egafd.com

NandoRick wrote:

>>>I don't know Bubo , so i don't want to speak on his behave,but i think he might be talking about this plane<<<


Oh Guys! Come on!!! This is old, old, old!!!!

It's long been debunked. Even among conspiracy theorists. Just for example, check out


http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/pod.html#angle


You'll have to do better than that to convince anyone.

Until and unless someone comes up with INCONTROVERTIBLE and WATERTIGHT PROOF that 9/11 was an inside job, then that's all that conspiracy theories are - THEORIES.

It is facile to dismiss conspiracy theories per se, just because they are conspiracy theories.

It is a proven fact that governments do get involved in the most involved and illegal conspiracies. Just off the top of my head: Suez 1956 - Britain and France conspired with Israel to attack Egypt; Watergate 1972 - the President of the US conspired with his aides to bug the Democratic National Convention offices; Iran-Contra 1986 - the President of the US conspired with his aides to sell arms to Iran, and use the money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua, in defiance of US law.

These a just proven conspiracies, and very serious ones. Eden fell over Suez, Nixon over Watergate, and Reagan came very close over Iran-Contra.

My point is not to say that 9/11 was the result of a CIA conspiracy, but to say that just because it sounds implausible does not mean it is not true. Governments have conspired to attack their own people and blame it on external enemies throughout history.

And I must say, the collapse of Tower 7 has never been explained to my satisfaction. The owner said the building was "pulled", ie demolished, but no-one will admit to doing it. The official version is that a 46 storey steel framed building, which had suffered no structural damage at all, collapsed becase of two small fires. If true, 7WTC was the worst built sky scraper anywhere in the world. It can't be true, and whilst legitimate questions like this go unanswered, then people will have every right to query the official statements about 9/11.

We're not saying that they are evidence.

"Oh Guys! Come on!!! This is old, old, old!!!!

It's long been debunked. Even among conspiracy theorists. Just for example, check out


http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/pod.html#angle"


Depends on who you believe buddy,That page you posted is written by Eric Salter...

So your saying that theory was debunked by Eric Salter ?

Heres a page on our friend Eric Salter



Hmmmm seems to have his own agenda

like its been said many times everybody has a Theory of what happened that day. Its who or what you believe yourself.

NandoRick wrote:

>>


.... and your link was written by someone who clearly doesn't like Eric Salter and who also apparently belongs to the crackpot "stickytape & mirrors" school of thought regarding 9/11 - in other words "no planes hit the towers and it was all somehow faked" (presumably with holgrams or whatever).

Shit! I've just had a look at that page you linked and the pics in the "Eric Salter's Worst Nightmare - The Pod Illusion De-Bunked" section, especially the one taken from underneath rear of the plane, and it definitely shows the same pod in exactly the same position as the other picture shows! That is in no way a reflection, 'cause whatever it is is itself throwing its own shadow over the fuselage of the aircraft! !shocked!

Despite being open-minded, I really do hope that it is a conspiracy, because the thought of all those innocent men, women and children in those airliners going up the way they did is very distressing. I'd sooner they were military aircraft sent in as a way to get at the Middle-Eastern oil.

Robches wrote:

>>


The point is that there are conspiracy theories - and then there are conspiracy theories.

As I said earlier in the thread, if someone says that they believe that there could be a conspiracy within the US Government to cover up incompetence, inaction and ineptitude over 9/11, that I can go along with. It's plausible. It's believable.

I could even, at a push, accept a scenario whereby some of the more Machiavellian elements of the intelligence community might have got wind of the 9/11 plot in advance but chose to hush it up for their own nefarious purposes.

I'm no fan of Geroge Dubya and his NeoCons at all. And I'm not so naive as to believe that governments are above manipulating events, covering up information or taking advantage of situations for their own ends. I'd even agree that 9/11 presented Bush & Co. with a golden opportunity to forge ahead with their own foreign policy agenda with renewed vigour.

But when someone suggests that the U.S. Government (for all its flaws) would deliberately murder thousands of its OWN people, that to me strains credibility.

And when people start putting forward claims that the whole thing was a hoax, denying things that thousands of eyewitnesses on the ground saw happen live in front of their very eyes (plus hundreds of millions of people all over the world watching on live TV) and promoting outlandish theories about military jets dressed up as civilian airliners, controlled explosions, fake cellphone calls from non-existent passengers, hijacked airliners being diverted to secret airfields and being replaced by unmanned drones and - most preposterously - that there were no planes at all and it was all done with holograms and that mysterious "men in black" then somehow moved in (apparently completely unnoticed) to scatter bits of plane about amid all the confusion, then I have to start asking what it is these people are smoking.



>>

They do indeed. But Suez was hardly a "conspiracy". A foreign policy blunder of the first order maybe, but not really a "conspiracy".

Watergate? Criminal yes, but a bungled break-in hardly equates with mass murder, at least not in my book.

Iran-Contra? Okay I'll give you that one. But just like Watergate it was uncovered pretty quickly even though it involved relatively few people - in any case far fewer than would have been needed to pull off a 9/11 consipiracy of the type suggested by the conspiracy nerds. Which just goes to show the near impossibility of being able to keep the lid on even relatively small-scale conspiracies in the upper echelons of democratic governments, never mind something of the magnitide of 9/11 (five years on from the event almost to the day, and yet all the conspiracists between them have still been unable to unearth a single shred of proof to back up their claims).



>>

Much has been made of the Tower 7 issue by the conspiracy theorists. But I see no great mystery here really.

I'm no structural or civil engineer, but I don't think it stretches credibility that much to say that even though Tower 7 wasn't struck by a plane, something like one and a half MILLION tons of debris collapsing violently might just have caused some serious structural damage to other nearby buildings, could it not?! Tower 7 could simply have been damaged beyond repair by the collapsing towers and thus needed to be demolished. Once again it's a common sense issue.

>But Suez was hardly a "conspiracy". A foreign policy blunder of the first order maybe, but not really a "conspiracy".

I'd say Suez was indeed a conspiracy. Britain and France agreed that Israel would invade Egypt, and they would then declare that the Suez Canal was in danger, so they would intervene to "protect" it from the warring parties.

Sounds very much like a conspiracy to me. Of course the reason we know about the Suez conspiracy, Watergate and Iran-Contra is because they failed. What about the ones that succeed?

Flat_Eric

"I could even, at a push, accept a scenario whereby some of the more Machiavellian elements of the intelligence community might have got wind of the 9/11 plot in advance but chose to hush it up for their own nefarious purposes.

I'm no fan of Geroge Dubya and his NeoCons at all. And I'm not so naive as to believe that governments are above manipulating events, covering up information or taking advantage of situations for their own ends. I'd even agree that 9/11 presented Bush & Co. with a golden opportunity to forge ahead with their own foreign policy agenda with renewed vigour."

^^Well said mate , thats exactly what i've been saying from the start.,you just say it better

Im starting to think your a conspriacy buff yourself hahaha j/k