WHO HERE THINKS

[FUZO]

THE USA HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH BRINGING DOWN THE TOWERS AND THE OTHER BUILDINGS

[mandarb11]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

You know I was never a person into conspiricy theories but as I educate myself about all these "crazy" ideas I find that there is to much truth in them. Did the US have anything to do with 9/11 well just look up Operation Northwoods:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of simulated or real terrorism and violence on US soil or against US interests, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro. As part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative, the plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.

[daved150]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

stratago's had an intresting therory in another post that i find totally believable...i would think that if they (our govern.) had much to do with it, it was along the lines he discribed. more of a after the fact, controll the fall, type of thing.

[T-Man007]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

Anything is possible, but I don't personally believe that we would kill that many of our own people. Don't get me wrong, if one day people confessed to it, I probably would not be surprised because people are capable of anything. I just think that people try too hard to make something out into a conspiracy. I've never seen a weak conspiracy, the people who put those things together really do their homework which is what makes them seem possible. But, when you take the one where the jet hit the pentagon and people actually ask the stupid question 'well, if a jet really hit the pentagon, where's the hole from the wings?' That was valid question to people who are ignorant to the aeronautical function of wings. The wings of a plane are very flexible and bend very far to avoid from being snapped off during flight due to turbulance. So, in hitting a building of that kind of construction, the wings will literally be ripped right off. However, unless you actually know that information, that theory sounds logical. Unfortunately, I do know that information so I don't buy into that one, or any of them for other logical reasons which I'm not going to go into.

[kite]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

I'm still kinda on the fence. Like T said, anything is possible, people do some fukked up shyt. I don't think that the gov. orchestrated it, I mean Osama is on video takin credit for the whole thing, he was just suprised about the extent of the damage. I really don't know to what extent the govt's role was but I do believe that there's more to it than is currently out there.
Ya'll know this thread is gonna give DJ a stiffy don't ya?

[Merc]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

I really hope that our governemnt wouldnt do something like that but I think they either allowed it to happen or had a hand in it in order to rally the people behind it. They even have documents from the 60's describing how they would need something big to happen like pearl harbor to get people to fully support the governemnt in the take over of another country.

Its a scary thought but I wouldnt put it past them...

[Klash]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

THE USA HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH BRINGING DOWN THE TOWERS AND THE OTHER BUILDINGS

I am fairly certain the buildings were intentionally demolished but I don't think the US government had anything to do with the towers collapse. The New York city government might have been involved but in a way consistent with Stratago's theory. Apart from that, I just can't see any motivation for the federal or local governments benefiting from conspiring with terrorists against American citizens.

[daved150]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

I am fairly certain the buildings were intentionally demolished but I don't think the US government had anything to do with the towers collapse. The New York city government might have been involved but in a way consistent with Stratago's theory. Apart from that, I just can't see any motivation for the federal or local governments benefiting from conspiring with terrorists against American citizens.

exactly!! thats what i was trying to say...i think they may have had something to do with controlling the collapse, but thats about it

[mandarb11]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

The problem is to control the demolition of a building takes weeks of advance palnning and literally days to set it up physically! How could they have done all that in a few hours time and with all the chaos going on, almost impossible I say. That article I posted earlier in this thread is not new news, the American government has been playing with the idea to orchastrate terrorist attacks on US soil for a long time now! And who benefits from it, well that is an easy one I won't even touch!

I am one that wants to believe that a government is supposed to protect the people, but as a historian I know that they do not. It is far easier to say that everything is the way the official reports say, as they come from our authority figures. Also conspiracy theorists are looked at by the general public as a bunch of wack jobs, non-conformists that rebel against everything in their lives from parents to governements, does not change the fact that they may very well be right!

[daved150]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

The problem is to control the demolition of a building takes weeks of advance palnning and literally days to set it up physically! How could they have done all that in a few hours time and with all the chaos going on, almost impossible I say. That article I posted earlier in this thread is not new news, the American government has been playing with the idea to orchastrate terrorist attacks on US soil for a long time now! And who benefits from it, well that is an easy one I won't even touch!

I am one that wants to believe that a government is supposed to protect the people, but as a historian I know that they do not. It is far easier to say that everything is the way the official reports say, as they come from our authority figures. Also conspiracy theorists are looked at by the general public as a bunch of wack jobs, non-conformists that rebel against everything in their lives from parents to governements, does not change the fact that they may very well be right!

how about if they set it up YEARS in advance...maybe after the last attack on it, when they realized that it was a serious target and were they to succeed in bringing it down, it would surly destroy and kill many more than in a controll fashion...just an alternative theory that i dont think is beyond the realm of possibilities

[daved150]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

as posted by stratago's in another thread


You don't necessarily have to buy into nefarious conspiracy theories to explain the towers collapsing straight on.

1. The WTC was attacked in 1993.

2. An analysis would determined that if the tower were ever attacked successfully that it would collapse in an uncontrolled fashion, killing thousands or tens of thousands more people than were it to collapse in a controlled fashion.

3. "The 1,500-lb (680 kg) urea nitrate-fuel oil device was intended to knock the North Tower (Tower One) into Tower Two, bringing both towers down and killing 250,000 people" [from Wikipedia]

4. To avoid this possibility, explosives were placed (concealed) within the towers' structure to allow for the possibility of choosing the lesser of two evils.

5. In 2001, the towers were struck again, and this time they were certainly going to collapse.

6. All efforts were made to evacuate both buildings.

7. The buildings would collapse in either a controlled fashion or an uncontrolled fashion.

8. Collapsing in a controlled fashion would save some large number of lives.

9. Some fewer number of lives would be lost by saving more lives.

10. The public could never accept the above calculations, or precautions, which would be seen as premeditated murder by the government of civilians.

11. The public could never be told of the above calculations, because it could not bear the burden.

12. How do you think the public would in fact have reacted had the above version been presented by the White House in September, 2001?

13. The public was never told the truth; the truth was covered up.

14. Suppose all of the above is The Truth. Is that bad or good?

15. What would you have done in light of #1-

[solidground]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

The USA no, members or govt, yes- gov't as a whole of course not. I believe it was "terrorism" but i think it was gov't and elite sponsored terrorism, throughout history the bankers and global elite are the ones calling the shots and making things happen, follow the money and youll get answers..I dont think who is responsible for 9-11 will ever be revealed, it's just crazy imo to not have doubts about the official story. Do you honestly think that high levels of our intelligence didnt know something of this magnitude was going to happen. This was a huuuge operation, and we have one of the best/complex intelligence network in the world.

[mandarb11]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

Can anyone really imagine the government planting explosives in a building in the prospect of a terrorist attack that may never happen? That sounds irrational to me. Imagine people going to work everyday in a building wired with explosives, it just doesn't make much sense. Taking down a building that is on fire, how does that make any sense either, and when has that ever been done before? It caused more death and destruction for the building to fall then to have it burn itself out. Anyone looking at buildings that have burned themselves out find that they look like a skeleton, just the frame is left, instead you take the whole thing down and kill a bunch more people in the process! Explosives are not safe to have sitting around, the only place I have ever heard of this is in a movie with a villian and a hideout rigged with explosives, which he detonates when defeated! lol

There is only one reason to take the buildings down, to eliminate evidence. If they did not fall then forensic scientists would have been able to reconstruct everything, best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make it all a burning rubble.

[daved150]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

Can anyone really imagine the government planting explosives in a building in the prospect of a terrorist attack that may never happen? That sounds irrational to me. Imagine people going to work everyday in a building wired with explosives, it just doesn't make much sense. Taking down a building that is on fire, how does that make any sense either, and when has that ever been done before? It caused more death and destruction for the building to fall then to have it burn itself out. Anyone looking at buildings that have burned themselves out find that they look like a skeleton, just the frame is left, instead you take the whole thing down and kill a bunch more people in the process! Explosives are not safe to have sitting around, the only place I have ever heard of this is in a movie with a villian and a hideout rigged with explosives, which he detonates when defeated! lol

There is only one reason to take the buildings down, to eliminate evidence. If they did not fall then forensic scientists would have been able to reconstruct everything, best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make it all a burning rubble.

WELL, I CAN SEE YOUR POINT AS WELL, WITCH WOULD LEAD ME BACK TO MY ORIGINAL OPINION THAT IT WAS FANATICAL ISLAMIST MILATANTS THAT SLAMMED A COUPLE PLANES INTO A BUILDING THAT MADE IT FALL....I STILL DONT KNOW HOW UN-REALISTIC THAT WOULD BE (WIRING THE BUILDINGS FOR FUTURE INSURANCE)...IS THAT AS UNBELIEVABLE AS A GROUP OF TERRORIST'S CONSPIRING WITH OUR GOVERNMENT AND ANOTHER GUY (WHO WAS OUT TO PULL AN INSURANCE SCAM) TO BRING THE BUILDING'S DOWN? CAN ANYONE REALLY IMAGINE OUR GOVERNMENT CONSPIRING TO KILL US OFF?

[Stout1]

Re: WHO HERE THINKS

Apart from that, I just can't see any motivation for the federal or local governments benefiting from conspiring with terrorists against American citizens.

Not saying I agree but tearing down our rights, how we live, our thought processes, who we elect in the future, etc all would have a POSSIBLE reason why they would or someone in gov't would conspire to commit these acts.