Now...

Thanks for speaking Connie.

Can we get this as a Windows Media File?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/08/paving_the_way_to_war_with_ira.html

I am going to debate a peculiar pro official story form a anonymous:

(Note that Penn & Teller represent comedic magicians who know how to deceive an audience for entertainment and they know how to spot con-artists who dishonestly deceive the public.)

-Yeah and Penn & Teller really made a point by speaking profanities throughout the whole 911 segment, giving no arguments against theories other than emotional comments, charged by the word Fuck.
(Not only did these emails agree with the conspiracy theories but some of them felt angered by my refusal to see their side (I did see their side, I just didn't agree with it). This amazed me because I have yet to see a single 9/11 conspiracy theory that makes any sense (what have I missed?) Moreover, most of the inventors of these theories do not even agree with each other (always a red flag) and most of their claims do not even meet the requirement of common sense. How in the world could anyone not see the holes in their argument, I thought.)

-So we should just feel nothing after our government let 9-11 happen, and we have people trying to defend the official story with explanations that dont make sense at all. What really makes no sense is the official story. That suggest that 3 buildings fell because of fire and structural damage, 2 of them being 110 stories hight, falling at a speed of 10 floors per second in about 10 seconds, close to free fall speed of 8.2 making it only 1-2 second resistance that all 110 floors gave away, making it almost freefall speed, making it appear as if steel had no strength at all, and to top it all off the top of one building broke to the side, reducing downward presure, yet the building fell evenly to its footprints, defying all logic.

(On second thought, I knew that beliefs can have such an overpowering affect on an individual that it can conceal important things like evidence, facts, and even reality. But these emails came from my people. Not necessarily nonbelievers, mind you, but liberals, freethinkers, and skeptics. Even the best of them can fall prey for scams, cons, illusions, frauds, and swindles.)

-This comment totally applies to the original story, where they conceal important evidence, like gettin rid of all the steel of the twin towers, and the government doing nothing to preserve the evidence, why they never reveal the inside trading in the stock market the days before 9-11, why the hid the tapes of the cameras sorrounding the pentagon, why they confiscated the firemen tapes, why they only show 5 frames from the pentagon explosion, when the cameras are 60 frames per second, and they are able to capture at least 20 frames from a object traveling at least 550 miles per hour, enought to capture a boing on video. Talk about the original story not making sense. Look at the big picture and not throught tunnel vision please.

(Of course we should allow anyone to ask any questions and speculate but these conspiracy theorists do not do this honestly. They leave out evidence that contradicts their theories, present out-of-context eyewitness reports, twist their words, and many times make things up. This makes them scam-artists and not worthy of respect. They use inductive reasoning (you cannot prove anything by inductive reasoning alone) and unsubstantiated deductive premises to explain them. Like all con-artists, they throw in their theories amongst actual facts to make them look as if they agree with the facts (they don't).)

-Of course we are asking question to the nonsense of the official explanations. Talk about leaving out evidence from the official explanations and the commission report. Talk about how the bush administration twist words by publicly saying: "We had no idea they could used hijack planes to attack us", when they where running simulations the same day about the same thing that happened on 9-11, not counting that inteligence had been telling the bush administration for months before that terrorist would used hijack planes to attack us, and to come in TV and claim they did not had any idea that would happen, is trying to hard to steer guilt away from them. How would you bush supporters responds to this discrepancies and lies known to be public. Talk about twisting facts, by invading iraq by making it seem there where ties of iraq to 9-11, when bush came on TV saying iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, when his letter to congress which you can find at whitehouse.gov justifying permission to go into iraq says that iraq was connected to the axis of evil that made 9-11 happen. Isn't that a boldface lie to us. That makes the official theory a conspiracy and far outlandish explanation to what happened on 9-11.

(For example, how could one not question the demolition theory of the WTC buildings? Think of all the people that would have to install explosives in every story of the buildings, lay miles of electrical detonation wires. It usually takes months for professional detonation crews to set up a large building for destruction and they also spend lots of time weakening structural columns with saws and torches.)

For example they where doing many 12 hour shift on secret, the where taking dog sneefing dogs for weeks before 9-11, plus bush brother was chief of security on those buildings. There is something call wireless technology nowadays people. and also you can easily deceive people by telling them building improvements being done, without telling them what materials they are using, or you could tell them its at complete rewire of certain systems in the building, that is without counting that most people that worked there died there. exept for some people that managed to survived but their stories have never been taken into account by the goverment and the media.

I could keep on debunking this argument but i think its enought to prove my point, if more debunking is needed i would be more than happy to go argument by argument with those protecting the official story.

http://news.com.com/2061-10802_3-6107949.html

BRIAN KILMEADE: "Hey, Mr. Secretary, finally, do you think in the next ten years we're going to be looking at some type of draft because we seem to need - have so many conflicts to cover?"

WILLIAM COHEN: "I'm not sure there'll be a draft. I think there should be a commitment to universal service. I think that only a few people are really committed to this war against terrorism and called. I think the American people have to be - understand - that we're all in this together. We ought to have a real call to national service to commit ourselves to some form of public service ...."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/August2006/250806Republican.htm