Your belief about September, 11th, 2001

[CaptainCrunch]

Note that the camera frames once every 2 seconds.

[Stimpy]

Interesting discussion with a quite a few strong opinions. It is amazing what emotions a good conspiracy theory can stir up. That is not meant to be a derogatory term directed at one side of the debate, because both sides are subject to the belief in one conspiracy theory or another. The one side believes in the story that a group of 19 poorly trained and educated Muslim men evaded the largest and best trained multi-national security net in existence to perpetrate the acts on September 11, 2001. The other side believes that the United States government either committed these attacks, or allowed them to happen, against their own people without remorse. Both are great theories, of diabolical conspiracies, but I don’t think either withstands the light of day.

What allows these theories to resonate is the specific mythology we choose to accept. Again, on one side you have a strong belief that the government is our protector and would never harm its own people. On the other you have a belief that the government is a Machiavellian cabal where any means to achieve a goal is acceptable. These are powerful myths supported by many narratives on each extreme. We choose to believe these extremes because they support our own beliefs and the narratives we have developed on our own which frame our individual reality. People ignore important issues or questions that challenge their reality simply because they don’t fit their own narrative.

One thing that has always struck me as strange is how quickly information was made available to the press. This was arguably the greatest crime ever to have taken place, simply because it happened on live television, and a complete dossier of information on the responsible parties was being broadcast within an hour of the last plane going down. This included names of people on the planes, security footage of hi-jackers going through security and voice messages from heroic passengers fighting their attackers off. All of this available without processing by law enforcement agencies. None of it made sense and only provided for developing more the great narratives and further mythologies for people to embrace.

Where does the truth lie? I don’t know and I doubt we will ever know. Both stories have a lot of holes and both require you to suspend disbelief to accept them as fact. Who is right and who is wrong? It doesn't matter because neither side are privy to the details that would actually allow the right to claim certainty.

[Phaneuf3]

How much thermite would be used to produce some of the effects that were apparently caused by thermite? Depends on who you ask based on where the thermite was placed and what it's purpose was but some have estimated it as high as 60 tons. Per tower. 180 tons of thermite total.

How did they sneak 180 tons of thermite into these buildings completely undetected? There's no security footage? The night watchman never questioned someone hauling in truckload after truckload of this stuff and strapping it to columns? Nobody noticed 180 tons of thermite laying around the next morning?
You make similar arguments trying to discredit much more minuscule discrepancies in the Pentagon attack but don't bother applying the same standard to your 'theory'?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Wrong. The 9/11 Commission Report is based on flawed testimony.

If the Commission members don't support the findings, then why should you or I or the public accept it?

The "pull it" comment is not the "smoking gun" argument you claim it to be for the "truthers". But if you ask me, if I were referring to fire fighters, I would say we decided to "pull them" .......not "pull it"

Pull it could very well refer to pulling the command to enter or pulling the mission. Of course to those who use their few remaining brain cells to puruse this idiotic conspiracy don't really have the capacity to understand that possibillity.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by Stimpy

....

One thing that has always struck me as strange is how quickly information was made available to the press. This was arguably the greatest crime ever to have taken place, simply because it happened on live television, and a complete dossier of information on the responsible parties was being broadcast within an hour of the last plane going down. This included names of people on the planes, security footage of hi-jackers going through security and voice messages from heroic passengers fighting their attackers off. All of this available without processing by law enforcement agencies. None of it made sense and only provided for developing more the great narratives and further mythologies for people to embrace.
....

To me this is the most important cultural shift made apparent by 9/11. I don't think it was strange how quickly the press reported information. At the time however, this kind of instant reporting was almost unprecedented and people weren't expecting it. Around 9/11 was also when people really embraced fast internet connections, video phones and electronic transferring of data among other common place technologies now. The reports were awash with information from so many new sources.

Before 9/11 information was processed and transmitted much slower but technology made it so we could get anything almost instantly. Ten years later and we see every major news story broadcast in real time and are now used to it.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.co...ry-of-911.html

The quotes show pretty decisively that the Bush Administration nor the Pentagon cooperated with the 9/11 commission. To the point of lying to questions posed.

It also has quotes from several former CIA agents calling for a new investigation of 9/11, some more credible than others.

It also has quotes of Congressmen seeking a new investigation into 9/11, including Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. Two congressmen who people think are kooks, but are actually some of the only true representatives of the people in Congress.

I'm not a truther, but I see a trend in this thread to accept every tenet of the standard story as fact. Both positions are misguided in my mind. It's naive to think the government could perform a large scale conspiracy, as well as to think the government acted in good faith and didn't engage in some smaller conspiracies and cover ups.

I think that's been said throughout this thread. I think you'd have to be pretty naive to think that the government and associated agencies have been transparent as to the breaches that occurred and ultimate responsibility for not preventing these attacks. However, I think you'd have to be full blown insane to think that the US government was responsible for carrying out the attacks.

[Stumptown]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

The witnesses include security guards and Pentagon employees. If you are not going to find out for yourself.....don't bother arguing.

Witness also include hundreds of people driving on Highway 110 right in front of the Pentagon that morning - including two people that worked with my mother. Her office was in Rosslyn, and the main route into the area takes you less than 1/2 a kilometer from the impact location. My mom was already at work that day and didn't witness it first-hand, but two of her co-workers were on that road headed into work when the plane crashed. They saw the plane. They called in immediately, and my mother called me about 20 minutes later to let me know that she was OK - knowing that I knew where she worked and how she would have gotten to work, and not wanting me to worry when I saw the news.

Look at a map of the area around the Pentagon. You will see one freeway and two major highways directly on three sides of it. It was rush hour. If you look at the map, you'll also see that the runways for National Airport are very, very close by. Which is why, at first - before hearing about the towers in New York, witnesses assumed it was a terrible accident, and not some sort of plot. If they hadn't seen the plane, they would have thought differently.

[Stimpy]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

I don't think it was strange how quickly the press reported information.

Really? The press have access to secure dossiers on suspected terrorists? They have access to security footage from airports? They have access to secure communications between cockpit and ground control? The access to information was unprecedented. I'm shocked the government would be able to gather the information, have it sanitized and packaged for public consumption, that quickly and efficiently. Even talking about it almost a decade later it still has a very odoriferous stench.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

How much thermite would be used to produce some of the effects that were apparently caused by thermite? Depends on who you ask based on where the thermite was placed and what it's purpose was but some have estimated it as high as 60 tons. Per tower. 180 tons of thermite total.

How did they sneak 180 tons of thermite into these buildings completely undetected? There's no security footage? The night watchman never questioned someone hauling in truckload after truckload of this stuff and strapping it to columns? Nobody noticed 180 tons of thermite laying around the next morning?
You make similar arguments trying to discredit much more minuscule discrepancies in the Pentagon attack but don't bother applying the same standard to your 'theory'?

Those people were all in on it, and of course, as common sense would tell you, have not mentioned a word of it to a soul since.

[Raekwon]

Well the date is wrong for starters. That proves the government is covering it up.

Originally Posted by speede5

Hey Mikey,

Could you please explain this picture to me?



I just want to know what kind of missile would be used to make a fireball of that magnitude? I have seen missiles explode before, and I have witnessed plane crashes and crash sites. Normal missiles and bombs do not, contrary to Hollywood, result in massive fireballs. The fireballs come when the target's fuel load ignites, or when it ignites in the collision, as this image shows. If a missle hit the pentagon, what was the fuel source for the fireball?

Hollywood makes grand explosions with det cord and diesel fuel, and it takes a lot of diesel to get a nice fireball. The image above is a few thousand pounds of jet fuel.

P.S. don't say napalm or something like that, the residue from that would be so easy to detect that even I would be converted.

P.P.S. There was a similar fireball at the WTC, so you could kill two birds with one stone here.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Well the date is wrong for starters. That proves the government is covering it up.

pwned

Where do I sign my conspiracy card.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Stimpy

Where does the truth lie? I don’t know and I doubt we will ever know. Both stories have a lot of holes and both require you to suspend disbelief to accept them as fact. Who is right and who is wrong? It doesn't matter because neither side are privy to the details that would actually allow the right to claim certainty.

I think everyone agrees that there are holes in the official story. But the holes are small are do not discredit the story or put it into question at all. In fact to put them side by side and dismiss them both like you have done is giving the conspiracy theory way, way, way, way too much credit. I think what you have said is logical fallacy. Claiming both sides are extremes therefore they are both false.

The official story is like a fully reinforced dam with a pin prick or two, where the conspiracy theory is like throwing a handful of pebbles into a raging river.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by Burninator

I think everyone agrees that there are holes in the official story. But the holes are small are do not discredit the story or put it into question at all. In fact to put them side by side and dismiss them both like you have done is giving the conspiracy theory way, way, way, way too much credit. I think what you have said is logical fallacy. Claiming both sides are extremes therefore they are both false.

The official story is like a fully reinforced dam with a pin prick or two, where the conspiracy theory is like throwing a handful of pebbles into a raging river.

I think it's not really fair to say there is one conspiracy theory. Obviously the demolition stuff is ludicrous, as is the something other than a plane hitting the pentagon. But that doesn't mean that the official story is correct either.

The events on 9/11 are probably correctly reported as the set up to fake it are, for the large part, impossible. However, that doesn't make US involvement through funding or other means implausible. Maybe other evidence does, I don't know. Obviously the burden of proof is on the accusers in this case.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Stimpy

The one side believes in the story that a group of 19 poorly trained and educated Muslim men evaded the largest and best trained multi-national security net in existence to perpetrate the acts on September 11, 2001.

Some of these guys, including Atta, and Al-Shehhi, and Jarrah were university enducated, Jarrah had aerospace engineering, and Atta had a degree in architecture. Most of them had fought in Bosnia and were experienced there. One of them had military training. All of them were trained heavily in Bin Laden's camps.

You also have to remember that prior to 9/11, America's security net was full of holes and somewhat lax, these guys were smart enough to procure entry visas and didn't run around in America yelling death to the infidels. They took enough flying lessons to guide a plane into a building, they didn't need to know about taking off and landing.

Theses were trained, educated and motivated terrorists, not poorly trained and educated.

You could almost put them on par with some of the special forces infiltration training that some Green Berets have. They just didn't have the advanced combat training.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Well the date is wrong for starters. That proves the government is covering it up.

Date is the cataloging date not the attack date.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Stimpy

Interesting discussion with a quite a few strong opinions. It is amazing what emotions a good conspiracy theory can stir up. That is not meant to be a derogatory term directed at one side of the debate, because both sides are subject to the belief in one conspiracy theory or another. The one side believes in the story that a group of 19 poorly trained and educated Muslim men evaded the largest and best trained multi-national security net in existence to perpetrate the acts on September 11, 2001. The other side believes that the United States government either committed these attacks, or allowed them to happen, against their own people without remorse. Both are great theories, of diabolical conspiracies, but I don’t think either withstands the light of day.

Good conspiracy theory = oxymoron

These are not competing "theories" worthy of equal attention. Creationists make this kind of argument, thinking that creationism is an alternative theory worthy of equal consideration as evolution. It is not a theory at all.

That 19 terrorists carried out the attacks on 9/11 is a fact supported by the evidence. That the US government participated or was complicit, is not supported by evidence.

[ynwa03]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Honestly, why don't you try to post your theories on JREF?'

The solid proof has been presented and is available to you in a million different ways. You simply choose to ignore the truth. How many people do you think are reading this right now and supporting your point of view? There is really no counter arguement to someone (like you) who chooses to ignore what is presented.

There's really no need for someone (like you) to get defensive. My point of view is that the government shouldn't treat something like this in such a top secret way or else it gives people ammunition to assume things. If no one supports that view then our society is even more messed up than it appears to be. I'm not looking for a counter argument from you or anyone else. I just want plain, clear and uncensored evidence. I'm not really ignoring anything.

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Date is the cataloging date not the attack date.

You guys are so wound up about this, I didn't realize green text was needed.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by troutman

Good conspiracy theory = oxymoron

These are not competing "theories" worthy of equal attention. Creationists make this kind of argument, thinking that creationism is an alternative theory worthy of equal consideration as evolution. It is not a theory at all.

That 19 terrorists carried out the attacks on 9/11 is a fact supported by the evidence. That the US government participated or was complicit, is not supported by evidence.

Conspiracies happen all the time. The Bush administration went to Tony Blair with the idea to dress up an American plane as a UN one and fly it really low over Iraq to get Iraq to shoot at it. That's true and it's a conspiracy theory. The US also conspired to successfully overthrow South American regimes. The US President has resigned in the past due to taking part in several conspiracies to illegally undermine political opponents.

[COGENT]

I'm not a huge conspiracy theory guy, I tend to simplify stuff down to logic. With that said, I have always questioned how all the buildings collapsed straight down in New York. I can't logically see how that is not a massive coincidence. All the videos out there of witnesses talking about other explosions doesn't help this.

I also don't understand why the government hasn't released much of the key videos/ recordings (i.e. Pentagon tapes, black box recordings). Just seems odd to me.

However, to offset my questions about 9/11 I just can't imagine the amount of people it would take to orchestrate something of this magnitude. Not to mention having them all agree to first do it and then never speak of it.

Whatever the truth is, it's terrifying.