Here’s our handy guide to 9/11 conspiracy theories — and how we know they’re b*llshit

It’s getting to be that magical time of year, friends. There is the faintest taste of fall in the air. The kids are headed back to school. The sky in the morning is the most brilliant cerulean and the afternoon light is the color of wine.

So any minute now, your friend who listens to too much AM radio and bought a lot of gold over the last few years because Ron Paul told him to is going to hitch up his Dickies, spit in the dirt, set down the bong (or excessively hoppy craft beer), push his “Make America Great Again” Trump hat back on his head and say, “Ol’ Dick Cheney did 9/11. It was an inside job so they could install the Patriot Act” or something equally hare-brained and improperly verb-ed.

And it may fall to you to try and set your friend straight. So, as a public service, we thought we would list for you some of the most prominent “Truther” conspiracy theories around the dreadful terror attacks that took place 14 years ago today and some ways that you might help your friend understand and accept that sometimes bad people do bad things that don’t have anything to do with the Illuminati, the International Cabal of Powerful Jews or even space aliens.

1. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney made 9/11 happen: This is the theory that the Bush administration and their band of neocons planned the attacks in advance, orchestrating the hideous destruction that followed as a “false flag” attack so that they might subvert the rule of law, increase surveillance on U.S. citizens and launch invasions of countries in the Middle East.

Why it’s persuasive: The Bush administration was pretty darn evil. Evidence does suggest that they were planning an invasion of Iraq well before the terror attacks.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: In all other respects, the Bush/Cheney administration was cartoonishly inept. The invasion of Iraq, for example, was a cock-up of global proportions. Liberty University graduates were given prime leadership positions in the Coalition Provisional Authority in spite of a complete lack of experience or training. Nobody foresaw the sacking of Baghdad’s priceless antiquities. Then, there was the shrink-wrapped $9 billion that someone thought it would be a good idea to send into a war zone — which then vanished without a trace.

Other Bush initiatives that failed include the privatization of Social Security, the failed attempt to convert all of U.S. Attorneys’ offices in the country into Karl Rove’s own farm of political mills, Guantanamo Bay, the response to Hurricane Katrina and the elevation to national prominence of a full coterie of brainless incompetents like Alberto “I don’t recall” Gonzales, Douglas “Stupidest fucking guy on the planet” Feith and Michael “Heckuva Job, Brownie” Brown.

In other the words, the Bush administration were the kind of guys who could fuck up a baked potato. To think that they could manage to engineer an operation as deadly simple but devastatingly precise as the 9/11 attacks is like thinking that a schnauzer puppy could play the complete piano sonatas of Ludwig Van Beethoven.

2. Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen: This strains credulity a little less than the theory that the entire attack was carried out on the president and vice president’s direct orders.

Why it’s persuasive: The administration did go on to use the attacks as a lever to enact some of its foulest policy agendas. There is also the story about the infamous Bin Laden Memo that said the Saudi extremist was planning on launching attacks in the U.S., which Bush notoriously responded to by saying “You’ve covered your ass.”

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: A lot of liberals who suffered through the eight years of Cheney and Bush would like to cast them as universally malign and capable of all forms of nefariousness. However, the real problem with the Bush years was that people in the highest offices in the land consistently let ideology blind them to the actual facts on the ground. Again and again, you can find stories of the administration wanting something to be true (WMDs in Iraq, anyone?) and simply firing people until they found someone who agreed with them.

People who subscribe to this theory have, in the words of author Robert Heinlein, “attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.”

If you’re still in doubt about this, go take a look at those infamous seconds of President Bush sitting there goggle-eyed for seven minutes with a copy of My Pet Goat in his hands from the morning of the attacks. This is simply not the face of a man whose evil plan is working.

3. 9/11 didn’t actually happen: This is where some of the most entertaining “Truther” theories can be found. There are apparently thousands of people out there who believe that the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were hit by missiles fired from within the U.S. and that the whole spectacle was elaborately staged in order to strike terror into the nation’s heart and make us more malleable and ready to accept the One World Government.

These theories encompass the full range of delusional hooey, including the idea that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, which an astonishing number of people believe in spite of the piles of evidence to the contrary.

Why it’s persuasive: The false flag narrative is oddly comforting to some people. One would believe that it would have the inverse effect, to make people more frightened and paranoid that forces so powerful and amoral exist that they would either kill thousands of people with missiles or make it look like it happened in order to subdue the populace.

However, when we look at the real psychological motivations behind conspiracy mongering, it becomes clear that the people who believe this kind of rot take comfort in the fact that it helps them make a kind of sense out of random and confusing world. To believe that everything happens because of a huge, all-encompassing plot projects a coherent narrative on to an out-of-control world and gives the lunk-headed believer a sense of specialness and purpose. Kind of like Christianity.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Missiles cloaked by holograms of airplanes? Really?

4. Mossad did it: This is the theory that the Israeli intelligence agency carried out the attacks in order to galvanize the U.S. against Muslim nations and cement the bond between the U.S. and Israel.

Why it’s persuasive: Amid the weird strain of anti-Semitism that seems to run through the conspiracy community there is simultaneously a sort of belief that the Israeli military is full of superhuman Terminator soldiers who can do anything a U.S. soldier can do, but even more ruthlessly and efficiently. Plus: Krav maga.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Bush and the neocons were already so far up Israel’s ass that they could taste it when Benjamin Netanyahu changed brands of toothpaste. Why would the country even need to plan such a massive operation to get what it could obtain simply by asking nicely?

5. Some other bunch of Jews did it: That aforementioned strain of anti-Semitism, the controlled demolition theories and the false flag contingent all overlap in the belief that the World Trade Center landlord Larry Silverstein was behind the whole thing in the world’s most elaborate “Jewish lightning” arson scam.

Why it’s persuasive: Truthers cite the fact that Silverstein took out an insurance policy on the Twin Towers a year before 9/11 that had a provision against terrorist attacks. They quote his decision to pull the fire rescue teams out of Building No. 7 as evidence that he gave the order for Building 7 to be demolished.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Of course Silverstein’s WTC insurance policy had a terrorist attack rider. The building was bombed by terrorists in February of 1993. The order to “pull it” on Building 7 was the order to pull out the fire rescue teams. Building 7 had a 20-story gash in it that it got when Tower 1 collapsed.

Again, this is an instance where anti-Semites attribute terrifying and sweeping powers to the International Cabal of Jews Who Run Everything. It hardens back to the original conspiracy theory, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an early 20th century anti-Semitic text that was purported to be the Jews’ handbook for global domination, but was in fact written in Russia as a ploy to discredit and smear Russian Zionists.

6. Aliens did it: In 2006, Dr. Judy Wood posited that the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93 were all “dustified” by energy weapons fired from space.

Why it’s persuasive: Because, well, the Truth is Out There.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Honestly, students of the many incompetencies and clusterfucks of Bush years might find it easier to believe that space aliens carried out these attacks than the same people who brought you the “Mission Accomplished” banner and “freedom fries.” But, no, this disaster was very much made by men operating on an agenda of religious and geopolitical extremism.


http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/heres-our-handy-guide-to-911-conspiracy-theories-and-how-we-know-theyre-bllshit/

Ah well because "they" wrote it, I must believe it.
Repeat; I must believe it.

Why it's persuasive:
Because "they" said it so it must be true.
(I must believe it)

Why you probably shouldn't believe it:

Because "they" said it.
And because there are too many other believable theories out there.
Because I'm not a robot.


Rest in peace to all those who lost their lives.
May the truth come out one day x

To be honest Eddie, I was just hoping to see what you thought of their rebuttals to each of the points made on each conspiracy claim. Hope you do as I would be very interested.

All the best.

Have a lovely evening didge x

So you aren't going to consider the rebuttals at all Eds? ;-)

Eilzel wrote:So you aren't going to consider the rebuttals at all Eds? ;-)

Interesting that none have Eilzel?

Well when you think about it, its not interesting at all. loi
The reason why we have seen none take on these rebuttals. Is because this is a fresh look at making rebuttals at the very core to all of the motives for the conspiracy claims. We both know they have rarely addressed the actual core motives for the conspiracies, but post supposed anomalies etc which they get from their conspiracy bible sites. They concentrate on claims like claiming no plane hit the pentagon etc and constantly duck out of the core motives for the claims. They failed to grasp they need the motives to make sense in order for the conspiracy claims to work.That is why many of them avoid the core motives, as their conspiracies will fall apart very quickly.

So as this is thresh these new rebuttals, I doubt this has been countered on the conspiracy sites yet. So they have nothing to google and source an answer. Well not yet anyway lol. It just proves that they know very little about 9/11 and go off what others claim on the conspiracy sites. Where they never question just how absurd the conspiracy claims are when you rationalize the motives.

That is why they have ducked out, they have nothing to resource from their conspiracy sites to counter back with yet. Hence their silence.

MIT professor Noam Chomsky doesn’t know what happened to “Building 7″ of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

But he is convinced that so-called “9/11 Truthers” don’t have the answer.

During a lecture on “Policy and the Media Prism” at the University of Florida a few weeks ago, 9/11 truth activist Bob Tuskin said the mainstream media had covered up evidence that Building 7 imploded in a controlled demolition. Tuskin asked Chomsky if he was finally ready to “jump on board with” 9/11 conspiracy theories.

“You’re right that there’s a consensus among a miniscule number of architects and engineers,” Chomsky replied. “They are not doing what scientists and engineers do when they think they’ve discovered something.”

“What you do when you think you’ve discovered something is write articles in scientific journals, give talks at the professional societies, go to the civil engineering department at MIT or Florida or wherever you are, and present your results, then proceed to try to convince the national academies, the professional society of physicists and civil engineers, the departments of the major universities, convince them that you’ve discovered something.”

“There happen to be a lot of people around who spend an hour on the Internet and think they know a lot physics, but it doesn’t work like that. There’s a reason there are graduate schools in these departments,” he continued.

Chomsky dismissed the claim that scientists and engineers hadn’t followed typical procedures because they felt intimidated by the government. He said publishing an article in an academic journal was virtually risk-free compared to other forms of political activism.

“There is just overwhelming evidence that the Bush administration wasn’t involved,” Chomsky added. “Very elementary evidence. You don’t have to be a physicist to understand it. You just have to think for a minute.”

He noted that the Bush administration blamed the 9/11 attacks on Saudi hijackers. If the U.S. government had staged the attacks as a pretense to invade Iraq, they could have just as easily blamed Iraqi hijackers and avoided the need to “concoct wild stories about weapons of mass destruction” as their justification.

Watch video, uploaded to YouTube by Bob Tuskin, below:




http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/noam-chomsky-slaps-down-911-truther-people-spend-an-hour-on-the-internet-and-think-they-know-physics/


Blimey even the wet lefty Noam smacks down the conspiracy loons.

Each plane contained about 20 tons of Aluminium. Leaking jet fuel caught fire and the high tempeture melted the Aluminium. Lots of water in tanks on roof. When molten Aluminium meets water it explodes with more force than Dynamite,hence the reports that people heard the explosives and thought they were Bombs!

I think there is some quite compelling evidence that the alleged attacks on the twin towers were not what they appeared...

Eilzel wrote:So you aren't going to consider the rebuttals at all Eds? ;-)

Erm no?
I don't even consider any of them to be worth looking into? And number one is the most likely but I've already covers it on the threads here?

I don't even look into Elvis being alive yet there are many that claim to have seen him or know he's alive.

Some things are utter bollocks; either made up by armchair nutters or nutters that work in powerful media manipulation and government jobs.

Nice try boys.

Don't fancy biting.

You can see the stuff I give the time of day to, on the threads here.

eddie wrote:Ah well because "they" wrote it, I must believe it.
Repeat; I must believe it.

Why it's persuasive:
Because "they" said it so it must be true.
(I must believe it)

Why you probably shouldn't believe it:

Because "they" said it.
And because there are too many other believable theories out there.
Because I'm not a robot.


Rest in peace to all those who lost their lives.
May the truth come out one day x

This is still the likeliest and most believable post

I think I just explained what happened, any other explanation is bullshit!

eddie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:So you aren't going to consider the rebuttals at all Eds? ;-)

Erm no?
I don't even consider any of them to be worth looking into? And number one is the most likely but I've already covers it on the threads here?  

I don't even look into Elvis being alive yet there are many that claim to have seen him or know he's alive.

Some things are utter bollocks; either made up by armchair nutters or nutters that work in powerful media manipulation and government jobs.

Nice try boys.

Don't fancy biting.

You can see the stuff I give the time of day to, on the threads here.

So what you are really saying is you do not want to read them incase it ends up proving to you the conspiracies are wrong. There is no other explanation if you are convinced you are right Eddie where you believe it is a cover up.
I mean I have ended up watching countless of the vids you have posted up. Fair enough so as I am able to see what they are claiming in order to counter, but I always check claims, before making any view on them.
Its nothing to do with biting, with have had a tirade of threads started on the topic making a new claim after claim.
We debate your threads, so to make excuses Eddie is either wishing to stick your head in the sand, not allowing yourself to be open, by then challenging the rebuttals or you refuse to read them as you are already highly skeptical the conspiracy claims are wrong. My guess is the later point and that you are clearly not very convinced by the conspiracies, because if you are convinced then these rebuttals should be easy for you to take on.

I don't dispute it nicko. The established and so far uncontested truth is brainwashed Islamist terrorists flew those passenger planes into the WTC. Nothing produced as yet really contends this key factor. Anti-Jews, conspiracists, Islamist apologists and the rest have nothing but hearsay and speculation.

A plane didn't hit the pentagon... where is all the footage from what is one of the highest security buildings in the world...!?


There were no bodies or plane wreckage in the field that supposedly had a people laden passenger plane hit it.


The first tower 'plane' hit had numerous eye witnesses saying it ncr not a plane, too small to be a passenger air plane.


Plus the speed and manoeuvres that are claimed in both towers are not conducive to the actual planes claimed were used to hit them.


Building 7 came down in what looked like controlled demolition at free fall speed when not hit by anything.


The media said it had collapsed a long time before it had actually happened.


Both the towers also came down in what looked like controlled demolition at free fall speed.


Traces of thermite were found in dust from towers.

Tommy Monk wrote:A plane didn't hit the pentagon... where is all the footage from what is one of the highest security buildings in the world...!?
Hearsay not backed up any sound reasoning. CCTV does not cover every inch of ground, where a plane travelling at over 500 miles an hour is pot luck if it passes in line of sight of a camera.
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made on the article and also your reasoning is absurd.


There were no bodies or plane wreckage in the field that supposedly had a people laden passenger plane hit it.
False.
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


The first tower 'plane' hit had numerous eye witnesses saying it ncr not a plane, too small to be a passenger air plane.
Unreliable, as many people easily confuse what they believe they have seen. This is evident from the countless conflicting reports that come in after nearly every catastrophic event 
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


Plus the speed and manoeuvres that are claimed in both towers are not conducive to the actual planes claimed were used to hit them.
Which shows you have not listened to the audios and go by another unfounded claim
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


Building 7 came down in what looked like controlled demolition at free fall speed when not hit by anything.
False
The cause was fire, just as building 5 partially collapsed also due to fire. This is very easy to prove when you see the Penthouse on the video fall first and was the first part of the building to collapse. After this the rest of the building collapsed.
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


The media said it had collapsed a long time before it had actually happened.
The media get things wrong as is often the case where confusion still reigns after such an event, so that is nothing more than easily explained just us every other poor point you have made
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article

Both the towers also came down in what looked like controlled demolition at free fall speed.
False based on the fact you are no expert in either Engineering or explosives and going off what others have claimed who also have no evidence. Also the buildings did not even free fall. 
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


Traces of thermite were found in dust from towers.

So Tommy did as expected and outlandish claims all easily explain or false or wrong, failing to tackle a single rebuttal on the motives claimed in regards to the conspiracies.

lol you cannot make it up how funny it is.
Counter the articles points, we have done claims made many times and if you again try to deflect this thread I shall just bump the article as the next post.
So all you could do was deflect lol

Try again:








1. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney made 9/11 happen: This is the theory that the Bush administration and their band of neocons planned the attacks in advance, orchestrating the hideous destruction that followed as a “false flag” attack so that they might subvert the rule of law, increase surveillance on U.S. citizens and launch invasions of countries in the Middle East.

Why it’s persuasive: The Bush administration was pretty darn evil. Evidence does suggest that they were planning an invasion of Iraq well before the terror attacks.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: In all other respects, the Bush/Cheney administration was cartoonishly inept. The invasion of Iraq, for example, was a cock-up of global proportions. Liberty University graduates were given prime leadership positions in the Coalition Provisional Authority in spite of a complete lack of experience or training. Nobody foresaw the sacking of Baghdad’s priceless antiquities. Then, there was the shrink-wrapped $9 billion that someone thought it would be a good idea to send into a war zone — which then vanished without a trace.

Other Bush initiatives that failed include the privatization of Social Security, the failed attempt to convert all of U.S. Attorneys’ offices in the country into Karl Rove’s own farm of political mills, Guantanamo Bay, the response to Hurricane Katrina and the elevation to national prominence of a full coterie of brainless incompetents like Alberto “I don’t recall” Gonzales, Douglas “Stupidest fucking guy on the planet” Feith and Michael “Heckuva Job, Brownie” Brown.

In other the words, the Bush administration were the kind of guys who could fuck up a baked potato. To think that they could manage to engineer an operation as deadly simple but devastatingly precise as the 9/11 attacks is like thinking that a schnauzer puppy could play the complete piano sonatas of Ludwig Van Beethoven.

2. Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen: This strains credulity a little less than the theory that the entire attack was carried out on the president and vice president’s direct orders.

Why it’s persuasive: The administration did go on to use the attacks as a lever to enact some of its foulest policy agendas. There is also the story about the infamous Bin Laden Memo that said the Saudi extremist was planning on launching attacks in the U.S., which Bush notoriously responded to by saying “You’ve covered your ass.”

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: A lot of liberals who suffered through the eight years of Cheney and Bush would like to cast them as universally malign and capable of all forms of nefariousness. However, the real problem with the Bush years was that people in the highest offices in the land consistently let ideology blind them to the actual facts on the ground. Again and again, you can find stories of the administration wanting something to be true (WMDs in Iraq, anyone?) and simply firing people until they found someone who agreed with them.

People who subscribe to this theory have, in the words of author Robert Heinlein, “attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.”

If you’re still in doubt about this, go take a look at those infamous seconds of President Bush sitting there goggle-eyed for seven minutes with a copy of My Pet Goat in his hands from the morning of the attacks. This is simply not the face of a man whose evil plan is working.

3. 9/11 didn’t actually happen: This is where some of the most entertaining “Truther” theories can be found. There are apparently thousands of people out there who believe that the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were hit by missiles fired from within the U.S. and that the whole spectacle was elaborately staged in order to strike terror into the nation’s heart and make us more malleable and ready to accept the One World Government.

These theories encompass the full range of delusional hooey, including the idea that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, which an astonishing number of people believe in spite of the piles of evidence to the contrary.

Why it’s persuasive: The false flag narrative is oddly comforting to some people. One would believe that it would have the inverse effect, to make people more frightened and paranoid that forces so powerful and amoral exist that they would either kill thousands of people with missiles or make it look like it happened in order to subdue the populace.

However, when we look at the real psychological motivations behind conspiracy mongering, it becomes clear that the people who believe this kind of rot take comfort in the fact that it helps them make a kind of sense out of random and confusing world. To believe that everything happens because of a huge, all-encompassing plot projects a coherent narrative on to an out-of-control world and gives the lunk-headed believer a sense of specialness and purpose. Kind of like Christianity.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Missiles cloaked by holograms of airplanes? Really?

4. Mossad did it: This is the theory that the Israeli intelligence agency carried out the attacks in order to galvanize the U.S. against Muslim nations and cement the bond between the U.S. and Israel.

Why it’s persuasive: Amid the weird strain of anti-Semitism that seems to run through the conspiracy community there is simultaneously a sort of belief that the Israeli military is full of superhuman Terminator soldiers who can do anything a U.S. soldier can do, but even more ruthlessly and efficiently. Plus: Krav maga.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Bush and the neocons were already so far up Israel’s ass that they could taste it when Benjamin Netanyahu changed brands of toothpaste. Why would the country even need to plan such a massive operation to get what it could obtain simply by asking nicely?

5. Some other bunch of Jews did it: That aforementioned strain of anti-Semitism, the controlled demolition theories and the false flag contingent all overlap in the belief that the World Trade Center landlord Larry Silverstein was behind the whole thing in the world’s most elaborate “Jewish lightning” arson scam.

Why it’s persuasive: Truthers cite the fact that Silverstein took out an insurance policy on the Twin Towers a year before 9/11 that had a provision against terrorist attacks. They quote his decision to pull the fire rescue teams out of Building No. 7 as evidence that he gave the order for Building 7 to be demolished.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Of course Silverstein’s WTC insurance policy had a terrorist attack rider. The building was bombed by terrorists in February of 1993. The order to “pull it” on Building 7 was the order to pull out the fire rescue teams. Building 7 had a 20-story gash in it that it got when Tower 1 collapsed.

Again, this is an instance where anti-Semites attribute terrifying and sweeping powers to the International Cabal of Jews Who Run Everything. It hardens back to the original conspiracy theory, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an early 20th century anti-Semitic text that was purported to be the Jews’ handbook for global domination, but was in fact written in Russia as a ploy to discredit and smear Russian Zionists.

6. Aliens did it: In 2006, Dr. Judy Wood posited that the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93 were all “dustified” by energy weapons fired from space.

Why it’s persuasive: Because, well, the Truth is Out There.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Honestly, students of the many incompetencies and clusterfucks of Bush years might find it easier to believe that space aliens carried out these attacks than the same people who brought you the “Mission Accomplished” banner and “freedom fries.” But, no, this disaster was very much made by men operating on an agenda of religious and geopolitical extremism.


http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/heres-our-handy-guide-to-911-conspiracy-theories-and-how-we-know-theyre-bllshit/

I'LL definitely have to go to Specsavers, I distinctly saw a plane fly into the Tower.

Did on second tower hit... not the first.

Tommy Monk wrote:Did on second tower hit... not the first.

Wrong you made an unsubstantiated claim, of which you have still not address the rebuttals to the 6 conspiracy motives:

Try again:







1. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney made 9/11 happen: This is the theory that the Bush administration and their band of neocons planned the attacks in advance, orchestrating the hideous destruction that followed as a “false flag” attack so that they might subvert the rule of law, increase surveillance on U.S. citizens and launch invasions of countries in the Middle East.

Why it’s persuasive: The Bush administration was pretty darn evil. Evidence does suggest that they were planning an invasion of Iraq well before the terror attacks.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: In all other respects, the Bush/Cheney administration was cartoonishly inept. The invasion of Iraq, for example, was a cock-up of global proportions. Liberty University graduates were given prime leadership positions in the Coalition Provisional Authority in spite of a complete lack of experience or training. Nobody foresaw the sacking of Baghdad’s priceless antiquities. Then, there was the shrink-wrapped $9 billion that someone thought it would be a good idea to send into a war zone — which then vanished without a trace.

Other Bush initiatives that failed include the privatization of Social Security, the failed attempt to convert all of U.S. Attorneys’ offices in the country into Karl Rove’s own farm of political mills, Guantanamo Bay, the response to Hurricane Katrina and the elevation to national prominence of a full coterie of brainless incompetents like Alberto “I don’t recall” Gonzales, Douglas “Stupidest fucking guy on the planet” Feith and Michael “Heckuva Job, Brownie” Brown.

In other the words, the Bush administration were the kind of guys who could fuck up a baked potato. To think that they could manage to engineer an operation as deadly simple but devastatingly precise as the 9/11 attacks is like thinking that a schnauzer puppy could play the complete piano sonatas of Ludwig Van Beethoven.

2. Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen: This strains credulity a little less than the theory that the entire attack was carried out on the president and vice president’s direct orders.

Why it’s persuasive: The administration did go on to use the attacks as a lever to enact some of its foulest policy agendas. There is also the story about the infamous Bin Laden Memo that said the Saudi extremist was planning on launching attacks in the U.S., which Bush notoriously responded to by saying “You’ve covered your ass.”

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: A lot of liberals who suffered through the eight years of Cheney and Bush would like to cast them as universally malign and capable of all forms of nefariousness. However, the real problem with the Bush years was that people in the highest offices in the land consistently let ideology blind them to the actual facts on the ground. Again and again, you can find stories of the administration wanting something to be true (WMDs in Iraq, anyone?) and simply firing people until they found someone who agreed with them.

People who subscribe to this theory have, in the words of author Robert Heinlein, “attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.”

If you’re still in doubt about this, go take a look at those infamous seconds of President Bush sitting there goggle-eyed for seven minutes with a copy of My Pet Goat in his hands from the morning of the attacks. This is simply not the face of a man whose evil plan is working.

3. 9/11 didn’t actually happen: This is where some of the most entertaining “Truther” theories can be found. There are apparently thousands of people out there who believe that the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were hit by missiles fired from within the U.S. and that the whole spectacle was elaborately staged in order to strike terror into the nation’s heart and make us more malleable and ready to accept the One World Government.

These theories encompass the full range of delusional hooey, including the idea that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, which an astonishing number of people believe in spite of the piles of evidence to the contrary.

Why it’s persuasive: The false flag narrative is oddly comforting to some people. One would believe that it would have the inverse effect, to make people more frightened and paranoid that forces so powerful and amoral exist that they would either kill thousands of people with missiles or make it look like it happened in order to subdue the populace.

However, when we look at the real psychological motivations behind conspiracy mongering, it becomes clear that the people who believe this kind of rot take comfort in the fact that it helps them make a kind of sense out of random and confusing world. To believe that everything happens because of a huge, all-encompassing plot projects a coherent narrative on to an out-of-control world and gives the lunk-headed believer a sense of specialness and purpose. Kind of like Christianity.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Missiles cloaked by holograms of airplanes? Really?

4. Mossad did it: This is the theory that the Israeli intelligence agency carried out the attacks in order to galvanize the U.S. against Muslim nations and cement the bond between the U.S. and Israel.

Why it’s persuasive: Amid the weird strain of anti-Semitism that seems to run through the conspiracy community there is simultaneously a sort of belief that the Israeli military is full of superhuman Terminator soldiers who can do anything a U.S. soldier can do, but even more ruthlessly and efficiently. Plus: Krav maga.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Bush and the neocons were already so far up Israel’s ass that they could taste it when Benjamin Netanyahu changed brands of toothpaste. Why would the country even need to plan such a massive operation to get what it could obtain simply by asking nicely?

5. Some other bunch of Jews did it: That aforementioned strain of anti-Semitism, the controlled demolition theories and the false flag contingent all overlap in the belief that the World Trade Center landlord Larry Silverstein was behind the whole thing in the world’s most elaborate “Jewish lightning” arson scam.

Why it’s persuasive: Truthers cite the fact that Silverstein took out an insurance policy on the Twin Towers a year before 9/11 that had a provision against terrorist attacks. They quote his decision to pull the fire rescue teams out of Building No. 7 as evidence that he gave the order for Building 7 to be demolished.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Of course Silverstein’s WTC insurance policy had a terrorist attack rider. The building was bombed by terrorists in February of 1993. The order to “pull it” on Building 7 was the order to pull out the fire rescue teams. Building 7 had a 20-story gash in it that it got when Tower 1 collapsed.

Again, this is an instance where anti-Semites attribute terrifying and sweeping powers to the International Cabal of Jews Who Run Everything. It hardens back to the original conspiracy theory, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an early 20th century anti-Semitic text that was purported to be the Jews’ handbook for global domination, but was in fact written in Russia as a ploy to discredit and smear Russian Zionists.

6. Aliens did it: In 2006, Dr. Judy Wood posited that the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93 were all “dustified” by energy weapons fired from space.

Why it’s persuasive: Because, well, the Truth is Out There.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Honestly, students of the many incompetencies and clusterfucks of Bush years might find it easier to believe that space aliens carried out these attacks than the same people who brought you the “Mission Accomplished” banner and “freedom fries.” But, no, this disaster was very much made by men operating on an agenda of religious and geopolitical extremism.


http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/heres-our-handy-guide-to-911-conspiracy-theories-and-how-we-know-theyre-bllshit/

I don't have to stay in the parameters argument that you set...

Tommy Monk wrote:I don't have to stay in the parameters argument that you set...

You do if you want your argument to be logical.

As far as eyewitness reports, as Didge pointed out, they're notoriously unreliable after horrific events like the attacks. The reason is probably that people who see things like this in person are filled with more terror and negative emotion than they'll likely ever be in their lives, and they're motivated to create a narrative that they can understand and that allows them to cope with the memories.

People do this all the time -- "I lost my job because I stopped going to church and God's punishing me." No, you lost your job because your company decided it would be more profitable without you.

"This is my lucky fishing hat." No, you just happened to catch a few more fish a few times you wore it, and you associate the hat with your success on those occasions.

The Rorschach test uses this principle -- we take things that don't necessarily mean anything and assign meaning to them in order to organize them into our worldviews and psychologically process them. People who have a low tolerance for ambiguity are particularly susceptible.

Not just about eye witness reports though is It...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Not just about eye witness reports though is It...!?

So I take that as you admitting I just knocked down that leg of your "argument" -- good, that's big of you.

Point me at the next leg and I'll sweep that one, too, until the whole thing collapses.

the buildings came down like a steeple jack had set charges...

No, I just swept away your whole argument...

---

"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information." US official quoted in Carl Cameron's Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring.

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war" Motto of the Mossad

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html

All facts.  They were set up to film BEFORE the plane hit.

So Tommy evades answering and sassy spams an article which is antisemitic claiming the Jews in the form of Israel carried this out.
Again she also fail to rebuke the rebuttal with any sound evidence or reason. The article is a load of hearsay, speculation and forming unfounded views to events that happened. That is not evidence but an opinion, a poor one at that.

I wonder if we will actually get someone take the article views and reason with evidence it is wrong. I mean its a no brainier that Israel never did this. Afghanistan was invaded over this. If Israel had of planned this, they would have ensured one of their main enemies took the blame, which adds to the points below. I mean you really must have to hate, comparable to racism to believe Israel carried out 9/11.


Did she address the following?

No





4. Mossad did it: This is the theory that the Israeli intelligence agency carried out the attacks in order to galvanize the U.S. against Muslim nations and cement the bond between the U.S. and Israel.

Why it’s persuasive: Amid the weird strain of anti-Semitism that seems to run through the conspiracy community there is simultaneously a sort of belief that the Israeli military is full of superhuman Terminator soldiers who can do anything a U.S. soldier can do, but even more ruthlessly and efficiently. Plus: Krav maga.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Bush and the neocons were already so far up Israel’s ass that they could taste it when Benjamin Netanyahu changed brands of toothpaste. Why would the country even need to plan such a massive operation to get what it could obtain simply by asking nicely?

5. Some other bunch of Jews did it: That aforementioned strain of anti-Semitism, the controlled demolition theories and the false flag contingent all overlap in the belief that the World Trade Center landlord Larry Silverstein was behind the whole thing in the world’s most elaborate “Jewish lightning” arson scam.

Why it’s persuasive: Truthers cite the fact that Silverstein took out an insurance policy on the Twin Towers a year before 9/11 that had a provision against terrorist attacks. They quote his decision to pull the fire rescue teams out of Building No. 7 as evidence that he gave the order for Building 7 to be demolished.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Of course Silverstein’s WTC insurance policy had a terrorist attack rider. The building was bombed by terrorists in February of 1993. The order to “pull it” on Building 7 was the order to pull out the fire rescue teams. Building 7 had a 20-story gash in it that it got when Tower 1 collapsed.

Again, this is an instance where anti-Semites attribute terrifying and sweeping powers to the International Cabal of Jews Who Run Everything. It hardens back to the original conspiracy theory, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an early 20th century anti-Semitic text that was purported to be the Jews’ handbook for global domination, but was in fact written in Russia as a ploy to discredit and smear Russian Zionists.

Just another part of the whole organised story...



There were numerous eye witness accounts who said quite clearly that the first tower impact was not a passenger plane...


Was way too small and was a totally different sound.

Plenty of people said they heard and saw the first impact into tower 1 and that it was not a huge passenger plane as claimed as it was much too small and sounded much different.


Plus there are other technical arguments about this being the passenger plane claimed... namely the claimed speed and flightpath/manoeuvres etc being inconsistent with that which is capable from claimed passenger plane...



However this is only one aspect of the whole story that is highly questionable... I have highlighted some of the other major points earlier on thread.

We have over killed to death the debates on lame pathetic claims you conspiracy theorists have on 9/11. None of which provides any evidence to your claims. They are poorly invented to make fit the conspiracy paranoid view point. What has been presented her is 6 rebuttals to the most important part of the conspiracy theory. The motive. Conspiracy claims without motives, have utterly no meaning. Where they will be easily dismissed. So as seen you all have posted on this thread but not one has rebuked the articles reasoning.

So posting up beliefs you have in the 9/11 conspiracy, is just the poorest deflection going Tommy. Its not going to work either, as the more you avoid  and deflect with conspiracy claims.The more you make it far,easier to show and prove that the Conspiracy 9/11 theorists avoid reasonable questions to their claims. They instead run away.

Hence why I am rooting for you Tommy to allow your stubbornness to control your reasoning and continue to prove my point where you continue to deflect.

Good luck lol

The questions are totally valid...


I am interested in facts and truth.



That is my only motivation.

The questions from the article are very valid on the motives for 9/11 conspiracies. So its about time you actually debated them, which is evident you have no intention to do.

So I guess that is you bowing out then by your last admission to failure to debate the points at hand. Facts? Well of the points you raised today on 9/11. The vast majority lacked any facts but speculation, hearsay and inventions. lol

No problem, enjoy your more twisty waffle lol

Try to answer my points, dodge...


All of which are highly legitimate and totally avoided by yourself...

Tommy Monk wrote:A plane didn't hit the pentagon... where is all the footage from what is one of the highest security buildings in the world...!?
Hearsay not backed up any sound reasoning. CCTV does not cover every inch of ground, where a plane travelling at over 500 miles an hour is pot luck if it passes in line of sight of a camera.
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made on the article and also your reasoning is absurd.


There were no bodies or plane wreckage in the field that supposedly had a people laden passenger plane hit it.
False.
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


The first tower 'plane' hit had numerous eye witnesses saying it ncr not a plane, too small to be a passenger air plane.
Unreliable, as many people easily confuse what they believe they have seen. This is evident from the countless conflicting reports that come in after nearly every catastrophic event 
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


Plus the speed and manoeuvres that are claimed in both towers are not conducive to the actual planes claimed were used to hit them.
Which shows you have not listened to the audios and go by another unfounded claim
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


Building 7 came down in what looked like controlled demolition at free fall speed when not hit by anything.
False
The cause was fire, just as building 5 partially collapsed also due to fire. This is very easy to prove when you see the Penthouse on the video fall first and was the first part of the building to collapse. After this the rest of the building collapsed.
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


The media said it had collapsed a long time before it had actually happened.
The media get things wrong as is often the case where confusion still reigns after such an event, so that is nothing more than easily explained just us every other poor point you have made
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article

Both the towers also came down in what looked like controlled demolition at free fall speed.
False based on the fact you are no expert in either Engineering or explosives and going off what others have claimed who also have no evidence. Also the buildings did not even free fall. 
This is not a rebuttal to a single point made  on the article


Traces of thermite were found in dust from towers.

So Tommy did as expected and outlandish claims all easily explain or false or wrong, failing to tackle a single rebuttal on the motives claimed in regards to the conspiracies.

lol you cannot make it up how funny it is.
Counter the articles points, we have done claims made many times and if you again try to deflect this thread I shall just bump the article as the next post.
So all you could do was deflect lol

Try again:








1. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney made 9/11 happen: This is the theory that the Bush administration and their band of neocons planned the attacks in advance, orchestrating the hideous destruction that followed as a “false flag” attack so that they might subvert the rule of law, increase surveillance on U.S. citizens and launch invasions of countries in the Middle East.

Why it’s persuasive: The Bush administration was pretty darn evil. Evidence does suggest that they were planning an invasion of Iraq well before the terror attacks.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: In all other respects, the Bush/Cheney administration was cartoonishly inept. The invasion of Iraq, for example, was a cock-up of global proportions. Liberty University graduates were given prime leadership positions in the Coalition Provisional Authority in spite of a complete lack of experience or training. Nobody foresaw the sacking of Baghdad’s priceless antiquities. Then, there was the shrink-wrapped $9 billion that someone thought it would be a good idea to send into a war zone — which then vanished without a trace.

Other Bush initiatives that failed include the privatization of Social Security, the failed attempt to convert all of U.S. Attorneys’ offices in the country into Karl Rove’s own farm of political mills, Guantanamo Bay, the response to Hurricane Katrina and the elevation to national prominence of a full coterie of brainless incompetents like Alberto “I don’t recall” Gonzales, Douglas “Stupidest fucking guy on the planet” Feith and Michael “Heckuva Job, Brownie” Brown.

In other the words, the Bush administration were the kind of guys who could fuck up a baked potato. To think that they could manage to engineer an operation as deadly simple but devastatingly precise as the 9/11 attacks is like thinking that a schnauzer puppy could play the complete piano sonatas of Ludwig Van Beethoven.

2. Bush and Cheney let 9/11 happen: This strains credulity a little less than the theory that the entire attack was carried out on the president and vice president’s direct orders.

Why it’s persuasive: The administration did go on to use the attacks as a lever to enact some of its foulest policy agendas. There is also the story about the infamous Bin Laden Memo that said the Saudi extremist was planning on launching attacks in the U.S., which Bush notoriously responded to by saying “You’ve covered your ass.”

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: A lot of liberals who suffered through the eight years of Cheney and Bush would like to cast them as universally malign and capable of all forms of nefariousness. However, the real problem with the Bush years was that people in the highest offices in the land consistently let ideology blind them to the actual facts on the ground. Again and again, you can find stories of the administration wanting something to be true (WMDs in Iraq, anyone?) and simply firing people until they found someone who agreed with them.

People who subscribe to this theory have, in the words of author Robert Heinlein, “attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity.”

If you’re still in doubt about this, go take a look at those infamous seconds of President Bush sitting there goggle-eyed for seven minutes with a copy of My Pet Goat in his hands from the morning of the attacks. This is simply not the face of a man whose evil plan is working.

3. 9/11 didn’t actually happen: This is where some of the most entertaining “Truther” theories can be found. There are apparently thousands of people out there who believe that the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were hit by missiles fired from within the U.S. and that the whole spectacle was elaborately staged in order to strike terror into the nation’s heart and make us more malleable and ready to accept the One World Government.

These theories encompass the full range of delusional hooey, including the idea that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, which an astonishing number of people believe in spite of the piles of evidence to the contrary.

Why it’s persuasive: The false flag narrative is oddly comforting to some people. One would believe that it would have the inverse effect, to make people more frightened and paranoid that forces so powerful and amoral exist that they would either kill thousands of people with missiles or make it look like it happened in order to subdue the populace.

However, when we look at the real psychological motivations behind conspiracy mongering, it becomes clear that the people who believe this kind of rot take comfort in the fact that it helps them make a kind of sense out of random and confusing world. To believe that everything happens because of a huge, all-encompassing plot projects a coherent narrative on to an out-of-control world and gives the lunk-headed believer a sense of specialness and purpose. Kind of like Christianity.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Missiles cloaked by holograms of airplanes? Really?

4. Mossad did it: This is the theory that the Israeli intelligence agency carried out the attacks in order to galvanize the U.S. against Muslim nations and cement the bond between the U.S. and Israel.

Why it’s persuasive: Amid the weird strain of anti-Semitism that seems to run through the conspiracy community there is simultaneously a sort of belief that the Israeli military is full of superhuman Terminator soldiers who can do anything a U.S. soldier can do, but even more ruthlessly and efficiently. Plus: Krav maga.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Bush and the neocons were already so far up Israel’s ass that they could taste it when Benjamin Netanyahu changed brands of toothpaste. Why would the country even need to plan such a massive operation to get what it could obtain simply by asking nicely?

5. Some other bunch of Jews did it: That aforementioned strain of anti-Semitism, the controlled demolition theories and the false flag contingent all overlap in the belief that the World Trade Center landlord Larry Silverstein was behind the whole thing in the world’s most elaborate “Jewish lightning” arson scam.

Why it’s persuasive: Truthers cite the fact that Silverstein took out an insurance policy on the Twin Towers a year before 9/11 that had a provision against terrorist attacks. They quote his decision to pull the fire rescue teams out of Building No. 7 as evidence that he gave the order for Building 7 to be demolished.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Of course Silverstein’s WTC insurance policy had a terrorist attack rider. The building was bombed by terrorists in February of 1993. The order to “pull it” on Building 7 was the order to pull out the fire rescue teams. Building 7 had a 20-story gash in it that it got when Tower 1 collapsed.

Again, this is an instance where anti-Semites attribute terrifying and sweeping powers to the International Cabal of Jews Who Run Everything. It hardens back to the original conspiracy theory, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an early 20th century anti-Semitic text that was purported to be the Jews’ handbook for global domination, but was in fact written in Russia as a ploy to discredit and smear Russian Zionists.

6. Aliens did it: In 2006, Dr. Judy Wood posited that the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93 were all “dustified” by energy weapons fired from space.

Why it’s persuasive: Because, well, the Truth is Out There.

Why you probably shouldn’t believe it: Honestly, students of the many incompetencies and clusterfucks of Bush years might find it easier to believe that space aliens carried out these attacks than the same people who brought you the “Mission Accomplished” banner and “freedom fries.” But, no, this disaster was very much made by men operating on an agenda of religious and geopolitical extremism.


http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/heres-our-handy-guide-to-911-conspiracy-theories-and-how-we-know-theyre-bllshit/



Just to post again where I easily answered his poor hearsay questions.

He still further avoids the article points on motive.

Why?

As he has no idea rendering his arguments and points on 9/11 meaningless