When Al-Qaeda themselves claimed responsibility, even with overwhelming evidence aside? Why were so many people still reluctant, I was researching about this stuff and was shocked to see people who I respect a lot believe in this

  • bamfic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    Because there was some legit sketchy shit:

    1. Bush was warned at least a month in advance that an attack was coming. He deliberately did nothing. This was documented publicly in a Senate hearing afterwards. We don’t know whether he did nothing because of incompetence or malice, and we don’t know who else knew in advance as well, but either way, at least he and the people who briefed him knew.

    2. The dirty secret of skyscrapers is that they’re mostly made of nothing. They’re almost entirely air. It takes precious little to weaken them and bring them down. The Bin Laden family was in the construction business and they knew this fact very well.

    3. As others have noted in the thread, Bin Laden and the Muhjadeen had been funded, trained, and armed by the USA. They were our creation.

    Usually when people are suspicious, they’re right to be suspicious. They’re not always right about what to be suspicious about.

    • remotelove@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      9 months ago

      It takes precious little to weaken them and bring them down.

      I would argue that an airliner filled with tons of fuel is not “little”. That was a lot of mass moving really fast into the towers. Even then, it took a while for the structures to become weak enough to collapse. Given the circumstances, it was amazing the towers lasted as long as they did after they were hit.

      Your core description is correct though: There really isn’t much to skyscrapers.

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m confused by this comment, what exactly is sketchy?

      W is/was an incompetent fool that didn’t feel the threat was worth acting upon. Instead of imagining some 4D conspiracy its much easier to see and understand that him and his administration were inept.

      There have been numerous documentaries and analysis about skyscrapers and planes and the conclusion was that the towers actually performed ABOVE average. People don’t seem to understand the power involved in a fucking jerliner slamming into a building.

      Bin Laden was trained and armed to fight the Russians, which he did. He then decided to turn on us because he always was always a lunatic.

      Again, nothing about 9/11 is mysterious to me and I don’t get the conspiracy thinking.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Usually the conspiracy theories are along the lines of…

      1. Of course Bush did nothing, it was him who ordered the attacks.
      2. The skyscrapers weren’t attacked, they were demolished
      3. Bin Laden (and anyone outside the US) was nothing but a scapegoat.

      The sketchy shit makes a lot more sense than the conspiracy theories about demolitions and no planes (just projectors, lmao)