Guess I'm in a Clique of One here, but while I do not buy everything the conspiracy theorists are saying, I do not believe that they were the "suprise" attacks that Bush & Co. would have us believe.

After extensive study, I AM now convinced that The Twin Towers could have pancaked; there is no sustainable explanation for building 7 collapsing, but there was sufficient reason to bring it down.

As for The Pentagon, there should have been remnants of the aircraft; all that is shown is an aircraft's APU, and the spools that were outside of The Pentagon were not moved or burned.

Remember too that I voted for Bush 43 twice as Gov. and for President as well, so I'm hardly a left-winged nut case.

 

That I have no real problem believing as possible as far as the statement goes.

Even the government admits that looking back all of the pieces of that puzzle were there long before, but the problem was that this agency had a small part, that agency had another part, and so forth, and IMHO thanks to the competition for funding each of the agencies wanted to whole story so they could present it themselves and look like heroes and thereby garner a bigger chunk of the pie. Also with the over all bureaucratic BS that goes on, it would not come as any surprise to me if someone came forth as said "Look sometime in the next week or two (or even if they said on 9/11) there will be a mass hijacking of several airliners with the intent of using them as WMD's." The govt would more than likely respond with thanks for the information now come back when you can tell us exactly which flights are going to be hijacked, who the hijackers are, what brand and color of undies they will be wearing that day and who will be or was the last person they are going to have sex with before killing themselves."

As far as the building 7 collapse goes, I think it would be virtually impossible for anyone to know for certain what would happen when two large buildings collapse in a complex such as that.

 

I respect your view.

Very much.

I think that one thing that makes it hard to discuss this is that the words are used different ways by different people with different levels of expertise.

After I finally grasped what a pancaked building looks like, then I began to see that the WTC buildings weren't "pancaked" --

Because I so believed the images I saw on 9/11 were a particular thing, it's hard to begin to see what I believed differently.

I don't question the existence of the planes. The planes were there. But the phenominal thing is that the planes were anticipated and the demolition charges were set to go off in relation to the planes...

For the longest time I couldn't get why building 7 would have been blown up. I had to watch that segment repeatedly before I actually heard that the CIA ect. were housed in the building, and that when it was blown up so too was all evidence of the planning...

the terrorist guys were dupes.

 

It's an interesting part of the presentation where the designer of the WTC talks about how the buildings were in fact designed to withstand impact by a plane....

the buildings didn't collapse... look at the pictures... they exploded.

Listen to the firemen and people who talk about the sound of the explosions, and feeling them...

Buildings are removed by controlled demolition all the time, and controlled demolition of one building doesn't cause others near it to demolish...

 

Do you really believe that any building could withstand a direct hit from a commercial plane? was the building made out of rubber? was the plane supposed to just bounce off? or maybe it had a magical force field around it?
so the designer said it could withstand it. the designer of the titanic said the ship was unsinkable.. OH NO!! I bet that was a government conspiracy too

 

Yes. Did you watch the presentation? Did you see how a bomber hit the Empire State Building?

Did you see how the WTC designer took into account the building being hit by a plane?

the presentation is a bit hard to watch because of the level of information, but the videos throughout are easier to watch.

Watch it... then see what you think...



The designer, whose name I forget, didn't say the building was indestructable. He simply took the mass and velocity of a plane and calculated that the building could withstand that.

And, clearly the buildings did withstand the impact. The planes were like arrows flying into a human being.

The firemen are heard to be saying the fires were being brought under control...

The presentation uses eye witness accounts... and there is a video that has sound of the explosions...

 

Some of these idoits claim it was not a plane that hit the Pentagon, well Got news for you, My sister watched it fly over her head into the Pentagon, a Passenger Plane, Not a Missile.

 

Exactly!

the planes were real.

 

I'm feeling a lot of pressure to watch this.

Could this be a conspiracy theory to get us to believe in a conspiracy theory?

Theoretically, some folks will conspire to theorize on conspiracies. In theory, though, conspiring only leads to theories of conspired theorizing. Of course, this is only my theory. 8)

 

very clever.

Okay. I give up.

I made myself watch it. I expected it to be flimsy. I was a bit hard to convince. I got carried away with treating my neighbor like myself. sorry.