Pete Carroll is apparently a 9/11 truther

Proofer wrote:

including Firemen

...and firemen concluding that those explosions could have very well been electrical or "whatever".

"I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building cowing down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever."

that is fine, and I can somewhat accept it, but it still does not discredit architects, engineers, physicists, etc. about Building 7.

Now we find out the truth, a transformer knocked down the buildings.

Proofer wrote:

that is fine, and I can somewhat accept it, but it still does not discredit architects, engineers, physicists, etc. about Building 7.

Have you read the full NIST report? Have you listened to other architects, engineers, and physicists that dispute the truther theories about building 7?

Here's a condensed youtube video that does a pretty good job:

Frank Marshall Davis.

What most of you are doing wrong is that you have (for whatever, credible or not, reason) picked a side and come into the discussion from that side.

What I would like to see, and this is where I stand, is people asking questions and willing to accept that some of their beliefs can be wrong.

I find it hard to believe that a 757 has crashed into the Pentagon but I have read a couple of explanations here, that I had never heard/read before that make me question my beliefs.

Most of you guys seem like scientists trying to prove that God exists or doesn't. The believers will find "evidence" that God exists and the non-believers will find "evidence" that God doesn't exist.

I am not trying to reason with the trolls but I understand that there are some reasonable people out there posting on these boards.

(and for those complaining about a wall of text, just go to jamin's threads)

As I posted earlier, I saw the plane hit the Pentagon. With my own eyes. Clearly, people who don't want to believe a plane hit the Pentagon will dismiss me as a liar or some paid consultant to a massive conspiracy, my only job now is to scour 9/11 truther websites and blogs to falsely claim I saw it happen.

Not only did I witness it, but I knew a few of the Navy people that died in the Pentagon. I went to a few funerals.

Proving that God exists and proving 9/11 was actually perpetrated by terrorists is not the same thing. Even Pope Francis would tell you that teh existence of God cannot be proven scientifically.

You do realize the odds that Larry Silverstein, his son, and his daughter would all not show up for work on the same day (p/11) for three different "reasons" is greater than 1,000 to 1 against?

K5 wrote:

You do realize the odds that Larry Silverstein, his son, and his daughter would all not show up for work on the same day (p/11) for three different "reasons" is greater than 1,000 to 1 against?

You're obviously not very good with probability.

I believe the witnesses that describe an airplane hitting the Pent. What I find hard to believe is that an hour after the 2nd WTC strike, a plane is flying off-course and there is no interception.

There are literally hundreds of accounts of planes going off of flight path and being intercepted by jets within minutes... literally. And sometimes they make national headlines.

I mean, we're talking about the most heavily guarded airspace on the planet... Washington DC, and a plane that is off-course for over an hour after the 2nd strike, maneuvering in massive descending turns over the the most important city in the world? That is sketchy.

And to add to it... a building goes straight down in free-fall speed, and the owner gives a sketchy account of why he wasn't there, but every other day he was? That, again, is sketchy.

The question is "who has really studied the evidence?" For two years after 9/11 I believed the official story. Then I discovered the internet,lol! For month after month I looked at website after website. If you do that with an open mind you will discover that practically EVERYTHING THE GOVERNMENT SAYS IS A LIE! Same with the JFK assassination. I spent OVER THIRTY YEARS studying the JFK situation and finaly gave up. THEN I saw a high resolution video of the Zapruder film and it is OBVIOUS Jackie Kennedy did it! So study the evidence!

THIS

Taynt Chodeberg wrote:

I believe the witnesses that describe an airplane hitting the Pent. What I find hard to believe is that an hour after the 2nd WTC strike, a plane is flying off-course and there is no interception.

There are literally hundreds of accounts of planes going off of flight path and being intercepted by jets within minutes... literally. And sometimes they make national headlines.

I mean, we're talking about the most heavily guarded airspace on the planet... Washington DC, and a plane that is off-course for over an hour after the 2nd strike, maneuvering in massive descending turns over the the most important city in the world? That is sketchy.

And to add to it... a building goes straight down in free-fall speed, and the owner gives a sketchy account of why he wasn't there, but every other day he was? That, again, is sketchy.

this was on 911, when total chaos was all around - you think the air force could intercept every plane that was off course?on a normal day, if one plane is suspicious, sure, it can be intercepted. On 911, with a war starting, it is easy to see how a jet out in the middle of freaking nowhere would not be intercepted.

Seriously... the amount of stupid in that post, trumps all.

You are hereby declared 'the dumbest SOB of all-time'... Congrats!

"In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."

Read down at the bottom.

So, you're telling me that a plane can fly off course and loop over Washington DC, unnoticed? No surface to air defense? An hour after the 2nd plane strikes, the skies over DC are as open as ever? You're telling me that an hour later, there were military units in the THE most important city on the planet that were not on high alert?

I mean, really?

Right.

I am just happy that this conversation has been allowed to continue on Lets Run. Brojos, thank you sincerely for not censoring it.

In my own experience, 100% of people who actually examine the evidence -- with an open mind -- admit that there are many extremely fishy parts of the story.

Here is one of the most bizarre pieces of evidence: Burned out cars along FDR Drive East River on 9/11. The East River, for those who do not know NYC geography, is about a half a mile away from the WTC site.

https://www.google.com/search?q=burned+out+cars+9/11+east+river&espv=210&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=qz7yUr3xJpHJsQT1q4CACA&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=624#q=burned+out+cars+9%2F11&tbm=isch&facrc=_&imgrc=EGSkPLX4EVgR-M%253A%3BfTBhaNo16GwvAM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fimg232.imageshack.us%252Fimg232%252F5246%252Fnokcarsad1.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fletsrollforums.com%252Fmelted-mystery-cars-world-t13669.html%3B350%3B257

Does anyone have a good explanation for this?

Building 7 was heavily damaged and fire suppression inside was insufficient. They got everyone the fu*k out of there and let it come down.

It was insured (OMG!) Cheaper to rebuild than to repair...that is all.

What's the conspiracy?