9/11 conspiracy crap (split from TSW)

[darksoul]

OK, granted. It's a bad thing compared to them giving up on nuclear weapon design in disgust.

On the other hand, it's not necessarily a bad thing compared to what they'd come up with on their own, assuming they even have any nuclear physicists of their own.

I think that Stuart meant that it was "unfortunate" for Khan's customers. That is the way that I read it but perhaps I am more used to the classic British habit of wry understatement or belittling by subtle sarcasm.

I agree.

I dont agree with the conspiracy theorists view. That people is useful. Otherwise, if there is a conspiracy somewhere, who would spot it?
I for one believe firmly that the 9/11 was an inside job. The American Goverment is quite capable of that, and more, so its plausible. Then again, I'm not an American nor am I directly involved in the whole war on terror problem, so I don't care that much to discuss it, actually.

[The Vortex Empire]

9/11 was not a fucking inside job. Do you have any idea how many people would have to be kept silent to keep a conspiracy like that under wraps?

Dude, you're about to get dogpiled in 5...4...3...2...1...

[Chamale]

I for one believe firmly that the 9/11 was an inside job.

OK, commence dogpiling. I'll start by pointing out that every 9/11 conspiracy theory would require the complicity of thousands of ordinary Americans. In this entire sample, surely some of them would bravely reveal the conspiracy, or show convincing evidence after the attacks that they were an inside job. Even if you're cynical enough to assume that thousands of random people could be bribed into silence, the budget required for these bribes would be very noticeable. If the government uses threats and intimidation, this wouldn't be enough to keep some people from writing a convincing tell-all book. Again, a book with actual evidence, not the loony stuff raised by the conspiracy theorists.

As for the evidence itself, conspiracy theories range widely on precisely what evidence "proves" there was a conspiracy. I'd rather not write a long post to rebut a dozen different views, so if you could give us a good description of the evidence that convinced you 9/11 was an inside job, I'd be happy to come up with whatever counterexamples exist. I should probably take it somewhere else, though, because it's not related to the story at all.

Friday 16th? It'll be up by then. Probably. Unless something terrible happens.

If Stuart wants to torment us further by pushing away the conclusion to the battle, I'm sure the very fact of Michael's fight stretching on for 2 more chapters would qualify. Not terrible in terms of story, of course, but terrible in terms of suspense. I already feel like Tantalus trying to read a book. The whole story has been approaching this conclusion, and I've been wanting to see Yahweh's head on a pike for months, but still I wait. It'll have been at least 3 weeks since Chapter 73 for us to finally learn how the battle turns out. I'm sure the conclusion will be worth the wait.

[bcoogler]

9/11 was not a fucking inside job. Do you have any idea how many people would have to be kept silent to keep a conspiracy like that under wraps?

Dude, you're about to get dogpiled in 5...4...3...2...1...

Woof! Woof!

It's an old but true canard: Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.

Why do so many people behave like this:

1) If a big event happens with no evidence of a conspiracy, invent a conspiracy.

2) If an event occurs for which there is *solid* evidence it actually happened, claim it never happened.

Examples of #1 include Pearl Harbor, various assassinations, and of course 9/11.

Examples of #2 include the Holocaust, Andersonville, Watergate, and the moon landing.

[Night_stalker]

Courtesy of Cracked.com's David Wong:

For instance, how much money would it take to get you to kill 3,000 random, innocent Americans? Or, say you stumbled upon somebody else's plan to kill 3,000 innocent Americans. How much would it take to get you to stay silent afterward?

A hundred dollars? Two hundred? Two hundred fifty?

Well if the conspiracy guys are right, there are people reading this right now who took that deal. No kidding.

Here's why. The entire 9/11 "Truth" movement rests on the idea that the World Trade Center towers were rigged with explosives, a "Controlled Demolition" like you see with old buildings. That's the whole thing. They say the buildings couldn't have come down otherwise.


Forget the fact that no experts on the subject agree with them. That's not the point right now. We're just trying to get inside these guys' heads.

Now, maybe you could keep the plan itself a secret. A few dozen murderous black ops guys, demolitions experts with a grudge against the USA, maybe they've been brainwashed. Who knows. Maybe it could be done. People point out that the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb was kept a secret, so why not this?

But the cover-up. Holy shit, guys. Covering this thing up after the fact would be like trying to keep the atomic bomb a secret after Hiroshima. Just wait 'till you hear this.

First, picture the demolitions teams wiring up the World Trade Center towers with explosives prior to the attack. Obviously you couldn't do it during business hours, since it'd be kind of hard to explain to the 100,000 people who worked at or visited the WTC towers on any given day why you had a huge chunk of wall torn out and were wiring up a bomb on the steel beams there.


I mean, keep in mind, I don't know how big of a job that would be (no one has ever demolished a building that size before) but a building just half the size of one WTC tower took 4,000 separate charges to bring down. Four thousand.

That job took seven months of prep work... and they had the run of an abandoned building, without having to hide their work from 100,000 people every day. Our demolition crew, on the other hand, can work only at night and has to spend the last bit of every shift carefully repairing the wall and hiding any evidence of charges or detonators as not to be discovered during the day.

Huge teams of demolitions experts, who had no problem wiring a building full of innocent New Yorkers to explode, hired in secret, worked every night for what had to be a year (and that's only if they had a big enough crew) placing maybe 10,000 separate charges in each tower and another few thousand in WTC 7 (the smaller WTC tower that also collapsed, later in the day on 9/11).

And nobody notices.

That's right. That's the theory they're putting out there. 100,000 DVDs they've sold with this.

Truckloads of bombs, dozens of mysterious workers, going in and out of the building, night after night. Security at the building doesn't catch them, Port Authority Police don't catch them, random eyewitnesses who stumble across the operation and call the cops don't catch them, maintenance workers who stumble across wet paint and repaired walls and bits of strange wire don't catch them, security cameras don't catch them.

The bomb-sniffing dogs who were brought in from time to time (remember, these buildings were bombed by terrorists in 1993) who are trained to find even one bomb, fail to notice the 10,000 bombs lining their building.


If you're saying that nothing could possibly be more retarded than that, you're wrong.

No, they're just getting started. It's at this stage of the hypothetical plot when the 9/11 conspiracy guys say the real cover-up began. This is when all of the many, many people who could have blown the lid off the whole thing chose to stay silent because they were paid off by the government.

That includes hundreds of private researchers and government employees who prepared gigantic reports about the collapse of the towers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Also, officials in the New York City Fire Department.

All were written fat checks, say the conspiracy guys, to cover up the murder of 3,000 New Yorkers. Keep in mind, some of them were New Yorkers themselves - all of the FDNY guys were - and some of them had friends who died in the towers. The theory even says it was the commander of the FDNY itself who detonated one of the buildings, and therefore he was in on the decision to kill 343 of his own firefighters and 60 police officers.


For money. If that were you... how big would that check have to be? These are people he saw every day, worked with every day. He went to weddings, birthday parties, to baseball games with these guys. In the mind of the 9/11 conspiracy, he'd kill them all for a big enough pile of cash.

Would you?

There's more. We have hundreds, if not thousands, of reporters and writers who researched the collapse, including the nine reporters and dozens of experts for the huge Popular Mechanics article on the subject.


They were paid off, too. And paid enough to walk away from the story of a lifetime, a chance to blow the lid off the conspiracy. Paid enough to refuse a sure Pulitzer and a lifetime of fame and riches as one of history's greatest heroes. And paid in such a way that no other reporters would notice and get jealous or ask questions. These people do tend to be the curious type, you know.

We're getting a nice sized payroll here. Now let's add in the hundreds of people from a dozen different agencies and police departments who claim to have helped clean up flight 93 wreckage, including 300 volunteers. The conspiracy guys say there was no plane, therefore they were paid to lie, along with all of the witnesses in Pennsylvania who claim to have seen the plane go down.

But wait, there's more. Because there are hundreds of thousands of civil engineers and structural engineers in the world (people who are experts in what makes buildings fall down) and lots of demolitions experts. Approximately zero of them say the 9/11 attacks looked like bombed buildings. All of them either say outright that the demolition theory is asinine, or are silent in the face of what the Loose Changers say is video proof of mass murder so obvious even an uneducated jackass off the street can spot it.

The conspiracy guys' explanation?

You guessed it. They were paid to stay silent. Hey, why not? Probably half a million people there, but, you know. Since we've got the checkbook out anyway...

Also, think of all of the friends and family of these paid conspirators, who suddenly see all this mysterious wealth...


...Wouldn't some rumors get started?

You've got some hypothetical professor who was about to write a paper proving the towers were demolished, suddenly coming into Powerball-sized wealth and abandoning the paper at the same time... his wife never let it slip? His kids didn't object? All his jealous colleagues who noticed the sudden new cars and new home and elaborate vacations, nobody asked questions? Nobody made an anonymous call to the IRS, just out of spite? All the bank employees who noticed thousands of mysterious deposits, all of which have to be reported to the IRS, that didn't leave a trail?

I mean, we're up to a sizeable portion of the US population here. Odds are you've passed some of these people on the street.

Today.

And keep in mind, this can't be chump change. Even in a world where every structural engineering desk jockey is okay with mass murder, they're still not going to risk jail and career ruin and walk away from a huge book deal for ten grand. Oh, no, it's got to be millions, per person, just to make it worth it. Even a dedicated conspirator would need to know he or she was set for life.

Let's say they wrote 500,000 checks (hell, you've got more than 120,000 people in the American Society of Civil Engineers alone, and they'd be the first ones to speak out). Say the average payout was ten million (barely enough to live rich the rest of your life, but let's just say). So that's 500,000 times ten million which is...

...Five TRILLION dollars.

That's about half of the value of all goods and services produced in the United States last year. Therefore the 9/11 conspiracy was, in terms of payroll, the single largest employer in the history of the world.



And here's the kicker...

100% of the people who were offered the deal, took it.

After all, we don't have a single person who has come running into the offices of the New York Times, waving a check and saying, "look! Here's a check for ten million smackers that the government gave me to be silent about 9/11! Can you believe these assholes? Now give me my book deal!"

Not one. Even with the lure of fame and fortune and a chance to go down in history as The Guy Who Saved American Democracy, even with the crushing guilt of seeing thousands of bodies hauled out of the rubble, even seeing the horrors of a nation turned inside out by war and paranoia that was completely manufactured as a gruesome hoax, some of these people having their own friends and families and colleagues die in the attacks, not one turned down the money... or took the money and came forward anyway.

And that, is the conspiracy mindset.

It's not a belief in corrupt leaders. Hell, we all believe in corrupt leaders. It's a belief in a corrupt everybody. It's driving around in a world where every single person you see out of your windshield is utterly bloodthirsty and amoral, all except for you and a few, brave friends. What could make you feel more important than that?




You can see the attraction right away. Most people, to feel special, have to actually do something special. But why not do what these guys do, and just make the rest of the world out to be wretched? Hell, once we've painted everyone else as mindless or murderous, all we have to do to feel superior to them is roll out of bed.

Remember what I said earlier about Dylan Avery and how it was probably just a desire for fame that drove him to do all this? Look at the parallel here. At the heart of all this is that basic human need to feel special somehow, twisted in the most warped and corrosive way imaginable.

In conclusion, the 9/11 Conspiracy Guys aren't evil and they aren't liars. They're merely filling a basic human need, using their imaginations and paranoia to elevate themselves to a level the real world will never elevate them to. Also, they're retarded.

[darksoul]

I'm glad everyone had kept the 9/11 thing pretty much civilized so far. That speaks highly of the forum.
But it's about enough of discussing the issue, this is not the place for it.
I believe the 9/11 is an inside job, because it could be. The possibility is there, and the United States are prefectly capable of thinking and doing something like this in a myriad of ways, even if it was only hiring the terrorist to do so, or not even hiring them, but planting the idea and easing their way. It's just so convenient to have this happening. And staging self attacks is not new by any accounts. So if the possibility exists, I'm inclined to take it.
Bear in mind that all of you are conditioned to believe in certain values of decency, free speech and other that seem to be core to the average American. All good and well, but I'm not. Different culture, different mindset, remember? We could discuss this at length, but it would not make any good, and frankly, I'm really not interest that much nor do I want to enter an argument in which the possibility to offend by not thinking the same is HIGH. So let's put the 9/11 conspiracy business aside and move on with the nuking of Yahweh shall we? That's something we all agree on.

9/11 is American: American war, American deaths, American problem. For me, just an intellectual event. A very distressing and dangerous event in a world scale, yes, but hey, it's not the first nor it will be the last.
We humans like to kill too much.

[Ryan Thunder]

I believe the 9/11 is an inside job, because it could be.

Then you are an imbecile.

[MGlBlaze]

I believe the 9/11 is an inside job, because it could be.

You are a colossal moron.

I am not an American either, but your "It could therefore it is" argument is logical fallacy of one of the highest calibres. If anyone could give me the specific name of the fallacy, I'd appreciate it. It probably counts as a Non Sequitur but I'm not sure.
Yes, perhaps the American government could have staged 9/11, but why the hell would they? 'Could' does not automatically mean something does/did/will happen. What possible reason could they have had to stage that catastrophe? And as was pointed out before, wouldn't someone have spoken out about this if that were the case? And how would they pull something of this magnitude off, anyway?

[Chamale]

Could we please have a mod move this 9/11 discussion into a ew thread? It's a subject worth discussing, but I don't want it to clutter up another Stuart's unrelated story discussion.

I'm glad everyone had kept the 9/11 thing pretty much civilized so far.

Then you are an imbecile.

You are a colossal moron.

Attack the argument, not the arguers.

I believe the 9/11 is an inside job, because it could be. The possibility is there, and the United States are prefectly capable of thinking and doing something like this in a myriad of ways, even if it was only hiring the terrorist to do so, or not even hiring them, but planting the idea and easing their way. It's just so convenient to have this happening. And staging self attacks is not new by any accounts. So if the possibility exists, I'm inclined to take it.

If the US staged this as a false flag operation, they didn't stage it according to their own motives. After the first Gulf War, the US military strongly wanted to topple Saddam Hussein. On September 11, 2001, Rumsfeld was already trying to see if enough evidence existed to attack Iraq. If there had been a false flag operation, the U.S. military would have loved to implicate Iraq. However, 18 of the hijackers hailed from major US allies, and the other was Lebanese.

After months of deceit regarding Iraq's role in the attacks, and capability to produce weapons of mass destruction, a majority of Americans believed that Iraq was directly responsible for 9/11. Surely, there was a conspiracy of some sort in the build-up to the Iraq war, so the American public would be more willing to attack a sovereign nation. However, the fact that 9/11 didn't provide much evidence for the invasion of Iraq proves that the US didn't stage the attacks as an excuse to start a war. Even though the government* may have had the power to aid the hijackers, the motive doesn't add up.

* The US Government, you may recall, couldn't break into a hotel or invade the Bay of Pigs without anyone noticing. The Bush administration, with its responses to Hurricane Katrina, and major leaks by Karl Rove and various others, didn't have the organizational strength to keep 9/11 a secret if they had any complicity. They couldn't even keep photographs of Abu Ghraib covered up. If 9/11 had any government aid, there should be photographic proof released by someone who was involved.

[DeRogue]

I believe the 9/11 is an inside job, because it could be.

Using this logic, I believe you are a sentient Galapagos Iguana, because you could be.

[darksoul]

I believe the 9/11 is an inside job, because it could be.

You are a colossal moron.

I am not an American either, but your "It could therefore it is" argument is logical fallacy of one of the highest calibres. If anyone could give me the specific name of the fallacy, I'd appreciate it. It probably counts as a Non Sequitur but I'm not sure.
Yes, perhaps the American government could have staged 9/11, but why the hell would they? 'Could' does not automatically mean something does/did/will happen. What possible reason could they have had to stage that catastrophe? And as was pointed out before, wouldn't someone have spoken out about this if that were the case? And how would they pull something of this magnitude off, anyway?

you are missing the point here. I'm not obligated to be fair, I don't hold public office nor my opinion has any weight more than that of that of a single individual, so I can think whatever i want and it doesn't affect the outcome. If I were a politician, a journalist, or any other figure of power or influence, then I couldn't be convinced by any theory, because it wouldn't be fair to condemn without proof. My opinion would be of weight, and I would need to show restrain and responsability when forming it. But, since I answer only to myself and I don't influence anyone, I can think whatever I wish. Up to now, conspiracy theory fits with what I know of American Government. Since I don't believe much of what they say, I found what I have heard about how it could be done to be plausible in at least a few ways. Therefore I have the choice to believe in whatever I want because it doesn't hurt anyone, and I choose not to believe the Government when they say they didn't do something they could and from which they benefit hugely. Surely, that's not an outrageous thing to do, don't you think?

After months of deceit regarding Iraq's role in the attacks, and capability to produce weapons of mass destruction, a majority of Americans believed that Iraq was directly responsible for 9/11. Surely, there was a conspiracy of some sort in the build-up to the Iraq war, so the American public would be more willing to attack a sovereign nation. However, the fact that 9/11 didn't provide much evidence for the invasion of Iraq proves that the US didn't stage the attacks as an excuse to start a war. Even though the government* may have had the power to aid the hijackers, the motive doesn't add up.

Yes, this right here is why I believe in the inside job. This is very true, however, how do we know it wasn't prepared that way so the people would think this precisely? And if Iraq would be involved more directly, surely someone would say something on the lines of "but if the Government stage the attack to invade Iraq, they wouldn't be so stupid to play it this obviously". There is always a way to look things the other side., because there is always the chance of the things being other that what it seems. Do you follow?
I'm not trying to uncover the truth here. I DON'T CARE THAT MUCH. I formed an opinion, and tossed in the water. Good luck with you own opinion, We are not voting or campaigning here

Btw, someone else agrees that the 9/11 can join the Hitler and Hentai references in the list of things that are exponencially probable to crawl in any forum?

[ChrisWWII]

I can't help but notice that you didn't really reply to any of the arguments you were confronted with darksoul. From my point of view, it seems like your argument is based around the idea that since you're not a politician, you can have any opinion you want and not have to supply evidence to support it in an argument.

I will admit, you CAN have any opinion you want without any evidence. We can't stop you from thinking the way you want, but the instant you put your opinion out in a public forum you have to defend it with the available evidence. Currently, you are not doing that. You're simply saying that "i'm not a politicina, so my opinion doesn't need to be responsible. lol"

Furthermore, I have to point out that the standard response to any and all conspiracy theories is that the US Government is not very good at doing things without SOME leaks. Especially given the size of the 9/11 Conspiracy committee, you have to admit that if it was a conspiracy within the government ONE of the plotters or some random bureaucrat who saw the plot unfolding would have gone to the presses.

[CSJM]

I'll merely point out that there was no need to rig whole towers with bombs to make them come down. Their very structure was such that a complete fault on just one floor would lead to the destruction of everything. If it was set up, it could be pulled off much easier than was described - stage a fire drill, plant a ring of remote-controlled or phone-detonated charges around the central support shaft on one or two floors, get out before the drill ends. I'm not saying it was, mind you. I'm just pointing out how it could be done.

Though it'd probably be easier to do it differently. No need for controlled detonations, just a little bureaucratical mishap, resulting in critical lack of fireproofing on the upper levels of the building. Then it's a matter of hiring willing pilots and securing their place onboard the airplanes. With a little engineering expertise and a few good computer simulations, it could've been pulled off.

[ChrisWWII]

CSJM: The problem with that theory is the people on the planes themselves as well as the pilots, not to mention the hijacking wasn't just 5 pilots. It was 19 human beings. If this was a conspiracy theory, you'd have to find 19 people out there willing to kill themselves and thousands of innocent people. As was mentioned earlier.....if you go out and try to find that amount of people, you're goling to have some who will balk at the idea. Those people will then on 9/12/01, remember that some strange government official came up and offered them millions of dollars to hijack a plane. They will then most likely come forward, if not for the patriotic fervour that spread after 9/11, then for the money and prestige that would come with it.

Finally, what you're suggesting is basically what happened during the real thing. This changes it from being a controlled demo thing to a 'who hired the hijackers?' thing.

[CSJM]

There were some estimates that the towers wouldn't have collapsed if their internal structure was properly protected against the fire caused by ignited aircraft fuel. Causing the towers to be as ill-protected as they were could well be a part of the thing. Also, what do you think would happen to people who refused to participate - well before the events, not to mention after?

The search could have gone without mention of destroying the towers, just finding people who hated the USA enough. Once found, people would be essentially presented with a choice - die now, or die and help pull off a staged terrorist attack. It can't be proved, of course, but you can't say it's unfeasible.

[Saint_007]

LOL. I actually read that article on Cracked.com. It was pretty damn hilarious.

Of course, knowing the conspiracy theorists, I don't see it too hard for them to try and backpedal saying that everyone within the Two Towers was in on the conspiracy too. The bodies they pulled out of the rubble? Movie props!

But seriously, it's effing ridiculous. There might have been a time when I was gullible enough to buy that, but now I know that no government or shadow agency in human history was ever that powerful, even in the era where nobody had access to public media.

All this raises a question: how'd we get from suitcase nukes to 9/11 again? Internet forums, I swear

Anyways, looking forward to the next installment, Stuart!

[darksoul]

I can't help but notice that you didn't really reply to any of the arguments you were confronted with darksoul. From my point of view, it seems like your argument is based around the idea that since you're not a politician, you can have any opinion you want and not have to supply evidence to support it in an argument.

I will admit, you CAN have any opinion you want without any evidence. We can't stop you from thinking the way you want, but the instant you put your opinion out in a public forum you have to defend it with the available evidence. Currently, you are not doing that. You're simply saying that "i'm not a politicina, so my opinion doesn't need to be responsible. lol"

Furthermore, I have to point out that the standard response to any and all conspiracy theories is that the US Government is not very good at doing things without SOME leaks. Especially given the size of the 9/11 Conspiracy committee, you have to admit that if it was a conspiracy within the government ONE of the plotters or some random bureaucrat who saw the plot unfolding would have gone to the presses.

I'm not replying on purpose. Review my answers and see that I don't want to get into a discussion on this because it's not that all important and this is not the place to do it. People just seemed compelled to have a counter argument to everything, that's all. I wouldn't answer to this post either, but you're being reasonable and deserving an answer.
Also, I don't need to defend every opinion I post, only if it is related to the subject at hand. Which this one isn't, is it?
Yep, of course a numerous conspiracy is bound to have a leak. But it could have none, it could be smaller, there might not be a conspiracy but rather a push in the right direction inside a fundamentalist movement, a laissez faire attitude, etc. Possibilities are endless.

And please stop this already. i came here to hear more about angels and baldricks, and not quite about American vs Muslims or conspiracy theorists vs official propaganda. Not what I signed for.

[DeRogue]

I'm not replying on purpose. Review my answers and see that I don't want to get into a discussion on this because it's not that all important and this is not the place to do it. People just seemed compelled to have a counter argument to everything, that's all. I wouldn't answer to this post either, but you're being reasonable and deserving an answer.
Also, I don't need to defend every opinion I post, only if it is related to the subject at hand. Which this one isn't, is it?
Yep, of course a numerous conspiracy is bound to have a leak. But it could have none, it could be smaller, there might not be a conspiracy but rather a push in the right direction inside a fundamentalist movement, a laissez faire attitude, etc. Possibilities are endless.

And please stop this already. i came here to hear more about angels and baldricks, and not quite about American vs Muslims or conspiracy theorists vs official propaganda. Not what I signed for.

Then why bring it up at all? Seeing the discussions previously on similarly controversial topics, why even mention that the belief you hold is one that 9/11 was perpetrated by the government of the United States? If you didn't intend this to become a huge discussion, you shouldn't have mentioned it.

[Ryan Thunder]

Then you are an imbecile.

Attack the argument, not the arguers.

His argument is so asinine that it's self-evidently wrong to anybody with more than two braincells.

[Kodiak]

I'm not replying on purpose. Review my answers and see that I don't want to get into a discussion on this because it's not that all important and this is not the place to do it. People just seemed compelled to have a counter argument to everything, that's all. I wouldn't answer to this post either, but you're being reasonable and deserving an answer.
Also, I don't need to defend every opinion I post, only if it is related to the subject at hand. Which this one isn't, is it?
Yep, of course a numerous conspiracy is bound to have a leak. But it could have none, it could be smaller, there might not be a conspiracy but rather a push in the right direction inside a fundamentalist movement, a laissez faire attitude, etc. Possibilities are endless.

And please stop this already. i came here to hear more about angels and baldricks, and not quite about American vs Muslims or conspiracy theorists vs official propaganda. Not what I signed for.

I get what you're trying to do:

darksoul: I believe 9/11 is an inside job!
Poster A: Why?
darksoul: Because it can't be proven that it wasn't!
Poster B: Here's a well-thought out and researched proof full of arguments counter to your claim
darksoul: I can't hear you with my fingers in my ears and therefore don't have to respond.

However, on THIS BOARD you are REQUIRED to back up claims:

Back Up Your Claims. If you make a contentious statement of fact and someone asks for evidence, you must either provide it or withdraw the claim. Do not call it "self evident", restate it in different words, force the other person to prove your claim is not true, or use other weasel techniques to avoid backing up your claims.

Right now your options consist of:

1. Provide evidence for your claims.
2. Withdraw your claim.

The choice is yours. If you want to provide evidence please cite sources. IF you want to avoid a dogpile I'm sure the Mods could create another thread or even set you up in the Coliseum. What you cannot do is say "I don't want to talk about it now", because you're the one who brought it up and must now defend your own words or concede the argument. Tread carefully, as people have been banned for such offenses.

[Mayabird]

There we go, split so everybody can go argue it somewhere else.

Sorry for not thinking of anything better to say than "crap" but "thread hijack" in this case seemed a wee bit in bad taste.

[RedImperator]

There were some estimates that the towers wouldn't have collapsed if their internal structure was properly protected against the fire caused by ignited aircraft fuel. Causing the towers to be as ill-protected as they were could well be a part of the thing.

Except the NIST ruled that the fireproofing wasn't at fault. At any rate, "causing the towers to be as ill-protected as they were" means that the buildings owners, the New York city building inspectors, and the project managers of the program to improve the towers' fire protection (which was underway at the time of the attack) were in on the conspiracy. It's already spiraling beyond plausibility.

Look, Jesus Christ, you people want a plausible conspiracy theory? Here: rogue government agents helped Bin Laden plan and fiance the WTC attacks. There. It involves no more than a handful of additional people, and it doesn't require any new physical evidence or force you to explain away any existing evidence. You have your pick of motives and high political figures who were involved (Clinton, Cheney, the Bildebergers, the Roswell aliens, whoever). It even explains why the Bush administration was so anxious not to let the high-ranking Al Queda guys we bagged talk to anyone on the outside.

[Dalton]

Then you are an imbecile.

Attack the argument, not the arguers.

His argument is so asinine that it's self-evidently wrong to anybody with more than two braincells.

Your title is well-earned. Do you know what an Ad Hominem attack is?

[Samuel]

Review my answers and see that I don't want to get into a discussion on this because it's not that all important and this is not the place to do it.

The CIA being insanely competant and evil is important. It basically would mean American democracy is screwed (compared to mass murder election rigging is alot easier).

Yep, of course a numerous conspiracy is bound to have a leak. But it could have none,

Even if everyone is loyal, the amount of resources being tired up by such an operation would be obvious to an outsider who looked into it. There are only so many demospecialists and you can see if a large number were sucked up for "special work".

Also, what do you think would happen to people who refused to participate - well before the events, not to mention after?

They smile and agree then defect to Iran? This would be awesome propoganda for them- the evil zionists are willing to sacrifice their own citizens in order to stir their population to war against muslims.

The search could have gone without mention of destroying the towers, just finding people who hated the USA enough. Once found, people would be essentially presented with a choice - die now, or die and help pull off a staged terrorist attack.

People who hate America generally don't cooperate with the CIA.

It can't be proved, of course, but you can't say it's unfeasible.

Yes I can. Al-Queda was able to pull of the 1993 attack and multiple others without assistence. While 9/11 was more difficult there was no real impossibility to what they were doing.

[1stPalladin]

I must congratulate everyone on how civilized thery are being to the original poster. I got back from deployment in November 2001 and went to see my family in Missouri. One of my sisters asked where I was when the Towers were attacked. She then told me her theory that it "was the Jews." I walked away from the discussion and haven't talked to her since.