We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
|
By:
If you can be bothered to watch that clip, and still think that fire alone brought down WTC7 (the only steel structured building in history, EVER! ), then there really is no point in debating the matter further.
not many fires originate from jet planes crashing into buildings at warp speed..nasty old fire |
|
By:
Extraordinary claims require extraorinary evidence.
Both the official version of events (19 Arabs with tape cutters and little flying skill outwitted the world's most powerful nation, etc) and the various alternatives are extraordinary claims. It is unfortunate, though understandable, that none of them are backed up by extrordinary evidence. This dearth is overlooked by supporters of any version, who are basing their view substantially on faith. |
|
By:
slartybartfast, is it not equally strange that the US government appears to have outwitted everyone in the world except certain gullible internet forum users
|
|
By:
Little fying skill? I'd suggest they had vastly more than average. I'm not sure about outwitted either. Did Raoul Moat outwit the police? Not sure why you thin tape cutters relevant either.
|
|
By:
Incredulity is a useful thing.
|
|
By:
how many of these gullible conspiracy theorists base their opinions on first hand accounts?
very few if any i would wager |
|
By:
How many of those who believe the official version base their view on first hand accounts?
|
|
By:
The official version?
|
|
By:
i saw planes slamming into the twin towers and people running for their lives on the ground, i accept this as fact until someone proves it was all actors, nobody has done so
|
|
By:
has there been a plane crash?
|
|
By:
how do you deduce whodunnit and why from those events, Pea?
|
|
By:
ICABOD PEAPOD 05 Aug 10 23:24
Trifecta, i imagine i could source a video of an elephant climbing a tree if i tried Go on then |
|
By:
ICABOD PEAPOD 05 Aug 10 23:24
Trifecta, i imagine i could source a video of an elephant climbing a tree if i tried Go on then |
|
By:
slarty, Al Qaeda took responsibility for one, could a US government based conspiracy have tvvert the other day featuring a adguaranteed Al Qaeda would do this and not deflect the blame back on to them?
Winkle, i saw a tv. advert the other day featuring an elephant climbing a tree ffs |
|
By:
eh?
|
|
By:
slarty, if you think 911 was hoaxed you need to take a long hard look at your nievity, thousands of people would have to have been involved, not one ever came forward!!!?
not one! how likely is this? i suppose the holocaust never happened either? |
|
By:
ha, nice try
|
|
By:
ha! nice try, but where is your counter argument fool?
|
|
By:
Resorting to insults now, I see.
Could you explain what exactly would necessitate the involvement of thousands of people? You seem to believe that 19 or so people did it. Why do you assume that thousands would be required in any alternative scenario? Please explain exactly why you believe this or I will assume this just a baseless assumption that you read somewhere and thought sounded good. |
|
By:
I asked this question 2 pages back, he insulted me when i said it could be done with 15 or so people
|
|
By:
If the media are complicit, then there would be millions not thousands involved. But there isn't :-)
|
|
By:
Misspoker, you jump in hours after i asked you why you believed 15 people could have done it!!
i still await an answer |
|
By:
she answered you shortly after, Pea
sparky, are you assuming that any alternative scenario would require media complicity? If so why? |
|
By:
Slarty, i do not remember ever saying only 19 people were involved
i do however believe it to have been an arab plot if it were not an arab plot then surely the planes slamming into buildings were all hoaxed, the desperate phonecalls from doomed passengers describing arabic speaking terrorists, the people running from the dustcloud on the streets of new york. Had this all been a hoax then many administrators, actors, security etc etc etc would have been needed no! it was simply an arab terrorist attrocity, nothing less, nothing more |
|
By:
No Slarty, I'm referring to the fact that media around the world, whatever it's political persuasion, and however aggressively they criticise the US government, recongise that this was an Al Qaeda attack on the US, and how the most common explanation for this (on here at least) is that they're a part of it.
|
|
By:
There are various possibilities which you seem not to have considered. It is a long time since I thought about this and it is late but here are a couple:
- that the Arabs were patsies (ie they were there but not responsible, perhaps having been set up in some way) - that the planes were remote controlled (such technology is reported to have existed for some time and would seem technically possible since we have had unmanned planes for many years) Unlike you and others, who seem to now with certainty what happened, I am not claiming that either of these are true. Merely that they are possible, along with many other possibilities. |
|
By:
*know
|
|
By:
If you have any reason to think either of those ideas to be true, then by all means do tell.
|
|
By:
hmm! slarty, are there any black box recordings of pilots controls not responding? no there are not!
there are however numerous cell calls from passengers to relatives telling of arabic speaking hijackers how could arabs be there and be set up!, they were fingered by numerous passengers via cell phones to be brandishing weapons on a hijacked aeroplane ffs! |
|
By:
Such evidence would be simple to fake, Pea.
This is pointless. We could go on and on, as I have done many times before here and elsewhere, arguing why this or that could have happened etc. But essentially, as with other events that spawn conspiracy theories, what you have is a dearth of evidence to go on. It's like doing a dot-to-dot picture with only three dots: you can make it look like whatever you want. And most people do. That's why I choose to refrain from assumptions and faith-based beliefs and remain agnostic. I can conceive of a number of scenarios being true, including the generally accepted view. But unlike many I don't feel compelled to support any of them exclusively. |
|
By:
The attacks of 9/11 were a national security disaster for the US and a major dent in the pride of the country as a whole. There is no conceivable way that the US goverment would have sponsored such an attack (signing the death warrant of thousands of good christians) to justify an aggressive foreign policy for political or ecomomic gain especially given the religious convictions of their leader at the time.
Aside from a gvt plot, it's difficult to imagine that US business leaders out for economic gain, would hatch a plot which would risk the subsequent investigation of the CIA / FBI for the potential gain of influence and control of middle eastern oil supplies. Would it really be worth the risk? Also unlikely that Mosad would kill off thousands of Jews in order that there be a backlash against the arab community given that the Isaellis generally don't feel compelled to justify any agression in this region. |
|
By:
Indeed. I love the idea of someone telling Bush he could do this. What benefits are there? Well, none really. What could we lose? Well, you could go from being the most powrful man in the world to, well, being executed as a mass murderer. What do we need for it to succeed? Those people who told everyone you choked on a pretzel...we need them too lie for us.
Go for it! |
|
By:
You and your assumptions!
Who said Bush needed to know? Who said the media needed to lie? |
|
By:
Slarty... even if he didn't need to know, would whoever plotted this really risk a life in jail for the the intangible benefits of possible political or economic benefit given that it isn't sanctioned from the top. You would be hiding in a whole like Saddam Hussein hoping that no one took the lid off
|
|
By:
Like watching a dog chase its tail.
|
|
By:
Not assumptions slarty, a response to assertions made on the forum. If you have a theory based around Bush not knowing and the media not being complicit, then by all means let's hear it. I actually have that position myself. I think it was terrorists.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Not assertions made by me, sparky. Are you saying that you can't conceive of any alternative scenario in which George Bush is not informed and the media not complicit? If so, I can see no reason for these assumptions and was seeking an explanation.
|
|
By:
No.
|
|
By:
I just can't see how such a scenario can be plausible. If you or anyone else cares to put one forward then I will of course pay it due attention. It all seems pretty straightforward though.
|