didn't present itself during his administration.

I don't understand why people are blaming iraq on Bush - if Clinton or Gore were in the same position, they'd make very similar decisions because this iraq war machine was set in motion long, long before bush jr came into office.[/QUOTE]

When Clinton made the switch in the Armed Forces, from fighting large set-piece battles in open terrain to fighting low intensity conflicts in urban areas, I knew that war with Iraq was going to happen in the near future.

Dec 17, 2009#70

Krisken

stienman;316927][quote=Bowielee said:
it was capitalized on in a big way by the most evil group of motherfuckers to hold power in US history.

Dec 17, 2009#71

SpecialKO

Krisken;316974][quote=stienman;316927][quote=Bowielee said:
it was capitalized on in a big way by the most evil group of motherfuckers to hold power in US history.

Clinton had just as big a desire to crack down on Iraq as Bush Sr and Bush Jr, but the opportunity didn't present itself during his administration.

I don't understand why people are blaming iraq on Bush - if Clinton or Gore were in the same position, they'd make very similar decisions because this iraq war machine was set in motion long, long before bush jr came into office.[/QUOTE]

I am in awe at how you can compare what someone DID and what someone in your mind may have wanted to do. I simply can not form an argument against an unsupported hypothetical.[/QUOTE]

Yeah...how does "Clinton might have done it had the timeline pushed it a couple years earlier" even come close to making it excusable?

It happened on Bush's watch, and going to Iraq was a decision made by his administration...as staffed by his father's ex-Cabinet.

Dec 17, 2009#72

Bowielee

I'm also fairly certain that the Clinton administration wouldn't have pushed such Mcarthyist propaganda on the public.

Dec 17, 2009#73

Shakey

Bowielee said:
I'm also fairly certain that the Clinton administration wouldn't have pushed such Mcarthyist propaganda on the public.

That's just as hypothetical as saying Clinton would have went into Iraq given the opportunity. Clinton wasn't exactly an angel.

Dec 17, 2009#74

Krisken

Shakey;317048][quote=Bowielee said:
I'm also fairly certain that the Clinton administration wouldn't have pushed such Mcarthyist propaganda on the public.

That's just as hypothetical as saying Clinton would have went into Iraq given the opportunity. Clinton wasn't exactly an angel.[/QUOTE]
Heh, I was thinking that too. I seem to remember 6 months of people crying "Wag the Dog".

Dec 17, 2009#75

Bowielee

Shakey;317048][quote=Bowielee said:
I'm also fairly certain that the Clinton administration wouldn't have pushed such Mcarthyist propaganda on the public.

That's just as hypothetical as saying Clinton would have went into Iraq given the opportunity. Clinton wasn't exactly an angel.[/QUOTE]

Never said it wasn't.

Dec 18, 2009#76

JCM

@Li3n said:
Suckers... everybody with half a brain knows that all the conspiracies on the internet are put there to distract us from the real conspiracy... the one involving an evil underground savage race of mole people!!!

But its the truth!

The pictures prove it!

Dec 19, 2009#77

@Li3n

Peter Jackson blew up the tower...

Forums