9/11-was the U.S goverment involved?

[DeletedUser8950]

Ok, the world still remembers that terrible day, I think everyone who lived through it does.
But there are large groups of people who believe in several conspiracies. I'll post the most valid and ask your views.

Foreknowledge
One of more high-ranking government official knew of the attacks before hand and either:

• Let it happen

• Helped it happen

1. The let it happen one is mainly that they told fighter planes to stand down, or scrambled their planes controls. This is unlikely, as the hi-jackers likely turned off the radar of the flights hi-jacked, making them hard to locate. Another plane behaving eratically when everyone had passed out from cabin decompression took 1hour and 22minutes to reach.

2. Helped it happen seems to revolve around that the U.S government planted explosives at the bottom of the tower and set them off not long after the planes hit the twin towers, seeing that they weren't going to fall.
Some claims people make in support of this arguement are:

Proponents, such as Steven E. Jones, Richard Gage and Jim Hoffman argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures. Jones has presented the hypothesis that thermite or nanothermite was used to demolish the buildings. In April 2009, Danish chemist Niels H. Harrit, of the University of Copenhagen, and eight other authors, published a paper that stated that nano-sized "chips" consisting of unreacted and partially reacted super-thermite are present in the samples of the dust.[63]
-Wikipedia

• The force of one plane crashing into the top of the tower would not be enough to destroy the whole tower.
• The fires and such inside would also not be enough

Other people believe the U.S paid Al Qaeda to hi-jack the plans, or similar theories.

Conspiritists believe that the U.S government would allow it/help it so that they could start the war on terror or whatever.

There's plenty more consipracy theories, some frankly stupid (such as no-plane theories) but those are the main theories.

Anyway I'd like to hear what you think of it. I'm not sure what I believe, but I find it most likely that the U.S government was not involved in these events.

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally very much doubt it , although I don't think the attack on the pentagon has been Adequately explained yet.

 

[DeletedUser13682]

Loose change does present some theories and evidence to back some of them up. They say the government wanted to crash a plane into Guantanamo Bay in the 70s or 80s and relocate the students that were supposed to be on there to other places.

 

[DeletedUser]

My opinion!

My opinion is that USA did it all by themself,so they had a reason to fight against the middle-east.Cuz a plane crashed in Pentagon to if im not mistaken,and that is imposible since pentagon is one of the most secured buildings in the world

 

[DeletedUser14239]

It was a bad day either way but I don't think the government had anything to do with it. Of course if I was proven that they were involved with the planning in some way I wouldn't be in horror shock.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't doubt the government had some knowledge of a terrorist attack, but to say they let it happen or will involved is insane. They probably did have people around to try to stop it but just couldn't in time. It's life, there are crazy people out there can't always stop them all.

 

[DeletedUser]

I have trouble with this conspiracy theory for the simple fact that I don't think the government (especially under GWB) would ever be competent enough to pull something like this off.

 

[DeletedUser]

They said the same thing about Pearl Harbor, but there isn't enough evidence to show that the government had a big enough motive to do something that horrible.

My opinion is that USA did it all by themself,so they had a reason to fight against the middle-east.Cuz a plane crashed in Pentagon to if im not mistaken,and that is imposible since pentagon is one of the most secured buildings in the world

Yeah, there were already terrorist groups in the middle east that were becoming hostile towards the US. The Pentagon is secure from people attacking from the ground, but it's not immune to airplanes crashing into it, and the building held out pretty good anyway.

 

[DeletedUser]

They did Help Al-qaeda

The US government did aid Al-qaeda in 9/11 because they were trained at bases set up and financed by the Us government form when the Russians invaded Afghanistan.
another thing those same bases trained the fighters who fought US troops and the weapons were payed for by the US money given to Bin-Laden
which was billions so in essance the US payed for both sides of the war

 

[DeletedUser]

They supported the Al-Quaeda in the late 80's and early 90's when they were fighting the Soviets out of Afghanistan. By 9/11 we weren't supporting them anymore because the USSR had fallen and the Al-Quaeda had turned against the western world, even though they still had our weapons stockpiled.

 

[DeletedUser544]

I believe certain elements in our government knew and maybe even helped arrange 9/11 in order to raise the political capital they needed to pass the patriot act, further sending us down the road to a police state.

the documentary "9/11 in plane sight" was what convinced me. in it, they analyze the footage from Time's documentary DVD about 9/11 (sold around the country to everyone). in it, you can clearly see some sort of missile/bomb attached to the bottom of the planes hitting the WTC, and there is a noticeable flash at the exact second they make contact with the building.

the pentagon is also debunked, consider that to this date the US government has only released something like 3 frames (FRAMES) of video showing the aircraft hitting the pentagon. The most secure building in the world (arguably) didn't have any security cameras that happened to be pointing the direction that plane flew in from? the news footage showing firefighters putting the fire out on the front pentagon lawn is noticeably lacking any debris that would have came from a plane. they analyze the strike point and compare it to bunker buster missile strikes, in the way the crater/hole in the wall looks.

and the scariest thing is that at the end, they go back and talk about McVeigh and the Oklahoma city bombing... and how their are parallels between the two incidents, such as who was involved in the intelligence community, how the stories "changed" drastically once they were aired on cable news (and the original local stories all of a sudden couldn't be viewed anymore the next day after the event)... For instance few people knew this but the day of Oklahoma city, local news agencies reported there were actually 2 bombs; the second one was found AFTER the explosion and disarmed by federal agents. by day 2 (after the explosion), those stories were squashed and not repeated on the cable news providers like MSNBC or FOX. and nobody was able to get their hands on the original local news versions of the covering of the bombing. that material just magically "disappeared"...

 

[DeletedUser]

It is highly possible the government was involved in this, a few days before JFK was assassinated he was handed the details of a false flag operation involving Cuba called Operation Northwoods

False flag ops have been relatively common since their introduction, Hitler was one of the first to use them. Why and how do people defy the possiblity?

Patriotism - "Our country would never do that syndrome."
Sanity - "You would want to be insane to believe stuff like that happened you are obviously crazy and a commie."
Logic - "Why would they do it they have nothing to gain?"

I would answer to these, yes your country would do it they are a power hungry machine run like a business and these are politicians not fluffly kittens.
No people who question these things aren't crazy it's happened countless times before just look at the history books.
They have everything to gain popularity in the polls, uniting their country in troubled times and motivating people into mindset of war.

 

[DeletedUser]

the documentary "9/11 in plane sight" was what convinced me. in it, they analyze the footage from Time's documentary DVD about 9/11 (sold around the country to everyone). in it, you can clearly see some sort of missile/bomb attached to the bottom of the planes hitting the WTC, and there is a noticeable flash at the exact second they make contact with the building.

You're probably mistaking a jet turbine for a missile, and it would explode when it hit the building because the engine was full of fuel. They wouldn't use war as a way to unite the country because just like Vietnam they would probably have known that it would only upset people. Did Bush have a motive to invade Iraq? Yes, to please the oil companies and probably some influence from Bush Sr, but I doubt he'd risk anything like this sort of conspiracy. A plane hit the pentagon and another one was heading for the White House before the passengers took out the terrorists and ditched the plane, so it would cost the government more than it would accomplish. It would also be hard to cover up a missile on the bottom of a plane flying out of a major airport. The real problem is that Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to go to Iraq when the real threat was coming from Afghanistan, and if more support had been sent there we could have put an end to Osama a long time ago.

 

[DeletedUser]

You telling me that a large portion of America wasn't for the war on terrorism in the direct aftermath? The fact is it wasn't til everyone realised that the war was being initiated on the wrong people for the governments own purposes that a lot of people stood against it. The opinion polls would have shown 80-90% of Americans would have been for a War in the aftermath. It comes under the someones gotta pay we don't care who category, the fact is it gave America a united front "War on Terror" to consolidate people against a common cause.

The argument about the exploding engine was that standard plane fuel can't burn at high enough temperatures alone to melt steel in fact it falls short by a good distance. The only argument for was the mixture of chemicals (windows, furniture) from inside the building mixed with the fuel would be sufficient to weaken the frame, but it's debatable.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, in the immediate aftermath we were for it but then the shock wore off and people started begging for peace, some because of foul play but most just because they were tired of young men getting killed, just like Vietnam. Most politicians nowadays were teens and young adults during Vietnam so they could have seen that coming a mile off. They wouldn't have started a war to unite the country, they would have started it for:
a) promoting the oil industry
b) the neccessary purpose of hindering the terrorists
c) please the crowds, because as you said, people were all for war at the beginning. At that point they wouldn't be thinking of the long term consequences

9/11 and Iraq have nothing to do with a police state conspiracy since the plummet in support from the war would come too quickly to get anything more than the Patriot Act passed. Bush did it for more common reasons that come with politics- to please the crowds in the short term and to please the big oil corporations in the long run.

 

[DeletedUser]

*facepalm*​

 

[DeletedUser]

I have trouble

I have trouble with this conspiracy theory for the simple fact that I don't think the government (especially under GWB) would ever be competent enough to pull something like this off.

Yes, lets just believe that a bunch of people living in caves were able to pull this off. Any way as I have always said, if you believe that a bunch guys from caves did this, then you also have to believe that only one man shot and killed JFK and that there was no conspiracy there either.

 

[DeletedUser]

You're right Gypsy it's equally as implausible that a bunch of cave dwellers managed to infiltrate the tightest network of security in the world.

 

[DeletedUser]

Forget about the twin towers collapsing from the airplane strikes (which they were designed to specifically take a hit from).

Forget about how the second tower hit was the first one to collapse (even though the airplane hit it at an odd angle which deflected about 60% of the impact).

Forget about how both buildings fell at *free-fall speed* right onto its own footprint, which is *only* plausible through a controlled demolition.

What I'd like to know is how building 6 fell too without any rhyme or reason (it wasn't hit by a plane; had minimal damage done by the collapse of the other buildings; and also fell at *free-fall* speed onto its own footprint).

Inside job? I say yes. Was the government involved? That's where things get a little sticky.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ugh, i'm really getting tired of these conspiracy debates. Anyone else in the mood to debunk all this?