posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 06:08 PM
First, a bit of hostility (but with humour at its heart, I'm not spewing hate at anyone, just having a quick laugh).
All those pictures of non 767 parts are only proof they used holograms to disguise the alien corpses!
Ok, joking aside, I don't "see" it, despite looking. I by no means side with any official story, my reference to the official way of things was
only for the sake of arguing that wild theories will not draw non-believers. I personally prefer to just ask a few simple questions that point out
some of the glaring inconsistencies and get them thinking first. I'll let them come to their own wild theories later.
As I stumbled onto this site from elsewhere, and having already known and read many of the theories here, I wasn't offput by it. I was merely
commenting that it's hard to find "safe" information to pass on to people I care about, whom I would like to take a moment to read and understand
and question things. When, mixed in the information are things that are speculative, and sometimes a bit hard to swallow for most, they immediately
shut down, their programming is far too deep to handle these sorts of theories. And, despite not being a huge fan of it, I'll just tell you where
_I_ stand. I believe 2 airliners roughly the size and appearance of 767's were remotely piloted into the WTC towers, and subsequent explosives
leveled the towers, building 7 was also leveled via explosives. The Pentagon was likely struck by a much smaller plane, or possibly a missle, what
little photographic evidence we are offered in completely useless, but the damage patterns are inconsistent with an airliner the size as given by the
official story. I believe NORAD was on stand down, and I believe there are high up players in this conspiracy, not 19 average joe foreigners. My
theory is a bit "tame" compared to some I've read over the last few years, namely the holograms and reptilian overloads (David Icke followers (and
yes, i know David Icke didn't come up with the idea, but he's the guy everyone knows for it)). My BIGGEST problem with these theories, and pretty
much ANY of our "wild" theories (I'll face facts, even my theory is a bit WILD for Joe 6Pack), is that they seperate us. They drive a wedge
between us, and we all start focusing on proving wrong the other theorist, but rarely do we unite to uncover that final piece of the puzzle that
"wins" any and all of our cases, that this whole thing was a charade. Everyone picks up a handful of evidence and runs wild in their prefered
direction, applying what works, and ignoring what doesn't. We are ALL guilty of it. I wish we could all come to some common ground and work towards
one goal, and worry about the speculations later. Speculation doesn't mean WRONG, it just means IDEA, inspired by evidence. It isn't persay BACKED
by any evidence yet, that's what makes a theory. We have loads of speculations (as my own is just as much as anyone elses), but few of us embrace
and reach for a solid theory. All I was really trying to get at was "Hey, lets all find a common ground to work from". Sorry for any confusion.
My points get lost amidst my diaretic keyboarding.