I pretty sure that ship sailed when you came up with the “Explosives were planted on every single floor of two busy office buildings with no one noticing anything odd” theory. That these were apparently magic explosives that leave no trace of themselves in the debris (or that there was a massive conspiracy to remove 220 floors’ worth of explosives before anyone saw them) is just a bonus.
None of them resulted in the immediate deaths of three thousand people in one place. Unless we’re operating with different definitions of the terms immediate, death, and people.
Never said you were.
Well, your links weren’t all that supportive of showing the immediate deaths of three thousand people at one time. And, the reason the particular WONJCTs that gain credence with a certain segment of the population, such as split p&j, is that certain segment is more than fond of pretending like they’re smarter than the people who actually know what they’re talking about. split p&j obviously doesn’t have a clue as is evidenced by his decided refusal to accept scientific explanations for things and his determined refusal to acknowledge facts.
You’re stuck on the 3,000 people number.
My point is that governments lie, leading to the deaths of hundreds, thousands or millions, purposeful or otherwise. So it’s not illogical in itself to believe or at least consider a government is lying after any particular incident.
How many governments have lied about the deaths of hundreds or thousands of its citizens in a single day within its borders?
Context matters.
Governments have been known to lie to the general public for a limited amount of time for a defined purpose. But it’s generally been limited parts of government that are involved and the truth has been well documented and eventually released.
I lie. Probably on a daily basis. Things like, “Yes, your hair looks fine.” or “That dress looks good on you.” or “I’m sure he didn’t take it personally” or “It’s me, not you”.
Things I don’t lie about include stealing, killing, auto accidents, money, and a host of other very important things.
Governments are no different. The extent, duration, and reasons for government lies are known to be limited by necessity. To say that the mere fact that governments lie about some things opens the door even slightly to any brain-dead conspiracy theory is facile, at best, and disingenuous, at worst.
There are at least a couple of answers, but one of them would lead to Godwinization charges.
Take a deep breath: The hair-splitting objection that clandestine drug/gas experiments on a government’s own people that were revealed to have injured or killed scores or thousands over weeks and months and years (depending upon which revelation is under discussion), or millions over the course of all-out wars that were started with lies so those examples can’t possibly count when wondering why there are conspiracy theories because the same government wouldn’t kill 3,000 of its own people at once by using explosives, is ludicrous.
Sure, but after 11 years of dozens of different teams filled with scientists and engineers investigating every possible thread of the 9/11 timeline, all the facts are on the table. Considering the possibility of a governmental conspiracy is reasonable. Continuing to believe it in the face of the facts is stubborn foolishness.
And I know you said you, Kenm, don’t. I’m speaking generally.
There is a difference between believing that the government is capable of killing a few thousand people and covering it up afterwards, and believing that they made the buildings actually disappear, or had a large number of ninjas sneak in and place magic explosives that nobody could see throughout the tower while it was occupied by thousands of workers so that it would collapse from the top down then make all evidence disappear immediately afterwards, or that the never existed in the first place and were actually holographic projections, or any of a number of scenarios that are worthy of the imagination of a six year old. When does the “Naw-this is actually too fucking stupid to consider” factor kick in?
Pour moi, 9/11, as I’ve said repeatedly.
Never, if believing something makes them feel smart, special, and better than everyone else. It’s a quick and easy route to being more perceptive than the common herd (yes, literally ‘herd’: How often do you hear the word ‘sheeple’?) that does not require any actual thought or creativity on their part. All they need is Alex Jones, Infowars, World Net Daily, and possibly NaturalNews.com and they’re set.
I find this ‘secret explosives’ idea fascinating. In 1997 they demolished the local hospital. I lived about 24km away and that blast was loud even at that distance. Not just a boom but a huge god-himself-snapping-his-fingers-overhead-crack-of-thunder loud, and that was just for a single building with maybe 15 floors. The amount of explosives needed to bring down WTC 1 & 2 would have been heard by everyone in NY.
I also found it fascinating, in the sense that there is plenty of evidence to show that when the collapse started, very little is heard, (quality of the video is bad, but audio is good)
It is not until the collapse is almost over that one can hear anything close to explosions, so far, there has not been any good explanation from truthers of why it was that the “explosive charges” go off at the end of the collapse. There are a lot of things close to the ground like generators and falling debris that explain those noises.
Of course I’m stuck on that. That is my whole freaking point.
And those people were seen as second-class, at best. Not exactly the same as a few thousand white-collar workers and some custodians.
Small world. I was visiting my folks in Canberra and we went out to watch that event at the fences.
First-class people take cabs in New York. Second-class people take the subway.
First they came for the strap-hangers. . ..
Here is what I don’t understand: let’s assume for the moment that the govt/Illuminati/lizard people put explosives in the building and then framed the hijackers so that they could use it as a pretext to start a war with Iraq. Why use Saudi hijackers rather than Iraqis? The Sauds were allies with Bush and the other big money types.
The whole thing is just so mind blowingly stupid it’s hard to know where to start.
None of whom are seen as sub-human, except maybe the subway drunks and the gangbangers. But they wouldn’t have been in the WTC.
The fact that some governments had no problem with causing then covering up the of deaths of “sub-human” or “low class” Blacks, Jews, homosexuals, mentally-ill, etc. on its home soil does not mean that a government would have no problem with doing the same to productive members of its society 50/60 years later. It’s a logical fallacy (false dilemma?) and does not compute.
When one adds in the notions of “that they made the buildings actually disappear, or had a large number of ninjas sneak in and place magic explosives that nobody could see throughout the tower while it was occupied by thousands of workers so that it would collapse from the top down then make all evidence disappear immediately afterwards, or that the never existed in the first place and were actually holographic projections, or any of a number of scenarios that are worthy of the imagination of a six year old,” it definitely does not compute.
I like that quote. 
What we have here is the difference between saying that a suspect wore white shoes, and saying that the suspect wore white shoes that enabled him to levitate 20 feet into the air and fly like a bird away from the crime scene. In the case of the second witness the police are not going to hang onto the “white shoes” part of the testimony and throw away the rest-the whole thing needs to be tossed out. All of the scenarios when it comes to 911 conspiracy theories fall into the latter category and should be thrown out without a second thought.