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?

  • TheUrbanaSquirrel [she/her]
    ·
    3 years ago

    I don't wade into 9/11 conspiracies much. I don't attribute malice to what could be explained by stupidity or weird coincidence. What's this talk about 93 being shot down? There's audio of the passengers breaking into the cockpit. Bush did allow politically-connected Saudis to leave the US, of course. That doesn't strike me as a grand conspiracy so much as rich people doing rich people crimes in broad fucking daylight.

    • GoopOnYaGrinch [none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I would say the biggest indictment of the Flight 93 being shot down theory is the crash site. There was virtually zero visible debris, which would not be consistent with how a normal plane crash might look. There was just one, fairly small smoldering hole in the ground. The official narrative is that 95% of the plane was found submerged deep in this tiny hole. It should also be noted that nobody has ever seen this alleged 95% that was recovered.

      It's also worth noting that a lot of debris was found within a 1-2 mile radius from the crash site, which would be consistent with a plane that was shot down.

      • TheUrbanaSquirrel [she/her]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Okay, but we don't normally have crash sites of planes that are deliberately driven into the ground. [Full disclosure: I acknowledge I don't know a ton about flight crash history, someone please someone correct me.] There was Germanwings Flight 9525, but it was crashed into the side of a mountain. And Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was very likely deliberately crashed into the sea. So those sites aren't really comparable. Does anyone know of any commercial planes driven into a field other than United 93?

        • Work [none/use name]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Okay, but we don’t normally have crash sites of planes that are deliberately driven into the ground.

          Yes we do. I mean the plane doesn’t really give a shit your intentions. But we have hundreds of plane crashes where they dove nose first into the earth from 40k feet going almost as fast as the speed of sound. I watch one these last night where the carbon pressure was too high and killed everyone in the plane while it was on autopilot until it ran out of gas and just went straight down. Small ass plane, still had debris.

          • TheUrbanaSquirrel [she/her]
            ·
            3 years ago

            The estimate is that the plane impacted at over 560mph. The photos of smoke from the impact site are from a single location. If it was blown out of the sky wouldn't there be little fires everywhere? Or at least a big ball of smoke in the sky from the gas tank exploding? I don't really want to get too deep into an argument here. I'm not a forensic investigator. I just think it's perfectly reasonable that people determined to create maximum destruction had a backup plan in case it was derailed. And they are recorded saying, "Pull it down," ("it" being the nose of the plane) before saying "Allah is the greatest." Seems like something someone would say right before intentionally driving a plane into the dirt.

          • spectre [he/him]
            ·
            3 years ago

            we have hundreds of plane crashes where they dove nose first into the earth from 40k feet going almost as fast as the speed of sound.

            Happy to see a counter example, but I can't think of any commercial airliners that have crashed at full speed into level ground without any intervention from the pilots.