9/11 Conspiracy road trip

  • Page

    of 3 First / Last

    Previous
  • Dunneh 8 Sep 2011 21:24:56 150 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Is anyone watching this on BBC 3?

    To summarise

    - 5 conspiracy theorists go to states where the presenter tries to convince them there was no conspiracy.

    I cannot believe these pricks.
  • NBZ 8 Sep 2011 21:28:03 2,371 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Which ones - the theorists of the ones trying to disprove them?

    There are unanswered questions - most likely due to US government incompetence and panic.

    Like how did they find the passports of the bombers at the scene when everything else was vapourised in the hear and how come a few of the people named to be hijackers were found to be alive years later.

    I assume the latter is a case of either mistaken identity or multiple people with the same names (and looks? I havent investigated it too deeply) but the former shows that they at a minimum had an inkling about the plot.
  • Red-Moose 8 Sep 2011 21:29:36 5,346 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    /adds NBZ to terrorist watchlist
  • Dunneh 8 Sep 2011 21:31:13 150 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I'm not getting into the theories, other than i think they are bollocks.

    However, just take a look at how dense these theorists actually are. For me, they are the absolute stereotype. It's actually quite difficult to watch.
  • NBZ 8 Sep 2011 21:34:51 2,371 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    In the plane bit I always wondered (but not enough to actually look into it) where was the damage from the wings (which is shown in the computer model... is there pictures of it on the actual site?)
  • NBZ 8 Sep 2011 21:35:04 2,371 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Red-Moose wrote:
    /adds NBZ to terrorist watchlist

    Boo!
  • FWB 8 Sep 2011 21:41:37 44,209 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Not pricks. Just morons.

    There is only one major event of the day that I would not be surprised may have been a cover up... the destruction of the flight in Pennsylvania. I could believe it was shot down IF it was. I'd order it if I was the President. But of course I would also come up with a story. As necessary as it would have been, you don't want to publicise shooting your own plane down. It also wouldn't be too difficult to keep that quiet.
  • NBZ 8 Sep 2011 21:43:59 2,371 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    The conspiracies covered (I have seen only two) are not that well covered or that good, especially the latter.

    They should cover the chance that the flight 93 was shot down instead of "it didn't exist".

    But I guess the latter is more ludicrous and easier to disprove (EDIT - though they are not too good at doing that either IMO. Surely they could get more compelling arguments against it?).
  • dnbuk 8 Sep 2011 21:53:03 4,943 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    When you look at the history of the American Government and the lies they have told, and help they've given to people who later became their 'enemies' it's not surprising people don't believe them.
  • FWB 8 Sep 2011 21:54:43 44,209 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    All governments lie, but so successfully on this scale? No chance.
  • Dunneh 8 Sep 2011 21:55:24 150 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Post deleted
  • Dunneh 8 Sep 2011 22:04:02 150 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    i think i would have head butted the wall if i was the presenter, or punt that skinny white girl in the baby maker.
  • Khanivor 8 Sep 2011 22:18:40 40,520 posts
    Seen 21 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    NBZ wrote:
    In the plane bit I always wondered (but not enough to actually look into it) where was the damage from the wings (which is shown in the computer model... is there pictures of it on the actual site?)

    Whenever people think that somehow a plane built out of thin sheets of light metal can withstand smashing into a building I like to link to this video.
  • AaronTurner 8 Sep 2011 22:21:37 7,681 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It's on bbc hd now, the black girl is very hot. That is all.
  • ecureuil 8 Sep 2011 22:24:14 76,705 posts
    Seen 14 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    There's definitely some questions that should be answered about 9/11. I don't fully believe the explanations given by the government. The more you read about the events of that day, the more you realise there was some real shady stuff going on. This does NOT mean it was an "inside job", and again, reading of any events of that day would make that clear, too.

    Unfortunately there's a band of monumental nutters who seem to think George Bush wired the explosives himself, which obfuscates any sensible discourse on the subject.
  • PearOfAnguish 8 Sep 2011 23:26:15 7,201 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The frizzy haired bint was an absolute cretin. She's clearly bought into it so much her pride will not allow her to admit when she is wrong. Out of all of them she was the most monumentally stupid. Weirdly the guy who I thought was going to be most irritating turned out to be sensible and admitted he'd made a mistake.

    Like how did they find the passports of the bombers at the scene when everything else was vapourised

    "Everything else" was not vaporized, massive amounts of paperwork and other easily flammable material was left scattered all over the area. The alternative is that someone dropped the passport there so we all knew who to blame, because airport security cameras and the passenger manifest weren't enough to tell who was onboard. Makes sense.

    how come a few of the people named to be hijackers were found to be alive years later.

    Oh ffs, they weren't. This is just so much bollocks. All it takes is 2 seconds on Google to disprove this nonsense.

    Don't even need any evidence, the barest shred of logic should tell you it's a stupid thing to believe. Unless you think that having arranged a massive conspiracy and committed mass murder they would then have allowed the people upon which they blamed it to keep their lives? And that not one of them would have come forward?

    There is only one major event of the day that I would not be surprised may have been a cover up... the destruction of the flight in Pennsylvania. I could believe it was shot down IF it was. I'd order it if I was the President. But of course I would also come up with a story. As necessary as it would have been, you don't want to publicise shooting your own plane down. It also wouldn't be too difficult to keep that quiet.

    They did authorise the military to fire upon hijacked planes, the BBC Conspiracy Files episode the other week interviewed Laura Bush, who said permission was given. However they also pointed out that due to various cock-ups fighter jets were too late and sent in the wrong direction.

    But there would be no need for them to cover it up even it had been shot down. After the events of that day they would have been perfectly justified.


    They should cover the chance that the flight 93 was shot down instead of "it didn't exist".

    Who ever said it didn't exist? The plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania after, as far as they were able to ascertain, passengers fought the terrorists.
  • TheSaint 8 Sep 2011 23:27:17 14,293 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    That girl and the Asian guy couldn't seem to see the distinction between an event happening and some people covering up some details to cover their arses and the entire event being faked.

    I also enjoyed her science argument about mobile phones not working at 42000ft while totally disregarding air phones, which have been common place on planes for years.
  • FWB 8 Sep 2011 23:31:19 44,209 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago

    They did authorise the military to fire upon hijacked planes, the BBC Conspiracy Files episode the other week interviewed Laura Bush, who said permission was given. However they also pointed out that due to various cock-ups fighter jets were too late and sent in the wrong direction.

    Most likely, however...

    But there would be no need for them to cover it up even it had been shot down. After the events of that day they would have been perfectly justified.

    No chance. Doesn't matter how justified you and I would see it. They'd be all kinds of lawsuits flying around. Plenty of people would be complaining: "Why couldn't they take out an engine? Why couldn't they force the plane down?". You name it, someone would come up with it.

    It's far more convenient to have the plane crash by itself. I know that if I had shot it down I'd quickly throw out a different story. Much better to swallow.

    On a side note, in my job I meet people from all over the world on a daily basis. This 9/11 conspiracy stuff has cropped up many a time and I can say about 99% of them think it was an inside job. Pretty pathetic.
  • PearOfAnguish 8 Sep 2011 23:38:02 7,201 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    TheSaint wrote:
    That girl and the Asian guy couldn't seem to see the distinction between an event happening and some people covering up some details to cover their arses and the entire event being faked.

    I also enjoyed her science argument about mobile phones not working at 42000ft while totally disregarding air phones, which have been common place on planes for years.

    Was that when she claimed they didn't have satellites in 2001 and it all used "wired stations"? Proper face-palm moment. They still use base stations now you stupid cow! And she's clearly not aware that mobile phones do work on aircraft, and can work at airliner cruising altitudes, it's just that the signal is not intentionally sent into the air and the planes go faster than the networks are designed to handle so the signal can be intermittent. She also appeared either ignorant of, or was deliberately ignoring, airfones.

    No chance. Doesn't matter how justified you and I would see it. They'd be all kinds of lawsuits flying around. Plenty of people would be complaining: "Why couldn't they take out an engine? Why couldn't they force the plane down?". You name it, someone would come up with it.

    It's far more convenient to have the plane crash by itself. I know that if I had shot it down I'd quickly throw out a different story. Much better to swallow.

    Actually plenty of chance, they could easily have justified this action, and we know it was authorised. Regardless, there's no evidence to show it was shot down.
  • FWB 8 Sep 2011 23:41:20 44,209 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    You need to pay more attention to the public. Doesn't matter how logical you and I would see the action. Plenty of people would not see it that way. he government lies about far, far, far less on a daily basis. And in America's fickle sue, sue, sue society...

    Heck, plenty of people still think the government orchestrated the entire event.
  • Johhny_Lizard_Face 8 Sep 2011 23:47:09 6 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    All seems legit to me. This is boring, lets talk about something else. How would you guys feel if god started talking to you from heaven. That would be pretty awesome right guys? It would be crazy at first but wow, it'd be cool.
  • PearOfAnguish 8 Sep 2011 23:50:31 7,201 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    No doubt some members of the public would kick up a fuss and people would try and sue and I'm sure that would have been taken into consideration, but at the end of the day that is irrelevant, military logic would have won. Permission would not have been given had they not been prepared to follow it through.

    They'd have been in far more trouble if they had been caught lying about it afterwards. Would have been tough to hide something like that, too many people involved and someone would have spoken. Any adviser with half a brain would have recommended they go public with it, and preventing another WTC-style attack would be all the justification they would need.
  • FWB 8 Sep 2011 23:57:13 44,209 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I'm sure they would be prepared to go through. Any sane person would.

    As for the logic of lying... when PR is involved they'll try anything. You can't even get a straight answer from politicians about simple questions, even when every one around them knows what it is. Just look at the blatant lies over the Second Gulf War, all in the name to sell it to the public. They're constantly getting caught out and get but a slap. God knows the number things they never get found out on.

    Not particularly hard to "cover up".
  • Bonesy 9 Sep 2011 00:03:24 36 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Even though I don't believe in the 9/11 conspiracy and that there's much better conspiracies out there with more unexplainable evidence, they did answer alot of questions like the plane that hit the pentagon that left a small exit hole.

    But I'm still surprised that the pilot was able to fly that low
  • FWB 9 Sep 2011 00:04:12 44,209 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    He wasn't. He crashed.
  • NBZ 9 Sep 2011 00:05:21 2,371 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Khanivor wrote:
    NBZ wrote:
    In the plane bit I always wondered (but not enough to actually look into it) where was the damage from the wings (which is shown in the computer model... is there pictures of it on the actual site?)

    Whenever people think that somehow a plane built out of thin sheets of light metal can withstand smashing into a building I like to link to this video.

    (I cant seem to see anything on that page)

    I only asked because the computer model they show in the pentagon explaining the damage seemed to show damage from the wings too (but without destroying pillars).
  • PearOfAnguish 9 Sep 2011 00:05:46 7,201 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    There was no plane, man, it was a cruise missile. The real plane was taken to an airfield and the passengers are dead/living off Swiss bank accounts (delete according to your preferred theory).
  • Deleted user 9 September 2011 00:07:07
    I pity people that truly think there was a "conspiracy theory".
  • Deleted user 9 September 2011 00:07:08
    I pity people that truly think there was a "conspiracy theory".
  • Page

    of 3 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply