Quote:
Originally Posted by dadakarma
Slowhand, the chasm between you and I is increasing, despite your assertion of skepticism regarding the Pentagon, your suspicion of a possible 'LIHOP' scenario and your overall distrust of the Bush administration. You characterize other skeptics who've embraced and believe the towers were demolished as crazy and having such ridiculous ideas, basing that primarily because of the lack of explosion noise, so you throw the baby out with the bathwater - a demo is now unfathomable to you because of who is proposing the idea ('crazy truthers'). None of the skeptics here can produce irrefutable proof of what happened. The only entity with the authority and resources who could have proven what happened at the towers and the Pentagon (along with being forthcoming in testimony, documentation, communiques, etc.) is the Bush administration, and instead they've thwarted any thorough investigation with their deliberate destruction of key pieces of evidence. If the White House didn't have something to hide, surely they'd produce, at a minimum, substantial footage/documentation/etc. of what happened at the Pentagon. That they're now being requested to be forthcoming with ALL information is the result of six years of secrecy and lies. Surely SOME footage and information volunteered by the Bush administration would have laid the big mystery to rest a long time ago.
Cooperation by the Bush administration with a thorough investigation (neither cooperation NOR a thorough investigation has transpired to this day) is the only means of finding out what really happened. Until then, I do not rule out a number of plausible alternative scenarios. The lack of closure is frustrating, but I'm unwilling to embrace Bush's official version in exchange for peace of mind - not because I despise him (which I do), but because their version lacks credibility, due to all of the missing evidence, their refusal to cooperate, the contradictions in witness accounts, and their shitty track record.
|
To clear the air here..when a heated debate on such a sensative topic as 9/11 ensues..tempers flare, and insults fly, and then there are those who stop by not to debate, but to stir the pot, and as a result, I call people crazy, and in return I get called a bushbot..Par for the course on any political message board..Certainly nothing new there
To give you an idea where Im coming from, is it has always been my nature to take a realistic, think outside of the box approach to situations, and problem solving..I have repeatedly read the CT's, and if you recall, I watched the DVD that you sent me, and came to a few skepitical, suspicious conclusions in line with a couple of of the points you have made..I did not buy the CD theory, but I did say that if one CT is proven, then the whole thing, whether I like it or not, also has to somehow be part of a master plan..The more I debate these issues, the more I examine the circumstances, the more possibilities that come to mind..For example..Bush was in office only 9 months prior to 9/11..From what I have read here so far..it is the general consensus that the Bush Admin is the mastermind behind the CT..Now, I take the fact into consideration that BushCo had 9 months to plan, construct, and execute this inside attack on our country..In all honesty..I sincerely doubt that 9 months is enough time to plan, construct, and execute such and intricately elaborate plan, and take into account, that if one facet of the crime gets exposed, the whole gig gets blown, and heads are going to roll big time..I think about what it would possibly entail to plant explosives in the three WTC's..and in a clandestine fashion no less, in plain site of thousands of people on a daily basis..and then rip those three buldings apart, plant explosives, and put everything back together like nothing happened..Sorry, but I dont see that happening, realistically..Up and down flights upon flights of stairs, up and down in elevators with explosives, tools, sheetrock, paint, wallpaper, wire, moulding, rugs, etc etc etc etc etc..then filling dumpsters, upon dumpsters of junk..I cant fathom how anyone could possibly pull this off, just to invade Afganistan, which was a farce..But the ulteriour motive being to ultimately attack Iraq, and change regime..I cant see why Bush would orchestrate an inside attack in order to justify invading Iraq, when all he had to do was site 1441 Security Council Violations, which is what he ultimately used after Colin Powell sold the Security Council the WMD's turkey..Had not Saddam been a defiant rascal for 12 years?..Hadnt he defied the Security Council mandates and evicted the weapons inspectors numerous times since 1991?..Had we not orchestrated air strikes to counter his shennagans repeatedly?..My point is, that we all know that Saddam was a royal sand bagging, foot dragging pain in the ass..and most Americans for 13 years believed that Saddam's dafiant behavior, was neccessary because he in fact had WMD's to hide from the inspectors, as well as a nuclear program to boot..So I ask you people..Why do you believe that Bush had to pull off an inside attack to convince the American public that it was imminent that we invade Iraq?..Did George H.W. Bush need to pull off a 9/11 when he invaded Iraq?..No!..He just did it..end of story!..And George Jr had more grounds for justification than his father did..And he did it without the UN Security Councils blessing, which leads me to believe, that he was going in there anyway regardless of what anybody thought or said..Does anybody think that the absence of a 9/11 was going to stop Bush from attacking Iraq?
I have examined the circumstances surrounding the collapse of WTC-7..And I have come up with what I think are more than reasonable scenarios, that plant serious seeds of doubt in my mind that it was a coverup, conspiracy, CD or what have you..I cannot ignore these possibilities, because they are possible as well as probable..If I were going to committ a crime of this magnatude, and risk it all if something were to go amiss..You had better believe that Im gonna dot every single "i", and cross every single "t'..If I can come up with a reasonable scenario, that would have the potential of foiling a bld 7 plot..Then how much more thourogh would the real criminals thought process have to be?