Too many 9/11 conspiracy theories. Let´s narrow it down.

I want to start a thread.
This thread is to deal with all the different variations that have come along with time on 9/11 conspiracy theories.
So what I propose is to make a list, an inventory to try and separate the reasonable, the credible, the possible, the logical, from the preposterous, unbelievable and plain crazy stuff.
9/11 conspiracy theories have become sort of a cult to some people, and the variety or arguments and new proposals is getting bigger and bigger.
What I would like to see is participation of ATS posters who like discussing these theories to find out what the feeling is amongst most of us, regarding these.
So. I would like to start by submitting for comment, the theories that I find the more unbelievable and see what opinions we get. For example:
1.- The no plane´s hitting the WTC towers, or holograms theory.
This to me is one of the most preposterous ideas.
2.- Right there with no planes would also be DEW. In the form of a weapon fired from another building or from space. Neither one has credibility IMO.
3.- Remote controlled hijacked passenger jets.
4.- Remote controlled secret military jets disguised as passenger jets.
5.- Mini nukes used to bring down the WTC Towers.
From these being the most incredible we would start going through those that are considered by many worthy of more investigation or where people believe there are enough loose ends to warrant more research, and a new independent investigation of the 9/11 attacks because they suspect some kind of an inside job or direct involvement by very powerful people, or government officials.

I´d like to start just with these 5 and see how it goes. I´m sure I´m not mentioning some very crazy theories that have been explored over the years, feel free to post them or discuss them also.

Basicaly I´d like to find out if most people agree that those 5 theories have no merit and maybe we should be thinking of doing something about it to stop that kind of nonsense to be insisted upon over and over again.

The only theory that matters is that the OS is wrong. In order to work out what really happened you need new data: a real investigation. Speculation has taken us as far as it can. Phase one of the entire 9/11 truth movement ought to be to prove that the OS is false. Mission accomplished. Phase two: real investigation. There just isn't sufficient evidence to debate the details of any particular conspiracy theories. I think this discussion will either be largely ignored or quickly become an unfocused, unmanageable argument. Using our imagination and intuition is not the right way to figure out what really happened. A collection of disperate theories is of little use. What then? What, once we have a half dozen different, "reasonable sounding" speculations? What's the point? The only way to "stop that kind of nonsense" is to provide compelling new evidence(which doesn't exist yet) that prefers one theory over all the others. Everyone who will participate in this conversation is already aware of the important evidence and theories. It is literally nothing more than a matter of personal preference which theory you choose to believe. The only thing that can be said with certainty is that the OS is false.

reply to post by rush969


Trying to limit the number of conspiracies may sound like a good idea, but if too many theories bothers your sensibilities, I recommend you alone stick to the theories that interest you rather than being judge jury and sole determiner of what is normal sounding vs not so normal sounding. The whole 911 official story has so many operational concerns that from my perspective, it's a wonder we don't have any more theories than we already have to consider.

While I completely understand your observation that there are perhaps too many 911 theories, but I for one would not discount or ignore the fantastical theories for the sake of what supposedly sounds plausible. That type of judgment call on such an elaborate and complex operation as was 911 requires that we remain open to all possibilities.

Besides, until another investigation is begun, no need in waiting to collect information, especially if there are those that take there specific theory to heart and pursue it to all ends in a manner consistent with some degree of factual data collection.

Anyway, time will tell, but as I stated at the beginning, if there are too many 911 conspiracy theories to suit your ability to keep up, then just play with the ones that you can keep up with. Asking the rest of the world to have less because you don't like some theories from others is like not being able to eat some of your mash potatoes because it was touching the peas.

Thanks for the posting.

I think the best way to to this would make some sort of FlowChart TimeLine.

Time - the only thing constant throughout all of the theories.


So you could run this timeline, and different explanations for different events can branch off of this Time Line similar to a Flow Chart....as some explanations will flow into other ones etc.


Whaddya reckon?

I admire what you're trying to accomplish here, but calling things preposterous is not the way to narrow down truths.

Originally posted by rush969
3.- Remote controlled hijacked passenger jets.
5.- Mini nukes used to bring down the WTC Towers.

I am 99% sure these two are correct. On #5 there is really too much info to post here. I recommend reading through Wizard's thread.

Are you a "gatekeeper", Rush969?

To bring down the Twin Towers, micro nukes were places at the bottoms of the lift wells. This video shows some of the results.

9/11: WTC ground level fireballs


www.youtube.com...

Large, winged missiles with fuel-air bomb warheads were used to attack the towers, causing the brilliant orange fireballs people saw, and accounting for the mixed reports on what hit the buildings.

News feed on that day was all routed through one control-room, which was staffed by the FBI as well as by the press. CGI animation for the planes could have easily been added to the broadcasts we saw with just the few seconds delay that is always present in live transmissions.

All cameras on the spot were confiscated that day, and returned later with the films processed. A team could have been prepared in advance to cover any film of the missiles with a Boeing.


Part of the ensuing cover-up has been to guide the direction discussion of 9/11 has taken by pressuring forums and news-sites, and hiring charismatic people like Stephen Jones to lead Truthers up the garden path, steering them clear of the actual truth.

The unpleasant reality is that traitors within America, probably with help from Mossad, used nukes and missiles against America. Many people want this fact covered up.

Originally posted by rush969
I want to start a thread.
This thread is to deal with all the different variations that have come along with time on 9/11 conspiracy theories.
So what I propose is to make a list, an inventory to try and separate the reasonable, the credible, the possible, the logical, from the preposterous, unbelievable and plain crazy stuff.
9/11 conspiracy theories have become sort of a cult to some people, and the variety or arguments and new proposals is getting bigger and bigger.
What I would like to see is participation of ATS posters who like discussing these theories to find out what the feeling is amongst most of us, regarding these.

My feeling is that I do see your point, since all one needs to do is read the posts being left here to see that the 9/11 conspiracy movement is attracting just about every flavor of abject paranoia there is like a moth is attracted to a flame. Secret controlled demolitions, nukes in the basement, lasers from outer space, secret cults of Satan worshipping numerologists bent on world domination, the list or crackpot claims goes on and on. The 9/11 conspiracy movement is in sore need of house cleaning.

However, you don't have even have a chocolate cake's chance in Rosie O'Donnell's kitchen of succeeding. You said it yourself- it's less of an honest desire to find the truth and more akin to a cult. If someone is so much in love with the idea that the world's problems are all being caused by the ghosts of aliens murdered by Xenu the galactic warlord, they're goign to believe that regardless of what you tell them. Similarly, if someone is so much in love with the idea that the 9/11 attack was really a secret Mossad oepration, they're going to believe it was a secret Mossad operation regardless of what you show them. This is becuase they have such an emotional attachment to it that they want their respective conspiracy theories to be true. This is why they always go to those idiotic TheGovtWantsToMurderUsAll.com and TheJewsWantToTakeOverTheWorld.com web sites for their information in the first place.

I have to give thanks to Bonez for pointing out that many of the supporters of these 9/11 conspiracies had some pre-existing angst against a pre-existing enemy even before the 9/11 attack occurred, so of course they're going to have a particula bias as to what the "blatantly a conspiracy" is. If someone had been railing for years about how evil the Masons are, take one guess who they're going to blame in knee jerk reflex once they see the WTC being attacked and destroyed. There being so many uber-zealous supporters of so many different "blatant truths behind the 9/11 attack" is the whole reason why the 9/11 conspiracy movement is all but getting into fistfights with each other over what the conspiracy even is.

Good idea,Op! S&F for ya.It's about time we narrow the theories down.Personally I have narrowed it down to 2.

1.9/11 was a false flag op that was carried out by various operators looking to remake the nation into a latter day Roman empire but,they did not expect the kind of resistance that they have met in the ME.and Eurasia.So now in their desperation they seek to start a war with Iran,China and Russia.


2.The Government allowed it to happen in order to create a Pax Americana (or as I call it Faux Americana.) and they still want to expand the "empire." American exceptionalism at it's worst and most frighting.

reply to post by rush969


Isn't that the best reason for the "truth movement" to conduct its own investigation? Shouldn't there be some place wherein all these competing and disparate theories, conjectures, opinions and interrogatories can be vetted before you appeal to the political masses for further authority?

I know from an interior viewpoint the hologram, mini-nuke and space weapons people look like they are right on the fringe, but really from an exterior viewpoint the difference in the distance to the edge of reality between the hologram advocates and the CD advocates is so miniscule as to be wholly irrelevant.

I mean, before you go petitioning the body politic for investigatory funding and authority you better have a pretty solid, coherent, unified argument on your plate just not to get laughed at let alone considered seriously. That's not an insult, that is just political reality.

Originally posted by OnceReturned
The only theory that matters is that the OS is wrong. In order to work out what really happened you need new data: a real investigation. Speculation has taken us as far as it can. Phase one of the entire 9/11 truth movement ought to be to prove that the OS is false. Mission accomplished.

Thank you for your post OR.
First I will be completely honest with you and tell you that I don´t support what is known as the truth movement.
In fact I would like to point out that I think there are several “different truth” movements, with different theories, and we have some that actually go against others.
So, there´s not one truth movement to begin with.
Good material for another thread. Pick your truth movement...
Now as for the OS being wrong. I disagree. I believe the OS may have some inconsistences, people made mistakes, some people lied to cover their backs or others backs, but I do believe that basically the OS is the truth.
That a group of terrorists financed by AlQaeda under orders from OBL and KSM carried out the hijackings of the four airliners and that they crashed where we were told (and many actually witnessed) they crashed.

Phase two: real investigation. There just isn't sufficient evidence to debate the details of any particular conspiracy theories.

Now. I don´t think I understand you here. You say there just isn´t sufficient evidence to debate the details of any particular CT but just above you claim the OS has been prooven wrong.
How was this done if not with evidence??

I think this discussion will either be largely ignored or quickly become an unfocused, unmanageable argument.

Hope that doesn´t happen. (But you´re probably right.)

Using our imagination and intuition is not the right way to figure out what really happened.

I completely agree with you here. But we should always use common sense to start an investigation or a theory. And this is something that is often missing in some of them.

A collection of disperate theories is of little use.

Hence my concern with some of them. I want to find out, of the many posters on 9/11, how many would agree that some have no merit at all, and should be discarded, or marked as hoaxes.

What then? What, once we have a half dozen different, "reasonable sounding" speculations? What's the point? The only way to "stop that kind of nonsense" is to provide compelling new evidence(which doesn't exist yet) that prefers one theory over all the others.

Well, that would be and interesting advance for those questioning the official accounts or the 9/11 comision report. And I would be very interested to find out what they are.
Again, the evidence that doesn´t exist yet??

It is literally nothing more than a matter of personal preference which theory you choose to believe. The only thing that can be said with certainty is that the OS is false.

Again. This would be interesting to see. What is your favorite theory??
Not asking you directly, but you´re welcome to share.
And again, you´re certain the OS is false, but there´s a lack of evidence to show this??
Doesn´t seem a valid argument to me.

Originally posted by MaxBlack

Trying to limit the number of conspiracies may sound like a good idea, but if too many theories bothers your sensibilities, I recommend you alone stick to the theories that interest you rather than being judge jury and sole determiner of what is normal sounding vs not so normal sounding.

That´s what I usually do. I barely read the whole thing when the stuff seems too much out there IMHO.
Not attempting to be judge, jury etc, etc...
As I say in the OP what I´m looking for is opinions.
What do you think personally about these 5 theories that I mention??

The whole 911 official story has so many operational concerns that from my perspective, it's a wonder we don't have any more theories than we already have to consider.

Well, I´m pretty sure this is probably the historical event that has the highest number, and most variation in themes, of conspiracy theories.

While I completely understand your observation that there are perhaps too many 911 theories, but I for one would not discount or ignore the fantastical theories for the sake of what supposedly sounds plausible. That type of judgment call on such an elaborate and complex operation as was 911 requires that we remain open to all possibilities.
Besides, until another investigation is begun, no need in waiting to collect information, especially if there are those that take there specific theory to heart and pursue it to all ends in a manner consistent with some degree of factual data collection.

Very valid opinion. Thank you for sharing this.

Anyway, time will tell, but as I stated at the beginning, if there are too many 911 conspiracy theories to suit your ability to keep up, then just play with the ones that you can keep up with. Asking the rest of the world to have less because you don't like some theories from others is like not being able to eat some of your mash potatoes because it was touching the peas.

HAHAHAHA. Thanks for that. No, that´s not a problem for me. I actually enjoy reading some of those. But as I said in the OP, I would like to see the opinions on those 5 theories to start with.
Welcome to share yours.

Originally posted by Nick_X
I think the best way to to this would make some sort of FlowChart TimeLine.

Time - the only thing constant throughout all of the theories.


So you could run this timeline, and different explanations for different events can branch off of this Time Line similar to a Flow Chart....as some explanations will flow into other ones etc.


Whaddya reckon?

LOVE THE IDEA. THANKS.
Care to share your own opinion on the 5 CTs posted??

Originally posted by SteveR
I admire what you're trying to accomplish here, but calling things preposterous is not the way to narrow down truths.

Originally posted by rush969
3.- Remote controlled hijacked passenger jets.
5.- Mini nukes used to bring down the WTC Towers.

I am 99% sure these two are correct. On #5 there is really too much info to post here. I recommend reading through Wizard's thread.

Thank you SteveR.
Preposterous is not meant as an insult to anyone. And not trying to narrow down truths.
But, one of the BIG problems with the nukes theory is that there are too many things that do not make any sense.
But, we should all respect your opinion.
Thank you again.
By the way, what about 1, 2 and 4?? What´s your take there??

reply to post by Kailassa


Not trying to play "gatekeeper". Just want to see what people here think about some things.
So, you´re in agreement with 4 and 5. (Disagreement with me.)
Thanks for sharing.
What about 1, 2 and 3??
While you´re at it, and beyond the scope that has been proposed here, what do you believe happened to all the passengers, crew members and the actual airplanes??

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

The 9/11 conspiracy movement is in sore need of house cleaning.

There being so many uber-zealous supporters of so many different "blatant truths behind the 9/11 attack" is the whole reason why the 9/11 conspiracy movement is all but getting into fistfights with each other over what the conspiracy even is.

Thank you GoodOlDave!!
Right on the spot. As always.

reply to post by mike dangerously


WOOOOW!!
Thanks mike dangerously.
I don´t share your theories but I respect you and thank you for your post and for your time.

Originally posted by hooper
I know from an interior viewpoint the hologram, mini-nuke and space weapons people look like they are right on the fringe, but really from an exterior viewpoint the difference in the distance to the edge of reality between the hologram advocates and the CD advocates is so miniscule as to be wholly irrelevant.

Thank you hooper.
I totally agree with you. We could add some theories to the ones I mentioned in the OP.

Originally posted by rush969
1.- The no plane´s hitting the WTC towers, or holograms theory.
This to me is one of the most preposterous ideas.

I guess you have not seen the programs that DARPA is working on concerning holograms.

2.- Right there with no planes would also be DEW. In the form of a weapon fired from another building or from space. Neither one has credibility IMO.

There was a report that the Russian version or our Airborne Laser was missing around 9/11.

3.- Remote controlled hijacked passenger jets.

Several companies have been working on remote control sytems for airliiners for several years. Also the auto pilots can been pre-programmed.

[qquote]4.- Remote controlled secret military jets disguised as passenger jets.

Again we have no clear evidence or official reports of what planes crashed.

5.- Mini nukes used to bring down the WTC Towers.

The EPA blamed radiation at the sites on DU from the aircraft, problem is the 757 and 767 do not cary DU.

reply to post by REMISNE


Wow! So you are ready to rationalize just about anything except four planes being hijack by 19 terrorists motivated by theological/political radicalism and crashed into buildings as a mass murder/suicide action.

Originally posted by hooper
Wow! So you are ready to rationalize just about anything except four planes being hijack by 19 terrorists motivated by theological/political radicalism and crashed into buildings as a mass murder/suicide action.

No. just showing that there are other facts that are possible beside what the official story states happened.

That what research has to be done to find the truth of what really happned that day.