The lack of definitive video footage argument is transcending full retard. The argument is apparently that if a football stadium full of people see something, it's not real unless it was caught on video. ******* crazy! While the lack of substantial video does seem a little peculiar, it is far more peculiar to believe that the witnesses that saw a plane fly over and knock down street-light standards right in from of them did NOT really see what they think they saw. Are we to assume that it is more likely that the perpetrators of this conspiracy somehow knocked out these witnesses on the roadway, replaced their memories with false ones, and then hurriedly damaged the area (including substantial damage to light standards) around the roadway before the stooge witnesses woke up from being hypnotized? Sounds reasonable.
They would also have to plant parts of a destroyed 757 around the Pentagon, and plant the passengers' (which are where at this point, exactly?) DNA all over the place, Mark Fuhrman-style.
right, but if you put so much stock in the eye witness accounts, why disregard the eyewitnesses that "saw" something besides a 757? the other part about the witness stuff that I find interesting is that people, like the priest that was quoted in this thread, largely said that they did not hear the plane until it was right over head. I live about 3 miles from PDX and lots of airplanes fly over my place at about 2000 feet. you can hear them coming from miles away. but like I said, full retard or not, let's see the tape! Longtex's point about what is on the tape is a good one. either no tape exists OR there is flight 77 shown hitting the building OR something else hit the building. those are the only 3 options in play, right?
the reason why the eyewitnesses to a plane crash are more believable is that there is a missing plane and parts of it were found int the pentagon.
A'sD on September 11th: "I disagree where this country is headed" A'sD on September 14th: "it make me sick to see what has happened in 30 short years " A'sD on September 17th: evidence for this? A campaign to convince Americans to support entering WWI in 1915 and a book published in 1928. Not the most cogent line of reasoning? uh...no. _________________________________________________
Why won't any of the conspiracy buffs answer the question about DNA from 184 of the 189 victims being found at the scene? The wedding rings? The luggage tags etc...? The personal effects that were returned to the victims families?
The only remotely plausible conspiracy theory is that there was top level interefence with the efforts to stop 9/11. However, none of the Truthers ever make that argument, which is indicative of the level of though that goes on in their camp. As I have stated before, 9/11 was pretty obviously a massive intelligence foul up that demonstrated what a joke the CIA has become. We were the only nation on earth that didn't know it was coming.
i'm no structural engineer, but i sure as hell know that a concrete building rising 60' or so feet in the air is going to be 1.7256 trillion times more dense at its base than the 100th floor of a skyscraper rising 1,300 feet in to the air.
I think that it is fair to say that there is no precedent for a plane crashing into a structure like the pentagon. amazing that a plane could bust through 5 reinforced concrete walls and still leave some wreckage that made it obvious that it was an AA plane. I would still like to know what became of the various confiscated videos. while I may be biased, I don't hear anyone on this thread ranting like a tin foil conspiracist. more video evidence would help answer people's questions regarding this.
