Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (3406)	10/12/2003 12:14:10 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Pretty cool - Do you think the little nukes that Mossad planted on toy planes was the way they made it look like commercial jets, piloted by Saudi hijackers, did 9/11? The jets were probably a hologram. Hmmmm, maybe there never really was a WTC. Since mostly Jewish financiers worked there, they probably had moved all their people to NJ years ago, previously destroyed WTC, and used massive holograms to make it look like WTC existed. How else, could they have those huge beacon memorials completed so quickly. I doubt I can be proven wrong on this one.

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (3406)	10/12/2003 2:14:59 PM
From: Don Earl	Respond to of 20039

The remote controlled airplane theory has never been one of my favorites, and I doubt the technology described in that particular article would have been of any use in the WTC attacks. You could stop by your local hobby shop and pick up a remote controlled plane, and likely for a lot less money than NASA spent for their similar sized toy. Flying by remote control is hardly new technology. It's been around for decades for everything from toys to testing experimental planes to guiding missiles. It's not that the 9/11 flights couldn't have been done that way. It's that there isn't a shred of evidence to support that they were done that way, at least as far as anything in the public domain is concerned. No doubt remains from the wreckage of the Pentagon and Pennsylvania flights "might" contain interesting evidence along those lines (assuming it hasn't been destroyed), but that body of evidence is NOT available to anyone, amateur or professional, conducting investigations. On the other hand, there is an unholy amount of evidence that can't possibly be explained by the official story, and which doesn't require speculation along the lines of remote controlled airplanes to support. IMO, things like the President of the United States staying in class to learn about pet goats for another half hour after being notified America was under attack. Or that hijacked airplanes could fly over half a dozen military bases without being intercepted over the course of several hours. Or that various politicians and Israelis were warned away from ground zero before the fact. Or that the Bush Cartel was on medication for anthrax a week before the letters were mailed. Or that over a dozen intelligence investigations into the activities of the alleged terrorists were derailed to prevent interference with the attacks. Etc., etc., etc... At a certain point, I think speculation on exactly how the planes were flown is less relevant than available information which effectively eliminates the possibility it was the work of "terrorists" working for bin Laden.