Wtc building 7

[MachineGhost]

A conspiracy does seem far-fetched to me, but it really bothers me how all of the buildings that collapsed went straight down--demolition-style--rather than topping over sideways even slightly.

It also bothers me about all of the alleged reports of a lot of hush-hush construction and law enforcement activity going on in the WTC basement, etc. several weeks before the attack.  Similar to what occured before the Okalahoma City bombing, except in that case enough of the "open secret" leaked out that most of the ATF employees stayed away from work on the day of McVeigh's attack.

Has this been refuted?

[stone]

My favorite conspiracy theory is AliG's claim that Tupac Shakur is still alive. His evidence:

if u rearange de lettaz of 'TUPAC SHAKUR' u get 'u trap cak sh' (dere is a spare 'u' which refers to de CIA hobviously). He iz askin us to be quiet ('sh') about de 'trappin' of 'cak', which basicaly meanz dat he couldn't 'ave been shot, coz overwise why would he still be telling us dat?

[WildAboutHarry]

Does anyone believe an inexperienced Hillary Clinton really turned $10K into $100K trading futures in just a month or two?

There was an old (Clinton era) parody sung to the tune of "Eleanor Rigby" that went something like:

"Hillary Clinton, picks up a check from a broker who might be a thief"
"Buys some more beef"
"Doing her taxes, she takes the maximum write off for Bill's BVDs"
"Nobody sees"

And so on.

[Reub]

Benghazi-gate was a conspiracy on the part of the U.S. Administration to cover-up their own malfeasance. It was blatant, coordinated, repeated lying to the American public so as not to be blamed for the murder of an American ambassador by Islamic terrorists just before an election.

[Pointedstick]

It was blatant, coordinated, repeated lying to the American public

That's a conspiracy? With so broad a definition, isn't the entirely history of the U.S. government a series of conspiracies?

[Ad Orientem]

It was blatant, coordinated, repeated lying to the American public

That's a conspiracy? With so broad a definition, isn't the entirely history of the U.S. government a series of conspiracies?

You beat me to it. That pretty much covers every administration with the probable exception of William H. Harrison who died before he could F--- anything up.

[Storm]

Benghazi-gate was a conspiracy on the part of the U.S. Administration to cover-up their own malfeasance. It was blatant, coordinated, repeated lying to the American public so as not to be blamed for the murder of an American ambassador by Islamic terrorists just before an election.

Please, Benghazi-gate?  Somehow this doesn't pass the smell test.  Most administrations wait for intelligence before deciding if an attack has links to terrorist organizations or not.  If Obama got up on day 1 and said "I could wait for the intelligence analysts, but instead, I'm just going to jump to the conclusion and say Al Queda did it," you'd be criticizing him for being careless.

If this is a conspiracy, what do you call Scooter Libby, a criminal convicted of leaking information to the press and helping an administration conspire to start an unnecessary war that cost tens of thousands of lives?  I guess it's fine to have a conspiracy to start a war, but no, waiting for intelligence analysts to look for evidence is a conspiracy of watergate like proportions...  Let's impeach immediately!  Wait, impeachment is too light of a punishment; I think a good old fashioned lynching is more appropriate.

[dualstow]

So, back to building 7: I remember reading various arguments in the mid 2000s about high octane jet fuel and melting steel. At least, I read it until my eyes glazed over. I am not a structural engineer. In the end, I decided that of course politicians will take advantage of a situation like 9/11. But, I could not find any evidence of foreknowledge.

Prediction: every future major disaster that is not caused by an earthquake or a volcano will have various conspiracy theories persistently attached like barnacles, complete with photo(shopped)graphic evidence and the sworn testimony of eyewitnesses.

[Reub]

This was a concerted effort by the Administration to lie to the American public. They repeatedly stated that this was a spontaneous attack as a result of a movie when, in fact, it was an Islamic terrorist, well-planned murder on the anniversary of 9/11. You can seek to minimize it, but they were caught red-handed lying to the American people.

[Pointedstick]

This was a concerted effort by the Administration to lie to the American public. They repeatedly stated that this was a spontaneous attack as a result of a movie when, in fact, it was an Islamic terrorist, well-planned murder on the anniversary of 9/11. You can seek to minimize it, but they were caught red-handed lying to the American people.

I guess I don't see how this is really any different from all the other times our government has lied to us about lots of other things. Shouldn't we be used to it by now? Of course the government is going to lie to us! Isn't that what the press corps is supposed to exist for? Seems to me like it's been doing a pretty good job in this matter!

I see politicians lying like I see bad weather. Why get mad at it? Just put on your raincoat or stay indoors.

[AgAuMoney]

So, back to building 7: I remember reading various arguments in the mid 2000s about high octane jet fue

Me too.

And yet, jet fuel is very low octane, so all those arguments are still null and void.

Jet fuel is basically purified diesel.  When you get better than 99% pure it is called kerosene.  Even more pure and with an appropriate mix of molecular weights it gets to be Jet-A.  Jet-B mixes in some pure gasoline (naptha) for better cold weather performance, but it is still very low octane compared to pure gasoline.

The only high octane fuel used in aviation is avgas for high performance piston engines, not jet turbines.

[AgAuMoney]

I decided that of course politicians will take advantage of a situation like 9/11. But, I could not find any evidence of foreknowledge.

And foreknowledge is not needed.

It is sufficient to know that politicians will take advantage of it.  So a group of 20-30 people can plan a false flag safe in the knowledge how the politicians will treat it.  It has been known to happen.  It will undoubtedly happen again.

The only real question re. 9/11 is if the 20-30 people planning it were islamic terrorists as claimed, or if it was such a false flag operation designed to raise the political will to "do what must be done."

[Ad Orientem]

Debunking 9-11 conspiracy theories...
http://www.debunking911.com/

[dualstow]

So, back to building 7: I remember reading various arguments in the mid 2000s about high octane jet fuel and melting steel

Me too.

And yet, jet fuel is very low octane, so all those arguments are still null and void.

Jet fuel is basically purified diesel.  

Told you my eyes glazed over.
But seriously, reading Ad Orientem's link now about fires in the absence of jet fuel.

[Ad Orientem]

A major problem with conspiracy theorists is that they can propose the most outrageous ideas in a few sentences that require book length responses to firmly crush. It creates an advantage for the kooks and nut jobs out there. And of course the internet is a great place to do research if you don't mind wading through a sea of fecal matter on controversial subjects like 9-11, presidential birth certificates, or assassinations. Some of these purveyors of conspiracy really do just make things up (or if you prefer more plain language, they lie). And unless you are reasonably knowledgeable on the subject you may not have a clue that you are being spoon fed a load of the brown stuff.

One way I assess a proposed conspiracy theory is by right off asking the question, how many people would have to be involved on some level with all of them keeping their mouths shut forever? On that basis alone I tend to be a hard core skeptic before the conspiracy theorist has gotten more than a few sentences into their idea.

Way too many people just fail to apply a little common sense to some of the bizarre ideas being peddled by the lunatic fringe or good old fashioned con artists.

[MachineGhost]

One way I assess a proposed conspiracy theory is by right off asking the question, how many people would have to be involved on some level with all of them keeping their mouths shut forever? On that basis alone I tend to be a hard core skeptic before the conspiracy theorist has gotten more than a few sentences into their idea.

There's one in every bar, but it requires a sufficient number to get the outlier.  If it is a black project operation and/or using military personnel as opposed to civilian, it could take decades for the truth to ever come out.

But when you have even a top level CIA executive whistleblowing recently, it does stretch credibility to think that a conspiracy could be maintained for long, especially one as momentus as 09/11.  However, I think there is a big risk in being a whistleblower nowadays that dissaudes those in the know, even if they're not liable to be prosecuted for violating security clearances.  And the reputable Fourth Estate certainly doesn't pay any attention to eyewitness testimonies or "open secrets" after the edict has been handed on down once the so-called conspiracy is debunked in a public manner.  So it doesn't seem all that hard for the actual truth to stay buried if only a relative few knew it.  We all like our comfort zones and not to be threatened by the men in black.

[Storm]

I just read more than I wanted to know about WTC 7.  This pretty thoroughly debunks it:

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

[dualstow]

A major problem with conspiracy theorists is that they can propose the most outrageous ideas in a few sentences that require book length responses to firmly crush.
...
Way too many people just fail to apply a little common sense to some of the bizarre ideas being peddled by the lunatic fringe or good old fashioned con artists.

Well said. I just don't understand why youtube and Alex Jones have so much influence. Is it simple laziness, that people are too lazy to do research when videos with dramatic music are readily available?

As far as I'm concerned, nothing is a conspiracy unless conclusively proven otherwise, not the other way around. And, if only those special few who listen to Coast to Coast AM radio know about zetas and "the truth" behind 9/11, well then, the burden of saving the world is on their shoulders.

[Reub]

Two points:

• I'm shocked -- shocked -- to find that government officials sometimes lie to cover their own asses.
• The event happened on September 11. By September 28, the U.S. had concluded that the attack had been planned, and not a response to the offensive video. I would say that changing your story in 17 days is not characteristic of a "conspiracy".

in this case the point (or conspiracy) may never have been to "get away with the lie" but to set it in peoples brains, most people follow the news only loosely and often only the headlines, avid watchers and people who analyze and question the news (the way many here do) are truly rare oddity's among news viewers, so if you lie for the first week or 17 days and the media headlines that lie for all those days, you basically have succeeded in setting that as "the truth" for a awful lot of people because the correction wont make headlines, and the majority don't follow story's all the way thorough or analyze and question them the way we are accustom to. In an election season convincing a lot of people that "it was a movies fault" and not a foreign policy problem could have a large effect on an elections outcome.

Obama's conspiracy of lies totally distracted from the administration's own ineptness and incompetence. They changed the subject from why they allowed our ambassador to go virtually unprotected on 9/11 in a Islamo-terrorist war zone despite prior knowledge of the danger. The subject became was it a spontaneous act or not. And if it wasn't then why were we told that it was. The subject of their gross inability to protect a US ambassador on the anniversary of 9/11 was totally lost in the translation.

P.S. Just because you might think that governments always lie does not make it right. Remember that they are lying to you.

how do you know a politician is lying? ... his lips are moving..

i am not surprised they lie during an election, or any other time they speak.. regardless of whether you think this is a "conspiracy" or "just another lie" it is interesting to contemplate the motives to understand why our lying lairs are moving their lips and what they hope to accomplish with the lies they tell.

[Tortoise]

Motives? You mean besides trying to gain and/or remain in power?

that is the fundamental underlying reason for sure.
but there is some value to be gained in understanding the mechanics of how we get manipulated, if you can see both the reason and the method used to manipulate, you become less susceptible to future manipulation..

I suppose. But, for me, alot of this can end up as evidence-free speculation and mind-reading (much like trying to predict the market).

So what would you say was the reason and method in this case?

in this case the point (or conspiracy) may never have been to "get away with the lie" but to set it in peoples brains, most people follow the news only loosely and often only the headlines, avid watchers and people who analyze and question the news (the way many here do) are truly rare oddity's among news viewers, so if you lie for the first week or 17 days and the media headlines that lie for all those days, you basically have succeeded in setting that as "the truth" for a awful lot of people because the correction wont make headlines, and the majority don't follow story's all the way thorough or analyze and question them the way we are accustom to. In an election season convincing a lot of people that "it was a movies fault" and not a foreign policy problem could have a large effect on an elections outcome.

there is certainly some speculation involved, and often the evidence can only be rounded up after the fact when the results are visible. but if you never look then you run the risk of being forever in the "fool me twice shame on me" group.
- the underling reason is as you said "remain in power"
- the immediate reason seems to be keep the focus off of foreign policy failures during an election season
- the equating of insulting Muslims with "yelling fire in a crowded theater" as a way to limit free speech may be another angle to achieve the underling reason.

- the main method is to rely on the lack of questioning and tendency of the American people to rely on headlines, soundbites and talking points for their information (distraction).
- and the use of Americas short attention span
- the rest is a mix of standard crowd manipulation methods, the use of fear (Muslims will attack us if we allow ugly speech), the use of propaganda 101 "repeat the big lie often enough". and so on..

whether this amounts to a conspiracy or if its just another lie seems to be a argument of semantics and details
all conspiracy require lies, not all lies are a conspiracy. it may come down to who new what when and whether they colluded to tell the lies or did it out of incompetence (the news may not be conspiring they may just be incompetent at journalism) or if they are people who passed the lies along as truth unknowingly because they trust the source.

Way too many people just fail to apply a little common sense to some of the bizarre ideas being peddled by the lunatic fringe or good old fashioned con artists.

Well said. I just don't understand why youtube and Alex Jones have so much influence. Is it simple laziness, that people are too lazy to do research when videos with dramatic music are readily available?

I could say the same thing about people who rely on the mainstream media for their information. You think most of them engage in rigorous fact-checking and are immune to the persuasive effects of flashy editing and dramatic music in what they watch?

It cuts both ways. People are easily influenced in general--like sheep--whatever the ideology happens to be.

[dualstow]

Way too many people just fail to apply a little common sense to some of the bizarre ideas being peddled by the lunatic fringe or good old fashioned con artists.

Well said. I just don't understand why youtube and Alex Jones have so much influence. Is it simple laziness, that people are too lazy to do research when videos with dramatic music are readily available?

I could say the same thing about people who rely on the mainstream media for their information. You think most of them engage in rigorous fact-checking and are immune to the persuasive effects of flashy editing and dramatic music in what they watch?

It cuts both ways. People are easily influenced in general--like sheep--whatever the ideology happens to be.

Sure it cuts both ways, but there's a difference between being skeptical of some details in the mainstream media, cynical even, and swapping out the news for the alterna-news. Swallowing the non-mainstream kool-aid instead of the mainstream is not applying a common sense test. It's just taking a dangerous leap in the other direction.

[Tortoise]

Sure it cuts both ways, but there's a difference between being skeptical of some details in the mainstream media, cynical even, and swapping out the news for the alterna-news. Swallowing the non-mainstream kool-aid instead of the mainstream is not applying a common sense test. It's just taking a dangerous leap in the other direction.

"Some details"... like, say, justifications for going to war? Oh, those pesky little details

When such "details" later turn out to be completely false (whether by conspiracy or not), their effect on people in possession of common sense is to cast doubt on the entire institution of the mainstream media, which parrots (at best) or cheerleads (at worst) whatever justification for war--War on Terror, War on Drugs, War on <Fill In the Blank>--the authorities happen to hand down to the unwashed masses.

I'm not trying to defend the folks who drink conspiracy Kool-Aid with a complete lack of skepticality. I'm just trying to point out that that's not the only type of Kool-Aid out there. Much of the propaganda in the mainstream media is simply a different flavor of it.

[MediumTex]

I feel like we are discussing the latest episode of Breaking Bad here, except people are more worked up about it because they imagine it is something happening in the real world.

I wish that there was some kind of political PP that people could adopt that would allow them to tune out all of these noisy and meaningless news stories.

The only people who should be intereted in the Libya story are the families and friends of the people who were killed.  The people who were killed are strangers to the rest of us.  Why should we be so concerned with the deaths of four people when thousands of people die tragically all over the world every day?

Surely any westerner who goes into a Muslim country shortly after a violent overthrow of the government is aware that something bad could happen to them.

[Reub]

M.T. He was an American ambassador. It was 9/11. We were lied to. It is newsworthy. 

[dualstow]

Sure it cuts both ways, but there's a difference between being skeptical of some details in the mainstream media, cynical even, and swapping out the news for the alterna-news. Swallowing the non-mainstream kool-aid instead of the mainstream is not applying a common sense test. It's just taking a dangerous leap in the other direction.

"Some details"... like, say, justifications for going to war? Oh, those pesky little details

When such "details" later turn out to be completely false (whether by conspiracy or not), their effect on people in possession of common sense is to cast doubt on the entire institution of the mainstream media, which parrots (at best) or cheerleads (at worst) whatever justification for war...

I mean, when someone like Colin Powell talks about yellowcake uranium, I want to know about it. The mainstream media reported that as accurately as they could. It wasn't so cool to see Wolf Blitzer exclaiming "Wow, that was a good one" during the shock & awe bombing, but I don't feel I was misled by the media anymore than I was misled by Yahoo Finance during the flash crash.

I feel like we are discussing the latest episode of Breaking Bad here, except people are more worked up about it because they imagine it is something happening in the real world.

Hah! That prescient Lone Gunmen episode posted earlier in this thread was created by none other than Breaking Bad's Vince Gilligan, affectionately known to some of his fans as "Villigan."