What really gets me is the assumption that those who don't believe in the conspiracy, whichever one it is, (although the "attack didn't happen at all" one is particularly loathsome) are somehow less informed than they are.
When you talk to a conspiracist, (and i'm not wanting to get personal, this is just what ive observed), they don't usually believe in just ONE conspiracy. They are far more likely to also believe in say, Princess Di having been assassinated, or Atlantis, or fake moon landings, Gnomes of Zurich, Lizard people. The list goes on. It's almost a condition.
I must be a closed mind sheep. Even though i've marched to a different drum my entire life, was an avid reader of Fortean Times in my stoner days, and a wannabee anarchist before i started actually developing my real passion in life.
I've heard allllll about scholars for 911, and pilots for 911, the "evidence" they present, the methodology they used to glean it, thermite, second planes, missing flights, wtc7 structural integrity, etc ad infinitum....and i've also read allllll about the debunking of the scholars and pilots for 911. Piece by piece. One by one.
Thankfully we have science; REAL science, science that doesn't have to spend valuable time debunking every conspiracy theory thrown at them because they have better things to do, like save lives and explore space, discover particles.... That...stuff..Empirical. Stuff that i've seen work, that means we can have this discussion over a communications medium spanning the globe.
So If i have to take sides, i think ill pitch in with those. Scientific theory and discovery based on testing and observation.
Was there a massive breakdown in security and/or intended/unintended knowledge of a possible attack? Possibly.
Did the attacks happen? yeeeeeep. Sadly.
I realise how utterly fruitless this post is. It's a religiously observed belief system, almost a faith, not based on real scientific concensus.
Back to mundane for me.
Now THAT'S some scary shi*t..