[quote name='White-Wolf']while most of your post was well thought out and had good points, it could do without the snark, k?[/quote]
Hey, that's how I roll.
You say mountains of evidence, but if you look across the river, their is another pile as wide and as tall. Look for yourself. Both sides have evidence. Your a foolhardy to think only the official story IS the story.
Why am I a fool? There's been many investigations as to what happened that day, to the most minute detail, by both layman and experts, they all lead to the same conclusions that are in line (mostly) with the official story. To claim that they've all been faked to keep some secret plot orchestrated by the Bush administration is bizarre if not because of the, yes, mountain of evidence, but simply because of the aforementioned ineptitude of the principal players. Wolfowitz, Pearl, Rummy, Cheney. These are the 'brains' you're putting this on. They're just not that clever.
As for wtc7, you are covering for something you know nothing about. Why would the administration say it was takeout by a gass leak when they demoed it. This is still a much avoided issue because it is suspicious and it will the be the scab that never heals becuse one lie leads to another, how far that lie goes, I can not be sure, but i do know that when the government lies about why a building falls down, one most ask questions.
Why lie about reasons for demoeing the building? I think it is anyone who can not see that something odd happened at 911 is the one who is a lost cause.
Insurance.
Insurance wouldn't cover the intentional demolition of the building, but if it were rolled into the whole attack, then it would be. Billions of dollars of insurance. If there were anything to the conspiracy theories, trust me, the insurance companies would be screaming it.
I am glad your friend made it out of wtc, must be one lucky sun of a bitch. ask him if he heard the secondary explosions, I know alot of the fire fighters talked about it (I listened to the tapes), That could just be cracking metal, or depressurized something or another, but it could be something else.
I have, and he didn't.
If bombs were planted, they were already in the buildings,
So these guys who hijacked the planes and had limited at best flight training were able to crash these 500 mph screaming buses into the exact floors where the bombs were hidden. That'd be pretty amazing for a building it was pretty hard to see the individual floors from the outside of during the day.
Its absurd to think that they were planted after the planes hit, but the FBI memo was a few weeks old or at the very least a week old. Be sure that this was pearl harbor all over again. at the very least this was aloud to happen.
Now 'letting it happen' has some limited credibility. It's what Al Franken calls 'Operation Ignore'. It relies mostly on the administrations seemingly complete ignorance and disregard for the entire topic of terrorism even though the previous administration warned them repeatedly. A case can be made for that, but one could blame that on the Bush administrations arrogance and hatred of the Clinton administration. So it's possible, but improbable, and wholly different then active participation.
Let’s assume that the bombs were planted after the planes hit, At what point could this have been done? I would think when people were told to go back into the building. You would have a whole mess of people with mass confusion, that would be the perfect time if you ask me.
So, if the second plane hit at 9:02, and the south tower collapsed at 9:59, that means that after the planes hit, CIA/NSA/BLACK OPS/WHOEVER had fifty seven minutes to get in with several tons of explosives, run up 64 flights, plant them, and get out with no one noticing them. Yeah, that happened.
But why were the people recalled back into the buildings? Who made that call? was it group think?
A huge fvck up on someones part. With all the confusion that day, to think that there was a team in place to potentially kill upwards of 25k people for the sole reason of making an excuse to invade Iraq so a few defense companies can make some money is absurd. Who would you get to do this? And would they just sit around high in pills waiting 24 hours a day for some possible attack?
But on I final note, I don’t appreciate being judge on my other ideas or values based off others that you most likely didn’t fully read. Yup you guessed it, the evolution crack. I will let you know that I do believe in evolution. Why? Because the evidenced is one sided. Most if not all point to it existing. If it makes you feel better you can think that I am simply picking out inconsistencies in wtc+7, but no one has made a competent rebuttal if any. So I ask of you, how come you could not rebuttal wtc7? You admit that it’s a demo job, but then that’s were your eyes cloud over.
I admit that it's a possible that WTC7 was 'pulled'. I could envision a situation where someone had to make the decision of either dropping it in a semi-controlled or at least expected manner rather then waiting around doing nothing waiting for it to collapse on it's own. Either way, I could live with that.
Simply it is a large hole in the truth that has yet to be answered by the government, or anyone in power for that matter. Once the truth of wtc7 is laid bare, the rest will fall into place. But for now I can only ask questions, until I find the truth
Back to my evolution analogy, Intelligent Design fills in the blanks in the theory of evolution with magic god beans, saying that because evolution doesn't have every single answer then the entire idea is flawed. You're doing the same thing, because the official explanation doesn't answer every single facet of the event, you're filling in the blanks with magic conspiracy beans. It's fine to say you don't know what happened and that you have more questions, but to let those questions be answered with paranoia is a disservice to the truth you seek.
