This was all over the media once there was actually definitive proof. Do any of your other theories have proof like this? No. Don't you think there are journalists out there that would want to make a name for themselves by breaking some HUGE story like all the conspiracies you dream about? Why do you think they don't do it? Because they are government controlled?
I'll give you examples. They do, do it, or DID do it.... <object width="960" height="745"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mcWT2lQszEE&hl=en_US&fs=1&hd=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mcWT2lQszEE&hl=en_US&fs=1&hd=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="960" height="745"></embed></object> Only aired once, these newscasters claim that there is no visable evidence of a plane crash at the pentagon. <object width="960" height="745"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oVH5jm06pJY&hl=en_US&fs=1&hd=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oVH5jm06pJY&hl=en_US&fs=1&hd=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="960" height="745"></embed></object> 50 second mark. Fox News employee says no windows were seen on the side of the plane, and an unsual blue logo. <object width="1280" height="745"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2w-G_Ru-x2M&hl=en_US&fs=1&hd=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2w-G_Ru-x2M&hl=en_US&fs=1&hd=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="1280" height="745"></embed></object> Fox News journalist claims Larry Silverstein asked his ins. company to approve of controlled explosives in WTC7. All these should make major headlines everywhere, right? Well despite the appearance of the Pentagon crash, (no wings of plane found, entire nose of airplane found in contact which is funny because if you see a plane nose cone when it hits birds is completely trashed.... but this nose cone inside the pentagon survived the crash) the government says a plane crashed into the pentagon (keep in mind the security tape showing plane crash was edited.... video you find today is diifferent then the one shown on 9/11) We must believe what they say, the government never lies. The flight 93 crash shows the same thing as the pentagon. No pieces of the plane to identify it as their respective flight numbers. Larry Silverstein claims he spoke with the fire department commander on 9/11 and thats when he told the famous 'pull it' quote to the fire department commander to pull the firefighters out and let the building collapse. The fire department commander denies having that conversation with Larry. What's larrys response? "No comment" Does any of this raise any flags? Or am I being too shallow here?
ToyCen, there is a gulf of oil difference between reasoned questioning and investigation of government malfeasance and believing every far fetched conspiracy theory unsupported by actual evidence. An analogy might be those who put more faith in pseudo-sciences than actual science.
This is what you call definitive proof? I saw the first 2...I'm not wasting my time on the last one. Nothing definitive...just something someone wasn't really sure of, or couldn't really see well...has it ever occured to you that the reason they weren't aired again is because people found out they were wrong? And you think these vids as definitive as the footage in Iraq? Unbelieveable.
Heres the bottom line IMO for the 911truthers out there, all the government has to do is show 1 of the other 27 videos they have of the plane hitting the pentagon, or show pieces of airplane wreckage identifying it as American Airlines flight 11, United flight 93, Delta flight 1989, American Airlines flight 77. If people have questions, why won't they provide, or try to provide answers? It'd be so easy to do.
The idea that the truthers could ever be satisfied is prima facia absurd. It is David Irving and proof of the Holocaust, or Orly Taitz and Obama's birth certificate. If they provide proof you will somehow weave into your delusions that it is "doctored evidence" or some other additive conspiracy. Look at the way you truthers incorporated the 9/11 Commission report into your paranoia. They provided proof, you immediately rejected it as proof of a massive conspiracy lead by the Bilderburgers and the Illuminati to silence you and your fellow super-geniuses. Therefore, the normal operating procedure with cranks is to not even dignify their paranoia with a response. There is no upside. The only outcome is legitimizing paranoia. Show me one example in the history of the universe where conspiracy theorists were given additional evidence and they said, "Oh, crap. Our bad. Looks like we were wrong all along. This additional evidence has totally proven that we were mistaken and there never was a conspiracy."
Delta flight 1989- what are you blathering about now? that's the other thing, you have no focus. this is a BP oil spill thread
