the truth about 9/11?

[mybackpages 0]

Concerning the appropriateness of this discussion consider the words of Families of Sept 11- The organization released the following press statement-

September 7, 2006

Statement of Families of September 11:

The Media's Portrayal of 9/11

As we mark five years since 9/11, we are inundated with the media's portrayal of that tragic day. Television miniseries, Hollywood films, comic books and countless "documentaries" are dramatizing and sometimes distorting the events leading up to and happening on 9/11.

Families of September 11 believes the best way to honor those who were lost is to make sure that what happened to them never happens again. As such, we must understand exactly what took place, and not allow "entertainers" to promote misleading or incorrect information as fact to the public.

If we do not learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it. Any depiction of 9/11 that is not accurate and factual propagates myths, myths that may cause us future harm.

In order to make our country safer and more secure, we owe it to those who were lost to acknowledge that which took place, so that we can ensure it never happens again.

This only thing disrespectful on this board is the inane comments. Want to be helpful? Use your engery in a dialogue for truth not slander.

[GaryC 7]

I find it interesting that this debate is going on after they released the tapes showing BinLaden and the 9/11 hijackers together. And the admition that they did it. Just goes to show that a conspiracy believer will still believe whatever he wants despite the obvious facts that contradict it.

Edited September 11, 2006 by Iniibig ko si Luz forever

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I find it interesting that this debate is going on after they released the tapes showing BinLaden and the 9/11 hijackers together. And the admition that they did it. Just goes to show that a conspiracy believer will still believe whatever he wants despite the obvious facts that contradict it.

True - everyone has seen the footage countless times of the massive commercial jetliners smashing into the buildings at 500-600mph, sufficient force to blow out the opposite side of the building. But people still seriously question that it could survive that sort of damage. Crazy.

The theory has more to do with some sort of anti-government wish-fulfillment on the part of individuals than any actual proveable facts.

Still - lets not hope this thread turns out to be another 15 page rehash of all that B/S.

[danae 0]

And if Paul felt this was appropriate to post this today (after all it IS just another day) then he is perfectly within his rights to do so. Its called freedom of speech. To suggest this thread gets closed is just plain ridiculous.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11 you wouldn't call it "just another day"

I didnt say 9/11 2001 was 'just another day'. I said 9/11 2006 is.

[mmmbop1976 1]

And if Paul felt this was appropriate to post this today (after all it IS just another day) then he is perfectly within his rights to do so. Its called freedom of speech. To suggest this thread gets closed is just plain ridiculous.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11 you wouldn't call it "just another day"

I didnt say 9/11 2001 was 'just another day'. I said 9/11 2006 is.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11you wouldn't call it 9/11/06 "just another day"

[Marc and Olga 0]

And if Paul felt this was appropriate to post this today (after all it IS just another day) then he is perfectly within his rights to do so. Its called freedom of speech. To suggest this thread gets closed is just plain ridiculous.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11 you wouldn't call it "just another day"

I didnt say 9/11 2001 was 'just another day'. I said 9/11 2006 is.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11you wouldn't call it 9/11/06 "just another day"

mmmm, was your SO (at the time) one of the victims?

[incanada1234 0]

and retards like desert fox..........

Yeah, NOW we're going to take your posts seriously. Jerk.

DESERT FOX ROCKS!

And if Paul felt this was appropriate to post this today (after all it IS just another day) then he is perfectly within his rights to do so. Its called freedom of speech. To suggest this thread gets closed is just plain ridiculous.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11 you wouldn't call it "just another day"

I didnt say 9/11 2001 was 'just another day'. I said 9/11 2006 is.

i bet if your SO was one of the victims on 9/11you wouldn't call it 9/11/06 "just another day"

I disagree. Lauraxmarie isn't exactly known for her compassion.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Whatever the truth is, GWB's speech isn't it.

Not political eh?

Bollocks.

[incanada1234 0]

Whatever the truth is, GWB's speech isn't it.

Oh stop being so bitter at everything Republicans do.

[mybackpages 0]

Whatever the truth is, GWB's speech isn't it.

Not political eh?

Bollocks.

[Jenn! 918]

He said "nucular" again!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Whatever the truth is, GWB's speech isn't it.

Oh stop being so bitter at everything Republicans do.

Why? I wouldn't complain if they weren't as crooked as a box of snakes, and if there were more electoral choices than merely the freedom to choose 1 of 2 boxes of snakes.

[incanada1234 0]

He said "nucular" again!

You thought he'd stop after 60 years?

By the way

"Main Entry: nu·cle·ar

Pronunciation: 'nü-klE-&r, 'nyü-, ÷-ky&-l&r"

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/nuclear

Whatever the truth is, GWB's speech isn't it.

Oh stop being so bitter at everything Republicans do.

Why? I wouldn't complain if they weren't as crooked as a box of snakes, and if there were more electoral choices than merely the freedom to choose 1 of 2 boxes of snakes.

Ok, I can't totally disagree with that statement. But at least they're less crooked than the dumbocrats.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Ok, I can't totally disagree with that statement. But at least they're less crooked than the dumbocrats.

Go ahead and qualify that - or were you just "thumbing your nose" at the other side just for the heck of it?

[dalegg 143]

In all fairness to Paul C guys, the article does not promote this rediculous theory, it is just talking about the fact that there are loonies who call themselves "9/11 scholars" out there that do believe it.

This is an actual quote from the article:

The 9/11 scholars go to great lengths to portray themselves as rational thinkers, who have been slowly won over by a careful, academic analysis of the facts of the day.

However, a study of the full extent of their claims is a journey into the increasingly absurd:

I for one actually wish they would have this debate out in the public. There are too many people who have been misled by this movement and there is enough pictoral evidence to crush it once and for all, fairly easily.