IT IS DONE! (9/11 commission report)

[Gokuma]

Piezo said:

The whole part about the planes being swithced doesn't make much sense, and the article doesn't provide any theories as to how that could have occured. They would have to have landed, all the while staying on radar. Then all of the hostages, or victims really, would have to have been rounded up and loaded onto the replacement plane, which to me is just silly.

Maybe they just gassed the people and buried them in a mass grave somewhere. I thought air traffic controllers did lose track of things.

[The Ultimate DooMer]

myk said:

Being that indeed the war on terrorism has to do with a lot of other things than terrorism itself (mainly oil and the power balance in the region where it is,) it's not surprising if people attempt to put together the facts that lead to things that are pretty evident on a global scale. Of course, the facts are specific, thus pinpointing them is bound to fail unless you have enough information. That's where you can draw numerous theories, most of which are wrong in their gist, but possibly close to the truth in some respects that are being left out in other accounts. The point here is to determine how the power relationships that lead to the events work. Then you can get an idea of "responsibilities".

[/b]

It also depends on how each person views the world and the human race. If they believe that humans are good-natured and caring, therefore wouldn't knowingly kill a few thousand others just to make a quick buck, then they will refuse to believe that there was anything sinister about it. If, on the other hand, they believe that humans are greedy and selfish in nature, then they will think it possible for someone to commit an act like that for personal gain (particularly if they believe that money = power and big business rules the world). Hence all the various ideas about what really happened. (some of which are far-fetched, but others are somewhat closer to reality)

Not exactly; with a definite lack of support from its populance and other countries it does not happen. And that needs some sort of pretext or justification to be strong enough. Be it true or false.

Yep. If they made an unprovoked attack on a country then it would be seen just like Hitler's invasion of Poland and would probably start World War III. But if they had a legitimate-sounding reason (whether it actually is or not is another matter), then it looks like they're going for a good cause, rather than their own bad one. As they got the 'war on terror' excuse, and because world opinion was split right down the middle for the Gulf War II, they got away with it. Had it been seen as unprovoked by everyone (like Hitler's), it could've been a different story.

[Gokuma]

The Ultimate DooMer said:

[/b]It also depends on how each person views the world and the human race. If they believe that humans are good-natured and caring, therefore wouldn't knowingly kill a few thousand others just to make a quick buck, then they will refuse to believe that there was anything sinister about it. If, on the other hand, they believe that humans are greedy and selfish in nature, then they will think it possible for someone to commit an act like that for personal gain (particularly if they believe that money = power and big business rules the world). Hence all the various ideas about what really happened. (some of which are far-fetched, but others are somewhat closer to reality)

Here's a thought. Humans basically start neutral and can go either way, good or evil, decent respectful person or jerkass. You've got people fucking everyone because they think they're basically evil anyway and don't deserve better while you got others assuming people are good and being too trusting.