How can people really still refuse to believe that there wasn't a conspiracy? It's been going on for decades, and not only in this country. What bothers me the most is that believers try to prove the conspiracy using really, unprovable talking points. Like how airplanes can't cause a skyscraper to collapse- I agree, especially when it comes to building 7. But the fact is that sceptics can always shoot this down, saying that fires in the twin towers were hot enough to melt the steel and weaken it enough for them to give way. As for building 7- I keep hearing how it was damaged, and there were fires that caused it to collapse. Again, I find this very unlikely, especially because it collapsed at freefall speed straight down, like a controlled demolition. But still, sceptics can debate it.

So how about some things that can't be debated? There are things that are proven fact, and although they don't 100% prove the government guilty, you can still see how unlikely it is that there is no way that something isn't goin on. So I want to share my views on this whole thing and provide a few links.

1. Operation Northwoods- undeniable proof people within our government are willing to carry out terrorist attacks against the people, and frame other countries, governments, namely Cuba. Also interesting to note one of the ideas was to hijack airplanes by remote control, and crash them. Again, this is nothing new. Its been going on for a long time. Most historians agree Hitler burned the Reichstag, which he then blamed on his political enemies, and declared marshal law.

2. There were NORAD drills mirroring the attacks of September 11th, on the exact same day and time of the actual attacks. Dick Cheney was overseeing these drills. No fighter Jets were scrambled because of the confusion of the real events and the drills. Dick Cheney also happens to be a member of PNAC, he signed a document along with several other members of the Bush regime stating they needed a "new Pearl Harbor" in order to accomplish their plans in the middle east. Weird how things work out, eh? See Link at bottom.

3. 7/7 London bombings. Exact same thing as 9/11. There were "drills" mirroring the real terrorist attacks that happened that day. Same places, same times as the real events were going down. The government says it was just a coincidence. See the Link at bottom.

Its problem, reaction, solution. We get attacked, everyone reacts, the government comes in to take away rights, install more and more security, and in some cases mobilize the troops. It shouldn't take a Sherlock Holmes to connect these dots, people. Click the Links.

NORAD drills on September 11th

7/7 London bombing drills

BBC radio reports on 7/7 drills

The Etruscans did it I tells ya!

Yeah thanks. Very insightful. You sure showed me

What we all have to understand is that both sides of this debate feel the same way, albeit in reverse. Those who accept the mainstream account find it hard to understand why people refuse to accept it, especially given the reports compiled by the 9/11 Commission and NIST, which they argue are fair.

This has long since ceased to be a discussion about the merits of either side's argument, but about the skill with which the arguments are presented. Just about every facet of this issue has been debated ad nauseum. No progress is ever made. Then, once discussion about a particular issue cools down a little, someone else comes along and regurgitates an opinion that has already been thoroughly examined, and everyone's frustration level goes up a notch.

I believe those who doubt the mainstream account - and that includes me - need to explore two avenues:

1. Don't constantly promote alternative theories (unless, of course, something new arises), but instead start demanding that those who support the mainstream one produce the sort of incontravertible evidence they're demanding of us; and

2. Switch the focus of the 'investigation' to individuals in an attempt to illicit admissions or other information that might help gather momentum.

There have been two examples of the latter in recent months: the comments made by the former Italian PM, which should be verified immediately; and the allegation made some months back that Silverstein and some of his immediate family were advised or else decided at the last minute to stay clear of the WTC on 9/11.

As entertaining and as educative as discussions about whether the towers were CD'd undoubtedly are, they're never likely to reach any consensual conclusions.

Good post coughy....what hurts the 9/11 truth is holographic plane stories etc....the truth is alqaeda is the CIA...thats why the italian president knows...the truth behind 9/11 isnt in the controlled demolition stories...it's in palm beach county florida were alqaeda operated for months...when atta tried to rent a cropduster he was after a target in loxahatchee,fl....when he bought the leatherman knife it was to slit the birds throat...keith hensons a name not to forget..he hosted alqaeda...why because he's CIA and so is alqaeda...everyone looks at the demolition theory and it's a good one...but the real truth is being covered up by the FBI...

I think the conspiracy lies in what happened after 9/11. Look at the extensive business ties between the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family. The Saudi's have invested trillions of dollars in the US economy, especially into Bush family conglomerates - The Carlye Group for one. The Saudi's were given the royal treatment the days after 9/11 as the rest of the country sat on the ground they were being flown all over the US picking up various members of the bin Laden family to get them home 'safely'. The FBI was furious over this under normal circumstances they would of interviewed members of the family in an attempt to get information about Osama. 17 of the hi-jackers were Saudi's. Osama is a Saudi and the Bush family has well-known ties to the bin Laden family as well as Saudi Arabia. The Saudi's have TRILLIONS of dollars infested into the US economy, if they pulled out their money it would destroy our economy. What about the possibility the Bush administration was told by their Saudi royal 'friends' if you come after one of our own and embarass us infront of the whole world we will pull out all of our money out of YOUR personal businesses, the US economy and stop all oil exports to the US? The US went into Afghanistan to appear to the public like they were actually doing something but the whole were plotting to shift the focus to Saddam so people would forget about Osama. Money is a very powerful influencer. There is a documentary coming out in January and it is about a journalist who goes on a hunt to find Osama bin Laden and apparently he comes pretty darn close. His whole point is of course - if I can find him then the US gov't can find him, they just don't want to.

Instead of wasting your time trying to convince the world that there is some 'conspiricy' on 9/11, why don't you do something useful like give a homeless person a meal or something.

Oooooo I have to fear my government because it may happen again... scared - NOT... because it was terrorists not our own stinkin' government.

Show me proof of these NORAD drills... not from some web-blog either.... authentic government documents that show the scheduled events for the NORAD drills, that's what I would like to see.

I have to agree to disagree, anytime something tragic like this happens, there are people that think there is something far more sinister behind them that normal people like myself just over look, and if we don't agree with you then you try and dig up crazy scenarios in a way to justify your believes no matter how far fetched they are. You start grasping at straws that make sense in your own eyes.

I know that when it comes to government, 1 plus 1 doesn't always equal up to 2, but there are certain things that we as a people do not need to know, if that makes me a sheep then so be it, as to you conspirisists........I will Never Forget....

Very well said

I'm getting mildly confused again.

It doesn't worry you that the government has been wasting these least several years waging war, or threatening to, on anywhere but where the terrorists actually came from?

Obviously because the video"Loose Change" from youtube is so convincing.

I think we need to take into consideration that how it happened isn't what we need to worry about, but more on the people who have suffered through this ordeal and the families of those who have suffered through it. Although it happened 6 years ago i don't think it is something that will blow over just by a few years.

It's not a case of refusing to see the truth as you put it, it's more a point that other people have formed their own opinions, so in fact, no I don't see YOUR truth and believe YOUR truth.

I have my own beliefs about what happened and therefore believe my OWN truth - which I think is quite common and that is that there was no conspiracy.

Just because you see it one way does not make everyone who does not agree with you wrong.

I have read your info, and much much more available and have conceded that I do not agree there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 and I'm entitled to that opinion.

I sometimes wonder... and let me think out loud for a second... if Americans stopped arguing internally and focused the amount of energy they used up by bickering amongst themselves and turned all of that energy outwards and focused on terrorism and sorting out your enemies, you'd eradicate it so damn quick, but instead, IMO, you bicker about your own government killing you off by the thousands and come up with conspiracy theories about every possible event in your history and probably within your future - and in so doing, you give the terrorists exactly what they wanted - a disjointed non-united United States!

PS, before I get blasted when I say 'Americans' I don't mean every single person as an individual, I mean as a whole, as an overall, as a Nation.

United States? Not from where I'm looking...

No offence meant, I'm just saying it how I see it from over here across the Pond.

What always amazes me is how people who do nothing more than read a few articles on the internet, oftentimes without bothering to check where they're coming from, suddenly become expert enough a a plurality of fields like the sciences and politics not only to decry trained scientists but to tell politicians (whose jobs, duties and information they're not even privy to) they've consistently done their jobs wrong.

And then these gifted people return to the Internet only to tell anyone who doesn't agree with them theirs is not only the single likely interpretation of events, but the only /possible/ one. Yes, thank goodness these transcendental people come to drag us unworthy simps into the one true Knowledge.

--Jaylemurph

Read a few articles on the internet? The mainstream media has reported on it! If you would bother looking at the links I posted you would know that. Its not just some conspiracy theorist, its mainstream media reporting on it as well. Like I said, everything I posted is FACT- all it takes is someone intelligent to connect the dots.

Yeah those terrorists- also reported by mainstream media that at least 7 of the hijackers are alive, some are suing the US. Amazing how a couple guys armed with boxcutters stumped the entire North American Aerospace Defense. You want proof of the NORAD drills? It has been in the mainstream media. Fox news reported on it. Newspapers have. Its been confirmed and admitted.

The air defense system was aimed at looking out for intruders from outside US airspace... it wasn't designed to track flights within the US.


I think there seems to be a tendency to want to beleive that your government is smarter than the evidence of day to day life shows them to be ... that people want to beleive that the government is capable of planning these great plots, when everyday experience shows that they wouldn't know how to boil a kettle if there wasn't some expert to show them how to do it.

ya and the CIA are the experts that boiled the kettle....you people give those 19 hijackers to much credit...without help,they never could have pulled it off...

I understand where you're coming from coughy, though I still feel it is important to keep the 'routine' topics high on the agenda with seemingly so many of the general public still unaware in the slightest of the controversy surrounding 9/11.

As for the people here claiming there is no evidence for a conspiracy or inside job, you are not looking very hard.

I thought the main stream media was controlled by the government. Isn't that another conspiracy about 9-11? So can we trust them or not?

The official 9/11 Commission's Report covers the various NORAD drills.

The media just reports what it's fed..and what the NSA lets them report...no the media can no longer be trusted..

Oh, i've seen some interesting theories, not just from people you'd call "conspiracy theorists", about where those hijackers came from, and where they were trained... whether a few hours at some dirt-strip flying school in Florida would've been enough to fly a 757 accurately enough to fly it into the Pentagon, say... just that, if there was more to it than meets the eye, I just don't think that the government'd be competent of pulling off something this big.

Just bear in mind where O. bin L. originally came from... and it wasn't Iraq ...

do you think the saudi govt is somehow involved?....I think saalam bin ladin is one of the masterminds, along with daddy bush, and frank carlucci..if were naming names...

Well the majority of the highjackers were from or are from Saudi Arabia. They were trained by Al-quada/Osama who were in turn trained by the c.i.a..

They could not have even been able to navigate, let alone fly a plane with a few hours of training on a dirt runway. Oh they could have crashed no doubt, but not into there intended tagets. 3 for 3 thats pretty good flying for a bunch of guys that could hardly fly a single engine prop plane.

I don't see how you think a few rag tag terrorists could pull this off but not your own goverment/C.I.A. Now thats a streech thinking these bafoons could actualy do what we are led to believe.

Just my 2 cents

And -- of course -- yours is the only /correct/ what to do so, right?


--Jaylemurph

LOL! Watch the Link! NORAD was running drills that VERY morning of hijacked airplanes crashing into the WTC and Pentagon AS IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. Watch the Link for crying out loud. It shows articles in USA Today talking about it, and a news piece on CNN talking about it. NORAD was planning drills like that for years. The mainstream media has already reported on the fact that these drills were actually happening on September 11th. It was just a "coincidence", just like the 7/7 bombings!



Im so sure. I guess thats how they have installed countless dictators all over the world in the last 60 years, too.

O. bin L.? Oh you mean Ken Osmond, the CIA agent.

Just something I posted on another thread but it has become relevant here now: -

After ‘attempting’ to research Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda myelf, my conclusion is… we have dead ends and contradictions at every turn! Not very helpful, though here are a few of the more interesting snippets I could ascertain (some opinion, some fact): -

• Viewing the history of Osama Bin Laden it seems likely he is/was not a permanent CIA asset. That is not to say the stories of ‘Tim Osman’ were not true during the time of the Afghan/Soviet war. The CIA did likely keep some contacts within Al Qaeda following the Soviet withdrawal though – it would seem foolish of them not to.
  
  
• Agents of the Bin Laden Issue Station, a CIA unit formed to track Bin Laden in 1996, infiltrated Afghan militant units and Al Qaeda in 1999. The fact Cofer Black described this as the “largest collection and disruption activity in the history of mankind” says to me there were definitely agents ‘inside’.
  
  
• Leading on from the above point, it was in 1999 that the Hamburg cell comprising of the hijackers Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah, plus other figures linked with the 9/11 plot decided to visit Afghanistan and join with Al Qaeda. Another four of the hijackers - Hamza al-Ghamdi, Ahmed al-Ghamdi, Saeed al-Ghamdi, and Ahmed al-Haznawi - met in 1999. There is evidence a further eight of the hijackers joined with Al Qaeda in 1999 – early 2000.
  
  If you missed the trick – that is 15 in total of the supposed hijackers who aligned themselves with Al Qaeda only after Cofer Black’s infiltration plan began.
  
  
• It was not until 1999 that Osama Bin Laden’s network became widely known as Al Qaeda.
  
  
• Osama Bin Laden likely died in 2001.

The above all lead me to believe that the CIA had inside men and Osama Bin Laden was setup through being video taped and having dealings with these infiltrators. It is quite possible that Bin Laden was not even aware of the impending 9/11 operation and it may have come as quite a surprise to him when he realised the ‘jihadists’ who had been working under him, had carried out the attacks.

Of course, the one thing I left out when talking about a shift in focus was the exploration of the historical context, something I've written about at length on my blog.

I haven't forgotten about this from the other thread, by the way. Still digging around.

They aren't just a few rag tag terrorists, Al Qaeda is a well funded organisation. A rag tag group couldn't have destroyed two US embassies in africa. You're completely underestimating the strength of the radical islamic threat.

It's simple to believe the inside job theory when you do that, you think Al Qaeda isn't a threat because they're portrayed as a bunch of crazies in the desert with AK47s when they are a powerful group with powerful benefactors.

You are actually right on this one- Al Queda IS a well funded organization. They were funded and trained by the U.S. government! Its a fact!

But as right as you were on this one, you missed the point. While they may not exactly be "rag tag", to say that the government, CIA, black ops are too dumb to pull something like 9/11 off and that Al Queda could, is just plain silly.

So the posters argument is void.

Don't get me wrong here Cradle. I think these guys are very well funded and very well trained. The question is were did this so called "rag tag" team originate. That is were I was going. It was Saudi's not Afgans that pulled this off. I would never underestimate Al Qauda, but I would not give "credit" were credit is not due. Al Qaeda could not have done this alone. You think I am underestimating them while at the same time I think you might be underestimating the greed that extrem capitalisim can do. There is a threat but I don't think we truely know what that threat is. The easy answer is radical Islam, but the logical answer is how could they have done this. Hell sometimes they can't even sneak a back pack on a train properly. Or they get caught at a check point with 5 gaurds, or a whole village is taken over. These Al Quada are good but please don't give them the credit for something well beyond what they could possibly hope to accomplish on there own. I will agree well funded they are when you have an Arab state such as Saudi Arabia backing you, I guess anything is possible.

I love how alot of the debunkers rely on verbal attacks an mockery to defend their position. Yet, sassy posts like "Bliffs" just go to show that its generaly those who still buy the official story, who are actualy the ones who haven't really looked into it.



Well, I don't know about the UK but the majority of Americans know the official story is bogus.



http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/13469

Kind of negates the OPs following quote doesn't it then?



Damn CIA...they should have targeted San Fransisco.....not New York...didn't do us any favors there did they?!

[quote name='joc' date='Dec 11 2007, 04:10 AM' post='2030657']
Kind of negates the OPs following quote doesn't it then?

It boggles the mind doesn't it, joc?

LOL. Not exactly. Although Im sure you would love for it to be that easy. Its not. And it is overwhelming proof that internal forces were responsible for 9/11. Just ask Bob Dole's former chief of staff and 400 families of 9/11 victims why they are suing Bush for not only knowing about the attack, but helping to carry it out.

Actually, on second thought, you are right. Except that it isn't my argument that is void, its the media reports. You see the media barely reported the true facts, they didn't even mention that the drills were taking place on 9/11 and mirrored the actual events. They reported on drills that were in the making, and being planned YEARS before 9/11, drills that foretold exactly what would actually later happen. Their stance was that all this was just "coincidence". The British media also reported several times on tv and radio, the 7/7 bombings coincided with drills that mimicked the real events. Same time, same places. But again, just like on 9/11, they said this was all just "coincidence".

And they know they can get away with it because most people will always believe what they are told, no matter how much evidence suggests otherwise.

Even though the 9/11 Commission members themselves called their limited investigation a farce, politically crippled and handicapped, lied to by the military and lied to by the CIA....

"Did they obstruct our inquiry? The answer is clearly yes," says Lee Hamilton, who co-chaired the 9/11 Commission, in the wake of reports the CIA destroyed videotapes of interrogations of two al-Qaida suspects. "Whether that amounts to a crime, others will have to judge," adds Hamilton.
http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=20521

One of the primary architects of the 9/11 Commission Report, Ernest May, said in May 2005: "The only point on which I fault Kean, Hamilton, and the other commissioners is their reluctance ever to challenge the CIA's walling off Al Qaeda detainees. The agency gave us all interrogation reports bearing on September 11. It even put to the detainees some questions sent them by commission staff. But the CIA refused to permit any direct access either to the detainees or to the interrogators and their interpreters. We never had full confidence in the interrogation reports as historical sources."
http://hnn.us/articles/11972.html

Chairman Thomas Kean said the CIA's destruction of the videotapes "hampered the panel's investigation into the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington". He also said "They told us we had everything they had on the detainees .... You don't expect not to be told the truth, but we weren't told the truth."

Even the Huffington Post and Digg- which normally avoid any story questioning 9/11 -- have picked up on the possibility that the tapes were destroyed because they showed that people other than a guy on dialysis living in a cave and his 19 pals were behind the 9/11 attacks.
http://digg.com/politics/Destroyed_tapes_r...kistan_911_link

Decades? Since only 9/11. 2001 and afterwards is mentioned, I can only assume you don't know what a decade is. A decade is 10 years; 9/11 occured just slightly over 6 years ago, hardly a decade has even passed yet.

This is how information gets warped. People read these things and pick up little snippets of information that they pass along. Some people may start stating -"Oh, that 9/11 conspiracy has been going on for decades"- simply because they've read it somewhere and are just repeating what they heard. Please be accurate in your facts (especially the little ones), or clarify what your statements mean, if you want to be taken seriously.

I'm actually one of those people who lean more towards the conspiracy theory, for various reasons, although I am hardly a hard core believer. It really irks me, though, when I see articles, etc that can't seem to even get simple facts right or make statements that contradict themselves. How am I supposed to believe an entire article if I don't know how many facts are slightly warped to fit the 'theory'? I'd hardly know how to research all the little nuances, nor do I want to.

My all time favourite inconsistancy, with many articles I have read, is (condensed): The Gov't planned and orchestrated the whole thing. The Gov't knew months ahead of time that this terrorist attack was imminent (due to warnings, threats, undercover intelligence etc). How can that be? Either the gov't did it, or the terrorists did.

Theories are theories, and that's fine. But when it comes to facts, make sure they are accurate and/or clarified.

Sorry for my wee rant.

If you want to do that, then I cite Operation Northwoods as undeniable proof that the government is unwilling to carry out terrorist attacks against the people. Operation Northwoods was turned down by the government, was it not?

Yeah, it was rejected by a man who later got shot with a magic bullet. lol

Got any proof? Osama bin Laden and his taliban cronies were funded and trained by the CIA to fight the russians, Al Qaeda was founded by Bin Laden afterwards. It's blowback, not some vast CIA conspiracy.

Of course the government COULD pull this off, but considering the amount of people who would have to be involved and the amount of planning, chances are it would be a secret that's impossible to keep. It's far too much of a risk, if one person grows a conscious it would completely fall apart.

Now, Al Qaeda planning these attacks makes far more sense, if a member of Al Qaeda grew a conscious, he would most likely tell someone who is anti-America anyway, who would benefit from not passing the information on to western intelligence sources.




Al Qaeda has alot of links, just because the majority of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia doesn't mean SA is responsible for the attacks. Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, they had backing from people all over the middle east. I do find it interesting that the US is allied to Saudi Arabia though, for all their rhetoric about Iranian soldiers crossing into Iraq to kill Americans, they ignore the fact that half the insurgents in Iraq are from Saudi Arabia.

What do you mean they couldn't even sneak a backpack on a train properly? That's after the wave of paranoia which emerged after 9/11. They hit the WTC once before. I think the old saying "Where theres a Will theres a Way" applies here. They were planning the attacks for years, the CIA and FBI missed it for ages and underestimated the threat when they did know something was on. They were incompetant, just look at the history of th CIA, it's a wonder the organisation still exists after all their blunders.

Radical Islamists are not incompetant. Look at all the attacks that have succeeded. The first WTC bombing, embassy bombings, 9/11, London, Madrid, Bali. Despite the pall of fear and paranoia after 9/11 they still managed two attacks in europe and one right on the door step of my country.

For them to pull 9/11 of they just needed to learn how to fly and how to hijack a plane. There were 19 of them involved. For the government to pull off such a thing it would require far more than 19 dedicated extremists.




I agree, Operation Northwoods was thrown out and the officer who thought it up was fired. From what I can tell, the officer behind it was a fierce anti-communist type not unlike General LeMay.




If it was such a good idea then why didn't LBJ go ahead with it, since he was the one who wanted JFK whacked, right?

You obviously don't know the history of false flag operations, staged terror, etc. Like I said in my original post, most historians agree that Hitler had the reichstag burned himself, so he could blame it on political enemies, declare marshal law, and begin his conquest. I also made reference to Operation Northwoods, an OFFICIAL declassified government document, from the 1960's, outlining a plan to attack american citizens, attack U.S. troops at Guantanamo(sp) Bay, and yes, even hijack airplanes by remote control, and crash them. It went on to say they could come up with fake victim names to be aired on tv. All this would be done so the American public would support an all out invasion of Cuba. Its nothing new. Its been around a very long time (way before 9/11)
Did you really think I didn't know what a decade is?

Actually its the exact opposite. The fact that they felt comfortable enough to draw up such a plan, and submit it up the ranks, ALL THE WAY to the President himself, is proof that the government is NOT unwilling to carry out these attacks. Kennedy rejected the plan, and we all know what happened to him a short while after.

You're right - I don't know the history of false flag operations, staged terror, etc. I did re-read your original post, yet it still seems to me that it seems to be centered on 9/11 and afterwards, even though you use Hitler as an example of this kind of thing happening before. I did not know operation northwoods is from the 1960's. Everything else you just mentioned is not in your original post - so I did not know what you were thinking in reference to things going on for decades. Initially, it does seem like your post centered mostly around 9/11 and afterwards, as do the references to your links. Thank you for clearning things up for me.

I didn't honestly think you didn't know what a decade was. I shouldn't have specifically said that, and for that I apologise. I more or less thought you were using the term without really thinking about it. I still think, though, that you could have been more clear about things that happened in the past decades which you feel have led up to the state of affairs to date.

I generally agree with your views.

basically I think, yes.


yup, i think, more or less.
Al Qaeda: not all that competent, really.

There wouldn't need to be many people in the know about what was going down, in the planning, or even knowing that they were associated with anything illegal. The whole point of compartmentalisation of information "NEED-TO-KNOW-ONLY" that is normal practice in any secretive military or intelligence operation, or any kind of secretive project, whether run by government departments, militant coup plotters, private corporations, or organised crime is to limit the number of people who know whats going on. The "conspiracy-of-thousands" is nothing but a strawman based more on emotional argument than logic and facts. It shouldn't be hard at all to google dozens of secret operations/projects that were kept hidden from outsiders for years, even decades, without a single whistleblower coming forward for years....