A terrible story? Indeed. True? Debatable. The true story of the events of September 11 2001 is probably not what Fox, CNN, and the US administration would have you believe. In my opinion, one would have to torture the truth out of Dick Cheney using waterboarding techniques. Delicious poetic justice which would probably reveal that the events were fully orchestrated and a fabricated casus belli for our violent and terrorist neighbours to the south.

If you honestly believe a plane crashed into the Pentagon, than I have a bridge in Brooklyn i'd love to sell you.

Good article. Unfortunately, I see the Barking Moonbats have already checked in with their Dubya/Cheney/Rummy were behind it meme. Perhaps Barking Moonbats is too polite. Asshats is probably more appropriate. How do you people make wild accusations with nothing to back it up? There is not one shred of evidence, or at least plausible evidence that anyone was behind this other than OBL & AQ. But then you guys probably also buy into the Charlie Sheen theory that the WTT were brought down by a controlled implosion despite reams of factual evidence that this could not have happened. Scary.

http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/pentagon_hole2.jpg

You believe a 757 fit into that hole? Really?

I believe a plane crashed into the Pentagon. So what can you tell me about this bridge of yours?

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

Try thinking, folks.

The conspiracy theory runs like this:

A tall bearded Saudi in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan did it. He sent swarthy pilots here and they carried out feats of flying which verge on the impossible. Buildings (conveniently insured against just such an event) miraculously collapsed when hit by commercial jets - even one which was not hit. Straight down. Like a planned demolition. One jet evaporated on contact with the Pentagon. Another spread wreckage over an eight kilometre radius, yet purportedly was flown into the ground as hijackers and heroic passengers struggled for its control. A terrorist exercise conducted by Dicky (birdshot)Cheney on the same day, at the same time, involving deactivated aircraft transponders had nothing to do with any of these events. Subsequent acts of invasion and piracy by the failing US empire are purely as a result of these 'terrorist' attacks. Oil and gas from the Caspian basin through Afghanistan is coincidental. Iraq's massive reserves of high quality light sweet crude are also coincidental. Add it up. Follow the money.

Good article. Didn't appreciate or understand the Oliver Stone comment.

Good article. Burgess makes some good points and raises some vaild questions.

To the conspiracy theorists. Believing in these kind of elaborate conspiracy theories is usually evidence (based on my years of teaching post-secondary logic) of lower than average intelligence and an inability to read widely, critically, and carefully. Many of the 911 conspiracy theories are also disturbingly anti-semitic.

Now go away and read Eric Von Daniken and The Da Vinci Code. BYE

I saw bits of the A&E movie the other day while waiting for the laundry to dry and it really didn't hold my interest. I had 2 passes to a preview of Flight 93 and didn't really think about it before I gave them away. I am curious enough to perhaps rent the movie but too often US films handle the enemy du jour as hamfistedly as they did the Axis in WW2 propaganda movies. Now the conspiracy part.

Andre28BC:

Where is that hole on the building? The picture is from the alley between rings C & B and not on the impact wall as is implied. Ironically, the interior location of the hole is often cited as further "proof" it wasn't a 757. Nobody claims an intact 757 made the hole in the picture, the issue is whether or not debris from a 757 could penetrate that far into the complex. In un-cropped versions of that photo the remains of a 757 wheel rim can be seen, but a cropped and misrepresented version is what you linked to.

No "question" on that site is difficult to answer, in spite of the fact they are framed around specifically chosen photos. A good example is:

Not when the selected photos have the lower floors of the building obscured by water from the firefighting operation. That conclusion is similar to a tourist returning from a rainy visit to Vancouver and deciding there are no mountains here because the photos from her trip didn't show them. My favourite question is Number 4:

Ever tried moving a single piece of construction equipment over grass? How about multiple heavy vehicles? The picture supplied with the question simply shows road building and staging area construction. Is there any proof that Rummy made that decision in the first place? Did he get right down in the site trailer and tell the crew exactly what he wanted done? I can picture the scene now:

Superintendent: Mr Secretary I protest! It is standard procedure for us to leave that lawn as is and simply drive all over it until it turns to a swamp at the first sign of rain.

The efforts to cut through the events of 9/11 range from the plausible to the absurd. Was flight 93 shot down by fighters? Were WTC 1,2 and 7 pre-wired for demolition? Was the Pentagon attack a truck bomb? In a manner similar to those who believe fossils are planted by the devil, anything that shows evidence contrary to the conspiracy is decried as "co-opted" or "planted" while completely ridiculous claims are cited as proof. A photo of a hole in the Pentagon Ring C is claimed to have come from where the plane hit on Ring E and becomes fuel for the conspiracy machine by virtue of some photoshop work and a question.

Now, if we accept the premise that it was not a 757, what did the damage to the Pentagon? One of the sites linked by Andre28BC makes the claim is that it was a truck bomb. That is ridiculous as it is accepted even by many conspiracy icons that something flew towards the Pentagon: damaging streetlights and utility poles on the way, ripping out some fencing, hitting a generator and finally hitting the exterior wall of E-Ring. The primary question is what flew into the building, and the damage and debris indicate that it was a 757 or similar size aircraft. How about arguing that it was under remote control like the other planes on 9/11 are claimed to have been? Is that only used when there is actual footage of the plane crash?

Fight 93 puzzles me in some ways.

Camp David, in that northwest arm of Maryland, is protected in part by ground to air weapons.

So Flight 93 makes it from Washington to Cleveland, is hijacked, and makes a hard left turn. Back to Washington it flies over the heavily populated areas of Ohio and Pennsylvania to south of Pittsburgh. The passengers are up there on their cell phones (that seem to be working okay) telling people they have been hi jacked, and hearing about the WTC attacks.
So the military knows this plane is hi jacked. They let it fly over that populated area (which makes some sense to me) then, tho they believe its target is in Washington, they let the passengers do the 'fighting'.
So the plane comes down in the sparsely populated area of south Pennsylvania just before it gets to where Camp David is.

Why not a ground to air from Camp David, rather than leave it up to the passengers and wait until the plane is over populated area of Maryland closing in on Washington?

(I realize it would have been bad pr for the people to be told that the pres or vice pres had ordered the plane shot down...especially that second week of September)

As I say, it puzzles me.

What also puzzles me is a person who can imagine a bunch of sectarian isolates living in wikiups in the wilds of Afghanistan coming up with a conspiracy that threatens the entire civilized world, but cannot imagine a conspiracy by the most powerful men on the planet to get control of the fossil fuel riches of Central Asia.

Absolutely, MacSasquatch. And for some background on the oil situation go have a look at what the Bilderbergers think about the oil depletion that's coming our way in 20 years or so.

Here's another link for conspiracy theorists:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

There are a few points that can be picked apart, but a lot of good questions are asked.

When the WTC collapses huge plumes of dust and debris were spewed upwards. This simply wouldnt happen with a purely gravitational collapse.

http://members.surfeu.fi/11syyskuu/soldier4.htm

http://members.surfeu.fi/11syyskuu/soldier5.htm

http://www.gallerize.com/150%20WINDY%20TOWERS%20OF%209-11%20One.htm

Not quite. The A&E film aired a couple months ago at least. I saw it and liked it quite a bit. I believe it was filmed in Vancouver with a few Vancouver actors.

Conspiracy theories cannot be discounted just because they're conspiracies. They have to be taken individually. There are so many crazy conspiracy theories, to be sure, but that shouldn't discount all of them. Afterall, the official explanation is a conspiracy. A conspiracy is a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act. The planning that went into the unlawful acts by Al Qaeda would constitute a conspiracy by any definition.

There are many proven US Government conspiracies too, such as Iran Contra, Bay of Pigs, etc. These are a matter of historical record.

Anyone who's commenting here and hasn't studied the Northwood's Project is just a little naive babe in the woods.

Go have a look, then come back.

Absolutely right, steerpike.

There's better googling under, "Operation Northwoods."

theres a film on google videos.
Not saying I buy the whole thing....But the questions it raises are verrrrrrrry interesting. Theres also a very good computer simulation of the crash and the hole caused by the "plane".
For those that havent seen it:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

its almost an hour and a half long.

Somebody linked to that video further above. I watched it last night. And I agree it was very interesting. Not saying I necessarily believe its conclusions, but there are tons of questions I'd love to see answered by disinterested parties. I'm sure some of the questions have reasonable answers. Fair enough. But they're still worth asking.

Robert Anton Wilson is alive and well and living on The Tyee. Whee!

You guys are all wrong. The aliens did it. I saw them, aided by Elvis on flight American 11 and the Ogopogo on flight 93. Then J. Harvey Oswald and the Mafia blamed it on Bin Laden before Tom Cruise and Jennifer Lopez's baby could save the day on his space ship from area 51.

-Skull and Bones member # 34564

This is what I was getting at earlier -- there are tons of wacko nut-job conspiracy theories out there, as Tax Cutter 99 lampoons above, but that doesn't ipso facto make all conspiracy theories laughable. Each has to be taken on its own. We can't (or shouldn't) reduce everything to its lowest form. Eighty percent of music and movies are crap, but that doesn't mean we go around saying all music and movies are crap.

In the case of 911, there are simply too many questions. If some choose to buy the party line about all this, thats up to them...(I have a border collie who loves to herd things)
But a lot of folks are questioning the actual facts as well. Such as, the government knew this was coming. The hole in the pentagon? The missing wreckage? How many people made money off these crashes?
The list is long. Asking questions is good.

9/11 is not the first time that the leaders of a government used a major incident to blame supposed enemies and consolidate power:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire

Sure, Bush is no Hitler, but it's interesting to see how history tends to repeat itself.

Perfect Stan, but I don't know why I can't seem to get anybody interested in googling "Operation Northwoods." It's almost an exact template for a possible conspiracy regarding 911. I've brought it up before on other threads. So I suggest again: Go have a look.

Briefly it's about a conspiracy in the American military to create all kinds of havoc in the United States, including killing people (blaming it on Cuba),in order to have a good excuse to attack.

This is not conjecture or rumour. It's a proven and well known fact. A conspiracy!

Obviously it never happened, but for those who just can't imagine that an American government would consider doing such a thing, it's very instructive.

One only needs to listen to the news of the day and the downing street memos to accept that they would do that...Bush wanted to paint a plane with UN colours, have it shot down and declare it an act of war.As well as confirmation that the occupation of Iraq was already a foregone conclusion, before diplomatic talks were exhausted.
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/
Its just amazing to me that so many people want to look the other way with all this info coming out.

Right at the begining of Loose Change (link above) Operation Northwood is mentioned.

I read the Operation Northwood page on wikipedia its very interesting.

Its also interesting to note that on 9/11, when most of us were still in shock, still trying to digest what had happended, Donald Rumbsfeld, by 2:40pm, was already trying to warp 9/11 into an excuse to invade Iraq:

That's exactly what I was going to say, stan. I Googled Operation Northwoods as soon as you wrote about it, Truman Green. It's very interesting, indeed. And it was talked about in the video. The similarities between 9/11 and Northwoods are eery. However, it's still circumstancial evidence which doesn't prove anything. However, it should make you sit up and delve deeper into the questions just to find out for sure if there was an Operation 9/11 in the works.

Wow. Truman, whoa. Just followed instructions and Googled Northwood. Urgh.

After a particularly nasty mosque bombing that occured recently, my partner turned to me and said, "Bush did that."

I'm not questioning that comment today. The Knights of Malta scare me.

We will probably never know the whole truth about 9/11, much like certain details of WW II have been kept hidden, to this day, under the Offical Secrets Act of various nations. And sometimes official paperwork goes missing, leaving only a few eye witnesses to be discredited. Once these witnesses have died, there is no one around to refute these happenings and history is twisted to suit those in power. Just look at the number of "historical experts" who deny that Holocaust could have ever happened, even though there are still survivors around.

Okay for all you conspiracy theory junkies do some google searches starting here,purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html and here, tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html I guess science wasen't your best subject. Oh well go light up another fat one.

Interesting simulation, i am so glad people are actually studying the event! It seems like the general public lost all interest in learning anyhing new about 9/11 after about the first 48 hours.

Its interesting that the simulation claims the body of the airplane did esentially no damage, just the fuel. Yet airplanes brought down the world trade center - even tho they were designed for just slightly smaller planes. Was the diff in fuel that relevent? from withstanding impacting to being completely turned into dust?

Interesting stuff!

One thing we learned from 9/11: no more need to do those fancy demolitions of old hotels and stuff with hundreds of bombs and dozens of cutting charges. Just light a deisel fire on the top floor, let it burn for 2 hours, and the whole thing will collapse into a pile of fine dust.

Flight 93: If you'd like to do your own thinking.

1: Look at photos of the crash site. Note the size of the area burned.
2: Look at photos of other crashes of planes with a similar fuel load
3: Look up info on how modern air-to-air missiles work - specifically the affect on planes with wing-mounted engines.
4: Draw your own conclusions

I was not aware of all this debate around the veracity of 9/11 events until I read Steve Burgess' review of ‘United 93’ and the resulting Tyee debate. If watching 'Loose Change' doesn't get the conspiracy theorist in you riled up, I don't know what will.

There are some amazing combinations of co-incidences that strain credulity. However, I believe it would be impossible to keep quiet the number of people required to carry out such a combination of actions, short of buying into David Icke’s ‘out-of-this-world’ conspiracy theories.

Curious how the Pentagon, a full four and a half years after the event, suddenly deems it prudent to release "security camera footage" of the Pentagon impact.

Pffft!

Talking about this 911 conspiracy stuff to a friend the other day and I told him a saying from the 70s he had not heard:

"Just because you are paranoid, it does not mean they are not out to get you".