bascule Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 It's hard to say what the 9/11 Truth Movement actually represents. About the only consistent claim they make is that the government isn't telling the whole story about 9/11. That's something I believe as well. However, in terms of the 9/11 Commission and the official reports released by engineers, physicists, and others who investigated the accidents, I believe the reports to be largely accurate and corroborated by hundreds of not thousands of independent scientists, engineers, and other specialists who can corroborate the official report. However, there's more to the 9/11 Truth Movement than government omission of details. I think it's safe to say that 9/11 Truthers believe at least one (if not all) of the following things: - The Pentagon was hit by something other than American Airlines Flight 77, possibly a cruise missile - World Trade Center 7 was demolished by a controlled demolition - The Twin Towers were demolished by controlled demolition Also: They have all seen Loose Change About the best synopsis I can give is trying to summarize a debate between two editors of Popular Mechanics, who have comprised a comprehensive defense of the official account of 9/11, and the creators of Loose Change, who engaged in a debate on Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/11/1345203 Not to strawman, but here's a strawman summary: Popular Mechanics: "But what about the technical details of..." Loose Change: "YOU'RE PART OF THE CONSPIRACY!" I'm sure many will see merit in the arguments of the creators of Loose Change. The entire debate essentially consists of both groups talking past each other. Both sides are clearly frustrated. So what's to be made of this? If there is anything to the 9/11 "Truth" movement, why are their ideas relegated to a particularly vocal minority, and why have they managed to gain little-to-no traction among the scientific and engineering community? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I'm sure there is a movement, but I believe if you ignore these people, then they'll eventually loose their foothold. If you try and debate them, they only scream harder, and believe their lies more full-heartedly. If you ingore them, you give them a chance to come around on their own time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolotovCocktail Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 - The Twin Towers were demolished by controlled demolition... Well, I guess they are choosing to ignore the footage which clearly shows an airplane hitting the towers: link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smKK8Tzhpso and link: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 They still contend that the planes themselves couldn't have been enough to bring down the towers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted May 9, 2007 Author Share Posted May 9, 2007 Yes, rather than utilizing Occam's Razor, they introduce the unparsimonious element of explosives planted in the tower (and yet no 9/11 survivor ever saw this happen) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 Yes, rather than utilizing Occam's Razor, they introduce the unparsimonious element of explosives planted in the tower (and yet no 9/11 survivor ever saw this happen) But, obviously, they wouldn't know what happened as well as the people who made the loose change video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolotovCocktail Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 Well, if they believe that it was a controlled demolition, how do they explain the fact that nobody saw any officials or people running around planting explosives, or the fact that debris went everywhere. Usually, in a controlled demolition, the explosives are planted in such a way so that it implodes to prevent debris from going all over the place. You need dynamite all over the building to make this work. Another thing that doesn't make sense is why the government would want to blow up the Pentagon in the first place given the fact that it is the building that coordinates all US military forces and defenses around the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 because thats what They want you to believe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolotovCocktail Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 because thats what They want you to believe... :rolleyes::rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 Another thing that doesn't make sense is why the government would want to blow up the Pentagon in the first place given the fact that it is the building that coordinates all US military forces and defenses around the world. As a justification for conquering the Middle East and making a New World Order and Global Warming and UN tanks and the World Bank and Bilderberg. Bilderberg! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GutZ Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 You forgot the thermite. I don't mind people having a different opinion but what erks me is that these people seem act as to having so much knowledge on the consequences of a plane hitting a tower.....like it happens everyday or something. Wiki look up, random guy vs team of scientists....yeah.... Loose Change vs Popular Mechanics. funny! yet making me so furious...especially the metallurgical arugments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted May 18, 2007 Author Share Posted May 18, 2007 what erks me is that these people seem act as to having so much knowledge on the consequences of a plane hitting a tower.....like it happens everyday or something. What irks me is these people advancing completely contrived, unsubstantiated ideas as "truth" I'll continue to label them as 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Although "crackpots" is probably more apt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now