Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

9/11 programme on 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
At the risk of sounding like David Icke - 'Governments dont conspire'?

Strictly for the birds that one.

The rebuttal of all theories that challenge this really isn't taking up the rational position. Go and ask Noam Chomsky.
 

davek said:
At the risk of sounding like David Icke - 'Governments dont conspire'?

Strictly for the birds that one.

The rebuttal of all theories that challenge this really isn't taking up the rational position. Go and ask Noam Chomsky.
Click to expand...
Well sure, and I'm certainly one who has no problems in believing that governments cynically, practically and venally lie to the people who they are supposed to represent on a fairly regular basis.

However, to give credence to a conspiracy theory which:
i) would necessarily involve so much expertise (in other words, not necessarily extremist amateurs)
ii) involve so many people in the planning and perpetration and
iii) would be so water-tight that it can remain sekrit years after
requires a suspension of rational behaviour and such a belief in the deepest cynicism that I find it hard to contemplate without harder evidence than the squelchy stuff that has so far been aired.

A "genuine debate" does not involve pointing to some wacky website and saying, see some people can write html and publish it so it must be true.

I've never been to Antarctica, but I'm sure I could find a website about the flat earth that would prove to me that I would fall off the edge of the world if I tried.
 
atrottel said:
Well sure, and I'm certainly one who has no problems in believing that governments cynically, practically and venally lie to the people who they are supposed to represent on a fairly regular basis.

However, to give credence to a conspiracy theory which:
i) would necessarily involve so much expertise (in other words, not necessarily extremist amateurs)
ii) involve so many people in the planning and perpetration and
iii) would be so water-tight that it can remain sekrit years after
requires a suspension of rational behaviour and such a belief in the deepest cynicism that I find it hard to contemplate without harder evidence than the squelchy stuff that has so far been aired.

A "genuine debate" does not involve pointing to some wacky website and saying, see some people can write html and publish it so it must be true.

I've never been to Antarctica, but I'm sure I could find a website about the flat earth that would prove to me that I would fall off the edge of the world if I tried.
Click to expand...

So we all believe that Governments can cover things up...

...just not 9/11.

Too big, too hard, and too many people all who know exactly what they are doing and exactly why they are doing it in Government. :unsure:

So did we find Osama yet?

We got Saddam, that bugger, you know, the guy that did, erm, you know that guy that had heaps stuff to do with 9/11....weapons of Mass Destruction and all that...North Korea have WMD's? Well they wouldn't have oil and pipelines and stuff...

Sorry, conspiracy theory is just so darn confusing I got sidetracked there
 
atrottel said:
Well sure, and I'm certainly one who has no problems in believing that governments cynically, practically and venally lie to the people who they are supposed to represent on a fairly regular basis.

However, to give credence to a conspiracy theory which:
i) would necessarily involve so much expertise (in other words, not necessarily extremist amateurs)
ii) involve so many people in the planning and perpetration and
iii) would be so water-tight that it can remain sekrit years after
requires a suspension of rational behaviour and such a belief in the deepest cynicism that I find it hard to contemplate without harder evidence than the squelchy stuff that has so far been aired.

A "genuine debate" does not involve pointing to some wacky website and saying, see some people can write html and publish it so it must be true.

I've never been to Antarctica, but I'm sure I could find a website about the flat earth that would prove to me that I would fall off the edge of the world if I tried.
Click to expand...


I haven't seen anything other than the broadest of brushstrokes in terms of 9/11 theories, so I'm not advocating or attacking their precise details. I'm underlining the validity of the point made by those theorists that, given other examples from history, it would not be beyond a ruling elite to have ignored information prior to the attack knowing full well that if an attack did succeed their strategists had a geo-political plan to implement that would to be to their advantage. That seems to be at the core of their argument and it appears straight forward and uncontroversial to me. It's about as far away from David Icke territory as you could get. In fact, anyone casting doubt that this is at least a valid position to take up given some of the anomolies surrounding 9/11 is by far and away the most obvious example of someone not able to grasp reality.
 
So we all believe that Governments can cover things up...

...just not 9/11.
Click to expand...
Actually, I said they can lie. One of the points is that governments, especially western governments are frequently comically useless when it comes to successful cover-ups of those lies (because people leave government service and have big mouths or there are competing blocs within a government, or, or)

So thus part of my scepticism about the 9/11 put-up job theory is the fact that you would need either a government decision to deliberately kill over 2,500 of their own citizens, plus over 300 people of other nationalities including extremely close allies, thus putting those alliances at grave risk or presumably including their governments in this massive deception,
or, a rogue government unit with the technical and secret capability to go against the express laws of their own country both during and after these attacks and still keep absolute secrecy.

Rationally speaking, I would rather believe that the moon landings are fake or that we are keeping little grey people in New Mexico or that Obama is a socialist Kenyan sleeper agent (just to make it clear, I don't believe any of those things either).

And, as far as government lies go, I'm perfectly happy with believing that there were conspiracies of lies about reasons for war or economic turmoil because there have been previous instances of them (Iran-Contra, Nicaragua, Iraq, etc.). But none of them have involved the cold-blooded execution of thousands of innocent civilians from their own country or (possibly even more inconceivably) from countries which are allies but which would recoil from any relationship were the truth ever to come out.
 

davek said:
I'm underlining the validity of the point made by those theorists that, given other examples from history, it would not be beyond a ruling elite to have ignored information prior to the attack knowing full well that if an attack did succeed their strategists had a geo-political plan to implement that would to be to their advantage.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have as much of a problem with this kind of theory, were there any plausible evidence to suggest this had taken place and were there any mitigating reasons (which would be acceptable to the people of the country or their allies) why this action would have been taken.

You are absolutely right that similar actions have taken place before (the bombing of Coventry being one example).

However most of the "theories" surrounding 9/11 that I have seen seem to go far further than - and indeed ignore - what you are suggesting and concentrate more weaving the alleged use of explosives to bring down towers, economic benefits, "unexplained" government aviation movements, relative lack of casualties at the Pentagon, etc., into a tapestry of a monstrous conspiracy.

And in the absence of any satisfactory (at least in my eyes) evidence that a) there was pre-knowledge of this plot and b ) that this knowledge was deliberately ignored or suppressed in full acceptance of the outcome, then I'll continue to consider it a fantasy for the wilder and woollier conspiracists.

Added: And, of course, the previous historical incidents to which you refer have come to light, which is why you are referring to them...
 
atrottel said:
I wouldn't have as much of a problem with this kind of theory, were there any plausible evidence to suggest this had taken place and were there any mitigating reasons (which would be acceptable to the people of the country or their allies) why this action would have been taken.

You are absolutely right that similar actions have taken place before (the bombing of Coventry being one example).

However most of the "theories" surrounding 9/11 that I have seen seem to go far further than - and indeed ignore - what you are suggesting and concentrate more weaving the alleged use of explosives to bring down towers, economic benefits, "unexplained" government aviation movements, relative lack of casualties at the Pentagon, etc., into a tapestry of a monstrous conspiracy.

And in the absence of any satisfactory (at least in my eyes) evidence that a) there was pre-knowledge of this plot and b ) that this knowledge was deliberately ignored or suppressed in full acceptance of the outcome, then I'll continue to consider it a fantasy for the wilder and woollier conspiracists.

Added: And, of course, the previous historical incidents to which you refer have come to light, which is why you are referring to them...
Click to expand...


I dont think you need to go outside the US Government to find grist for the conspiracy theorists mill.

The former CIA head, George Tenet, revealed that he'd warned Condoleeza Rice of an imminent attack in July 2001 and it fell on deaf ears.

The US Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, stated in his book that the Bush Government were planning for an attack on Iraq in February 2001 and that 9/11 made it feasible.


Is that evidence of government complicity to murder thousands of its own citizens? No. But is it any wonder a conspiracy theory has gained traction?
 
Last edited:
Can't inwardly reconcile that it would be an inside job. A government wouldn't kill thousands of its citizens to launch a propaganda war. They have other ways.

WTC 7 is incredibly suspicious though.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top