The tin-foil hat conspiracy brigade

[Craig R]

Hope you have been watching BBC2 since 11:20

 

Debunking lots of the daft 9/11 conspiracy theories.

[tommythejambo]

Never saw it. Might try and catch it on BBC iplayer or something.

 

Any examples of what it went into?

[Craig R]

Never saw it. Might try and catch it on BBC iplayer or something.

 

Any examples of what it went into?

 

Definitely worth watching. It covered pretty much every conspiracy theory regarding 9/11 I had heard of, from the Pentagon not being hit by a plane to the towers being brought down by explosives.

[Jambo83]

Some of the strangest things I heard about the Pentagon crash were:

 

There was no damage done to the lawn infront of the burning hole in the building! This does not compute considering a jumbo jet had apparently just smashed into the side of the building. There was no sign of the usual rubble that is normally associated with plane crashes either.

 

A petrol station a mile or two from the Pentagon had it's CCTV seized by Government agents minutes after the explosion

 

It's an interesting conspiracy

[Uberjambo]

Definitely worth watching. It covered pretty much every conspiracy theory regarding 9/11 I had heard of, from the Pentagon not being hit by a plane to the towers being brought down by explosives.

 

How did it explain the Towers being brought down with explosives?

[Spitonastranger]

Hope you have been watching BBC2 since 11:20

 

Debunking lots of the daft 9/11 conspiracy theories.

 

thats right all the politicians and their friends always tell the truth:confused:

[Brian Whittaker's Tache]

Gotta link on iplayer?

[Craig R]

How did it explain the Towers being brought down with explosives?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6341851.stm#2

 

After 9/11, investigations by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) determined that the collapse of the Twin Towers was due to the impact of the planes and the large quantities of exploding jet fuel released into the buildings.

 

Those questioning this account point to the lateral puffs of smoke that emerged from the towers just ahead of their collapse. Could these be explosive devices planted as part of a conspiracy?

 

They also argue that jet fuel, which has a far lower burning temperature than the melting point of steel, is unlikely to have weakened the steel supporting framework sufficient to prompt the collapse of the Twin Towers.

 

Jet fuel burns at 800 degrees Celsius whereas temperatures must reach 1,500 degrees Celsius for steel to melt.

 

The explanation for the puffs of smoke offered by the authors of the Popular Mechanics study is that as the floors crashed down of top of one another, a pressure wave forced dust and smoke out of the windows.

 

As for the fuel temperature - the official explanation holds that whilst steel does indeed melt at 1,500 degrees Celsius, it loses half its strength at a much lower temperature of 650 degrees Celsius.

 

The fuel might not have melted the steel columns, but it weakened the structure, and especially the trusses that supported each floor, to the point that they could no longer support the weight on the building.

[Chester™]

Both of the above are US government agencies. Now they arent going to be entirely neutral here are there....

 

No one is going to be happy from either camp over this subject. The government will keep issuing denials from its own departments and workers eg teachers and scientists and "debunking" conspiract claims, while the opposition will do their best to counter such claims.

 

We will probably never get the true answer to it all.

[269miles]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6341851.stm#2

 

IIRC , the steelwork should have been painted with some sort of cement compound in order to increase strength in event of a fire. It wasn't. Thus adding to the weakness of the structure.

[hmfc_steve]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/item/b00795mb.shtml?order=aztitle%3Aalphabetical&filter=category%3A100005&scope=iplayercategories&start=1&version_pid=b006x0qz

[coppercrutch]

I think the questions about WTC #7 (IIRC) are the most interesting. There are so many interviews with firemen etc.. just after it goes down saying that is was 'taken down'. All pointed out that it was done by explosives.

 

Again this doesn't prove anything but very interesting. Also the fact that the BBC reported on WTC 7 going down before it actually happened is rather strange to say the least...

 

There is definitely something dodgy about the attacks. Exactly what that is however is the tricky thing.

[Uberjambo]

The explanation for the puffs of smoke offered by the authors of the Popular Mechanics study is that as the floors crashed down of top of one another, a pressure wave forced dust and smoke out of the windows.

 

 

The video footage of the towers coming down did not show dust and smoke coming out of the windows. I was sceptical till I saw the footage, posted on here.

I am sure that someone can repost a link to it. What is seen there does not match the above excuse.

[Craig R]

The explanation for the puffs of smoke offered by the authors of the Popular Mechanics study is that as the floors crashed down of top of one another, a pressure wave forced dust and smoke out of the windows.

 

 

The video footage of the towers coming down did not show dust and smoke coming out of the windows. I was sceptical till I saw the footage, posted on here.

I am sure that someone can repost a link to it. What is seen there does not match the above excuse.

 

Sounds like a perfectly valid explanation to me.

 

More valid than the building deliberately being brought down via explosives while half the city's emergency services were still inside the building. That's just plain stupid.

[coppercrutch]

Sounds like a perfectly valid explanation to me.

 

More valid than the building deliberately being brought down via explosives while half the city's emergency services were still inside the building. That's just plain stupid.

 

Maybe. But go and have a wee look on Youtube. It seems half of the cities emergency crews thought WTC7 was brought down by 'explosives'....

 

All there for anyone to see. Maybe they were all wrong and caught up in the confusion of the day.

 

But seeing as they are no doubt fairly experienced in explosions I imagine they knew what they were talking about.....

[Uberjambo]

Sounds like a perfectly valid explanation to me.

 

More valid than the building deliberately being brought down via explosives while half the city's emergency services were still inside the building. That's just plain stupid.

 

Have you seen the video? What can be seen ain't coming out of no window.

[Craig R]

Have you seen the video? What can be seen ain't coming out of no window.

 

No. I just started a thread about the programme and then didn't bother watching it.

 

How can you tell if it was coming from a window or not?

[Uberjambo]

Don't be flippant. Look again at the corners of the building, floor height. No windows there.

[Craig R]

Don't be flippant. Look again at the corners of the building, floor height. No windows there.

 

Are you having a laugh? Look how many windows there were.

[Uberjambo]

Look Mate, I have my views based on what I saw on that video. I was sceptical until then. What I saw on it was not windows blowing out. If it was then the whole side would have came in, not just a tiny corner at the concrete supports to each floor.

[Chester™]

I was sceptical until then.

 

Sceptical of what?

[Uberjambo]

Sceptical of what?

 

It being a conspiracy. Still don't know but am open to information.

[Craig R]

Look Mate, I have my views based on what I saw on that video. I was sceptical until then. What I saw on it was not windows blowing out. If it was then the whole side would have came in, not just a tiny corner at the concrete supports to each floor.

 

Please post a video showing the concrete corner supports getting blown up as I certainly haven't seen this footage.

 

Watch this, its at totally random places:

 

When floors are collapsing vertically upon another, there is going to be a horizontal burst of pressure.

[Uberjambo]

http://www.fugly.com/videos/5702/911_wtc_squibs.html

[Pants Shaton]

Anyone who believe the US Government perpetrated the 9/11 attacks is, quite simply, a *********.

[bean counter]

I missed this programme but have seen similar in the past I was surprised at the claim in one that within 24 hours the US Gov had secretly flown out of the country over 20 of Bin Ladens relatives

[coppercrutch]

http://www.fugly.com/videos/5702/911_wtc_squibs.html

 

There are too many dodgy things about this to be completely innocent.

 

When you see these corner bits blowing out I can only think the same thing. Why would they just blow out at one little single point ? If they were forced out by the pressuse as the US agencies suggest then surely it would come out the entire side, and not just one little point ?

 

Also why were so many people talking about WT7 being 'taken down' if it wasn't. Where would this have come from ?

 

Dodgy with a capital D !!!

[Sconnie]

Anyone who believe the US Government perpetrated the 9/11 attacks is, quite simply, a *********.

 

Consider me a *********.

[Craig R]

http://www.fugly.com/videos/5702/911_wtc_squibs.html

 

How can you possibly say that is right on the corner? The right hand side of the building is at 90 degrees to the camera so that smoke/dust could easily be coming from any of the windows down that side.

[Uberjambo]

How can you possibly say that is right on the corner? The right hand side of the building is at 90 degrees to the camera so that smoke/dust could easily be coming from any of the windows down that side.

 

As mentioned above, why was the whole side not taken out?

 

If it was a window.

[coppercrutch]

As mentioned above, why was the whole side not taken out?

 

If it was a window.

 

Indeed. I am no engineer. However the theory suggests that these windows blew out due to force. Well the force must have been the weight and pressure of thousands of tons of concrete and steel coming down.

 

Just how do the other windows manage to stay intact for a wee bit longer ? Would they not be pulverised immmediately...

[The Future's Maroon]

Watch Loose Change (Final Cut) - that certainly raise's a load of questions, and goes into alot of detail regarding loads of different incidents that happend that day (and before, and after).

 

Twin Towers - Work being done of floors leading up to the whole incident, the fact the owner took out a ?Billion doller insurance policy to cover 'terrorist attacks' just a few weeks before 911, how did the steel melt, explosions before the collapse, the way they fell - my favorite....how a terrorist (who hijacked the plane) passport was found almost intact at the bottom etc etc

 

WTC 7 - one of the most puzzling parts to it all, e.g. some of the 'residents' in WTC7, certain fraud files which went missing, how the BBC had a reporter saying it had collapsed while the building was still standing behind them and how it 'fell' etc etc.

 

 

George Bush caught telling porkies about it.

 

Major Guliani's famous 'pull it' comment - pull it being a term meaning to bring a building down.

 

The fact the Bush family and Bin Ladens have been in business together for decades.

 

Why a host of Bin Ladens were flown out of the country the day before (I think it was the day before...could have been that morning)

 

Pentagon - no danger a commercial airliner hit that, as said above...not a mark on the grass (must have been an amazing pilot to get that right), no large bits of debri....the damage done to the Pentagon. Why was video footage from a gas station and nearby Hotel which would clearly show the attack snatched by the FBI/CIA within mins.....why have they only ever released a couple of stills rather than video footage?

 

The plane that supposidly came down in Pensilvania (sp). again.....no debri.

 

And lots more.

 

 

Yes it is a conspiricy theroy video and its put across that way deliberatly.....but still asked loads of questiond yet to be answered by the government (which probably will never be answered).

 

 

http://www.loosechange911.com/finalcut/

[Pants Shaton]

This conspiracy theory is not just nonsense it is deeply offensive to the victims and their families.

 

The only points which are worthy of consideration are:

 

1. United 93 was shot down by the USAF to prevent it reaching its target.

2. The attacks were known about, but permitted to provide a pretext for war in Afghanistan/Iraq.

 

Neither of these is likely. Option 1 is, at least, justifiable and the 'Let's roll!' story preferable to the victims' families than a 'being shot out of the sky' account of events.

 

To believe that the WTC was brought down by controlled explosions is beyond ridiculous. The 2 planes hit it. Countless independent engineers, of various nationalities, attest to the mechanism by which burning jet fuel brought down the structure. Building 7 - how many experts are people willing to ignore whilst listening to wild eyed amateurs and the bedsit sad-cases who produced loosechange?

 

Ultimately the conspiracy is not feasible because:

 

1. The unprecedented level of administrative competence required to pull off a conspiracy like this is hardly in keeping with the Bush administration's record.

 

2. How many people, at a minimum, would have to have been in on it? How do you keep that many people silent. How does the originator of that idea broach it with another person, "Hey, I was thinking of manufacturing a fake attack on our country, killing thousands of professional New Yorkers - you in?"???

 

3. You've planned the greatest conspiracy theory of all time but proceed to commit a number of, if the conspiracy theorists are to be believed, elementary errors. Sorry that doesn't make sense.

 

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

 

I'm no fan of US foreign policy but 9/11 should be taken for exactly what it was: a repugnant attack on a secular democratic republic by a band of theocratic facists.

[Craig R]

Watch Loose Change (Final Cut) - that certainly raise's a load of questions, and goes into alot of detail regarding loads of different incidents that happend that day (and before, and after).

 

Twin Towers - Work being done of floors leading up to the whole incident, the fact the owner took out a ?Billion doller insurance policy to cover 'terrorist attacks' just a few weeks before 911, how did the steel melt, explosions before the collapse, the way they fell - my favorite....how a terrorist (who hijacked the plane) passport was found almost intact at the bottom etc etc

 

WTC 7 - one of the most puzzling parts to it all, e.g. some of the 'residents' in WTC7, certain fraud files which went missing, how the BBC had a reporter saying it had collapsed while the building was still standing behind them and how it 'fell' etc etc.

 

 

George Bush caught telling porkies about it.

 

Major Guliani's famous 'pull it' comment - pull it being a term meaning to bring a building down.

 

The fact the Bush family and Bin Ladens have been in business together for decades.

 

Why a host of Bin Ladens were flown out of the country the day before (I think it was the day before...could have been that morning)

 

Pentagon - no danger a commercial airliner hit that, as said above...not a mark on the grass (must have been an amazing pilot to get that right), no large bits of debri....the damage done to the Pentagon. Why was video footage from a gas station and nearby Hotel which would clearly show the attack snatched by the FBI/CIA within mins.....why have they only ever released a couple of stills rather than video footage?

 

The plane that supposidly came down in Pensilvania (sp). again.....no debri.

 

And lots more.

 

 

Yes it is a conspiricy theroy video and its put across that way deliberatly.....but still asked loads of questiond yet to be answered by the government (which probably will never be answered).

 

 

http://www.loosechange911.com/finalcut/

 

The programme the original post is about debunks all the theories in Loose Change.

[hughesie27]

Surely somebody would have seen a plane smash into the Pentagon.

[coppercrutch]

The programme the original post is about debunks all the theories in Loose Change.

 

And I am sure a programme could be made to debunk all the findings in that one too. That is the way of these things. You have to look at both sides and make up your own mind.

 

I have made mine up. There is something dodgy about 9/11. Who it involves and what the story is behind it who knows.

 

But something is dodgy. I would bet every penny I have on that.

[Craig R]

And I am sure a programme could be made to debunk all the findings in that one too. That is the way of these things. You have to look at both sides and make up your own mind.

 

I have made mine up. There is something dodgy about 9/11. Who it involves and what the story is behind it who knows.

 

But something is dodgy. I would bet every penny I have on that.

 

I've weighed up the evidence from both. I'm going with the BBC documentary.

 

I'm open to the possibility that the US Government may have deliberately chosen to ignore the intelligence they had that strikes were going to take place. However I'm more inclined to believe that they were just grossly incompetent. I'm fairly certain they had no part in orchestrating or carrying out the attacks themselves.

[Craig R]

Surely somebody would have seen a plane smash into the Pentagon.

 

Many did.

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

[Chester™]

The programme the original post is about debunks all the theories in Loose Change.

 

I believe the programme in question was made before the Final Cut was released.

 

This conspiracy theory is not just nonsense it is deeply offensive to the victims and their families.

 

As much as I agree in part, there are many many victims and families of those who died who are involved in the 9/11 Truth Movement.

[bean counter]

This conspiracy theory is not just nonsense it is deeply offensive to the victims and their families.

 

The only points which are worthy of consideration are:

 

 

2. The attacks were known about, but permitted to provide a pretext for war in Afghanistan/Iraq.

 

 

Many people believe that in 1941 the American administration knew more than they admitted to about the Pearl Harbour attack.

 

As a result of the attack it gave President FD Roosevelt the excuse\reason he needed and wanted to enter the war

[The Future's Maroon]

Its one of those subjects that people will NEVER agree on.

[coppercrutch]

For anyone who is interested....

 

BBC2 have a programme on tonight at 9pm about the towers. Looks like a 'debunking the conspiracy' sort of deal. I would imagine it ends up not 'proving much. These things rarely do !!

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

For anyone who is interested....

 

BBC2 have a programme on tonight at 9pm about the towers. Looks like a 'debunking the conspiracy' sort of deal. I would imagine it ends up not 'proving much. These things rarely do !!

 

Dont listen to CC its a government plan to brainwash you all via subliminal messages and alien technology to make you more compliant, its all transmitted through the tv, save yourself, save your children, dont watch.

 

Ya bunch of mentalists.

[Ben Dover]

As has been said before, it would take an incredibly well organised cover up to carry this off and one doubts if the powers at work would be competent in doing so ?

Having said that. Did it happen that way ?.............I doubt it. Are there people / agencies that would carry out such a thing for the perceived 'greater good' ?.............yes I believe there are

[coppercrutch]

Dont listen to CC its a government plan to brainwash you all via subliminal messages and alien technology to make you more compliant, its all transmitted through the tv, save yourself, save your children, dont watch.

 

Ya bunch of mentalists.

 

Nah I just think there is something very fishy about the whole thing. Not saying I think the US Government planned this all. However they def know a lot more than they are telling us. What that information is however is anyones guess.

 

You must agree there are dodgy aspects of the collapses. Especially WTC7 ? That is well dodgy IMO.

[Acey]

And I am sure a programme could be made to debunk all the findings in that one too. That is the way of these things. You have to look at both sides and make up your own mind.

 

I have made mine up. There is something dodgy about 9/11. Who it involves and what the story is behind it who knows.

 

But something is dodgy. I would bet every penny I have on that.

 

That's the sort of wishy-washy statement I hate. Have the balls to say what you think; don't hide behind "I'm not believing the official account for the sake of it because I'm FIGHTING THE MAN".

 

By the way, anyone who believes Loose Change loses all credibility. Here's a debunking video for your pleasure.

 

http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

 

By the way, here's the best argument against the conspiracy idiots: how many people do you think would have to be involved in order to successfully plan, rig and detonate several massive buildings? And none of "them" have let slip that they were involved? Impossible.

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

Nah I just think there is something very fishy about the whole thing. Not saying I think the US Government planned this all. However they def know a lot more than they are telling us. What that information is however is anyones guess.

 

You must agree there are dodgy aspects of the collapses. Especially WTC7 ? That is well dodgy IMO.

 

Ive told you before, its the Celtic fans.

[coppercrutch]

That's the sort of wishy-washy statement I hate. Have the balls to say what you think; don't hide behind "I'm not believing the official account for the sake of it because I'm FIGHTING THE MAN".

 

By the way, anyone who believes Loose Change loses all credibility. Here's a debunking video for your pleasure.

 

http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

 

By the way, here's the best argument against the conspiracy idiots: how many people do you think would have to be involved in order to successfully plan, rig and detonate several massive buildings? And none of "them" have let slip that they were involved? Impossible.

 

What planet are you from.

 

What else is a random punter supposed to come out with apart from a 'wishy washy' statement !!??

 

You want me to draft a detailed analysis of a minute by minute theory.....

 

I simply think there have been far too many dodgy things raised by many people that do not all add up. What that means who knows. The US Governmnet know more than they are letting on. I think that is for certain.

 

The US Government does not have to be part of the actual initial events to be part of a 'conspiracy'. It is what happened after the events that is interesting. For example - finding the alleged pilots passport almost intact on the ground after he had flown head first into a building that erupted in a mass of flames.

 

I am no expert but I will give you odds of about 1,000,000,000,000 - 1 of that actually being likely.

 

I don't think the US Government were INITIALLY involved. I think they GOT involved.

[Acey]

 

What else is a random punter supposed to come out with apart from a 'wishy washy' statement !!??

 

You want me to draft a detailed analysis of a minute by minute theory.....

 

I'm just wary; you're very fond of "I was right" posts - just guarding myself against it this time when it's revealed that there was a spelling mistake in the latest official report or something like that.

 

I simply think there have been far too many dodgy things raised by many people that do not all add up.

 

...such as?

[coppercrutch]

I'm just wary; you're very fond of "I was right" posts - just guarding myself against it this time when it's revealed that there was a spelling mistake in the latest official report or something like that.

 

 

 

...such as?

 

I dont think the WTC events will ever end up in 'I was right' territory.

 

And as for 'such as' have a look at the numerous videos in circulation about them. Just because another video comes out and says 'Conspiracy debunked' means not a lot to me. I am sure another will arrive to debunk that one !!

 

Atta's passport has to be the most glaring issue. His passport simply was not found at the bottom off the WTC almost intact. Whether this was part of some sort of conspiracy or the US authorities just took advantage who knows.

 

WTC being reported on before it had even collapsed !!?? Still no official confirmation as to where this information had come from. Dodgy all round IMO.