So almost 20 years after TWA Flight 800 crashed, we hear about retired government investigators who were deeply involved alleging the government covered up evidence that supported conspiracy theories that existed at the time. When the event happened, there was an instant and fullblown investigation that lasted 4 years. There was also a massive effort to recover the craft and reconstruct it. That was for a single jet incident that resulted in 230 deaths. When 911 happened, just confining things to the twin towers, two jets were involved, two massive buildings, several thousand people dead. There was by comparison almost no investigation. No reconstruction. No stopping and interviewing Bin Laden relatives who were in the country, etc. In fact there was a great battle by W and Cheney to prevent an investigation. And when they couldn’t stop it, they stacked the deck, and only testified together and off the record, all in the name of “patriotism and national security”. And then used the event to implement the Patriot Act, what I think most people agree is about as un-American and totalitarian as it gets.
Furthermore, at the time of the TWA incident, people had the usual knee-jerk reaction to tar and feather anyone who didn’t agree with the government line. And yet here we are, 20 years later, and someone then knew something that’s only coming out now.
My point is, I think any reasonable person would be right to be suspicious that something was not right about 911.
There was by comparison almost no investigation [of 9/11].Investigation began immediately afterwards. The "official" investigation, named The Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, officially began on November 27, 2002 and went to July 22, 2004. The final report of TWA 800 was 341 pages. The final report of 9/11 was over 500 pages. So your claim is simply wrong.
No reconstruction.That's because anything that could have been reconstructed either disintegrated or was consumed by the fire--that burned for 12 weeks!
No stopping and interviewing Bin Laden relatives who were in the country, etc.100% wrong. They were interviewed by the FBI] and not allowed to leave until the FAA reopened airspace. And since the FBI determined they had nothing to do with the events, and since people with attitudes like yours might want to lynch them for nothing more than guilt by association, I don't blame them for wanting to return to their home country. Your false claim is also contradictory. If Boooooooooosh had something to do with 9/11 as the troofers claim, then bin Laden's relatives had noting to do with 9/11. The claim about bin Laden's relatives implies bin Laden's involvement. Which is it? Boooooooooosh or bin Laden?
And yet here we are, 20 years later, and someone then knew something that's only coming out now.If they have evidence, let them present it and see how strong it is. The NTSB clearly said of TWA 800, "The source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty..." They then listed some possibilities, but their wording seems to leave open other explanations. If strong enough evidence points to something, then so be it. If not, we may never know with 100% accuracy the ignition source of TWA 800.
My point is, I think any reasonable person would be right to be suspicious that something was not right about 911.No. Only a person with a preconceived political position who allows their political beliefs to dampen their critical thinking ability would be suspicious. The facts are not with you.
No reconstruction.One other point about reconstruction. Reconstruction of a crashed aircraft takes place to help determine the cause[es] of accidents. Since the initial cause of TWA 800 was not known, and since its pieces landed in the water, it could be reconstructed for that purpose. But since 9/11 was not an accident, and since all reasonable and rational people know what happened, due to eyewitnesses, audiotape recordings from cell phones of passengers onboard and videotapes from the ground. And what happened was 19 Islamofascists dispatched by bin Laden hijacked the planes and purposely crashed them for purposes of jihad. Thus reconstruction wouldn't really be necessary, even if the pieces were still capable of being reconstructed.
Actually, the remains of TWA 800 were reconstructed. It was part of one of the most expensive accident investigations in history and the reconstructed remains are still being used to train accident investigators to this day.
One of the theories I find most laughable is that a missile was fired at the aircraft from one of our warships. As a Navyman, I can tell you that with the accountability for weapons being as strict as it was then and still is now, a ship making port which was short a missile in it’s magazine would provoke a LOT of questions. Further to the point, there’s no way…and I do mean NO possible way…a missile goes off the rail on a warship without the entire crew knowing about it.
It just doesn’t happen. Period.
Military people are not the mindless automatons a lot of people here seem to think we are. We see things and put stuff together. Had something like the above happened, somebody would have pieced it out and spilled the beans by now.
Personally, I have no comment on what happened on that day.
I do think that the government did a lousy job (to say the least) investigating the most horrid attack on our country.
This video is quite interesting which shows a pretty popular view amongst many (though maybe not most) Muslims:
Osama Bin Laden Dead, 9-11 and Islam, Islamophobia for Dummies, Hamza Yusuf - YouTube (1:30 -10:30 is the relevant portion)
I dont really agree or disagree with much of the stuff, but many (but not all) of their claims are well referenced.
Until I properly invistigate 9-11, I dont like pointing fingers at who is responsible
Accusing someone of killing 3000 people is serious and requires strong proof
Cuthbert-My point is, I think any reasonable person would be right to be suspicious that something was not right about 911.This Forum is becoming infested with reasonable thinking people like yourself. It really is. It's becoming more and more like the comments section in the Washington Post under News Articles. One tries to have a reasonable discussion with the likes of you. Try to put forth reason and facts, but you folks just keep coming back. This 9/11---TWA800 thing of yours simply tells me that any assumed or actual knowledge you may have about anything in life was obtained through rote means.
Actually, the remains of TWA 800 were reconstructed. It was part of one of the most expensive accident investigations in history and the reconstructed remains are still being used to train accident investigators to this day. One of the theories I find most laughable is that a missile was fired at the aircraft from one of our warships. As a Navyman, I can tell you that with the accountability for weapons being as strict as it was then and still is now, a ship making port which was short a missile in it's magazine would provoke a LOT of questions. Further to the point, there's no way...and I do mean NO possible way...a missile goes off the rail on a warship without the entire crew knowing about it. It just doesn't happen. Period. Military people are not the mindless automatons a lot of people here seem to think we are. We see things and put stuff together. Had something like the above happened, somebody would have pieced it out and spilled the beans by now.One missile theory has it being Iranian agents going after an Israeli jetliner and hitting TWA 800 by mistake. Can't imagine we'd cover that up, however.
Accusing someone of killing 3000 people is serious and requires strong proofWell now, since Al Quiada bragged about and was able to back it up, and since the people who were known to be flying the aircraft were known Al Quaida operatives, I can see where objective people would be inclined to point the finger at them....especially when they publicly pointed the finger at themselves.
One missile theory has it being Iranian agents going after an Israeli jetliner and hitting TWA 800 by mistake. Can’t imagine we’d cover that up, however.One missile theory has it being Iranian agents going after an Israeli jetliner and hitting TWA 800 by mistake. Can’t imagine we’d cover that up, however.I KNOW the U.S. would never have covered THAT up.
You remember when you were a kid and you got caught doing something you weren’t supposed to do? You would come up with a story to cover yourself. It always had lots of details and reasons why A led to B led to C and you weren’t able to get in by curfew when in fact you were just having fun with your friends and decided to break the rules. If you looked at the story you made up and compared it to the truth which one was simpler? Occam’s razor. Unless there is damn good evidence to the contrary the simplest explanation is usually where the truth lies. So unless these claims are accompanied by something more than accusations, given the choice between a center fuel tank explosion or some missile firing followed by an elaborate cover up which managed to silence everyone involved Im going with what’s behind curtain number one.
You remember when you were a kid and you got caught doing something you weren't supposed to do? You would come up with a story to cover yourself. It always had lots of details and reasons why A led to B led to C and you weren't able to get in by curfew when in fact you were just having fun with your friends and decided to break the rules. If you looked at the story you made up and compared it to the truth which one was simpler? Occam's razor. Unless there is damn good evidence to the contrary the simplest explanation is usually where the truth lies. So unless these claims are accompanied by something more than accusations, given the choice between a center fuel tank explosion or some missile firing followed by an elaborate cover up which managed to silence everyone involved Im going with what's behind curtain number one.Funny, your post is a direct contradiction to your signature: For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong. And that's what I don't understand with so many posters here, how willing they are to go for the simple "obvious" line the government and media has fed us. USA Good, Muslims Bad, Muslims hate us for our freedoms.
My post refers to the tendency of people to think there is a simple way to solve a complex problem like for example using the death penalty to reduce homicide rates or putting prayer in the schools to reduce in school violence. Obviously not every problem is amenable to a simple explanation but if you have two theories to explain a phenomena the one that requires the fewest leaps of faith and the fewest assumptions is usually the one that is most likely to be correct.
No stopping and interviewing Bin Laden relatives who were in the country, etc. In fact there was a great battle by W and Cheney to prevent an investigation. And when they couldn't stop it, they stacked the deck, and only testified together and off the record, all in the name of "patriotism and national security". And then used the event to implement the Patriot Act, what I think most people agree is about as un-American and totalitarian as it gets.Was the Bush Administration's Red Carpet treatment of their friends the ultra-rich Bin Ladens ever explained? Was it every satisfactorily explained why the Bush Administration ignored warnings and refused to take any proactive action on the terrorist front until after a "little" attention getting incident went down - oops - whodda thught it would turn into such a giant attention getting incident. oops again :red: But most important is the question why American had such a hard on for getting into a war that everyone with even a little bit of objective brains - could easily predict would turn into a never ending spiral of violence and war. Do you suppose perhaps this war wasn't as advertised "A war to save us from Weapons of Mass Destruction" ~ but in fact that it was actually about selling Weapons of Mass destruction throughout the world and guaranteeing that the new millennium would bring nothing but unrest and violence throughout the world?
~ ~ ~http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/27/world/middleeast/us-foreign-arms-sales-reach-66-3-billion-in-2011.html?_r=0 WASHINGTON — Weapons sales by the United States tripled in 2011 to a record high, driven by major arms sales to Persian Gulf allies concerned about Iran’s regional ambitions, according to a new study for Congress. Overseas weapons sales by the United States totaled $66.3 billion last year, or more than three-quarters of the global arms market, valued at $85.3 billion in 2011. Russia was a distant second, with $4.8 billion in deals.
HOW WAR MADE THE BUSH FAMILY RICH http://theinternationalcoalition.blogspot.com/2011/06/how-war-made-bush-family-rich.html
Rense.com Cashing In - Fortune In Profits Await Bush Circle After Iraq War By Andrew Gumbel The Independent - London 9-15-2
Dick Cheney: War Profiteer Published on Thursday, November 17, 2005 by CommonDreams.org Questions persist about Vice-President Cheney's role in the ongoing investigation and scandal swirling about the White House. His chief of staff and confidante Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice. Let's take a look at some personal incentives for Cheney's selling war to our country. Cheney has pursued a political and corporate career to make himself very rich and powerful. He is the personification of a war profiteer who slid through the revolving door connecting the public and private sectors of the defense establishment on two occasions in a career that has served his relentless quest for power and profits. As Defense Secretary, Mr. Cheney commissioned a study for the U.S. Department of Defense by Brown and Root Services (now Kellogg, Brown and Root), a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton. The study recommended that private firms like Halliburton should take over logistical support programs for U.S. military operations around the world. Just two years after he was Secretary of Defense, Cheney stepped through the revolving door linking the Department of Defense with defense contractors and became CEO of Halliburton. Halliburton was the principal beneficiary of Cheney's privatization efforts for our military's logistical support and Cheney was paid $44 million for five year's work with them before he slipped back through the revolving door of war profiteering to become Vice-President of the United States. When asked about the money he received from Halliburton, Cheney said. "I tell you that the government had absolutely nothing to do with it."http://www.businesspundit.com/the-25-most-vicious-iraq-war-profiteers/
How dare you doubt the official story! But seriously, to support your points see books by Gore Vidal (Perpetual War) and Greg Pallast (Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Armed Madhouse).
But I don’t see any connection to 9-11 being an inside job to orchestrate a war.
Abdul, I like the linked argument even though I may disagree with some points with regards to claims about what the true nature of Islam is supposed to be interpreted as. I agree that it is likely that most Muslims are moderate thinkers, I don’t make a distinction between a religious interpretation by any one group as any truer or falser than another with regards to correctness of Mohammad’s intent. For example, the statement at the beginning claiming that Islam forbids killing civilian: Quran 5:32, …whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth can easily be interpreted that today’s terrorist acts by some group of Muslims have been justified on the grounds of “corruption in the earth”.
I agree that there is justification for skepticism through what others may consider “conspiracy theories” are relevant because of the nature of humanity to capitalize on any justifications necessary to fulfill alternate goals. Even presuming that Bin Laden was sincerely guilty of all he was accused of, there is just grounds to believe that the Bush administration took a license of opportunity to be just as devious for their own desires. The presumption that one side must be good just because another appears to be evil, is illogical. Only emotional thinking polarizes the reality because our personal bias to see ourselves with distinction from our environment as polar. When I don’t get what I want from my environment, then I perceive the relative injustice against me with respect to the environment. Therefore, I must be “wronged” because my personal needs are always “right” relative to myself.
Conspiracies do exist. To say they don’t presumes that people never collectively act to preserve their own group’s interest nor against those outside the group. Evidence to assure us this isn’t the normal behavior of humans should be burdened by those who deny the possibility of sincere conspiracies.
But I don't see any connection to 9-11 being an inside job to orchestrate a war.Nor do I claim that. I think it was just a little willful ignorance, that got out of hand...
I agree that it is likely that most Muslims are moderate thinkers, I don't make a distinction between a religious interpretation by any one group as any truer or falser than another with regards to correctness of Mohammad's intent.Interesting comments Mr. Mayers. I used to think this as well a few years back. But here is the problem. Do we trust those who have studied (and even mastered) Arabic literature-----classical; modern; quranic, pre islamic;---, Hadith (Islamic prophetic Traditions), religious history, etc or Do we trust those who (at best) only know Arabic as a spoken language and cant even distinguish authentic traditions from forgeries. To get a better understanding of what I am saying see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3w_v0aEX38 (this is only a minute long). This applies to all fields of studying. Unfortunately, we often speak before studying. We sometimes just end up making fools of ourselves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b3XR7LdtKo (a comedian documenting what I am saying )
For example, the statement at the beginning claiming that Islam forbids killing civilian: Quran 5:32, ...whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth can easily be interpreted that today's terrorist acts by some group of Muslims have been justified on the grounds of "corruption in the earth".This interpretation has been rejected by all scholars of Islamic studies (including even non-Muslim professors of Islamic Studies) http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/ An interesting note on these terrorists http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxiR27qmWw4 (2:00- 3:00; this is the same video I gave before but this time slice is the relevant portion) I think we should all choose the academic and scholarly consensus rather than trust a few random people who cant even speak classical arabic properly