Some of you may be interested in an article I recently came across entitled "Trying to be Reasonable About the 9/11 Conspiracies" by Bill Veale, who is a potential political candidate.

"Pretending for a moment not to be a convert to the pinnacle of conspiracism, putting aside the several, if not many occasions when it was necessary to defend with a certain amount of vehemence those ideas which Cockburn and others of the Left have scoffingly dismissed as lunacy, is there a manner in which the subject can be approached with an open-mind, and with reason and caution and circumspection? After all, many, if not most of us, arrived at this craggy spot overlooking the most frightening of chasms, not out of whim, or fanciful political disposition, but rather through an introduction to Professor David Ray Griffin’s work, New Pearl Harbor.

If you had your pick from all of central casting for the part of lunatic conspiracist, Professor Griffin would not be anyone’s choice. He is a well-respected 60 plus year old, now-retired, Theology professor from a school of note who looks that part, and when you see him at the podium, sounds and acts that part. Now no one, of course, should end a consideration of matters as heart-stopping as whether or not the US government sacrificed three thousand of its own citizens for power political reasons with what an advocate looks or sounds like, or even with his credentials, but it seems perfectly reasonable to begin a study based on his, or a similar person’s, recommendation, doesn’t it?"

The article goes on to ask several questions that Veale feels have been left unanswered.

<a href="http://www.vealetruth.com">Veale Truth</a>

I will double post this because I think these questions need answers these questions are not leaps of the imagination just common sense....

Please guys I would seriously like someone who believes the official story to answer this question ...

Let's just agree we will never get any real answers as to how the building came down because most or all of the evidence has been destroyed so lets take a different approach.

Now it has been well documented that there were plenty of warning signs prior to 911 see link.....

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...e_9/11=warnings

My question why no one would warn New York ?

What is most note worthy about the official story is how can they explain all the uncertainty of it all . FAA knew when the plane changed course they must of tracked the plane to New York so when it hit the first tower they knew right then that this was know accident.

You have to look at all prior warning before 911 if these warning did happen the minute that plane hit the trade center wouldn't warning bells sound somewhere within our government ?

Now next question FAA knows this is no accident and also knows they have other planes that are hijacked why would no one feel the need in any of our government agencies to notify New York to evacuate tower 2?...


It is well known that FEMA was at ground zero the day before September 11 would 't someone think of telephoning FEMA the Federal Emergency Managment Agency?

These are questions that have never been asked in this context. Why?

Not one government official has been reprimanded for this gross Incompetence...Why?

I think you answered it already chris...why would you convict yourselfs?

limitied i know the answer i'm just wondering if anyone else out there in fantasy land is getting it ...

Maybe you could explain it to dumb ol' me. I guess I don't get how we jump from government incompetence to government complicity. Please explain, in monosyllabic words, so I can follow along. Thanks in advance.

My only interest in the 9/11 conspiracy is in the engineering arguments, so I won't get into this, but I am going to point out one thing.

You began with an article titled "Trying to be Reasonable About the 9/11 Conspiracies" and quoted the claim of "is there a manner in which the subject can be approached with an open-mind, and with reason and caution and circumspection?"

You then personally asked "Please guys I would seriously like someone who believes the official story to answer this question ...".

After setting everything up in this manner, after implying that you wanted to be reasonable, to talk about hings with an open-mind, to be taken seriously, what is your first response?

"limitied i know the answer i'm just wondering if anyone else out there in fantasy land is getting it ."

Chris, how could anyone interpret this as anything other than you simply playing lip-service to the idea of being open-minded, and in reality just looking to antagonize "anyone out there in fantasy land"?

How do you expect to be taken seriously when out of one side of your mouth you are talking about being reasonable, and out of the other you are making clear your contempt for other peoples opinions?

How is it possible that no one could warn New York ?

after the plane hit wtc 1 they knew this was no accident ..

they had about a 25 minute window to do something dont you think ?

In fairness, chris didn't start this thread. He merely highjacked it.

After the first plane hit, everyone speculated that it was an accident. After the second plane hit, everyone knew it wasn't.

This is true. My apologies. I still, however, pose the spirit of the question to Chris.

I remember the morning of 9/11 (It was three days before I went to OCS). Even after the second plane hit, I couldn't quite wrap my head around the fact that this was intentional. It really wasn't until I heard about the Pentagon that I realized that America was actually under attack.

wrong they new when the flight went off course at around 8:15 they had a unresponding plane that changed course that also took off from Logan its not like it took off from JFK and smashed into the trade center it changed course dramatically and headed for New York meaning not a accident second I was wrong it looks like they had about a 20 minute window for the next plane to hit it's target the fact of the matter these people new they had unresponding air planes after the first plane hit they new these were terrorists they could of did more than they did we are supposed to believe that we were completely defenseless.


how about a simple phone call .

read the time line.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...&startpos=0

I can barely read that. Mix in some punctuation if you want to be taken seriously.

Either way, the whole system was slow in reacting. It's a giant leap to just assume that means the government carried out 9/11. Read the Vanity Fair article to actually see how NEADS responded to the planes going offline. The second plane struck pretty much as soon as they scrambled jets and had some semblence of what was going on. They were caught with their pants down just like the rest of us.