You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #22: The way they are listed makes it seem as if they are all included [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
Nikki Stone 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-11-06 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. The way they are listed makes it seem as if they are all included
If there are options, that should be stated. Also, how many of these factors do you need to be a conspiracy theory? Clearly not ALL since you can't have #13 and #14 at the same time. So do you need 10? 8? 2? And who judges some of those factors?

The problem I have with the whole notion of "conspiracy theory" is that sometimes there ARE conspiracies (like Watergate for example) and every investigation of a conspiracy at some point produces a theory; otherwise, there'd be no guide to the investigation.

The notion that conspiracy theory equals urban legend is faulty for this reason. Perhaps, there should be a subset of urban legend designated for conspiracy "beliefs".

I can tell you that I think some suspicions about 9/11 are more well-founded than others. The idea that the Pentagon was NOT hit by a plane seems less likely to me for the simple reason that there were some eyewitnesses who actually saw the plane and that planes had just been used as weapons in NYC. The French theory that there was no plane just doesn't hold water for me.

But the complete lack of reaction from the military; the complete lack of reaction by the Secret Service as the Junior Bush sat and read My Pet Goat (even after he knew that two planes had hit the WTC); the 9/11 commission testimony that Cheney was, in fact, monitoring the plane headed toward the Pentagon but ordered no military jet to intercept it--all of these are just bizarre to me. Add to that Colleen Rowley's testimony (Minneapolis FBI office) about being completely stonewalled by the central FBI management in regard to a FISA warrant for Moussaoui's laptop in the summer of 2001 and the complete ignoring of the Phoenix FBI's report on the training of ME pilots around the same time, even when there was an intelligence report in August 2001 stating that Binladin intended to hit the US and the fact that the government was aware of such terrorist plans as Project Bojinka (1995, I think) which called for hijacking planes and crashing into buildings.

There are too many government irregularities. One could argue that the FBI was grossly incompetent, but that the FBI (on two separate occasions), and the US military and the Secret Service should all be thoroughly incompetent around a single event causes one to think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -What does it take to be a "9/11 conspiracy nut"? Nikki Stone 1  Sep-11-06 05:46 PM   #0 
  - How about believing that all five of those choices are possible?  Fox Mulder   Sep-11-06 05:48 PM   #1 
  - If you think Martians did it, your a nut. Otherwise, you're right on the  cspanlovr   Sep-11-06 05:49 PM   #2 
  - IMO, suspending the laws of physics and/or  Warpy   Sep-11-06 05:49 PM   #3 
  - Believing the first two  brentspeak   Sep-11-06 05:49 PM   #4 
  - 5 implies 2.  Warren Stupidity   Sep-11-06 05:49 PM   #5 
  - 100% Full - Fledged  whiterabbit76   Sep-11-06 05:49 PM   #6 
  - don't forget the inaction of the Secret Service . . .  OneBlueSky   Sep-11-06 05:50 PM   #7 
  - Good one!  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 05:52 PM   #9 
  - Wikipedia actually had some good criteria.  LoZoccolo   Sep-11-06 05:51 PM   #8 
  - Some of those "features" tend to contradict each other  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 05:55 PM   #11 
     - Not necessarily so.  LoZoccolo   Sep-11-06 06:26 PM   #20 
        - The way they are listed makes it seem as if they are all included  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 06:54 PM   #22 
           - Evidence and Plausible Scenario.  MervinFerd   Sep-12-06 08:04 AM   #26 
  - The hatred of people who can't win an argument  Rex   Sep-11-06 05:52 PM   #10 
  - huh?  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 05:55 PM   #12 
  - a brain. nt  thereismore   Sep-11-06 05:57 PM   #13 
  - I don't know any...  wildbilln864   Sep-11-06 05:58 PM   #14 
  - I don't have cable.  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 06:04 PM   #16 
  - What does it take to be a "9/11 conspiracy nut"?  Poppyseedman   Sep-11-06 05:58 PM   #15 
  - So you think those of us who doubt the official story are nuts?  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 06:12 PM   #17 
     - There is a line between healthy doubt  Poppyseedman   Sep-11-06 06:42 PM   #21 
        - We really don't know much  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 06:58 PM   #24 
  - Which part of "totally" don't you buy? Please explain. EOM  Nozebro   Sep-11-06 06:15 PM   #18 
  - The profound incompetence of the US military in Washington DC  Nikki Stone 1   Sep-11-06 06:19 PM   #19 
  - Any and all of those, and also  DireStrike   Sep-11-06 06:56 PM   #23 
  - From my experience in the foray, all of the above except #3  Sinti   Sep-12-06 12:49 AM   #25 
  - Depends on who you ask. Ask the average Freeper and in any  treestar   Sep-12-06 08:50 AM   #27 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC