9/11 conspiracy

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:55 pm

let's try this.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:08 pm

(These questions remind me of the logic which says "I beat my wife but she was nagging me so it's her fault.)

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:18 pm

Lulu2 wrote: (These questions remind me of the logic which says "I beat my wife but she was nagging me so it's her fault.)

i'm just trying to accommodate all the apologists for al qaeda. so it seems a fair set.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:19 pm

(We don't have to follow formal rules of debate in order to discuss this, do we?)

Adam Zapple · Post by **Adam Zapple** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:25 pm

I was going to vote that it was perpetrated by Scrat and Spot but since that option wasn't there I went with the first one.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:32 pm

:yh_rotfl

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:47 pm

I went for option 2 "al qaeda, but provoked by US foreign policy, so US govt shares blame" but I don't agree with that last part. Yes the US foreign policy upset them but any reasonable government would seek arbitration and compromise. Saying the govt is responsible is saying they should double guess every move they make! You then reach the stage of doing nothing because you're afraid of any consequences which might occur because of something you've done!

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:21 pm

Very, very close between the first two options (there should always be an Other option in these polls BTW).

The main problems with US foreign policy came with the response to 9-11 rather than the build up to it but I've gone with option 2 purely because of the US government's backing and support for OBL during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan which gave him the base from which to mount his attack.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:27 pm

And so he had no option but to attack the WTC and the Pentagon. Of course. Silly of me not to realize that.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:32 pm

Lulu2 wrote: And so he had no option but to attack the WTC and the Pentagon. Of course. Silly of me not to realize that.

Not at all - and so he had the means to attack the WTC and the Pentagon and the bolt hole to run to after he had done so.

Silly of you not to realise that that was what I was saying (I thought I was being quite explicit that I was referring to the platform from which he mounted the attack rather than the rational behind it).

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:35 pm

Bryn Mawr wrote: Very, very close between the first two options (there should always be an Other option in these polls BTW).

The main problems with US foreign policy came with the response to 9-11 rather than the build up to it but I've gone with option 2 purely because of the US government's backing and support for OBL during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan which gave him the base from which to mount his attack.

there's almost no evidence to support the suggestion that the US directly backed or supported osama bin laden either overtly or covertly. bin laden cofounded the MAK to fund and recruit directly, using his massive family wealth.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:42 pm

"I've gone with option 2 purely because of the US government's backing and support for OBL during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan which gave him the base from which to mount his attack."

++++++ Yup....silly of me not to believe this sounds as if it was the fault of the US govt. Yuppers. Silly.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:28 am

c'mon conspiracy adherents, step up to the plate. be counted.

Post by **spot** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:42 am

anastrophe wrote: c'mon conspiracy adherents, step up to the plate. be counted.
In what way do you distinguish between US Intelligence and its Al Qaeda operatives? Surely Al Qaeda is as much their tool as the Contra terrorists were.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:21 am

what a cowardly response. i expected no less. you have your option above, the last in the list. don't be an evasive twit.

yep, i peeked!

ARgi · Post by **ARgi** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:25 am

option 3 ...

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:26 am

spot wrote: In what way do you distinguish between US Intelligence and its Al Qaeda operatives? Surely Al Qaeda is as much their tool as the Contra terrorists were.

A new low even for you..

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:26 am

SnoozeControl wrote: I think you would've had a better distribution of answers if you hadn't made the results visible.

why? i've never known anyone to be shy about identifying their feelings on the matter elsewhere.

spot clearly believes it was a US govt operation, there's no question about it. so his dancing around, microparsing the possibilities, is just...well, it's typical spot.

ARgi · Post by **ARgi** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:31 am

zinkyusa wrote: A new low even for you..

don't encourage him :wah:

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:44 am

I wasn't going to vote to begin with as I thought it was a bit simplistic but then decided I was being a bit picky.

The thing is the rise of terroprism is due in part to western (and not just the US) foreign policy but also the actions of middle eastern govts in suppressing political freedom in their own countries-maybe the US is culpable for propping them up regardless and bringing down anything remotely smacking of independent thought but at the end of the day if someone does you down how you react to it is your responsibility and no one elses. Not all muslims are fundamentalists though maybe more and more are being driven to it. OSB is a very small minority that circumstances brought to the fore, every culture has it's nutters that occasionally come to the fore-the west is no different.

The part Saudi arabia plays in this is always played down. How about it is due to the actions of the saudi royal family and their cynical manipulation of religious sentiment to help curb calls for social reform by offering a distraction from real political denate in saudi. That more than anything else is to blame for 911, the US is a convenient scapegoat.

koan · Post by **koan** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:23 pm

I haven't decided yet.

Post by **spot** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:31 pm

anastrophe wrote: spot clearly believes it was a US govt operation, there's no question about it. so his dancing around, microparsing the possibilities, is just...well, it's typical spot.You seem far more certain of my opinion than I do. I've looked at your poll options and I'm by no means sure which of three options to select. I have insufficient evidence by which to distinguish the allegations clearly enough to make that selection. On the one hand I have Bin Laden saying "we had agreed with the Commander-General Muhammad Ataa, Allah have mercy on him, that all the operations should be carried out within 20 minutes, before Bush and his administration notice", which confirms with a positive statement that Bin Laden had accepted plans for something similar (though not identical). On the other hand we have the impossible (by lottery-jackpot proportions) cellphone calls from the planes. When the 21st century equivalent of Daniel Ellsberg finally decides to flood the internet with key documentation we'll all know far more about it. Was Bin Laden party to a plan to crash planes in the US? Undoubtedly. Was US Intelligence aware and operating in parallel? Undoubtedly. Were any Saudis flying planes into buildings that morning? I doubt it very much. Was Bush party to the objectives and methods before that September? That depends on how much of a puppet he really is, but I've no doubt about his Secretary of Defence and Vice President being in the loop.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:21 pm

I can understand why people in hindsight think that the U.S. government didn't fully appreciate the reality of the threat at that time, but then who really can say they thought it would really happen? Its like the nightmare of a Nuclear Weapon being used on a city, we all know it could happen but its hard to concieve that it actually will. Also of course you can take U.S. policy in the middle east as an excuse for 9/11, but then all major governments in the world and all people should be targets as no government is blameless for the multitude of problems in the world.

There is no excuse or justifyable reason for what happened on 9/11, it was simply a mass atrocity against civilians, Al Queda doesn't speak for the supposedly oppressed masses of Islam, it is simply a collective of different groups whose have an extreme and apocalytic take on the Islamic religion and are prepared to commit acts of mass terror that are unlimited by moral or political considerations. Trying to parley, negotiate, or understand them is pointless, they don't want to be understood or accomodated, they have already decided that the west and particulatly the U.S. is beneath contempt, and they don't accept the idea of peaceful co-existence. What I will say is that the Iraq war had nothing to do with any of this and has been very costly and tragic distraction from the real and more immeadiate threat.

koan · Post by **koan** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:34 pm

I made my choice. I can't believe anything worse than what I voted but find it difficult to believe anyone can see it as any less.

Galbally wrote: supposedly oppressed masses of Islam...

distraction from the real and more immeadiate threat

lifted out of context...these two phrases caught me off guard. Just wondering why the use of "supposedly" and what is refered to by the last bit. There have been so many prophecies I lose track of who is thinking what.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:05 pm

koan wrote: I made my choice. I can't believe anything worse than what I voted but find it difficult to believe anyone can see it as any less.

lifted out of context...these two phrases caught me off guard. Just wondering why the use of "supposedly" and what is refered to by the last bit. There have been so many prophecies I lose track of who is thinking what.

Yes I thought someone would pick me up on that. Well with the "supposedly" I was pointing out "who" exactly are being oppressed and by whom?, obviously the Palestinians are not being treated particularly well by the Isralies, but in other cases Iraqis were oppressed by their own political leaders, the Kurds are being "oppressed" for want of a better word by fellow muslims in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, the Dafur Sudanese are being annihilated by fellow muslim countrymen, the GIA in Algeria target secularlists in their own country and murder them, the Iranian government recently passed laws that prohibit secularists from teaching in universities, the Taliban were far more interested in murdering fellow afganis than anyone else, there are scores of examples. The idea that Al Queda are perhaps seen as championing various Islamic causes is rubbish, they opportunistically use any current and popular cause to hitch their mast to, whether its Palestine, Chechnya, Iraq, whatever, in reality they don't care what happens to these people as they are activally engaged in trying to cause a general conflict that if it were to happen would be the worst possible outcome for such people, but would suit them and their millenarian fantasies perfectly.

In general I dislike this sort of take on things is that somehow the U.S. (and formerly it was the Europeans) are basically directly morally responsible for the desperate situations in many contries in the planet, I don't go in for that kind of simplistic revisionism, hypocritical moralizing, and pseduo conspiracy theory stuff which is really an expression of distaste for the Western World and its culture, its particularly silly when educated western people fall for that kind of nonsense.

As for the last bit I will have a look as I've gone off on a right rant there so I need to steady meself.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:17 pm

Well as I see it, is that the immeadiate threat is that of very large terrorist attacks on Western and non-western cities by groups affliated to Al Queda, that is a real threat and needs to be dealt with as best as possible, though its extremely difficult.

The longer term threat is that the division and polarization between the islamic and the western world, (and particularly between muslims and non-muslims living in western countries), that these people want to increase. That is also of course a responsibility on the part of our own governments to diffuse general tensions within and without our own countries, but if multiple attacks similar to september 11th continue to occur, or god help us a nuclear or chemical attack on a city like say L.A. or perhaps Rome, Manchester, Paris, or Seattle, or Houston the dynamics of conflict between differing cultures will just increase exponentially and it will be very hard for the tolerant voices in our own societies to stop that process, thats a scary thought because I don't know where that sort of situation would lead us to.

koan · Post by **koan** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:47 pm

Galbally wrote: I've gone off on a right rant there so I need to steady meself.
Steady boy, steady now! :wah:

I understand your use of the word "supposed" now but still feel the need to assert that Arab people are being oppressed without a doubt. The concept that all Arab people are oppressed would definitely be faulty as would the idea that all Islamic people are as well. There are Christian Arabs being treated just as poorly in the middle east and I'm sure the odd white guy has his complaints. Separating out that the oppression is a conspiracy theory then you have reasonable grounds to express dismay at the oversimplification.

As to conspiracies about 9/11. It is mostly white Americans heading these groups is it not? I think the fact that the movement is still gaining strength five years after the fact shows something about the lack of transparency and trust in the population towards their own government as much as it shows contempt from any other source. I will not forget the time I was asked if I am one of the lizard people so I agree that conspiracy theory people can reach contemptable levels, but the increasing number of people who readily believe in these conspiracies (not just the US) is indicative of a growing societal issue. One that may well be part of the long term threat to civilization.

I, personally, have not had any real part of my life free from worry of injury or some kind of violence on a local or international level and, perhaps as a result, don't feel the threat is any greater now than it ever was. To me, I fear no country more than any other.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:43 pm

koan wrote: Steady boy, steady now! :wah:

I understand your use of the word "supposed" now but still feel the need to assert that Arab people are being oppressed without a doubt. The concept that all Arab people are oppressed would definitely be faulty as would the idea that all Islamic people are as well. There are Christian Arabs being treated just as poorly in the middle east and I'm sure the odd white guy has his complaints. Separating out that the oppression is a conspiracy theory then you have reasonable grounds to express dismay at the oversimplification.

As to conspiracies about 9/11. It is mostly white Americans heading these groups is it not? I think the fact that the movement is still gaining strength five years after the fact shows something about the lack of transparency and trust in the population towards their own government as much as it shows contempt from any other source. I will not forget the time I was asked if I am one of the lizard people so I agree that conspiracy theory people can reach contemptable levels, but the increasing number of people who readily believe in these conspiracies (not just the US) is indicative of a growing societal issue. One that may well be part of the long term threat to civilization.

I, personally, have not had any real part of my life free from worry of injury or some kind of violence on a local or international level and, perhaps as a result, don't feel the threat is any greater now than it ever was. To me, I fear no country more than any other.

O.K. I've got to know. Who asked you if you were one of the lizard people? What on earth did they ask you that for? What reply did you give?

Adam Zapple · Post by **Adam Zapple** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:01 pm

koan wrote: I agree that conspiracy theory people can reach contemptable levels, but the increasing number of people who readily believe in these conspiracies (not just the US) is indicative of a growing societal issue.

It's called irrational, obsessiive Bush hatred. Plug any other president or potential president into the equation and most people wouldn't give these conspiracies a second thought.

koan · Post by **koan** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:33 pm

gmc wrote: O.K. I've got to know. Who asked you if you were one of the lizard people? What on earth did they ask you that for? What reply did you give?

lol

It was a hairdresser that I worked with. She was really into David Icke. I hadn't heard of it and just asked "A what?" So she explained it. She thought because of my intelligence and ability to predict the future that I was an alien instead of a bright person with good intuition.

I assured her that I wasn't. She just said that I might not know it if I was.

And Bush was not the president at that time.

Nor was he the president after JFK was shot.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:19 pm

Adam Zapple wrote: It's called irrational, obsessiive Bush hatred. Plug any other president or potential president into the equation and most people wouldn't give these conspiracies a second thought.

for that matter, there's no evidence that this is a 'growing societal issue'.

yes, more people believe in conspiracy theories than did, say, fifty years ago. of course, fifty years ago there were three billion people capable of entertaining silly ideas. now there are six billion. proportionally, we don't know if there's been an increase in rates. i'd bet there's been a general decrease in rates.

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:38 pm

" middle eastern govts in suppressing political freedom in their own countries"

This is what I get.............and it isn't just political freedom!!!!!!!!.............it is religious freedom too.

What happened to Yugoslavia and the other Eastern block countries when they broke up???????????????

They divided on RELIGIOUS LINES............

Don't tell me the world is not divided by religious belief!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:20 pm

nvalleyvee wrote: " middle eastern govts in suppressing political freedom in their own countries"

This is what I get.............and it isn't just political freedom!!!!!!!!.............it is religious freedom too.

What happened to Yugoslavia and the other Eastern block countries when they broke up???????????????

They divided on RELIGIOUS LINES............

Don't tell me the world is not divided by religious belief!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yugoslavia divided on ethnic lines, back into the greoupings that existed before Yugoslavia was artificially created. It just happened that the ethnic groupings covered more than one religion.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:59 am

koan wrote: Steady boy, steady now! :wah:

I understand your use of the word "supposed" now but still feel the need to assert that Arab people are being oppressed without a doubt. The concept that all Arab people are oppressed would definitely be faulty as would the idea that all Islamic people are as well. There are Christian Arabs being treated just as poorly in the middle east and I'm sure the odd white guy has his complaints. Separating out that the oppression is a conspiracy theory then you have reasonable grounds to express dismay at the oversimplification.

As to conspiracies about 9/11. It is mostly white Americans heading these groups is it not? I think the fact that the movement is still gaining strength five years after the fact shows something about the lack of transparency and trust in the population towards their own government as much as it shows contempt from any other source. I will not forget the time I was asked if I am one of the lizard people so I agree that conspiracy theory people can reach contemptable levels, but the increasing number of people who readily believe in these conspiracies (not just the US) is indicative of a growing societal issue. One that may well be part of the long term threat to civilization.

I, personally, have not had any real part of my life free from worry of injury or some kind of violence on a local or international level and, perhaps as a result, don't feel the threat is any greater now than it ever was. To me, I fear no country more than any other.

I completely agree with you that yes there is oppression and would add that Western governments have been complicit in it due to their foreign policies over the years as have many other governments, and there are specific cases to be dealt with and answered, and of course history is littered with very real and long-standing abuses. But that shouldn't be a reason for people to generalize or make moral dis-equivalences between say the record of the U.S or say Tsarist Russia, or Mao's china, or revolutionary era France or the Ottoman turks etc etc. For whatever reasons the world is as we find it now, and we have to deal with the problems at hand in a constructive and pragmatic way.

I take your point about the conspiracy theory thing, and Iaccept that it does indicate a disenchantment and isolation that people feel about those in power, but it also has a lot to do with media culture, and perhaps some people's inclination or even need to see everything as being caused by controlling malevolent forces. I think the one salient feature of the world is that in fact no-one or no single organization ever has, or hopefully ever, will been able to control very much about what goes on, governments tend to do their best to muddle through events as they happen, but rarely get to dictate the way things turn out. I think one of the lessons that people should take from say spetember 11th is that despite its power and influence in the world, the U.S. government could not prevent a handful of people with knives from destroying part of its militray HQ or the World Trade Center.

People could I suppose be forgive for thinking that because of 20th century history that the U.S. is some kind of all-powerful force that shapes the world in any way it see's fit (and some U.S. politicians and others have on occasion perhaps tried to peddle that line for different agendas), the reality is that even the U.S. at the height of its power is as vunerable to events as other, smaller, and less powerful nations, that should give pause to thought to everyone. What is happening currently in world proves to me that because of the changing world and technology, we are all more dependent and inter-dependent than ever before. What depresses me about the current U.S. administration policy is that in response to the vunerability that the U.S. and the western countries feel about their security, their answer is to become more isolationist and unilateral in their actions to global problems, (though not on all things, the U.S. government is trying to tackle many global issues and seems to be taking global poverty and climate change more seriously than in the past).

As for the Lizard people, I hope they are doing well. I do remember there was a British T.V. presenter who went off on a trip like that, maybe thats where they are getting it from?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 6:13 am

koan wrote: lol

It was a hairdresser that I worked with. She was really into David Icke. I hadn't heard of it and just asked "A what?" So she explained it. She thought because of my intelligence and ability to predict the future that I was an alien instead of a bright person with good intuition.

I assured her that I wasn't. She just said that I might not know it if I was.

And Bush was not the president at that time.

Nor was he the president after JFK was shot.

Ah David Icke! A good example of what happens of you wear nylon sweat suits all the time. The static does your head in.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:11 am

And the Icke rots your nethers.