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: J.B.C. who wrote (2339)	9/13/2006 12:55:48 PM
From: longjonsilvers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50729

keeping it simple - 911 theories i am sure that you can pick and choose from the various 911 truth proponents and find things that are not in alignment with the facts but if you do that and adhere to the establishment conspiracy theory (you know 19 muslums with boxcutters hijacked 4 planes and........) you must explain several things - and this is to cut to the chase of the controversy: 1. how did building 7 fall into its own footprint when it had not been hit by a plane? 2. how did the buildings fall into their own footprint when no modern highrise building has ever been brought down by fire alone and even if the world towers were, how did they fall into their own footprints and not twist and fall as the jet fuel heated one side of the building and not the other? 3. why were none of the "hijacked" airliners intercepted even tho there are fighters on the tarmac at all times ready to go within minutes of NY and there was lots of time between the first "hijacking" and the rest? any problems that are found in the 911 truth movements theories are small compared to the establishment's problems in answering the above questions.