Why do people use "conspiracy" to attack alternative 9-11 theories if the gov't story is a conspiracy theory?

Question

I've listened to both sides of this debate and the official 9-11 theory involves a conspiracy that required a guy in a cave to coordinate a plan with multiple other people taking place thousands of miles away in secret. That is the definition of a conspiracy theory too. The FBI still doesn't even say Bin Laden did it on their website. So aren't these two sides (there's really more than two theories but this makes it easier) just debating the likelihood of either conspiracy theory?

Answer 1

The propagandists attempt to dismiss the reality that 9-11 was an inside job in the only way they can -- that being to dismiss the whole concept that the government pulled off a horrific conspiracy against its own people in order to rally support for an otherwise stillborn political agenda as being merely unthinkable, crazy and the ideas of "kooky conspiracy theorists." Of course, those propagandists must know the truth or they would simply analyze the data and the evidence in a calm and coherent manner. This is never done and is never allowed by the mainstream propagandists. The very job of these propagandists is to make sure that the real conspiracy is never presented to the people in an intellectual manner.

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." -- J Edgar Hoover (Former head of the FBI)

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.” - David Rockefeller

"The easiest way to gain control of the population is to carry out acts of terror. The public will clamor for such laws if the personal security is threatened." -- Joseph Stalin

Watch 9-11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=9-11+mysteries&total=636&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Answer 2

They are called conspiracies because all the theories involve some kind of sinister, evil conspiracy. Usually ending with Bush rubbing his hands together in a dark room and laughing evilly about all the oil he's going to steal.

Osama bin Laden publicly said he was responsible for the attack. The government doesn't need a conspiracy when they have someone who will take the blame all by themselves. Unless people think bin Laden works for the US government. I have read many "alternative" theories about 9/11. Most sound scientific and reasonable, but don't hold up under close scrutiny. A few are simply too outlandish to give serious consideration. So far, the "theory" that makes the most sense is the accepted one. That bin Laden and al-Qaeda pulled off the unthinkable, and after ten years of trying, finally brought the WTC down.

Answer 3

Well whatever your position on 9/11, the fact remains that within 2 weeks of other major disasters, there was a formal investigation announced. Pearl Harbor, JFK, the space shuttles, hurricane Katrina--all within 2 weeks, most within a week. It took 411 days for there to be an "official investigation" into 9/11....an event that killed over 3000 innocent people, in broad daylight, on American soil, with all the cameras rolling. 411 days!!

Forget about that though, take a look at what was spent on the effort once it finally got rolling vs. something like, say the Clinton Administration's screw ups.

Cost of investigating the Clintons for Whitewater and semen on the dress of Monica?......about $65 million

Cost of the 500+ page 9/11 Commission's report?.....about $15 million

Comparatively speaking, something is wrong here folks. It's kind of tough to believe that the facts have been completely fettered out for $15M. In fact, it's REALLY tough.

And so, we're left to the confusion and fear of not knowing the truth--exactly the state that governments and terrorists want us to be in. Propaganda is a powerful thing in the hands of people that know how to use it--that's been proven over and over. Next to organized religion, propaganda has killed more people than anything man has ever invented.

There are a LOT of unanswered questions about 9/11 and anyone that thinks otherwise has had WAY too much Koolaide. Americans have the freedom to ask questions and every American should until the truth is revealed. It hasn't been so far....so keep asking.

Answer 4

"'ve listened to both sides of this debate and the official 9-11 theory involves a conspiracy that required a guy in a cave to coordinate a plan with multiple other people taking place thousands of miles away in secret. That is the definition of a conspiracy theory too."

A conspiracy theory is a theory that a given explanation is false, and an alternative explanation, the conspiracy theory, is provided. You obviously do not understand what a conspiracy is.

"The FBI still doesn't even say Bin Laden did it on their website."

The FBI is an internal organization, to my knowledge it doesn't operate outside of the US borders, the CIA does. And if they put it on their website, would you be more inclined to believe it?

Just because an alternate theory exists doesn't put the first one in jeapordy. There's massive amounts of evidence to support the government's explanation, including intelligence reports from various world governments detailing Bin Laden's motives.

Answer 5

While Bin Laden and others did conspire, they have made no effort to cover up their actions, have admitted to doing it, and applauded the results. I don't think most people consider it a "conspiracy theory" to claim that someone who admits to doing something actually did it.

Of course, the inside job believers will claim that Bin Laden's admission was either faked or a lie along with all other evidence linking him and Al Qaeda to 9/11, which in their minds would make both equally "conspiracy theories".

Answer 6

Conspiracy Theories are fairly easy to identify. They feature, at thier center, of course, a Conspiracy. They offer conjecture in lieu of proof, and refer to any contrary evidence as a product of the Conspiracy.

The 9/11 'truther' theories fit that to a 'T.'


There is, of course, no doubt that the 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy - there were certainly more than just the 19 hijackers involved, and even two people can consitute a criminal conspiracy. However, that's where the resemblance to Conspiracy Theories ends. The conspiracy in question has run it's course, and those investigating it have no need to blame said conspiracy for lack of evidence of it's existance - since there's plenty of evidence, and since the conspiracy in question has run it's course, and /couldn't/ supress evidence anyway.


I'm sorry if this disapoints you, but you can take sollace in the supposition that I could be a member of the 9/11 conspiracy tasked with discrediting anyone who comes near the truth.

Answer 7

Ah both are conspiracies it's true, but one is an explanation of what actually happened based on mounds of evidence including that guy in the cave confessing and the other is an idiotic theory. We don't use "conspiracy" to attack those alternatives to what happened on 9-11, we use "theory" to attack them.

Answer 8

The "official" story does, of course, involve a conspiracy of 19 hijackers plus all the people who provided them with support.

However, the alternative theories of 9/11 involve what to me are way-out theories that the U.S. government allowed the attack to happen or aided it, or that explosives or incendiary devices were planted at the World Trade Center because a plane full of jet fuel wasn't enough to bring down one of the towers.

A hallmark of these theories is that there were deeper, hidden currents to everything, and that the official explanations are hiding things from us. These alternative theories tend to be more complicated as explanations than what we already believe to have been the truth. Many of these explanations tap into the widely-held distrust of government that is typical of many Americans.

About 800 years ago, a monk known as William of Occam came up with a good principle for deciding on what explanation to choose out of multiple possible explanations: if you choose the simpler explanation, you are likely to be correct. This principle is widely used in science and it has worked for as long as it's been used. Applying it in this case, one could argue that it's simpler to believe that a bunch of terrorists who don't like the U.S. coordinated an attack than it is to believe that the U.S. government brought down the towers or whatever wild theory you want to hold.

A modern-day corollary to Occam's razor (as the above-mentioned principle is known) is that, if you have to choose between a wild conspiracy theory and simple sloth and stupidity for an explanation, go with the sloth and stupidity and you will always be right. In other words, the U.S. government did not bring down the towers, it was simply incompetent in detecting and preventing the terrorists' plans.

Answer 9

little more than ad hominen fallacy attempting to bring discredit on the questioner by stereotyping them.-- a dishonest tactic which is as obvious as it's tired - to detract from the fact is the official account is a cover up.
It also means that a certain shallow type feels immediately superior to the "conspiracy theorists" without actually having to be superior. so it's a ball that type particularly likes to pick up and run with ...and run with...and run....

Answer 10

If they can't figure that out and that happened in the last decade what about what happened 2000 or 1500 years ago.
More proof of things that cover will remain covered until the lord himself reveals the truth.