Fahrenheit 911

[DCW]

I'd heard that

Fahrenheit 9/11 was well documented. I'm glad they did this...

Dubya is hopefully history in Nov...Baring

some last minute trickery like postponing the elections or bringing up Bin Laden from the White House Basement

The Bin Laden theory is what I've been hearing.



DCW

[Whitehall]

Where

would Kerry take us? Into the busom of the UN and the arms of the French? PLEEEZE!

Could Kerry deliver bin

Laden when Bush's command of the US military could not? (Frankly, OBL is more than likely some red splatter

someplace and will never be found.)

Would a Kerry energy policy be any better than Clinton/Gore's? At least

Clinton had surplus natural gas to push - that's all gone now. And please don't argue for "renewables" - what

some politicians (Kerry and other Democrats largely) are really offering is "something for nothing" - an ancient

ploy. As an energy specialist, the only way we've gotten any "renewables" is to make them a form of corporate

welfare.

Can we prevent future terrorism attacks with NO additional restraints on the most open society on

earth?

The answer is that Kerry only offers us wishful thinking and empty promises. We are faced with a

world-historical challenge and only Bush has a realistic strategic plan. We voters had best realize that this is

war and the fate of Western civilization depends on our decisions.

Watching a Michael Moore propaganda flick

is hardly responsible preparation for deciding November's choice.

Besides, the betting odds are better than

3:2 Bush.

[Sacogoo]

<<We are faced with a

world-historical challenge and only Bush has a realistic strategic plan.>>

You're joking, right?

I

mean, seriously.

Bush the only guy with a "realistic" and "strategic" plan?

That's a joke.

Right?

And what's the plan? To go on an another 30 day vacation, get drunk as hell and bash his mellon on a

coffee table as he passes out while Satan's minions Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Rice rape the world so that

they can get fat ass year end multi-million dollar bonus checks once they get re-hired by oil companies and defense

contractors after they get ousted in 2004 or get thrown to the street due to term limits in 2008?

<<We voters

had best realize that this is war and the fate of Western civilization depends on our decisions.>>

What war?

That we illegally invaded two countries that had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks and pissed off every

single human being in the known universe that doesn't watch the Fox News Network means we're at war? If you can

constitute that we are at war (and Appointee Bush has already stated a year and a half ago that major "conflict" was

over, so we can't possibly be at war, can we?), then the only reason we are at war is because the Bush

administration started the frickin' war in the first place.

It ain't about political parties at this

point. It's about doing what's right.

Give me one single, solitary point where anything that this

administration has done has actually benefitted Americans other than corporate cronism and military

spending?

How's the environment?
How's the deficeit?
How's the economy?
How's the forclosure

rate on small businesses?
How's the education system? (NCLB)
How's the medical system?
How's your

personal freedom? (Patriot Act)

It's a freakin' scam and everybody knows it. I'm completely pissed, and

I'm a white, middle-class, honorably discharged US Army Infantryman, college grad, who typically votes

conservative.

Pissed.

Way pissed.

Now listening to: Rock Against Bush "Volume 1"

[Whitehall]

Hey, Sacogoo, you can be just as

pissed as you want - I'm sure you're enjoying your self-indulgent emotionalism.

Obviously, my understanding

of the facts and issues differs considerably from yours.

But if you don't understand that a big bunch of

well-funded murders wants to make you bow to Mecca tive times a day - or kill you if you won't - then you're

blind, dangerously so. And it's not just al Queda.

If we pull back inside our borders, they will still come

at us. You can't win playing defense and you can not deter. The only route is take it to the enemy - that is,

change the Middle East.

We're in this foxhole together, remember?

As to the rest of your complaints,

the environment is OK, getting better - there is argument about some details. I'm good with closing all those old

coal plants, BTW, even if Bush thinks they are truly grandfathered under existing law. The economy is doing great -

not a phoney boom, but the start of a steady growth phase. Education - the Federal government should do less, not

more. I look to my local school board, not Washington. The deficit is truly bipartisan - don't you recognize

Keynesian stimulation?

So just what does Kerry offer? Sorry, but so far all I've heard is contradictory

mush from that guy.

[DrSmellThis]

Way to take on all them pot smokin liberal commies, Whitehall!

EeeeHaaaw! Yep, we'd all be wearin head towels if it wasn't for Mister President Bush goin after Bin Laden with

all them troops. He's a manly Commander Chief! War hero if'n I remember correct! Much better than that little

girlie fly-boy wimp, Kerry! Just take over the whole damn middle east! Just in case. We got the guns, may as well

use 'em! Karma Schwarma! Get it? Hee Hee! Human Shuman! I love that trickle down economics too. You only have to

look at one statistic! Look how good our economy's doin! Oops, damn! That was one of them adylescent emotional

outbursts again. I just couldn't resist a little self-indulgent emotional outburst, with all the liberal wacky

tobbacy I've been smokin' (oops, shouldn't have said that on line, thanks to the Patriot Act. the Feds'll be

here any minute!), but I'm learnin' from those God fearin Republicans how to be more selfless. And hell, the

planet's going to be uninhabitable anyway, lets just have fun burnin up the rest of the oil. Give everybody a

Humvee! And don't go seein that well documented pack of lies 9/11 thing. Wouldn't want to interfere in all your

open minded info gatherin' your doin to study for the election!

[Whitehall]

Way to take on all them pot smokin liberal commies, Whitehall! EeeeHaaaw! Yep, we'd all be

wearin head towels if it wasn't for Mister President Bush goin after Bin Laden with all them troops. He's a manly

Commander Chief! War hero if'n I remember correct! Much better than that little girlie fly-boy wimp, Kerry! Just

take over the whole damn middle east! Just in case. We got the guns, may as well use 'em! Karma Schwarma! Get it?

Hee Hee! Human Shuman! I love that trickle down economics too. You only have to look at one statistic! Look how good

our economy's doin! Oops, damn! That was one of them adylescent emotional outbursts again. I just couldn't resist

a little self-indulgent emotional outburst, with all the liberal wacky tobbacy I've been smokin' (oops, shouldn't

have said that on line, the Feds'll be here any minute!), but I'm learnin' from those God fearin Republicans how

to be more selfless. And hell, the planet's going to be uninhabitable anyway, lets just have fun burnin up the rest

of the oil. Give everybody a Humvee! And don't go seein that well documented pack of lies 9/11 thing. Wouldn't

want to interfere in all your open minded info gatherin' your doin to study for the election!

Takes me back to some of my more spirited debates with FTR. At least she gave

good phone sex.

[Gossamer_2701]

The answer is that

Kerry only offers us wishful thinking and empty promises. We are faced with a world-historical challenge and only

Bush has a realistic strategic plan. We voters had best realize that this is war and the fate of Western

civilization depends on our decisions

OMG.... What a crock'o'shit!!!! Keep spewing that

cokehead's useless partylines....sad thing is that you actually believe that crap!!!

[Sacogoo]

But if you

don't understand that a big bunch of well-funded murders wants to make you bow to Mecca tive times a day - or kill

you if you won't - then you're blind, dangerously so. And it's not just al Queda.

Don't try to

use that McCarthyism BS to justify an illegal invasion of two countries that had nothing to do with the September 11

attacks. The hard sell of the Communism Domino Effect by the military industrial complex in the early 50's is what

got us into the Vietnam fiasco, but I guarantee you that this line of crap ain't gonna work this time. Bowing to

Mecca. That culture doesn't have the mentality, organization, or social structure to be anything more than a base

tribalistic society rather than the organized imperialistic world conquerers that the hard core neo-cons are

painting them to be.

Well funded murderers. Are you referring to the U.S. military? The Saudis? Because

the people who I see committing the murders, attacks, and crimes against humanity (such as illegally invading two

countries which had nothing to do with the September 11 attacks and killing ten of thousands of innocent civilians

in the process, or being the country of origin of the terrorists who committed the 9/11 attacks) are those

groups.

<<The only route is take it to the enemy - that is, change the Middle East.>>

Yeah, that's

terrific foreign policy. Let's manipulate and influence and change foreign countries just for the benefit of

American corporations and . Worked wonders for us in setting up the Central American Banana Republics, East Asia

(remember Vietnam at all? Korea to this day?), the Middle East (Shah of Iran anyone?). This type of foreign policy

of corporate imperialism has only created the type of resentment and hatred from foreign countries that we tried to

"change" that culminated in the September 11 attacks against the US. Nobody is bombing Canada or Finland, because

they are smart enough to keep their noses out of everybody elses business.

<<We're in this foxhole together,

remember?>>

If you are supporting an administration that committed illegal, pre-emptive invasions of

countries that had no involvement in the September 11 attacks we're not. If you are supporting an administration

who not only condones, but conducts torture, illegally detains people with no charges, and violates the Geneva

conventions we're not in the foxhole together. If you are supporting an administration that came to power without

a majority of the popular votes (and electoral to all you Hamiltonians out there as it has been shown repeatedly

that if the supreme court did not halt the recall, Gore would have won Florida and the electoral college - we

already know he won the popular vote) then we're not in the same foxhole together.

<<Education - the

Federal government should do less, not more. I look to my local school board, not Washington.>>

Too bad

Bush's "No Child Left Behind" legislation has basically removed any potential for your local school board to

regulate themselves, and will be the ruination of public education. (Even hardcore conservative states like Utah

are decrying this horrific piece of legislation.)

<<As to the rest of your complaints, the environment is OK,

getting better>>

Whoa ho! Better? That's rich! Bush has been labled as the worst environmental president

in history. Hell, he makes Regan and James Watt look like tree hugging squirrel lovers.

<<The economy is

doing great - not a phoney boom, but the start of a steady growth phase.>>

Bush's economy:
* I shattered

the record for the largest annual deficit in US history.

* I set an economic record for most private

bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.

* I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month

period.

* I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the US stock market. In my first

year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues every month.

<<So just

what does Kerry offer? Sorry, but so far all I've heard is contradictory mush from that guy.>>

Anybody but

Bush in '04. If he gets re-elected, I swear to the powers that be that I will pack up my daughter and move out of

the country. He isn't going to get one more tax dollar out of me so that he can fund and run his fascist regime of

illegal global corporate imperialism. The only appointment that the Bush/Cheney ticket deserves in '04 is ajoining

cells in the maximum security section at Leavenworth with 300 lb. rapists (with a penchant for anal sex) as

cellmates.

Now listening to: Pink Panthers Penthouse Party

[koolking1]

you guys could do what I do

and that's whenever I'm discussing politics with anyone I now refer to Bush as "Appointee Bush" instead of

President.

[DrSmellThis]

It's not clear who could've

"appointed" him, either. A Supreme Court can't. Maybe we should call him "spilled milk" and look to the future.

[belgareth]

It's not

clear who could've "appointed" him, either. A Supreme Court can't. Maybe we should call him "spilled milk" and

look to the future.

A rational comment, Doc? I may have to delete it as being off topic.

[DrSmellThis]

Yep, gonna have to go back to

all that "irrational" posting of exhaustive documentation. I admit there have been some emotions in the thread,

but that is part and parcel of the subject of Bush, for some reason; hugely moreso, here and abroad, than any

president in any of our lifetimes -- even in the history of the US. Why??!

[belgareth]

OK, a rational comment about

politics in this thread.

[metroman]

Don't try to use

that McCarthyism BS to justify an illegal invasion of two countries that had nothing to do with the September 11

attacks. The hard sell of the Communism Domino Effect by the military industrial complex in the early 50's is what

got us into the Vietnam fiasco, but I guarantee you that this line of crap ain't gonna work this time. Bowing to

Mecca. That culture doesn't have the mentality, organization, or social structure to be anything more than a base

tribalistic society rather than the organized imperialistic world conquerers that the hard core neo-cons are

painting them to be.

Well funded murderers. Are you referring to the U.S. military? The Saudis? Because

the people who I see committing the murders, attacks, and crimes against humanity (such as illegally invading two

countries which had nothing to do with the September 11 attacks and killing ten of thousands of innocent civilians

in the process, or being the country of origin of the terrorists who committed the 9/11 attacks) are those

groups.

<<The only route is take it to the enemy - that is, change the Middle East.>>

Yeah, that's

terrific foreign policy. Let's manipulate and influence and change foreign countries just for the benefit of

American corporations and . Worked wonders for us in setting up the Central American Banana Republics, East Asia

(remember Vietnam at all? Korea to this day?), the Middle East (Shah of Iran anyone?). This type of foreign policy

of corporate imperialism has only created the type of resentment and hatred from foreign countries that we tried to

"change" that culminated in the September 11 attacks against the US. Nobody is bombing Canada or Finland, because

they are smart enough to keep their noses out of everybody elses business.

<<We're in this foxhole together,

remember?>>

If you are supporting an administration that committed illegal, pre-emptive invasions of

countries that had no involvement in the September 11 attacks we're not. If you are supporting an administration

who not only condones, but conducts torture, illegally detains people with no charges, and violates the Geneva

conventions we're not in the foxhole together. If you are supporting an administration that came to power without

a majority of the popular votes (and electoral to all you Hamiltonians out there as it has been shown repeatedly

that if the supreme court did not halt the recall, Gore would have won Florida and the electoral college - we

already know he won the popular vote) then we're not in the same foxhole together.

<<Education - the

Federal government should do less, not more. I look to my local school board, not Washington.>>

Too bad

Bush's "No Child Left Behind" legislation has basically removed any potential for your local school board to

regulate themselves, and will be the ruination of public education. (Even hardcore conservative states like Utah

are decrying this horrific piece of legislation.)

<<As to the rest of your complaints, the environment is OK,

getting better>>

Whoa ho! Better? That's rich! Bush has been labled as the worst environmental president

in history. Hell, he makes Regan and James Watt look like tree hugging squirrel lovers.

<<The economy is

doing great - not a phoney boom, but the start of a steady growth phase.>>

Bush's economy:
* I shattered

the record for the largest annual deficit in US history.

* I set an economic record for most private

bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.

* I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month

period.

* I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the US stock market. In my first

year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues every month.

<<So just

what does Kerry offer? Sorry, but so far all I've heard is contradictory mush from that guy.>>

Anybody but

Bush in '04. If he gets re-elected, I swear to the powers that be that I will pack up my daughter and move out of

the country. He isn't going to get one more tax dollar out of me so that he can fund and run his fascist regime of

illegal global corporate imperialism. The only appointment that the Bush/Cheney ticket deserves in '04 is ajoining

cells in the maximum security section at Leavenworth with 300 lb. rapists (with a penchant for anal sex) as

cellmates.

Now listening to: Pink Panthers Penthouse Party

Nice post Sacogoo! I think you

covered all the bases on that one. Sen Robert Byrd on Meet the Press Sunday with Tim Russert says he's served

under 11 Presidents & Dubya is by far the most dangerous one...

[DrSmellThis]

"I think

every American ought to see it." (Rolling Stone, 7/13)

"As far as I know, none of the facts in the movie have

been refuted. That is, I think the evidence in the movie is accurate." (Nova TV (Dutch), 7/14)

[Holmes]

!WEWILLKILLMICHAELMOORE!

[DrSmellThis]

Interesting post. (and nice

pik! )

[Holmes]

Jagshemash, Pepsi Max!

[Friendly1]

Hm. Okay. I'll make a

political statement and then jump out of this discussion.

The news media (who are generally agreed to have a

liberal bias by most conservatives) have had a field day with Mr. Moore, picking apart the inaccuracies of this

movie. For example, the claim that members of the Bin Laden family were allowed to fly out of the United States

during the 4-day ban on air traffic has been shown repeatedly to be pure nonsense.

People like Moore, who take

facts and mix them with fiction in order to stir up pseudo-patriotic slurs, never tell the whole truth. You can find

them on both sides of the aisle (Moore is countering Rush Limbaugh's years and years of conservative tirades). The

film is propaganda, contains clearly-documented facts and falsehoods, and hopefully will have no effect on the

election.

Kerry just scares me. His body language is so fake and contrived. He doesn't speak with conviction.

Bush, at least, speaks with conviction. And for all his faults (and despite Moore's character assassinaton film),

he has never been shown to have lied about the reasons for his invasion of Iraq.

Many people in this country

wrongly believe we are in Iraq for the oil. At the height of its production, Iraq never provided more than 5% of our

imported oil. President Franklin Roosevelt committed the United States to long-term mutual defense obligations with

Saudi Arabia in the 1930s. He did so because the European powers were carving up oil mandates in the Middle East at

a rapid clip, and Roosevelt feared the United States would be left without vital resources in the event of another

major war.

So, the first Persian Gulf War was fought for two reasons: to put a stop to Saddam Hussein's

aggression (which would ultimately have led to another global-wide conflict, since his declared aim was to create a

new Arabic/Islamic empire); and to honor our then 50+ year old treaty with Saudi Arabia, which was under imminent

attack.

Former President Bush was wrongly portrayed as being concerned about Kuwaiti oil, because it really

didn't matter who controlled the oil. What mattered was how we honored our agreements and whether we were prepared

to stand idly by while another dictator began capturing huge portions of the world. The Soviet Union was only just

collapsing after existing for 80 years. It was never in American interests to allow a new power to arise and replace

the Soviet Bloc as a threat to our stability.

The current President Bush was given bad evidence by the

intelligence community. Period. This fact has been so well documented through several investigations that, if the

Democrats could show it was otherwise, our current presidential campaign debates would be overwhelmingly focused on

the confirmation of Moore's nonsense. Instead, we have Bush nailing Kerry over Kerry's supposed changes in

position and Kerry chasing Bush over Bush's supposed mis-interpretations of Kerry's supposed non-changes in

positions.

Why isn't Kerry pressing home the attack that Moore launched? Because Moore's attack was little

more than hot air with no political value.

If the so-called liberal media cannot help but find fault with Mr.

Moore's "facts", and if the Democratic Party's presidential candidate cannot use Mr. Moore's "facts" to rally

American public opinion against the incumbent Chief Executive, clearly there is something seriously wrong with Mr.

Moore's "facts".

And, therefore, they should be given no further scrutiny. I, for one, am tired of seeing the

movie picked apart for its factual errors. It has failed to make its case, since its case is built on inaccuracies

and misrepresentations.

I could just as easily call Mr. Moore a liar, but I would rather say he did no better

than Mr. Bush, and acted on bad information.

Mr. Bush, btw, is responsible for far fewer Iraqi deaths than his

predecessor. By some estimates, U.N. sanctions resulted in approximately 500,000 Iraqi deaths -- all children. Even

10 per cent of that number represents a price too high for NOT going into Iraq.

Yes, we'll probably lose more

than 1,000 soldiers before this is all over. And that number doesn't include the numerous serious injuries our

soldiers will return home with. Thousands of American families are going to be impacted by our involvement there.



But the alternative was that we would have continued murdering thousands of Iraqi babies through deprivation every

year.

If going into Iraq was wrong, maintaining the sanctions would have been even more wrong. So, let's give

Mr. Bush some credit for making a hard choice, even if we don't all agree with or like the consequences of the

choice he made. Mr. Gore, had he won the election, would have had to face the same choice. I fear he would have

continuing allowing innocent children to die.

President Clinton was one of the worst commanders-in-chief this

country has ever had. His foreign policy was generally derided and considered disastrous during his presidency. He

failed to provide our troops with the support they required when they were committed to action, and though we

technically won the Battle of Mogadishu by inflicting more casualties on the enemy than we took, AND by achieving

most of our objectives, he nonetheless betrayed the courage and trust of our soldiers by acting like we had been

defeated, and generally leading our armed forces in a shameful, cowardly fashion.

He also disgraced this nation

with numerous scandals. But because most Americans had jobs, we were willing to endure his nonsense and bad

leadership.

If Mr. Bush loses in November, he will lose because too few Americans have jobs, not because of the

choices he made with respect to which countries would feel the brunt of American military power.

While many

people could have chosen differently from Mr. Bush, it has yet to be shown (and can never really be shown) that

anyone would have chosen more wisely.

At the very least, we now have an obligation to help the Iraqi people

avoid falling into the misery of living under another dictatorship. Because if a new Iraqi dictatorship rises from

the ashes, what guarantees do we have that they won't try to create a new Arabic/Islamic empire again?



Absolutely none. In fact, the forces opposing Iraqi democracy today (from wothin Iraq) all represent, to one

degree or another, the very real threat of a future regional war of conquest. We owe it to the service people who

died in the first Persian Gulf War, as well as those who have perished in the current Iraqi conflict, to do our best

to ensure that their sacrifices were not in vain.

We cannot do that by pulling out of Iraq before it is clear

our continued presence will only serve to make matters worse. We CAN do that by continuing to allow narrow-minded

extremists like Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Moore to continue to lambast our presidents with half-truths and

unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

[DrSmellThis]

Thanks for your detailed and

substantive post, Friendly1 -- good grist for the mill of left vs. right debates. You made some interesting

points; some I concur with, some unclear, and others I disagree with. I wish I had time to respond as thoroughly as

your post deserves. But with all the work I have these days I just wanted to call attention to the fact that there

is no longer any need to settle for general dismissives like, "Moore's film is obviously chock full of falsehoods".

Anyone can now take the specific references for each claim, as linked above, and lay out their case. For example,

Section Two of the references documents the exodus of the Saudis and Bin Ladens shortly after 9/11. It

indicates that "only one" of the many such flights was thought to occur during the grounding; that the film never

claimed the whole exodus happened during the grounding; but, that the mass exodus did happen as portrayed, approved

at very high levels of government. Not that Moore should be anybody's preferred news source, but what wasn't

factual? The only thing I know of is that the limo was maybe pelted with just one egg in that one scene and not

"eggs," as the movie claimed.

[DCW]

Someone sent me

this today. I never considered this what do

u think?

Real or what?

DCW

[Pancho1188]

That's really messed up.

[bjf]

Yea, it is. What evidence is there

that there was a plane, btw?

[DCW]

I never believed that the crash in

Long Island was caused by the wind, remeber that one it was a few days after 911.


DCW

[bjf]

Yea, I remember that. When you said

Long Island, I was thinking of the JFK to Paris one that went down, and people said they saw a missle. The one that

went down after 9/11 they recently came out with an explanation. Basically, I think somethign fell off the plane,

and then the pilot overcompenstated or something.

[belgareth]

Yea, I remember

that. When you said Long Island, I was thinking of the JFK to Paris one that went down, and people said they saw a

missle. The one that went down after 9/11 they recently came out with an explanation. Basically, I think somethign

fell off the plane, and then the pilot overcompenstated or something.

The plane that went down over Long

Island was due to a mechanical flaw. It had to do with the stresses on the laminate used in the tail section, the

effects of wake turbulance and repeated side to side motion. It was something Airbus had specifically warned about

months prior to this accident. Nothing really that remarkable about it. Airliners and huge ships both are amazingly

fragile to stresses outside their design limits.

As for the video, it was well done and asked some good

questions that need to be answered. There were several things about it that struck me right off as nonsense. First

was the grainy footage from the Pentagon cameras they were using to question it being a 757. It was too poor a

footage to be able to tell anything.

Most investigators dismiss eyewitness accounts because they are not very

reliable and they have probably heard all the comments about what it looked and sounded like. Try it sometime, after

a sudden stressful but brief event, give people a couple days then compare their stories. It can be pretty

interesting.

Another was the hole through the building. An airplane is a fragile thing, impacting concrete walls

at over 500 MPH it would have mostly disintegrated on impact. Only a few of the more massive parts would have

travelled far. One of those parts was just the right size and shape to have made that hole they showed in the inner

rings; the engines! I thought it was strange that there was no debris also, even a missile would have left some

debris, especially one that made such a nice, neat hole through a wall like that. I suspect the picture was taken

after the remains were at least partly clean up. You'll notice that there isn't even remnants of the wall shown!

Where did all the concrete and twisted steel go?

They mention that the E-Ring didn't collapse for about 23

minutes. It took the World Trade Center towers 56 and 103 minutes to start to collapse. I think it's pretty clear

that they were hit by airplanes. You'll also recall that the jet fuel burned off very quickly at the World Trade

Center; funny thing about jet fuel, it's highly volitile and would go up quickly causing the kinds of fire damage

you saw in some of the pictures. It would be extremely hot but burn out fast.

There may be some validity to the

questions posed but much of what was shown only made me think they were lacking any real engineering knowledge or

evidence and pretty much spoiled their argument.

The JFK to Paris flight you mentioned was interesting. I'm

still dissatisfied with the government's answers about that. While what the investigation describes could have

happened, I saw the picture showing what looks much like a missile below the plane. It could be an artifact or could

be closer or further away than it seems but I've never heard it addressed other than a curt dismissal.

[DrSmellThis]

The video does indeed ask some

important questions. A lot of the conspiracy theories about Bush are sounding less far-fetched with time.

[belgareth]

The video

does indeed ask some important questions. A lot of the conspiracy theories about Bush are sounding less far-fetched

with time.

If so much of their video wasn't clearly baseless, it would have done better at bringing up

the important questions.

[DrSmellThis]

We are not constrained from

asking questions by the quality of the film, incomplete and vague though it was. The film as a whole was far from

completely baseless. To be objective I think you have to look at what you can take from the film; instead of taking

the part you can't know about one way or the other, and being primarily interested in that aspect of it. The film

is not responsible for providing any final word or proof on anything, after all. For example, why no wreckage? There

wasn't time to remove it all before the footage was shot, and total disintegration of the plane is almost

unimaginable. What engineering data would suggest otherwise?

BTW, has anyone even seen a coherent

engineering/munitions analysis of the WTC disintegration and collapse? I'd love to. Not to be paranoid, but I'm

still not fully convinced that the two planes by themselves, with their rapid-burning fuel, could have caused that

whole chain of events to unfold as it did.

[Pancho1188]

I'm still

not fully convinced that the two planes by themselves, with their rapid-burning fuel, could have caused that whole

chain of events to unfold as it did.

You don't believe that two planes weighing tons upon tons flying at

hundreds of miles per hour into the middle of a building could cause the top to topple down? Take a 300-pound metal

object and send it at 60 miles per hour into the middle of a tree. The top is coming down. That may or may not be

a good analogy, but even I as a skinny 150-pound wide receiver could take down a big lineman if I take him down from

the hips or lower.

Maybe I'm seeing this from the wrong angle, but planes are big, heavy, and move very fast.

You could take out enough of a building for it to lose stability and topple over.