9/11 Conspiracy Nuts?

[Mudpuppy]

Originally Posted by Trip

you need to watch the history channel conspiracy show with that guy on it. I thought he got pwned.

all that show did was further make me question the conspiracies.. the so called experts looked like idiots if you ask me.. that was just more propaganda..

anyone see the jesse ventura conspiracy theory episode on 9/11? it's pretty interesting and raises a lot of questions.. and he actually talks to actual experts and witnesses not just some programmed idiot who falsified a report like the clowns on history channel..

i wasn't there, i wasn't involved so i really don't know what happened but there sure is a lot of questions that remain unanswered.. and just because you talk to the guy who did the report doesn't mean they are now answered - like self checking your own work? if you wrote a report would you admit you were wrong or you fabricated the truth? hell no.

[Mudpuppy]

Originally Posted by defector

I don't know if I qualify as a conspiracy nut or not, but I believe one thing.
Somebody, somewhere, in the US Govt had to have some sort of info about this prior to 9/11.

Could it just not gotten to the "right people" in time to be thwarted?
Could they have thought the perpetrators actually incapable of completing the task?

there was MASSIVE information out there warning of this and they ignored it (probably on purpose - reference pearl harbor and the event that led to vietnam)..

[Homeslice]

I believe the Pennsylvania plane might have been shot down, but that's the only "conspiracy" that I hold any stock in at this time.

However I will say that it still amazes me that relatively inexperienced pilots (in terms of actual airtime) were able to do what they did, and hit such small targets like the Pentagon at such high speed, without freaking out or changing their minds.

[t-homo]

Originally Posted by defector

I don't know if I qualify as a conspiracy nut or not, but I believe one thing.
Somebody, somewhere, in the US Govt had to have some sort of info about this prior to 9/11.

Could it just not gotten to the "right people" in time to be thwarted?
Could they have thought the perpetrators actually incapable of completing the task?

I'm sure they heard something about it, but how many other attacks have they heard something about that never happen?

[goof2]

What I don't understand about the whole "It wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon/It wasn't a plane crash in PA" thing is why would "they" (whoever they are) fake it? "They" already controlled 2 widebody airliners and flew them in to buildings in a very public manner. "They" can do that easily, but getting one more was too difficult? The easier option was to somehow secretly launch and fly a rather large missile through Washington, DC? For the PA crash the same concept of it being easier to get an airliner still stands, but more importantly why would "they" bother in the first place? I don't see that crash as the easiest way to serve any goal. Why go through the trouble of creating a fake crash scene (that nobody in the area apparently saw being created) for no reason?

For the "No steel structured building has collapsed from fire" deal, how many steel structured buildings have been subjected to a massive impact from 200 tons traveling at 500 mph while at the same time being doused from the inside with 20,000 gallons of burning jet fuel? Jet fuel burns hot enough for steel to loose 50% or more of its strength. What effect do you think that would have on an already severely damaged building?

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by goof2

What I don't understand about the whole "It wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon/It wasn't a plane crash in PA" thing is why would "they" (whoever they are) fake it? "They" already controlled 2 widebody airliners and flew them in to buildings in a very public manner. "They" can do that easily, but getting one more was too difficult? The easier option was to somehow secretly launch and fly a rather large missile through Washington, DC? For the PA crash the same concept of it being easier to get an airliner still stands, but more importantly why would "they" bother in the first place? I don't see that crash as the easiest way to serve any goal. Why go through the trouble of creating a fake crash scene (that nobody in the area apparently saw being created) for no reason?

For the "No steel structured building has collapsed from fire" deal, how many steel structured buildings have been subjected to a massive impact from 200 tons traveling at 500 mph while at the same time being doused from the inside with 20,000 gallons of burning jet fuel? Jet fuel burns hot enough for steel to loose 50% or more of its strength. What effect do you think that would have on an already severely damaged building?

I may be wrong but I think the force of the impact of the jetliners knocked a lot of the fire proofing off and that contributed to helping weaken the steel leading to the collapse

[Evadd]

Originally Posted by Rider

You guys need to lay off the mind altering drugs. It's making you paranoid. The only conspiracy was that the Muslims got together and decided to blow us up because we support Israel.

We need to cut all ties with Israel and things will be much better. We also need to disassociate ourselves with England until they stop backing Israel as well.

so, your solution is to just bend over and let the terrorists win? awesome.

[101lifts2]

We know the CIA informed the FBI back in 1998 that something of this magnitude was going to happen. Details were very light and the FBI did not act upon it. It was again pushed in 2000 and then in June 2001. I'm pretty sure certain people knew about it, but face the facts. The government is really nothing more than a money transfer scheme. They want money, but need to devise a clever scheme to pull it out of our pockets. What better way then to fuel up terrorism just so you can get a budget to fight it?

Some people in the government have had blood on their hands since 9/11...

[Trip]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

We know the CIA informed the FBI back in 1998 that something of this magnitude was going to happen. Details were very light and the FBI did not act upon it. It was again pushed in 2000 and then in June 2001. I'm pretty sure certain people knew about it, but face the facts. The government is really nothing more than a money transfer scheme. They want money, but need to devise a clever scheme to pull it out of our pockets. What better way then to fuel up terrorism just so you can get a budget to fight it?

Some people in the government have had blood on their hands since 9/11...

The only conspiracy I can really get behind is at least incompetence or neglect by our government to protect us from these attacks, but I highly doubt they had anything to do with causing them.

The whole WTC 7 shit is just stupid. If they really wanted to take out paper and computer trails, there is the delete button and paper shredders. Why risk hard drives and paper being recovered in the debris...

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by 101lifts2

We know the CIA informed the FBI back in 1998 that something of this magnitude was going to happen. Details were very light and the FBI did not act upon it. It was again pushed in 2000 and then in June 2001. I'm pretty sure certain people knew about it, but face the facts. The government is really nothing more than a money transfer scheme. They want money, but need to devise a clever scheme to pull it out of our pockets. What better way then to fuel up terrorism just so you can get a budget to fight it?

Some people in the government have had blood on their hands since 9/11...

Here's the thing, if you want to claim inept handling of the situation, I'm with you. If you want to claim that we spent billions of dollars and thousands of lives to drum up support for a bigger terrorism budget.... yea, sounds like the exact plot of "Long Kiss Goodnight"...

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/164373...t_911_in_1996/