Were the USA behind 9/11 ?

Covered End

I ask this, after reading another thread, which brought it up.
I also ask, as someone I know is convinced that they were and is often telling me, that at least one of the pilots are still alive, that the buildings were blown up by explosives the USA planted themselves etc.
This person also believes that the UK were responsible for 7/7.
They tell me I should look on youtube and I'm ignorant of the true facts.
I have seen some stuff, where you have apparent eye witness accounts, substantiating this, but overall I don't want to spend hours and hours looking into this stuff. What does everyone think ?

Discuss :-

Henry Irving

It's bollocks is my considered opinion.

BBC did an programme about a guy giving himself a Muslim name and flogging this tripe in the Muslim community here (most of whom laughed it off)

turned out he was a white, non-muslim, hippy living somewhere in rural Ireland. Total nut job.

JollyRobin

Lots of scientists who try to prove that it was a plot by the US government because of supposed 'scientific evidence'. What the conspiracy theorists don't tell you are the other 80% of scientists with evidence that disproves this.

Try and find an economist who will tell you it was a government plot and then their is an argument, but you won't and you never will.

Leroy Ambrose

No. They weren't. It's absolute bollocks - and anyone who believes they were is a fucking idiot. HTH

The one thing that might possibly be true amidst all the conspiracy theory toss is that the US military might have shot down the plane that was seemingly headed for the Whitehouse. I'll grant you that is a possibility. But the rest of it is crap spread by idiots who believe what they read on the internet.

And I think 80% is a bit pessimistic JR. More like 99.9%.

December_The_5TH

[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]
The one thing that might possibly be true amidst all the conspiracy theory toss is that the US military might have shot down the plane that was seemingly headed for the Whitehouse. .

Is that the united 93 plane which got made into a film

Leroy Ambrose

[cite]Posted By: December_The_5TH[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]
The one thing that might possibly be true amidst all the conspiracy theory toss is that the US military might have shot down the plane that was seemingly headed for the Whitehouse. .

Is that the united 93 plane which got made into a film

Yes. I think it's a realistic possibility that the military shot that one down.

Goonerhater

There is a first time for everything even at my old age---i agree with Leroy and Henry !!!! its bollox.

DRAddick

Not behind it as such but there's definately a lot more to it. Too many coincidences and stuff that doesn't sit right. For instance i still haven't seen any decent evidence that a plane actually hit the pentagon.

And Leroy to say that anyone who believes in the conspiracys is an idiot and the very next sentence say one might be true is a bit odd.

Goonerhater

i saw it on UTube the plane hits the Pentagon and about 5 mins later a pilot gets out oft the rubble and says "f**k that its bollox"

Leroy Ambrose

[cite]Posted By: DRAddick[/cite]Not behind it as such but there's definately a lot more to it. Too many coincidences and stuff that doesn't sit right. For instance i still haven't seen any decent evidence that a plane actually hit the pentagon.

And Leroy to say that anyone who believes in the conspiracys is an idiot and the very next sentence say one might be true is a bit odd.

Oh leave it alone FFS. What hit the Pentagon then - a missile? Fired by whom? From where? To what ends?

What are these other 'coincidences'?

And the fourth plane being possibly shot down doesn't mean I believe that it was - just that it is possible that it was.

ThreadKiller

[cite]Posted By: DRAddick[/cite]Not behind it as such but there's definately a lot more to it. Too many coincidences and stuff that doesn't sit right. For instance i still haven't seen any decent evidence that a plane actually hit the pentagon.

And Leroy to say that anyone who believes in the conspiracys is an idiot and the very next sentence say one might be true is a bit odd.

Snopes

Covered End

Ok, as I didn't want to prejudice initial comments, I'll now say that I do not believe in these conspiracy theories.
But how do you convince someone that does & has in the past e mailed you plenty of "proof".
I really don't want to spend hours trying to research anti- conspiracy material or whatever you may want to call it ?

Friend Or Defoe

The way the towers collapsed was interesting. Surely they would topple to one side?

Leroy Ambrose

[cite]Posted By: Friend Or Defoe[/cite]The way the towers collapsed was interesting. Surely they would topple to one side?

Nope. This is one of the 'strange' things that conspiracy nutjobs always point to. Anyone with even a basic grasp of structural engineering (which, of course, counts those same conspiracy nutjobs out) can tell you that buildings do not topple to one side when they fall over. They collapse in on themselves. This is exactly what happened with the trade centre towers.

Off_it

Everyone is talking bollox.

The truth is that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by a consortium consisting of various international crackpots including Hitler, Pol Pot, Michael Jackson and David Icke. FACT.

Icke was largely working alone when it come to the 7/7 attacks, although he did receive clandestine assistance from the Duke of Edinburgh. FACT.


(Well, you started it!)

Big William

There was a program about this on a while back, and it concentrated on the twin towers being blown up from inside. They showed a team of guys preparing to demolish a schoolhouse with explosive charges somewhere in the rural US, about 20 of them working for a week or so, sawing into girders, placing charges in weak spots etc. All this for a building about a hundreth of the size of the world trade centre.

They put it to one of the conspiracy theorists that possibly someone would have noticed this type of thing going on and he replied that they did it after work when everybody had gone home. I wasn't convinced....

Saga Lout

The older I get the less easy I find it to determine where the truth lies. However, I do think the idea that the US was responsible for 9/11 and the UK was responsible for 7/7 is probably bollox.

Athletico Charlton

[quote][cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Ok, as I didn't want to prejudice initial comments, I'll now say that I do not believe in these conspiracy theories.
But how do you convince someone that does & has in the past e mailed you plenty of "proof".[quote]

I suggest you don't bother. If people are so deluded they want to beleive this is a conspiracy they are clearly completely nuts.

Eddie Firmani

[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Everyone is talking bollox.

The truth is that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by a consortium consisting of various international crackpots including Hitler, Pol Pot, Michael Jackson and David Icke. FACT.

Icke was largely working alone when it come to the 7/7 attacks, although he did receive clandestine assistance from the Duke of Edinburgh. FACT.


(Well, you started it!)

Is that the same consortium that Slater outbid?

colthe3rd

There is a good documentary on this, Loose Change, you can watch on youtube. I don't believe the US was behind it but that film does raise some interesting points and makes you question some of the decision making that was made.

Covered End

So, at the moment only Threadkiller has provided any "evidence" that it really happened. You see this is my whole issue, there's no point just telling my "friend" that it is bollocks, because he has sent me plenty of "proof" that the USA did it & I have nothing to reply with other than saying it's bollocks.

DRAddick

[cite]Posted By: ThreadKiller[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: DRAddick[/cite]Not behind it as such but there's definately a lot more to it. Too many coincidences and stuff that doesn't sit right. For instance i still haven't seen any decent evidence that a plane actually hit the pentagon.

And Leroy to say that anyone who believes in the conspiracys is an idiot and the very next sentence say one might be true is a bit odd.

Snopes

Yep read that many times, along with many other articles. You've also got impartial experts on crashes saying other things, if indeed there are impartial experts on either side and that goes for everything not just the pentagon site.
Why haven't the US Government released the CCTV they say they have of the crash? that would debunk it in one go. Whilst they refuse it allows the questions.

DRAddick

[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: DRAddick[/cite]Not behind it as such but there's definately a lot more to it. Too many coincidences and stuff that doesn't sit right. For instance i still haven't seen any decent evidence that a plane actually hit the pentagon.

And Leroy to say that anyone who believes in the conspiracys is an idiot and the very next sentence say one might be true is a bit odd.

Oh leave it alone FFS. What hit the Pentagon then - a missile? Fired by whom? From where? To what ends?

What are these other 'coincidences'?

And the fourth plane being possibly shot down doesn't mean I believe that itwas- just that it ispossiblethat it was.

There are hundreds of CCTV cameras outside the Pentagon. Why is the only footage released a poor image of a flash of line. Where are the others that the Government have "Classified" and refused to release? Surely realising them would answer the theory?

Why did a news station anounce the collapse of one of the buildings a long tine before it did collapse?

How come all the airforce protection didn't work that day. The US government said that the aviation authority didn't tell them there were hijacked planes and that the twin towers had been hit until it was to late, yet the Aviation authority deny this and NORAD generals at the time said publicly they were told in time but then later said they weren't...Who's telling the truth?

I know major things like this are never perfect when looked at in minute detail later. The evidence can be looked at in many different ways and it comes down to who and what you want to believe a lot of the time. But there are questions unanswered that allow the conspiracy theories to carry on.

I'm not saying I believe any or all of the theories, I haven't really made up my mind. My point is I accept I don't and probably never will know for certain so i find it hypocritical to say you're open to a theory but say that all others are idiots for doing the same when it's a theory you're not open too.

Off_it

[cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]So, at the moment only Threadkiller has provided any "evidence" that it really happened.

What? It "really happened" alright. Just ask the families of the people who died?

Or do you think they got Spielberg in to direct the special effects?

ShootersHillGuru

I completely endorse Henry, Leroy and Goonerhater.

It's bollocks

DRAddick

[cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]So, at the moment only Threadkiller has provided any "evidence" that it really happened. You see this is my whole issue, there's no point just telling my "friend" that it is bollocks, because he has sent me plenty of "proof" that the USA did it & I have nothing to reply with other than saying it's bollocks.

No one can tell you the truth, unless you believe without question what the governments or the theorists tell you. Both have plus and minus points. You need to research yourself from as many sources as possible and come to your own opinion.

Folev the red

DRAddick
"Why did a news station anounce the collapse of one of the buildings a long tine before it did collapse?"

could you explain please.

Off_it

[cite]Posted By: Folev the red[/cite]DRAddick
"Why did a news station anounce the collapse of one of the buildings a long tine before it did collapse?"

could you explain please.

Means nothing. Fcuk me, news stations get things wrong all the time. If you watched any news bulletin today I guarantee you would be able to pull it apart this time next week for the "facts" that they got wrong with the benefit of hindsight. Except none of us will bother because todays news bulletins wont be gone over ad nauseum by the world and his nutty brother trying to "prove" some old tosh to fulfill their own agenda.

For example. Just after the Japanese earthquake hit the BBC were interviewing someone in Japan who was saying that there didn't appear to be much damage and thankfully it didn't all seem as bad as the New Zealand earthquake. That statement looks a bit silly now, doesn't it? But if I really wanted to I could come up with a theory that the Japanese government took the opportunity to use the earthquake as a cover for their wiping out a few thousand people for god knows what reason. It must be true because not 30 minutes after the quake struck someone was on my telly telling me it "wasn't bad". They MUST be right and everyone else is lying.

DRAddick

[cite]Posted By: Folev the red[/cite]DRAddick
"Why did a news station anounce the collapse of one of the buildings a long tine before it did collapse?"

could you explain please.

BBC World News (had to google it as couldn't remember who off hand) reported live on air that "Building 7" had collapsed about 20 minutes before it actually did.

Benny Hill

[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]No. They weren't. It's absolute bollocks - and anyone who believes they were is a fucking idiot.

Sorry I will re-word that anyone who believes 3 people can fly a jumbo jet sucessfully (on 3 seperate runs) into a pinpoint target after a couple of leasons in a Cessna is a fucking idiot!

Covered End

[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]So, at the moment only Threadkiller has provided any "evidence" that it really happened.

What? It "really happened" alright. Just ask the families of the people who died?

Or do you think they got Spielberg in to direct the special effects?

Sorry Off it, I worded that badly. I meant provided evidence that it was carried out by terrorists and not by the USA.