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 : Welcome to Slider's Dugout -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gold$10k who wrote (1298)	3/16/2006 8:36:02 PM
From: Sawdusty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50498

Hi vt. I have never been much on conspiracy theories, but was only during the lead up to war that I became deeply suspicious. Even then the possibilities were almost too much to comprehend, but too many strange things were happening within a very short time, with the justification always being 911, and that started me thinking on who the real beneficiaries were to the tragedy. Since then I have spent many hours reading what I could find, the amount of information from credible sources is staggering. I no longer have personal doubts, but it is a very difficult for one to accept. Here is another video that drove home many of the same facts. It was so compelling that I saved the link. 911truestory.com

To: gold$10k who wrote (1298)	3/17/2006 9:37:50 AM
From: J.B.C.	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 50498

The conspiracy theories on 9/11 are pure BS, Just for one refute: here's an article with embedded photo's taken at the Pentagon on 9/11 that clearly shows airplane wreckage, as well as plenty of evidence during recovery of airplane parts: abovetopsecret.com. Also the "Loose Change" footage alludes to a planned demolition of the twin towers on 9/11 by showing building demolition that go straight down just like the twin towers did, the difference is the planned demolition of buildings is intended to drop straight down so as to not disturb surrounding structures. If the "government" didn't care about the loss of lives then the wouldn't have cared about whether the buildings toppled or fell straight. So I could imagine the supposed planning strategy meeting with the experts where the discussion about how to bring the buildings down; straight or topple? "Let's bring it down straight, that way folks will figure it to be a planned event...." And oh, how about the primacord? There would have had to have been thousands of feet of it laid before hand, I think someone would have noticed in a fully occupied building? Don't you? Then there's the problem about where to place the explosives (which floors)? And then having Mohammed Atta, barely qualified as a private pilot, fly his plane (traveling at 540 MPH) into exactly the right floors. Mohammed, can you hit the 77th floor, because that's where the explosives is???? Yeah, right. Oh and the final problem, the tower actually began collapsing above the flames (the impact points) that would have actually severed and or burned the connections which would have made the demolition impossible anyway. There is plenty of REAL evidence to refute the "loose change" hatchet job, you just have to be willing to find it. Thanks Jim