this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
190 points (95.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35027 readers
1322 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

When Al-Qaeda themselves claimed responsibility, even with overwhelming evidence aside? Why were so many people still reluctant, I was researching about this stuff and was shocked to see people who I respect a lot believe in this

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Also the usual pattern (seen in many countries/empires, not just USA) - since civil war war-profiting (closely related to the two parties & why the switch happened) the industry was always hungry and in need of a good loosing-ish war (or - only short periods without a war).

It always follows the same pattern --> need for profits/power expenditure rises --> if public is (fuded) on board, great, if not, we need a terrorist-like attack, seemingly unpreventable yet utterly publicly show before it happened.

Like in WWII, USA had stakes on both sides, but also not 'as big' of a military budget as they could have. The problem was that the public was super against entering the conflict (80~90% against, this is the time when the civil war was well within lining memory with soldiers and widows on proper military pensionsv still alive, regular parades, etc). So for the first time ever they decide to put all their ship-eggs in one Pearl-basket & advertise that move a lott, how they did that, where they did that (how much time they are gonna wait there, lul), and what defenses are there, how the seamen were sent home etc. All under the disguise of showing their military power to Japan (that's like exposing your balls to an enemy that is already attacking you). Ofc the attack successfully happened, propaganda machine spun up (still today we get movies about that, 'the horror'), the public option switched over night and politicians could hike the military budget substantially. (Movies that we don't get is about what/how USA did to japan - like how they killed more civilians with regular carpet bombing per day compared to the killed in blasts of atomic bombs - the most destructive single air attack in human history ... and USA dropped about 4× as much bombs total in Vietnam)

The same with 9-11, public is anti war, you have the two towers and movies detailing how easy it would be to crash a plane into specifically the towers. Or Vietnam proxy war, which lasted for so long that the public turned back against it (hippies) and government had to demonize them (the ridiculous anti weed laws/enforcement, "satanism", etc).

Funding and assisting a foreign terrorist group for profit is shockingly common. Sometimes you even have to manufacture a new group because the existing don't suit your needs.

Oh, and the atrocities compared are always like x killed in domestic attack, xxxxxx killed in the foreign bombarding campaign. When public opinion isn't that big of an issue a smaller trigger point is needed - usually USA sends literal military personnel into sovereign foreign countries & when the invaded county returns fire in the invading force USA counts that as an act of war (huh, I guess technically that is correct).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Sort of like how Israel has been funding Hamas?

I'd be willing to entertain the 9/11 theory of the US funding Al-Qaeda except for two facts:

  1. Al-Qaeda was sufficiently well-funded and supported without US involvement
  2. I saw that video of Bush hearing the news and sitting, indecisively and in shock. The man was not that good an actor; he was pretty obviously at a complete loss about how to react.

It requires more suspension of disbelief that the head of state would be utterly unaware of such a program or plan, and if he was aware, he'd certainly have a better photo-op reaction planned than sitting there like a stunned cow for several minutes.

Al-Qaeda was absolutely a product of US intelligence agencies, but not to this end. We created them to cause grief for the Russians, and once spawned, they grew their own agendas, some of which were turned against their creators. I doubt any US agency had any knowing involvement with 9/11. What we did have is indirect involvement, and a shit-ton of hubris.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

RIP Trevor Moore

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

People are emotion driven. The idea of a conspiracy is somehow more soothing to them than a chaotic world where no one's really in control. Also many people are, frankly, fragile cowards, and the idea of admitting they are wrong is too much for their ego to take.

People's beliefs are social. Once they're in a social group that believes something, they're very unlikely to change. It's not even wholly conscious. But if someone's in conspiracy circles, abandoning the beliefs means losing all those friends. That feels like Danger to the brain, and most people will reject it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Because the collapse of the towers looked like a controlled demolition. It wasn't, but it looked like it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

For me its Tower 7 falling. Nothing hit it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Sometimes there’s enough ambiguity around an event that any attempted exact reconstruction will likely be wrong in some details. Some people can’t accept that ambiguity, and take the lack of a single, definitively-proven version as evidence that the “real” version was suppressed.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (9 children)

I've argued with multiple people who swear the war in Iraq was over 9/11.

People are just fucking stupid

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Reading all the comments here, I think that it is wild that anything other than what the US says is a ‘conspiracy theory’, what I can gather from this is that no one probably has any concrete idea about who was responsible, so there might be different views, but apparently any other view other than what the US tells you is a ‘conspiracy theory’

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Operation Northwoods

Wtc7 a building not hit by a plane collapsed. With there being a video of the leaseholder saying they brought it down on purpose because it was badly damaged. Controlled demolition takes weeks of planning.

Plus the BBC reported on wtc7 collapsing too early, the building was still visible in reporters background

It is the only day in history that 3 steel buildings collapsed because of fire

Firefighters reported explosions going off in the basement just before the plane hit the building

Reports of pools of melting iron which allegedly can only be caused by thermite. Thermite would also be the reason why there was so much dust

The Pentagon; no good footage of the plane hitting. All the camera footage of surrounding business have been confiscated

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

https://www.facebook.com/rallyforjustice/videos/wtc-owner-larry-silverstein-gave-order-to-pull-building-7/1313503455744806/&ved=2ahUKEwjgpeCxsqqEAxXs9wIHHRVgDdcQo7QBegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2RmpBAKFmsL8MRumJ8Un3H

https://benthamopen.com/DOWNLOAD-PDF/TOCPJ-2-7/&ved=2ahUKEwi7xo3QsaqEAxUJ7AIHHYKSCZgQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0-5vVgUAuvoyabZ6icDfJ_

[–] zarkanian 6 points 6 months ago

Reports of pools of melting iron which allegedly can only be caused by thermite.

You can only melt iron with thermite? What?!

Thermite would also be the reason why there was so much dust

Yeah, why else would there be dust...around a gigantic building that collapsed.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

For those who actually believe in these theories or are uninformed about them, consider reading this, which is backed up by sourcing and debunks every common 9/11 theory. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/9/11

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

"Controlled demolitions take weeks of planning" because under normal circumstances, the risk of waiting is not that high. That doesn't mean that subject matter experts aren't capable of making an intelligent plan in a short period when a building is catastrophically damaged in heavily populated area where waiting can very easily result in more damage and more risk of casualties.

As for "melting iron", if you're talking eyewitnesses before the demolition, they have no idea what was melted. If you're talking after, no shit they used demolition-grade explosives. It was a fucking skyscraper in the middle of a massively populated city that wasn't stable. It had to come down.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›