Reply to: Bill Clinton and 9/11

[Joe Black]

Who cares? Claire Forlani is on TV. Puts life in perspective... sigh....

B*ll*cks, I missed that. Guess I'll just have to get out the ol' home video instead.

[Ardesco]

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...031&q=jfk+bush

theres a good one

[Asterix]

Conspiracy theories

Like someone said earlier, if only conspiracy theories were offering a simpler explanation to account for what happened than the official line. Be it the assassination of JFK, the death of Diana or the fall of the Twin Towers etc etc etc. all require us to be more gullible than were we to believe what ACTUALLY happened. For this reason, I am out.

[Ardesco]

Well I don't belive that oswald did it by himself if he did. That one bullet he used to kill the president is mighty amazing and i'd love to have a few of those, I could take a random shot into the houses of parliament and the amazing bullet would take out TB and half of his cronies in one fell swoop

[oraclesmith]

Re targets : I still think that any sizeable civil target would have done, simply because the US wasn't used to foreign terrorists daring to blow up anything on US soil. The shock of planes taking out the UN building in New York, for example, would not only shock the US to go to war, but would also bring many other nations in against the terrorists than have done so far.

The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they overanalyse everything. My wife does the same - I'd say something completely innocently and she'd interpret it with loads of 'meaning' (intonation, phrasing, underlying meanings of words blah blah).

It's also a form of denial - eg. that there must be more to it than a bunch of nutters with penknives because that would be (a) not complicated enough and (b) mean that the US civilian infrastructure is populated with numb-nuts. When you've been hit badly, it's always tempting to believe that you've been somehow cheated.

Take JFK. It's not enough for people to believe that a no-hoper like Oswald actually killed their national hero. But he certainly did.

Also, all real conspiracies have weak points. The participants are only human and are tempted by riches and fame to eventually spill the beans on what they've been up to. Anything on a wide scale involves quite a few people, many of which will not be fully-paid up conspirators and will be even more open to influence.

[Ardesco]

I've seen a lot of boolocks aout it too, but there are just too many coincidences for it all to have happened with no help/knowledge from the US government.

[Mailman]

Have a hunt around for some info and you may well be shocked.

Yeah but you will only be shocked at the level of ignorance by the 9/11 conspiracy cnuts

You know what really gets me is that the conspiracy cnuts say what really happened didnt happen BUT as proof they offer up something even more rediculous than what really happened

Its even more of a joke when you see the half truths and lies that are trotted forward as irrefutable proof of the governments, controlled by them evil zionist joooooooos, involvement in a massive cover up!

But its true, the ignorant will believe anything. Just take a look at [insert who ever you dont like from the forums here] .

Mailman

[Ardesco]

What seems more probable?

Rag tag band of afgan rejects who had extremely low levels of flying skill manage to hijack 4 aircraft using nothing but bolt cutters somehow hidden in thier jackets and then fly 2 aircraft into the twin towers with american military doing absolutely nothing to bring the planes down.

A third airliner flown like a military jet is then slammed into the pentagon which has probably the most highly protected airspace of anywhere in the world (but it hits the only part of the pentagon that was specifically renovated so that it could withstand and airplane being flown into it.

2 steel core buildings with steel that is guranteed to retain its structural integrity when exposed to temperatures in excess of 2000 degrees for several hours suddenly melt due to a fire caused by air fuel (which burns at around 1700 degrees) and completely collapse falling down onto thier own footprint (one takes an hour and one takes 30 mins). This is despite the fact that there are radio trasmissions from a fireman who reached the floor the aircraft hit stating that the fires aren't that bad and he thinks they can be put out (obviously a raging inferno well above 1700 degrees up there).

1 Steel core building not even hit by a plane and a few buildings away from the twin towers also collapses due to a raging inferno that is obviously as hot as the jet fuel fires.

or....

The US government had something to do with it all?

Have a hunt around for some info and you may well be shocked.

[Paddy]

Which seems more probable?

Scenario A: Democratic administration caught up in sex scandal and possible presidential impeachment miss various golden chances to take out Al Qaeda leadership instead preside over first WTC bombing in 93, US embassy bombings in East Africa etc

or

Scenario B: Republican administration that came to power with no intention of getting involved in world politics somehow involved in highly intricate plot to fly planes into WTC and then use controlled explosions to bring them down as a pretext to invading Afghanistan and the Iraq to secure oil supplies and boost military spending.

Hmmmmmm. whatever floats your boat!!!

No, scenario C. Explosives already in the WTC building by Bin Laden family who were involved in building them. US Administration aware of the plot but both too incompetent to act and others wanted it to happen as a matter of political convenience.

[wendigo100]

...his administration failed to act on intelligence to take Bin Laden out...

To the movies? A cosy meal for two?

[Chico]

Which seems more probable?

Scenario A: Democratic administration caught up in sex scandal and possible presidential impeachment miss various golden chances to take out Al Qaeda leadership instead preside over first WTC bombing in 93, US embassy bombings in East Africa etc

or

Scenario B: Republican administration that came to power with no intention of getting involved in world politics somehow involved in highly intricate plot to fly planes into WTC and then use controlled explosions to bring them down as a pretext to invading Afghanistan and the Iraq to secure oil supplies and boost military spending.

Hmmmmmm. whatever floats your boat!!!

[ratewhore]

But if you hit an embassy building or a UN building you wouldn't scare the general populace into agreeing to back you to go shoot jolly foreigner in his own country.

Johnny Foreigner.

HTH...

[Paddy]

A lot of people are making a lot of money selling arms for the war in Iraq. There has been senate investigations on the expenditure that reviled items sold for silly prices by manufactures like a nut a bolt for a tank costing $3000. Make no bones about it, people are making a fortune out of 9/11 and Iraq.

[Ardesco]

But if you hit an embassy building or a UN building you wouldn't scare the general populace into agreeing to back you to go shoot jolly foreigner in his own country.

Most yankies would probably say oh UN got hit, oh well. Oh embassy well that happens in those horrible countries where our embassies are based.

To get the most bang for buck you would have to hit something that americans never thought would get hit, that way you scare the populace into beliving that they a personally likely to get attacked and killed unless you send your troops out to kill all and sundry.

[oraclesmith]

What I don't understand about the conspiracy theories is that it wouldn't make sense for a US President wanting a war to weaken his country's military and financial strength. The logical thing would be to hit the UN building or maybe the Embassy district or maybe an airport.