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: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (10314)	3/10/2005 6:45:06 AM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Gus > For the first three years, it's been impossible for unofficial researchers like us to dig up video evidence of plane debris for the WTC crash. I agree, but it doesn't mean the evidence wasn't there and has just been "manufactured". I believe the evidence was, for some reason, too embarrassing for general release and it's for that reason that I am interested in it. > Likewise, I brought to your notice that no pictures or videos have been available that show the South/South-west sides of the WTC ON --or shortly after-- "impact". Yes, I know you believe that and it's hard to disprove. The German article however, which Don and Ray have rejected with contempt, indicates that something is wrong with the "pod" video and intimates that the airplane could have been superimposed on what was there before, which I consider could have been the impact of an aircraft other than a 767. You, of course, don't believe there was any aircraft whatsoever. We agree to differ. > My interpretation of such a conspicuous lack of video/picture of the WTC facades OPPOSITE the bombed ones is that the media-military complex swiftly imposed a blackout on such video evidence I can't say what the reason is but I agree there were very few pictures of the ancillary damage. To reference it yet again, the German article, and for the first time to my knowledge, addresses the question of the lateral and contralateral damage and also the fireballs. That's another reason why I brought the article to the thread. > Yet the no-planes theory will remain credible regardless of all the "new" (and fake) videos and pictures that may suddenly crop up on the internet that show the south-west sides of the WTC on the time of impact. Theoretically, yes, but practically, no. In my opinion, too many people saw, with their own eyes, an aircraft flying into WTC2. If the only evidence was the video evidence then I would say you have a point, but it wasn't so. My interest is what does the video evidence really show? > More than three years after the event, the time is not to analyze "brand-new" evidence again and again, the time is rather to make out the political ins and outs of the whole conspiracy. I would have thought the political implications of 9/11 were rather self-evident by now -- and they certainly do not benefit, and have not benefitted, bin Laden, Al Qaeda, Saddam, Al Zaquari or any other known or unknown "terrorist" group.