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
Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 2876 comments are related to the topic:
9/11 was it a conspiracy?
9/11 was it a conspiracy?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 2,876
|
By:
Conspiracy theory ?
You would have to be some sort of nodding dog to accept the official version of events. Like when they found the passports (slightly scorched) of the attackers amid the rubble at the foot of ground zero... The way that second plane arced smack into the middle of a skyscraper,being flown by a man who had apparently had a handful of flying lessons (official story-they didn't seem interested in learning take off/landing , just getting the weight of steering a plane at 500 mph then ) Besides all this then why was the reaction to 9/11 directed at Iraq? Completely uninvolved in any way. Then Afghanistan ? Ruled by the Taliban who were allies of the US but three years previously? I'll tell why... Iraq gave the US a massive bloody nose when they started dealing their oil in Euro rather than dollars.Iran and North Korea followed suit (ringing any bells regarding the "axis of evil" ??) the fact every barrel of oil sold in the world is traded using dollars is critical to the US economy, Saddam needed to be taught a lesson,that lesson was SHOCK and AWE. The follow on from that lesson has become a horrible mess of a war that has dragged on so long,I am beggining to think someone didn't think it through properly. As for the Afghans,when the Taliban thumbed their nose at America all previous bets were off.No more funding for arms for them. They were supposed to roll over and have their tummy tickled, an almost medieval society living in a mineral and resource rich part of the world EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT . The gloves were well and truly off. But the Afghans have a 4000 year history of being invaded and the only person to have achieved any sort of result was Ghengis Khan , almost a thousand years ago.That war too will drag on, young men will die for no good reason . You may think I have gone off topic,the Iraq / Afghanistan problem existed pre 9/11 . There was a feeling in the White House only a Pearl Harbour style assault could justify another war in Iraq. I would suggest 9/11 was just that. |
|
By:
so in order to invade middle east countries the US has to murder thousands of its own people
but are not clever enough to fool internet forum members eh? were you there? can you substantiate anything you say can you explain how a plot this large by the US government could remain basically a secret when thousands must have been involved is crime and murder involving aircraft not basically an arab trait did osama just fall into line by admitting it was him get real you absoloute fool not everything has to be government conspiracy |
|
By:
could it be that both sides are correct in this argument in some ways , the conspiracy theory could hold some grounds but not in the fantasy ways some are saying and more in the way that when certain branches of intelliegence run by the powers that be recieved word that these people where acting strange could they not have worked out what was going on and maybe turned a blind eye thinking that a certain loss was acceptable but not really thinking of the devistation that would happen with the towers coming down and more along the lines of what a terrorist attack would do to promote agendas , which also means that yes it is extrememly plausable that yes it was terrorists who hijacked the planes and crashed them
this hypothesis could make every post on this thread apart from the juvenile squabling mid read have plausable parts to them and everyone is rite in a way |
|
By:
The US went to war with Iraq because they were selling oil in euros rather than dollars. Not only that, they were responsible for 9/11 in order to invade. I've heard it all now.
|
|
By:
is this thread worth reading?
|
|
By:
if you're really really bored and like to read something you've read before for about an hour then... yes
for fascists though, definitely no! |
|
By:
[;)]
|
|
By:
lagmorian, you're correct. Google MIHOP and LIHOP - the strong and weak 911 conspiracy theories.
Pea, I'm still waiting for your reasons why thousands would be needed for any alternative scenario. "PNAC" and the "five dancing Palestinians" may also be worth Googling. |
|
By:
Far be from me to agree with IP, but I think he's right on this one.As for those that say there was no CCTV coverage you might want to look at this.
http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonAttackCctvVideo.shtml Also those that say it wasn't a plane ignore the fact that the majority of eye witnesses said they saw a plane no a missile hit the pentagon. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html?q=911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html |
|
By:
sunset, do you realise those are both conspiracy sites?
|
|
By:
Sunset
I've seen that footage dozens of times.There is no plane. |
|
By:
Well if they are then they are debunking their own beliefs.
|
|
By:
There doesn't need to be camera footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon. Plenty of eyewitneses are on record describing a large commercial jet flying low over them or near them and then smashing into the Penatagon. Some of these witnesses are/were in professions and positions to know what they were seeing and be able to relate accurately and truthfully. Although I daresay I could recognise a large commercial jet if one came screaming low over me, and I'm just a Joe soap.
Oh, and those eyewitnesses, 87 of them, and their statements are detailed on one of those conspiracy sites (with no attempt to discredit any of them). |
|
By:
How so, sunset?
|
|
By:
Gene Hackman as has already been explained cctv wouldn't capture a plane coming in at speed. Do you know how cctv works? You can see from the footage that in doesn't record every split second.Why are you ignoring this and why are you ignoring the eyewitnesses that saw a plane hit the pentagon? Why are you in denial?
|
|
By:
Slarty they are debunking their own beliefs because for one they say there is no cctv footage. Obviously there is.There own sites prove this. The plane is moving to fast to be seen that's all. They then conveniently ignore the eyewitness testimony of those that saw the plane hit the pentagon. This is intellectually dishonest.
For those that believe in conspiracy can you please explain why no one heard the blasts of the detonators when the Twin towers came down? Also what happened to the passengers of the plane if it didn't hit the Pentagon? Also why has there been no evidence of detonators or explosive charges found in the rubble of the twin towers? To name just a few. |
|
By:
Sunset
The fact that you keep quoting eyewitnesses as evidence does your case no good at all.Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable - who was it that said he saw De Menezes with explosives strapped to him? - and in this case there were hugely conflicting reports from the eyewitnesses. Regarding the cctv footage/lack thereof: No,I'm not an expert on such matters and I'd like to bet that you aren't either. The internet is full of various clips of cctv footage capturing all kinds of events from all over the world.I would have thought that the equipment used to protect the Pentagon would be a bit more sophisticated than the stuff they use on your High St,and would capture the image of a plane from scores of different angles -side on,head on,from behind,yet we have not been shown any convincing footage. The flightpath of the plane would have passed hundreds of cctv cameras on its journey to the pentagon - remember it was clipping lamposts on it's approach,it being so low to the ground,yet not one of those cctv cameras outside garages,shops,and businesses captured anything! Denial? |
|
By:
In common with many opponents of any alternative explanation, you seem to think all people who don't actively subscribe to the official version of events believe the same alternative version. The truth is that there are numerous different alternative scenarios some of which are "no plane theories" (which I believe are a nonsense), missiles hit the Pentagon (which I think is unlikely), the Twin Towers were brought down deliberately using explosives/space weapons/etc.
The fact is you can believe a good deal of the official version and still believe it was some form of false flag operation. |
|
By:
eye_iz_ere Joined: 02 Jan 05
Replies: 345 06 Aug 10 07:39 The US went to war with Iraq because they were selling oil in euros rather than dollars. Not only that, they were responsible for 9/11 in order to invade. I've heard it all now. It beggars belief that people who know nothing about history (even recent) and don't understand economics can be so dismissive .Ignorance must be bliss. Alright eye iz ere, you shot me down it was all about weapons of mass destruction. |
|
By:
There we have it, then. At least 87 eyewitnesses at the Pentagon (all largely reporting a similar scene, not as you would have us believe, with hugely conflicting stories), all either mistaken or lying.
Have you asked yourself this: If these 87 witnesses were all materially wrong in what they reported seeing, where is the body of eyewitness testimony along the lines of: "well, I was driving on the highway past The Pentagon at the time, and those reports of a plane are all baloney. It was definitely not a plane." There must have been hundreds, if not thousands, of motorists in the relevant vicinity. Where, therefore, is the body of refuting evidence that it wasn't a plane? |
|
By:
Your ridiculous naivety is touching,cobblaz.
|
|
By:
 You're winding me up aren't you? |
|
By:
I'm sure he is. There's an overwhelming weight of evidence which proves a plane hit the Pentagon.
He's 'avin' a larf. |
|
By:
Not least the bits of plane!
I would love though, to hear what conspiracists believe to be a more logical explanation for the disappearance of that flight and its passengers! |
|
By:
No.
If you aren't aware/have never read about the conflicting eyewitness reports,then you haven't read enough about the Pentagon strike to come on here and pass your opinion. The TV stations that daren't step out of line are hardly likely to run around looking for people in Washington to say "No,I didn't see any plane" are they? By the way:There were,according to you,"hundreds,if not thousands" in the relevant vicinity that didn't see the plane? How come they could only come up with 87 witnesses that did see it then? |
|
By:
Now I know you're winding me up.
There is plenty on the web about The Pentagon strike and I've read much of it. It is not necessary to read all of it. If I understand you correctly, you are asking me to believe that 87 eyewtnesses are all in collusion and all lying? Presumably, even those that appear to all intents and purposes to be ordinary members of the public are actually "plants" and thus lying to assist a cover-up? And, as Sparkmaster so pertinently says, there were plane parts strewn across the area. Or would you have us believe that these pieces of metal, rubber etc. were lying, too? Anyway, that's my position and you haven't produced anything yet to convince me otherwise. |
|
By:
Cobblaz
Remember that Sparky (and Orioles) see the refutal of the conspiracy theorists views as some sort of intellectual challenge. They no more believe the official 9/11 version than I do.They know that the masses believe the official version,and that any sort of questioning mind doesn't,so the biggest challenge to such ego's will be to engage with,and oppose the conspiracy theorists. |
|
By:
Remember that Sparky (and Orioles) see the refutal of the conspiracy theorists views as some sort of intellectual challenge.
Well...not much of one! |
|
By:
As always Sparky,your ego and arrogance gets the better of you.
|
|
By:
This is hat one of the better open-minded 911 websites has to offer on the events at the Pentagon:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/index.html See the menu under "Pentagon" on the left handside for a detailed analysis of the various evidence and some theories. |
|
By:
*what
|
|
By:
Sparky backtracked on the steel comment earlier in the thread. Made me chuckle. Intellectual my arѕe
|
|
By:
I've had a look at the first link there slarty. It starts off reasonably enough with some sourced claims, although no real argument is made. Are they attributing some significance to the fact that the part of the building hit was less populated than usual, or other parts of the building. If so, what? I really don't see the point.
I'm not sure what they're suggesting by the unsourced final part either. They're saying that the actions don't to them, make much sense - I can't really comment on if the trajectory as described is correct, but it doesn't seem to odd to me that they would attempt to hit from the side as far as possible - you've got one less dimension to worry about. But even if the actions are unwise, what of it? |
|
By:
I'm sorry, where?
|
|
By:
Day after the Lord Mayor's Show here!
|
|
By:
doantwin2easy Joined: 14 Aug 04
Replies: 364 05 Aug 10 23:38 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 No plane crashed into WTC7, yet it fell to the ground in 6.5 seconds. |
|
By:
WARP SPEED! CRIKEY!
|
|
By:
An impressive list of idiots on this thread, well done canary!
When I used to try to debate this subject on here, I actually thought I was debating with informed, reasonable people. It turned out that none of them had even the slightest inkling of what went on that day and how the truth has been buried by the mainstream media since and controlled on the internet with the advent of fake "truth" sites which most clowns on here link to when trying to defend the indefensible. 9/11 was a huge psyop that made some rich people even richer, gave the US a mandate to start an illegal war against a make believe enemy and enabled the demolition of a group of largely redundant buildings. No planes. No passengers. No missiles. No Arabs. It was a staged event and most of you fell for it. The power of TV, eh? |
|
By:
I reckon it the same group who carried out the Oklahoma bombings that did it.It was then blamed on Bin laden, Afghanistan and Saddam etc as an excuse to invade and to cover up the actions of right wing extremists.
|
|
By:
*was
|