Top Ten Conspiracy Theories

[Cardie]

Did i say it was a missile?

 

I asked why they haven't shown conclusive video footage. You can't make any judgement on the plane seen in that shitty vid they released. Suerely they have a duty to the American people to show this attack especially given the circumstances.

 

They don't release all the information on anything, why should they suddenly start for that?

 

Their seems to be this idea that the goverment have this high def long running video of a plane gliding through the air with a camera swooping in all michael bay-esque before crashing into the pentagon.

 

It's traveling at X hundreds of miles an hour I think people's expectations for your average security camera are a little too high.

[snez1]

They don't release all the information on anything, why should they suddenly start for that?

 

Their seems to be this idea that the goverment have this high def long running video of a plane gliding through the air with a camera swooping in all michael bay-esque before crashing into the pentagon.

 

It's traveling at X hundreds of miles an hour I think people's expectations for your average security camera are a little too high.

 

Hahaha your fucking deluded.

 

You don't think that THE PENTAGON, one of the most important buildings in the world would have numerous security cameras that would have captured this event on tape? You think they have CCTV equivilent to McDonnalds?

 

They should release the information due tothe continued speculation surrounding the incident. It would clear a lot up. I see no logical reason for witholding the footage. I see no ligacal reason they confiscated all CCTV cameras in the area.

 

This isn't just some little building with run of the mill CCTV footage that would prove fuck all because of low quality. This is the fucking Pentagon. Security cameras are all over the fucking place.

 

You don't have to believe any conspiracy but coming out with shit like this really makes you look stupid and small minded in the extreme as part of your agenda to discredit these conspircy theories with such ridiculous statements.

 

Also, they should release the footage because it's the biggest terrorist attack ever on American soil and people have a right to see it.

[Cardie]

Hahaha your fucking deluded.

 

You don't think that THE PENTAGON, one of the most important buildings in the world would have numerous security cameras that would have captured this event on tape? You think they have CCTV equivilent to McDonnalds?

 

They should release the information due tothe continued speculation surrounding the incident. It would clear a lot up. I see no logical reason for witholding the footage. I see no ligacal reason they confiscated all CCTV cameras in the area.

 

This isn't just some little building with run of the mill CCTV footage that would prove fuck all because of low quality. This is the fucking Pentagon. Security cameras are all over the fucking place.

 

You don't have to believe any conspiracy but coming out with shit like this really makes you look stupid and small minded in the extreme as part of your agenda to discredit these conspircy theories with such ridiculous statements.

 

Also, they should release the footage because it's the biggest terrorist attack ever on American soil and people have a right to see it.

 

So you think they do have high def, camera footage of a plane panning in and out like a hollywood blockbuster?

 

What, would you say, is the primary job of a security camera?

[philyhamann]

I'm not sure about the Pentagon, but there are some strange events that surround it. The FBI confiscated CCTV tapes within an hour or two from the surrounding areas, a hotel and a gas station then released what looked to be tampered. Really strange that no CCTV captured it, and CCTV camera tapes were confiscated as part of an investigation by the FBI, but never released. Weird, but I still think that a plane hit it.

[snez1]

So you think they do have high def, camera footage of a plane panning in and out like a hollywood blockbuster?

 

I think that the Pentagon with al their security cameras and the footage they confiscated (why?) from buildings in the area may just have a little more than a 0.5 second shot of something near the building.

 

If that's the extent of security recordings in the Pentagon then i'm a fucking monkey. You don't have to believe the theories thats your chocie. However, to show such ignorance and pig headedness to think that things aren't being covered up and ignored is ridiculous.

 

ONE CCTV camera caught a plane smashing into one of the most important buildings in the world? ONE?

 

If you honestly believe this and can't see why people are sceptical because of such matters then fair enough i just won't debate you any further because it's pointless.

[Cardie]

Nobody has suggested that's the extent of the footage, or that their is only one camera. That's an assumption you've drawn on your own.

 

But by their nature security camera's are not trained on the sky's hoping for that day when a plane is flown into the side of the building. they are trained on the surrounding area, access points, carparks, perimiters.

 

You won't get a neatly packaged and edited little video that show's everything you want to see. You'll see a climpse of something here, a few seconds of something their.

 

This idea that the people deserve to be shown everything is admirable but the reality is it never happens and probably never will. Their's no doubt footage from rescue attempts, recovered footage from within the towers and other things you'll never see (including horrific footage that people who have seen it wish they haven't).

[snez1]

Nobody has suggested that's the extent of the footage, or that their is only one camera. That's an assumption you've drawn on your own.

 

But by their nature security camera's are not trained on the sky's hoping for that day when a plane is flown into the side of the building. they are trained on the surrounding area, access points, carparks, perimiters.

 

You won't get a neatly packaged and edited little video that show's everything you want to see. You'll see a climpse of something here, a few seconds of something their.

 

This idea that the people deserve to be shown everything is admirable but the reality is it never happens and probably never will. Their's no doubt footage from rescue attempts, recovered footage from within the towers and other things you'll never see (including horrific footage that people who have seen it wish they haven't).

 

Okay.

[Spy Bee]

I think it's 100% that some of the powers that be in the US were complicit to 9/11.

[Monkeywool]

Hahaha your fucking deluded.

 

You don't think that THE PENTAGON, one of the most important buildings in the world would have numerous security cameras that would have captured this event on tape? You think they have CCTV equivilent to McDonnalds?

 

They should release the information due tothe continued speculation surrounding the incident. It would clear a lot up. I see no logical reason for witholding the footage. I see no ligacal reason they confiscated all CCTV cameras in the area.

 

This isn't just some little building with run of the mill CCTV footage that would prove fuck all because of low quality. This is the fucking Pentagon. Security cameras are all over the fucking place.

 

You don't have to believe any conspiracy but coming out with shit like this really makes you look stupid and small minded in the extreme as part of your agenda to discredit these conspircy theories with such ridiculous statements.

 

Also, they should release the footage because it's the biggest terrorist attack ever on American soil and people have a right to see it.

 

Maybe the reason they don't show it is because they WANT the conspiracy theories to continue? A good old government conspiracy from mental people who are easily discredited is a handy diversion from the fact that they were incompetent as a government. As a Government it's better the nutters believe you are hiding something than the world knowing you fucked up completely.

[Section_31]

The Diana conspiracy is one I could easily believe in though, apparently she'd spoken to Jemima Goldsmith about the rules concerning conversion to islam when you marry a muslim male.

 

If people don't think the prospect of the mother of the future king of England being muslim didn't concern some of the establishment, they're nuts!

[Anny Road]

I think it's 100% that some of the powers that be in the US were complicit to 9/11.

I defo think there are agencies in the US that operate above the office of the president.

They may serve their own agenda or that of the elected office but I would say they exist.

[Cardie]

I defo think there are agencies in the US that operate above the office of the president.

They may serve their own agenda or that of the elected office but I would say they exist.

 

 

I could definitley sign up to some sort of 'the company' style sexy goverment agents.

[Spy Bee]

The Diana conspiracy is one I could easily believe in though, apparently she'd spoken to Jemima Goldsmith about the rules concerning conversion to islam when you marry a muslim male.

 

If people don't think the prospect of the mother of the future king of England being muslim didn't concern some of the establishment, they're nuts!

 

There was a lot more to that too. Muhammad Al Fayed had always refused to explain where he had made his wealth. He went to Cuba potless and fifteen years later he left as a very wealthy man. His wife is of course the sister of Coshogi (or whatever the fuck he's called) who was the biggest arms dealer in Europe at the time. There were some very murky connections.

 

A friend of mine in the pub (the guys in his sixties now) predicted that Diana would be knocked off before she died.

[Red Phoenix]

I'm with Snez on the cameras. Ok, they might not want to release Pentagon camera footage for whatever reason, but when the families of those that died and many other Americans are demanding answers, why don't they at least release the footage of the cameras from the surrounding area? Also, the hole in the pentagon wall has been said by several people to be way too small to have been from the impact of a plane of that size, because of the fact that there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence of impact damage from the wings of the plane at all. And when you look at pictures and see no impact damage from wings, you might think, well they just got smashed up and didn't leave much damage, but what about the massive fucking jet engines that were on the wings aswell? Now they would have left some serious damage, and it's just confusing trying to see anything that even registers as possible impact damage from those engines.

 

They also say that the lack of debris is because the plane vapourised on impact, but it's been said numerous times that those steel jet engines just couldn't have disintegrated like that from the impact + fire caused from the fuel, and if the fuel setting alight and causing the explosion did manage to disintegrate the whole plane, then how did any DNA evidence or Human remains manage to stick around? Any why did they LITERALLY have to cover over the area shortly after the building was hit? Then there's photo's that clearly show things like computers, chairs with books on them and other things that looked almost undamaged right next to part of the building that had collapsed after the crash, but if the fuel had ignited upon impact, those things should have been on fire, as should the building have been too, for a way longer period of time than it actually was.

 

And this is just some of the questions and confusing areas from the Pentagon attack alone!

 

Still not believing it had to be the government plotting the whole thing, but numerous things are off. One other thing that comes straight to mind is that some guy from the military/government of Pakistan as far as I remember, wired $100,000 to one of the supposed hijackers around the day that the attacks happened, but the government didn't follow this up, saying something like it wasn't a main priority, but others are saying of course it's hugely important why that transfer occured, and the guy who sent the cash was supposedly in America meeting with government officials on or around the time of the attacks.

 

Then there's the intelligence from several other countries governments that an attack was imminent on US soil, which wasn't followed up on enough to have any type of effect of preventing anything.....I could be here all day with this. It's not the point that it had to be the government, it's the fact that there's many, many reasons why things don't add up, but there was no investigation that wasn't overseen by the US government itself. People have called for an independant investigation but it's never happened, and that's without even mentioning any of the officials who were part of that commission and their histories... And yeah, why would Bush want to give evidence with Cheney, and why the fuck didn't he do it under oath? Has a single American President EVER not gone under oath when giving evidence before, in the entire history of the USA? Or even anyone at all when giving evidence? It's just a complete mess.

 

Anyway, I've been sat here for about an hour with this, going back over it to make sure that it's not too garbled and that it makes some sense, there'll still be some errors in it though I guess, but I'm about done. I was going to mention something about NORAD aswell, but it's from the wiki and doesn't have a source, so I took it back out.

 

But if you gather up all of the confusing issues that can't easily be answered from the pentagon attack, then the towers, then the 3rd building that went down, then the other plane that went down aswell, then the following investigation and the people appointed to oversee it, and their histories and ties with the Bush administration itself....well there's a lot of strange stuff that can't easily be answered sufficiently I don't think, even if you spent years researching.

Edited October 24, 2008 by Red Phoenix

[Melchett]

I defo think there are agencies in the US that operate above the office of the president.

They may serve their own agenda or that of the elected office but I would say they exist.

 

 

What, you mean like Knight Rider?

[Cardie]

Also, the hole in the pentagon wall has been said by several people to be way too small to have been from the impact of a plane of that size, because of the fact that there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence of impact damage from the wings of the plane at all. And when you look at pictures and see no impact damage from wings, you might think, well they just got smashed up and didn't leave much damage, but what about the massive fucking jet engines that were on the wings aswell? Now they would have left some serious damage, and it's just confusing trying to see anything that even registers as possible impact damage from those engines.

 

 

 

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

 

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide — not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.

 

There has been over a hundred witness statements stating they saw a commercial jetliner, not one witness has come forward saying they saw a missile hit the building.

Edited October 24, 2008 by Cardie

[Strontium]

The one thing these conspiracy theories all have in common is the lack of a single piece of verifiable evidence to support any of them.

[snez1]

[Cardie]

 

Christ, I quote something that ridicules the idea that a plane leaves a cartoon like whole in a wall and wouldn't you credit it that someone would then bomb along and dump the exact discredited pictures/models.

 

The plane didn't glide a few feet from the floor hitting the pentagon while flying perfectly parallel to the ground punching a perfect hole in the wall.

 

The damage extends along the ground floor, for a neat hole in the wall you want to be showing the exit hole the landing gear allegedly punched out, you'll find it in loose change (I think, probably version 1) being passed off as the point the plane/missile/magic lightening bolt entered the building despite it being one of the inner levels of the building.

Edited October 24, 2008 by Cardie

[tokyojoe]

I tell you one thing I did not know watching that film was that the attacks on london took at the exact same time and in the exact same stations where an anti terrorist exercises against bombings where taking place. Thats fucking wierd is it not.

 

I didn't know that but I've no doubt that Blair and his cronies were behind it as the ID card bill was due in parliament a couple of days later.

[Cardie]

I didn't know that but I've no doubt that Blair and his cronies were behind it as the ID card bill was due in parliament a couple of days later.

 

It wasn't quite the coordinated coincidence it's made out to be though.

 

The bombings occured 40 minutes before Visor Consultants started what they describe as a 'Paper exercise' involving a small group of executives.

 

they also say that “Every week across [britain] there are probably about hundred exercises, tests and simulations going on to get crisis teams familiar with their roles. We certainly do this regularly for many clients, the vast majority of them paper-based.”

[Red Phoenix]

Just found this on the July 7th Truth Campaign site, after having a read up on a few things. It's at the bottom of the page about conspiracy theories.

 

 

When two or more people plan to commit a crime, there exists by definition a 'conspiracy'.

 

Therefore, any theory about who did it, or how it was done, is by definition a 'conspiracy theory'.

 

The question is then not whether you are a conspiracy theorist, but for which conspiracy theory you find the evidence most compelling.

[Red Phoenix]

Sorry, I missed all that back up there, and thanks Cardie, because despite what you believe, I am still trying to keep an open mind with the whole thing. The way I see it now though, jet or no jet, the set of attacks as a whole and the wierd things that have happened after that still make me think that things don't add up. One fact on the side of the way you see things aswell Cardie is that that part of the building had been reinforced before it was hit, so the thing disintegrating does seem slightly more believeable......even if I can't fully believe it. Sitting on the fence does suck though with this one.

 

Have you seen the money masters Cardie? It's not some conspiracy theory program, but it's about how bankers have controlled the world throughout history. It's actually a 3 hour documentary and the guy who made it has facts to back a lot of his stuff up. When you see something like that, it really makes you wonder who's cashed in from the war and oil revenues after all this happened in Iraq too.

 

Anyway, if you're really into the idea of the money masters, you can just type it in google video and it's there, and it's also in parts on youtube. It's seriously interesting for anyone into that type of stuff, and even though it comes across as conspiracy, it's more about a battle between politicians and the bankers through the centuries, which has a lot of facts in it, and the presenter makes that clear from the off.

 

I'm done with Pentagonesma for the time being anyway, it's driving me half mad. (and great tags here, "area quaresma", hahah.)

[Red Phoenix]

Saw a clip on part 3 (I think.) of Zeitgeist, and tracked it down, it's pretty awesome. It's from a film called Network :

 

[YOUTUBE]MTN3s2iVKKI[/YOUTUBE]

 

Turn off your tubes!

[rargh]

Clive Thomas 1977.

The Heysel ban.

Graham Poll 2000.

UEFA letting the meeeeerderers defend the European Cup in 2005/2006.

Pierluigi Collina.

Graham Poll again in 2005, sending Arteta and Neville off.

Mark Clattenburg.

Getting Standard Liege straight after they had played us.

 

The authorities are too afraid to unravel the evidence..........