I believe 9/11 was an inside job now

[DeistPaladin]

@Doubting Thomas & FNM

Good posts. I think you guys have robbed the conspiracy of any explanatory power it potentially could've had.

See my conspiracy theory. It's enough. Frankly, I'd have never believed it possible until it actually happened.

[FallentoReason]

@Doubting Thomas & FNM

Good posts. I think you guys have robbed the conspiracy of any explanatory power it potentially could've had.

See my conspiracy theory. It's enough. Frankly, I'd have never believed it possible until it actually happened.

Oh, I was talking about the conspiracy of 9/11 being an inside job i.e. the WTC buildings being destroyed by the US.

[*Deidre*]

Let's say it was a conspiracy/inside job (which I don't believe)...what would the motive have been?

[FallentoReason]

Let's say it was a conspiracy/inside job (which I don't believe)...what would the motive have been?

Wouldn't have the slightest clue. I'm not read up on another country's government, let alone my own government.

[*Deidre*]

Let's say it was a conspiracy/inside job (which I don't believe)...what would the motive have been?

Wouldn't have the slightest clue. I'm not read up on another country's government, let alone my own government.

Yea, that makes a big difference if I would buy into a conspiracy theory or not, in general. I would need to know motive. That makes all the difference.

[FallentoReason]

Wouldn't have the slightest clue. I'm not read up on another country's government, let alone my own government.

Yea, that makes a big difference if I would buy into a conspiracy theory or not, in general. I would need to know motive. That makes all the difference.

The manner in which the buildings collapsed will be directly influenced by the political atmosphere. This would be the case if the buildings really were demolished. Therefore, if we look at the WTC buildings in isolation and come to a conclusion, it will have powerful implications for what the political atmosphere would have been like. And, personally, I find it a lot easier to analyze something physical such as buildings collapsing than the political atmosphere. Physics doesn't lie.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Yea, that makes a big difference if I would buy into a conspiracy theory or not, in general. I would need to know motive. That makes all the difference.

The manner in which the buildings collapsed will be directly influenced by the political atmosphere. This would be the case if the buildings really were demolished. Therefore, if we look at the WTC buildings in isolation and come to a conclusion, it will have powerful implications for what the political atmosphere would have been like. And, personally, I find it a lot easier to analyze something physical such as buildings collapsing than the political atmosphere. Physics doesn't lie.

Cause and effect, though, which was really what I was asking in my other post a whilst back.

The political and social context of the event may also impact on the way the act is carried out too. I think it's impossible to look at weather the WTC was demolished in a controlled demolition synchronically. Indeed, I think doing a diachronic analysis really does blow the idea that the WTC was demolished out of the water if I'm honest.

[FallentoReason]

The manner in which the buildings collapsed will be directly influenced by the political atmosphere. This would be the case if the buildings really were demolished. Therefore, if we look at the WTC buildings in isolation and come to a conclusion, it will have powerful implications for what the political atmosphere would have been like. And, personally, I find it a lot easier to analyze something physical such as buildings collapsing than the political atmosphere. Physics doesn't lie.

Cause and effect, though, which was really what I was asking in my other post a whilst back.

The political and social context of the event may also impact on the way the act is carried out too. I think it's impossible to look at weather the WTC was demolished in a controlled demolition synchronically. Indeed, I think doing a diachronic analysis really does blow the idea that the WTC was demolished out of the water if I'm honest.

I just think a diachronic analysis has too many dimensions to it. In saying that though, the dimensions grow proportionally to how much one is willing to assume. An extreme example: for those that believe the Illuminati are behind it, they will happily assume that the media is controlled by them. Thus, in the event that a diachronic analysis leads to the conclusion that the buildings weren't demolished, the "Illuminatist" will say "but of course you'd come to that conclusion!" They might also believe that evidence has been destroyed which would lead back to the US having performed the "attacks". Then at the other end of the scale, we have more.. uhh.. "down to earth" people who will assume every bit of info/media can be trusted, and thus, an altogether different theory will be put forward.

A synchronic analysis bypasses all the subjectivity and tedious effort of the diachronic analysis. Physics is rather straight forward as opposed to trying to follow a story.

[Doubting Thomas]

The major problem with 9/11 being an inside government job is that it would have taken thousands of people to pull off successfully, each of which would have to undergo a security clearance and background check, then the government would have to make sure that not one of them would ever talk about their participation. I held a security clearance in the military and worked in military intelligence, and even then it was impossible to keep everything 100% secret because there was always some dumbass talking about work outside of secure areas.

Not to mention that participating in something as horrific as 9/11 where thousands of people died, it's extremely difficult to think that not one of the thousands of conspirators wouldn't have a guilty conscience and come clean, even anonymously. Whistleblowers have come forward over far less heinous crimes, so it would be conceivable that now, 12 years later, at least one person involved in, say the demolition of the towers, would feel guilty enough to alert the media or raise awareness in some manner, and not through being an "anonymous source" on a conspiracy website.

And really, if the conspiracy were true, what did it accomplish? We went to war for over a decade in the Middle East and destroyed our economy. Couldn't the government just have lied about WMD's like it did with Iraq and start invading? Far easier and cheaper than having to fake four hijackings and airplane crashes into buildings, then setting off demo charges which somehow made the buildings collapse from the top down, when the horrific hijackings and crashes would have been impetus enough to start a "war on terror."

[LastPoet]

The few that I come across in real life around here claim that it was all to spark the US war industry economy. They all have no evidence, but demonizing a group of people.

The way I see it is, that some nutcases made a plan to kill thousands, but the US gvt also took advantage of the situation to make profit.