Here's some of the info from the NOVA special...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/dyk.html

I am struggling a bit here to put into words what I'm thinking.

I think the government should not run social security because the money is better in the private sector. Many would say that I am crazy to take it away from government control and give any portion to the private sector, yet believe that same government would launch such a conspiracy.

I think we should not move to government run health care (socialized medicine) because the private sector is more capable of management. Many would say that the private sector is too much about profit and the government should be entrusted with it, yet believe that same government would launch such a conspiracy.

I find the dichotomy of - and I am guilty of this as well - of what the government should and should not be trusted with as an interesting one. The very suggestion that Clinton would have lauched missiles into Iraq and Afghanistan on the same day as the Monica Lewinsky testimony to distract attention from the testimony is met with cries saying that it is a whacked out conspiracy theory. I do not subscribe to that, it just seems so small in comparison to this theory.

I haven't paid much attention to the 9/11 conspiracy theories because the events, as they were reported, seem pretty plausable to me. Not to say that I don't beleive that our administration is filled with lying, rat bastards. I just think that these events were a product of incompetence rather than anything more sinister. This administration seems to lock their focus on things like Iraq, Energy policy, gays, and social security reform; meanwhile neglecting everything else such as disaster relief from a hurricane, reports that Bin Laden was interested in running airplanes into buildings, and basically anything else that doesn't line up with their agenda. I think they were given plenty of evidence to suggest that 9/11 was inevitable but they were too busy figuring out how to get reelected than doing what was in the best interest of the country.

Not conspiricy, just flat out neglegence due to short sighted political goals.

And, iSm, you can add the fact that I'm just as fascinated by the events that occured on 9/11 to the list of things we have in common.

I think that part of it does stem from coming from NY. I remember the skyline before they were there and the sense of awe and wonder after they were built. I never would have imagined that some day they were going to be removed from that skyline, especially in the way that it occurred.

And part of it is simply its historical significance. This attack was unprecedented and horrific and was burned into our memory as vividly as those alive during the Kennedy assasination. I never understood how an event could be so memorable to the extent that damn near everyone could recall in detail exactly what they were doing when they heard the news. Now, I understand.

I saw it a while ago. I thought it was good that it raised questions. I also thought the tone was paranoid and that for the most part it was bunk. I do have to say I believe the government is capable of a conspiracy like this, I just don't believe in this case they were involve. Or, at least not involved in it to the depths that the makers of Loose Change believe.

I like that it says this on the website: I'm all about being given as much info as possible & then being able to make my own decision. I also rely pretty heavily on common sense. For instance, in at least one of the editions (I saw them both at one time or another) they talk about how the plane that went down in PA (I think it was that flight, like I said I saw it a while ago, so the details are getting sketchy in my head) didn't actually go down there, but instead landed in Cleveland or some place and the passengers disembarked. Well, where did they go then? Are they all still living in the airport like that Tom Hanks movie? Were they killed? Put in Witness Protection? Had their memories zapped a la Men In Black? A lot of what the filmmakes present makes less sense to me that what they are saying doesn't make sense. Am I making sense? ;)

I read MBC's post and am tempted to once again get involved with a discussion of where negligence exists - if any - in our government related to 9/11, but it has been discussed so many times that everyone knows what I think.

With political spin, it is possible to make any agenda seem inept when something major happens that was not a part of that agenda. As in, they were paying so much attention to A that they paid no attention to B. Whether A has been affected or not or would have been a problem should B have been he priority doesn't much matter. Political opportunism will rise up to take advantage. It works this way no matter who is in power.

All I know is that during Presidential campaigns, whether against Gore or Kerry, the subject matter wasn't Bin Laden when it came to national security. Kerry said "if you don't believe Iraq is a threat, don't vote for me." However, it is now poliically expedient to forget such words and say Bush didn't care enough about what was the risk.

I discount all such discussion as hindsight being 20/20 and opportunism.

I really dislike conspiracy theories.

I always like a good conspiracy theory* (Courtney killed Kurt; there was no lunar landing; and of course, Andy Kaufman is alive and well.) This particular one, to me, just isn't any good.

*I didn't say I always believe them, I just like them.

One generation's conspiracy theory is another's obvious fact.

Only nimrods think Oswald acted alone ... but that was once considered a wild conspiracy theory.

When we say the "government" or the "administration" may have been involved in a conspiracy, that does not mean the entire government or administration. The Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy among dozens of people in government, but that doesn't mean the entire government was in on it.


As such, I find scaeagles claims that those who believe government conspiracies possible should also not feel comfortable with the government taking heath care out of the profit realm to be a completely meaningless and absurd comparison.

Great book for conspirary lovers.

If the government is capable of such conspiracy and treachery regarding national defense, one of the only constituionally mandated funcions of the federal government, then they should not be trusted to take on other areas outside of specifically enumerated constitutional authority. All powers not specifically granted to the federal government are granted to the states.

My point is that I find it ridiculous that so many with such distrust of the government would want them heading up anything additional, such as nationalized health care, or think that social security money (nothing but a federally mandated pyramid scheme) is better left with the government than entrusted into the private sector.

Most certainly not meaningless nor absurd in the comparison to how some view the government.