egafd.com

No doubt there are things we're not being told about 9/11.

But I've no reason to doubt the basics of the "official" version: Namely that a bunch of Arab terrorists hijacked 4 airliners, flew them into the WTC and the Pentagon, that the WTC towers collapsed as a direct result of all this and that a total of around 3000 innocent people died.

Call me naive, but we saw it happen live on TV for God's sake!!!

All these daft conspiracy theories about the airliners being unmanned drones and that the passengers had been secretly removed by the CIA beforehand (presumably, the CIA would then have had to kill them anyway to prevent any possibility of the truth getting out - so why bother?!), that Mossad did it, that Bush & his cronies organised the whole thing, that the mobile phone calls from passengers and flight attendants on the doomed planes were all faked, that explosive charges had been pre-planted in the WTC blah blah blah blah ....... All complete bollocks IMHO.

And as for the "no plane hit the Pentagon" conspiracy theory: Okay CCTV camera footage was withheld until just a couple of weeks ago, and even then it showed very little. But what about the hundreds of eyewitnesses on the ground who DID say they saw an airliner fly into the building? The conspiracy theorists always conveniently overlook them (or maybe they were all CIA "plants"??!).

Yes, the Bush / Cheney neocons no doubt then milked 9/11 for all it was worth as an excuse to push their own agendas - but that's probably as sinister as it gets.

But why let logic get in the way of a good conspiracy theory?!

This may sound silly, but have any of you ever thought that it could be a "Star Wars PT" set up, where a third party is pitting both the Yanks and the Muslims up against one another?

strictlybroadband wrote:

>
> Please be sceptical - there's no other way to watch something
> like this.


Wouldn't everyone, everywhere be better off If Everyone kept an open mind rather than be "blinded" or "sceptical" to start with?

Sceptical = Marked by or given to doubt, questioning: as in "a sceptical attitude"; "sceptical of political promises".

A sceptical mind is an open - but not a cynical - mind.

HTH

yeah but was it laden with fuel? It seem'd to have a pretty long flight going half way across America and then diveting when the hijackers took over so it must have used a large chunck of it's fuel

AngieRiley wrote:

> strictlybroadband wrote:
>
> >
> > Please be sceptical - there's no other way to watch something
> > like this.
>
>
> Wouldn't everyone, everywhere be better off If Everyone kept
> an open mind rather than be "blinded" or "sceptical" to start
> with?

Yes and No... if everyone believed everything we'd not get very far as a species. People need the ability to distinguish reality from bullshit. Far too many people accept far too much without evidence. For example: racist ideas, religion, or the belief that you need a 4-blade razor to shave you properly.

Planes may fall to pieces if they hit a hard object. But vanish without a trace? There's a big difference.

strictlybroadband wrote:

>>

If you're talking about the Pentagon, I seem to recall TV footage of them finding a fucking great jet engine casing smoking away in there. But then - the CIA must have planted it surreptitiously afterwards I suppose (rolls eyes).

Flat_Eric wrote:

> strictlybroadband wrote:
>
> vanish without a trace? There's a big difference.>>>
>
> If you're talking about the Pentagon, I seem to recall TV
> footage of them finding a fucking great jet engine casing
> smoking away in there. But then - the CIA must have planted it
> surreptitiously afterwards I suppose (rolls eyes).

You recall wrong.

lots of pics of debris here