Conspiracy Theories

[Cameron]

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth

This is a pre-discussion to the documentary that is going to air tonight (8:00pm EST) on CBC. It looks to be an interesting hour. The website has more on what it's going to be on.

I would wish that everyone will watch it. I will be posting my thoughts tomorrow.

[KrustyKidd]

I know I will. Thaks for the tip.

[Cameron]

Sorry guys and gals. That was on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 at 9pm EST.

[daniel]

I tried to look for it yesterday and ended up watching Marketplace instead about Grand Theft Auto.

I just picked up a new car!! Should I have waited to 2005 for the key immobilizer?

About the Fifth Estate that'll be on tonight, dare we guess what it'll report and what each of our reactions will be?

[Cameron]

Not a bad report. I thought they left out some good left-wing babble in the commercials prior to airing. Too bad.

Some of the information was a little shocking, but for the most part it didn't send me to the cellar brandishing a rifle. Most of us know that the US has ties with the Saudis, that isn't new. Some of the witnesses stated that it was a missile that hit the pentagon, whilst CBC asked airline crash detectives about the scene and they reported it was consistent of with the known knowledge of crashes, again, the evidence doesn't lie.

One interesting point they made, was the day after 9-11, 3 aircraft were allowed to leave the US carrying high-level Saudis onboard. The reasons they were not questioned are still unknown. That brings us back to the point of the relationship to US - SA, which we all know of by now.

Other interesting facts are the relationships between the Bush family and the Bin Ladens. Oil money, building contracts, etc. I think GWB knows more than he is telling us. This Bush administration has the closest ties to SA than previous administrations in my opinion, history doesn't lie.

For the most part it wasn't a massively-shocking report. We already know that SA and the US have deep ties. The fact that SA didn't respond like it should have on 9-11 (If it was a true alley), should be questioned. Saudi Arabia is probably funding terrorists if they know it or not. The US needs to take a long hard look at its relationship with SA.

You can read more here if you missed it.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/index.html

[KrustyKidd]

One interesting point they made, was the day after 9-11, 3 aircraft were allowed to leave the US carrying high-level Saudis onboard. The reasons they were not questioned are still unknown. That brings us back to the point of the relationship to US - SA, which we all know of by now.

Other interesting facts are the relationships between the Bush family and the Bin Ladens. Oil money, building contracts, etc. I think GWB knows more than he is telling us. This Bush administration has the closest ties to SA than previous administrations in my opinion, history doesn't lie.

I think I can throw out a pretty good explanation.

Just say for example you were the Bush's prior to 9 11. you need money for something. Do you think Bin Ladens would make GW sit in a waiting room while they did a credit search on him? Of course not. These people have the highest of prefferential treatment. Now back to 9 11. Maybe the Bin Ladens told the government in private many things that they now were able to piece together. I for one thought that the US was able to determine that it was Al Queda awfully quick so maybe they had help from the Bin Ladens.

Letting them go is not too far to reach as well. Why hold a business partner whom you have a trusting relationship with. They needed to get out before all hell broke loose in the States (as many feared) with them being the target. As a friend, GW expidited this. Most likely with the understanding that if they could help further they would be able to answer questions 24/7 via phone.

Another counter conspiracy point. If the Bin Ladens were involved in this with the government then why not leave the day before? Week or even month before to shift suspiscian? I for one think there is a fairly begnign reason for this.

[Moderate Centrist]

I'm a little disappointed that the fifth estate would give credence to these types of stories.

It's been my experience that most conspiracy theories are put forward by quacks or people looking to make a quick buck.

Something has to be remembered with regards to the United States staging the terrorist attacks - a conspiracy that big wouldn't hold togeather.

The more people/agencies involved the greater the chance it will fall apart.

[daniel]

It's been my experience that most conspiracy theories are put forward by quacks or people looking to make a quick buck.

When you don't know what the truth is how do you know who the quacks are?

Take a look at any post in this web site. Right wing or left wing, any government or opposition from any jurisdiction is subject to attack. Who really knows what the truth is.

my experience

It looks as though you hold the truth.

So prove the official versions were the truth:

1) Kennedy Assassination;

2)John Lennon Assassination;

3)Princess Diana's car accident;

4) 9-11

5) WMD in Iraq

And then let the rest of the posters here determine if your evidence is proof.

[Moderate Centrist]

Hi Daniel,

"So prove the official versions were the truth:"

Daniel

Actually you've got it backwards. This is turning logic on its' head.

It is universally acknowledged by the scientific and academic communities that it is the responsibility of the claimant to prove the claim and not the other way around.

The best evidence that we have indicates a security lapse on the part of the United states as one of the driving factors in the success of the 9/11 attacks.

No evidence has been put forward to suggest that the US government was deliberately behind it.

And since you asked:

1) Kennedy Assassination;

Most people that I know base their claims on the Kennedy assassination on the Stone film - visually impressive, yet so contrived as to be almost impossible to follow.

An investigation in the 1970s by the House Select Committee on Assassinations established the following:

"the HSCA found that there was a 'probable conspiracy,' though it was unable to determine the nature of that conspiracy or its other participants (besides Oswald). " source: http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca...ca/contents.htm

Jim Garrison may not have been a quack,( although I have my doubts), but he was to say the least eccentric.

2)John Lennon Assassination;

Killed by a nutcase. Where's the conspiracy here?

3)Princess Diana's car accident;

Diana got in a car with a drunk driver. Nothing more needs to be said on that as far as I'm concerned.

4) 9-11

Again, there are many questions left to be answered but no evidence that the US government was behind it. And further - this would be impossible to successfully pull off.

5) WMD in Iraq

Conspiracy indicates at least some level of secrecy. It was well known there were no weapons of WMD in Iraq so therefore it's not a conspiracy.

I make no claims to truth. I don't have to as, again, it's your responsibility to provide the proof if you want me to believe in the claim.

[daniel]

I was asking how your experience determined that conspiracy theorists are "quacks".

Show us your credentials, and prove they are all quacks.

[Moderate Centrist]

Hi Daniel,

I guess I wasn't clear.

First - I don't need credentials because I'm not making any claims re: 9/11.

I accept the following:

The US was attacked by an extremist Islamic group (most likely Bin Ladins').

This attack was planned years in advance

There was a failure of US security to prevent it due to lack of proper intellegence coordination.

I do not accept the claim that the United States Government was deliberately involved and there has been absolutely no proof put forward to suggest that they were.

"My experience" with conspiracy theorists as quacks is as follows:

Outlandish claims based on little or no evidence (certainly no hard evidence) - Big Foot, Bermuda Triangle (Fraud), UFOs

Claims put forward by "experts" who have little or no training in the topic they are researching. (UFOs, Bigfoot)

Claims put forward in which the facts are changed to fit the theory and not the other way around. (JFK assassination)

Generally poor research and a tendancy to "take the claimants' word for it" with little or no proof. (Bermuda Triangle)

People with a world view which is so paranoid to be almost delusional. (UFO, Alien Abduction crowd, JFK crowd)

Theories which give the government way too much credit. (UFOs and JFK)

Theories which fail to take into account the more people involved in a cover-up or crime the less likely it will hold up. (Again JFK, UFOs)

Theories which link people to events that have nothing to do with them. (JFK, 9/11)

Conspiracy theories are often put forward so people can comfort themselves after a traumatic event or make money(ex: selling books and doing the talk show circuit).

I must stress - I do not believe the US was involved in the attack on itself. That is all I am required to say.

You must prove they were - I am not required to prove they weren't.

I'm sorry but this is the way rational thinking works.

My calling them quacks is admitted opinion, not fact. Conspiracy theories tend to arise where there is no proof and take on a life of their own.

If you want to question me on specific conspiracy theories feel free although it may take us way outside the boundries of this discussion forum. I'll leave that to Greg.

[Mr Farrius]

There is another conspiracy credited to the U.S. as well. Apparently, both scientific and economical evidence proves that there is indeed a cure for cancer, AIDs, and other numerous deadly diseases. However, the economy might collapse if there was such a great shift in industry as there would no longer be more research in this area. The government is withholding such treatment as a secret, and accessible only to the extremely wealthy. I find it that this actually makes sense considering that America is such a technologically advanced society, with a corrupt government that cares nothing for the individual citizen.

[Hugo]

a corrupt government that cares nothing for the individual citizen.

You could level that charge at any government in the world or history, without exception. However, the US is one of the "least worst" in this regard. As I've said before, those who think that America is a corrupt and evil empire merely demonstrate that they have no idea what a corrupt and evil empire is.

[Mr Farrius]

Why don't you respond to what I actually had to say?

[Moderate Centrist]

"Apparently, both scientific and economical evidence proves that there is indeed a cure for cancer, AIDs, and other numerous deadly diseases"

Mr. Farrius

I'll take a crack at responding. I think this claim is ridiculous but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt -

What scientific and economical "evidence"

Let's have it!

[Mr Farrius]

Read some science magazines. I won't find you evidence for it because I could care less if you believed the claim or not. I merely introduced the theory for the sake of contribution.

[Moderate Centrist]

Well I think it's theory at best.

I don't believe it and am not overly interested enough to research although I'll see what I can find.

[Mr Farrius]

I guess I had a change of heart.

http://members.lycos.co.uk/tiot/cons/consa...es/pharmcon.htm

[Moderate Centrist]

Hi Mr. Farrius,

Sounds like paranoid delusion to me.

However, getting back to the 9/11 issue - I say again I believe it was irresponsible for the 5th estate to give creedence to this foolishness.

[Mr Farrius]

Sounds like paranoid delusion to me.

Ever wonder why Magic Johnson (a former NBA basketball player that was HIV +) lives so long? He has the cash. Cash=access to treatment.

[Lost in Manitoba]

I tried to find the show where I heard it, but no luck. It was in the past year I heard on CBC RadioOne's news show 'The Current' an article about a conspiracy similiar to the events of 9-11.

I believe the project was called 'the Woodlands'. It was a plan proposed to JFK, in where a commercial airliner was to be 'hijacked' by 'Cuban terrorists' and crashed into some buildings. Of course it was to be set up by the CIA. It was believed that this would generate such popular outrage that there would be nothing to do but go in and take over Cuba. JFK wasn't remotely receptive to the idea.

Fast forward this idea 40-50 yrs. I'm not saying I believe this but it's worth looking at. For a group of men who would do anything for their country, that believe that committing no crime or sin is too great to ensure the exsistance, safety, and prosperity of their beloved nation. What is the lives of a couple of thousand people compared to the 'new american century'?

Like I said, sorry about not finding the source on this. If anyone has heard of this or finds a link, let me know.

[KrustyKidd]

One of the reasons I give credence to the storey of Jesus is because when he arises from the dead he is a good guy. He doesn't go out and kill those who screwed him around and set fire to the world in retaliation, he is just peace itself. An example. If he were a character in pretty much any fable or legend he would have risen from the grave and scorched the earth with fire and brimstone while turning people into blocks of salt and such. Then put it our with a flood or two.

What does this have to do with conspiracies? Lots.

You don't fake something like this so that you can bomb a bunch of mud huts and fire some beard seeking missiles at a tribe of stinky, pre-medival woman haters.

Second, you don't kill three thousand of your own so that you can go over to Iraq and spend two or three hundred billion on a rebuilding project.

You don't do something like this so that you can spend a few nail biting weeks wondering if some action will get approval at the UN ......

You bomb, and bomb, and bomb until there is nothing left of whatever it is that you wanted then take it over completely with no pretentions of humanitarian aid, rights, constitutions or whatever.

And everybody says you did the right thing because you don't wait, you do it while sentiment is on your side. Completely the opposite of what happened.

[Moderate Centrist]

"Cash=access to treatment. "

Mr. Farrius

No arguement that people with cash can do better than people without. This is NOT equal to a cure for anything however.

I'm not saying the United States isn't MORALLY capable of

a 9/11 event. I'm saying it is impossible to pull this off and get away with it and furthermore there is no reason to conduct such an opperation.

Conspiracy theory offers a very poor outlook of the world - one based on paranoid delusions and not reality.

[Black Dog]

Just say for example you were the Bush's prior to 9 11. you need money for something. Do you think Bin Ladens would make GW sit in a waiting room while they did a credit search on him? Of course not. These people have the highest of prefferential treatment.

Bush's family ties with the bin Ladens go back to the former's dalliances in the oil industry (the late Salem bin Laden-Osama's brother- was a partner in Bush's failed company Arbusto Oil). James R. Bath, a friend and neighbor of Dubya, was used to funnel money from Salem to set up George W. Bush in the oil business, according to The Wall Street Journal and other reputable sources.

Letting them go is not too far to reach as well. Why hold a business partner whom you have a trusting relationship with. They needed to get out before all hell broke loose in the States (as many feared) with them being the target. As a friend, GW expidited this. Most likely with the understanding that if they could help further they would be able to answer questions 24/7 via phone.

So it doesn't concern you that mere hours after the largest single act of retail terror in history, even as hundreds opf suspects were detained and investigated, the family members of the man believed to have perpetrated the act were exempted from a ban on air travel and whisked away? How naive can you get? "Sure we have you here now, but I'd hate to inconvinience you. Do you mind if I give you a dingle later on and you can tell me what you know about your brother killing 3,000 civilians. Great, thanks."

I think the fact that the man who is suppossed to be leading the "war on terror" has deep (and well-documented) personal and financial connections with the blood relations of known terrorists, as well as known sponsors of terror (the House of Saud) should be of great concern to all citizens, don't you?

[KrustyKidd]

Bush's family ties with the bin Ladens go back to the former's dalliances in the oil industry (the late Salem bin Laden-Osama's brother- was a partner in Bush's failed company Arbusto Oil). James R. Bath, a friend and neighbor of Dubya, was used to funnel money from Salem to set up George W. Bush in the oil business, according to The Wall Street Journal and other reputable sources.

Yes, we all know that as it is an itregal portion of the conspiracy discussion. Thank you for mentioning it again though.

As I said before it is not difficult to understand that the Bin Laden family had an alibi; they were making money, a lot of it at the time this occured, well known by the higher echelons of business and government I would doubt that their loyalty leaned even remotely towards Fundementalism. As well, you don't think that they had already been looked at very closely in the decades before while OBL was fighting Americans in Somalia and elsewhere? I have no doubt that they were wisked away for their own protection knowing that they left hundreds of billions of dollars as an unofficial bail bond should they need to be asked or required co-operation of any kind.