Conspiracies abound

Self | 11/12/2001 | Lawdude

[lawdude]

After reading a few hundred posts on the FR forum today I can only say, FR has turned into a "Conspiracy Theory Haven". People have been posting the most OUTLANDISH comments with absolutely nothing to support them except that a "Government Spokesman" has denied them. I guess that denial is proof in the world of the cynic who is unable to look at information and sift fact from conjecture.

I don't know what caused the crash today. I know for certain I DON'T have enough factual information to even form a reasonable opinion. (Note: the key word is REASONABLE!)

I look at known, objective information which I believe most would accept as factual and add to that pile of info as it becomes available. So far, there is absolutely no, I say again, NO, evidence that the crash was anything but malfunction. Now, a person needs fact to whittle away at that supposition. What FACTS do we have to do so?

Darn little, if any. Let's look-

1) Crashed in Rockaway. Hmmm Normal takeoff route. But one of many.
2) Rockaway is home of Mike Moran. SO?
3) Some witnesses claim to have heard an explosion...Most do not!
4) This type of airplane is crashproof. BS. Not worthy of comment.
Add others and try to RATIONALLY draw conclusions based on FACT. Not some hypothetical desire to be the one that proves it was OBL beyond a reasonable doubt. You ain't gonna be a hero, chum.

Flame away tin hatters, I can take it. But until I see some viable arguments to prove a conspiracy/terrorist influence, I will believe that a mechanical malfunction was the cause for the loss of 255 + innocent lives.

[dawn53]

Seems to me that at this point the speculations and explanations of a mechanical failure hold no more water than the speculations of a terrorist act.

There are points for both arguments.

So what makes the "mechanical" speculation more valid than the "terrorist" speculation?

[mlo]

This accident was with American Airlines and NYC, do you see even the remotest connection to Sept. 11 and the reason why speculation abounds?

Of course I do. There can be reasonable speculation. What I object to is a certain sort of mindset that thinks they already know the answer and any investigator or official that doesn't back up their little theory is a liar and any freeper that doesn't buy in is an idiot. They are idiots and I have little patience left for them.

[copycat]

For anyone to state that it MUST have been sabotage, terrorists, our own fighters, etc., is a bit irresponsible - don't you think?

In the absense of surety, is it not equally irresponsible to state that it MUST be an accident?

[mlo]

Speculating isn't the issue. It's the people that have already made up their minds.

[copycat]

What I object to is a certain sort of mindset that thinks they already know the answer

Please point to any poster that stated that they KNEW it was not an accident.

[mlo]

In the absense of surety, is it not equally irresponsible to state that it MUST be an accident?

Who said that?

[ImpBill]

I have taken part in and watched the "Forum" for some time now and am saddened to see the tenor and substance of replies to so many threads sink to the level they have. The service this once great forum provided has been diminished almost geometrically. I say this not as a complaint. More just an observation, as I know nothing the JR's can or could have done to keep from what has happened from having happened.

Sad, but almost an inevitable destination considering the manner in which our culture has evolved ... devolved.

[mlo]

There have been many posts on FR, by a number of different people talking about cover-ups, lies, and sheeple. What do you think that means? It is not specualation about the cause, it is the prejudgement that any non-terrorist explanation is a lie. Don't even try to tell me that isn't going on here today. You will just make yourself look silly.

[copycat]

The original post...

But until I see some viable arguments to prove a conspiracy/terrorist influence, I will believe that a mechanical malfunction was the cause for the loss of 255 + innocent lives.

Seems to me YOUR side is jumping to conclusions while our side is merely raising possibilities.

[It'salmosttolate]

Yes I agree, using the word "MUST" is a bit irresponsible.

But it "MAY" have been......

[teresat]

Waste of space...if I am sceptical about everything the media puts out what makes you think I should be concerned about what a guy named "lawdude" has to say?

[dawn53]

Speculating isn't the issue. It's the people that have already made up their minds.

I am one who doesn't believe in coincidences. So in a way, I've made up my mind, and I believe it was an act of terrorism.

HOWEVER, I am more than willing to have my mind changed, if the facts are presented that indicate it was mechanical failure. Until then, I'll keep my opinion, and believe it was a terrorist act based on the evidence I've seen, i.e. place, timing, airline involved, day of incident,parts of airline scattered, etc.

[mlo]

The whole idea that there are "sides" for mechanical explanations or terrorist ones is the problem! I'm on no "side". I'm not offering an explanation for the crash. I will see what the evidence is as it develops. What I'm talking about is people who can't do that, a point you've aptly demonstrated by putting yourself on a "side".

[martian_22]

If you are too resonable you may never know.
Who implants and verifies your reasoning?
Is your article a conspiracy?

[Freedom of Speech Wins]

Way I see it there is no reason to it was mechanical failure at this point.

May be, but let's see some facts and see what is on the voice recorder.

Some of the things sited as evidence of mechanical failure aren't mutually exclusive. They do not eliminate the possibility of a terrorist incident yet, as some seem to suggest.

[spectre]

But it "MAY" have been..

Fair enough.

[anniegetyourgun]

You mean you two haven't figured out that we're all a bunch of dupes, and that W is an evil man bent on marching us into the NWO because he is the anti-Christ? Everyone knows that what happened today must be a terrorist plot that the government just doesn't want us to know about. That's why on 9/11, the President said we are at war. Oh sure, on 9/11 he was willing to come clean. But on 11/12, he's not. It must have taken him a while to get the memo about keeping things from the public. We all know he's just the type to lie to Americans - why, he has such a long track record of it. Obviously, he's another pol just like his predecessor - trying to pull the wool over our eyes. It's all his fault that the FBI and CIA are dysfunctional - but, heaven knows they aren't so dysfunctional that they can't plot against average Americans. That's what they're doing after all. Haven't you been reading the reports of all the doors being broken down of little old ladies with blue hair as they sit quietly in their rockers? And what is W's motive for all this freedom-grabbing, secret-keeping, confuse the masses agenda? I already told you - he's the anti-Christ.

Now get with it you two.....

[copycat]

Some of the things sited as evidence of mechanical failure aren't mutually exclusive. They do not eliminate the possibility of a terrorist incident yet, as some seem to suggest.

That's what I'm talkin about...

[copycat]

It appeared to me that you took a side when you decided to trash anyone who speculated that this was a terrorist act. Will you now admit then, since you claim you don't take a side in this, that it is possible that this crash was the act of terrorists?

[copycat]

PS I will admit it is possible that this was a mechanical failure.