I just watched "9/11: The Conspiracy Files" on BBC2. This trashed most of the Conspiracy Theories around the..

They try to handle issues too complicated for them. Most of the "conspiracy theorists" are just normal people who are not too smart but have an active imagination. They typically don't bother to examine the evidence and choose to believe what they want. Since they cannot investigate it themselves they choose facts selectively and are quick to jump to conclusions. Or, they just want to have an original opinion to that of the mainstream.

Don't be a sheep. Don't just take what you see on TV at face value, and don't embrace the conspiracy theories. THINK FOR YOURSELF.

Personally, I find the conspiracy theories stupid, (Osama Bin Laden was wanted by the US in the 1990s and considered a terrorist threat - whether or not he was behind it is uncertain but he certainly became the scapegoat).

However, 9/11 did suit the US government's aims and they could have been complacent or negligent, but there is no way they were behind it.

Depends on your point of view before watching the programme.

If you are 'anti-conspiracy' then the programme solved all the questions and the case is closed.

If you are 'pro-conspiracy' the programme only skimmed over 10 questions (when there are hundreds more unanswered), and in many cases, offered very flimsy arguments in order to defend the official version.

For instance Building 7 (how can anyone watch that collapse and say it's not controlled demolition?!). The BBC concluded by saying FEMA have decided it wasnt a controlled demolition, it collapsed from fire damage.

They then said they admit the chances of this happening were very very unlikely (especially considering no building has collapsed from fire damage before). So....... very unlikely, but thats what happened, apparently. And they expect us to believe it (and people will!!!)

Also about why the fighter jets weren't scrambled in time... we were told that because a plane hadn't been hijacked in the US for over 20 years, the Air Defense dept weren't prepared enough.

Does that really make sense? The most sophisticated air defense in the world wasn't prepared for an emergency, simply because one hadn't happened for a while?!?

And it goes on and on. Most of the programme was in a similar vein. So like I say it depends on your point of view before watching it.

The people who hate 'conspiracy theories' will have probably sat back all smug, concluding that the BBC has 'debunked' all possible theories on the matter and the case is closed.

The 'conspiracy theorists' will probably be angry that many important questions were ignored, the programme assumes the official version is gospel and every attempt was made to prove the alternative theories wrong, rather than the official one.

Not all of the 'conspiracy theories' may be correct but even if just ONE aspect is.... that would render the official version false, no?!

And by the same token, if just one part of the official version is provably false, the whole thing is then a LIE is it not?!

But the programme only concentrates on proving the CTs false, not the official version, which is never even questioned.

Personally I thought it was biased towards the official line, but in a very subtle way that was not immediately obvious.

Granted there are some loonies out there. But the 9/11 case is a very serious one and deserves serious attention. Many people (myself included) seriously doubt the official explanation because it simply doesn't make sense. This is why there is such a large and growing truth-seeking movement. I think Sunday's BBC2 programme will only add to the feeling that we are not being told the truth. It simply avoided many questions that need answering. The mainstream media and some politicians are trying to use this label "Conspiracy Theorist" to hold people up for ridicule. Why are people watching "Loose Change" in their thousands and buying books by writers such as Webster Tarpley, Mike Ruppert and others? Because they need answers, and the politicians and the media, for their own reasons and motivations, have decided to give us only half-baked and evasive explanations. There is a web of official secrecy surrounding the events of 9/11 which one day must surely be broken.

I watched that too, and I found it a little offensive the way that they portrayed the conspiracy theorists in the film. I felt like they were being shown in an unfavourable light - as in they were all nut jobs who sat around all day with pitiful lives doing nothing beneficial and making a nuisance of themselves. Like the Texan DJ who was preaching with evangelical passion over 9/11, and Dylan Avery who when you were taken through his house you were presented with a group of 20-something guys who looked like they had nothing to do all day. It might have worked a little better if they expanded on their vox pop section more.

Secrecy breeds contempt. People are bound to be intriuged by such an event, and its only natural that they would want questions answering such as "what happened to the engines?" or "they found a passport but no black box?". I'm interested in the demolition theories surrounding 9/11, and I know other people are too, but the BBC2 dismissed the ideas as rubbish and easily explained away, which I didnt appreciate.

So basically in response to your questions:

a) So everyone that is of the opinion that 9/11 was an "inside job" or something of that nature suffers from the same chemical imbalance in their brain that makes them dellusional and paranoid. Like a reaction to a drug?

b) All conspiracy theorists are desperate to prove that we in the West are wrong and are the root of all evils? Granted, if you believe one conspiracy theory you're likely to be partial to another, but honestly, they're not all out to get you.

c) Now thats just shallow. I for one am certainly not desperate to have a little "reflected glamour" in my life, I just question what I saw and what I believe. I dont force my beliefs on you, I query them with you.

How gullible are you? That programme was biased. Out of the few conspiracy theorists who featured they mostly concentrated on Dylan Avery. I feel he's not very good at getting his point across and keeps jumping from one theory to the next. I don't rate his film Loose Change; Alex Jones's Terror Storm and Road to Tyranny are much more informative. Alex hardly featured, except when he was ranting at a seminar, looking to people who don't know him like a nutter. Alex wanted to mention things like Operation Northwoods, but was told he couldn't and the BBC were laughing in his face.

Operation Northwoods shows false flag terrorist exist, and isn't just an overactive imagination. The US were going to stage terror attacks on themselves and blame an innocent country (Cuba). They were then going to invade this innocent country killing innocent people. American soldiers would obviously have been killed. Government killing innocent people for political gain? Nah!

Plenty of views were given by people who think the theorists are crazy, but what about credible people like Labour MP Michael Meacher and ex MI5 officer David Shayler who think it's an inside job? William Rodriguez and many other people heard explosions in the basement BEFORE the plane hit. What about that?

If I was a terrorist I wouldn't contemplate hijacking jets and crashing them into major buildings 'cause I would asume NORAD would stop it. How can anyone believe this is what terrorists planned? Also, on the programme it showed the theory of how the floors collapsed. This showed the steel core remaining. What about this steel core? The official story is that the steel weakened. Erm, hello, steel buckling wouldn't fall at ten floors per second.

Popular Mechanics magazine were shown in a favourable light; however, the research editor made a fool of himself whilst trying to debunk "9/11 myths" on a radio show. He was asked how the hijackers were known a couple of days afterwards. He said their DNA was found at ground zero. Really? Most people from the towers had no DNA recovered, let alone the people in the plane. When asked where the original DNA came from to compare it to he fell silent. He also made a prat of himself trying to explain away other things. This man is a cousin of somone in government, hense the reason for talking bull. Listen to the whole embarrassing, hilarious thing here: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=20640111...

WAKE UP YOU BLOODY IDIOTS!

A. Definitely A. We watched the programme and I didn't understand what they were trying to get at. Very strange.

Maybe the BBC should trash their theories about Y2K, lol

I think they're naturally paranoid, they've gone of the deep end of health skepticism.

conspiracy theories only exist because the so called truth does not make sense.

re;9/11 the American government had more to gain than the terrorists, those who do not think so, only do so because they cannot bear the thought that the government would actually be involved in killing their own citizens.

it is unfortunate that Blair was so weak that he brought us into a war that turned out to be based on a lie

yes

yes

yes

and check out www.david ike.com/www.dvadick.com and search for 9/11 on his site and check out the video

You must be the only person who watched it then.