Pentagon not hit with a plane, but a missile

[OzmO]

You mock the idea of a second investigation.

There are easily ten very strong pieces of evidence which were not allowed in the first investigation (budget reasons, we're told) which would open up a pandora's box of problems and prove the official story untrue.

for example:

1) seismic data, witness/firefighter statements, and video evidence showing bomb blast characteristics (noises, huge smoke plumes, etc).   These were rejected from the 911 commission - never allowed in.  If they HAD been admitted, they would have caused any reasonable person to simply test one piece of the metal from the towers, for explosive residue.  One piece.  Would have taken maybe 2 hours.  And it would have pretty clearly either proven or disproven the possibility of their claims.

Things like that.  The 911 widows BEGGED the commissioners to address the evidence, or just test ONE piece.  They refused.

ozmo, do you believe they should have just tested one piece to see if explosives were present?

TExt troubles....  you don't get it dude,  I already told you i am for a second investigation.

[OzmO]

If you look at the CT sites, you'll see they go out of their way to continually cite mainstream media sources when composing their thoughts.  And their thoughts/intent is clear and not that intrusive - just do one complete investigation.

seriously, i dont know why we're arguing.  the 911 chairs say the investigation is incomplete. 3000 dead people.  it should be automatic to do a complete investigation.  it's beyond me why anyone would protest it.

When you say things like:  If i could show you a document proving it........  tells me you information is highly suspect becuase fo plain common sense reasons such the easy way anyone can fake docs on the web.  And you know this! Which says volumes of what you are willing to concede to convince people.


That combined with the seemingly deliberate changing of small details altering the facts such as "The top pentagon brass,  the ring leader etc..."  tells me either you are flawed or the CT sites ar flawed.  I give you the benefit of the doubt.

Also,  there will be another investagation,  you can count on it.  but not for those ridiculous reasons i outlined earlier.

[chaos]

I gotta stick my nose in here and say that alot of people want a second investigation 240, but maybe not for the reasons of who in our gov to blame, but only for closure, maybe just to end it all with conclusive evidence. Not trying to be a dick but the way you tell it, you would like to charge the top brass with all kinds of crimes against America. that's just how it comes across, anyways like I said I'd support a full and impartial second investigation.

[OzmO]

Well, it's hard to get complete information, or we'd certainly share it.
 

Then why make assumptions that you call facts with incomplete information?

That's irresponsible.

Newsweek telling us something worded like "the top Pentagon brass received warnings not to fly the next morning", then NO MEDIA OUTLET touching the story after that.  And the pentagon denying it.  And Newsweek tight lipped on it.
 

You did it again.   "All" the top brass vs a "group" of top brass is 2 very differnt things that lead the reader to 2 different conclusions. 

For you to be this irresponsbile is criminal and takes away your credibility. 

that's why people give you so much shit about your "facts"

Condi admitted that Air Force One received coded threats from an inside mole that day, on Meet the Press.  The next day, Ari Fleischer saying he knows nothing about it, then refusing to address it again.
 

Based on your past track record, i don't completely believe you.  Condi may have said:  "Air Force One received suspected or possible coded threats"  which changes the meaning of her statement dramatically concerning the issue. 

that's why i try and usually ask you to give me a link.  Hopefully not some gay ass music laced amature final cut pro movie.  hopefully you can just post the actual straight forward video of it.  Kind of like that reporter at the pentagon.  pretty straight forward.

But no,  you usually don;t becuase you are getting all the info from tainted sources. (9/11 CT sites)

Things like that cast monster doubt on the credibility of the very admin we're supposed to believe?  No way.

And, the fact they didn't let the investigation be independent.  that they gave it 13 mil (after putting $60M on bush's inauguration lol).  the fact they ordered the scope be limited oNLy to al-Q... any evidence pointing elsewhere was not to come into play.  WTF is that? lol...
 

All of which DOES NOT points to:


-  The pentagon was hit by a missile
-  The WTC's were brought down by bombs
-  Flight 93 was brought shot down by a US fighter jet or was another missile, not a plane to begin with
-  WTC was acontrolled demolitioin

But instead point to cover upi of incompetence.  Becuase America wants to why the billions we spend on security failed that day.

[OzmO]

Condi said they got a credible threat using codewords that only that morning's secret service would have, very indicative of a mole. 

now i know you love to talk about those 4 point, let's do it:

-  The pentagon was hit by a missile
The hole and lack of debris say missile, Rummy says plane.  Believe what you wish.

-  The WTC's were brought down by bombs
Witnesses, seismics, and video shows bombs.  Bush says fire. Believe what you wish.

-  Flight 93 was brought shot down by a US fighter jet or was another missile, not a plane to begin with
Rumsfeld, debris field, and crash site say fighter jet.  Bush said crash.  You choose what you want.

-  WTC was acontrolled demolitioin
Visual characteristics VERY strongly point to controlled demo.  Govt won't address it.  You believe what you want.


In the end, believe what you want.  I know it hurts like f**k to know you've been lied to, and the people you elect to protect can actually kill 1/100,000 of the US population to keep the other 1/99,999 under control and with cheaper gas.  So you don't have to think about it.

More cheesy loaded statements.   Getting old. 

Condi said they got a credible threat using codewords that only that morning's secret service would have, very indicative of a mole. 

Again,  information you post here in things like this is suspect.  Post a link of the actual interview.

Wait a second........  have you actually even seen the interview yourself?  lol

[sandycoosworth]

At the core of the main stream 9/11 CT's, from what i've seen, is this:

-  The pentagon was hit by a missile
-  The WTC's were brought down by bombs
-  Flight 93 was brought shot down by a US fighter jet or was another missile, not a plane to begin with
-  WTC was acontrolled demolitioin

I doubt this movement is growing, and if it is, it's only growing based on curiosity that will eventually lead to dismissal based on it being completely ridiculous.

I do however believe that due to the overall growing distrust and confidnece in our government there will be and is a growing call for a new 9/11 investagaion based mostly on the cover up on incompetence.

The only plausible CT i can see in all of this would be BUSH's forhand knowledge of the attacks.  Something that, even if it could be proved by democrats or who ever, would never be allowed to surface becuase of the long term damage to the country.


BTW,

cute trapping statement: "you're not doubting the 911 skeptics are growing.  Are you?" 

The most mainstream conspiracy theory is 19 aRABS with boxcutters pulled this off.

The less popular ct's claim otherwise

[OzmO]

The most mainstream conspiracy theory is 19 aRABS with boxcutters pulled this off.

The less popular ct's claim otherwise

No, your statement isn't accurate.

A better one would be:  19 arabs have been identified as the ones who hijacked the 4 planes.  Based on pone calls from air phones on one of the flights, some of them may have used a combination of Box cutters and the threat of bomb on board to keep control of the passengers.


I'm not suprised how you slanted the facts and ommitted other facts.   And then wrapped it up in a lame persuasive sentence.  240 does it all the time.

At least he isn't so stupid to think the BBC article was overwHelming evidence.   

[Cavalier22]

240, i just think you are overestimating teh amount of people who are into these theories.  You mentioned it is all over college campuses, yet I heard absolutely no one talk about it let alone endorse them in all the classes, discussion, conversations, editorials in the school paper, etc when i was there (grad last May). In fact, other than his board I have never met anyone who believes this stuff.

Should tehre be another investigation. Probably.  It likely would be full of the same problems as the last one; people trying to avoid blame or fault, cover up their own negligence, etc. 


Call me close minded or just in touch with reality, or a lil bit of both, but until someone who has inside knowledge of the plot (and there would be thousands with a plot this complex) steps forward I will not consider this fantastic theory of the CT sites to even be in the realm of possibility.  There would probably even be 10s of thousands.  For a secret like that to be kept is impossible.

 Every study by experts on the various parts of what happened on 9/11 has backed the main premise of the official story. Unless they are all part of the cover up, then that is good enough for me at this point.  When an English professor starts talking about the complex physics of a tower collapsing I don't feel too inclined to put much stock in what he says compared to someone who's expertise is in that field.

In any event, there is no point arguing about it. You believe what you want to believe, I believe what I watn to believe.

We will see how it plays out. 

You all be safe this saturday night.

[Dos Equis]

240, i just think you are overestimating teh amount of people who are into these theories.  You mentioned it is all over college campuses, yet I heard absolutely no one talk about it let alone endorse them in all the classes, discussion, conversations, editorials in the school paper, etc when i was there (grad last May). In fact, other than his board I have never met anyone who believes this stuff.

I agree.  I've met two people who believe this stuff, neither one of them students, and I have about 20 or students a semester in my class.  The people who believe this stuff appear to read the same websites and spout the same nonsense.  Probably the most remarkable thing about this stuff is how some of them get angry and insult you when you don't believe them.  I saw the "nutty professor" do this on Fox.  And of course 240 does it all the time.

[sandycoosworth]

No, your statement isn't accurate.

A better one would be:  19 arabs have been identified as the ones who hijacked the 4 planes.  Based on pone calls from air phones on one of the flights, some of them may have used a combination of Box cutters and the threat of bomb on board to keep control of the passengers.


I'm not suprised how you slanted the facts and ommitted other facts.   And then wrapped it up in a lame persuasive sentence.  240 does it all the time.

At least he isn't so stupid to think the BBC article was overwHelming evidence.  

you fucking idiot; by virtue of having 4 simultaneous suicide attacks,  911 had to have been a conspiracy because it took more than one person to execute

therefore, any theory explaining it is by definition a conspiracy theory

anything else

[OzmO]

you fucking idiot

I'm a fucking idiot and you are the one who thought a BBC article was overwHelming evidence?  That's rich!

by virtue of having 4 simultaneous suicide attacks,  911 had to have been a conspiracy because it took more than one person to execute

Is this your big comeback point?

He did you know the sky is blue to the human eye?

Did you that 100 + 100+ 40 = 240?   

[sandycoosworth]

sad as it is, someone had to explain what the term conspiracy theory means because you clearly did not know

[kh300]

princess Dian was killed by a drunk driver that was driving too fast. thats the official explanation after it was investigated. many people believe it was an inside job.. thats the conspiracy

911 was officially investigated and got an official explanation. making any other explanation a conspericy to the official one,, get it?

[OzmO]

sad as it is, someone had to explain what the term conspiracy theory means because you clearly did not know

Plain desperation.

[OzmO]

Plain desperation.

by virtue of having 4 simultaneous suicide attacks,  911 had to have been a conspiracy because it took more than one person to execute

Maybe the phrase:  "no shit sherlock"  might mean something to an ignorant jack ass as youself.

The most mainstream conspiracy theory is 19 aRABS with boxcutters pulled this off.

This right here isn't a an accurate statement becuase it wasn't just box cutters.


Why do i have to spell everything out for you? 

probably becuase you are a moron.