posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:46 PM
Last night on SBS TV in Australia - 18th Jan, a show called "September 11 Didnt happen".
In contrast to the title, the show was firmly in the view that 9/11 was caused by terrorists, not the American government. I also think this is what
happened, especially considering the informative forum article looking into the plane that struck the Pentagon.
Having said that this is a quick list of some of their "proof" to debunk conspiricy therists:
1. Only one expert called to explain anything, in this case saying the plane that hit the Pentagon crumpled from the nose to the wing, the wing then
folded back and the whole plane melted. No pictures of wreckage and other proof like eye witneses.
2. If you ask people a question and then say - "if you wonder about this question, search more for the answers yourself" - are easily manipulated
and are lible to believe anything. I say the opposite is true, why would they ever think that?
3. That digging up dirt on the people who write about the conspiricy theorys means the theorys themselves are automaticaly wrong if they can find any
dirt. Does that mean If I ask a criminal "Is the sky blue" and they reply "yes" means the sky is not blue, according to this program thats
exactly what it means.
4. By putting an offputting tune everytime the conspiricy therarist tried to talk, and a more normal tune when one of their experts were talking.
5. Information on the Internet is wrong and if it is on a website people will believe it is true even if it is not. I say people who use the internet
to find answers to questions are more informed and less likely to believe what they have read. Just because it is printed in a newspaper doesnt
automaticaly mean it is true.
6. At one stage it was aledged that 4,000 Jews did not turn up to work at the twin towers because they had prior knowledge. Their proof that this
was not right was to say that 400 jews died on September 11 so they had no prior knowledge. By this "proof" find an obscure country where nowone
died on Sept 11 meaning they must have known and were behind it all. Obviously this is all rubbish.
7. Interviewing a woman whos son died on Sept 11. All she said was she would not wish this on her worst enemy. How is this proof one way or the
8. In the books that were written about the conspiracy of 9/11 they were able to find mistakes, which to them meant the whole book is wrong. Obvously
you look at the whole book and decide, not because it has one or two mistakes.
9. At the very end they mention the Madrid train bombings as "proof" again that 9/11 was commited by terrorists. How is this proof? Two different
events years apart supposidly commited by two completely different terror groups.
In all it made me almost reverse my thoughts on the matter and decide there was a conspiracy, the exact opposite they were trying to prove - with no
evidence to give when there is plenty, and saying conspiricy therisists must be lying because - well we said so, It must be true you can believe us
with no proof given.
I have never seen such a load of rubbish in my life.