BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?

Subject: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Keef
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 11:27 PM

On September 11th I watched events unfold and felt shocked and angered like most people did. I was glad that Bush and America were now going after the bad guys. When people started talking about Bush just going after the oil, and far fetched conspiracy theories, I felt that was just fashionable anti American sentiment.
Only now, 5 years on have I been able to even consider that factions of the US government could be complicit in mass murder.

I have always had some misgivings about the neat way in which both towers collapsed from the top down and fell perfectly vertically into their own footprint. Hard to achieve in a controlled demolition. Even less likely if caused by two non identical aircraft impacts.

This site presents a case that I find unimaginable but plausible

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

From photographs taken during construction it is clear that the central core of the building was a massive steel and concrete structure which could not be significantly damaged by the impact of a relatively fragile light alloy airframe.
By some amazing process this mass of steel and concrete (which was still standing a few seconds after the collapse of one tower) was almost vaporised into a cloud of fine dust.
A google search for 911 controlled demolition or similar will throw up a number of sites of varying credibility. The general scenario is that dark forces conspired to allow the aircraft hijackings to proceed and that the towers had been pre-rigged with explosives to produce a spectacular demolition and bring about a new "Pearl Harbor".
Please set my mind at ease, tell me it's all bullshit.
If not then I might have to start building a bunker cos things don't look good!

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 06 - 11:42 PM

This is not news. I think the Towers were blown. Others think not.

Good site HERE.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: LadyJean
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:29 AM

I've seen it. I'm fairly certain it can't be true. The World Trade Center must have been a fairly busy place, and I expect it remained busy 24/7. So people would have seen the charges being set. They might not have known it at the time, but they would have seen someone workmen in odd spaces at odd times, and that's the sort of thing you remember.

Now if 9/11 WAS the work of the Bush administration, why was George W. reading "My Pet Goat" with a bunch of kids?
Why wasn't he at a military base, where he could make a good show as he did when he declared, rather prematurely that the war in Iraq was over?
Or in the oval office at the White House. If the bombers are working for him he's going to be safe. He can make a noble speech about refusing to leave his post when the nation is under attack?
Why, when he finally addressed the American people did George W. make a stupid speech saying nothing in as short a time as possible. Why didn't he have an eloquent address prepared for the American people?
On 9/11, Rudi Giuliani was the man of the hour. If he'd decided to challenge George W. for the Republican nomination in 2008, I think he'd have gotten it. I can't think George W. or Karl Rove or Dick Cheney was happy about that.
So, I'm betting that 9/11 happened pretty much the way they said it did.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Old Guy
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:36 AM

This conspiracy theory proposes that GWB, while being too stupid and incompetent to tie his shoes and eat a pretzel, is somehow cunning enough to pull this off in complete secrecy.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:38 AM

Maybe what did get pulled of was not quite what George expected. That might explain the seven minutes of funk while he was in that Florida classroom.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:43 AM

"So people would have seen the charges being set."

So explain the other tower that collapsed. The third tower.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:44 AM

George Bush may not have been in on it at all, LadyJean. He may have been used as an unwitting dupe by other key players in the administration. I don't think the whole administration was behind this...but I think a significant secret group within the government was...and they were acting at cross purposes to the conscious purposes of other people in the administration and military. There is a great deal to suggest that this was an "inside" job and that the buildings were taken down by controlled demolition...after the airplanes hit them...the airplanes being the visible excuse and provocation to launch a series of foreign wars against countries which did not, in fact, attack the USA. A "Pearl Harbour" type event was needed to get the American public onside, and it was grandly provided on live television. What more could you ask for to start a foreign war?

I think Bush made a poor show at the time, because he wasn't personally in on the planning. Who was? Oh, some very familiar names...and some not...but I am not gong to suggest who. Not my job to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: DougR
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:46 AM

The world is populated with a fair number of idiots. Those who believe the towers were destroyed and the Pentagon damaged by anything other than hijacked airplanes are at the top of this group.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:47 AM

To pull something like this off and have it work efficently would require much more work and coordination then that website would lead us to believe. Too many people would have been involved.

Anything is possible, but this is highly improbable. People love to perpetuate Hollywood scenarios, and all it does is deflect us from seeing the real answers.

This is bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Old Guy
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:51 AM

Betcha it was the same group that blew up the Murrah building.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:52 AM

So how was Building 7 so damaged and Bulding 6 just got away unscathed?

Oh, but Ron calls it bullshit, and therefore it is. Right.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:03 AM

No, Doug, the people who are at the top of that "fair number of idiots" in the world are people who do totally ordinary, mundane stuff like...watch "Survivor", get F-in drunk on the weekend and assault someone, deal drugs, take drugs, gamble their savings away, eat nothing but junk food, rob convenience stores, rape people, run red lights because they're impatient, think the WWF Wrestling is real, go to the monster truck rallies....stuff like that. ;-) And most of them would never think to question what they see on the 6 O'Clock News. Such people are easily manipulated. When they're young and strong, they become jarheads and go off to foreign wars and kill funny-looking foreigners for America and even torture them sometimes. Remember Lyndie England and her pals at Abu Grahib? What a bunch of idiots, eh? Such idiots will believe and do anything they are told, it seems.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:46 AM

Bush didn't know about the upcoming events of 9-11. I've followed this for 5 years, closely, and the man was in the dark. But he was in charge, and he helped cover up the events. He's as guilty of the murders as Cheney, Rumsfeld, Eberhart and Myers.

The WTC complex was old and at something like half occupancy. Anyone could have rented space in the towers and done anything they wanted, unnoticed.

The murderers are now desperate because the truth is breaking like a tidal wave over the American people. Their main mouthpiece right now is Popular Mechanics, which claims to have "debunked" the "911 conspiracy theorists." The truth is that 19 men with boxcutters making NORAD stand down is the conspiracy. Popular Mechanics' main argument is that we were all (including reporters) traumatized those first two day after the attacks, so no reportage from that time is reliable. But that's the time when all the news anchors used the term "controlled demolition" when speaking of the falling towers, and when reporters on the scenes reported the truth from the Pentagon and Pennsylvania. But now we're being told (in true brainwashing fashion) that we were too "traumatized" to know what we were doing. Bushit. The truth was told the first two days, and since then the govt has covered up and lied.

Your first instinct was correct. They were demolition jobs.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Old Guy
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:48 AM

Halliburton did it to start a war.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:51 AM

Did the Mafia have anything to do with JFK's assination & it's affiliation with secret government agencies? I don't know & you never will either.
Did Bin Laden have any thing to do with the Twin Towers & his past affilitation with secret government agencies?
I don't know & you never will either.

I do think that GWB is to much the idiot & his 7 minutes of "funk" could've on been a "I'm Micky the Dunce" (which he is) routine & now I have to play along because he was still tied to "some kinda of plan dat was goona go down, DUH".

And if anyone thinks that this couldn't have been done so sweetly, it wasn't. The pent didn't turn into a tent & the other plane never made it to it's destination. A minor screw up with the passangers? The 'Brink's Job' was done better than this & idiots pulled off that one.

I'm not saying the government was involved & I don't know that they weren't. I'm not putting it past them & they weren't at all helpful in handing over documents to the families & investagators. Though I do think it's up to the idiots to prove themselves to be beyond a reasonable doubt. They need to disprove all the plausable theories that are going round. For the soul purpose of healing a nation & answering to the families of the victims & above all to bring the trust back to the people. It would be far better to clear up any of the conspiracy theories now rather than let them fester for decades like JFK. It will lead to another 60's generation (which is where it is headed) where the government can't be trusted even under a close watch. A government that can't be trusted is not a government for the people nor is it a government of the people & it sure isn't a government by the people. For me it never will be but for my kids I would love it to be that way,,,,once more.

Barry,
who wasn't old enough to know a good caring government & came of age during the early 60's & I hate that what could've been & should've been wasn't, though it still could be & I hate that even worst because it's a place that I love more than those who are in charge of it's well being do .

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 03:53 AM

"This conspiracy theory proposes that GWB, while being too stupid and incompetent to tie his shoes and eat a pretzel, is somehow cunning enough to pull this off in complete secrecy." Old Guy

Hmmmmm. Old Guy, I knew about the pretzel- but what's this about being unable to tie his shoes? Nobody tells me nothin'.

*G*

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 04:42 AM

Some of you seriously need therapy.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 05:57 AM

It may all be nonsense, but the US has a long history of knowingly taking hits in order to set up profitable revenge wars (and the British did it with the Falklands). And we don't believe the President is really in charge, do we?

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: John O'L
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:10 AM

When I consider the kinds of guys who really are in charge, nothing would surprise me.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:22 AM

GULF OF TONKIN RESOLUTION--for the younger folks here . . . .

"The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was an alleged pair of attacks -- the second of which did not occur -- by North Vietnamese gunboats on two American destroyers, the USS Maddox and the USS C. Turner Joy, in August of 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin. Later research, including a report released in 2005 by the National Security Agency, indicates that the second attack did not occur, but also attempts to dispel the long-standing rumor that U.S. President Lyndon Johnson had knowingly lied about the existence of the incident.

The outcome of the incident was the passage of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted the President authority to assist any Southeast Asian country whose governments were jeopardized and was Johnson's legal justification for introducing American troops into the Vietnam War."

That ring any bells?

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:28 AM

"I've followed this for 5 years, closely"

So have I. I agree that Bush was not in on the whole thing. Hence the 'blue funk' while he was in the Florida school.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:32 AM

"Magic is the pretended performance of those things which cannot be done. The success of a magician's simulation of doing the impossible depends upon misleading the minds of his audiences. This, in the main, is done by adding, to a performance, details of which the spectators are unaware, and leaving out others which they believe you have not left out. In short a performance of magic is largely a demonstration of the universal reliability of certain facts of psychology." (John Mulholland, The Art of Illusion, Charles Scribner & Sons, 1944.)

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:35 AM

Neat thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: greg stephens
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:48 AM

Fantastic stuff. But I dont quite follow the argument that the secret conspiracy people wanted to hide the fact that a controlled demolition had taken place, so they deliberately carried out a controlled demolition that looked like a controlled demolition. Now, the naive would think this might lead people to suspect that a controlled demolition had taken place. But maybe this was a double bluff...? And where exactly do the green lizards fit in?

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:49 AM

They are in the White House, Greg.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:54 AM

Look at the Pentagon crash. Please, show me wreckage of a Boeing 757.

Today's tale is brought to you by the Letter N or Letter N______.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 06:59 AM

"Bush didn't know about the upcoming events of 9-11."

George Bush is inept. He couldn't organize a blowjob at a cocksuckers' convention.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Peter T.
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 07:04 AM

It astonishes me that while there are open conspiracies being perpetrated on the American people right now by their government, people should be wasting their time on idiocies like this. These kinds of masturbatory paranoia only indicate how incapable people seem to be of getting organized to do something -- instead they sit around and talk about this nonsense.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 07:13 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 07:15 AM

" open conspiracies being perpetrated on the American people right now by their government"

Clue us paranoids in on this, Peter T. Oh, please do. And what the fu#k are YOU doing about anything?

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 08:40 AM

What a load of Idiots! On one side, we have some professional reporters, watching a building fall down, they call it a controlled demolition, as they don't have any good words to describe what they're seeing, and some people belive them.
On the other side, we have legions of professional engineers, who have a perfectly sensible explanation of why they fell as they did, that requires no conspiricy theory. Even if you don't believe either side, Occams Razor argues against the existance of any conspircy, other than that of the hijackers.



Guest Dave, that's a new theory on me. We set up an invasion of the Falklands, to make money out of it? Bollocks. The Millitary ruler of Argintina thought it would make him more popular, and Britian wouldn't feel it worthwhile doing anything about it. Not complicated....

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 08:51 AM

Notice how this "guest" takes pleasure in knocking individuals like Peter and myself yet can't defend his positions? We express our opinion, that this is bullshit, this troll's only defense is to try to attack those who offer a different point of view. Why? Because this troll realizes that his or her does not have any "evidence" other than a few websites created by people with very little knowledge of the facts. Anyone who WANTS to find a reason will see what they want to see.

The FACT that many people have alerady addressed these accusations and offered data that contradicts is summarily dismissed by trolls like this because it ruins their scenario. So they attack the people.

As I said in the beginning, it is highly improbable (but not impossible) that a conspiracy like this occured. It is bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 08:58 AM

It's just conspiracy theories on the Left--to balance those on the Right--like the UN black helicopter business. But at least it makes it real easy for sensible people to position themselves as moderates.

Bush--and his regime--are consummate propagandists. And Bush is the ultimate opportunist.

It was a godsend to him--since aside from propaganda, his only other skill is in destroying. The ironic thing is that if he stopped at just toppling the Taliban--and pursued Osama, while concentrating on rebuilding Afghanistan, his reputation at least in foreign policy, would be on a par with other US leaders during the "good wars".

I'm sure his domestic policies would have been just as abysmal as we've seen.



But the controlled demolition idea--what a classic waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 10:26 AM

"But the controlled demolition idea--what a classic waste of time"

It wouldn't be a waste of time if there was hard evidence. Everything I saw on the website was circumstantial, open to interpretation, or just wrong. It is right, and important, to question. We would not have known about Watergate, Bay of Pigs, Gulf of Tonkin, and other attrocities if it weren't for people digging for the truth.

In this case, people are buying into a theory that has been disproven by multiple sources.

It worries me that this whole scenario might simply be a ploy to shift the blame and attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 10:37 AM

You can spend your time investigating theories like this--but you have to go at it objectively, realizing that some of your ideas are blind alleys. Conspiracy theorists are not famous for this--there's too much of a temptation to disregard anything that doesn't fit your predetermined conclusion--just as Mr. Bush himself did to justify the Iraq invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 10:41 AM

One of the real dangers of the world wide web, IMO, is the dissemination of this unproven, specious information as truth. It is ludicrous to all but those who want to see conspiracy in everything. This information is published out of context. The "cruise missile" comment at the Pentagon is a classic example.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 10:45 AM

The biggest problem I have with this idea, besides the fact that most conpiracy theorists are a few IQ points short of a Labrador Retreiver's bowling score, is that, at the same time they're saying that Bush & co can't organize the escape of air from a paper bag, they somehow coordinated the use of explosives and planes and pilots from other countries flying from different destinations with precision timing, no 'Murphy' moments, and without one single person out of the many who had to be involved spilling the beans or figuring out what was going on. Takes an enormous amount of intentional stupidity to believe that.

My opinion. As to whether Bush had ANYTHING to do with it, it's a possibility, but I'm not going to believe it happened just because of someone's fictional bizarrest-case scenario.

And GUEST, cookie tosser and chat-room-style-poster, I respect Peter T. Not you.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 11:46 AM

And sometimes, in the middle of a perfectly good rant, you type something like 'from different destinations'. I think people who believe these theories (as opposed to just thinking 'what if') are nuts, but I think I just took the piss out of myself. Damned subconscious!

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 12:33 PM

I have watched 4-5 different TV programs, some more than once...(one just last night)...explaining in DETAIL just how the burning fuel from airplanes further weakened the structure already damaged by impact. I saw scale model demonstrations.....I saw images of the $15 million tests done by structural engineers using mock-ups of the girder system to test loads.....

....and now, some idiots come along, observe some puffs of smoke, remember some images they saw of 'controlled demolitions', and make wild leaps of speculation in which they IGNORE all the evidence that doesn't support the conspiracy theories they have about every nasty event for 40 years!!

They DID find airliner debris at the Pentagon...small pieces, but they were there...and other pieces deep inside the building.

This is another classic case of "believing what you want to believe" and 'interpreting' evidence to support ONLY what you already believe.

We have 4 missing airplanes, we have witnesses who SAW those airplanes hit where they did...we have video of 3 of them..(yes, there IS video of the Pentagon crash...or rather, a set of brief stills played as video) The images corroborate what witnesses saw.

There ought to be a law against spreading stupid rumors and inserting unfounded speculation into what is already a sad & painful experience.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:05 PM

Ohfergoonessakes! It was fire, not the airplane impact or concussion of fuel explosion that brought the buildings down.

The upper floors, not surprisingly, were built of MUCH lighter girders than the lower floors. I've heard that, for weight reasons, the usual asbestos (or whatever) coating on the girders was skimped or dispensed with. The heat of the fire twisted or buckled the girders, which destroyed the planned play of support from the metal structure, which started the cascade effect of collapse.

Why do some people have such a HUNGER for marvels and dirty secrets and conspiracies?

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:10 PM

"Why do some people have such a HUNGER for marvels and dirty secrets and conspiracies?"

Part of it is because of past history. There have been many dirty deeds undertaken by governments in the past. The problem is, some people automatically assume that there is a conspiracy in EVERYTHING and interpret facts in alternate realities.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: freightdawg
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:13 PM

Jeri,

"most conspiracy theorists are a few IQ points short of a Labrador Retreiver's bowling score"

I must object.

Item one: it is not "most," it is ALL conspiracy theorists in this particular case. (some conspiracies, such as what caused the destruction of the Hindenburg, are entertaining to discuss).

Item two: why must you denigrate the athletic achievement of a most noble and beautiful creature to illustrate the shear stupidity of those who claim to "know" something that is absurd? As a fellow dawg I must send a muted growl in your general direction.

Your ability to verbally paint a picture with such stunning accuracy and detail is hereby noted, however. I heartily wag my tail in approval.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:14 PM

There is one video in, I think it was, the first link, to some NYC firemen talking right after...they said it was like a controlled demolition. I have to give some credence to their professional take on things. I don't consider them to be idiots.

Jeri, I think the problem with some conspiracy theorists is their intelligence is high as opposed to their deductive reasoning and/or any mental health issues the former may cause, i.e. paranoia, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:21 PM

Freightdawg, I stand by my comments, and I believe you're being overly sensitive. Bloodhounds may be able to bowl, herding breeds of dogs are fairly good at it, but retrievers, as a rule, aren't. They just keep bringing the ball back. Some of my best friends have Labs, and I have nothing against them. Or the dogs.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:47 PM

The real truth is...none of us know exactly what happened. None of us know the whole truth. We're in no position to. We are all theorizing, based on partial and quite fragmentary information...based on media spin...and based on the opinions and statements of many other people, who in most cases ALSO don't know exactly what happened on 911. Our theorizing, furthermore, is heavily driven by our prior emotional prejudices which color the way we interpret EVERYTHING we encounter.

As a result, you will see many vehement disagreements on this matter, and they will not be resolved. ;-)

And yet, most of those vehement people talk as if they knew.

My, my. What pretentiousness.

I am freely willing to admit that I don't KNOW for sure what happened on 911, who was behind it, who is lying about it, and who is telling the truth about it.

And neither do the rest of you.

It seems reasonably likely to me that certain people in the government (but most likely not George Bush himself) were involved in helping to set up 911...or in just helping to not stop it from happening. It seems likely to me that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. But I don't KNOW that, okay? It just seems likely to me, based on a great deal of stuff I've read about it, and based on the PNAC planning that was in place long before 911, and based on a prior attempt to bring down the WTC, and etc..etc. I don't KNOW. I just think it's rather likely. I await further information.

Now why don't all you other folks admit you don't KNOW too, and show a little humility for a change in the face of your personal limitations? You too, DougR...because you don't know. Admit it. You don't. You've just chosen to believe what you emotionally want to believe...same as pretty well everyone else here has chosen to do.

Nobody knows for sure what really happened except for some of those...a few of those sitting in the highest positions of power in the government, FBI, CIA, and such...and they are not posting about it on this forum, are they? I mean, hey, why the hell would they? ;-)

I figure they're probably busy doing other stuff that they consider more vital, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: C. Ham
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 01:57 PM

I am freely willing to admit that I don't KNOW for sure what happened on 911, who was behind it, who is lying about it, and who is telling the truth about it.

Both George Bush and Osama Bin Laden agree on WHO was behind the events of 9/11. Their only disagreements are on motivation and justification.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 02:23 PM

Yup, that's what our media tells us... ;-)

Do you think our media tells us the whole truth all the time? I very seriously don't.

Do you think anyone who had the whole truth would dare to tell it publicly? Or would live long if they tried to?

I don't.

But I'm just theorizing, same as everyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 02:24 PM

LH--"more vital"---bingo. Got it in one.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 02:25 PM

...and that is exactly why the U.S. will never 'find' Osama.

Subject: RE: BS: Twin Towers Controlled Demolition?
From: C. Ham
Date: 16 Sep 06 - 02:29 PM

Yup, that's what our media tells us

No, it's what Bin Laden and Bush tell us via our western media AND the Al-Jazeera and other Arabic media.

I've never taken either Bin Laden or Bush, or the media at face value. But really, the whole premise of this thread id comepletely idiotic.

I'm gone from this one.