What do you think of 9/11 conspiracy theorists?

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Why the heck would anyone (government conspirator or terrorist) target WTC 7 anyway? Who ever even heard of it before 9/11? I bet even a lot of New Yorkers didn't know the building existed.

[/ QUOTE ]
From wikipedia:

The government agencies housed at 7 World Trade Center were the United States Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council (IRS), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). [2]


Seems like somewhere in there is probably a reasonable motive for someone to want to destroy it.

[Utah]

I like a good conspiracy as much as the next person and I am not one to dismiss them outright. So, if a good argument can be made I will believe it.

However, I haven't seen a single solid and cohesive 9/11 conspiracy theory, much less one that makes any sense from a "best options" standpoint. The approach seems backwards in that they are using minor clues to create a master conspiracy when the approach should be to define the theory at the highest level and then see if the clues fit.

I dont really want to hear about how a Rolls Royce turbine should have square nuts versus round nuts. This is just not evidence at this point. I would much rather hear a plausible theory as to what happened to the plane that took off then. And, if there is even a plausible theory for that why would any internal conspirator execute the plan they did?

Is one to believe this is the conversation at the Conspiritor Brainstorming Session:

Conspirator 1 - "Lets have a plane take off and then make it disappear somehow. Then, we will crash a different smaller plane into the pentagon and also use a missile"
Conspirator 2 - "Um, why not simply crash the first plane into the pentagon?"
Conspirator 1 - "You miss the beauty of my plan. It will drive the conspiracy theorists just freakin nuts and you know how much I hate those guys as they are always messing up our work. Wait till they see that I used the wrong bolts on the engine mountings we are planting. It will send them into a tizzy!!"
Conspirator 2- "Lets do it your way then"

Until there is something really convincing one simply needs to use occam's razor to view 9/11.

Also, you can completely disregard the response to popular mechanics. Any author who states, "since clearly Bush is too stupid to have planned and engineered such an operation." needs not to be taken seriously and can completely be dismissed.

Also, the Scholars for 9/11 Truth are a joke and their list of issues are laughable. It was nice to see my undergrad. school, St. Thomas, listed first. lol

I will give the guy who did the video a lot of credit. Although I believe his conclusions are dead wrong, he certainly did his homework.

[Hybrid_11]

I sort of wonder how if the truth was different if the same effet would happen. Hypothetically lets say JFK was shot from the knoll and that was concluded as the initial "truth". What happens to the idea of the shooting from behind for some reason the names escaping me right now and i feel ashamed about that. Now the conspiracy theorist, we could imagine there would be people disbelieving hte idea of the knoll. If this situation played out would the crazy ones be the people believing in behing shot from teh building behind.

Same concept if the truth that was stated involved more then planes, like demolition, fake crashes. Would it then be crazy for people to believe that planes were the sole cause.

It just seems a lot of whats considered conspiracy and whats considered sane is based on the first "truth" put out there.

Theres mentions that the truth we know is lacking a lot of information, but there is not enough information to prove an alternate option. How can there be a truth then. What caused the initial conclusion to stick and become the right.

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
JFK conspiracy theories flourished during the antiwar movement against vietnam against the backdrop of watergate. 911 conspiracy theories are flourishing during the Iraq war against the backdrop of Bush lying about WMDs, doing secret wiretaps, and not to mention Enron.

A lot of people fundamentally distrust capitalists and politicians right now. The correct response to the war, poverty, corporate corruption and the government lying to us cannot be found through the lense of a bogus conspiracy theory. What is necessary is an institutional analysis of capitalism and the political system.

Instead of voting Bush out we should throw absolutely everyone out. All of the wreckers, and power mongers, and rich that are sending the poor to die in Iraq need to be completely obliterated from political existence. Their base of support, which is the capitalist class, needs to be expropriated completely of all ownership of the means of production.

Workers need to rise up and take over the entire economy. We need to utterly smash the state, and establish worker's power. Conspiracy theory whackos have a close affiliation with anti-semites. I remember in the 1880s Engels called anti-semitism "the socialism of fools" because it's language was very demagogic and anti-elitist, but it leads to a blind ally.

Basically Larouche types, who are basically crypto-fascists want to paint the picture that the bush administration is a radical departure from business as usual. They want us to believe that the administration is a dangerous cabal that is foreign to the american political tradition. Like all reactionaries, they want us to embrace the wisdom of our forefathers, revive our national identity, and make a return to the "utopian" world of the 1950s or somesuch date. Instead of building a bridge to the future, they want to dig a trench to the 19th century. No thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love the subtle thread hijack for the opportunity to plug Communism. In case you you have your blinders on to recent history: It didn't work.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
I love the subtle thread hijack for the opportunity to plug Communism. In case you you have your blinders on to recent history: It didn't work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. You could have said the same thing about democracy after the roman empire fell. Anyway, good call on the hijack. I guess I wanted to explain the difference between institutional analysis and conspiracy theories. Maybe I didn't make my point in the best way.

Later,
Snowball

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If 9-11 was a government job, it was certainly not the first time that a powerful government attacked its own people (and in so doing, gained their terrified support), nor was it the first time that the mainstream media disseminated false information to the people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please provide examples. Numerous examples. On a scale like 9/11.

[/ QUOTE ]

false flag terrorism

examples

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
From ABC station WTVG 36, Lexington_Kentucky

Terrorism expert says at least one person tipped off to London attacks

[/ QUOTE ]Well, finally someone convinced me. Because if it is reported on WTVG 35 in Kentuky then you know its true. I thought this was hilarious. My God, couldnt the conspiracy crowd come up with anything better than freakin WTVG 35 in Kentuky [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] But hey, it beat the previous source in the point above this that quoted prisonplanet.com as its source of information.

[MrMon]

Some of that looks pretty thin. George Galloway as a source? Mmmmm, okay. I'll try and look it over later, but nothing in there at first glance appears to be very large scale. Perhaps the best possibility is the Moscow apartment buildings, but I don't think anyone's ever proven it.

[HLMencken]

New Oliver Stone 9/11 Film Introduces 'Single Plane' Theory

August 8, 2006 | Issue 42•32

NEW YORK—Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone said Monday that his new film World Trade Center unveils "compelling and controversial" new evidence that a single plane was responsible for all four collisions in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001.

"There's no way anyone can ever deny there was only one plane."

"Get ready to go through the looking glass here, people," Stone told reporters at a Manhattan press conference before an advance screening of the movie, which premieres Wednesday. "The film you are about to see is going to blow the lid off the 9/11 Commission's official report and expose a conspiracy that reaches the highest levels of government."

World Trade Center, which stars Nicolas Cage as a dedicated Port Authority officer who stumbles on secret evidence amid the rubble and carnage of the terrorist attack, tells a story quite different from what Stone called "the official government line" about the event. According to the film, at 8:46 a.m., a lone commercial airliner flew diagonally through the North Tower of the World Trade Center, maintained a circular holding pattern for approximately 17 minutes, then struck the South Tower before heading to the Pentagon.

[KOTLP]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, the Scholars for 9/11 Truth are a joke and their list of issues are laughable. It was nice to see my undergrad. school, St. Thomas, listed first. lol

[/ QUOTE ]
please elaborate