True - reading "My Pet Goat"...upside down.



I think it could be a plane - just not 60 ton airliner. How the generator could be hit and yet the cable spools remain right in front of impact point is just another enigma that will remain as such - till we see the original, unedited, tapes.



What did you see Stony? I'll tell you if you wasted your time or not. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Loose Change Final Cut is a good start

USA Today - Terrorism drills part of passing torch :

"White House officials have not said what specific scenarios will be played out in next month's exercises. One overriding concern since 2001 has been the possibility that Washington comes under attack. In that case, plans would need to be in place for the replacement of key government officials.

'They would be smart to be thinking about these things,' says John Fortier, executive director of the Continuity of Government Commission..."

I guess we'll see. Like 9-11 and 7-7 London, always a convenient diversion for would be responders.

Assuming it was all set up what was the advantage of replacing the airplane with whatever is believed to have hit the Pentagon?



So how many people under investigation came out ahead when building 7 went down?

That's a valid question with a million possibilities. 60 tons of mass would have (in many's opinion) created a much larger damage area - certainly more that a small hole with front support pillars intact. Keep in mind whatever hit it hit in the only area to have undergone extensive fortification to the outer walls - another convenient coincidence. So minimized damage to the building/personnel is one possibility. Maybe there wasn't another airliner available to drone in on its target. Somebody knew something about AA and UA before the attacks - Put options on AA and UA stocks in the couple of days preceding were 285X their average. And perhaps a 'sleight of hand' was more feasible logistically and financially. Maybe nothing hit it - there was a quite a few Pentagon folks who smelled cordite and called it out by name, many other described a shock concussion wave experienced around explosives.



I'm quite sure no one has ever come under investigation <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> But yeah - Silverstein the new lease holder (who took out an unprecedented 99 yr lease on the buildings just 4 months earlier) scored big time on his investment. Got them for a song due to the fact that compliance with asbestos removal was slated at over $1 billion. With insurance claims and return of the initial $125 million by the Port Authority, his $380 million investment netted him about $2 Billion. Not bad for a dude who's only claim to fame prior was his Laotian heroin laundering operation at his nightclub in Queens 10 years before.

And of course there's all that gold that was in WTC4 that was found deserted in vans under WTC 1&2 when unearthed - wonder where that went. ah well.

7 years in the making - NIST's explanation of WTC7 collapse.

Scott Forbes

another interview

Must have been a huge hand. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

As for the suspicious-sounding word, but ineffective low-explosive propellant product called cordite:



Cordite

So, I guess we're to believe that a Boeing 757 did a low flyover to distract everyone's attention while a main battle tank sauntered up to the Pentagon and blasted away without being seen and rode off down Pennsylvania Avenue while everybody was looking the other way. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />

Uhhhh - wat a minute......

1) Where's the plane?

2) Where are the passengers?

Frank <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />

I would guess these military professionals did not consult the infallible wikipedia before making thier statements.

Cordite is just a term for explosive powders - As is duly noted

Why can't we see the tapes Frank?

'Because' is not a legitimate nor intelligent answer.

So what brought down WTC 7?

Whether anyone still maufactures the stuff is not the issue..... the issue is that cordite is a low yield, slow-burning explosive that was commonly used as a propellant. The reason that it was chosen for that job is because it doesn't burn fast enough - or hot enough - to damage gun barrels. The only use for the stuff in your scenario would be as a fuse or igniter for higher yield explosives placed inside the Pentagon - which if true would have caused the blast to blow the Pentagon wall outward..... which didn't happen even in the "Truthers" version of events.



Failure to understand the rationale already presented isn't very intelligent, either...... why feed the morbidly curious and copycats something that serves no purpose? Do you also want to see JFK's brains spattered all over the limo?



Who knows? Maybe one of those phantom sleight of hand missile thingys that nobody saw. Did they smell cordite there, too? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I'm more interested in the question posed by Michael (Grasscat):



Now that question could have 2 meanings:

1) He wonders why you don't have many in your camp.....

-or-

2) He wonders why folks dream up this stuff.

I think he meant the former, but I was intrigued with the latter, so I've tried to find out an answer. It's not easy to understand some folks, but the best explanation seems to be found in the area of "Alternate Reality" - here's an example:



web page

But then there's the Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich connection:



Trutheriness and Ron Paul

Actually, I think the Alternate Reality and Ron Paul/Dennis Kucinich ideas both work together to form a sort of parallel universe or multiverse doctrine of anti-government with a smattering of intrigue for the gullible and easily brainwashed who never see the problem in their story with not finding answers to:

1) Where's the plane?

2) Where are the people?

Frank <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/forums/images/graemlins/sleeping.gif" alt="" />



What rationale? That planes do indeed vaporize yet leave their passengers still sitting their seats? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />

Morbidly curious eh? Yeah, it's all just a 'curiosity' for anyone that sees a connection between 9-11 and the loss of liberties and military expansionism. You go Frank! <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/kewl.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for the MSNBC BS - you really set us all straight there. I mean - this is Gail at MSNBC - If anyone DOESN'T have their head up their <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/butwiggle.gif" alt="" /> its gotta be the 'Answer Desk' gal Gail. I'm glad to see that the oil surveys referenced were only dealing with the north slope area - cuz we all know there's no way there could be oil anywhere else - especially in that tiny state of AK. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Funny thing about this crack pot that happened to work up there for years. He said in early July (on Alex Jones no less)(when oil was at $145) his oil executive sources told him oil would be in the $50's late fall. Funny Gail didn't bring that up. 'Morbidly' funny.

I mean only a wack job could 'dream' up something like that. Perhaps you have a conspiracy theory behind that one for us too <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cyclops.gif" alt="" /> Lemme guess - "Coincidence" <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />

And...predictably, we have another straw man. This time via the informed, brilliant mind of another hack - Michelle Malkin. This one is a little weirder now though...Apparently Ron Paul is discredited because Truthers support Ron Paul and he supports a new investigation. The Truthers are discredited cuz they support Ron Paul cuz...he supports the 'anti-government' idea of returning to the Constitution, transparency...???...something like that.



Where is the plane Frank?

Where are the passengers? "They said" is proof of nothing.

Where are the tapes? Why can't I see the tapes? If its a slam dunk why not just show us the tapes?

It's more proof than not having a clue, yet believing the plane did a "flyover" to who knows where..... and that the personal effects of passengers that were returned to the families of victims were what..... lies?



Either quit whining...... or go file a Freedom of Information Act request with the Supreme Court. Demand it of them - you can do it. Go prove your paranoid Alternate Reality suspicions or leave it alone.

<img src="/forums/images/graemlins/sleeping.gif" alt="" />

Frank <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />

They've been requested infinite times. The doctored Doubletree video is the result of lawsuit. 'National security' was the response for the remainder. Maybe you could explain that one for me.

Why these sort of things have to be requested in the first place is a graver concern.

Returning personal effects and DNA samples is not proof of a jet liquefying through a fortified building and in fact contradicts the claim. It simply means they were murdered.

The burden of proof doesn't rest on the one providing evidence that a claim is false - the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. That's pretty basic stuff.

Other than knickers and wigs, I'm cool with 'whiners' <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/kewl.gif" alt="" />