-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
9/11
- Thread starter Harry
- Start date
Harry said:
There was an article in yesterdays Herald-Sun about how there are 18 million links to the 9/11 conspiracy theories.
It also commented on how although it has taken some time,the conspiracy theories are all starting to be disproved as well.
Recent polls in the states are also suprisingly showing that a huge % of the population believe the Government had some role in 9/11!
Yep.
The ones that make you think are the small piecing hole in the pentagon (how can a plane make such a hole?), the explosions heard and seen in each of the floors below the impact area as the towers crumbled, and the neat collapse of the WTC 7. Also what exploded in front of the nose of the planes just prior to the planes making contact with the buildings?
Many questions exist which will never be answered. If the US Govt had something to do with it, no-one will ever know, as the people asking these questions will be dismissed as conspiracy theorists by mainstream western civilization and would not be taken seriously.
The ones that make you think are the small piecing hole in the pentagon (how can a plane make such a hole?), the explosions heard and seen in each of the floors below the impact area as the towers crumbled, and the neat collapse of the WTC 7. Also what exploded in front of the nose of the planes just prior to the planes making contact with the buildings?
Many questions exist which will never be answered. If the US Govt had something to do with it, no-one will ever know, as the people asking these questions will be dismissed as conspiracy theorists by mainstream western civilization and would not be taken seriously.
Initially I thought the government may have something to do with it but it's an incredibly long stretch.Harry said:
- You still have to convince the people hijacking the planes to take their own lives(Al Quaida).
How on earth do you do that? Unless Bin Laden's in on it I can't see how. :don't know
- How would the US government keep such a massive operation as that quiet? Before and after.
Can you imagine what it would do to the US people and the US economy if the Government were seen to murder their own citizens??
I do agree however that the Pentagon particularly is a bit suspect.
I think perhaps they had to shoot down a plane and it got a bit messy so they perhaps tried to cover it up but even then it would be incredibly high risk.
it's all extremely unlikely.
Anduril said:
The moon landing was a hoax...
Elvis is still alive...
The Illuminati control the world...
Fiction is more captivating than the truth in many instances.
How do you convince your people to go to war?
You scare the living daylights out of them by orchestrating an attack on home soil.
Not far fetched at all IF those in control are ruthless, evil spirited power mongers.
The US Govt has a chequered past.
Very possible and shouldn't be dismissed as fantasy land.
You scare the living daylights out of them by orchestrating an attack on home soil.
Not far fetched at all IF those in control are ruthless, evil spirited power mongers.
The US Govt has a chequered past.
Very possible and shouldn't be dismissed as fantasy land.
Harry said:
Such theories are debunked, one after the other, here by 'Popular Mechanics":
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=2&c=y
....and if you are still suspicious of who really did do it, then read this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/11/11/wbin11.xml
Enjoy! 8)
....however, if you still "want to believe" that its all a big hoax...here's a conspiracy-theory site that tries to debunk the "Popular Mechanics" view:
http://911review.com/pm/markup/index.html
Harry said:
A chequered past?
Such as......?
What I find interesting about the conspiracy theories behind who really perpetrated 9/11 is that if the US govt was genuinely involved in such an operation it would have taken many years of planning and was probably even being put in place during the Clinton administration, it would have involved 100's, possibly 1,000's of people and yet every single one of them kept absolutely silent about the whole thing, not a hint of it. Two other genuine conspiracies: Watergate and the Iran Contra affair which were on a much smaller scale were both blown because someone talked. Maybe it's easier to think that the 'evil' US govt did this than accept that there are a bunch of lunatics out there who hate us and our way of life and are prepared to go to any lengths to destroy it.
LidsandBling said:
No "official" line LidsBling....my belief is that the al-Qaeda organisation, led by Bin Laden, carried out the 9/11 terrorist acts, that led to thousands of people, from different nationalities, cultures, and religions, being killed.
My first and only post of this topic presented Harry (and you, seeing you read it also) a link to how the conspiracy theories were solved using science. My other link was a site that tried to prove that science was wrong. And my third link was of Bin laden admitting he and his organisation did actually carry out the 9/11 terrorist acts.
You can make up your own mind.....but my "official line" won't change, no.....Bin laden was behind it and has admitted so, unless you think he is lying?
CarnTheTiges said:
Spot on! :clap
Funny thing is, that the conspiracy theorists who believe the USA did it themselves , or Israel, etc.....are usually the same people who condemn the Yanks for going into Iraq looking for the supposed "Weapons of Mass Destruction".
Now you'd think an 'evil' organisation like the USA, who has been able to carry out such an elaborate and destructive plan of destroying 4 airlines, plus 2 skyscrapers in one of the busiest cities in the world,, and part of the Pentagon, would SURELY be able to plant, out in the deserts of Iraq somewhere, some WMD's to justify their war on terror, right?
Hmm... intereseting idea. I wonder why, when the Christianity thread was in circulation, there wasn't a science thread hosting similar debate.Liverpool said:
I saw a fraction of the show the other night and thought a lot of the points were well presented and it didn't seem to be very in-your-face. When I say that, I mean it wasn't saying "This is how it happened...America did it". It didn't beat me over the head like other conspiracy theories have. Some of the evidence provided was damning but, by the same token, a lot of it was pretty spurious.
This, to me, seems the most damning argument against the conspiracy - one any of the conspiracy theorists would struggle accounting for.Tigers of Old said:
The pentagon strike raises the most questions.
How can a commercial plane cause such a narrow piercing hole which penetrated some 7 layers into the pentagon?
How come there were no remains of the plane anywher near the crash site?
Why was there evidence of unburnt furniture and even paper near the crash site. The plane would have exploded on impact whereas a missile or bunker buster would have penetrated and then exploded?
Why was there no footage of the plane considering there are numerous camera's around the pentagon?
How can a plane even get close to the intelligence centre of the US without being shot down by anti-plane missiles?
The evidence around the twin towers is a bit more hazy but there is no denying that the Pentagon strike raises some very valid questions, that cannot be dismissed as a crazy conspiracy theory.
I'm not one for conspiracy theories, heck I don't care whether the US landed on the moon or not, or whether Elvis is dead or alive. But when it comes down to thousands of innocent people dying then all questions and concerns should be raised and looked at. Dismissing them only causes a greater injustice to these people.
How can a commercial plane cause such a narrow piercing hole which penetrated some 7 layers into the pentagon?
How come there were no remains of the plane anywher near the crash site?
Why was there evidence of unburnt furniture and even paper near the crash site. The plane would have exploded on impact whereas a missile or bunker buster would have penetrated and then exploded?
Why was there no footage of the plane considering there are numerous camera's around the pentagon?
How can a plane even get close to the intelligence centre of the US without being shot down by anti-plane missiles?
The evidence around the twin towers is a bit more hazy but there is no denying that the Pentagon strike raises some very valid questions, that cannot be dismissed as a crazy conspiracy theory.
I'm not one for conspiracy theories, heck I don't care whether the US landed on the moon or not, or whether Elvis is dead or alive. But when it comes down to thousands of innocent people dying then all questions and concerns should be raised and looked at. Dismissing them only causes a greater injustice to these people.
As I've said the Pentagon does seem the most suspicious.
Very hard to see how a passenger plane could crash into a building like that and leave no wreckage.
The official line was at the time was along the lines that the plane disintergrated on impact and due to the extreme heat of the fire left no distinguishable wreckage.
Spectators also said that they saw what looked like a missile rather than a plane.
This is where I think perhaps the US government has possibly covered things up.
Harry what do you think of the notion that after the initial planes crashed into the towers that the government made the difficult decision to shoot down the remaining planes?
Perhaps then the military under direction of the Government fired on the Pentagon to avoid the flak of killing their own citizens knowing that it would be easy to cover it up?
Just typing it sounds ludicrous. I'm not sure how such a decision could be reached without having prior knowledge of such an event. We are only talking a couple of hours window here.
Hmmm.
Very hard to see how a passenger plane could crash into a building like that and leave no wreckage.
The official line was at the time was along the lines that the plane disintergrated on impact and due to the extreme heat of the fire left no distinguishable wreckage.
Spectators also said that they saw what looked like a missile rather than a plane.
This is where I think perhaps the US government has possibly covered things up.
Harry what do you think of the notion that after the initial planes crashed into the towers that the government made the difficult decision to shoot down the remaining planes?
Perhaps then the military under direction of the Government fired on the Pentagon to avoid the flak of killing their own citizens knowing that it would be easy to cover it up?
Just typing it sounds ludicrous. I'm not sure how such a decision could be reached without having prior knowledge of such an event. We are only talking a couple of hours window here.
Hmmm.
Not you too Harry - the last bastion of sensible posting on PRE has also gone loopy.
The US thought that crashing two planes into the World Trade Centre wasn't enough to scare the living daylights out of the US citizens so they decided to crash one into the Pentagon as well. Please.
The US thought that crashing two planes into the World Trade Centre wasn't enough to scare the living daylights out of the US citizens so they decided to crash one into the Pentagon as well. Please.
<
Hillsong Houstons
|
Dan is dead
>
