About the idea that conspiracies are all nonsense?

[Baruch]

Official inquiries though, are usually political/commercial coverups.  The inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic, completely exonerated the Cunard Line and the captain at the helm ;-)  So unfortunately, there was an official inquiry into 9/11 ... so we will never know.  There was an official inquiry into the Challenger failure ... but fortunately a general poked a physicist into telling the truth ... Feynman.  Without that nudge, and Feynman, NASA and Morton Thiokol would have been ... found innocent.

[FaithIsFilth]

There actually are parallels between conspiracy theorists and religious people.  The most obvious ones are a reliance on personal conviction instead of hard facts and a tendency to hang onto disproven claims, either ignoring disconfirming evidence or obstinately denying that their claims are disproven at all.

That is absolutely true. Most conspiracy theorists are whacked out and believe some really dumb stuff.. There's no denying that. That is true for most people in the world. Most people in the world are theists afterall.

Nothing I've said on 9/11 has been disproven. Al Qaeda being involved we can agree on. The Bush Administrations involvement or lack of involvement is a separate matter from the Al Qaeda question. This question is still up in the air, while the Al Qaeda question is not still up in the air. It's been settled. Al Qaeda did it, or at least hihacked the planes. It's still up in the air whether the Bush Admin allowed it to happen, so let's not pretend that this is all one question rather than two separate matters. You don't just get to say, Al Qaeda did it, so end of story. It's not the end of the story. Knowing that Al Qaeda did it only answers part of the story, not the entire story.

I have no problem with the idea that the official story of 9/11 is correct. I have no problem with the idea that it's unlikely that the Bush Admin would have let 9/11 happen. I have no problem with "truthers" being called out or compared to Christians when these people make claims that can't be backed up, and this is something that they absolutely do all the time. There's no doubt about that. Truthers are mostly too sure of themselves, just like most other people are too sure of themselves. What does this prove though? Does it tell us one way or the other whether the Bush Admin allowed the attacks to happen? It doesn't tell us anything about that. This is still a legitimate question, no matter how many truthers make asses out of themselves.

Why mirror the truthers who act like they know everything, by acting like you yourself know everything? This is what we always say about Christians. That they are afraid to say "I don't know". Why can't we just say "I don't know" when it comes to the Bush Administrations involvement in 9/11? If your response to me is that I haven't proven anything about 9/11, you would be right. I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm just making a case to say that it's ok to doubt the government. So to recap, I'm fine with the idea that 9/11 happened as they say it did. I'm fine with the idea that it's unlikely that the Bush Admin had anything to do with it. If you're going to say I'm the same as a flat earther or something like that for even raising questions and saying maybe just maybe Bush let it happen, then I'm sorry, but you are acting like you have knowledge that you can't possibly have. We are all going by the same facts here. You don't have that knowledge, so don't pretend you do. None of us do. All we can do is speculate, one way or the other. You speculate one way, and I the other. Again, I'm not trying to say that most conspiracy theorists aren't morons, and I'm not trying to prove anything about 9/11. That was never the point for me. I'm just defending those who say "maybe, just maybe". These people are not the same as flat earthers. If someone makes a claim that can't be backed up, go ahead and call them on that.

[Johan]

and that's why my take on 9/11 can't be debunked.

And what exactly is your take? If its what you wrote in the above post then yeah, it can be debunked. Pretty easily actually.

[FaithIsFilth]

And what exactly is your take? If its what you wrote in the above post then yeah, it can be debunked. Pretty easily actually.

My take is that Bush and Cheney may have let it happen. Go ahead and debunk.

[josephpalazzo]

There's a ghost in my attic. I dare anyone to disprove that.

[FaithIsFilth]

There's a ghost in my attic. I dare anyone to disprove that.

Why bring in the supernatural? That would only make sense if ghosts were already known to exist. My claim was that Bush and Cheney may have lied to get into a war. They have been known to lie to get into war. That is reality. All I'm saying is maybe they did once more, what we already know they have done and were willing to do, because they did it in Iraq. Lie to go to war. I'm proposing they may have done something we know they have done before. That's not something farfetched like a belief in ghosts. Not even close. You think Bush didn't let it happen, and that is speculation on your part. I am speculating just the same as you are. We are doing the same thing, so don't act like you are going by the facts and I am denying any facts, because that's not the case.

[Johan]

My take is that Bush and Cheney may have let it happen. Go ahead and debunk.

With advanced knowledge of the event or without?

[FaithIsFilth]

With advanced knowledge of the event or without?

I don't know exactly what the Bush admin knew. Maybe Bush knew exactly what was going on, what time it was going to happen, etc. Maybe he knew less than that. I don't know.

They had a shitload of warnings that Bin Laden was determined to attack. I don't know if they knew all the specifics. The WTC and Washington should have been obvious targets though. Muslims went after the WTC before, so those buildings should have been protected if the government didn't want them to be hit. PNAC said shortly before 9/11 that there was consensus among those in power. They wanted to see a "transformation" with the US military. They said this transformation would be painfully slow without a Pearl Harbor like event. So, shortly before 9/11, PNAC is admitting that those in power can't accomplish what they want to accomplish as is. Something big needs to happen, they say. Shortly after that, Bush is elected, and something more than big happens. The neo-cons get their Pearl Harbor. Now, that doesn't show that they made it or let it happen, but what it shows is that those in power benefit from 9/11 in a big way, and this is why I say maybe, just maybe they let it happen.

[Baruch]

My take is that Bush and Cheney may have let it happen. Go ahead and debunk.

Been done, FDR let Pearl Harbor happen.  Then Hitler also declared war on the US ... and this was a good thing that the American people were opposed to.  Americans were pro-German but anti-Japanese ... because racism.

But there will be no paper, signed by FDR in his own blood ... saying that this was so.  But then we have no paper, signed by Washington in his own blood ... that the Constitution of 1787 was a coup ... though it was.  There was no authority for the convention.  But then Americans are traitors.

Of course one can say that the public existence of the PNAC is proof of intent ... and others would say that the PNAC shows intent, but that doesn't convict anyone in court ... you have to have blood on your hands, not just intent to kill.

Denial or agreement ... regarding FDR or Shrub ... is a matter of politics.  And no ... Lincoln didn't let the South start a war ... snicker!  All politician's ethics are as white as the driven snow ... and I am in kindergarten still wearing pull-ups ;-)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Official inquiries though, are usually political/commercial coverups.  The inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic, completely exonerated the Cunard Line and the captain at the helm ;-)  So unfortunately, there was an official inquiry into 9/11 ... so we will never know.  There was an official inquiry into the Challenger failure ... but fortunately a general poked a physicist into telling the truth ... Feynman.  Without that nudge, and Feynman, NASA and Morton Thiokol would have been ... found innocent.

Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist.

[Baruch]

Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist.

Tell me how the Titanic investigation or the Pearl Harbor commission etc all went down.  The government always tells the truth (and they know it, they know all things) and so do corporations.  Tide really is new and improved ... hallelujah!

[Hakurei Reimu]

Official inquiries though, are usually political/commercial coverups.  The inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic, completely exonerated the Cunard Line and the captain at the helm ;-)

How can anyone realistically be blamed for not wanting to run headlong into an iceburg? Or thinking that the best-built and compartmentalized ship to sail to that date could afford to skimp a little on the safety?

So unfortunately, there was an official inquiry into 9/11 ... so we will never know.

There was an official inquiry into the Challenger failure ... but fortunately a general poked a physicist into telling the truth ... Feynman.  Without that nudge, and Feynman, NASA and Morton Thiokol would have been ... found innocent.

Bullshit, as anyone who had read Feynman's account of his role in the investigation would know (What Do You Care What Other People Think?).

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Tell me how the Titanic investigation or the Pearl Harbor commission etc all went down.  The government always tells the truth (and they know it, they know all things) and so do corporations.  Tide really is new and improved ... hallelujah!

It just so happens that I have all forty volumes of the Congressional Investigation into the Attack on Pearl Harbor online. http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/congress/

Enjoy reading the 38,000 pages, I did. (But I was 14 when I started reading them, so I  had ahead start on you.)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The problem here is that some folks think they have THE TRUTH and everybody else is just stupid. Doesn't do much for their credibility when they start of with "you ignorant sheeple don't know shit" and things go down hill from there.

[josephpalazzo]

With advanced knowledge of the event or without?

You think Bush didn't let it happen, and that is speculation on your part.

But that would require the ability to read minds, which is not available, not more than investigating ghosts.

I am speculating just the same as you are. We are doing the same thing, so don't act like you are going by the facts and I am denying any facts, because that's not the case.

That was the point of my post. Investigating ghosts is just as bad as investigating the mind of W. Bush.