Homeland Security wraps up first mock cyberattack

TalkBack 23 of 69:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Well..

"I also had a cousin work in the pentagon that said all the pieces of that aircraft were imbedded embedded in the inner walls. Including jet engine parts. His eyes burned for 2 weeks because of all the jet fuel ruling out a cruise missle."

Whatever hit the Pentagon just happened to hit the only part of the building which was not only the least occupied, but also recently "renovated".
Plane parts could have easily been stuffed into that part of the building (along with jet fuel and whatever else) and then once the building was struck the explosion caused the placed plane parts to spill out all over. Yes, it sounds ridiculous, but yet, still possible. It almost sounds as ridiculous as actually believing that 19 arabs with laptops in an Afghanistan cave easily walked over the US military-industrial complex.

"I believe the official version is more accurate than the conspiracy version."

Official what?
Can you PROVE to me that there actually even were hijackers on those planes?
Can you PROVE that they actually flew it?
Can you PROVE that cell phone calls were made from those planes?
Can you PROVE the silly pancake collapse "explanation" of WTC1, 2?
Can you PROVE that WTC7 fell due to peripheral damage from WTC1, 2? (Oh wait, you yourself admitted that Silverstein BLEW UP his own building)
Can you PROVE that a plane really did hit the Pentagon?
Can you PROVE that steel melts before glass? (there was still glass intact on the towers, even though the steel "had melted or weakened")
Can you PROVE that Osama was behind 9/11?
Can you PROVE that NORAD was really fooled and helpless for more that an hour and forty minutes?
Can you PROVE that it wasn't insiders who shorted UA and AA stock right before 9/11?
Can you PROVE that what the federal government is saying is true?
Can you provide this "smoking gun hard evidence" you keep asking us for?

Ummmm, yes, those were all rhetorical questions. You have no proof because none has been provided. So how can you speak of some "official version" of events, when NONE EXISTS? What official hard evidence can you provide me which the government has bestowed? Tada! See how foolish you sound?
Until the government de-classifies ALL intelligence relating to 9/11, there is no official NOTHING!
EVERY SINGLE thing put forth thus far is theory.

PS -- I guess you still believe that Oswald shot Kennedy, because there's been no alternate evidence/theories provided?
We don't have to have "smoking gun hard evidence" in order to see things differently..just intelligence and a more open mind..;-)

Posted by: 5th Limb in the Kisser   Posted on: 02/11/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now