# Is it futile to discuss 9/11 with truthers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 21, 2015, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016 "2015-12-21T18:14:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/61 "2015-12-23T13:54:19Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > I was making up a list and try to contain within it both sides. > > Like I said, is futile to talk to ANY of those groups, and their supporters. …Both sides? Is there somehow some equivalency between the anti-trump folks and 9/11 truthers? Like, I realize they’re both pretty fervent in their opposition, but there’s worlds between them in terms of what they do. Like, here, let me add some more folks to your list, for the sake of having “both sides”: - Evolution advocates - Ken Ham - Scientists who accept relativity - Electric Universe Supporters …You see how ridiculous this gets? Virtually any well-thought-out, well-backed, rational position could be placed on a list of people it is “futile to talk to”. And equally equated with any lunatic position based on absolutely fucking nothing. And personally, I think if you started showing real, significant evidence that racism in America was a thing of the past, or that women and men have equal opportunities and sexism isn’t still rampant and a part of day-to-day life, you’d do just fine talking to feminists and civil rights advocates. But to just claim that these movements are radical or not worth talking to… Nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/62 "2015-12-23T14:01:34Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > That last line about the elites appears to be you asking if 9/11 was a conspiracy they concocted. And, unlike the other examples, there isn’t a plausible mechanism by which this is possible. It absolutely depends on what you want the conspiracy to be. If it’s about the buildings coming down then plainly you have a mountain of fact to surmount. if it’s about two sets of elites interacting to facilitate, enable or choosing to ignore a group which might be at a stage of developing a terrorist act against the USA, then that mechanism is in place and has been for decades. Look, elements within an elite can conspire successfully to invade an entire country, another elite can turn a blind eye to a plan to knock down a couple of towers. We will absolutely never know but, given the history - especially between US and Saudi elites - why not. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/63 "2015-12-23T14:10:25Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > We will absolutely never know but, given the history - especially between US and Saudi elites - why not. The trouble is that we’ve heard that stupid question in various forms over a hundred times, and no evidence seems to support it, so is the question dropped? Hell, no! People like you just say “We will absolutely never know”, then ask the stupid question yet again. You, and others like you, are going to keep asking that stupid question until you get the answer you want, not the answer that actually exists-_That_ is why you are "JAQ"ing off when you do this. ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/64 "2015-12-23T14:57:01Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Some facts to keep in mind: > > The entire complex, being owned by the Port Authority, was exempt from building & fire codes. Do you have a cite for this? Why would ANY building being built have exemptions for “building and fire” codes? You believe that because the Port Authority owned them, they could ignore everything in the “how to build a safe skyscraper” handbook because they owned it? I never read this before, but it doesn’t seem credible to me. How could these buildings have possibly been insured, or if what you say is true, how could any insurance policy be valid and pay off the owner after they collapsed? Thanks ---
**Author:** ![Deu5Vult](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ec9cab/32.png) [@Deu5Vult](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deu5Vult)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/65 "2015-12-23T15:05:47Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > The word ‘conspiracy’ seems to have been used in relation to me as if a label you use to dismiss someone, like ‘witch’ or ‘anti-Semite’. > > We don’t really have that here so it’s interesting to understand the dynamics, especially given the recent history of proven, and very deadly, conspiracies. The juxtaposition of conspiracy here is not particularly useful given that you are seemingly unequipped to name this ‘elite’ nor have you provided the motivation for this ‘elite’ to invade Afghanistan and occupy it for 13 years. There are many groups or individuals that are held to account for 911 by the truth movement. What is it that makes you specifically target the US government, given all the possibilities that one could truly entertain? > [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > We will absolutely never know but, given the history - especially between US and Saudi elites - why not. And why would we absolutely never know? The precedents you have listed say otherwise but 911 appears to be a different case in your mind. Any reason why? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/66 "2015-12-23T15:08:31Z")
> [@crypto](#): > > Do you have a cite for this? Why would ANY building being built have exemptions for “building and fire” codes? You believe that because the Port Authority owned them, they could ignore everything in the “how to build a safe skyscraper” handbook because they owned it? > > I never read this before, but it doesn’t seem credible to me. How could these buildings have possibly been insured, or if what you say is true, how could any insurance policy be valid and pay off the owner after they collapsed? > > Thanks [From Wiki.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_%281973%E2%80%932001%29#Design) > [@](#): > > As an interstate agency, the Port Authority was not subject to local laws and regulations of the City of New York, including building codes. Nonetheless, the structural engineers of the World Trade Center ended up following draft versions of the new 1968 building codes. **Skywatcher** was half right, half wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/67 "2015-12-23T15:48:51Z")
[I see the bombing prompted the Port Authority to follow fire codes.](http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/23/nyregion/port-agency-to-observe-fire-codes.html) At least in the Towers; ISTR at least one of the fuel tanks in 7 violated the codes. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/68 "2015-12-23T16:07:11Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > It absolutely depends on what you want the conspiracy to be. If it’s about the buildings coming down then plainly you have a mountain of fact to surmount. > > if it’s about two sets of elites interacting to facilitate, enable or choosing to ignore a group which might be at a stage of developing a terrorist act against the USA, then that mechanism is in place and has been for decades. > > Look, elements within an elite can conspire successfully to invade an entire country, another elite can turn a blind eye to a plan to knock down a couple of towers. > > We will absolutely never know but, given the history - especially between US and Saudi elites - why not. How would the American elites benefit? How would the Saudi elites benefit? ---
**Author:** ![Gedd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gedd/32/4938_2.png) [@Gedd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gedd)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/69 "2015-12-23T16:07:30Z")
> [@Deu5Vult](#): > > The juxtaposition of conspiracy here is not particularly useful given that you are seemingly unequipped to name this ‘elite’ nor have you provided the motivation for this ‘elite’ to invade Afghanistan and occupy it for 13 years. > > There are many groups or individuals that are held to account for 911 by the truth movement. What is it that makes you specifically target the US government, given all the possibilities that one could truly entertain? It was actually the Illuminati in the government working to take out the Mafia (in WTC 1&2) and the Lizard People (in WTC 7). I thought that was obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/70 "2015-12-23T17:36:56Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > Look, elements within an elite can conspire successfully to invade an entire country, another elite can turn a blind eye to a plan to knock down a couple of towers. Well, it turns out this is true but banal. With the famous _Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US_ report and other red flags including foreign nationals training in flight schools to fly but not land planes, hindsight is full of warning signs that were missed or downplayed or not compiled into a single cohesive idea until it was too late. If you want to imply something more sinister, it’s not enough to merely suggest it might be possible; you have to bring some actual evidence to the table. Heck, anything _might_ be possible. It’s the classic conspiracy theorist who runs with the _possible_ while ignoring the _actual_. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/71 "2015-12-23T18:02:42Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > What are you talking about - in English, please. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. You say the same things that 9/11 Truthers or JAQ(Just Asking Questions)ers do wrt 9/11, so basically I’m simply pointing that out…and pointing that I’m un-surprised that you’d be in that category. I’m also un-surprised you attempt the standards connect the dots shuck and jive that many 9/11 CTer types have tried, namely you point to something the US has done in the past then attempt to link it to the possibility that 9/11 might have been done by the US. Just asking questions, right? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/72 "2015-12-23T18:14:09Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > [From Wiki.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_%281973%E2%80%932001%29#Design) > > **Skywatcher** was half right, half wrong. Thanks for the info > [@Skywatcher](#): > > [I see the bombing prompted the Port Authority to follow fire codes.](http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/23/nyregion/port-agency-to-observe-fire-codes.html) At least in the Towers; ISTR at least one of the fuel tanks in 7 violated the codes. This link, and \*\*running\_coach’\*\*s makes me curious as to what we are actually referring to. According to the article: > [@](#): > > Because the Port Authority does not fall under any one jurisdiction, it is also exempt from local building codes and some other regulations, said John Kampfe, an authority spokesman. He said that the agency has always met or exceeded building codes. So does that mean that the fire codes that the P.A. had previously exempted themselves from were procedural? (i.e. No surprise inspections, or maybe the P.A.didn’t have all of the “Fire Exit” lights illuminated, and wanted 72 hours to fix those types of issues before an inspection?) That, to me, is much different than the building’s fire-proofing requirements that were (or should have been) built into it. Or are we talking about the building itself and the fire protection required to be built-in by NY building codes? I guess what I am trying to understand is if the “building codes” that the P.A. “met or exceeded” are referring to 1) the fire-proofing elements for the building, (like fire-proofing of steel, or sprinkler systems, etc), 2) properly lit and identified escape routes in case of emergency, working fire extinguishers, etc, or 3) both? Thanks ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/73 "2015-12-23T18:17:19Z")
> [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > The word ‘conspiracy’ seems to have been used in relation to me as if a label you use to dismiss someone, like ‘witch’ or ‘anti-Semite’. > > We don’t really have that here so it’s interesting to understand the dynamics, especially given the recent history of proven, and very deadly, conspiracies. “Conspiracy theorist”, imho, is defined by people who insist there is a conspiracy without regards to whether they have evidence that one exists. The vast, vast majority of 9/11 conspiracy theories fall short on this measure, with only one theory that makes sense with the evidence: that the attacks were a result of a conspiracy among high-ranking members of Al Qaeda. Once the theory is proven by demonstrable evidence (documents, video, etc), (like Iran-Contra) the nomenclature changes - it’s no longer a conspiracy but a scandal, a “-gate”, “corruption”, etc. But the _conspiracy_, by dent of exposure, is pretty much dead by then. So, yes, the word “conspiracy” is used as a pejorative, especially here, because of this lack of evidence brought about by the conspiracy theorists. For example, this “THE PORT AUTHORITY DOESN’T FOLLOW NYC FIRE CODES!” argument brought in this thread is a perfect example. You read that and think “Huh. Why is that? Could this have had something to do with the Towers falling?” But a simple reading shows: 1. They did follow the NYC codes when the buildings were built back in the late 60’s, early 70s. 2. The WTC was not up to 2001 compliance standards. However, neither is/was my house built in 1980. 3. Other federal and state agencies (not just in NY) have this same code exemption written in their charters, and it is a standard practice. 4. Other buildings not subject to local fire and building codes: Federal courthouses, embassies, the United Nations, and the NY subway system. There are many, many others, some very likely in your city. And, in addition, there’s the implicit assumption that had the buildings been up to 2001 compliance standards that they would still be standing… an assumption that is never tested and can’t be proven, regardless of how many popsicle sticks you use in your model. (Old joke.) So, yeah, if you believe that the PA’s lack of fire code compliance is evidence of some over-arching conspiracy… you’re a conspiracy theorist, with all the baggage that title holds. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/74 "2015-12-23T18:23:48Z")
ETA: Meant to add the word “probably” in: 1. The WTC was not up to 2001 compliance standards. However, neither is/was my house built in 1980. to be: 1. The WTC was probably not up to 2001 compliance standards. However, neither is/was my house built in 1980. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/75 "2015-12-23T18:36:50Z")
In case anybody cares, [here is the NIST report on Fire codes and the WTC](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXtLLDzvLJAhWKox4KHRvlCpkQFggsMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nist.gov%2Fel%2Fdisasterstudies%2Fwtc%2Fupload%2F7Bukowski.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGImS3NVE9xUdx1RmlPFj5UmtC6xg&sig2=ZAdqTtm8i9rximvMmNwRVA&bvm=bv.110151844,d.dmo). (1meg PDF) ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/76 "2015-12-23T18:51:28Z")
> [@Deu5Vult](#): > > The juxtaposition of conspiracy here is not particularly useful given that you are seemingly unequipped to name this ‘elite’ nor have you provided the motivation for this ‘elite’ to invade Afghanistan and occupy it for 13 years. would you believe it’s probably not a neatly defined gang with secret handshakes and sew on badges. Did you know you are talking abut Afghanistan for no obvious reason. > [@Deu5Vult](#): > > And why would we absolutely never know? The precedents you have listed say otherwise but 911 appears to be a different case in your mind. Any reason why? That’s because they are … precedents. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/77 "2015-12-23T18:55:52Z")
That’s because you’ve got… nothing. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/78 "2015-12-23T19:03:33Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > How would the American elites benefit? In a war that can never end created at a time the Cold War had ended - have you seen the cost of Iraq and the on going bills for the war on terrah , the cost of Homeland security, etc. All that glorious government money. The smartest spot of all was Google buying up chucks of the robotics industry but, for now look at drones These are glorious days for defence and security contractors: quite literally a war that can never end as long as you keep fueling the fire of rage, and keep your own people scared. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/79 "2015-12-23T19:07:10Z")
I admire your abundance of faith in the industrial military complex. ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2015, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016/80 "2015-12-23T19:08:35Z")
They never let you down. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-futile-to-discuss-9-11-with-truthers/741016.md?page=5)