Ninja48

^What plane in PA? You mean flight 93?

About the evidence supporting this conspiracy, most of it is based on suggestive situational circumstance. For example, in the beginning of the video, it outlined operation northwoods, created by Lyman Lemnitzer, joint cheif of staff at the time. It was a plan that suggested staging terrorist attacks, switching planes, etc, in order to have a reason to go to war with Cuba (this is 1962). The plan was rejected, though, and Lemnitzer was removed as the chief of staff by Kennedy. A document like this suggests that the government could possibly do the things suggested in later parts of the video. Another example, many eyewitnesses report explosions from within the twin towers before their collapse, and a few weeks before 9/11, drills were conducted in the twin towers and WT7 (the three buildings that happened to have collapsed) that included evacuating the building and the removal of bomb sniffing dogs from the buildings for "security reasons," ordered by Marvin Bush. This suggests that bombs could have been planted before hand and later detonated.

After 9/11, companies profited from insurance and put options. Later, Bush goes to war with terrorism, which makes more profit. Oil is stopped in Iraq, even more profit. As you can see, a valid reason for planning 9/11 is to make tons of money for everyone (except the middle to lower class).

However, evidence such as this isn't concrete. The most it should do is rouse suspicion. The facts are off just slightly from eyewitness reports, coincidences with financial things (insurance and put options prior to 9/11), and security in the towers adds fuel to the suspicion. Without concrete evidence, though, people must look at the video from an innocent until proven guilty standpoint. Also, the average person have a building structure's physics and intricate economics masters degree, so one should not jump to conclusions too quickly.

The video just makes me think "...eh? why's that?" It doesn't make me think "zomgbbq, i hate bush therefore i must jump to conclusions without concrete evidence and say he did it...!!1"


@optimus, Optimus Prime rules :P. But the points in the video were far from random stupid suggestions. I think they were well organized, and thought out (a little). It's not suprising that it can convince people who have a slight degree of gullibility. As for me, I want to look into the facts mentioned in the video and check it's accuracy before I jump to a conclusion.

@Miburo, mad props to the aliens who're racist against middle easterns :P. The conspiracy theorists that you're referring to are the extreme ones. Those are the ones that are quick to jump to any conclusion that sounds somewhat feasible, which is rather annoying. However, don't let the image of these theorists persuade you to automatically brush off any conspiracy theory. Because there's usually different versions of a conspiracy theory, varying from extreme to logical. And if you brush off the logical theories too quickly (not... sure if there are any anyway), then you're the same as the extremist conspiracy theorists who believe Dick Cheyney is an alien, as you both would be jumping to conclusions too quickly (although, brushing off a theory is much more logical than being super gullible).

__________________