It’s a bit shocking to me when I see people online putting 9/11 conspiracies in the same box as “MAGA” conspiracies (for lack of a better term, sorry).

For reference, I was 24 in 2001 living in central NJ. Even without social media or fake news websites or what cable news has become today, I have vivid memories of people having the firm belief that there was something up with the attack on 9/11. Was this just my social circle?

Jet fuel melting steel beams was one of the more fringe and unfounded (and quickly debunked) ideas but the rest of everything on that day was questionable. Tower seven falling, the missing plane debris at the pentagon and central PA, the military / president not responding to known threats, if a person with limited flight time could hit a tower, the fact that Bush attacked a country that had nothing to do with the event, and so much more are still, I thought, reasonable questions - especially when looked at together.

This is not about rehashing each theory. Or maybe it is? Have I missed that everything has been debunked?

I mean, I still believe 9/11 was an inside job or at least high level officials, including Bush, were aware it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it. I thought this was still a common opinion of most or many Americans over the age of forty.

  • InverseParallax@lemmy.worldEnglish
    605·
    3 months ago

    Seriously, it was pretty fringe to be openly truther back then.

    It wasn’t till Obama that we started getting all these batshit insane morons on parade.

    Birtherism really pushed it, but basically losing 2008 made the right desperate, they were willing to recruit from anybody, anywhere, right when social media started its upswing.

    I think we can say most of our modern conspiracitardacy was fairly quiet till the social media wave.

    • oxjox@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      93·
      3 months ago

      That is not what I recall. What I do recall was both republicans and democrats having serious concerns that the government knew something we didn’t and that we were attacking a country for the president’s personal vendetta. This is based on my personal interactions with friends, family, and coworkers, as well as national and local news and newspapers. Granted, I’m from central NJ so perhaps we on higher alert and more “purple” than the rest of the country.

      batshit insane morons

      Was it birtherism or just Sarah Palin?

      I think we can say most of our modern conspiracitardacy was fairly quiet till the social media wave.

      I fully agree that social media has made things worse in this, and almost every, regard. Though, I’m trying to understand the mindset of Americans in 2001, not today, not post 2008.

      The conspiracy around 9/11 was that the government knew more than they were telling us. That perhaps they were well aware of the event, possibly took part in it, and/or used it to manipulate public sentiment for invading Iraq for no other good reason or perhaps (ok, this I admit is crazy) setting up a new world order where we give up our rights for the sake of “national defense”. There would be no Wikileaks if there was no 9/11.

      I admit this are a bit fringe-sounding but we were all aware of this back then. Didn’t most people believe there was some plausibility in these theories?

      Don’t most people today believe the government knows more about 9/11 than they’ve told us?

      • stinerman [Ohio]English
        182·
        3 months ago

        we were attacking a country for the president’s personal vendetta

        This had nothing to do with 9/11. Invading Iraq was much later. You’re conflating the two.

        “Bush did 9/11” is crazy talk. “Bush invaded Iraq because he wanted to get back at Saddam Hussein and make money for Halliburton” is not.