The Conspiracy Theories Thread(was: 911 Conspiracy theories)

anyone that wants to talk about 911 Conspiracy theories or any other conspiracy theories, may do so here.   But please keep them out of my 911 thread.

You should let go the "Conspiracy Theory" terms. "Money"  and "Ideologies" might be more interesting.

"Power?"  Not sure that works...

Anyway, I'd like to know what "evidence" there is that the "official story" of what happened on September 11 is untrue.

Yeah, you're right. "Money" is enough.

I said all that I had to say in the other thread, justly by respect and memory for the deads and famillies.

For such a matter, each one should find his own conclusion (I don't have a definitive one besides), and it requires an effort.

Just there have been so much works from serious people watching closely and bringing light on the 911 event ! You'll find...

Oh... Just one of the "funniest" things I remember, for the little story:

An american channel (BBC?) announced live the 3rd building that had collapsed near the towers... Unfortunately it was 20 min before it really happened. You still can see the building standing behind the woman who present the news. She was only reading her paper.

I don't have any more leads to links, sorry, but you may find it...

Even though you put it in quotes, you may want to change the word "funniest."

So they knew it would collapse due to the fact that it was, what, on fire and in danger of imminently collapsing, and had that text prepared, but the anchor mistakenly read that text instead of the text saying "___ tower will collapse at any moment."

There's nothing strange about that at all.  It's like when obituaries for famous people accidentally get published before the person dies - they have these things ready in advance so they can announce it ASAP when it happens.

And BBC is a UK channel, not American (British Broadcasting Corporation).

Not the towers. I was talking about the 3rd building... Hours later.

Anyway, nobody will bring you a serious answer here I think, cause it's a whole and you can't just consider a couple of isolated details. Geopolitical culture will help (and should be what to begin with), though the invert way is still a good option.

I still think the thread title is wrong.

I'm aware that you're talking about the 3rd building.  It was damaged as well, and was clearly going to fall at some point.  The news studio in question likely had text prepared for the anchor to read when the building collapsed, as it was clear it was going to fall.  The anchor mistakenly read said text too early.

... Somebody brought a serious answer (finally).

I repeat from elsewhere that I don't believe in a conspiracy theory of history, more a cock-up of conflicting conspiracy theories.

Groups with special interests throwing their weight behind schemes some of which converge and others which cancel each other out creating an unpredictable chaotic mess.

The conventional 9/11 scenario is in itself a conspiracy theory built largely on a fantasy of a terrorist network backed by an Islamist mastermind.

None of these attacks (even if you take the conventional narrative at face value) are directly linked and are rarely even loosely connected to each other.

They are based on an idea that American and Western ideals are uniform and an infection which can be attacked through terror.

There is nothing new there I grew up with while the Baader Meinhof group were saying pretty much the same thing, only they were not Muslims and were based in Europe.

In answer to C3PX direct question aviation fuel can melt steel but most of that fuel would have spent in the initial blast.

The fires that burned were started by this blast but fed not by the aviation fuel but by plastics, wood, paper the trappings of any office environment.

They can not melt steel.

The conventional narrative is that these fires weakened the steel joists on the initial floors by 10% causing them to snap and fall down upon each other creating the so called Pancake effect.

This doesn't correspond with the collapse of the towers as we all saw on that terrible day.

The buildings (including building 7 which was never in contact with aviation fuel and had comparatively less damage) fell all in one go not in stages.

The collapse of one floor onto the other would create consecutive resistance which isn't shown in the actual footage.

Compared with the Windsor Tower Fire in Madrid where a building of similar construction burned for 24 hours without collapsing at all (let alone in this particularly unusual way) and you have a case to question.

This isn't just myself and a bunch of eccentric Flat Earthers saying this.

This is the conclusion of a significant number of trained and experienced engineers and experts.

I've read the official answers but I'm not convinced, I'm not convinced of an elaborate conspiracy either but the PNAC document is difficult to shake out of my mind.

Especially with the long history of covert deceptions throughout history for example.

It's very easy to jump to conclusions about who did what and how this was done that's not my reason for reacting against Warbler's statement earlier.

While films like Loose Change and Zeitgeist are slickly made they leap from one conclusion to another.

What is needed is to take the hysteria away from asking questions like why was the debris from the towers taken away destroyed without testing for explosives?

Why was the steel sold and melted down?

It was a crime scene, hopefully the most notorious crime scene of our lifetime so why wasn't picked over with same care and attention a plane crash might or the space shuttle crashes were?

If I were to recommend a documentary to watch I'd suggest a film that entirely takes the conventional narrative as read.

It's called The Power Of Nightmares : The Politics Of Fear by Adam Curtis.

It doesn't mention any of the unconventional narratives for the 9/11 attacks at all.

It does uncover the synchronicity of the rise of the Radical Islamist movement in the east and the Neo-Conservative movement in the west and how both ideologies have converged to create the disproportionate climate of fear which we now exist in.

I strongly recommend you read the official accounts with an open mind too. 

I encourage people to read around and make their own minds up based on how they read the evidence.

To track back to what I said on the other thread I also suggest that people shouldn't let this one terrible act warp the perception of threat that these clusters of individuals pose to our collective way of life to the disproportionate curtailment of our freedoms and liberties.

If there was a concerted effort to bring down our way of life we would be having terrorist attacks all the time.

You don't need hijacked planes or bombs to cause major disruption to a global civilisation like ours.

The obvious observation is that these events (9/11 being the most hideous example) are vanishingly rare I'm more dismayed by government agencies sinking to level expected of these groups than the groups themselves.

They are meant to represent us and our ideals and if we want to underline the superiority of ideals over those held by the people responsible  for these actions we shouldn't be kidnapping and torturing people.

Torture is a rubbish way of collecting reliable intelligence and a poor example to setting the rest of the world.

Our armed forces should be used to guard our borders and fulfill out treaty obligations and not abused in attempting to make grabs for mineral resources.

... The Power Of Nightmares : The Politics Of Fear by Adam Curtis

Thanks.

Well, if that's the best "evidence" there is, I'm gonna make my permanent exit from this thread, as I've heard all that before and none of it is convincing in the slightest.

Don't forget your tinfoil hats, kids.

Naturally that's not all the evidence there is I don't have time to right a book in an internet forum.

If you have a serious interest read some books (though I wouldn't recommend David Icke) from both sides and watch a variety of documentaries. If you don't have a serious interest read David Icke's books they are a real gas though utterly bonkers.

I didn't chose the title of this thread Warbler did.

Besides tin foil hats don't work, everybody knows that.

You need an underground bunker, wire mesh underlay behind your wallpaper, plenty of guns and tinned food and something to stand on when the graboids come through the floor.

Slightly off-topic but better here than in the other thread...

http://www.regretsy.com/2010/09/10/the-mother-of-all-9-11-posts/

Warning: There is a ton of disrespectful and offensive stuff there.

To really breakdown the various 'non-flippant' points raised and lay them side by side with the official account on the interwebs is something that could be done relatively easy in the form of a wiki.

It would require strict policy to keep the Lizard men/UFO/Illuminati types out as well as detractors who use association with that crowd as a brush to tar the subject with.

This will naturally have the Ickians screaming 'shill alert' and the 'you moron' brigade pointing at this as proof that anyone with concerns has been watching too much V and reading too many Dan Brown books (is it possible to read one all the way through and remain conscious?).

I'm still suprised nobody has done it.

Like fanedits their is a large number of video makers, duplicating some of the same material and bolting on their own twist.

Having a less hysterical and more sober text led look on the web would save people having to sift through a lot of 'out there' material on both sides.