9/11 20 years on

[mauvais]

I’ve no doubt that behind the scenes it would be a huge amount of work, but would we see the public facing sites falling over? I get the impression the web is a lot more resilient nowadays, with hosting sites and servers a lot more flexible in terms of load, given the right tech teams behind them?

Probably too much of a tangent for the thread for us to indulge this for very long, but running these services still relies on a big dose of predictability, there's always preparation and scaling up for known big events. And there are loads of services you've probably never heard of that are central to everything working. There are only a few commercial services able to scale to the needs of global content providers and something like 9/11 would be a great big stress test on those, it would probably show up some serious chain reaction failures. You're right that it's more scalable and resilient compared to back then, but the trouble is the internet is changed too, load is a lot more multi-faceted and intensive. Imagine the sheer weight of content that would be generated now compared to mostly centralised, linear broadcasting in 2001.

The BBC front page still breaks from time to time, it failed earlier this year for a few hours along with much of the rest of the Internet because of an outage at a provider called Fastly.

 

[Mrs Miggins]

We were there - I think it was the 4th day of a 10 day holiday in New York.

I won't tell a long and detailed story but it was very frightening and weird.

What did irritate me last week though is our team admin manager, who absolutely loves the sound of her own voice, bringing it up and then just talking over me when I was telling some of my story.

 

[hitmouse]

Looks like you have to purchase a subscription to view the actual story, but apparently AQ have published a new document saying "it was definitely us, we did it, please stop giving other people credit for our work":

AQ-aligned Unit Publishes Booklet Presenting Evidence of AQ Role in 9/11, Debunking Conspiracy Theory

ent.siteintelgroup.com

 

[skyscraper101]

I was watching Neighbours at home with my mate on a weird old TV with a picture that bent in at the sides that was probably from the seventies.

As it finished the news cut in and we were glued for hours. Mates Dad worked for the MoD and he called him at work straight away and his Dad was like 'NO not now I'm in a meeting... ' and almost hung up and my mate was like 'Er Dad, I think you're going to want to hear about this one - it might dictate everything about your work now on'

 

[Duncan2]

Looks like you have to purchase a subscription to view the actual story, but apparently AQ have published a new document saying "it was definitely us, we did it, please stop giving other people credit for our work":

AQ-aligned Unit Publishes Booklet Presenting Evidence of AQ Role in 9/11, Debunking Conspiracy Theory

ent.siteintelgroup.com

Somehow can't imagine many people being prepared to pay AQ to read this booklet.

 

[weltweit]

Somehow can't imagine many people being prepared to pay AQ to read this booklet.

Probably some kind of ruse to get more of them out in the open.

 

[CH1]

This has just come out in HD on Youtube

The director, Dylan Avery, is rated as a conspiracy theorist by Wikipedia.

A certain amount of attention is given to the likelihood of an internal explosion in order to generate thousands of body parts from victims in the towers and vapourisation of others entirely.

The film lasts 1 hr 30 mins because it tracks several families - including one British family - seeking to both suitably commemorate their lost relatives and also get the inquests re-opened so that a full investigation of the incident will be done - and naturally the guilty will be finally held to account.

I would rate this as a soft core conspiracy in a wrapper which excites sympathy for some directly affected through their families.

 

[Dogsauce]

A certain amount of attention is given to the likelihood of an internal explosion in order to generate thousands of body parts from victims in the towers and vapourisation of others entirely.

As with all similar loon shit, it won‘t bother to simply answer the question of why bother with additional explosives/secret missiles etc. Smashing planes into buildings was enough to trigger the wars they wanted, what would be the point in rigging up buildings with a high chance of getting found out and the whole plot unravelling? What was the extra gain from this? It’s fucking nonsense.

 

[Pickman's model]

This has just come out in HD on Youtube

The director, Dylan Avery, is rated as a conspiracy theorist by Wikipedia.

A certain amount of attention is given to the likelihood of an internal explosion in order to generate thousands of body parts from victims in the towers and vapourisation of others entirely.

The film lasts 1 hr 30 mins because it tracks several families - including one British family - seeking to both suitably commemorate their lost relatives and also get the inquests re-opened so that a full investigation of the incident will be done - and naturally the guilty will be finally held to account.

I would rate this as a soft core conspiracy in a wrapper which excites sympathy for some directly affected through their families.

The only internal explosion was of the planes' fuel tanks as they smashed on contact with the towers, as can be plainly seen on videos from the day

 

[Pickman's model]

.

 

[Pickman's model]

Somehow can't imagine many people being prepared to pay AQ to read this booklet.

I imagine it's being issued without charge

 

[Dogsauce]

Btw, to shoot down another much repeated fallacy, steel structures do not need to be heated to the melting point of steel in order to fail. When the rails on railways buckle in forty degree summer heat I don’t see any loons waving their arms and calling hoax. It’s such basic fucking simple physics that most people who’ve got a GCSE in it would understand.

 

[SpineyNorman]

This has just come out in HD on Youtube

The director, Dylan Avery, is rated as a conspiracy theorist by Wikipedia.

A certain amount of attention is given to the likelihood of an internal explosion in order to generate thousands of body parts from victims in the towers and vapourisation of others entirely.

The film lasts 1 hr 30 mins because it tracks several families - including one British family - seeking to both suitably commemorate their lost relatives and also get the inquests re-opened so that a full investigation of the incident will be done - and naturally the guilty will be finally held to account.

I would rate this as a soft core conspiracy in a wrapper which excites sympathy for some directly affected through their families.

Dylan Avery is the loon behind the 'loose change' films.

 

[CH1]

Dylan Avery is the loon behind the 'loose change' films.

And Alex Jones was an executive producer apparently.

 

[ouirdeaux]

Smashing planes into buildings was enough to trigger the wars they wanted, what would be the point in rigging up buildings with a high chance of getting found out and the whole plot unravelling? What was the extra gain from this? It’s fucking nonsense.

I've never understood that one either. Either crashing planes into buildings or planting explosives would have worked to provide an excuse, but would require phenomenal organisation, and at any point could be leaked. Why double the problem?

Also, if the ultimate aim was to invade Iraq, why do it in such a roundabout way? Surely the conspiracists could have framed Saddam directly for 9/11 and gone straight there rather than faffing around with unlucrative Afghanistan for a few years.

Also, why did these conspiratorial masterminds not manage to plant any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq so that they could then say 'see, we told you they had them'? Surely that would be child's play compared to the organisational problems of a belt-and-braces Twin Towers approach.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I've never understood that one either. Either crashing planes into buildings or planting explosives would have worked to provide an excuse, but would require phenomenal organisation, and at any point could be leaked. Why double the problem?

Also, if the ultimate aim was to invade Iraq, why do it in such a roundabout way? Surely the conspiracists could have framed Saddam directly for 9/11 and gone straight there rather than faffing around with unlucrative Afghanistan for a few years.

Also, why did these conspiratorial masterminds not manage to plant any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq so that they could then say 'see, we told you they had them'? Surely that would be child's play compared to the organisational problems of a belt-and-braces Twin Towers approach.

See, the mistake you’re making here is applying rational and sensible logic to the situation.

 

[Dogsauce]

Also, why did these conspiratorial masterminds not manage to plant any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq so that they could then say 'see, we told you they had them'? Surely that would be child's play compared to the organisational problems of a belt-and-braces Twin Towers approach.

tbh I think they did try something like that with the faked ‘yellow cake’ story (more as an encouragement for the war rather than post-invasion), strangely we never got the Scooby Doo moment of revealing who was actually behind that.

 

[Duncan2]

I thought the old guy with his well-thumbed copy of the 9-11 Commission Report was quite eloquent in his attempt to express the extent to which the families need for answers and closure were overlooked in the rush to a war which he, for one, was from the outset very much against.

 

[spitfire]

Btw, to shoot down another much repeated fallacy, steel structures do not need to be heated to the melting point of steel in order to fail. When the rails on railways buckle in forty degree summer heat I don’t see any loons waving their arms and calling hoax. It’s such basic fucking simple physics that most people who’ve got a GCSE in it would understand.

Indeed. I love this video that shows it oh so well.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Lest we forget.

 

[two sheds]

Sorry for the bump but it seems the US is discovering details of what everyone else has known about/suspected for 20 years.

New 9/11 Evidence Points to Deep Saudi Complicity

Two decades of U.S. policy appear to be rooted in a mistaken understanding of what happened that day.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Pickman's model]

Sorry for the bump but it seems the US is discovering details of what everyone else has known about/suspected for 20 years.

New 9/11 Evidence Points to Deep Saudi Complicity

Two decades of U.S. policy appear to be rooted in a mistaken understanding of what happened that day.

www.theatlantic.com

Do you have a full text link that's not paywalled?

 

[two sheds]

This?

https://archive.md/rpFkf

Sorry I should have quoted bits:

The global War on Terror was based on a mistake.

A new filing in a lawsuit brought by the families of 9/11 victims against the government of Saudi Arabia alleges that al-Qaeda had significant, indeed decisive, state support for its attacks. Officials of the Saudi government, the plaintiffs’ attorneys contend, formed and operated a network inside the United States that provided crucial assistance to the first cohort of 9/11 hijackers to enter the country.

The 71-page document, released in redacted form earlier this month, summarizes what the plaintiffs say they’ve learned through the evidence obtained in discovery and recently declassified materials. They allege that Saudi officials—most notably Fahad al-Thumairy, an imam at a Los Angeles mosque and an accredited diplomat at Saudi Arabia’s consulate in that city, and Omar al-Bayoumi, who masqueraded as a graduate student but was identified by the FBI as an intelligence operative—were not rogue operators but rather the front end of a conspiracy that included the Saudi embassy in Washington and senior government officials in Riyadh.

 

[CH1]

Sorry for the bump but it seems the US is discovering details of what everyone else has known about/suspected for 20 years.

New 9/11 Evidence Points to Deep Saudi Complicity

Two decades of U.S. policy appear to be rooted in a mistaken understanding of what happened that day.

www.theatlantic.com

Interesting - full text https://archive.ph/AxSzI

I suppose it's peripheral but there was a World Trade Centre bombing in 1993.

1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Those guys got 200 years in prison. Not mentioned in the article.

Everyone and their cat thought the Iraq war was a put up job.
Michael Moore did a 9/11 video alleging that Saudi royals were evacuated from the US for their own safety when US air space was closed to everyone else after 9/11. Never hear any more about that claim which he made 22 years ago.

What is so fascinating about your Atlantic article is the almost Biblical exegesis. And it shall be revealed (unless the Saudi move to dismiss...)
This is apparently all about THE TRUTH and the interplay with US government secrecy.
The US Courts shall set us free!

 

[petee]

Michael Moore did a 9/11 video alleging that Saudi royals were evacuated from the US for their own safety when US air space was closed to everyone else after 9/11. Never hear any more about that claim which he made 22 years ago.

as i remember it, the other members of the binladen family who were in the US at the time were flown out. i accepted it as fact.

 

[gosub]

9/11 survivors’ exposure to toxic dust and the chronic health conditions that followed offer lessons that are still too often unheeded

Those directly exposed to toxic dust and trauma on and after 9/11 carry with them a generation of chronic health conditions, which are placing them at higher risk during the pandemic and as they age.

theconversation.com

 

[CH1]

The Michael Moore video is still around on YouTube in a momentous commemoration edition (like this thread) if anyone hasn't seen it and wants to

 

[seeformiles]

Bit late to this thread but it stirred a few memories. I was working at a Uni with a US student exchange programme. On that day I was part of a welcome/induction committee for 30 students who were getting a guided tour of the college. There was a central room where staff and students would go for a cig and a cuppa with a TV showing news. I still smoked then so was having my cig when the news broke on the TV. Just then, the guided tour reached us and two students saw what was happening and burst into hysterics as both their fathers worked at the WTC. Poor lasses as it must have been horrible to see this while being so far from home.

 

[Pickman's model]

as i remember it, the other members of the binladen family who were in the US at the time were flown out. i accepted it as fact.

Yeh widely known I thought

 

[spitfire]

23 years on and I never heard about this before today.