Why's that? Is there something wrong with being a skeptic?


Yep, Maxi thinks it's a specific attack on Bush somehow. I guess this
also means Maxi thinks Bush is a "good" president, something most
republicans now realize is not true.


RB
35s5
NY

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I think we need to keep an open mind... no not about Robert... :-) I
don't think there's any doubt that two planes hit the towers, but there
is doubt about what caused the towers to collapse. I have serious doubts
about what hit the pentagon. There are two many inconsistencies to just
dismiss them out of hand. We shall see.

You, too, are nuts.

Why's that? Is there something wrong with being a skeptic?

Not at all. But there is something seriously wrong with being so
anti-something that you're willing to jump into bed with any half-baked
conspiracy theory that comes along to discredit it.

Healthy skepticism is the backbone of science. There's nothing healthy
about this left-wing conspiracy BS. This is the same sort of crap that the
black helicopter, tri-lateralist, ultra right-wing militia types engaged in
during the Clinton administration. Fanaticism, pure and simple, with no
basis in reality.

Consider this: we all saw the second airliner hit Tower number two. And
later we saw the film of the first plane hitting Tower number one. And
based on the info we now have, we can safely conclude that this was, indeed,
an al Qaeda act of terrorism against the USA. And we can also safely
conclude that it happened virtually without warning. (This is not to say
that signals weren't ignored--they were, but the attack itself was not
expected at that particular time on 9/11/01.) We also know that four
airliners are now gone, along with their passengers and crew. And we also
know that something hit the Pentagon--something with a huge amount of fuel
onboard. Yesterday we saw films of the plane hitting the Pentagon, and it
clearly looks like an airliner. So what other theory of what hit the
Pentagon will possibly hold water? A missile? Fired at what, and by whom?
An F16 fighter--why would the Pentagon deny that? **** happens, and flying
fighters is no picnic on the beach, especially when scrambled. The military
branches have all been absolutely forthcoming when dealing with aircraft
accidents. So why would they lie? And how would they get everyone else to
go along with such a lie in such short order, especially when the country is
in disarray following and unexpected attack of the magnitude of 9/11?

What is your theory of what happened to the Pentagon, and upon what do you
base that theory? Simply being skeptical isn't enough--you've got to have
an explanation to support an alternative to what the government is claiming.
Are you simply believing something because you *want* to believe it, or do
you have some solid evidence upon which to hypothesize such a belief? So
far Bubbles hasn't come up with anything beyond paranoid conjecture.

Max

Airliner debris http://www.snopes.com/rumors/images/debris.jpg

punch a small hole? http://www.snopes.com/rumors/images/pentagon.jpg

Robs fallen for a French who

Origins: The
notion that the Pentagon was not damaged by terrorists who hijacked
American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and crashed it into the
military office complex, but that the whole affair was staged by the
U.S. government, has been promulgated by French author Thierry Meyssan
in his book, The Frightening Fraud. Meyssan offers no real explanation
for what did cause the extensive damage to the Pentagon, asserting only
that Flight 77 did not exist, no plane crashed into the Pentagon, and
that "the American government is lying."

Read all about it and see the pictures.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

Show a link to the CEO of Boeing making that statment Robert.
Never happened. You are dumber than dirt to fall for such bull****
Mysterry.

You should be ashamed to call yourself a NY'er.

Capt Suzy
35s5
NY

Show a link to the CEO of Boeing making that statment Robert.
Never happened.



Sorry, Joe. I already posted a link to the Loose Change video, which
you can watch for free. It has comments from Boeing and also Rolls, who
said the engine found was not from a 757. Watch it and then comment.
http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonPlaneRotor.shtml

Joe, I don't have the answers, but why do you believe your government
and mainstream media in the face of so much evidence?



RB
35s5
NY

I believe and respect the efforts of the victims familys.
They know all to well what really happened.

Capt. Suzy
35s5
NY

"Capt. Rob" wrote:

Show a link to the CEO of Boeing making that statment Robert.
Never happened.

Sorry, Joe. I already posted a link to the Loose Change video, which
you can watch for free. It has comments from Boeing and also Rolls, who
said the engine found was not from a 757. Watch it and then comment.
http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonPlaneRotor.shtml

Joe, I don't have the answers, but why do you believe your government
and mainstream media in the face of so much evidence?

RB
35s5
NY

Could you tell me how a plane can make more landings than takeoffs, (ten
takeoffs, fourteen landings)?

Cheers
Marty