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: Raymond Duray who wrote (10225)	3/6/2005 2:43:38 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

I believe there could be some benefit gained by those in the 9/11 research community getting together to hammer out some kind of consensus on the quality of the available evidence, and the conclusions that most reasonably may be drawn based on that evidence. A more united front on what facts the majority is willing to stand behind would be a big plus. There is one thread which runs all through 9/11 and that's that the whole thing is almost unbelievable. Time and time again, the evidence fully supports the truly incredible. While I don't completely go along with some of the more popular theories attached to the Pentagon attack, much of the evidence is difficult to discount out of hand. More incredible than the point of impact on the Pentagon, is, by the accounts I've seen, the plane flew almost directly over the White House before the Pentagon was in sight. I've never been to DC, so I'm not 100% sure what the White House looks like from the air, but my impression is it's a rather sprawling area of open space, with a very distinct landmark right smack in the middle of it. In photographs from the air, open spaces such as parks, etc. tend to stick out like a sore thumb. The idea that a foreign terrorist would pass up a huge, soft, bubble domed structure, in favor of a heavily fortified one of considerably less significance, is simply not believable, especially when the more desirable objective was directly in their flight path and should have been in their cross hairs plenty long enough to acquire as a target. Even if they over flew it on the first pass, the idea they could make a big loop to hit the Pentagon, but not the White House, is patently absurd. If, as the Oil Empire folks say, it was indeed a 757 which hit the Pentagon, what possible motive would there be to confiscate all of the video which would show that to be the case? On the pod theories: I've watched the clips, and there is no doubt in my mind something is there that can not be explained away as being part of a normal 767. It looks to me to be an explosion more than anything else. From what I can tell from the admittedly low resolution footage available online, the bottom of the plane comes into view, then over the course of several frames, the "pod" appears to mushroom from the belly of the plane. I'd be kind of curious to know if you and Mark chatted about the Airbus photo on his site?