9/11 anniversary, where were you when it happened and was it a conspiracy?

knucklehead6 · 12-09-2013 06:49PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Culture? no
Business? maybe
People? hell no!!

So you don't watch any American produced TV shows or films? Or eat in any American type restaurants?

In terms of people, do you not have any family or friends living over there?

The_Kew_Tour · 12-09-2013 08:09PM

knucklehead6 wrote: »

So you don't watch any American produced TV shows or films? Or eat in any American type restaurants?

In terms of people, do you not have any family or friends living over there?

What has watching TV shows got to do with Culture?

Eating in American restaurants? Does that make me have a India and Chinese culture too?

I lived there for about 3 months back around 2006. In Florida. it aint no Ireland. Neither is Boston or New York. I have family in Atlanta.

PyeContinental · 12-09-2013 09:29PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Are the various American defense company chiefs and government figures, men who are already multi multi millionaires, truly evil enough to plot to allow an attack that would merely turn them from very rich to filthy rich?

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Is there a consortium of American defense CEO's, government officials and oil men who were already ridiculously wealthy who would sacrifice 3000 lives and the further lives of thousands more American troops so that they could quadruple or more their already enormous wealth?

The short answer to the question is simply: yes.

To expand on that a little, you and I might make the assumption that there is a certain amount of wealth that we or a "normal person" might accrue that would be enough for us. Enough so that we might say to ourselves "I am rich enough now, and I have everything I need to be content, and any more would make no difference to me, and would therefore be pointless to pursue."

I am of the opinion that it is more likely for people who are obscenely rich to always want more. The motivations behind this I'm sure could be teased out over a very long thread in humanities. I'm sure it's mixed up with the desire for power, and how a person's desires are rarely satiated when they get what they've been striving for. Complete realisation of their desires are always just over the next hill. Perspectives change once they reach a particular plateau, and they find themselves in at the bottom of an entirely new league, which their personality drives them to want to rise to the top of again. I'm talking about something like a perverted form of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

You also assume that these people in positions of power would have enough empathy, or human decency, to prevent them from participating in any plan to enrich themselves that might cause harm to ordinary innocent people. You have to consider the possibility that there are people out there who simply do not share this characteristic with you or I, and because of this single-minded ruthlessness are more likely to ascend to positions of power. We think of psychopaths as being serial killers, but they are more accurately described as people who don't have any empathy. They can be unperturbed by causing harm (directly or indirectly) to people, but are not necessarily people who are motivated by actually killing people.

For example:
Beware corporate psychopaths – they are still occupying positions of power.

Psychopaths are simply the 1 per cent of people who have no conscience or empathy [...] rising to key senior positions within modern financial corporations, where they are able to influence the moral climate of the whole organisation and yield considerable power, have largely caused the [banking] crisis'.

The Disturbing Link Between Psychopathy And Leadership

In the ranks of senior management, psychopathic behavior may be more common than we think – more prevalent in fact than the amount such seriously aberrant behavior occurs in the general population.
...
We tend to think of psychopathy as the province of criminals
...
The hallmarks of the psychopathic personality involve egocentric, grandiose behavior, completely lacking empathy and conscience.

So don't assume that this couldn't happen for nefarious reasons, simply because you might not like to have to envisage a world where people actually are that evil.

IvaBigWun · 13-09-2013 06:57PM

clairefontaine wrote: »

It's because it happened to a superpower, the Pentagon, and a city most of us have a connection to, no matter how tenuous.

This is true, there's very few landmarks and cities that would have had similar impact on worldwide TV. Paris/Leaning Tower and London Tower/Big Ben would have come close

Sunglasses Ron · 14-09-2013 02:02AM

PyeContinental wrote: »

The short answer to the question is simply: yes.

To expand on that a little, you and I might make the assumption that there is a certain amount of wealth that we or a "normal person" might accrue that would be enough for us. Enough so that we might say to ourselves "I am rich enough now, and I have everything I need to be content, and any more would make no difference to me, and would therefore be pointless to pursue."

I am of the opinion that it is more likely for people who are obscenely rich to always want more. The motivations behind this I'm sure could be teased out over a very long thread in humanities. I'm sure it's mixed up with the desire for power, and how a person's desires are rarely satiated when they get what they've been striving for. Complete realisation of their desires are always just over the next hill. Perspectives change once they reach a particular plateau, and they find themselves in at the bottom of an entirely new league, which their personality drives them to want to rise to the top of again. I'm talking about something like a perverted form of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

You also assume that these people in positions of power would have enough empathy, or human decency, to prevent them from participating in any plan to enrich themselves that might cause harm to ordinary innocent people. You have to consider the possibility that there are people out there who simply do not share this characteristic with you or I, and because of this single-minded ruthlessness are more likely to ascend to positions of power. We think of psychopaths as being serial killers, but they are more accurately described as people who don't have any empathy. They can be unperturbed by causing harm (directly or indirectly) to people, but are not necessarily people who are motivated by actually killing people.

For example:
Beware corporate psychopaths – they are still occupying positions of power.

The Disturbing Link Between Psychopathy And Leadership

So don't assume that this couldn't happen for nefarious reasons, simply because you might not like to have to envisage a world where people actually are that evil.

That's all very interesting and I sort of half agree. Had an experience of sociopathic behaviour myself. I had a work mate who became a good friend of mine, temporarily at least. Gradually it unraveled to me and the rest of us that he was a man who would kill his own grandmother without a seconds thought.

While I understand all that, it just seems to me that it is too long of a shot for these CEO's, many of whom probably live in New York as so many of America's wealthiest do, to back this plan with the risk, however minute, that their own sons, daughters, siblings, nephews nieces lifelong friends etc could be in the vicinity and get caught up by coincidence.

Let's just make an assumption and say the consortium behind 9/11 contained two CIA heads, three FBI men who were tasked with ensuring that any tip offs never got escalated to an arrest and foil level (a major allegation re the arrest of Moussaoui with the FBI refusing to allow local investigators to search his laptop etc etc), four major defense CEO's who were due a windfall from this, two air force commanders tasked with ensuring sloppy intercept times to hijacked planes, and the president and VP. There were also low level ground men- people at airport security who allowed armed hijackers to board the planes, demolition men who installed explosives in the towers , immigration officers who deliberately didn't interrogate the men on arrival etc.

That is 13 men in our hypothetical group, and that excludes the aforementioned ground workers who put the wheels in motion. These 13 men have maybe 35 children, a few have grandchildren, 40 siblings, 120 nephews and nieces and dozens of good friends, neighbours and army comrades who may have saved their life during some skirmish back in Vietnam. That is an awful lot of people these sociopaths either had to pre warn to stay away from the target sites, or risked killing by allowing the attacks.

As for military men, they would have known good friends and comrades would have died at the Pentagon. Love them or loathe them the US military works on the whole leave no man behind malarkey, deliberately killing their own great and good is nearly a step too far for me.

Nevertheless, interesting points you made there all the same about wealth addiction and psychology. It was particularly blatant with Sean Quinn for instance, gambling the lot to reach a level of fortune he couldn't spend in a thousand years.

Pug160 · 14-09-2013 02:07AM

I think most of the conspiracy theories have been blown out of the water. Still, if it gives people a hobby then let them enjoy themselves. But quite frankly, if you believe that it was a conspiracy, you are an idiot. Even more of an idiot than Bush, and that's saying something.

nacho libre · 14-09-2013 10:27AM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

That's all very interesting and I sort of half agree. Had an experience of sociopathic behaviour myself. I had a work mate who became a good friend of mine, temporarily at least. Gradually it unraveled to me and the rest of us that he was a man who would kill his own grandmother without a seconds thought.

While I understand all that, it just seems to me that it is too long of a shot for these CEO's, many of whom probably live in New York as so many of America's wealthiest do, to back this plan with the risk, however minute, that their own sons, daughters, siblings, nephews nieces lifelong friends etc could be in the vicinity and get caught up by coincidence.

Let's just make an assumption and say the consortium behind 9/11 contained two CIA heads, three FBI men who were tasked with ensuring that any tip offs never got escalated to an arrest and foil level (a major allegation re the arrest of Moussaoui with the FBI refusing to allow local investigators to search his laptop etc etc), four major defense CEO's who were due a windfall from this, two air force commanders tasked with ensuring sloppy intercept times to hijacked planes, and the president and VP. There were also low level ground men- people at airport security who allowed armed hijackers to board the planes, demolition men who installed explosives in the towers , immigration officers who deliberately didn't interrogate the men on arrival etc.

That is 13 men in our hypothetical group, and that excludes the aforementioned ground workers who put the wheels in motion. These 13 men have maybe 35 children, a few have grandchildren, 40 siblings, 120 nephews and nieces and dozens of good friends, neighbours and army comrades who may have saved their life during some skirmish back in Vietnam. That is an awful lot of people these sociopaths either had to pre warn to stay away from the target sites, or risked killing by allowing the attacks.

.

Bear in mind being a psychopath, when it comes to the crunch, may mean being prepared to sacrifice people close to you to achieve a goal. There are psychopaths who are capable of outwardly living the seemingly perfect life, but a certain situation leads to their psychopathic tendencies coming to the fore with terrible consequences. I prefer your idea that such a conspiracy could not be kept underwraps because someone would talk, perhaps out of greed or, more likely through conscience- unless we assume in this theory everyone in on it
is a psychopath.

14-09-2013 10:46AM

I was in school when I heard and I believe the conspiracy. I'm not into theories but there are just way too many things convincing me it was an inside job.

I don't see why it's a problem to think that.. Most of the people who'd call me crazy don't know the first thing about what happened. Germany made it illegal to question the Holocaust but with 9/11, society polices it itself with shouts of "conspiracy nut".

theGEM · 14-09-2013 11:00AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I was in school when I heard and I believe the conspiracy. I'm not into theories but there are just way too many things convincing me it was an inside job.

I don't see why it's a problem to think that.. Most of the people who'd call me crazy don't know the first thing about what happened. Germany made it illegal to question the Holocaust but with 9/11, society polices it itself with shouts of "conspiracy nut".

When you finished school you obviously didn't go on to study engineering then. But have convinced yourself from the rantings of Alex Jones et al.

Sunglasses Ron · 14-09-2013 11:13AM

IvaBigWun wrote: »

This is true, there's very few landmarks and cities that would have had similar impact on worldwide TV. Paris/Leaning Tower and London Tower/Big Ben would have come close

Strangely there was a prior plot to fly a plane into the Eiffel Tower that was foiled when the French special forces stormed the plane as it made a refuelling stop (the plan was to load enough extra fuel to make the attack more of a fireball). It seems that by 2001 we had forgotten about the reality of such a plan.

You would want to have a bollocks made of iron to have been the first man to jump in off that staircase :eek:

Drumpot · 14-09-2013 11:15AM

I was in college and got a text "plane hits world trade centre" . . Didn't think much of it but I cant remember if we went to the local shopping centre just to get a coffee or see what was going on. Was in the Square (tallaght) watching the events unfold in a department store. I get goosebumps thinking about it and remember being scared - "if America is bombed/attacked, will China take over!!?" etc etc etc. .

I have watched countless factual information about the 9/11 attacks, including the conspiracy stuff (including "loose change") and anytime I have seen conspiracy theroists in the room with educated people to counteract their arguments, they have been consistently shown up BADLY for their flawed conspiracy's.

In 2002, I was on a trip around the world. Getting on a flight in Sydney (to Hawii), I was searched (randomly) and they took a wine bottle opener off me because it was judged a potential weapon. Given what happened in Sep 11 I understood the over cautious approach. Then on the plane as we get our first meal, I get a steel knife to cut up my food! Sep 11 was just poor security and general incompetency on behalf of the FBI and homeland security.

I noticed a sub discussion about whether or not a person in power (Corporations dictate US policy, not presidents) would be capable of intentionally killing people and for anybody to think it wouldn't happen, then I am sorry for you. Even on a micro level in practically every company I have watched people screw people over just to get one position ahead.

The world that I have grown up in is one that constantly tells me I should never be happy with who I am or what I have. I am too fat, I need fancy clothes, a new house, a new iphone, a new car etc . . Everything is about incentivising consumption and making it an inherent desire in us all to want stuff we simply don't need. To do this we need to make more money. To do this we have to decide how much of our morals/principles we are willing to sacrifice to get there. Its similar to politics where it seems practically impossible to succeed without reverting to dirty/dodgy tricks or lieing.

14-09-2013 11:25AM

theGEM wrote: »

When you finished school you obviously didn't go on to study engineering then. But have convinced yourself from the rantings of Alex Jones et al.

I don't need an engineering degree to know that Building 7 was a controlled demolition.. Sure 20 minutes before it dropped, the news were reporting that it had happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI

The onus is on people like you to explain all the strange stuff that day, not me.

Sunglasses Ron · 14-09-2013 11:30AM

Drumpot wrote: »

I noticed a sub discussion about whether or not a person in power (Corporations dictate US policy, not presidents) would be capable of intentionally killing people and for anybody to think it wouldn't happen, then I am sorry for you. Even on a micro level in practically every company I have watched people screw people over just to get one position ahead.

Of course. But there is a difference between your riendly on the surface call centre colleague ratting you out for chatting away during quiet times when you should have been doing pointless busywork because she reckons it is a good way to suck managerial cock and move from her 24K position to anywhere between 27 and 40K when the interview season comes around (it happened, I felel sorry for whatever poor bastard marries that snake hooer :pac:) compared to being a billionaire who will do it all just for another billion. Nothing can be ruled out as entirely impossile but mega rich maniacs plotting to destroy New York for wealth and ego is just a bit too much of a James Bond plot for me.

nacho libre · 14-09-2013 12:08PM

[QUOTE=Sunglasses Ron;86. Nothing can be ruled out as entirely impossile but mega rich maniacs plotting to destroy New York for wealth and ego is just a bit too much of a James Bond plot for me.[/QUOTE]

obviously Kennedy thought the same about operation Northwood. Having said that, as that plot demonstrates, it's silly to think there aren't people dastardly enough to contemplate doing such a nefarious act..
also remember those who penned the PNAC document call for a cataclysmic event to catalyze the American people into supporting foreign adventures, i believe the only constraint on them would be the great difficulty of carrying out such a operation covertly, rather than any moral compunction. To right-wing supporters of America I understand that is unpalatable because they see America as noble and a benevolent nation with homely values.

so personally i don't believe 9-11 was an inside job, but not for the reasons those who think America is a knight in shining armour who can do no wrong do.

darced · 14-09-2013 12:10PM

This post has been deleted.

SwissRoll1982 · 14-09-2013 12:15PM

Charlie Rock wrote: »

A conspiracy of that magnitude could not be kept secret.

But the fact that it's now a conspiracy theory would mean that the secret hasn't been kept. Just because it's a conspiracy theory does not mean it isn't true

Drumpot · 14-09-2013 12:50PM

Sunglasses Ron wrote: »

Of course. But there is a difference between your riendly on the surface call centre colleague ratting you out for chatting away during quiet times when you should have been doing pointless busywork because she reckons it is a good way to suck managerial cock and move from her 24K position to anywhere between 27 and 40K when the interview season comes around (it happened, I felel sorry for whatever poor bastard marries that snake hooer :pac:) compared to being a billionaire who will do it all just for another billion. Nothing can be ruled out as entirely impossile but mega rich maniacs plotting to destroy New York for wealth and ego is just a bit too much of a James Bond plot for me.

As I stated I don't believe any of the conspiracies put forward, but I don't think its impossible to believe that there are Billionaires capable of killing (intentionally or not intentionally) to create more wealth for themselves.

Everything is relative. A person in a call centre screwing over another to get a better wage/job is not physically the same as a billionaire killing thousands to get more money, but they are dealing with completely different sets of circumstances on completely different levels. My perception of what is an acceptable level to sink to get to the top could be different to yours.

Its very easy to see how a person so out of touch with society (how could a billionaire possibly be emotionally connected to the average Joe), Bill Gates being the exception by putting his money where his mouth is and by his actions (not driven to make more money).

Human beings can practically justify anything to themselves if they are unable to see beyond their own motivations. I don't think theres any evidence to suggest that 9/11 was anything more then poor security measures by the americans. However, if we default to the historical genocide in human history, it clearly proves that people will engage in horrible acts against other humans if they think its in their interest.

If we go back even further, wars were faught for power and more land/riches. Is it that hard to believe that we have the same kind of wars, but in a less conventional way ?

I have heard the James Bond plot put out there before. I wouldn't rule out there being a rich billionaire who is prepared to literally do anything (like maybe poison another person with anthrax!

) do maintain or enhance their riches. Does anybody really think that all these newly made billionaires from Russia didn't "break a few eggs" while amassing their wealth? Why then would it be difficult to imagine these kind of billionaires committing bigger atrocities for bigger gains ?

IvaBigWun · 14-09-2013 08:57PM

Then there are the actors. This guy was the worst of the lot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z45hI6YuC-I

mitosis · 14-09-2013 09:01PM

Of course it was a conspiracy. To think otherwise is daft. Al Qaeda conspired and carried out a terror act. QED. Conspiracy. Not all conspiracies are carried out by western govts.

darkpagandeath · 14-09-2013 09:06PM

conspiracy's everywhere omg ...

The American government cant keep the economy going you think they can keep thousands of people silent about them doing the 9/11 attacks and keeping everyone in Nasa quiet about them never landed on the moon. You have any idea how many people you need to keep 1 guy under surveillance let alone thousands. Next it will be aliens that flew the planes and alien ships that hit the pentagon as there was no wreckage.

theGEM · 14-09-2013 09:09PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't need an engineering degree to know that Building 7 was a controlled demolition.. Sure 20 minutes before it dropped, the news were reporting that it had happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI

The onus is on people like you to explain all the strange stuff that day, not me.

The fire department told the news agencies that the building was going to collapse and that they were going to withdraw their crews. Senior fire officers in Fire Departments both here in Ireland and the US are Chartered Structural Engineers. During the confusion of the day BBC took it up wrong - that the building had in fact collapsed.

The internet movie Loose Change has been viewed by more than 100 million people according to its makers and it asks this question in the latest film release: "Where did CNN and the BBC get their information especially considering the building was still standing directly behind their reporters?"

It turns out that the respected news agency Reuters picked up an incorrect report and passed it on. They have issued this statement:

"On 11 September 2001 Reuters incorrectly reported that one of the buildings at the New York World Trade Center, 7WTC, had collapsed before it actually did. The report was picked up from a local news story and was withdrawn as soon as it emerged that the building had not fallen."

I put this to the writer and director of Loose Change, Dylan Avery. I asked whether he believed the BBC was part of the conspiracy. Given the question his film had posed about the BBC I was surprised by Dylan's response: "Of course not, that's ludicrous. Why would the BBC be part of it?"

He added candidly: "I didn't really want to put that line in the movie."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/controversy_conspiracies_iii.html

You're just believing bull**** spouted by tinfoil head conspiracy theorists.

Read the NIST report on the WTC7 collapse. It will answer all your questions. Sign up for a Engineering degree and understand the truth.

Hulk Hands · 14-09-2013 09:11PM

theGEM wrote: »

When you finished school you obviously didn't go on to study engineering then. But have convinced yourself from the rantings of Alex Jones et al.

That makes no sense. It's Engineers and Architects that are some of the biggest supporters of the conspiracy theory. The theory is only there because of the engineering anomalies in the first place. That seems to be fallback of everyone slagging the 'theorists'. You ask a few simple questions about WTC7 and people tell you to go read the NIST report. They must clearly not have read the report themselves if that's what they're using to back their argument. Its ridiculous inaccuracies are the reasons so many engineers are speaking out in the first place.

This is full of supposed experts with degrees in relevant fields (from checking the net, apparently the names check out). It's long winded and everyone has to introduce themselves by saying their profession, degree and achievements, which is a bit annoying. However it's the most in-depth scientific look at what happened, especially in relation to building 7, and is well worth the watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tTMMNTisBM

Edit: Seen you referenced the NIST report just before I posted. LOL

MonaPizza · 14-09-2013 11:33PM

EdCastle wrote: »

This isn't the forum for discussing this, there is a CT forum already set up for you crackpots so why don't you take your sh*te BS theories over there.

Book a session with a shrink will you're at it!

Anyone who believes a passport made from paper can survive a fireball that melts steel is a crackpot and ought to see many shrinks.

darkpagandeath · 14-09-2013 11:50PM

MonaPizza wrote: »

Anyone who believes a passport made from paper can survive a fireball that melts steel is a crackpot and ought to see many shrinks.

Paper does not ignite instantly there would be plenty of time for it to be blown free of the worst of the fire and fall to earth. Unless you think passports are made of rice paper or crepe paper ?

15-09-2013 05:34AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Paper does not ignite instantly there would be plenty of time for it to be blown free of the worst of the fire and fall to earth. Unless you think passports are made of rice paper or crepe paper ?

And in all the confusion and chaos, someone picked up a passport and realised it belonged to a hijacker? How does that possibly happen?

Kold · 15-09-2013 06:08AM

Ihatecuddles wrote: »

I was in Florida, down the road from the school Bush was in.

Sitting in a Denny's, all the staff were screaming and crying.....they thought it was a movie on tv at first. They had to close the restaurant to go collect their kids from school. Was terrifying.

We went to Disneyland a few days later and it was empty!

Swings n roundabouts innit

Frank Bullitt · 15-09-2013 06:31AM

The day after I got my junior cert results, I was on the way to town to get a playstation 2.

No way was it a conspiracy.

MonaPizza · 15-09-2013 06:57AM

Gintonious wrote: »

The day after I got my junior cert results, I was on the way to town to get a playstation 2.

No way was it a conspiracy.

You sound like someone outta Trainspotting

MonaPizza · 15-09-2013 07:08AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Paper does not ignite instantly there would be plenty of time for it to be blown free of the worst of the fire and fall to earth. Unless you think passports are made of rice paper or crepe paper ?

And the jacket/jeans/bag that it was inside? A human is immolated inside an aircraft yet a passport survives such an event? You certainly have a stretch of faith in the impossible.

Tell you what...take an old copy book....stick it inside an old handbag. Stick all that in an old car....douse that car with petrol and then ram it into a building. Detonate the whole thing and tell me the old hand bag is vapourised but the copy book is fine and you've just found it without a singe :pac:

Canis Lupus · 15-09-2013 07:38AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't need an engineering degree to know that Building 7 was a controlled demolition.. Sure 20 minutes before it dropped, the news were reporting that it had happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI

The onus is on people like you to explain all the strange stuff that day, not me.

A plane flew into the building, the building fell down. I'd imagine the onus is on you to prove otherwise..

MonaPizza wrote: »

And the jacket/jeans/bag that it was inside? A human is immolated inside an aircraft yet a passport survives such an event? You certainly have a stretch of faith in the impossible.

Tell you what...take an old copy book....stick it inside an old handbag. Stick all that in an old car....douse that car with petrol and then ram it into a building. Detonate the whole thing and tell me the old hand bag is vapourised but the copy book is fine and you've just found it without a singe :pac:

Other stuff survived the fligh 93 crash 'a wedding ring and other jewelry, photos, credit cards, purses and their contents, shoes, a wallet and currency, are among seven boxes of identified personal effects salvaged from the site.' If they can survive then so can a passport.

9/11 anniversary, where were you when it happened and was it a conspiracy?

Comments