The 911 BBC Blunder

[Amerikanse]

I'm not going to argue these points, since I haven't researched it. But the fact remains that people did see a plane hit the building.

And I honestly do want to know why the fall of WTC7 would be "scripted." I simply don't see any point.

 

[LoneGunman]

by 'scripted' - it (the existence of the building while reporting its collapse)
suggests that news agencies were being fed information, some of which
came a little before it 'should have'..
No ones suggesting the TV station is complicit - however, there is much
curiosity about such an awesomely amazing good piece of 'guessing' - which
was passed onto the Media, and repeated by them.
especially given that - as said before - no steel building had ever collapsed
from fire damage before.
Yet whoever was passing 'breaking news' to the BBC, somehow 'guessed'
that a specific building 'had' collapsed, before it DID.

This suggests that events themselves, were somehow 'scripted' - as its
highly improbable that a mere guess (which wasnt reported as such) could
manage to pinpoint the exact building, including its name, and its collapse -
odd, given that historically, this was massively unlikely to occur.
(who knew of WTC 7, or its name, before 911?)
Someone did, 26 minutes or more before it collapsed, and gave precise
details about what only happened later, as if it had already happened.

Thats extreme suspicious fortune telling..

 

[Amerikanse]

by 'scripted' - it (the existence of the building while reporting its collapse)
suggests that news agencies were being fed information, some of which
came a little before it 'should have'..
No ones suggesting the TV station is complicit - however, there is much
curiosity about such an awesomely amazing good piece of 'guessing' - which
was passed onto the Media, and repeated by them.
especially given that - as said before - no steel building had ever collapsed
from fire damage before.
Yet whoever was passing 'breaking news' to the BBC, somehow 'guessed'
that a specific building 'had' collapsed, before it DID.

The lack of significance in this tidbit gives your argument a bad case of the swiss cheeses and weakens the cause of tinfoil hat-wearers everywhere.

Any other cases like this one that suggest a trend?

 

[LabAnimal]

eish... too much to read now... will catch up tomorrow...

 

[LoneGunman]

Amerikanse - don't be a troll. you make no sense. You are clearly the tin foil hat wearer,
for choosing to not 'understand' the problem.

I'll quote from people who've commented at the BBC themselves..
=============================snip
1. BBC reports for 20 solid minutes that WTC7 has collapsed when even in the live shot it stands as sturdy as the day it was built.

2. The idea that WTC7 would collapse spontaneously due to minor fires and minimal damage to the north face is laughable and an insult to intelligence. But it did, approximately 5 minutes AFTER BBC's report....or at least 5 minutes after Jane Standley's live shot was disconnected.

3. BBC loses all of it's 9/11 footage so this cannot be reviewed or explained. My nephew still has all his VHS tapes from that day. He recorded almost every news station for 24 hours straight. He's 19 now. He was 13 when it happened. So, a 13 year old can be more responsible with his VHS tapes than one of the largest news organizations?

4. The archive footage is mysteriously pulled off of YouTube and Google video repeatedly and without provocation or explanation.

5. BBC's response is, 'there is no conspiracy. it was a mistake.'

Grant us logical thinkers at least one thing. This is highly suspicious. The BBC needs to reveal what source they drew the conclusion that WTC7 had collapsed.

Oh, and the ez-out phrases like 'it appears' and 'we're receiving reports that..' were not used throughout this footage.

Especially when the anchor starts talking about the (lack of) body count since there was so much time to evacuate since the collapse of WTC 1-2.

The BBC needs to reveal what source they drew the conclusion that WTC7 had collapsed. I do not necessarily think the BBC is a witting participant in some 9/11 conspiracy, but it's definitely looking like you were a pawn. Revealing who/where the BBC received the information that WTC7 had collapsed would be a good start in clearing your name."
===========================end

 

[Amerikanse]

Suspicious, yes. Significant, no. But I haven't passed judgement, yet. I'm trying very hard not to be the close-minded person I am often accused of being (not necessarily here.)

 

[kilo39]

Strange that WTC7 should collapse with the signature of a controlled demolition while 1 and 2 collapse with a massive ejection of materials and enough heat to destroy dna, concrete pulverised to dust and molten metal in the basement (which smoldered for weeks.) Sorry, just got to laugh.

Tech May ID More 9/11 Victims
The New York City Medical Examiner's office oversaw the testing of about 20,000 body parts from the World Trade Center site; some fragments were so small and damaged that they didn't appear to have come from a living being.
-
Some were presumably vaporized during the attacks, but the DNA of others may still lurk in bone samples.
-
While DNA is pretty strong stuff -- Mother Nature clearly doesn't want our blueprints to be fragile -- it's especially vulnerable to heat and humidity.

and lots of sick people:

9/11 First Responders: 'We're Dead Men Walking'
Years After Attacks, Many Face Reality Death May Be Near
CBS 2 spoke to just six of the 33,000 people who are now being treated after working at ground zero. As time goes by, new health problems emerge, some unexplained.
"I have a rash that's in the back of my leg now," Valente said.
"The fear is that most of us are going to get some kind of cancer in our esophagus," Feal said.
They also suffer from massive migraines, unexplained rashes and aches and pains that defy explanation.

 

[LoneGunman]

for the fans of Pentagon lawns,
some lovely pix showing the awesomely
strong lawns that planes can bounce on, and
leave no marks... ditto the amazing 'Plane-Wing-Mark-Repel' treated
walls and windows..
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/bluehi.html

 

[Claymore]

then riddle me this:

2)why, in the immediate photographs taken, before the section collapsed, is there only a tiny hole visible, around 16 - 20 feet in diameter.

(No damage, or broken windows to either side of the hole - which is where the wings and engines would have smashed into it..)

This has been covered many times before - check the position of the hole you mention. Count the rows of windows from the top, and you'll see that the hole is in the third floor, and the great gaping hole beneath (the aircraft hit 1st and 2nd floors) is obscured.

 

[JK8]

I'm not going to argue these points, since I haven't researched it. But the fact remains that people did see a plane hit the building.

And I honestly do want to know why the fall of WTC7 would be "scripted." I simply don't see any point.

Some saw a plane some didnt see a plane... The plane hit the section of the Pentagon that was under renovation lol how convenient.

 

[JK8]

Is G W Bush a Jew?
http://www15.ocn.ne.jp/~oyakodon/meanwhile_j.htm#IS%20PRESIDENT%20BUSH%20A%20JEW

 

[LoneGunman]

Okay - for fans of the Pentagon saga..

Will you guys accept the official word of former Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld -
from an interview hosted on a US military Dpt of Defence site..

go to
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html
and search on the page for 'missile'

".. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique
and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every
conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an
American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building
and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to
deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are,
and dealing with them."

I don't think he's talking about a plane

and from http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics and History/Missile-Not-Flight-77.html

"Remember, the 757 must fit into a hole the width of three windows, not the gaping hole
from the later activities of the firemen. Note also that no damage to the building occurred
at the points where the wings would have struck the outer wall....at over 400 mph.
(A 737 would fit the damage profile better.) The fuel tanks would have increased the
momentum of the wings creating a hammer-like blow to the facade. No evidence of
that. Then how did all that aircraft squeeze into the relatively small hole in the Pentagon
shown above? Some hypothesize that the wings became crushed against the side of
the fuselage and followed it into the hole. That still doesn't explain why no damage to
the exterior of the Pentagon at the point of hypothetical wing impact. Besides, the
fuel tanks inside the wings should have burst and most of the fuel exploded outside
the building as the plane was extruded through that small hole. Once the tanks are
ruptured in the extrusion, the fuel would be squeezed out."

"The "something" that hit the Pentagon slammed through six walls before it left an
exit hole approximately twelve feet across. Can you imagine something in an
aluminum aircraft that could remain intact through six walls, multiple pillars and
leave an exit wound so small. It can't be one of the engines because there is
only one hole and the exit hole is consistent with the trajectory of the fuselage,
not an outboard turbine. Besides, this is too near the opening and an engine
would not have burned up in a fire in the open courtyard. The nose cone of the
757 is made of a very hard carbon compound that could not be expected to
survive crashing through all that structure and still have enough momentum to
blast a twelve foot hole in the heavy wall in the Pentagon. It's starting to seem
as though Secretary Rumsfeld might be right"

 

[LoneGunman]

Here's what the BBC and official mainstream 'experts' describe as 'a raging
inferno' - an NYPD picture of WTC 7, showing the actual fires in the building
on 911..
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/march2007/050307notaraginginferno.jpg

And by way of comparison.. here's a picture of another steel structure
building, in Madrid - that burned for 18 hours without falling..
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/march2007/050307windsor.jpg

and here's a 13 minute google video on WTC 7
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2179339594842383954&hl=en
NYPD officer Craig Bartmer awoke on 9/11 to images of the World Trade Center burning.
Knowing colleagues who worked inside the towers, he immediately headed for ground
zero, to help with the rescue efforts. He is now suffering from respiratory illnesses as
a result of the toxic dust inhaled at the site. Bartmer was in the immediate vicinity of
Building 7 before its collapse at approximately 5:20pm.

"BARTMER: "I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just
a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness
testimony down there of hearing explosions. I didn't see any reason for that building to fall
down the way it did -- and a lot of guys should be saying the same thing. I don't know
what the fear is coming out and talking about it? I don't know -- but it's the truth."
[...]
BARTMER: "I walked around it (Building 7). I saw a hole. I didn't see a hole bad enough to
knock a building down, though. Yeah there was definitely fire in the building, but I didn't
hear any... I didn't hear any creaking, or... I didn't hear any indication that it was going
to come down. And all of a sudden the radios exploded and everyone started screaming
'get away, get away, get away from it!'... It was at that moment... I looked up, and it
was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. The thing started pealing in on itself
... Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running, and the ****'s hitting the ground
behind me, and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom."
I think I know an explosion when I hear it... Yeah it had some damage to it, but nothing
like what they're saying... Nothing to account for what we saw... I am shocked at the
story we've heard about it to be quite honest."

 

[Dmitrimm]

You're right Lonegunman, these people are all deluded:

http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html

 

[LoneGunman]

never said that those folks were deluded.

I'm just pointing out clear evidence that 'doesn't fit' and that
shouldn't exist, in the official conspiracy theory that a bunch of
barely trained, alcohol-drinking, lap-dance buying supposed devout
Muslims, orchestrated from a cave somewhere by a guy on a dialysis
machine, somehow bypassed the security mechanisms of the most
powerful nation on earth, rode airplanes around for a couple of hours,
made the airplanes exceed their software specifications and switch off
their transponders, and who coincidentally somehow duplicated military
exercises that 'just happened' to be taking place AT THE SAME TIME,
dealing with the same thing they were doing, in order to commit their
naughty deeds, armed with box cutters!

And this naughty deed, made three buildings collapse - despite no
steel structure buildings in the history of Building having ever collapsed
from heat damage, two disintegrated into dust in mid air, all three dropped
beautifully into their own footprint, and all three collapsed at free-fall speeds.


I'm not the conspiracy theorist.

The people who believe the above official story, are the wingnut, tinfoil-cap wearers amongst us

PS - are you calling Donald Rumsfeld, a liar?
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html
".. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique
and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every
conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an
American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building
and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to
deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are,
and dealing with them."

 

[Dmitrimm]

The people behind many of these points are driven by brazen naivety about the world. They can't believe the most "powerful" nation on earth could fall victim to a suicidal attack on it's own soil. In denial that groups of suicidal men would have the audacity to commit these acts. It's happening everyday in Iraq. Sure, a busy market in Baghdad isn't as "glamorous" as two tall skyscrapers. But beyond the logistics of learning to pilot these aircraft, which these men clearly did do, what exactly is the core difference?

never said that those folks were deluded.

I'm just pointing out clear evidence that 'doesn't fit' and that
shouldn't exist, in the official conspiracy theory that a bunch of
barely trained

But they did train. Whether they were good pilots or not is irrelevant. One of those plains didn't reach it's target. The others did.

alcohol-drinking, lap-dance buying supposed devout Muslims,

You don't believe in the existence of..hypocrisy? Or conflicted personalities driven by multiple desires..sexual, religious, political..? That these desires are sometimes independent of one another?

orchestrated from a cave somewhere by a guy on a dialysis machine

Seemed like a pretty simple plan to me. What's wrong with a cave? You'd prefer the shiny boardroom of some shady governmental organization? Is that easier to comprehend? Most of us in the West can't understand the need to commit suicide on the promise of an eternity surrounded by virgins.

, somehow bypassed the security mechanisms of the most powerful nation on earth

They stepped on board of the aircraft and hijacked them. This has happened many times in the past.

, rode airplanes around for a couple of hours,
made the airplanes exceed their software specifications and switch off
their transponders, and who coincidentally somehow duplicated military
exercises that 'just happened' to be taking place AT THE SAME TIME,

YOU'RE RIGHT. It's very strange that the vast U.S. military happened to be at work on a Tuesday morning.

dealing with the same thing they were doing, in order to commit their
naughty deeds, armed with box cutters!

Don't believe it's possible? Banks have been robbed with vegetables. Determined suicidal men will use their bare hands.

I wonder what would have happened if you were on those planes and a man armed with a blade cuts open an air hostess and forces the pilots out of the cockpit, perhaps cutting one up as he resisted. Am I being presumptuous? Perhaps, but at least I don't presume on the lives of 100s of ordinary people afraid when confronted by determined men prepared to die for their cause.

And this naughty deed, made three buildings collapse - despite no
steel structure buildings in the history of Building having ever collapsed

How many times in the "history of Building" have airliners been plowed into skyscrapers? Do we have any examples of what might happen?

from heat damage, two disintegrated into dust in mid air, all three dropped
beautifully into their own footprint, and all three collapsed at free-fall speeds.

So you believe everything should be explained neatly?
That perhaps shortcuts were taken during the building of the towers thirty years before, perhaps the result of budgetary constraints, or perhaps incompetence - insufficient fire protection was installed in the building - and that the massive impact of the aircraft, something never seen before "in the history of Building", and a thousand other factors that day could have caused their collapse?

Rather, you'd prefer this:

That a secret U.S. governmental organisation placed demolition charges unnoticed inside two of the largest skyscrapers in the world and then blew them up..killing thousands of their own citizens..and then disappeared in their black helicopters off into the sunset, never to be heard from again?

All so that oil prices could soar, and the U.S. could enter into a failed incremental war..?

I'm not the conspiracy theorist.

Disbelieving idealist perhaps. Shocked "that the most powerful nation in the world" couldn't prevent this.....so they must have been behind it..? Bad things happen.

The people who believe the above official story, are the wingnut, tinfoil-cap wearers amongst us

You mistake "belief" for commonsense.

PS - are you calling Donald Rumsfeld, a liar?

PS - stop twisting a few words to suite your narrow vision of this event.

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html
".. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique
and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every
conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an
American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building
and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to
deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are,
and dealing with them."

Twice now you've quoted this. I was hoping I wouldn't have to explain it to you.

You think he was actually referring to a missile? It didn't cross your mind that this career bureaucrat\politician was using words designed to portray the U.S. as a victim of an act of war, as opposed to a simple civilian hijacking? The word "aircraft" substituted for "missile" as a way to further emphasise these attacks as having military intent, and therefore provide justification for a U.S. moving on terrorist training camps? Or does this political language confuse your bashful naivety towards world politics, and events?

 

[LoneGunman]

a)"But they did train."

Yes, some at US AIRFORCE BASE FLIGHT SCHOOLS..
"UQ Wire: 911 Hijackers Who Lived At A US Navy Base"
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0208/S00085.htm
"Alleged Hijackers May Have Trained at U.S. Bases"
http://www.prisonplanet.com/alleged_hijackers_may_trained_us_bases.html
and your friend, who supposedly piloted a commercial airliner, at low altitude, clipping lamposts and skimming into the Pentagon, was considered such a bad pilot, they wouldnt let him use a Cessna

re drinking, 'devout' Muslims, buying lapdances, leaving Korans on the bar, and LOUDLY telling everyone in the area that the US will pay tomorrow!!..
being explained away as 'hypocrites' or 'conflicted'..

You cannot be that stupid, can you? Really?
Okay, maybe you are
explain:
MAY Several of the alleged 9/11 hijackers make six trips to Las Vegas and seen in the local Strip clubs.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/10/04/MN102970.DTL
Last Friday Atta, the most prominent face of the hijack teams and the man who linked them together, and two other Middle Eastern men were spotted at a bar in Holly-wood in Florida called Shuckums. They ran up a bill and started rowing with waitress Patricia Idrissi over the cost of their vodkas and rums. Atta shouted at the manager: 'You think I can't pay? I'm a pilot for American Airlines. I can pay my f***ing bill.' He pulled out a wad of $100 and $50 bills and threw money at Idrissi, leaving her an insultingly small tip." - Sunday Herald (09/16/01)
http://www.sundayherald.com/18498
"Barroom bravado at the Pink Pony Nude Theater in Daytona Beach on the eve of the assault has left owners wondering.
"Tomorrow, America will see bloodshed,'' a man with a Middle Eastern accent seated with two other men reportedly said there Monday night.
John Kap, vice president at the Pink Pony, shrugged it off.
On his way into work Tuesday morning, Kap heard the news from the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
"We knew right then we had to call the FBI,'' said Kap, who has turned over to FBI agents credit-card receipts, driver's license numbers and a copy of the Quran left by one of the men."
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/orlandosentinel/80619409.html?did=80619409&FMT=ABS&FMTS=FT&date=Sep+14,+2001&author=Mark+Silva,+Sentinel+Political+Editor&pub=Orlando+Sentinel&desc=FBI+PIECES+DETAILS+OF+SUSPECTS'+LIVES+HUNDREDS+OF+AGENTS+SCOURED+FLORIDA+

re "Seemed like a pretty simple plan to me."
explain how the 'hijackers' made NORAD stand down, made the FAA not scramble aircraft (and manually cut up written notes, made the President sit quietly instead of being hustled from a live scheduled meeting, made FEMA workers arrive THE DAY BEFORE 911, to be ready for it etc etc..
Duh

re the collapsing buildings
saying "So you believe everything should be explained neatly? " and mentioning budget constraints..
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00177.htm
explain why the insurance underwriter was fired after 911, for clearly pointing out that the official explanation did not gel with the recorded tests ahead of insuring the building..


re your:
"Rather, you'd prefer this:
That a secret U.S. governmental organisation placed demolition charges unnoticed inside two of the largest skyscrapers in the world and then blew them up..killing thousands of their own citizens..and then disappeared in their black helicopters off into the sunset, never to be heard from again?"

I refer your uneducated simplistic mind, to a declassified document called Operation Northwoods - where in the early Sixties - the US Join Chiefs of Staff, signed off on a plan to - among other things - fake a hijacking of an airplane, crash it, bomb US cities, finance sniper attacks and more - all to
and I quote "provoke a healthy wave of indignation" amongst the US population - in order to provoke a war with Cuba.
It was only thanks to JFK refusing to do this, that the plan didnt happen.

If the US Military and Government, were willing to kill large numbers of
its people, and destroy commercial airliners, as early as around 1962 -
you have to be pretty moronic, to believe that they somehow got 'nicer'
by 2001.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html

And please explain the Israeli Mossad agents arrested ON 911, for laughing and cheering as the buildings burned.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html
Explain how they knew to set up video cameras BEFORE the event.
Explain what they meant, when they went on Israeli TV, and stated that their purpose in being there, was to 'document the event'.

Or maybe explain how come Emergency equipment for the Pentagon's MASCAL emergency plane crash plans were already out of their storage areas for an inventory check before the Pentagon was hit.
http://history.amedd.army.mil/memoirs/soldiers/responding.pdf

Maybe you should learn a little about current affairs, politics and history, before waving your laughably undocumented hearsay and ignorance around

Theres an awful lot of evidence, across the net, thanks to newspaper archives and sites storing the data..
try http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/oddities/911.html

 

[Claymore]

It seems that the conspiracy theorists not only get facts rather wrong, in many cases, but they will happily distord those they have. Then they produce a whole bunch of "anomalies" that are not consistent with each other, or with the choice collections of anomalies reported by other theorists. And none of them have actually come up with a theory, in detail, of what they think happened.

 

[kilo39]

The people behind many of these points are driven by brazen naivety about the world. They can't believe the most "powerful" nation on earth could fall victim to a suicidal attack on it's own soil. In denial that groups of suicidal men would have the audacity to commit these acts. It's happening everyday in Iraq. Sure, a busy market in Baghdad isn't as "glamorous" as two tall skyscrapers. But beyond the logistics of learning to pilot these aircraft, which these men clearly did do, what exactly is the core difference?

Bush and co. ignored terror briefings or any policy on Al Qaeda. At the very least they were [complacent] at worst they were complicit. Especially as they ignored direct warnings from [many] governments in the days leading up to 911. At the very least they are morally deleterious, at the worst they are [playing their cards from another deck.] Then the deliberate policy of squashing any and all investigation of these persons, though they were 'spotted' in the days (and months) leading up to 911. There is more. How stinky does the fish have to be? Morally bankrupt. Deleterious in the duty. A wanton ignoring of the warning signs. Deliberately shut down any investigation before and after. 3/4's still classified. What are they hiding?

But they did train. Whether they were good pilots or not is irrelevant. One of those plains didn't reach it's target. The others did.

Irrelevant? I would have thought every little point was relevant in a debate of this size. Especially when it comes to navigating a few hundred miles and then hitting a target precisely first time after a piece of impeccable flying. How tall does this tale have to be?

You don't believe in the existence of..hypocrisy? Or conflicted personalities driven by multiple desires..sexual, religious, political..? That these desires are sometimes independent of one another?

So these boisterous terrorists tell all and sundry but nobody notices? Or was this just the farewell party?

Seemed like a pretty simple plan to me. What's wrong with a cave? You'd prefer the shiny boardroom of some shady governmental organization? Is that easier to comprehend? Most of us in the West can't understand the need to commit suicide on the promise of an eternity surrounded by virgins.

The most well planned terrorist attack in the history of humanity. Practically impeccably executed. Months of planning, scheming, exercise. But no one noticed. High technology too. No problem when you have all the schematics... in your cave in afghanistan.

They stepped on board of the aircraft and hijacked them. This has happened many times in the past.

Watchlists and surveillance but nobody noticed them (and somehow they weren't on the passenger manifest.) Oh and here begins our day of coincidences that have never happened before in all the days of history, impossible basically. But it happened. All impeccably planned, executed from a cave in 'stan.

YOU'RE RIGHT. It's very strange that the vast U.S. military happened to be at work on a Tuesday morning.

No but that's the problem; they weren't working, or were looking the other way.

Don't believe it's possible? Banks have been robbed with vegetables. Determined suicidal men will use their bare hands.

Greatest terrorist attack in history. Vegetables? I don't think so.

I wonder what would have happened if you were on those planes and a man armed with a blade cuts open an air hostess and forces the pilots out of the cockpit, perhaps cutting one up as he resisted. Am I being presumptuous? Perhaps, but at least I don't presume on the lives of 100s of ordinary people afraid when confronted by determined men prepared to die for their cause.

The real question is: what forces were at play that allowed this to transpire?

How many times in the "history of Building" have airliners been plowed into skyscrapers? Do we have any examples of what might happen?

Besides the b52(?) into the empire state, not many; but twice on the same day in the same pattern, oh plus one? Some things stretch the imagination. This is one of them. (By this I mean the buildings collapsing in the same pattern, exactly, within an hour of each other.) They were twins but isn't this taking the concept of twins a bit far?

So you believe everything should be explained neatly?
That perhaps shortcuts were taken during the building of the towers thirty years before, perhaps the result of budgetary constraints, or perhaps incompetence - insufficient fire protection was installed in the building - and that the massive impact of the aircraft, something never seen before "in the history of Building", and a thousand other factors that day could have caused their collapse?

Yes, we all know 27000 gallons of fuel melted thousands of tons of steel (which smoldered in the basement for weeks.) Or are we stupid?

Rather, you'd prefer this:

That a secret U.S. governmental organisation placed demolition charges unnoticed inside two of the largest skyscrapers in the world and then blew them up..killing thousands of their own citizens..and then disappeared in their black helicopters off into the sunset, never to be heard from again?

Um, isn't this similar to the kennedy story and a dozen others?

All so that oil prices could soar, and the U.S. could enter into a failed incremental war..?

Yes, (american) companies get [fat] and rich when the oil price goes up and the world is at war. Failed incrementally 'cause they have no desire to win. All a big plan see. A scam. Attack an 'innocent' country on the pretext of terrorism then declare your dedication to freedom. All the while watching the oil price soar while you gut the country for your own end.

Disbelieving idealist perhaps. Shocked "that the most powerful nation in the world" couldn't prevent this.....so they must have been behind it..? Bad things happen.

Yes. Sh#t happens but when the people doing the sh#t are deliberately ignored and practically encouraged then I have to question. Especially if I wish to remain a realist not blinded by any idealism.

You mistake "belief" for commonsense.

PS - stop twisting a few words to suite your narrow vision of this event.

Twice now you've quoted this. I was hoping I wouldn't have to explain it to you.

You think he was actually referring to a missile? It didn't cross your mind that this career bureaucrat\politician was using words designed to portray the U.S. as a victim of an act of war, as opposed to a simple civilian hijacking? The word "aircraft" substituted for "missile" as a way to further emphasise these attacks as having military intent, and therefore provide justification for a U.S. moving on terrorist training camps? Or does this political language confuse your bashful naivety towards world politics, and events?

You mistake idiocy for truth. Because only an idiot could fail to see the untruth in a long stream of events that are inexplicable while been led to believe a long stream of lies proven false over and over. But believe in your idealism, better to believe a dream that hard, cold reality.

Oh and so you are telling us this politician is already prepped with doublespeak and lies to further his agenda?

It seems that the conspiracy theorists not only get facts rather wrong, in many cases, but they will happily distord those they have. Then they produce a whole bunch of "anomalies" that are not consistent with each other, or with the choice collections of anomalies reported by other theorists. And none of them have actually come up with a theory, in detail, of what they think happened.

It was an impeccably planned [exercise] with access to technical manuals, skills and procedure that a few weeks in a cessna (or any other prop plane) wouldn't account. It was impeccably executed overriding the inbuilt defence systems of the US (on duty every day except this one; or inexplicably in some other part of the country; with no backup.) A country facing a severe terrorist threat. Known peeps. A trail a mile wide. But no THEY did it (oh ya, not to forget BL.)

Now you want us to come up with a plan? Why should we do that when here is one perfectly executed. I mean.

 

[Claymore]

It was an impeccably planned [exercise] with access to technical manuals, skills and procedure that a few weeks in a cessna (or any other prop plane) wouldn't account. It was impeccably executed overriding the inbuilt defence systems of the US (on duty every day except this one; or inexplicably in some other part of the country; with no backup.) A country facing a severe terrorist threat. Known peeps. A trail a mile wide. But no THEY did it (oh ya, not to forget BL.)

So totally impeccably planned that they leave behind all these bits of contrary "evidence"? "They" manage to keep silent thousands of co-conspirators, including members of the media, the military, and civilians, but screw up on minor details like forgetting to tell their BBC stooges not to announce a collapsed building before it happens? Yeah, that's credible.

Now you want us to come up with a plan? Why should we do that when here is one perfectly executed. I mean.

How about an explanation of what exactly was done, by whom, and how, and how that fits all the conspiracy evidence.

I call troll. No-one can be this credulous...