I think everyone here believes 9/11 conspiracies to a certain extent. Hell, I think most people believe in certain variations of them. The extent of which is where your mileage may vary.

  • Bush/Cheney/Rumself knew about it and intentionally did nothing to stop it
  • The Saudis did it

These two are pretty universally accepted in these circles (and beyond them). But I'm curious to where everyone here feels about the more nitty gritty theories:

  • Do you believe that the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld-lead cabal actively coordinated in ways to make it easier for the hijackings to be successful (such as disrupting the NORAD response, intentionally allowing the hijackers into the country and coordinating freely, etc...)

  • Do you believe in the controlled demolition theory?

  • Do you believe Flight 93 was shot down?

  • Do you think the people the official narrative claims were flying the planes were actually flying the planes? This seems to breakdown to two different scenarios:

    1. The hijackers were never actually flying the plane (Which is a theory I don't support)
    2. The hijackers were "flying" the plane but it was actually being piloted as an autonomous drone (I think this is way more likely)

  • Do you believes the planes that crashed into the buildings weren't actually the reported planes and the passengers were disposed by other means?

  • Do you believe a missile hit the Pentagon?

  • Do you believe that certain people were aware of what was going to happen and tipped off about it, allowing them to execute lucrative securities trading?

For me, I believe:

  • That the involvement of the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld-lead cabal definitely took active measures to make sure it succeeds
  • Flight 93 was shot down
  • The planes were being autonomously piloted

I am agnostic to the controlled demolition theories. The physics and engineering component of it goes a bit over my head, so I'm left to trusting certain peoples analysis. I've seen people I trust provide arguments for both sides.

I'm curious to hear where everyone else falls on this spectrum?

  • CoconutOctopus [it/its]
    ·
    3 years ago

    I'm definitely in the LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) camp, rather than the MIHOP camp.

    For the details:

    • I think the Bush/Cheney cabal knew Al-Quaeda was plotting some major attack, but not the exact details. The actual attack may have been bigger than they were expecting.
    • I think at least parts of the Saudi government and royal family knew about the pending attack, if not all the details.
    • I think the Bush/Cheney cabal worked to make sure the plot didn't get foiled in advance, by shelving relevant FBI investigations and so on, but didn't really do anything directly to help it succeed or interfere with the response beyond normal bureaucratic actions.
    • If there was a controlled demolition, it was likely done not to make the attack more serious, but in order to prevent the uncontrolled collapse of the towers that could have damaged other real estate. This would have been a contingency measure already in place for any unexpected disaster to befall the towers, not specifically this attack. I'm agnostic on whether a controlled demolition actually happened.
    • I do think there was insider trading based on tips that "something" was going to happen, but that this wasn't the main goal of interfering with investigations into Al-Quaeda; the main goal was facilitating PNAC's foreign policy goals.
    • The Bush administration did help various Saudis leave the US before they could be investigated, but if they were even involved with the attack, it was probably not operationally.
    • I don't think a missile hit the Pentagon, nor that the planes were piloted autonomously. I'm neutral on whether Flight 93 was shot down.
      • GoopOnYaGrinch [none/use name]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Yeah I have no issues with this. Again, I believe Flight 93 was shot down, but I'm open to hearing otherwise.

        I also strongly question how the fuck Hani Hanjour - widely considered the worst pilot of the bunch who flight instructors tried to get his pilots license revoked and allegedly could not solo a Cesna 150 - somehow pulled off an absurdly difficult maneuver that ultimately hit the Pentagon at a weird angle EXACTLY on the only side to receive a very recent safety upgrade against this type of thing (and was not a particularly populated section of the Pentagon on the opposite side of all the important people).

      • CoconutOctopus [it/its]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Yeah. I also stop pretty early on the conspiracy train. My feel is that by doing it this way, the neocon cabal gets plenty of plausible deniability, and if one attack fails, the jig isn't up; they can just let Al-Quaeda take another bite at the apple. The neocons can even double-dip by taking credit for foiling failed attacks. Biggest payoff for the least risk.