English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

But not evil enough to hunt down and kill all the conspiracy theorists?
You would think if the government is evil enough to kill 3000 innocent people, that a few more would make no difference, right?

2006-11-28 00:00:33 · 12 answers · asked by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 in Politics & Government Politics

Trey and Matt know what's up!

2006-11-28 00:11:29 · update #1

12 answers

whenever I hear a conspiracy nut, the immediate and most striking mental image that immediately jumps into my mind, is that of "warren" in "there's something about Mary",..... "Beans and Frank!"

Matt Stone and Trey Parker were correct, 1/4 of Americans are retarded.

2006-11-28 00:08:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

I think there are 2 different thought processes on this. The first is the lunatic fringe. These are the people who see conspiracy in everything the government does and all they need is a little innuendo to start the process. The second are the ostriches. These are the people who feel safer believing the government did this because they cannot accept the real reality, which is the fact that there are people in the world who want to destroy us. If it was the government then just exposing them will stop it from happening again. However, if terrorists did it, then we really aren't safe and it can definitely happen again. Either way it doesn't matter, the people who believe in the conspiracy are beyond reason because they will not accept any evidence when it is counter to their theory, even when it comes from eye witnesses. Because of this bias logic is wasted on them. I don't believe in the conspiracy, but I do believe there are unanswered questions regarding the event. We will never know the answers to these questions because they have been lost forever in a sea of ridiculous allegations which have blurred the facts for too many people.

2006-11-28 08:26:17 · answer #2 · answered by Bryan 7 · 3 0

My theory is that it's denial.

If the government caused it, then an election, or a few impeachments, will solve the problem.

If genocidal Islamic radicals caused it, we are facing a long and costly war to defeat the ideology that spawns such attacks.

It's EASIER to believe Bush did it - because the problem is easier to solve.

These conspiracy folks are crazy, of course. But this is the only semi-rational explanation I can come up with.

2006-11-28 09:34:33 · answer #3 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1 0

Its called Denial.

Many Muslims can't accept that their "brothers" could do this and so find it easier to say it was the USA or the "Jews".

Liberals and Lefties just love conspiracy theories! As do sad friendless people who sit on the PC all day discussing if Elvis is still alive or aliens really landed at Roswell.

2006-11-28 08:56:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

- Mass communication has improved tremendously
- Some people hear things and don't do proper research before formulating a personal opinions
- It seems over time the US goverment has tested the publics trusts levels and it is very difficult to regain the trust of hundred of thousands of people. When people don't trust you and you hide things, then theories stick better...
(samples of trust being broken: Watergate, Kennedy assassination (with holding information about it), senators being bribed, intern scandals, poor spending, poor money management)

2006-11-28 08:17:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

For me personally it is because to some the ends always justify the means and human life means nothing to this government.
If they wanted to avenge 9/11 they would have actually hunted down Bin Laden and I dont want to hear they cant because they are more than capable of doing it.
I dont want to hear that he is probably dead or incapacitated, this is the man who according to our government is responsible for the worst, most violent terrorist attack on US soil and we do not get him? Sorry just doesnt work for me.

So obviously I know we think differently about this matter, I am not asking you to agree with me of course, I am just trying to explain the thought process on it.

2006-11-28 08:05:04 · answer #6 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 0 3

People do not really think that.
All the postings you see regarding this issue are coming from one or two fundamentalist Muslims who are trying to deflect their guilt in order to fix their public relations problem.

2006-11-28 08:35:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

They tweak facts in weird ways to make their case. I found out how they twist and squiz facts to make crazy theories. Please read some of my findings here.

Some bloggers and 911 theorists say hijackers are found alive and links to BBC article titled ‘Hijack 'suspects' alive and well.’ Note the quotation around ‘suspects.’ This article is about possibility of mistaken identity of hijack suspects. It appears hijackers may have stolen someone else's IDs and passports. Criminals stealing IDs? Hard to believe? BBC article ends by saying “FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.”
You can read the entire article here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1...
You’ll notice in the middle of this BBC article titled ‘Hijack 'suspects' alive and well’ it also says in bold face ‘Mistaken Identity.’
Conspiracy gurus never even finished the entire article it appears.

Building 7 had a giant hole stretching over 10 floors and its picture exists, but conspiracy theorists probably don't want you to see since it dampens their 'demolition' theory. See the photo here. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm....... Conspiracy theorists do not discuss this massive structural damage, but talk about ‘pull’ quote that is very vague and arbitrary.

911 conspiracy theory claim Rumsfeld said flight 93 was shot down. On 9-11-01 it is Cheney who mistakenly believes 2 planes were shot down by Airforce during the attacks. Cheney have ordered to take down any hijacked planes that may be heading for a target after WTC was hit. Rumsfeld tells Cheney he knows one plane is down, but can’t confirm who brought down the plane (flight 93). This episode was explained in PBS’s Frontline: Dark Side. They had obtained actual transcript of their conversation. You can see this transcript here http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/... Cheney/Rumsfeld conversation is shown in ‘part one’ at beginning of documentary.

Rumsfeld was in Pentagon when it was hit and helped rescue crew which was caught on video. Why would he or others order missile to hit it when they're in the building. Several light poles were knocked down in parking lot. Did single missile swerve around in mad circile before hitting pentagon? Or may be planes wings took out bunch light poles. They also have photos of plane parts, engines...etc.

Some claim debunking911 websites are debunked and links to infowar website, but there they only discuss ‘pull’ comment again which is very vague and arbitrary and they do not discuss other countless flaws in 911 conspiracy theory. They do not explain the fact that many experts have explained ‘molten metals’ and several structural engineers and experts have disputed Steve Jones’s (physicist and not structural engineer) theory.

Debunking911 websites were never debunked, because 911 theorists never explained why things in debunking911 websites are wrong. There are just too many odd assumptions in these 911 theories. 911 theorists do engage in what we now call ‘cherry picking of information’ in order to complete their picture of reality.

Why would government kill 3000 of it own citizens to make case for a war when they can just generate evidence of WMD using intelligence which is so much easier? The US went to war without UN security council clearance anyways. If we can go to war whenver we want to why kill 3000 people? Just for the fun?

2006-11-30 19:59:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

all democratic governments capable doing 9/11 wt it citizen
but to do it on other nations there much has better benefiting

2006-11-28 08:20:53 · answer #9 · answered by kimht 6 · 0 1

Stephanie - Don't get all Machiavellian on us. Just admit that you are unhappy with anything that has not been created by liberals. You have an acid tongue and need to lighten up or get some... or something to get in touch with your feminine side.

2006-11-28 08:08:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers