It’s a bit shocking to me when I see people online putting 9/11 conspiracies in the same box as “MAGA” conspiracies (for lack of a better term, sorry).

For reference, I was 24 in 2001 living in central NJ. Even without social media or fake news websites or what cable news has become today, I have vivid memories of people having the firm belief that there was something up with the attack on 9/11. Was this just my social circle?

Jet fuel melting steel beams was one of the more fringe and unfounded (and quickly debunked) ideas but the rest of everything on that day was questionable. Tower seven falling, the missing plane debris at the pentagon and central PA, the military / president not responding to known threats, if a person with limited flight time could hit a tower, the fact that Bush attacked a country that had nothing to do with the event, and so much more are still, I thought, reasonable questions - especially when looked at together.

This is not about rehashing each theory. Or maybe it is? Have I missed that everything has been debunked?

I mean, I still believe 9/11 was an inside job or at least high level officials, including Bush, were aware it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it. I thought this was still a common opinion of most or many Americans over the age of forty.

  • N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    There was a conspiracy involving 9/11, but it had nothing to do with secret thermite demolition or Israel or holograms or any of that nonsense. People were rightfully questioning how these hijackers were able to enter the US and stay under the radar while training for and executing the attack. We now know that Saudi officials helped them.

    It’s also worth noting that the Bush family has very, very deep ties to Saudi Arabia, which may have affected the investigation and how information concerning Saudi complicity was handled.

    • ɔiƚoxɘup@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      This exactly. It represented such a huge intelligence failure that it’s very hard to believe that it wasn’t allowed to happen to create an argument for war, that and it kinda rhymes with another (arguably preventable) event in history that was used to create a pretext for war… Pearl harbor. IMHO that was justified though, Nazis being pretty bad and all.

      Also tower 7 seemed very sketchy, and I never believed that there was a whole plane’s worth of rubble at the Pentagon.

      The Patriot act was also a product of that, which if you’ll recall is part of what Snowden uncovered.