What is Digg?527 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -53/+189Strawmen are usually fairly easy to knock down.
- MarkusBlair, on 10/12/2007, -33/+119You can't debunk a conspiracy theory, you can only become part of the conspiracy!
- aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -56/+114Yes I'm sure those evil Jooos and Bush got to the BBC....right?
You are proof that 10% of the population is retarded. - L0phtpDK, on 11/03/2007, -40/+92Bottom line guys.... Do you SERIOUSLY believe that the current administration is capable of scheming a plan like this?
You give these guys too much credit. - Lord_oftheTrons, on 10/12/2007, -77/+129@ISIfunded911 - You should spend your time doing something productive. Quoting Loose change and running around getting raging clues is a waste of time and bandwidth. Your spam is also pretty annoying. Welcome to the block list.
We haven't been to the moon either right? No wonder there are stories about how the U.S. lacks an understanding of science compared to Europe. What you quote can hardly be considered science. - damienoneill, on 10/12/2007, -26/+76I notice they, the 9/11 moverment, did not question the BBCs when they aired a documentry that suited their views
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20070212125702379
(at the bottom, they recommend the power of nightmares)
I guess the BBC is only sloopy/bias when its proving you WRONG - Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -67/+117Brace yourselves gentlemen, here come the whackjobs.
- ElFredo, on 10/12/2007, -34/+81@ISIfunded911,
You, sir, are an idiot. FYI here is a photo of the WTC7's southwest corner before it collapses:
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/1809/wtc72sw4.jpg - damienoneill, on 10/12/2007, -20/+65Really? You watched it? Instead of attacking the BBC why not attack the content? After all, you have no evidence they were paid off. The BBC do not get money from advertising and they are forced to show where they get money and how they used it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -57/+96id be more interested in a real investigation here
ofcourse since all the evidence has been destroyed it might be kind of hard
i havent seen the video yet but ive heard for a week that it was going to be a major hitpiece, where they only talk about the most far out theories and avoid any real evidence
only presenting strawmen and nutjobs, and comparing 9/11 questioners to people who think the moonlanding was staged and talking about UFOs.. what does 1 have to do with the others? nothing
the only reason to make that comparison is to make you feel like asking questions is siding with every theory out there..
theres nothing wrong with asking questions - graberc, on 10/12/2007, -16/+55BBC debunks 9/11 conspiracy so guess what . . . time to say they are in on the conspiracy.
- ryland2, on 10/12/2007, -20/+57I don't like to get caught up in the conspiracy *****, but calling building 7 a "Raging Inferno"???
http://www.infowars.com/headline_photos/April/bd7.jpg - spudnic, on 11/03/2007, -28/+63The BBC is publicly funded, but it's by no means 'state television', it's actually required by law to be politically impartial
- d00ley, on 10/12/2007, -5/+38The fear, leaked by BBC officials, was the restriction of access to the American market if the final cut was not re-edited. Also, there are quite a few legitimate questions surrounding 9/11. The whole Loose Change phenomenon sidetracked the drive to answer those questions. Loose Change went into the realm of "conclusive speculation" and became a magnet for the low IQ conspiracy and anti-conspiracy crowds.
One major unanswered question is, why was all of the steel of WTC immediately carted of and shipped to China as scrap metal? Under normal (read: ANY) circumstances, the steel beams would be kept and studied as evidence in a crime scene. And, at the very least, they would be kept and studied in order to understand exactly how and why the structure failed so that knowledge could be used to build better and more sturdy buildings.
Here's the craziness surrounding that 'decision" by Bloomberg to melt down valuable evidence that could be used to study the collapse:
"Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage."
"New York authorities' decision to ship the twin towers' scrap to recyclers has raised the anger of victims' families and some engineers who believe the massive girders should be further examined to help determine how the towers collapsed.
But New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg insisted there are better ways to study the tragedy of September 11.
"If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do," said Bloomberg, a former engineering major. "Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything." " - jokerthief, on 10/12/2007, -9/+37@iron,
You do know that Al Qaeda hit the US multiple times before 911 right? The Cole, embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the Khobar tower bombings. Don't you think it should be standard procedure to draw up war plans to confront an enemy that has already attacked you? - qwonking, on 10/12/2007, -13/+41I can't say this program necessarily 'debunked' all of the 50+ conspiracy theories. For instance, they gave absolutely no explanation as to what occurred at WTC7. They simply stated that there are conspiracy theories surrounding it.
- benthere, on 10/12/2007, -42/+70@Lord_oftheTrons
Only 6% believe the moon landings were faked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing#Moon_Landing_hoax_accusations
According to New York Times and CBS, "53 per cent of respondents think the Bush administration is hiding something, and 28 per cent believe it is lying" about 9/11.
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469
"Only 16 per cent of respondents say the government headed by U.S. president George W. Bush is telling the truth on what it knew prior to the terrorist attacks."
If you believe the gov't is telling the truth about 9/11, that puts you in a camp almost as small as the "fake moon landing" camp. Don't try to turn it around and say the opposite. You're not fooling anyone. - randf, on 10/12/2007, -15/+41i'm probably the only to have read ISIfunded911's last rant...
but you really got me with your last two "facts": two other buildings have been hit by airplanes and didn't collapse. is that supposed to be one of your "debunks" to prove that the collapse couldn't have been caused by the jets/fuel/fire?
if that's the case, i know two guys who have survived being shot. therefore, no one dies from bullets?
like someone said before....welcome to block list - inactive, on 10/24/2007, -8/+34It makes me sad that pretty much anyone who agrees there was a conspiracy is being dugg down :(
I don't know if I can believe there was an entire conspiracy, but I am sure that some things don't seem to add up.
Questioning the way our government is run and what is being presented to us in the media should be a priority for every American - not something to get scoffed at or ridiculed. These people are just trying to be responsible citizens. (This does not include those that make stuff up or lie. Just those that "dig" a little deeper to find the truth.) - 1310nm, on 10/12/2007, -24/+50We already know what happened to WTC 7. It was a controlled demolition per Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC buildings.
- skilskilskil, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30THANKS FOR SHOWING ME THAT USING CAPS LOCK IS A TOTALLY AWESOME WAY TO MAKE A POINT!!!!
- evilesttoast, on 10/12/2007, -29/+52@ISIfunder911
Your comments take forever to unscroll down. So, I'm gonna have to block you. - aahpandasrun, on 11/03/2007, -53/+75it's a conspiracy maaaaan!
- Angostura, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21As an earlier poster claimed: "Interestingly, there is a story which claims that there are two versions of the BBC 'documentary' and that one is fair, the other is a hit piece, but that the BBC was pressured to air the hit piece."
... at that point I gave up. - GuitaristTom, on 10/12/2007, -19/+38"IT'S A CONSPIRACY THAT EVERY COMMENT ON HERE NOT SUPPORTING THE OFFICIAL VERSION IS BEING DUG DOWN."
Ohhhh that explains a lot. See people, the conspiracy people don't even know what a conspiracy is.
You can't blame people for having common sense. - masgrada, on 10/12/2007, -18/+37Apparently nobody here actually watches those internet videos and just makes fun of them. Right on!
- damienoneill, on 10/24/2007, -16/+35"I don't think the BBC were paid by anyone...it seems more a case of lazy journalism. None of the real issues were given any time, the reporter seemed to think the "X-files" guy has the answer to it all. Laughably bad program and no real threat to the truth movement."
No, he was explaining a possible motive and the fact he wrote a simlar storyline in a program. He did not try to answer the thoerys at all. He came in towards the end.
Again, attack the program not the content? Why unless your weak in that area? It explained an awful lot. The towers and such. Even showed loose change had spun evidence and quotes. They provided a lot of evidence - brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -12/+30"Documentary film maker and radio host Alex Jones, coordinating today's 9/11 truth movement events in downtown New York City, says that the atmosphere around ground zero has dramatically changed, with the majority of firefighters and police officers now sympathetic to the claim that 9/11 was an inside job."
When did radio hosts become credible sources? This guy believes the Illuminati controls the world through the World Bank, and that "the lower and middle class will be put in a global plantation and the United States will be put under martial law." (wikipedia) He is a career conspiracy nut. How do you people expect anyone to take you seriously. All you ever do is quote other conspiracy theorists, present them as "experts" and then dismiss any and all evidence against you as tainted by the conspiracy itself. In your world, there is no way for you to lose. You don't bother to do any responsible research (and no, talking to other conspiracy nuts is NOT research), then say things without any proof whatsoever. There are answers to your "questions," but you don't bother to look. You don't look because face it, you don't REALLY want the answer to begin with. Real life isn't sexy and exciting enough for you. You think the world is like the movies. "Loose change" is a classic example of conspiracy spin, from interviewing a UL engineer in charge of water quality about steel strength to assuming that steel does not weaken before it melts, and much, much more. - merr, on 10/12/2007, -51/+68@ISIfunded911 - I hate you
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+30What's funny to me is how the authors of movies like Loose Change ban people from their forums and their web sites anytime someone offers up a counter-claim that disagrees with what they think. Leftists and CT's are a funny thing - because in one hand, they curse people who disagree with them for being close-minded and are typically unwilling to listen to what someone else has to say if it's not in agreement of their own views. In the other hand, they slam Bush for being a religious fanatic and an idiot, while also claiming he's capable of pulling off one of the greatest coup's of all time. People who think logically and rationally know and realize that the idea behind 9/11 being planned is simply stupid - there's never been any real evidence to support it, and most of the evidence that gets debunked is attributed from CT's as being engineered from the government.
For a starting point, go read what this guy has to say (he backs up all of his claims with evidence) in regards to Loose Change, because I think this sets the standard for what idiot CTists think. The authors of this are human, but they are so extreme to the point that anytime someone lays evidence in front of them, they quickly dismiss it and don't tend to offer up any real counter-evidence. They often use the phrase, "We're a bunch of 20 year olds and nobody wants to talk to us." Really? I'm around the same age, and doing my own research has negated plenty of people open and willing to discuss it with me.
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
I'm quite certain that as more and more CTists log onto Digg, posts like mine and many others will be Dugg and people fill forgo simple logic above their own extreme views. - caboosemoose, on 10/12/2007, -15/+32It utterly astounds me that anyone could be so confident that 9/11 was a US government conspiracy. I grant that anything is possible - but people, get a grip. If the US government wanted to fake an Al Q. attack, there are so many less risky ways of going about it. The number of people that would need to be involved in both wiring up the towers for demolition and flying the planes and whatever other preparations would have been needed, including the war games and so forth would have been huge. And the more people involved, the harder it is to keep a grip on the situation. A single dirty bomb etc would have the same effect with many orders of magnitude less risk of the conspiracy being exposed.
I think the issue of the collapse of WTC7 is a perfect example. According to the conspiracy theorists, it wasn't enough to have flown planes into the two towers and the Pentagon and then brought down the towers in a controlled explosion (or a thermal event etc). Oh no! That's not enough! What we conspiracists really need to do is add more risk of our plan being exposed and bring down WTC7, too. Because without bringing down WTC7, no one is oging to believe this is an is an Al Q. plot!
Laughable.
I don't know what really happened, but I do know that it's extremely unreasonable to hold the opinion that the most likely scenario is a government conspiracy. - lnf69, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Why would anyone attack someone who supports their point of view?
- CandidateZero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Dammit. Loose Change makes those who think it was a controlled demolition look bad. I wish those guys never put out a video. The best presentation I've seen on the tower collapses is an MIT engineer by the name of Jeff King. Here's him talking: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Son0BWduQx4 (14:35). He's not selling anything, which makes him more credible to me, he's not pushy and arrogant (like the Loose Change guys are) and most important, he doesn't say "the government did it." He presents a good case and anybody who argue against the "conspiracy" never address the stuff he talks about.
- LeoFightnwo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Bin Laden is not wanted for crimes related to 9/11.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm - canihaveurpants, on 10/12/2007, -13/+29The total collapse of WTC 7 has always left me thoroughly puzzled. A logical explanation for this collapse is never given, although Larry Silverstein (developer and leaseholder of the WTC towers) is on video stating that he decided to "pull" the building at about 5pm on 9/11. Pretty interesting considering the large amount of demolition planting and planning that would be required to actually demolish a 47-foot tall steel building. Here's a link to the video of Silverstein I was talking about, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0scE7bQWdk.
- PixelVision, on 10/12/2007, -7/+23please don't put Leftists and CTs together.
- LeeJunFan, on 10/12/2007, -32/+48I don't get it? Where's the controversy around building #7? I thought it was now common knowledge that it was demolished. The FEMA report says it was fire damage but I've seen video of the owner of the buildings saying that he said to, "Pull it.". Meaning that it had been damaged and he ordered it demolished. Yet FEMA continues to report that it was fire damage? I don't know. What I do know is that a conspiracy is an event in which the truth is hidden, and the American people (in fact the world) has not been given a complete/impartial investigation into the facts surrounding 9/11.
Shouldn't we be able to know the real reason we are at war with Afghanistan? Why were we sitting there wanting to eradicate the Taliban for months prior to 9/11? We needed an excuse to topple the gov't there and get our pipeline in. We got it, just like we got our excuse for WWII by allowing Pearl Harbor, and faking the Gulf of Tonkin for Vietnam.
Our Gov't has proven it walks like a duck many times before, why should we think anything different now? Because FEMA says so? - brandonvan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20What if the Conspiracy theory is part of the conspiracy itself?
- Ratteler, on 10/12/2007, -11/+26Of course.
A weather balloon crashed in Roswell.
There was a single gunman in Dallas.
Saddam had WMD's.
The "Patriot Act" protects us.
and...
Windows Vista is an Upgrade with tools to protect users.
It's all true because we were told over and over that's it true.
Now Don't look behing that curtain cause I am the great and powerful Oz!!!
:rolls eyes: - Archos, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21Conspiracy = "agreement between two or more natural persons to break the law at some time in the future"
Now, if you didn't see proof that 9/11 was a conspiracy, you have no intelligence at all.
People like Guy Smith make you think that believing in conspiracies makes you a paranoid and dumb person. That means that people on both sides (govt. / al-q.) are paranoid and dumb.
It's just your choice to decide what side of the story you believe; the one line story told to you by a corrupt government (war lords), media and 'their' experts - full of lies and big gaps... OR the hundreds of theories which at the heart are all based upon some hard facts (that the official story doesn't touch) by millions of independent investigators.
Fact is that whatever you believe, the US government was involved in large crimes in the Middle East since WW2, so they were responsible for the attacks anyway. Another fact is that the elite took huge advantage of the attacks immediately after they occurred. With lies.
And I'm enough informed to know that it doesn't stop with the Middle East.
Research and decide for yourself guys, you can't fully trust anyone on both sides. - bennyboy371, on 10/12/2007, -11/+25First time I've ever logged in to block someone, ISIfunded911 should feel honored. Nothing like people who use conspiracy websites and quoting other conspiracy theorists over and over in a fun circular pattern, eh? When your sources are other people who get asked what their sources are, they're probably not very quotable. Plus, they applauded the BBC when they had a documentary on their side, now they say the BBC is crooked and bought off because something says they're wrong. Oh, and everyone who thinks it was terrorists that could carry out a terrorist attack is just a mindless drone and the evil government has gotten to them. Reminds me of Hyde on That 70s Show when he was high.
- bustaballs, on 10/24/2007, -8/+22Thank you sir. I've heard that it use to be a patriotic thing to question your government. I guess times have changed. Maybe we shouldn't have questioned Watergate and just accepted the official story and blown off anyone who denied it as a crazy, tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist.
- damienoneill, on 10/12/2007, -10/+23Why is the BBC not a credible source compared to internet websites? You cannot simply label any oppersition as 'part of the conspiracy' because you do not like it. The 9/11 truth movement had no problems with the BBC when they did a program that favoured some of their views...
- cpemma, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16This would be the same BBC that claimed, before the invasion of Iraq, that intelligence on Saddam's WMD had been "sexed up" to scare the public into backing said invasion? You think they're government-controlled?
- ElFredo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16And how do you demolish a building that's on fire? With explosives? You'll need a lot of 'volunteers'!
- iFungus, on 10/12/2007, -10/+21Doesn't it seem much easier to plant WMDs in Iraq then it is to cause 9/11?
- Ibanezfoo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18How do we know Bush didn't actually make this video to divert attention from his world domination, eat your oil and hoagies, and steal your teddy bears campaign? (AKA "The World Domination, Eat your Oil and Hoagies, and Steal Your Teddy Bears Campaign" or "TWDEYOHGASYTB" for short) hmmmm?
Conspiracy theories are great entertainment! I love how some pasty nerd 10000 miles away from anything to do with anything can write up a whole website about he knows "what really happens".... and a bunch of other pasty nerds eat it up hook, line, and sinker. Gullible fruits! You all are good for a laugh!
Way to go BBC! - anasazi, on 10/12/2007, -16/+2710% of the population may be retarded however it has been proven time and time again that a much larger proportion exists on digg
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -19/+30Big Brother doesn't exist. ISIfunded911, please remain at your present location for a.. survey.
- paplord, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14All that the powers that be need to be is release the materials that will completely, and comprehensively debunk the lot. Like footage of a jet hitting the Pentagon, which must be available in more than five frames. Release the evidence to debunk the conspiracy theorists. Otherwise, don't spend time and money getting a bunch of people to say "it's patently not true" one after the other.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 523 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
