Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

An interesting article about the report  on the third World Trade Center Tower to fall (Tower #7) is due to be published in the States this summer.

"The official explanation is that ordinary fires were the main reason for the collapse of Tower 7. That makes this the first and only tall skyscraper in the world to have collapsed because of fire. Yet despite that all the thousands of tonnes of steel from the building were carted away and melted down."

"Avery points out that Tower 7 housed some unusual tenants: the CIA, the Secret Service, the Pentagon and the very agency meant to deal with disasters or terrorist attacks in New York - the Office of Emergency Management."

I didn't realise so many people, in the States, felt that Bush and his government were hiding something over the attacks (53% according to the New York Times) or that a third of another poll believed that government officials either assisted or allowed the attacks to take place.

Anyway, here's the BBC's article:

The Evolution of a Conspiracy Theory (BBC Online; Friday 4th July 2008)


( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
Jul. 4th, 2008 12:24 pm (UTC)
I always like the concept of conspiracy theory as cover... Its something I have been toying with in RPGs since the 90's...

But it always seemed to me that the borderline insanity displayed by most conspiracy theorists tends to discredit them, and thus the best way for a government to do a cover up is to simply let these nut-jobs do it for you.

The theory was developed based on Roswell and Kennedy assasination, but applies equally to the 9/11 theories...

Back in our old Camarilla days, whenever I set a plan in motion I always threw out a rumour of something a little bit conspiracy based to cover it, and half the time the rumours started spreading back to me... Which was always fun.
Jul. 4th, 2008 12:45 pm (UTC)
The daleks probably made it...
Jul. 4th, 2008 01:57 pm (UTC)
I'm with Richard Nixon on this one...
as to why I don't believe in conspiracy theories.
In later years, asked about Watergate, he said somehting to the effect of: "There were only six of us. We'd all known each other for years, been to school and college together, come up through the ranks, trusted each other completely. And yet the instant the cracks started to appear it was every man for himself."

A conspiracy on the scale to topple the WTC would have to involve at least hundreds of people and yet...nuthin. No cracks, no every man for himself.

However, as someone wisely observed about what people think "When people beleive in nothing, then they wil lbeleive in anything".
Jul. 4th, 2008 02:39 pm (UTC)
Re: I'm with Richard Nixon on this one...
There was something about this on BBC late night the other day... And upon the televised examination of evidence, the only conspiracy that they could attribute to 9/11 was one that covered the arses of the Police, Spies and Politicians that failed to work together and failed to share information and thus allowed the terrorists to prepare and train unhindered...

Of course part of this was simply down to the (mistaken) belief that something like this could not be organised and synchronised to this level of competance.

Which is where the Hollywood guy (who wrote the Lone Gunmen episode with a Jumbo flying at the WTC) pointed out that a conspiracy theory is like a comfort blanket, because the truth of the sheer level of competance combined with absolute hatred held by the people behind things like 9/11 is far more terrifying than a crackpot half-baked theory...
Jul. 5th, 2008 09:05 am (UTC)
There is a documentary series on National Geographic, called Air Crash Investigations. It's great, and they did one where a jumbo jet crashed into a block of flats in Holland. It's very interesteing, as they found most of the bits of plan the old flats never fell down. It is very similar to the so called scale of the pentagon crash. Yet at the penatagon there was hardly any bit of plane left, and the one in the field disintigrated on impact.

Plus there is the whole black box part of the conspiracies. This boxes are bomb proof literally. THey can survive a nearly 2000 degree fire sustained for 2 hours and the data is still intact. The can survived being hit by a hardedned steal diamond tiped spike dropped on them with a several ton weight behind them and barely get scratched. In fact I would bet you can drop a black ox from low earth orbit and it would survive. I know they can survive greater depths of sea than most submarines. So the fact that something this tough just got vaporised is welll just unbeliveable, and that it happend 4 times on the same day is near impossible.

The black boxes are the one bit of evidence that can prove or disprove everything and all of them are convenantly vapor. yet they were designed to survive such crashes and worse.
Jul. 5th, 2008 09:32 am (UTC)
They did apparantly find the one that hit the pentagon, but it's rather shakey as to it's authenticity as there is no cockpit voice recording. So from the flight data the plane seems to do some odd things before crashing. Such as circling and waiting, surely if your going to crash a plane into a government building surrounded with anti aircraft weapons, you don't circle a few miles away. And the fligt 93 ones were found, but the 4 (2 boxes per plane) from the WTC apparenly were never found.
Jul. 5th, 2008 11:43 am (UTC)
The whole issue of 'Conspiracy theories' gets messed up not only by the inevitable people who take things to ludicrous levels of paranoia, but also by the nay-sayers who regard the idea of workable conspiracies as rubbish.

History is actually full of well documented, known conspiracies on a variety levels from small plots (such as the gunpowder plot) through to full scale military coups (which are effectively conspiracies to overthrow a government). Governments themselves are also bound to cover up embarrassing material (frequently destroying data to cover their own backsides) and sometimes do strange things to protect what they view as 'the national interests'.

Most recently we have, of course, the Iraq war - a war which was initially sold to us on the idea (implausible even then to anyone who had been seriously following the issue) that Iraq had WMDs. Having had the American and British governments show 'evidence' of this that is now proven false, no WMDs being found at all, and even people who were once involved in the policy making saying the war was never about WMDs and always about oil- doesn't this count as a conspiracy? A conspiracy to mount a war on false premises and to fool the electorates of their own countries into supporting it?

The problem with conspiracies that are suspected, but not known for certain, is to separate the rubbish from the plausible, fact from fiction. It is of course made harder by undeniable levels of incompetence, and the possibility that cover ups might exist to conceal the level of this and guard the people concerned's backsides.

My concern with 9/11 is that there are clearly issues yet unresolved that suggest that at the very least a cover-up to conceal incompetence may have happened - yet at the same time the self same people involved were also involved in a successful attempt to mislead and lie to their nation about the Iraq war. That alone makes me think that a serious examination of doubts about 9/11 should be made.

A serious examination of the beliefs and principles of the neocon's philosophically and morally also reveals that they do believe that the intelligent and strong are morally justified in lying to the masses, manipulating the truth, and making judgements that serve their own interests at the peoples expense.

It is also quite reasonable that if there was, at any level an actual conspiracy (and the simplest theory 'they let it happen' actually only needs a small number of people to be knowingly involved) people would not break ranks on it and reveal the conspiracy. It would not be in their own interests to do so since they would be revealed as complicit in not only deception, but also mass murder, and potentially treason. I know if I was involved I would keep my mouth firmly shut.
Jul. 7th, 2008 06:00 pm (UTC)
Conspiracy theories are interesting, not least as a source of RPG ideas, but almost all are so fundamentally flawed that you don't know where to start debunking them -- then again there's little point trying to debunk them as most believers in most CTs are driven more by faith than reason.

I didn't realise so many people, in the States, felt that Bush and his government were hiding something over the attacks (53% according to the New York Times) or that a third of another poll believed that government officials either assisted or allowed the attacks to take place.

40-45% of Americans believe that humanity was created in it's current form by "God" within the last 10,000 years. Numerous surveys over the last 20 or so years have returned roughly the same numbers.

It's faith in both cases -- you choose to believe that what you want to be true is true, evidence dosn't matter. You can't have a reason-based debate with "true believers" of any flavour -- WTC, Christianity, 4ed D&D, etc.

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2015


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow