Jamie_L

The thing is, attacking the evidence for the mainstream version of 9/11 events does not in any way support another version of those events. In order to support some other version, you need evidence of that version. And just showing that people in power benefit from some other version isn't good evidence either. The news media got a big boost from 9/11. I could craft a conspiracy about the news media being behind the attacks. Then I could use the same arguements seen in this thread to attack the mainstream version. And so on.

This is the way psuedo-science supporters argue against skeptics. "You can't disprove my theory, so it's true!" "You can't tell me how John Edwards knew that information about that woman, so he's psychic!"

Or, in this case:

"You can't prove that the government isn't lying to you, therefore there's a shadow-conspiracy fighting an unseen war that really caused 9/11."

Jamie

Elaborate

Frivolous:
You asked
But you answer your own question in the same post!
Get it? They reveal that they did it so they could scare the American people.

Frivolous

Im not really weighing on one side or another here, im only 50/50 with a conspiracy theory on this one. All im pointing out (for the purpose of frivolousness) is that there is another possibility here. We blindly follow information we are given by the media, who get their censored sources from government departments. The people who work in these government departments all pass down the information they get from a higher source.

For instance the tape with Bin Laden on it... that would have been top secret information, released from only the highest source of intelligence and authority in the government. I'm saying that This source could be the one behind a conspiracy. The source that all other government departments get their information and authorisations from. This source would be incredibly powerful and influential would it not? It would be hidden from the public by sitting behind 'classified information' because if the public isnt aware of it, then the public cant question it. Could this department be devious, in order to protect what it believes is the greater good? I'm saying it would be, and that it has been.

The evidence for Al-Qaeda's involvement boils down to

1) Government information, passed down the authority levels. All from the same source really.
2) A sketchy video tape.

Sure we all want to believe it was Al-Qaeda and thats because most of the world doesnt like them. Or the Taliban for that matter. Or Iraq.

We want to believe it. A source we trust tells us to believe it. But we dont scrutinise the evidence enough. Does this situation remind you of something?

The motives of this department are so hard to define from the publics perspective, because the public isnt aware of all the information worldwide. And we dont have think-tanks and incredibly smart people all working together to form predictions about the future. Well not on their level anyway. Thats why their motives arent easy for us to see.

So if a devious cunning government department in high authority, that would do anything in its power to protect itself from future problems such as losing its global military and economic dominance existed, do you think this department would have gone to extreme lengths if it predicted a severe and seemingly unavoidable problem in the future?

I dont know what the problem was. But im saying that it could have something to do with the 'axis of evil' whether they knew about it or not. They probably didnt know about it.

And also note that im not saying that this department Isnt doing it for the greater good, it may well be.

If you didnt trust the media, the evidence for Al-Qaeda's involvement would be sketchy. After all, where did the media get all its top secret information from?


"You cant prove the government isnt lying to you, but does the government lie? Do you really trust the government that much?"

No one completely trusts the government i think. And so it has obscured its information and promoted the 'unified against a common cause' feeling in america and the world. Our emotions are being used against us. And if we examine closely, the information that seems to be coming from separate sources is all really coming from one source.

We think terrorists are wrong. They think they are right, to the extent that they will fight for it.
We've been led to believe that AL-Qaeda are a bunch of evil saddist bastards. Our image of them is one of dirty brutality. I think this is not entirely correct. Do you really think they wanted to 'scare' the american people just for kicks? Thats what i mean when they said they wanted to get away with it.

Sure they hate americans but think about it from their perspective. Assume that to function as a group effectively, you would have to have moral values such as loyalty and trust. Not just a little loyalty and trust... these guys would have very well defined virtues. It takes a lot of courage to override your survival instinct and sacrifice yourself for what you believe to be the greater good.

Now imagine them thinking "lets scare the american people today".

The government could be playing on our ignorance of these groups and how they think, cos lets face it... how many of us know what a terrorist thinks? Even the FBI is having trouble getting inside the mind of a suicide bomber.

I think that we are all basically human, no human is completely evil and that even Al-Qaeda are not so dramatically different in terms of morality and honour than the rest of us. We believe that Al-Qaeda is evil because it is ignorant and stupid. It also happens to have conflicting ideas with america.
But how did such a stupid ignorant organisation form cells around the world in a tightly regimented rebellion against world powers. I agree that they are not entirely good, but i also agree that they are not entirely bad.
Stupidity and ignorance are not the traits of an organisation that manages to remain funded and hidden from a global power like the U.S.


lets keep this thread going....

[ December 12, 2002: Message edited by: Frivolous ]</p>

Frivolous

Ok here is my theory so far. I invite you all to test its rigidity. I am also prepared to concede defeat if i am out-reasoned.

Note that when i say americans and america i am referring to the american government, not the american people.

here goes:

A very highly influential government department, with access to highly intelligent think-tanks exists. The purpose of this intelligence department is to protect the interests of the american people at all costs. It predicts future situations with a high degree of accuracy, and very cunningly changes global situations in a way that the general public isnt aware of. After all, it makes it a whole lot easier for them to do what they do if they dont have us on their backs all the time. So they do things in secret.

I think a department like this could exist and if it did, it would have higher influence than the CIA.

This department has been monitoring worldwide situations in terms of diplomacy, economy and military power. Closely and for a long time

Say it foresaw that eventually, the axis of evil (Iraq, the Taliban etc) could become a problem. Not a direct threat to the U.S but more of an indirect problem in terms of finance and promoting a global anti-american feeling.

After all if the world likes america, we are more inclined to agree with its government when it wishes to do something. Like kick out Saddam Hussein. (I know what you're all thinking, shush dont butt in).

Part of my suspicion comes from the
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=oil+pipeline+built+afghanistan+news+american " target="_blank">Oil Pipeline</a>

America has an obssession with oil control. The Taliban would never let another country build an oil pipeline through its land, particularly if it had anything to do with america. The importance of this oil pipeline is generally underestimated. The pipeline takes oil from the west and transports it to the east. There is a huge market for oil in the east, think about china. The biggest oil suppliers are in the middle east (which is the west in this case). Like saudi arabia. And iraq, if only you could get it to trade cooperatively.

Note the coincidence of kicking out the irrational iraqi government with increased oil trade for america. And more benefits for the WTO. We would never expect such a huge attack on the WTO to have been somehow related to benefits for itself. And look, the pipeline from saudi arabia could easily be extended a little to service iraq. When the pesky dictator leaves.

I dont think that the WTO is in on the conspiracy. Its probably being helped out by its unknown fairy godmother (the conspiracy department), because if the WTO is in good shape, then american financial interests are in good shape. And finance is what keeps the military so powerful

Back to the conspiracy department. Say they predict also that in the future, these axis of evil countries expand their influence in promoting a global anti-american sentiment. This is bad news for america of course, not only in terms of trade but in terms of the global support it needs when it wants to take military action.

America cannot easily take military action unless it has a motive, and worldwide support. Because worldwide support affects the american voters, the american voters affect the american power hierarchy and the american power hiearchy must be in the right order for it to protect its own interest in the first place. So even this department cannot escape the influence of democracy. Yay.
So it manipulates the voters, with very well refined techniques. Like using our emotions to quickly jump to conclusions that we are fed, without questioning these conclusions in great detail.

So the department foresees the gradual downfall of american influence in the future, and perhaps the end of pax americana. Which in all honesty, could be a bad thing you know. It probably is. But thats changing the subject.

It cant change what will happen using conventional techniques. It juggles a whole lot of possible solutions, before arriving with the best answer.

Solution? Effectively replace the political system of the main countries who are going to promote this anti-americanism. Because for america to stay in power, its most important asset is that it can apply military action when it needs to. The american voters give the government the authority to use its military. The american voters are influenced by how everyone else is feeling around the world. So the american voters are good and just. Hence the department needs to manipulate what appears good and just, so the worldwide public and the american voters accept it.

America would have had a big problem throwing out the taliban and iraq if it had not been for 9/11. Basically because the worldwide public would oppose it. But it really really needed to throw them out, because they dont cooperate with america like the rest of the world does and there was no subtle way it could influence countries with such strong dictatorships.

So it needed something drastic. Something that would:

1) Promote global sympathy to the U.S and its interests
2) Allow it to attack these countries without restraint applied by its voters or the worldwide community
3) Basically something that would shock us all.

9/11 was that event. It stopped the world for a while as we stood and stared at the planes hitting buildings on our tvs. Then out poured our emotions. Grief, sorrow and anger. Thats just what the american government needed. Its the only way that it could attack the taliban and throw it out. Its the only way it could resume its pressure on iraq without global restraint, which it is feeling already. America is being caught up with the UN already.

The department is well in touch with how the Taliban thought and would react. So it knew it would respond in the way it did. That, coupled with the fact that most of the globe didnt like the taliban much allowed america to attack it, unrestrained. This is what america wanted in the first place.

When i say how the taliban would react, i mean in this way:

Say you were the taliban, generally speaking. You are a government with what you believe is high moral virtue, under allah. You are the only country in the world with such high standards of following god. You are very proud of what you are and rule your country very strictly. You would rather fight to the end than undermine your virtues in front of your people.
Bin Laden is a war hero in your country. He helped fight off the soviet invasion and although he may dabble in undesirable situations, basically you know him to be a good follower of your regime and he is a hero of the people. A celebrity and a symbol of afghan courage and strength.
Then 9/11 happens. America accuse you of hiding the perpetrator of this crime, your war hero. The world turns their attention to you. Bin Laden says he has nothing to do with it. You humbly ask for evidence that it was Bin Laden. America tells you that it has evidence and the world behind it, but it refuses to show you its 'classified' evidence because this would reveal too much about american intelligence gathering capabilities to the world (this is exactly what happened). You have a dilemma. You know your regime will be ended by force if you refuse, but then again you dont have any evidence that it was Bin Laden anyway. You're morals tell you to fight to the end for what is right, rather than to become corrupted by intimidation. So you stand your ground. The world sees this as defiance and even more evidence that Bin Laden, and perhaps even your regime was behind 9/11. But you see it as standing your ground in light of the fact that you were never given any evidence from those infidel dogs in the first place. And so the world wipes out your regime, and replaces it with an american-friendly one.

The department knew this would happen. It knew the taliban would do exactly as it did, when placed in that situation. Perhaps it was the only way to defeat the taliban. Wrong maybe, but it had it own interests to protect as a priority. If you want to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs.
In my opinion, getting at bin laden could have just been a cover for attacking the taliban itself.

The pro-american anti-terrorist/dictatorship global feeling now rolls on and america can apply aggressive pressure to iraq. Why? Because it suspects it to be producing weapons of mass destruction, possibly to be sold to terrorists. Of course it has evidence again. Some sketchy satelite photos of smoke emanating from buildings. They ordered some uranium enrichment rods. The rest is classified. Of course the more aggressive you appear towards an arabic country the more you will get defiance from them, which is exactly what you want to make yourself look like you're in the right.
But then again, no one really cares for iraq anyway. No one with enough guts and power to do anything about it.

So you get to throw out two of the three regimes that were causing you the projected difficulties in the future. They havent thrown out iraq yet, but we'll see what happens in the future. And pressure on north korea has begun already. This department is very methodical and precise. But of course it has to be.

So we have a motive. Now we need a 'how':

So how does a department with virtually unlimited funding and access to technology pull off 9/11 and frame someone else?
Well you dont really need too much convincing evidence because after all, accusing an american department of pulling off 9/11 would just be absolutely absurd. And no one else in the world would attack in that nature.

Best places to hit? Something big. Something that everyone knows to be american. Something that would completely remove all shadow of suspicion that the real motive behind it all could have something to do indirectly with the WTO. Like the WTO itself.
But just attacking the WTO wouldnt be enough. Because then it may look like an attack on the WTO, or just new york. So you have to make it look like it really is an attack on america, and not just part of it. So you hit the pentagon as well. Hitting the white house would just be going too far, and it may really kill the morale of the american people. You need to hit something governmental, important and repairable. Also, hitting the department of defense really makes the military look innocent. Good stuff.

The conspiracy department knew that hitting those buildings wouldnt kill the morale of the american people. It knew that it would boost the patriotic feeling incredibly, which it did.

So america builds its oil pipeline, to be regulated by the WTO of course. And it gets rid of the big future problem it foresaw. Attacking itself is a huge dilemma, but then again its a sacrifice that it had to make. And who would ever suspect america to attack itself in the first place? Especially when theres someone sitting on the sidelines easy to blame, that we all dont like anyway.

How do you frame a terrorist organisation?
Get some arabic people to do it, and tell everyone that they have links to an arabic terrorist organisation. What more do we need to believe it? Out of all the people in the world to frame, muslim extremists would be the easiest.

Getting 12 or so arabians to do a job like that isnt so hard, if you either brainwashed them, blackmailed them or convinced them that you would reward their starving families. So you get the arabs to do it, then you fill in the media with information that you give them, as well as give them a sketchy videotape that you made.

Now it doesnt sound so far fetched does it?

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Frivolous ]</p>

idiom

Did you ever see "wag the dog"?

Jamie_L

Compared to the alternative, yes it does.

Our alternative theory is one person with an insatiable hatred for the U.S. and a lot of money convinces a handful of cult-indoctrinated people to go out in a blaze of glory killing their supposed oppressors to please their god. He pays to train them, and they execute a fairly simple (though clever) plan.

This story requires only a few agents with easily explained (and openly existing) motives. All available evidence (which is not all from government sources) fits. It is a SIMPLE explanation with no need to invent mysterious agents and agencies that are at best inventions of our imaginations.

Your story requires many, many agents, executing something whose motive is only speculative, highly illegal, and if exposed would threaten the jobs and perhaps lives of all these many agents. No one in this long chain of command slips up in maintaining the secrets. No one in the media catches on. This plan requires much more inertia and damage control, and it's ends are complex and have little to any evidence supportin it.

Large conspiracy theories almost always fail the reasonability test because they require so many people to be on the same page, never questioning the validity of what they are doing, never leaking secrets, always covering their tracks with 100% success. In my book, that IS far-fetched.

Jamie

Kosh

Bush got ahold of the script for Star Wars: Attack of the Clones, and decided he really liked the character of Senator Palpatine (sp?). At night, he parades around the white house pretending to be a Dark Lord of the Sith, and he set this whole thing up to create a false threat to the security of the US (just like the separatists movement to the Republic) so that he could create a new homeland security office (just like the clone army) and sieze control as a dictator.

Public records indicate a huge amount of D battery cells being ordered by the white house to power the light sabers he plays with at night.

There, happy now?

[NOTE to humor impaired CIA operatives: the above paragraph was written as a subtle sarcastic joke to make fun of conspiracy theorists, and in no way reflect my true thoughts about the bush administration]

Wyz_sub10

I agree. Secrets of this type require so much coordination that it becomes implausible. It's one of the reasons (one of many, many) that moon hoax theories or alien visitations are so ridiculous.

Kosh

What do you think about the JFK assasination theories in this respect?

CND

The JFK conspiracy claims are no more valid than those of Roswell, the Moon landing, and 9/11.