9/11 conspiracy theories

[Evil Inky]

Not only do I believe that the towers toppled ridiculously fast but also the plane that crashed into the pentagon clearly was never a plane. The US government's reluctance to release footage of this (which does clearly does exist) only backs this up.

Again, I ask : if the US government wanted people to believe that a plane had flown into the Pentagon, why not just fly a plane into the Pentagon. Why make things harder for themselves by using a missile ?

 

And as for the reluctance to release the crash footage ( they did eventually ), I would suggest that this is simply because the Pentagon is steeped in a culture of secrecy : it's their job to protect classified information, not pander to the ravings of conspiracy theorists.

[Muppet]

I'm sure if America had wanted to make it seem that terrorists had carried out this task, it would have been relatively easy to have had a group of terrorists funded and trained by a back door route to actually do it.

 

Why on earth would they take the risk of doing it themselves and having to cover it up? The reasons already given in this thread have mentioned many reasons why they could, and eventually would be found out.

 

Does anyone know if America has the same system as here when classified documents would eventually be released?

[Mario]

Not only do I believe that the towers toppled ridiculously fast but also the plane that crashed into the pentagon clearly was never a plane. The US government's reluctance to release footage of this (which does clearly does exist) only backs this up.

Again, I ask : if the US government wanted people to believe that a plane had flown into the Pentagon, why not just fly a plane into the Pentagon. Why make things harder for themselves by using a missile ?

 

And as for the reluctance to release the crash footage ( they did eventually ), I would suggest that this is simply because the Pentagon is steeped in a culture of secrecy : it's their job to protect classified information, not pander to the ravings of conspiracy theorists.

 

Have you seen the footage? The only footage I've seen is of the explosion and there is no evidence of a Boeing - which is what the US goverment claim it was.

 

In my eyes, they are covering something up - I don't know exactly what it is but I don't think anyone can argue the lack of explanation/reluctance to release 'proper' footage is a little disturbing.

 

If they have nothing to hide, why not show it? They showed something like 2 secs of footage of the Pentagon incident. Is that when the camera's nearby switched on? Doubt it. What happened to the rest of the footage?

 

It just seems that the US government could easily put an end to the conspiracy theories once and for all by releasing information to the public. However, for some reason, they are not forthcoming with such evidence.

[Ghostrider]

If they have nothing to hide, why not show it? They showed something like 2 secs of footage of the Pentagon incident. Is that when the camera's nearby switched on? Doubt it. What happened to the rest of the footage?

 

The two most viewed clips of Pentagon released footage are 3 min 12 secs and 3 mins 22 secs respectively. What "rest" are you wanting, more of the nothingness before the fact, or to watch the bonfire burn that bit longer?

[Mario]

If they have nothing to hide, why not show it? They showed something like 2 secs of footage of the Pentagon incident. Is that when the camera's nearby switched on? Doubt it. What happened to the rest of the footage?

 

The two most viewed clips of Pentagon released footage are 3 min 12 secs and 3 mins 22 secs respectively. What "rest" are you wanting, more of the nothingness before the fact, or to watch the bonfire burn that bit longer?

 

I just watched the two clips you talk of. I can't see anything there that resembles a plane - can you? It's hardly conclusive proof that it was an aircraft. I did get the video I saw from a different source and it was only 3 secs long - my mistake. It was just an exert from the 1st video however. There is no doubt that something hits the pentagon but I seriously don't think it's a plane - what evidence suggests it's a Boeing? Oh yeah - I forgot, it was all obliterated in the explosion right? Given the pentagon's security measure, surely you think that somehow a camera has captured the "plane" arriving? All footage they've released is totally inconclusive... until I see a plane hitting that place, I'm not convinced - based on the following reasons:

 

Lack of conclusive video evidence

Lack of witness accounts of actually seeing a plane

Lack of Boeing debris in/around the impact point

[Ally]

Again, I ask : if the US government wanted people to believe that a plane had flown into the Pentagon, why not just fly a plane into the Pentagon. Why make things harder for themselves by using a missile ?

 

And as for the reluctance to release the crash footage ( they did eventually ), I would suggest that this is simply because the Pentagon is steeped in a culture of secrecy : it's their job to protect classified information, not pander to the ravings of conspiracy theorists.

 

Jeesh Inky, you'll be telling me that they really did put a man on the moon next!

[ChristopherWilliamThomson]

Perhaps Sweden is to blame, I mean its quite plausible. They just play the two sides against each other, eventually they'll destroy themselves and then Sweden can rule the world!

 

On a more serious note, I don't care who did it. I care about its consequences. The culture of fear is bringing us to our knees!

[Evil Inky]

Jeesh Inky, you'll be telling me that they really did put a man on the moon next!

 

Ooh... don't get me started....

[HacksawDuggan]

I'll throw this into the barrel.

 

 

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

 

 

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ppfinal.html

 

 

 

Fact is, you can twist things round to look however you want. You're never going to get the whole truth presented to you in one documentary by a couple of film school plebs, or any of the web sites devoted to such devious conspiracies (or the sites i've linked to, by the way). And i already said in the first thread about the sketchy knowledge of science used in that film...

[Ghostrider]

Two conspiracy theory questions for anyone who cares to care....

 

1) Is it really believable that the U.S Government, or any government for that matter, given the beuracratic red-tape strangled quagmires that all are, could have, in 9 months, planned, organised, and executed events of 9/11 so effectively that their role remains undiscovered to this day? That at the same time as establishing themselves as the government of the day. Remember, it went to the wire any beyond with court appeals, before anyone knew whether Bush or Gore was going to be the man in the big chair. Even if it was all planned beforehand, is it believable everything and everyone on the ground could have been organised to pull it all off so well? Given that most conspiarcy theorists also assure us what a bumbling inept idiot Bush is, they're rather contradicting their own agrument in my opinion.

 

2) Had the four "incidents" which constitute 9/11 occured at four sites in the U.K instead of the in the U.S. and the U.K. Government had behaved in the same way as the U.S. one, giving the world the same explanation of events. Would the same individuals who doubt the U.S version of events have been equally doubting of the U.K Government saying the same thing? and if not, why not?

 

I would suggest, in light of the woeful lack of conspiracy theories that seem to exist concerning "questionable" behaviours of the UK Government on "terrorism" issues, that far fewer people would have been doubting, and those who did would not be doubting so deeply. Otherwise, where are all the conspiracy theories about David Kelly's "murder", or the London Tube bombers being allowed to go on their merry way with the full knowlege of the security services? They may be out there, but I haven't seen any, and they're certainly not attracting any meaningful attention.

[JAStewart]

If they have nothing to hide, why not show it? They showed something like 2 secs of footage of the Pentagon incident. Is that when the camera's nearby switched on? Doubt it. What happened to the rest of the footage?

 

The two most viewed clips of Pentagon released footage are 3 min 12 secs and 3 mins 22 secs respectively. What "rest" are you wanting, more of the nothingness before the fact, or to watch the bonfire burn that bit longer?

 

Hotel camera.

Traffic camera.

Gas station camera.

 

Only when the government release the videos that they swiped then we'll see.

 

If the government release the videos and prove that a plane hit the building, I will accept it, until then, the government are guilty until proven innocent - why are they so afriad to answer a few questions or release a few videos if they have nothing to hide?

 

Also, the newly released pentagon video has been tampered with [analysis of the video shows this and this can be found over on the forum of Loose change's website].

[Mario]

Also, the newly released pentagon video has been tampered with [analysis of the video shows this and this can be found over on the forum of Loose change's website].

 

I'm not entirely sure of that - i just think the video footage is entirely inconclusive. In terms of the other factors, I'm fairly with you JAStewart.

 

For me when I saw it happening - it all looked a little too unbelievable, almost scripted... I'll believe that until I see evidence that proves otherwise.

[Ally]

Everyone who has watched Loose Change should also take a look at this viewers guide: http://www.911myths.com/911_loose_change_2_guide_1.doc (5.2mb download)

 

It's a nice 145 page report on some of the (numerous) errors, quotes taken out of context, selective use of footage and other things of that nature. I think it's important to read both sides of the story before you jump to any conclusions as a result of watching LC.

[JAStewart]

Everyone who has watched Loose Change should also take a look at this viewers guide: http://www.911myths.com/911_loose_change_2_guide_1.doc (5.2mb download)

 

It's a nice 145 page report on some of the (numerous) errors, quotes taken out of context, selective use of footage and other things of that nature.

 

Also in the process of being debunked

[Ally]

 

Also in the process of being debunked

 

No doubt! And then there'll be a counter documents and so on and so fourth...

 

Like I say, I'm pretty wary of the current US administration, but it's always important to look at both sides.

 

As Evil Inky points out, the yanks couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery (I'm paraphrasing here, naturally : wink: ).

 

To pull off such an amazing logistical feat is, i suspect, quite beyond them

.