Posted on 09/15/2006 10:41:04 AM PDT by Sergeant Tim
While thousands came on 9/11/2006 to honor and remember the 3,000 murdered five years ago by Islamofascists terrorists, a couple hundred people came to repeat scurrilous accusations. Their gathering to express these views is free speech yet their gathering on 9/11, at Ground Zero, says a lot about their lack of character.
CLICK ON THE IMAGE ABOVE FOR DETAILS
The leader of these self-proclaimed "9/11 truthers" is Alex Jones, who was also there Monday. He is the guy in the sunglasses in the bottom left of the photo below. The truth is the last thing these ghouls want for their otherwise mundane lives have been made "better" and some of their personal fortunes have increased solely based upon innuendo.
One prime theory the "9/11 truthers" have is the World Trade Center Twin towers, as well as WTC building 7, collapsed not because United Airlines flights 11 and 175 were crashed into the North and South Towers. Instead, they theorize they were all brought down by controlled demolition. Protec, the foremost authority on controlled demolitions, examined this assertion and strongly disagrees. Take a few minutes and read their report. While facts will not cause the "9/11 truthers" to slink off in shame, you will be far better informed than the next foolish person you hear saying, "WTC 7 was pulled."
This is the second in a continuing series of articles on Stop the New York Times.org. Please also see Dishonoring the 9/11 dead.
Uhmmm...the site I point to is Screw Loose Change's second edited version of the 'truthers' Loose Change 2nd Edition video. In it Screw Loose Change has again inserted the facts. You can't just listen to the video, you have to read the screen because they are written in a black box over the video. This website is a Screw Loose Change website it is not a 'truthers' website. I urge everyone to watch the video and read the facts that Screw Loose Change has inserted to counter the baseless theories of the 'truthers'.
http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr
I don't think there is anything wrong with having questions as long as you are looking for facts to answer your questions. During the Dubai Port hubbub I had a ton of questions and I had to search for the facts before I was satisfied.
My problem with the 'truthers' is that they are not looking for facts. They have a theory that is not based on any of the evidence and they are ignoring the facts. I wouldn't stand up and applaud people who don't search for facts and flat out ignore facts due to their own political bias.
.................hmmmmmmmm...
Perhaps that statement was a bit lame ...I'll admit.
The Libertarian in me was just bragging I suppose.
Let's hope the Redskins trounce Dallas tonight...
[I've now opened myself to Cowboy fans ...... why can't I just keep my yap closed?]
Sorry for shouting in your ear. :)
Shalom.
Look, you've said that that there are some valid questions raised. A poster asked you to specifically cite such valid questions and you haven't done so. That's all I'm saying.
Oh .... my....god.
Did you look through my posts over the past several years? Had you done your homework ....
I'm tired of this thread to the point of projectile vomiting my lunch.
I'm a big boy, I can handle getting mugged .... but cripes... where the hell is the crime in admitting I'm lacking in a few facts and hoping for clarification?
Next time I have the nutty thought of parading my ignorance on FR I'll poke my eyes out instead.
Did watch the game though ...... actually watched the ND quarterback get beaten as badly as I have throughout this thread. Felt a little connection....
Thanks for clarifying that.
The fact that we didn't have fighters on the wingtips of the doomed airliners has always had my head itching
This has been discussed on many other threads which, unfortunately, I didn't bookmark for future reference (who knew this would still be going on years into the future?). There are a number of possible explanations, I've heard several different things---such as, no jets ready to go at Andrews, number of jets ready to go reduced by budget cuts or reloication, or that the jets were elsewhere involved in attack scenarios, etc. I don't know what or which is true, and the state of our air defenses at that time against internal rather than external threats is not my area of expertise.
I DO know that, prior to 9/11, it was not the nation's policy to shoot down hijacked planes full of passengers. In view of that, even if the jets had managed to appear "at their wingtips" in the small window of time available, I kind of doubt their mere presence would have dissuaded the hijackers from their mission.
The Osama question isn't serious. If you and Hillary think he'd be that easy to find, I believe there's a reward of about fifty million dollars in it for you.
You wanted to see pictures of a plane in the Pentagon. I provided a link to some pictures here on that thread. It's by no means all the pictures, but it's the most I've ever seen in one place, and more pictures and diagrams are added on the thread that follows it.
If you're looking for pictures of an intact plane, you're going to be disappointed, because there wasn't one by the time the crash was over.
........me and Hillary ..... used in the same sentance?
I may be scarred for life over that one.
Ipecac.......I need a spoonful of it....quick!
Of all the slams I've taken in this thread .... that one hurt the most.
Some months ago, Hillary slammed the Bush administration for failing to find "the tallest man in Afghanistan".
All you added was the dialysis machine.
As I mentioned previously, I do not nor have I ever bought the idea drones or anything other than hijacked commercial airliners were used to strike the towers, pentagon and crashed in the Pennsylvania field.
The kids, in their dubious video said they asked many times for photos of actual jet wreckage .... and after I thought about that I started to wonder why I've never seen any either. Thank you for that link.
Let me make myself clear ...... perhaps I didn't compose my questions properly.... I've had a very busy couple of weeks here at the hacienda and at work. I could have been more concise in my questioning and a bit less enthusiastic in my approval of Loose Change. I just saw the Loose Change video with my wife recently and for some reason was never interested in any alternative theories regarding 911 until now.
It drove my wife nuts because I kept pausing it to object, jump up, flail my arms and scream near obscenities at it. Some of their charges are not just lame ... but they hint at treason from our president. A concept I don't agree with in the least.
I simply wonder why the govt. doesn't slam dunk these kids by taking them at their challenge. Why isn't the video of the jet hitting the Pentagon released? I know it's gruesome ... but how much more than the video of the jets hitting the Towers?
As one poster here said, I don't want my grandchildren to ask one day .... why didn't our government do all they could do to refute all the claims of a cover up? In my mind it tarnishes and cheapens the deaths of all the people we lost that day.
I guess the Bin Laden comment was out of frustration. I know it's not all that difficult to hide when you have the money and connections to stay hidden.
I've been a private investigator for many years and know about all sorts of toys the government uses to reach out and touch folks ..... but those toys require a real person at the interpretive end. I'm sure the toys I've seen are but a small percentage to the toys they don't allow civilians to see. Perhaps it's as you said, the intel community has been gutted, mismanaged and understaffed. But that is fuel for the question : Why?
Is the world any less dangerous?
Is government bureaucracy to blame for our slow reaction time? Is it a leadership problem?
Just watched the film 13 Days last night. It reminded me somewhat of this conversation. In times of national crisis it's tough for a leader to shut out the noise of experts and to chart new territory. Most of the time the lessons learned come from the rubble of mistakes.
I have not meant any disrespect to our country ... any of you ... or to the ideals I hold myself. Perhaps it's my age. I'm not so full of piss and vinegar now....and as I watch my children grow, have families and begin to forge their values and passions ... will they be have the confidence to follow their elected officials as I have been....or will they lose hope and see the process as broken and figure, what the hell......
Well, now you see how it's done.
The "kids" were making a conspiracy movie. If you were writing the script for a conspiracy movie, which one of the following would sound more ominous and conspiratorial to you?
"We asked and asked for photos of actual plane wreckage from the Pentagon...but we asked in vain..."
Or:
"We found dozens, maybe hundreds, of photos of plane wreckage at the Pentagon, some taken even before the roof collapsed on top of everything. Here's a few of the best shots!" :D
Why isn't the video of the jet hitting the Pentagon released?
There was the one video released in 2002 (or 3?) that the conspiracy theorists weren't satisfied with, and then recently one from a Citgo station nearby was released. I *have not seen it* myself yet, but it reportedly does not show a plane moving at 600 mph into the Pentagon any more clearly than the first one did. In other words, those who didn't "see the plane" in the first video probably won't like this one any better. And I do not know if there IS any better footage. We might have already seen the best there is.
The only reason we had a helicopter's eye view of the second plane hitting in New York is because the first plane had already hit. There weren't helicopters in the air and news crews on the ground at the Pentagon until after the damage had been done.
Another point to consider is the nature of surveillance video. It isn't a continuous frame record .. it starts stops start stops . I cannot recall at the moment the frame count but the math says it can miss details of an object moving at 600 mph. All you'll see is a blur .... which I've seen on the latest released video from the parking lot cameras.
It might not have been 600 mph, it might have been 500 mph or even lower. I don't know if the exact speed was determinable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.