Thanks for the support
isenhand - I was beginning to worry that all PO forum members are also Conspiracy Theorists.
Now for some plain speaking:
It suddenly occurred to me last night that I had no chance of winning the argument with
bozzio ... his reaction to my WTC7 comment showed that he regards the "secret" of the WTC7 collapse as HIS special property. I bet that some form of comment:
Can you tell me how many buildings of the World Trade Centre collapsed straight down into their footprint on 9/11? Here's a clue, it wasn't two as reported in the trusty media.
is his party piece, his claim to fame.
bozzio, are you perchance a male, under say 25, single, not very sporty, with quite a lot of spare time and a fairly thin social life? I bet you raise the WTC7 issue in many conversations each week. If you have time you'll probably show your chemical expertise (?) by discussing "cold" acetone peroxide explosions on 7/7. You might even bring in the theory that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile or perhaps the plane was under remote control. And don't forget the SAS caught in a "booby trapped" car in Basra.
I doubt very much that you would change your story even if presented with hard evidence such as detailed videotapes.
"They are obviouly forged". You NEED your versions of the 9/11 and 7/7 stories as a key part of your social life. This explains why you don't seem to research the data TOO much - it might not fit in with your story.
You still believe that a TATP explosion makes no flash and is icy cold - despite some fairly good evidence that you are wrong.
You raised the WTC7 issue as soon as you are under pressure on the 7/7 front.
You essentially called me a liar when I spoiled the WTC7 "revelations" that you were about to present. You cannot afford the possibility that you might be wrong - or that someone might show your stories to be less than 100% solid.
Fifty-size people died in the London bombings, and hundreds were injured ... but I have a suspicion that deep down you don't even think about these poor souls: you have your "stories" with which you can impress others.
I know that
bozzio will never be swayed - he is too far gone for that ... but for others reading this sad thread please check the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Sidique_Khan.
You will find that the lead bomber, Mohammed Sidique Khan, videotaped his reasons for attacking the civilian population. The videotape was shown by Al Jazeera Television. Somehow I doubt that Khan was an SAS agent.
So we have CCTV showing the bombers meeting up, we have a confession videotape, we have 56 dead & many maimed, we have home-made low-cost TATP being identifed as the explosive .. and yet some still feel the need to blame The Powers That Be.
Now to
pippas comment
re black boxes ... the boxes at the "hard impact" sites were indeed lost. However they
were recovered at the "soft impact" site ... the Flight 93 crash in Pennsylvania. Your source of information is obviously flawed.
As for the
Air Traffic Control confusion, don't forget that something like this had never happened before ... what would YOU have done if 4 planes went "off the air", but hadn't crashed? It would seem like a series of hijacks ... but nobody would be expecting suicide crashes. You would be wanting to hear the hijackers demands, and for the "hostage negotiators" to move in.
Now to
Cognitive Dissonance ... you see it all the time on 911 conspiracy websites. Any source of data which might show that the USA was attacked by foreigners who simply hate what America stands for is ignored ... it is SO much more exciting to imagine that the CIA or NSA or whoever set up a huge conspiracy just like in so many movies.
Now to
bombs in or under trains ... I suspect that the reverse pointing shards were caused by blast reflections. An extract from here
http://www.mne.psu.edu/psgdl/ISSW23.paper.PDF says:
Depending on Mach number, the peak overpressure behind a shock reflected from a wall can be 2-8 times the incident overpressure. Even-higher overpressures occur where the wall geometry produces shock focusing. Various recent studies amply illustrate that shock motion in interior spaces quickly becomes very complicated, and is poorly understood compared to outdoor blast effects.
So the experts have no idea how blast propagates in confined spaces ... yet our untrained amateur 7/7 sleuths can of course determine that the bombs were under the trains. Gosh, I'm impressed.
Anyway, instead of seeing boogeymen in every horrible incident, why not do a bit of in-depth research rather than relying on pre-digested half-truths from others?
If AFTER doing some in-depth and proper research you HAVE found a cover-up or conspiracy THEN come back and tell us. If your data is correct we will have no choice but to believe you.
(Research does NOT mean simply visiting a few crappy websites which go on about "squibs", "thermite", "falling in its own footprint" or any of the other "elite insider" jargon)
Finally, the most important question for me is:
WHY DO SO MANY NORMALLY SANE PEOPLE GET SUCKED INTO THIS INANE CONSPIRACY THEORY MESS?
We all learn to lie and sniff out lies. I don't need to get technical or watch re-runs of the towers going down to think:-
OK, so maybe the ones at the towers were toast - but what about the other two crash sites? - Reminds me of "I left my homework on the bus, Sir"
- Try "Sorry, I didn't see you there"
- That's not a lie or some sort of mistake - imagine that it was you watching the plane come in on the radar screen (ok my technology knowledge is out of date bear with me) - cruel? negligent ? A little upsetting? No.......
