9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Gather At LA Conference

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
www.cnn.com...

Looks reminiscent to say.... This??

I think we're seeing some conclusion jumping here.

I think that survey is reasonably correct. In general, the American public has grown accustomed to the fact that our government, or factions of our government, regularly engage in activities that require some degree of cover-up.

However, we need to be clear of the general public distinctions and how it compares to ours.

From my conversations, nearly every "lay person" I talk to believes that there are aspects of the 9/11 attacks that are being "covered up" by the US government. But this does not mean they believe "the government did it" by extension, nor does it mean they think Osama didn't.

As conspiracy theorists, we tend to automatically assume that "cover up" in this context refers to our perception of what's being covered up... deep government complicity ranging from sponsoring the terrorists to firing missiles on government buildings. But that is generally not the case for the general public. For them, cover-up could simply mean that we'll never get the full picture of any advance knowledge, or that intelligence community mistakes may have paved the way for the attacks.

Just because a public poll indicates people think there are 9/11 related cover-ups doesn't mean the cover-up involves the type of scandals discussed here.

Originally posted by Communication_Burger
Don't turn around now and try to imply we all think it's the President who carried this out,

Same difference.

I know your game. That's not going to wash. He was in on it, but he himself didn't do it all.

I am not trying to play a game.

[edit on 26-6-2006 by Nygdan]

The Classic Whodunnit

Originally posted by Communication_Burger
Freeze! Hold it right there. We are talking Government here, more accurately criminal elements within them. Don't turn around now and try to imply we all think it's the President who carried this out, and is solely responsible. I know your game. That's not going to wash. He was in on it, but he himself didn't do it all.

Don't you think that maybe this is just a bit melodramatic?

At this point, I'm half expecting you to demand of Nygdan, “Where were you on the night of September 10, 2001?”

Then, if we want to complete the charade, you could reach out, pull off his mask and reveal that he is actually Old Man Tucker, the eccentric caretaker of the WTC who rigged them to collapse, whereupon he could ruefully complain “And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids.”

Sorry if my point seems silly, but this business of pointing fingers at other members like they're devious criminals out to get you is absurd.

What I know of Nygdan strongly suggests that he has no interest in covering anything up, but rather tries to keep an open mind and questions assumptions -- including his own.

Members disagree on things all the time. That does not mean they're sinister or dishonest.

Please, let's try to bear that in mind and leave the finger-pointing and attempted character assassinations for Court TV.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Just because a public poll indicates people think there are 9/11 related cover-ups doesn't mean the cover-up involves the type of scandals discussed here.

Agreed. Many of the folks I've spoken to regarding 9-11 and such "do" feel there is/was a "cover-up". However, their definitions as to what a cover up is range from "They'll never admit they dropped the ball" to "Yes, we'll never know the whole story." Of course, there are others who ... uhm ... would fit right in with what's discussed on ATS.

IMO, it's rather difficult to gauge the "accuracy" [read: implication] of such a poll when using the term "cover-up", especially considering the Wide range of definitions that can be applied to, or implied by, said phrase/term.

$.02

Nygdan, just because people think there was a cover up doesn't necessarily mean that they think "al Qaeda didn't do it". There are many possibilities, as SO pointed out. It's not a clear-cut, either/or situation. Opinions range all over the place. Even I believe that Arab Terrorists drove planes into the WTC. That doesn't mean that I think "al Qaeda did it" or the "Bush did it". There are many details I am undecided on.

Originally posted by Nygdan
No its not, its perfectly clear. "Who did 911?"

I disagree that this question is perfectly clear.

- Who drove the planes?
- Who financed it?
- Who masterminded it?
- Who allowed it to happen?

What do you mean, "who did it"?

There's a lot of gray there. It's not as simple as "Who ate my donut"?

Originally posted by Nygdan
Indeed, and if there were a zogby poll that polled the general public, I'd go along with it.

Date: May 17, 2006
This is a telephone survey of adults nationwide conducted by Zogby International.
...
24. Some people believe that the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks, saying there has been a cover-up. Others say that the 9/11 Commission was a bi-partisan group of honest and well-respected people and that there is no reason they would want to cover-up anything. Who are you more likely to agree with?

US government and 9/11 Commission are NOT covering up - 48%

US government and 9/11 Commission are covering up - 42%

Not sure - 10%

Thinking that the government is involved in a cover up also doesn't imply that the government "did it", nor does it state clearly that Al Qaeda did or didn't. You can think of it as a simple question and perhaps in your mind, it is, but there are many assumptions made with such a simple answer as "They did it".

Originally posted by Majic
Don't you think that maybe this is just a bit melodramatic?

Hehe. No. I thought it was funny. Nygdan wanted to pull the old 'oh their nuts, they think Bush did it' card, which will lead us down the road of how much power the president really has, and a load of other nonsense. Take a look at how badly this thread is off topic. Over 20 replies, and not one of you have even mentioned the conference, or the international News coverage it has recieved! NICE ONE! This thread is now a classic, on so many different levels, and for so many different reasons. You people never cease to amaze me.

Originally posted by Majic
At this point, I'm half expecting you to demand of Nygdan, “Where were you on the night of September 10, 2001?”

LOL!

I may persue that line of questioning at a later date.

Originally posted by Majic
Sorry if my point seems silly, but this business of pointing fingers at other members like they're devious criminals out to get you is absurd.

What I know of Nygdan strongly suggests that he has no interest in covering anything up, but rather tries to keep an open mind and questions assumptions -- including his own.

I know what you mean here, and I would agree, but I think you have somewhat misunderstood my bizarre post to Nygdan. I wan't saying 'I know your game' Implying the person was some type of Agent, or a 'devious criminal'. I meant he/she was using a special worming tactic to tunnel out of the terrible argument. I don't think you are a devious criminal, Nygdan, and I didn't mean to sound like I was implying you were.

Originally posted by Majic
Members disagree on things all the time. That does not mean they're sinister or dishonest.

I know.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
- Who drove the planes?
- Who financed it?
- Who masterminded it?
- Who allowed it to happen?

What do you mean, "who did it"?

If we asked 'who did the holocaust', we would all answer 'The Nazis" or "hitler", not "Dorpf Schlegenmaker, from Bremen, was responsible for making sure that the gas chamber line was neat and orderly". I think that if there was a poll that asked "Who did 911" and the choices were "Bush" and "Bin Ladin", the majority of the public would say "Bin Ladin". I simply disagree that only 'hard core' 'beleivers' don't think that there was a

wild and far-fetched

conspiracy, which is what the OP was saying.

Its intersting that this conference was reported on, but it doesn't represent some fundamental shift in the way people are thinking about these things, the conference is reported as a human interest story, a 'hey, ain't this weird' story. They are not reporting on the conspiracy theories as something for the public to think about, they are reporting on the conference as a whacky oddity, thus, its not indicative of there only being 'hard core' non-beleivers that aren't accepting the theories being bandied about at the conference.


On a side note, dang, why don't we have an on location reporter there?!

Lies, Damn Lies, Statistics And Polls

Never one to leave well enough alone or use one word where twenty will do, and despite my misgivings about going too far afield of the topic, I want to advise caution about arguing over polls, poll results and what they mean.

Based on how much press they get, most journalists and politicians seem to swear by opinion polls as if they can give us a clear picture of what people think. The problem is that these same journalists and politicians are also known to play fast and loose with the truth.

Opinion polls are subject to much, much more than just statistical error. The way questions are worded, the way they are asked, the context in which they are asked, when they are asked and who answers them can vary widely.

You can give the same people the same poll on different days and get wildly different answers, for any number of reasons. Thus they are a loose guide at best.

That doesn't mean they're worthless, but I do caution against reading more into them than is actually there -- an error I see repeated over and over again, day in and day out.

Here I see it taking over a thread about a conspiracy theorist conference.

Poll Trolls

But it gets worse. As bad as telephone polls are -- which only sample the opinions of people who aren't savvy enough to screen their calls and actually do have time to "answer a few questions" (a group which explicitly excludes people like me and most people I know) -- Internet polls are utterly worthless.

Even assuming that they aren't routinely and deliberately skewed by "poll hackers" (which they are), the nature of online polls is such that even under the best circumstances, they only assess the opinions of people who visit certain websites, and taste in websites tends to isolate very unique groups of people who are rarely representative of larger groups.

The Yankee Stadium analogy definitely applies. Online polls tend to address issues of special interest to special groups, who are often far more passionate about them than the population as a whole.

Also, the Internet is a worldwide medium, so online polls that purport to question "Americans" or some other national group are just plain wrong. Even if such things as IP addresses are used to factor out such discrepancies, what's left is still a gross approximation at best.

But what really puts the nail in the coffin of online polls can be found in a single word: "freep".

"I Heard It On The Internet"

Groups organize all the time to skew polls toward their preferred outcomes, and their reach and capability should not be underestimated. Additionally, there now appear to be commercial businesses which specialize in influencing online opinions.

The result: online polls aren't worth the bits they're printed on. The fact that they are often misrepresented as being more accurate than they are doesn't help.

It's no coincidence that politicians and journalists habitually present poll results which only support their agendas. Polls which disagree with them undermine their messages and thus don't tend to find their way into articles or speeches -- except perhaps in those of opponents, who likewise cherry-pick the results they want.

Even "poll-driven" stories are routinely "spun" (i.e. "lied about") to reinforce an agenda, regardless of what they may actually indicate. Polls and their results are selected for the effect desired.

Polls are more often used as tools of manipulation than as tools of evaluation.

Thus, in my opinion (oh the irony), arguing over them is utterly pointless -- akin to arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

It's ultimately subjective, which is why so many people end up deluding themselves by seeing the answers they want to see in polls, whether the answers are actually there or not.

My advice: Be skeptical of the very real limitations of opinion polls, and don't believe everything you read on the Internet.



[edit on 6/26/2006 by Majic]

Originally posted by Nygdan

No its not, its perfectly clear.
"Who did 911?" The vast majority of people in the west are going to say 'al-qaida' or 'bin laden'. It doesn't require any citation. There a reason why its called a conspiracy theory, rather than 'the general public perception'.

Just to show how the average Joe American is dumb. I was watching CNN (I think) yesterday and they had a poll for the troops in Iraq. 85% said they were there because of Sadam's part in 9/11. Just goes to show how smart Joe Schmoe is.

Polls and public opinion are one thing...

What I'd like to know is why aren't there any major american news agencies reporting on this story?

Originally posted by mecheng
Polls and public opinion are one thing...

What I'd like to know is why aren't there any major american news agencies reporting on this story?

I've seen a decent amount of reports coming out on this. You have Reuters - Via Yahoo! Asia News, Yahoo! Biz, even News 24 South Africa is covering it! That's pretty good considering how low it is in the news at other moments. I'm surpised its getting this much attention. Even C-Span will be holding parts of the conference on tv this week!

Originally posted by mecheng
Polls and public opinion are one thing...

What I'd like to know is why aren't there any major american news agencies reporting on this story?

Good question. One might also I ask why, after 28 replies in this thread, you are only the second person to make even a single mention of the conference this thread is about. It doesn't exist until it has been on FOX, or SKY UK, I guess? Look how everyone has just totaly ignored it. Even Skeptic Overlord felt the need to just repeat an issue already covered right here in this very thread. There's an echo in here... I swear, but the source of the original sound is not discernable, it would seem. Very strange. Very strange indeed.

Originally posted by niteboy82


Reuters - Via Yahoo! Asia News, Yahoo! Biz, even News 24 South Africa is covering it! That's pretty good considering how low it is in the news at other moments. I'm surpised its getting this much attention. Even C-Span will be holding parts of the conference on tv this week!

The only American outlet there is C-Span. Unless Yahoo Asia, N24 South Africa, and Reuters India are American outlets.

Originally posted by Communication_Burger
The only American outlet there is C-Span. Unless Yahoo Asia, N24 South Africa, and Reuters India are American outlets.

It's easily searchable on Yahoo! News, and I'm in America, so I found it to be relevant. C-Span covering it is pretty acceptable I think. Sorry that I didn't meet the regulations that it was on the front page, but it was a standard search, and it was very easy for me to find. Why the sarcasm in the response?

Does any one know who the suprise guest was at the conference? I know that Alex had been hinting at a big time suprise guest but I havent' heard on who it was.

Thanks.

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
Does any one know who the suprise guest was at the conference? I know that Alex had been hinting at a big time suprise guest but I havent' heard on who it was.

Thanks.

I saw a press release online that Charlie Sheen might have been coming around. Don't know if he actually did or not. I know that the press release was from Alex, though. Hope that helps some.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Nygdan
However, its pretty clear, that the vast majority of the public beleives that it was al qaida, and certainly that it was islamic fundamentalists, and certainly not the Bush Administration.

I'm sorry, but unless you can provide some kind of data other than "all the people I talk to say it was Al Qaeda", I can't buy it.

Same. Talk about going to a Yankees game and taking a poll, the people you socialize with aren't a valid sample either. Most all of my friends strongly believe it was an inside job, but I don't put this out as a valid sample, and you certainly wouldn't accept it as one.

Using the worldviews implied by the major media as evidence of a general consensus is laughable, too. I tend to think that that goes the other way around.

Two Zogby polls were done, at least calling people all around the country, and based on those results, saying a "vast majority" of people still think al Qaeda alone did it in light of those polls is curious.


I'm not saying those polls point out that most people believe the government did it, but it sure as hell doesn't show that a "vast majority" still follow the official story, either.

And I have to wonder why such a focus on what most people believe, unless there are some ideas in a few heads around here that aren't welcomed, and for which seeming social pressures seem not to help. Just a thought.

[edit on 26-6-2006 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by Nygdan

There's way too much gray area to say that the vast majority think Al Qaeda did it. Especially without a source to back it up and explain what that means. The statement is just too vague.

No its not, its perfectly clear.
"Who did 911?" The vast majority of people in the west are going to say 'al-qaida' or 'bin laden'. It doesn't require any citation. There a reason why its called a conspiracy theory, rather than 'the general public perception'.

www.teamliberty.net...
valis.gnn.tv...
www.911truth.org...

On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

You said what again?



[edit on 6/26/2006 by ThichHeaded]

[edit on 6/26/2006 by ThichHeaded]

Originally posted by bsbray11
Two Zogby polls were done, at least calling people all around the country, and based on those results, saying a "vast majority" of people still think al Qaeda alone did it in light of those polls is curious.

Please site the second Zogby poll, I am only aware of some of the internet polls and the one zogby poll for NYC, which, again, showed that half of the respondants felt that there wasn't even a cover-up, let alone that the government actually helped bin ladin do it.

And I have to wonder why such a focus on what most people believe

What do you mean you have to wonder at it? It was brought up in the opening post, thats why we are discussing it here.

Originally posted by Griff
Just goes to show how smart Joe Schmoe is.

I agree, the average american is a complete twit., clueless about the world around him and how it operates.

mecheng
What I'd like to know is why aren't there any major american news agencies reporting on this story?

...

Reuters, I should think, counts as part of the mainstream media. As far as why its not on cnn or fox...why should it be? Why should fox be reporting on a conspiracy theory conference???

Thichheaded
You said what again?

I said that its pretty obvious what "Who did 911" is getting at.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by bsbray11
Two Zogby polls were done, at least calling people all around the country, and based on those results, saying a "vast majority" of people still think al Qaeda alone did it in light of those polls is curious.

Please site the second Zogby poll, I am only aware of some of the internet polls and the one zogby poll for NYC, which, again, showed that half of the respondants felt that there wasn't even a cover-up, let alone that the government actually helped bin ladin do it.

So here you actually nullify your claim that the vast majority of people believe that 'Al queda done it,' don't you? It's funny watching some back-peddling in counter clockwise circles.

Have you finished with that now? Now can we actually get on and discuss the conference?