CJ

"P.S. - is there anybody at all on OLO who has been persuaded by James/daggett that the 9/11, Madrid, London etc terrorist attacks were in fact orchestrated by the American government?"

Yes, I'd be interested in knowing that too.

I haven't followed any of the 9/11 threads before, though I had a quick skim of the one you and James linked me to, and I did notice there were others who weren't dismissing the theory out of hand as you were.

What's lead you to feel so strongly against it?

I don't want to do a whole lot of reading on it right at the moment, nor do I want to highjack examinator's thread, but if there's ever another discussion on it I will get involved and follow the arguments more closely.

I'm not totally closed to the idea. When it comes to Bush, Chaney, Rumsfield and co, I'm firmly of the view that anything's possible.

Hi Bronwyn - without wanting to give any oxygen to what is the latest conspiracy frootloops' cause celebre, let's just say that while I certainly don't think the general public will ever know the full story of the 9/11 attacks, that doesn't mean that the evil American government perpetrated them. Contrary to James' bleating, I did read and watch much of the so-called 'evidence' when I first became aware of the conspiracy nutters' claims - and I remain much less than convinced.

I was certainly no fan of the Bush administration, and I opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, that doesn't mean that I've suspended my critical and analytical faculties. Of course, anybody's entitled to express their beliefs regardless of how far-fetched they are, but I object to them using several sockpuppet accounts in order to inundate others with them.

We've had plenty frootloops at OLO who introduce their particular obsessions into any and every discussion regardless of relevance, and the rules about identities and posting limits seem to me to be there to keep them in some reasonable check.

Bronwyn,

In response to your endorsement of CJ Morgan's question "P.S. - is there anybody at all on OLO who has been persuaded by James/daggett that the 9/11, Madrid, London etc terrorist attacks were in fact orchestrated by the American government?"

Here is a link to one of my posts to Ludwig's 'Three Years on OLO' topic that he opened on Thursday 6 November 2008: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2258#49556 I believe it explains my position, or more precisely, why I was prepared to examine the 9/11 events more critically. Such explanation is, I think, at least tangential, if not directly relevant to this topic.

Be careful not to identify what might appear to be my position re 9/11 as being precisely within the terms of CJ's question. It is in my opinion possible for events of the like of 9/11 to one way or another be orchestrated by interest groups within or close to executive government without there existing a 'conspiracy' involving such appointments as the presidency or departmental secretaries. (See this post for a fuller explanation: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166#48920 ) CJ appears to seek to widen the net with his references to the London and Madrid events in association with those of 9/11 in his quoted question. I have not formed any view with respect to them.

Here is my speculation as to the general nature of the events of 9/11: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166#50533

Have I been persuaded by James/daggett ....? Only to the extent that he has posted supporting links, and that he has highlighted areas of seeming inconsistency between official explanations and other believably reliable testimony. Do I agree with his view? Not necessarily. In particular I think it dangerous to rush to judgement with respect as to who may have been actively involved in any orchestration of events. The convincing key, to me, lies in evidence of checks and balances, and standing operating procedures, having been violated.

If Christopher had properly read the evidence as he insists he has, then he would know that one of the reasons that "the general public will ever know the full story of the 9/11 attacks" is that no proper investigations of the 9/11 attacks were ever conducted.

Both the 9/11 Commission and NIST ignored and suppressed vast amounts of evidence which was contrary to the official US Government explanation. This included, as one of many examples I could give, 118 pieces of eyewitness testimony from members of the Fire Department of New York including accounts of often massive, unexplained explosions before and during the 'collapses' of the three towers (http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/Article_5_118Witnesses_WorldTradeCenter.pdf). None of this was discussed or included in the reports issued by the 9/11 Commission or NIST.

The 9/11 Truth Movement, including many who lost loved ones on the day and first responders, many of whom are now dying from the toxic dust they ingested on or after 9/11, want proper explanations and have therefore demanded a new investigation.

However, Christopher is opposed to the demand for a new investigation.

He has shown that, in fact, he prefers not to "know the full story of the 9/11 attacks", but, rather, instead, to trust the word of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice et al, who used 9/11 as the pretext to launch the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan that he claims he opposed.

(tobecontinued)

(continuedfromabove)

Bronwyn, thanks for keeping an open mind and being willing to consider the evidence.

Anyhow, I agree with your suggestion that the discussion continue elsewhere.

One place to continue the discussion is the "9/11 Truth Forum" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=76. However, at 459 posts, being the longest single forum ever on OLO, it is becoming rather unwieldy, so it may be a good idea if someone were to request that another forum be set up.

Other forums at which the 9/11 issue has been raised (or should be raised) include:

"Terrorism and how it affects everyday life and how to stop the flow of terror" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=77
"What do we do about George W Bush?" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2465&page=0
"Bush's democracy of hypocrisy" forum at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8288#133131
"War: not in my name" (now closed) at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8306#130548
"Iraq: 'dramatically freer, dramatically safer and dramatically better'?" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8331#131187
"Australia has no business in Afghanistan" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8338#131439
"Bush's legacy" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8484

CJ, Forrest and daggett

Thank you all for your responses. I'm totally intrigued now. Just wish I had super skim reading powers to get through all the evidence! It would be far too daunting to start from scratch at a 459-post thread, and no doubt numerous links, so I won't be doing that.

I agree, CJ, the whole scenario just seems far too implausible, especially as a straight out conspiracy theory. But there are obviously many inconsistencies that haven't been satisfactorily explained and could quite possibly have been deliberately covered up. So I'm certainly not dismissive of the theory that the government might have been involved in some way. Though of course I'll freely admit I'm speaking from ignorance at this stage, whereas I don't think you are.

I hear what you're saying, Forrest, and understand you're taking a qualified and naunced position. Your specific links were very well targeted and most helpful, thank you. (BTW, I still don't know how to link to specific posts like that myself and have on occasions wanted to be able to. Is there a how-to instruction on the site somewhere? Or is it just one of those very basic skills I still haven't figured yet but most others have?) Good to hear from you again, Forrest. I haven't 'seen' much of you lately, but you were definitely one of the posters I had in mind when I echoed CJ's question!

James, I haven't done so yet, but I will read the link of witness accounts that you sent in your first post. I'm also happy to read one or two introductory or overview type articles if any come to mind. I don't want to wade through whole threads or lengthy documents at this stage, but if you knew of something concise that might help bring me up to speed without involving too much reading I'd be very grateful.

Thanks all of you, Much appreciated.