Next Level BS #2: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, From a Journalist's Point of View

On this, the thirteenth anniversary of the attacks on 9/11, we tone things down just a bit with an exclusive interview with acclaimed broadcast investigative journalist, George Knapp. Being no stranger to all types of government conspiracies and coverups, while also being a highly award-winning investigator, George provides a unique and seldom heard perspective on 9/11 conspiracy theories. We close the video with some powerful, rarely-seen footage of the attack on the World Trade Center.





Follow Next Level BS on Twitter @theNLBS

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Check us out on DailyMotion

Follow Next Level BS on LockerDome

Or, just go to the website: Next Level BS Website







Next Level BS is a production of The Above Network, LLC, with the collaboration of AboveTopSecret.com. The views expressed in the videos, video comments, and social media pages of Next Level BS are those of the producers and host, and don't necessarily reflect the views of AboveTopSecret.com or The Above Network, LLC.

Knapp makes some good points.

Thin evidence.

But always beware and question government.

And the databases are here to stay !!

Well done, Joe.

Your interview with Knapp was interesting and food for thought, but the montage afterwards has hit me hard indeed.

a reply to: theNLBS

Why didn't you ask him about Architects and Engineers for Truth? Ask him what reason a group of professionals would have for taking the stance they have?

In his last remarks he said the biggest price we paid was the loss of our civil liberties and the full development of the surveillance state. You could have asked him if that was the conspiracy and if 911 could it be investigated in reverse, taking the PA and moving backward from that point.

Unfortunately I see some missed opportunities for questions.

a reply to: theNLBS

Wow...

Great job on a) getting the interview with Mr Knapp, and b) on the show in general.

The footage at the end is always a gut check, even for those of us who are not citizens of the United States of America. Even if you believe some of the more outlandish tales told about that day in history, if you dial all that back into your brain, and forget it for a moment, and just WATCH video like that from the scene... there is something so haunting about it, watching all these people coming to terms with the events, not yet knowing the true scale of the destruction and death surrounding them.

A thousand blessings for the dead, and for those they left behind.

The 'dancing Israelis' ? someone knew something..a lot of people knew something. Building fit for the purpose?
Okay then, above all do we really need this now..today, after all Obama first in office said, "it's time to move on" when his later reiteration of the 'patriot act' clearly states to all and sundry that time has not moved on. Other stuff, the surveillance plan as it is today, was already in the can, only the implementation was the problem, Bush achieved that covertly and then again. So frankly OP, stuff this thread too much water under the bridge.

a reply to: theNLBS

Nice job until no mention of Dr. Judy Wood's research.
Dr Judy Wood

a reply to: Bilk22

There's only so much that can be done with limited time. And as George Knapp said, he's not expert on many of the various theories -- but is an expert on how/if a journalist might approach them.

As a conspiracy theorist I don't buy a lot of the extreme conspiracies of 9/11, like no planes hitting the towers, or a tactical nuke being used under the towers. Seems like you are painting with a big ass brush to be calling extreme bullsnip on me. I guess all the architects and engineers that don't buy the official story are also on your list of extreme bullsnip.

I like George, but he could not have been more vague, why doesn't he feel like wtc 7 is a problem?

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: Bilk22

There's only so much that can be done with limited time. And as George Knapp said, he's not expert on many of the various theories -- but is an expert on how/if a journalist might approach them.

He claimed to have read "physics papers", so my question was in response to that. Those "physics papers" were obviously written by experts in the field, so why not ask him why a large body of experts have taken a vastly different viewpoint on this event?

9/11 is like any other important/pivotal event in human history.
Because of its dramatism, emotions and underlying layers of complicated affairs it's an instant food for conspiracy theories. Basically psychology 101.
What Knapp does is use layman's terms and description to quickly and swiftly get the point across. Excellent interview.
I also like your angle in this, Joe. You point out - along with Knapp - where the REAL possible conspiracies may be hiding and where we should really put a spotlight of scrutiny.

From reading a mass of material regarding 9/11, including conspiracies about that event, I always felt the very same feeling I get when analyzing UFO topics - often we get so high into convoluted and improbable plots of conspiracies that we don't see the very real, very down-to-earth things that are happening by proxy or as a direct result of the basic events, things that are the REAL DEAL.

Also, I think that many of these stories insult people who died there, their families and all of the people who tried to help. One of friends of my mother had a son who died there, in the first tower that got struck.

She told me: "Like we weren't slapped in the face enough by the horror of that attack, by the loss of our loved ones, by the absolute disregard for human life on the part of the attackers, we have to endure a stream of useless and insane theories made by people who really should stay silent, people who just totally defile the memory of the ones who died in these attacks and the ones who tried to help them. At the very least, give us peace for we will never forget what happened there and will never really stop hurting".

I would like to see an effort to investigate the UA Flight 93 deal...

Building 7 has alot of oomph as a conspiracy theory, but I could never get past how the 93 deal went down...

and then use that as the rally cry for war?

to this day, having watched the coverage on that terrible day, I could never come to grips on how a jet that size, nosedived into the Pennsylvania countryside, with a first reported 8 mile debris radius?

YMMV, for me... I still wait for the truth on how that went down.


Thanks NLBS, thanks Mr Knapp, questions still remain, someday the truth will surface, I hope it's soon

a reply to: theNLBS

I'm so impressed that I am toungue-tied at the moment. But if you are still interested in criticism?

Joe, thanks for setting ATS apart.

GBA

a reply to: theNLBS

Thanks Joe, the Mr Knapp interview was an excellent addition to this, another fantastic installment.

Q: What proof is there that a bloke with renal failure, affiliated with the Bush bloodline, living in a cave, orchestrated all of this mayhem on this fateful day?

We've all read and researched the same crap and I am not convinced, more so now than ever.

Norad standdown.

Pull it.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: Bilk22

There's only so much that can be done with limited time. And as George Knapp said, he's not expert on many of the various theories -- but is an expert on how/if a journalist might approach them.

That is not how I see it, journalists no matter how good, can so often be in limbo because of the machinations of governments. 'The Guardian's favourite maxim is about stories, 'they would not touch with a bargepole' They hold many documents that 99% of the people will not see, at least in somebody's lifetime. This thread is not to deny ignorance, frankly it's weird.

a reply to: theNLBS

I LOVE this.

I agree, 9/11 is what it was,
and the conspiracy is in how we have given away many of our rights in the name of security.

If I could give you 100 flags, I would.
Instead, I am going to share this on Facebook.

a reply to: smurfy

I don't think I understand your point… if there is one.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: Bilk22

There's only so much that can be done with limited time. And as George Knapp said, he's not expert on many of the various theories -- but is an expert on how/if a journalist might approach them.

He`s contradicting himself.

He says he`s not an expert on it, but seems to know the evidence is flimsy and thinks to know 9/11 isn`t a conspiracy. So he bases his opinion on limit research and knowledge.

It would be better if next time you guys ask someone who has enough knowledge about the subject.

We got no more from this as, we have someone who has looked into it somewhat and decided to ignore the many anomalies in this matter, and just go with was presented by him by the government.

He also tries to downplay the 9/11 conspiracy as being harmful, by making the suggestion it`s harmful for other conspiracies. That`s trying to influence people on the subject.

I got the feeling he was working by an agenda to downplay it all.

Tough crowd this evening!

*munches popcorn and watches*