There are many different mutually contradictory but often simultaneously believed 9/11 conspiracy theories. In general, though, they attribute the destruction of the WTC to demolition charges planted inside the buildings. Some of these crazy people believe that planes were flown into the buildings (they differ on whether these were the actual commercial aircraft lost that day or not), some believe that these were just holograms, some believe that it was military planes firing missiles at the towers before crashing in to them (I swear I'm not making this up), but in any case I believe the planes/holograms/drones/missiles these idiots believe in were allegedly just a distraction and not the real reason the towers fell.
And it collapsed exactly, I’ll repeat EXACTLY like the ones we are told collapsed due to impact of aeroplanes. If you’re ok with that, then fair enough
Well, the fire weakened the supports just like it did in the twin towers, so it isn't surprising it fell in the same way.
Also, my students (who were not alive in 2001) tell me the planes were CGI'd into the picture and the television was on a 7 second delay. Then I tell them my cousin and her husband were in the street and watched the second plane hit. So. Yeah.
Also, I got 20/20. I know way too many conspiracy theories.
The towers didn't collapse because they were hit by airplanes (they took time to collapse) They collapsed because of the damaged the crashes caused to the integrity of the buildings. WTC 7 collapsed because of being hit by the debris from the Twin Towers collapsing. Steel loses structural integrity well before its melting point and is especially problematic in tall buildings.
I am so glad that Al Gore and others have decided to "promote" the theory that the climate changes since it has been doing so for the past 4-and-a-half billion years.
Sure, and cars speed up and slows to a stop all the time for years, but that one time it goes from 70 to 0 mph in a half second by hitting a brick wall still totals it.
I've never heard of anyone arguing that "climate change" is a hoax, since part of the definition of climate is that it changes. The alleged hoax is man-made global warming, which has been switched to "climate change" to distract from the fact that global temperatures didn't increase dramatically, as predicted by global warming "experts" like Al Gore who said NYC would be fully underwater by 2016.
It was changed because some areas of Earth might become cooler even though the planet is warming up, plus there are numerous other effects on the climate patterns.
yeah but isn't many of these actually TRUE??? Labeling it and putting this next to actual conspiracies is just plain deceptive, almost as if you are promulgating your personal opinions and lies as opposed to the truth.
Nope on both. The CIA never tried to kill Castro with a exploding cigar. They tried to kill him lots of other ways but the conspiracy about the exploding cigar is unproven. They did not introduce crack into the black community. They funded Contra b/c they were trying to overthrow the revolutionaries in Central America. Internal memos showed that some in the CIA were aware of the drug smuggling but there is little evidence they directly dealt crack (or paid people directly too) and they certainly did not introduce crack.
The Jesus lived and married theory is properly a heresy rather than a conspiracy theory - the conspiracy theory is that the subsequent bloodline was important in European history and secret organisations existed to protect it/ the belief.
The Castro and Epstein ones are the two most plausible of the lot, but there is no good evidence for either theory. Rumor in one case and conjecture in the other.
CIA tried to kill Castro several times but the exploding cigar was only proposed and never attempted. CIA proposed a lot of things, including staging false-flag attacks on American citizens in order to blame Cuba and justify an invasion.
Nope. All still a conspiracy. They funded the people who helped spread it (Contra) but not because they were trying to spread crack/coke. It's because Contra were fighting the revolutionaries in Central America. The conspiracy is they intentionally spread it throughout the black community and there is no evidence to back this up.
I always keep an open mind for this stuff. Sometimes governments confess the very things they used to deny and the previous 'nutjobs' are proven right. Look at the state of the topic of UFOs, Pentagon itself is talking about them and by looking at the various documents they revealed to the public one can easily tell they deliberately tried to deny and debunk the people who tried to tell their experiences/thoughts. It is clear that official declarations do not automatically mean true, so they are not 100% trustable. That is not to say that we should believe claims without evidence of course, hence the keeping an open mind thing.
"One of these conspiracy theories is actually true - but I won't say which one!"
It's important here to distinguish between rumours and conspiracy theories. The modern usage of the phrase "conspiracy theory" basically means 'something which I and other intelligent people can see is crazy but other people believe to be true'. Hence something will be dismissed as "that's conspiracy theory".
A conspiracy theory may be true or untrue, it is no more likely to be true or untrue just because there was a conspiracy.
Finally I think this common understanding is quite dangerous. If someone actually were wanting to commit a conspiracy then it becomes almost impossible to allege it without looking like a lunatic - perfect for any real conspirator.
Its funny how many of these 'theories' are facts and mounds of evidence support them while other wild theories are thrown in. In other words, Elvis probably died in 77 but the global warming official stance is a conspiracy in and of itself. The moon landing and 911 official stories are certainly bunk.
This way, theories with little evidence are bulked in with theories which are likely true and supported by much evidence. This is an association lumping to discredit likely theories.
It's like saying 'Christians, conservatives and terrorists,' like they all three go together.
The person who got shot in Dallas was shot for trying to investigate in to a countries nuclear powerplant, for if this powerplant could be used for building nuclear weapons and if so try to stop it. This country did not get happy about it and thus shot him over it.
The CIA introducing crack into African-American communities in the United States is absolutely true, as evidenced by admissions by politicians who worked with many racist politicians.
The worst 9/11 conspiracy theory I ever heard was by a roommate many years got that there was no one in the Towers when they collapsed.
Having grown up in NJ, I knew a handful of people who made it out safely, and one who didn't. I really wanted to pop him in the face for spreading such a stupid conspiracy theory, but thankfully remembered he was my friend and used that leverage to debunk it.
It's definitely true that airplanes destroyed the Twin Towers. The more interesting theories, in my opinion, are about who did it. George Bush? The Vatican? Israel?
It’s beyond fishy mate. Reported by the BBC as collapsed before it actually did fall, in an identical manner to the other two buildings, which had superheated jet fuel penetrate the core building supports. Apparently. And 7 tumbles like a replay. Nothing to see here. I don’t suppose there was a spare plane that might have failed to hit its intended target anywhere? Can’t leave all that thermite lying around eh…
The BBC just made a mistake in reporting—shocking, I know.
WTC 7 received catastrophic damage from the collapse of WTC 1; that, coupled with the fires it started, made the building so obviously unsafe that firefighters deemed it a lost cause and pulled out efforts to put the fires out (hence the infamous Larry Silverstein "pull it" quote which I never understood as conspiracy fodder as why would he admit to demolishing them in a TV interview).
Note how almost all the footage of WTC 7 you see from that day showed its undamaged north face; meanwhile, the other side had a long hole cut from nearly top to bottom, with smoke pouring out. The Deutsche Bank Building suffered a similar but much smaller hole from the collapse of WTC 2.
Whats funny is no one wants to talk about how FDR did in fact know a Japanese attack was likely and needed it to get into the war. However he, and all his staff, assumed the attack would be on the Philippines. It was the location, and not the attack itself which caught him off guard.
The Japanese did attack the Philippines though. They semi-simultaneously attacked various places (Singapore, Hong Kong, Philippines etc.) alongside pearl harbour
I totally thought the guy's name was Ebstein, not Epstein (the Ebstein-Barr virus must have gotten to my brain). It'd be nice if this was an accepted answer
I hate how people spread lies about 9/11. You can obviously see that it wasn't a planned detonation and they are almost disrespecting all the 3000 people who died that day.
Yes, the best way to know the truth is to watch YouTube videos made by average Joes. Experts only want to trick you because they want to feel smart and special and feel like only THEY know the truth. Reality is, uneducated and untrained people are just as good at everything—that’s why I got my eye surgery in the alley behind Montana’s from a guy named Star for $18.
WTC 7 cant be just by fires it was truly a great steel structure and couldnt had go down that quickly and that easy, and please I have seen so many demolition videos and that looks exactly like that you can get an actual office building that big to go down with just fire you need more
Well that one journalist reported that he found contacts that said the CIA facilitated the contra in Nicaragua to sell cocaine/crack to American cities to raise money for the fight against communism. All his contacts seemed to disappear though, which made the journalist depressed enough to shoot himself in the head twice.
I used to think more information was almost always better. I've changed my mind. It's too easy now for people to create and spread absolute trash. And AI will only make it worse. We're doomed.
I can believe Pearl Harbor and World Trade Center partially, fully believe Roswell, Area 51, John F. Kennedy, Fidel Castro, Jeffrey Epstein, Crack, Rothschild, Adolf Hitler, Kurt Cobain
Crack, Castro and JFK I fully believe it was made by CIA, I dont think the planes were that powerful but they should have at least do something, Rothschild sounds fully true, Epstein didnt kill himself, Aliens definitely exist, and Hitler wasnt going to kill himself come on he could have easily escaped. And obviously a world leader that wants to get more popular is going to portray himself as a hero
fdr may not have had foreknowledge of precise battle plans, but he intentionally pursued policy guaranteed to force japan into a war footing with the US
the CIA from their own internal memos did try to assassinate castro with an exploding cigar. see operation mongoose
bill gates has expressed interest in putting nano-chips in vaccines, whether he has actually accomplished it is another matter.
i doubted the CIA crack thing, but as i've read more over the years, it actually is beginning to seem less far fetched
rothschild... i don't know but is it far fetched to believe that elite bankers would like SOME measure of control over the world? and use money to try to achieve it?
no one doubts climate change. gore pushed anthropogenic global warming and conveniently invested in a company that you could buy carbon shares from, the way sinners could once buy indulgences. in addition the entire institution of peer review has been corrupted by this heavily government funded "science"
I looked at my genealogy, saw the Jesus and Mary Magdelene thing, and now, not believing that, wonder if I exist or not. If I do, who are my great-great-great x 100 grandparents?
Most of these are conspiracy facts. BTW, those who see the negative issues with fluoride generally do not deny it mitigates cavities but argue, overall, its dangerous and the negatives far outweigh the positives.
The fluoride conspiracy theory always seemed hilariously silly to me. how does putting some relatively innocent chemical in public water supply brainwash people? the upper limit for healthy fluoridated water consumption (according to the USDA) is 10 liters of water, about three times as much as you're supposed to drink in a day, so you'd really have to chug quite a bit more than usual to have any health effects, lol.
And it collapsed exactly, I’ll repeat EXACTLY like the ones we are told collapsed due to impact of aeroplanes. If you’re ok with that, then fair enough
Also, my students (who were not alive in 2001) tell me the planes were CGI'd into the picture and the television was on a 7 second delay. Then I tell them my cousin and her husband were in the street and watched the second plane hit. So. Yeah.
Also, I got 20/20. I know way too many conspiracy theories.
It's important here to distinguish between rumours and conspiracy theories. The modern usage of the phrase "conspiracy theory" basically means 'something which I and other intelligent people can see is crazy but other people believe to be true'. Hence something will be dismissed as "that's conspiracy theory".
A conspiracy theory may be true or untrue, it is no more likely to be true or untrue just because there was a conspiracy.
Finally I think this common understanding is quite dangerous. If someone actually were wanting to commit a conspiracy then it becomes almost impossible to allege it without looking like a lunatic - perfect for any real conspirator.
This way, theories with little evidence are bulked in with theories which are likely true and supported by much evidence. This is an association lumping to discredit likely theories.
It's like saying 'Christians, conservatives and terrorists,' like they all three go together.
anyways back to my bunker
https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/Mary-Magdalen
https://www.smmschool.org/
https://stmarym.org/
Having grown up in NJ, I knew a handful of people who made it out safely, and one who didn't. I really wanted to pop him in the face for spreading such a stupid conspiracy theory, but thankfully remembered he was my friend and used that leverage to debunk it.
He now no longer believes that.
WTC 7 received catastrophic damage from the collapse of WTC 1; that, coupled with the fires it started, made the building so obviously unsafe that firefighters deemed it a lost cause and pulled out efforts to put the fires out (hence the infamous Larry Silverstein "pull it" quote which I never understood as conspiracy fodder as why would he admit to demolishing them in a TV interview).
Note how almost all the footage of WTC 7 you see from that day showed its undamaged north face; meanwhile, the other side had a long hole cut from nearly top to bottom, with smoke pouring out. The Deutsche Bank Building suffered a similar but much smaller hole from the collapse of WTC 2.
Get yourself on YouTube and watch some demolition videos.
Doesn’t mean that’s certainly what happened btw, but it’s hardly disrespectful to victims to believe their killers may have escaped justice.
WTC 7
Cospiracy theory? That's the straight out truth lol
7 % of the land mass but more than 50 % of the UFO...
Crack, Castro and JFK I fully believe it was made by CIA, I dont think the planes were that powerful but they should have at least do something, Rothschild sounds fully true, Epstein didnt kill himself, Aliens definitely exist, and Hitler wasnt going to kill himself come on he could have easily escaped. And obviously a world leader that wants to get more popular is going to portray himself as a hero
the CIA from their own internal memos did try to assassinate castro with an exploding cigar. see operation mongoose
bill gates has expressed interest in putting nano-chips in vaccines, whether he has actually accomplished it is another matter.
i doubted the CIA crack thing, but as i've read more over the years, it actually is beginning to seem less far fetched
rothschild... i don't know but is it far fetched to believe that elite bankers would like SOME measure of control over the world? and use money to try to achieve it?
no one doubts climate change. gore pushed anthropogenic global warming and conveniently invested in a company that you could buy carbon shares from, the way sinners could once buy indulgences. in addition the entire institution of peer review has been corrupted by this heavily government funded "science"