When deciding which tag to place this under, I noticed that 'politics' or anything similar was absent, emphasizing how unwelcome it is for foreigners to talk about such topics. I'm curious whether this blog will be allowed or not. Anyway, here we go: I'm of the habit of never taking news stories entirely at face value, especially if the content has a high social, economic or political relevance. Call me a conspiracy nut if you like, and I'm sure some of you will after reading this. How about a bit of speculation about old news stories here in China? But first, a bit of western conspiracy theories, to clarify where I'm going with these stories, and whether or not you want to read on...

I'm sure you've heard 9/11 conspiracy theories before, and if you haven't, a simple google search will reveal a plethora of accusations, some appear plausible, others are so ridiculous that they seem to have been created purely to drag down the credibility of conspiracy theories.

In short, the US government has been accused namy times over of being the engineers of the 9/11 attacks. The benefits and motivations are obvious, though some may be less obvious:
*- Improve public opinion for war. Create a reason to go to war, and an enemy. A "new Pearl Harbour".
*- It is uncertain how much gold was actually stored in the WTC vaults (or whether it was all found again), but it was significant, and the whole affair raised the price of gold considerably, great for traders in gold.
*- Strike fear into the population, enabling the government to take away civil liberties.
*- Get rid of some expensive buildings, which also needed to be renovated to remove asbestos, which would cost billions.
*- Make countless stockbrokers a bundle of money on airlines put-options.
*- Destroy court evidence for numerous fraud cases, preventing a stock market crash. The Enron guys may have been convicted, but you can't blame them for trying.
*- Allow an oil-producing country to be occupied, also raising the price of oil. Great for traders in oil, such as Bush and his Bin Laden trade partners.
*- Create a steady demand for war materials. Great for traders in war, such as Bush and his Bin Laden trade partners.
*- Air defense blunders, showing the ineffectiveness of the department of defense, further justifying an increase in defense budget.
*- Raise the popularity of the administration, they become war heroes.
*- Give US & NATO troops field experience.
*- Increased military spending, borrowed directly from the Federal Reserve, enriching its owners. Federal Reserve has owners, it's not state run.
*- This devalues the dollar, causing bankruptcies and mortgage crisis, allowing the rich to buy up companies and real estate.
*- Namecalling: Whoever the government calls "Believed-to-be-linked-to-al-qaida" is fair game. A perpetual "War on Terror".
*- Polarization: Increased loyalty from the more radical christians. More christians become radical. More people become christians.
*- Nationalization: Increased loyalty and trust in the government, as people feel the need to work together and help their country in a time of trouble.
*- Less crime and unemployment, as people are encouraged to join the army.
*- Anti-American sentiment in the Middle-East creates the perfect patsy, who by their own opinions, incriminate themselves. Criticism of the USA worldwide becomes associated with terrorism.

To be fair, I suspect my own (dutch) government is involved in the murder of a public figure who spoke out against muslims. Theo van Gogh was murdered on the streets by Mohammed B., who stuffed a list of targets into Theo's throat. After the public outrage it became apparent that Mohammed B. was in the employ of the AIVD (dutch secret services). The AIVD claimed he was counterspying in their midst, and was in fact part of a terrorist cell. I think it's similar to how the CIA claims that Al Qaida went rogue on them. Similarly, the 7/7 London bombers were also cooperating with British secret services. The hilarity of that situation was that they arrived late for their terror attacks because of Tube delays (likely they thought they were just taking part in a gov't training drill, for which they had also made a video), so when they heard of *real* bombings taking place, they put 2 & 2 together, and headed for international newsmedia in London's Docklands. An Australian newspaper placed a web report of witnessing 3 terror suspects being shot down by police snipers in front of their building's windows, but the article was quickly removed. A lot of what I listed above is merely a summary of many conspiracy videos I watched over the years, and I received fierce condemnation for posting it at the time. I expect nothing less this time around. There have been counterarguments allegedly debunking some of the claims made, but I don't list them because of the length of this blog. Feel free to post links in the comments, though. I will mention one amazing counter-claim:

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

It's an awesome article that claims that the sulphur from the plastered walls, and the aluminium from the aircraft, functioned like thermite to cause an exothermic reaction powerful enough to melt steel and pulverize concrete. It's an attempt to explain why the 110-storey WTC buildings could be reduced to ground-level rubble in 9.8 seconds without controlled demolition. If true, they would be the only steel-framed buildings in human history to have collapsed as a result of fire. And they did more than collapse; they were crushed flatter than I could crush a tin can. My sources were compelling videos: Zeitgeist, 9/11 coincidences (YT vid), 7/7 Ripple Effect, September Clues (torrent DLs) and a great deal of other videos on the matter. I avoided anything too ridiculous, so if you hear mention of 'Illuminati', 'leftist elite's war on Christianity' or 'reptilian aliens', you've stumbled on a bogus nonsense video.

Now, after this longwinded introduction, I have either gained or lost attention and respect from you, dear reader. It is a sensitive issue for many people. But if the conspiracies are true, and only gov't espionage agencies have true insight into the issues, try to imagine the Chinese government reaction. I imagine it as something like: "Hey, we spend more money on 'social maintenance' than on our own military, but you're telling me we can save a bundle of money if we just generate fear and play into the population's innate xenophobic tendencies?? We might even get to start an armed conflict without international retalliation, too? USA teach us how!!!"

Do you remember the story of an attempted rape by a British citizen in China last year? I believe that was China's tentative first step into conspiracyland. We see a photo of a Brit standing over a Chinese girl he allegedly tried to rape (but she appears to be holding onto him), and then he gets beaten the crap out of by passers by. Now, Chinese do become brave if they are in enough numbers, so that part is not strange. I tried finding follow-up stories about the Brit, but there are none. He was deported and disappeared, just like many 'terror suspects' in western media stories are reported on by the news, but their subsequent release without charges is ignored. The major tell-tale sign is Yang Rui: an accomplished, internationally-oriented interviewer who has interviewed foreign dignitaries and the like. Suddenly, he gets media attention for posting comments condemning 'foreign white trash'. I seriously doubt such a high-profile figure would do a thing like this unless his higher-ups told him to. He risks his lucrative job if he spoke out without approval, and knowing Chinese, he would not risk the prosperity of his family. I think he was safe all along, and the commentary was advertised in order to help the government direct the anger and outrage towards foreigners, to distract people from socio-economic problems the country was facing at the time. I had just lived in China a few months last year, but my wife warned me to be careful on the streets because I'm half-British. I suspected something was afoot at the time. At the very least, Chinese newsmedia lacked the cultural sensitivity to avoid emphasizing the offender's nationality. No Chinese national would gain national news coverage for an *attempted* rape, and no reputable western newsmedia would place so much emphasis on nationality. But that can simply be attributed to an absence of anti-discrimination laws, at least regarding non-national minorities. We aren't in their guanxi, there are few repercussions if Chinese politics has a go at foreigners, so we're fair game.

Recently, there was a news report about the ETIM claiming responsibility for the Beijing terror attack.

http://www.echinacities.com/news/Turkistan-Islamic-Party-Accepts-Responsibility-for-Terrorist-Attack-on-Tiananmen-Square

I searched the English wikipedia for a summary, but it struck me that it still hasn't been updated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Turkestan_Islamic_Movement

Was the claim not reported on by international newsmedia yet? Wikipedia is usually very fast to update politically relevant news stories. Does this mean the claims were only released within the Chinese newsmedia, and China didn't feel the need to expose their spin-doctor tales to foreign scrutiny? Because that's what I thought when I saw it. Shenanigans!!!