I have seen some videos, and read some material on the "inside job" conspiracy theory, but perhaps I'll have to dig deeper into this, interesting stuff.

Honestly I still don't know I buy it. It doesn't make sense. If you wanted a reason to start a war, there are many easier ways to go about it. And there are many things I've read that just don't make sense to me. A couple reporters said a building collapsed before it did. This is suspicious why? Two reporters got wires crossed with their folks in the field, I'm not surprised. Buildings collapsed, that one was on fire, they could have made the mistake of linking the two and making an erroneous report.

Why would a reporter have inside knowledge? That makes no sense at all. To make a report that it had collapsed would indicate that they knew it was going to do so, and were ready to report this. Why would some BBC station know this? Why would our government let any news station know? It doesn't make any sense. This obviously would be something they'd want very quiet. It makes no sense to me at all, that they would tell news stations about it beforehand. It makes much more sense that in all the confusion, a couple reporters screwed up their stories.

And why collapse that building at all? If I were trying to make a statement that we need to start a war on terror, I'd think the two largest buildings in NYC and the Pentagon would suffice. There is no point to the smaller building. It doesn't make their case any stronger at any rate.

There seems to be too many holes, and too many leaps of logic that folks are making in many parts of this story. Even though folks SAW a jumbo jet flying at the Pentagon (one guy had to drop to the ground to avoid being hit by an engine), including AA marks, people claim it was a missle. How you make that leap in logic astounds me.

Jesse, as much as I respect the guy as a "I will change things if I decide to run for congress" sort of person, isn't what I'd call the most reliable person out there. Ex-steroid user, ex-wrestler, an avid entertainer (i.e. he knows how to drum up attention and get noticed), he isn't something I'd bet my car on as a reliable source of info.

Jessie also told me Wrestling is real

Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars
Like I said, I'm sure the readers of the thread can make draw their own conclusions about Prof Steven Jones.

I don't think we've strayed too far off topic. Nice try though.

Not "trying" anything. Where in the OP does it speak of Prof. Jones?

BTW TY, remember all the so called scientist who said we would never fly? Please don't make me hold you hand on that one.

Um... apples to apples here please. Trust me, I'm not the one that needs their hand held.

There are also MULTITUDES of other credible scientists who -also- share Prof. Jones views.. have they all automatically discredited themselves?

Well I suggest you start a new thread and list time and their credentials. I will be more than happy to join you in a discussion about them there.

Originally posted by Lethil
It wasn't brought down by demolition,this nonsense has been debunked more times than ive had hot dinners...please stop the charade...

[edit on 29-7-2008 by Lethil]

are you kidding me? if they weren't brought down by controlled demolition.. then how may I ask did they come down so perfectly? and when the building architect said they were designed to withstand 2 jetliner impacts....

seriously.. the people who think 9/11 happened the way the Bush Adminstration says it did and DONT believe it was controlled demolition are laughable at this point.. none of you have a leg to stand on...

Originally posted by spookjr
So are you saying that the charges sat on the support columns for 8 years and not one person ever saw them or if they did, did not question their presence?
No offense but that seems a little far fetched.

All exterior columns and core columns (except the exposed columns located in the elevator shafts) where encased with gypsum wall board (I have proven other materials were present also, but that's a different thread). Does it really seem so far fetched now that we know the columns were encased and could potentially hide what ever was attached to the column?

I can quote the NIST report where I get this information if need be. But, my advice to all is to research on your own.

I'm no wtc7 debunk-er... trust me

I'm with most of you

But Jesse is an ex-pro wrestler, he sees an "angle" and knows when to run with it.

An expert on demolition... that's debatable, an expert on self-promotion... that's a fact.

He's just painting this with a wrestling promoters brush, running a gimmick on all the "marks".

A few years in the military, or 30 yrs in pro-wrestling, you tell me what he's an expert on.

I'd perhaps use the plenty of other experts on wtc7 as an authority on what happened. Mr.Ventura is hardly someone who I'd quote on this matter.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by wrathchild]

Originally posted by wrathchild
I'm no wtc7 debunk-er... trust me

I'm with most of you

But Jesse is an ex-pro wrestler, he sees an "angle" and knows when to run with it.

An expert on demolition... that's debatable, an expert on self-promotion... that's a fact.

He's just painting this with a wrestling promoters brush, running a gimmick on all the "marks".

A few years in the military, or 30 yrs in pro-wrestling, you tell me what he's an expert on.

these are all very good points... well said

I'm speaking from experience....
4 weeks in pro-wrestling school, 8 weeks as a pro-wrestler, and a 1-18 record, I am an expert on the subject.

The mere fact that Howard is giving Ventura a hearing on his show is important. The hard core on both sides of this issue have got their stories and are sticking to them, but Howard reaches a mass of people who don't usually have the time or interest to research something like 9/11. I think as the Bush "era" (it seems like an eon or age, really) passes the doubts about 9/11 will get more of a hearing in the mainstream media.

Kudos to Howard. FU Ba-ba-booey and Robin.