LFC - so we're not bananas after all!

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/07/12/313399/conspiracy-theorists-vs-govt-dupes/

"Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.


The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites"

Just as an aside whenever a doctor appears on tv, radio or in the press he/she will almost
without fail be dishonest on whatever the subject.

Navel-Gazer i really am surprised, i would have thought that a realist,(as any Evertonian must be!)
would see that the doctors had to come to just such a conclusion. Their time and money dictated that
they should do so.

Anybody can make anything seem possible. Bring out a vid, call everything in it facts and the gullible will follow.

But stop!!!  Think!!!  While they are on here they are not out wandering the streets with their axes!!!

poly if you are not a creationist then why do you champion that perception so highly.

And exactly when did I do that?
And "if" now? for the last few days you've been undeniably certain of it and constantly repeated it as fact.

-Let's set your insane 9/11 beliefs aside a moment
-I love this repetitive line poly.
So anyone who challenges the officail 9/11 Commission Report is insane. Is this what you are saying?

It's fairly clear what i'm saying "Let's set your insane 9/11 beliefs aside" You're welcome to implicate this group yourself, but there is no safety in numbers benefit in this case regardless.

there is only one conspiracy .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luGkdBs95kY

@McGinty
Oh very nice. Says a lot about you. How's yer goat?

From Fox News 2005 (Regarding Able Danger)

WASHINGTON –  A third person has now come forward to verify claims made by a military intelligence unit that a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, it had information showing that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta (search) and other terrorists were identified as being in the United States.

J.D. Smith, a defense contractor who claims he worked on the technical side of the unit, code-named "Able Danger" (search), told reporters Friday that he helped gather open-source information (search), reported on government spending and helped generate charts associated with the unit's work. Able Danger was set up in the 1990s to track Al Qaeda activity worldwide.

"I am absolutely positive that he [Atta] was on our chart among other pictures and ties that we were doing mainly based upon [terror] cells in New York City," Smith said.

And this is how the Able Danger hearings unfolded.

The Pentagon’s top intelligence official clashed repeatedly Wednesday with former operatives of the clandestine Able Danger program over how much the government knew about al-Qaeda before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Much of the testimony focused on whether hijacking mastermind Mohammed Atta had been identified long before the tragedy.

In a rare public display of bitter disputes within the close-knit military intelligence community, three members of a computer data-mining initiative code-named “Able Danger” told Congress that the Sept. 11 attacks might have been prevented if law-enforcement agencies had acted on the information about al-Qaeda they unearthed.

“It shocked us how entrenched of a presence al-Qaeda had in the United States,” former Army Maj. Erik Kleinsmith told two subcommittees of the House Armed Services Committee.

J.D. Smith, a defense contractor who also worked on the Able Danger team, said he used Arab intermediaries in the Los Angeles area to buy a photograph of Atta. Smith said Atta’s photo was among about 40 photos of al-Qaeda members on a large chart that he personally delivered to Pentagon officials in 2000, more than a year before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Asked by Rep. Curt Weldon, a Republican from Pennsylvania, how certain he was that the chart contained Atta’s photograph, Smith responded that he kept a copy of the chart on the office wall.

“I’m absolutely certain,” Smith said. “I looked at it every day.”

[...]Stephen Cambone, undersecretary of defense for intelligence, testified Tuesday that an extensive Pentagon review of Able Danger under his direction failed to locate the chart its operatives say they produced, and didn’t find evidence documenting their other claims.

“There’s no one here looking not to bring the information forward. We simply have not found it,” Cambone said.

Pentagon officials previously said the al-Qaeda data produced by Able Danger had been destroyed because of regulations that prevent the military from maintaining information on U.S. citizens or legal residents.

But in a series of tense confrontations, Weldon told Cambone that his military sources had informed him some of the Able Danger data still existed.

“What’s going on here?” Weldon asked. “Is this a massive effort to deny reality?”

Weldon said that an unidentified current Pentagon employee had, within the last three weeks, run computer searches using pre-9/11 Able Danger data. They had five hits on “Mohammed Atta” and three hits on “Muhammed Atta,” Weldon said.

“There’s been no investigation!” Weldon said. “There’s been no analysis by the 9/11 commission or anyone else.”

Same as it ever was poly, same as it ever was poly....

b&b

No not at all, Atta was known and tracked, the ops involved in Able Danger admitted this but were met with opposition from the Pentagon agency.

So on this very basic level we see how having `prior knowledge` to the attacks could be covered up. If there was prior knowledge, then to what degree the US agencies layed their own plans down on that day is open to discussion.

I think you're at the wind-up vreadnbutter.
What about the passengers on the planes who's names were released? Were they fictitious?
And if they were how do you explain those relatives who were interviewed and spoke of their loss?
Or are they all part of the conspiracy

There is film of the 1st plane

And what about the 1000 or more who saw the 2nd plane with their won eyes while standing in the street ? Are they all in on the conspiracy ?

@ breadnbutter

Nothing to do with evidence. The question is if these planes didn't exist and the hundreds of victims on them was false why were thousands of relatives in mourning? WERE THEY ALL INVOVED IN THE CONSPIRACY?

@ Angel Gabrial

You use expressions like 'perhaps', 'could suggest' and 'perhaps leads to' and to me that sums up the conspiracy theories. People take possibilities as facts and then add fingers and thumbs.

Are people now suggesting the towers weren't hit by planes?

Only for the last decade Blacky...sharp as usual.

I'm being deadly serious - are you suggesting that the twin towers WEREN'T hit by planes?

Its a yes or no answer, emoticons aren't required thanks.

I'm being deadly serious - are you suggesting that the twin towers WEREN'T hit by planes?


No