Any of them could have been pilot error, but with them being Boeing planes I've always suspected mechanical issues. Occam's razor says that a few more Boeing planes crashing is less far-fetched than the official story or conspiracy theories. They were such iconic buildings and it was such a tragic day that society can't accept sometimes shit just happens.

[–] JustSo@hexbear.net 14 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Eh pilots just do that sometimes. Like for example just on that same day someone crashed into the Pentagon. Happens all the time.

[–] happybadger@hexbear.net 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Like you said, on that same day someone crashed into the Pentagon. It isn't even in the same city as the World Trade Centre but we can't accept that sometimes life hands us lemons. The same people who link those unrelated events will also throw in another plane that crashed in a field in a third state, something that happens almost weekly without any of them ever crying "oh noes it's 9/12".

[–] Owl@hexbear.net 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Bullshit, Bush knew the flight paths when he built those towers, he knew they'd get in the way.

[–] happybadger@hexbear.net 7 points 5 days ago

It's a really unfortunate design choice and I see why most other buildings don't use it. Any pilot can easily dodge one skyscraper. Two identical buildings next to each other tricks the the brain, like how you probably only read one "the" in this sentence.

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Some people can't accept it was an intelligence operation. National tragedies are orchestrated all the time and humans feel safe when they can trust their government

[–] happybadger@hexbear.net 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Occam's razor. Orchestrating such a large tragedy would involve so many people, all of them being silenced or keeping it a perfect secret for almost a quarter of a century. Humans feel safe when they can trust their government, but Alex Jones shows that they feel powerful when they can make it the villain in their personal James Bond film and uncover the grand plan.

Accidents happen daily with or without human intervention. Until 9/11, nobody had ever thought to call any of the plane crashes 9/10 or another combination of numbers. They weren't lumped together as a grand conspiracy. They were just unfortunate dice rolls in an absurd world. Even striking a bird can take down a plane, something that happened in that same city with US Airways Flight 1549. Loose bolts, flap settings, software problems- there are so many things that are one or two holes in the swiss cheese away from making a plane uncontrollable. Shit happens.

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That's not how Occam's razor works. Following your application of it, the towers just did that. Even fewer assumptions.

Your argument is nearing circular logic. Either a conspiracy is proven untrue due to its many leaks and mistakes, like the ones I've mentioned - "Do you really think they would make such simple mistakes if they were planning this?'; or it is proven untrue by its lack of leaks and mistakes - "do you really think they could do this and not have someone talk?"
You don't need everyone to be in on it. You need a tight circle capable of manipulating the strings. There will be an outer circle with a somewhat understanding of some parts of the machine and then a bunch of moving parts with no understanding - flight control officer's who had their first day on the job, army officers running the air-drill that day and so on.

Look at Epstein. Look at how many was involved, look at how little slipped out until recently. Look at how what slipped out was treated in popular culture.

The fact is we don't know what happened that day, we don't have the full picture. But with the details we do have available it is clear that the official story is, at the very best, woefully incomplete. Acting as if this was just an everyday possible accident is like falling for the "a security service guy accidentally shot Kennedy" story. It's put out there to make you feel clever for "figuring it out" while not challenging the status quo. Any deeper look makes it obvious that that isn't an explanation at all

[–] happybadger@hexbear.net 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The fact is we don't know what happened that day, we don't have the full picture.

That's the logic you're going off of. You don't know what happened, but there's a bigger picture that must have happened. Any little detail of anything that happened on that day can be free-associated to prove that the bigger picture must exist. Epstein could certainly be described in that grand conspiratorial way, but there's a solid paper trail proving a specific timeline. The public knew who he was for over two decades, he was just a protected open secret because he served a purpose for powerful people. That's no more surprising than Harvey Weinstein and Diddy having full careers.

There is no Jmail equivalent for any of the 9/11 conspiracies, including the "official story". There is no single Epstein email equivalent that shows two henchmen or planners saying "I would like to do terrorism today is now a good time Sent from My iPad" like you can actually point to with Epstein. Such a vast conspiracy would have a vast paper trail coordinating it.

My argument isn't circular at all. It's just materialist. I can point to planes crashing on that day, so the towers clearly didn't "just do that" (reductio ad absurdum). I can point to planes crashing on other days too and don't make assumptions. I wait until the NTSB releases their report before I distinguish between pilot error or mechanical failures, let alone assume that it was some kind of action movie plot. Most people made up their mind that day to suit their own needs. I just look at the facts that would hold up to casual or court room dissection. Planes crash sometimes but flying is still safer than driving.

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That's the logic you're going off of. You don't know what happened, but there's a bigger picture that must have happened.

No, that's the conclusion I came to after looking into the whole thing. Stop condesending those you disagree with and have the assumption that they have the same basic sapience that you do.

Epstein could certainly be described in that grand conspiratorial way, but there's a solid paper trail proving a specific timeline.

There is now. There wasn't when the accusations were first made. There was an arrest and some leaked flight logs.

There is no single Epstein email equivalent that shows two henchmen or planners saying

"The torture video was awesome btw"

I'm not gonna engage with the rest of your text because it's full of the same paternalising condescension. You fling out critique, yet fail to observe yourself.

[–] happybadger@hexbear.net 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

If you're this emotional about 9/11, maybe that's why you need to retreat into conspiracy theories to explain it? shrug-outta-hecks

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

> Be condescending towards someone
> They react negatively
> "Why are you being so emotional?" smuglord

You're defaulting to "lmao triggered" like some random dipshit redditor

[–] chloroken@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 days ago

I don't like the way you post. You're trying to be smart and clever but coming off as belligerent and annoying.