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 (10348)	3/12/2005 7:33:34 AM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Gus > It's impossible for flight 175 to have just vanished inside the south tower. 90% of the airplane should have ended up on the ground at the tower's foot. Should have is not necessarily did. > You seem to hold these fragments as irrefutable evidence that airplanes did indeed crash into the WTC I do. But if they didn't come from the actual aircraft which struck WTC2, then where did they come from? That is, a large piece of engine (? from a 767) in Murray St, a tyre and wheel assembly ( also ? from a 767 and I don't know where they found it) and a section of fuselage with a few windows (according to one researcher, not particularly burnt or otherwise damaged) on the roof of WTC5, amongst the other debris which fell on the roof. WTC5 is North East of WTC2 and clearly in the apparent flight path of a plane that would have struck WTC2 on the South wall, going in a NE direction. Murray Street is also due North, possibly North East, of WTC2. > but just look at the OFFICIAL "crash path" of Flight 175 into the South Tower Now you're using "official" fantasy (as you see it) to trump my fantasy (also as you see it). But, being Sherlock Holmes, I guess only you are allowed to. After all these years we hear that the dog that didn't bark wasn't even a dog -- it was a cat!