Defending the Truth

The pilot absolutely DOES have the qualifications to make that claim.

On the other hand, is it possible to successfully do something "accidentally? Could a 10-year old kid "accidentally" drive a truck into a river? I think so.

I've also been doing a little more reading on the 757s. From what I've read, they make it sound like it's actually a very "fly-able" very "forgiving" and basically an easy plane to fly - especially for its size. The degree of likelihood is slim, but I believe it's entirely possible to (almost by dumb luck) fly the thing into the Pentagon.

Why wouldn't its wings have punched through the Pentagon walls? Well... the wings are made of aluminum, and filled with fuel. The Pentagon is built like a fortress. Simple physics & common sense indicates what's going to happen.

Weird? Yes. Impossible? No.

I'd agree that a kid could accidently drive a car into a river, since I know something about cars. I have never driven a truck, so I can't say squat about them.

However, if you listen to the audio interview, you hear that it's the plane that cannot fly the path the plane was supposed to have made, not the pilot. He talks about the angles and speeds and stuff. I got the impression the plane was like a large elephant vs a mouse.. guess that's not a good analogy... more like a truck vs a race car.

He also talks about the jet engines, and how there should have been two holes, one for each engine. He says the nose of the plane would have crumpled upon impact. The engines are much sturdier.

There were alot of other interviews listed on that website and the interviewers said they were discussing 9/11 alot... maybe some other pilots dispute what Capt. Wittenberg says... and maybe they have just as impressive credentials as he does. It may be worth a listen if you have the time.

The fact that the Bush administration had been forewarned and had prior knowledge to the attacks is enough for me to vote that the Bush administration may have been complicit in the attacks. That, coupled with the rather criminal handling of the air toxicities in New York, and with the deliberate exploitation of the events of 9/11 and the emotions stirred thereafter to fulfill political and Machiavellian goals pertaining to the personal neo-Imperialist philosophies of PNAC and neo-conservatism, only leads me to this conclusion further.

I personally think that Osama Bin Laden and his ring of religious fundamentalist thugs committed the attacks, but the Bush administration may have deliberately let the attacks happen, whether conscious or subconscious, and wanted justification for their already predetermined goals. This is not just speculation because it is backed with actual documentation. We know that the Bush administration was forewarned. And we know that the Bush administration had prior ambitions to invade Iraq, and now the damning piece of evidence of cold, yet deliberate, Machiavellian exploitation of 9/11 and the working up of this terror storm was the Downing Street Memo. I think that in light of such evidence, at least an investigation should be launched for possible complicity or at least criminal negligence.

1. They had received countless threats of countless possible attacks. Which ones were they supposed to magically "know" were actually going to happen?

2. If that's what you're determined to believe, you're free to believe that. And you're also free to believe that the earth is flat.

3. Again, that's based on speculation and wishful thinking.

Where is the plane and the crew and passengers? Not a single person has yet to answer that.

Nor will they...

I did in an earlier post, although it was pure speculation based on how someone in the Bush Administration reworded the EPA statement about air quality at Ground Zero for "national security" reasons. In that earlier post, I linked to two statements - one not reworded and one that was. I suggest you read both of them and see the difference.

As a result, we had many people at Ground Zero with greater exposure to unknowns in the debris dust thanks to this "reassuring" statement. Now we will have many people who get sick and die from it. They (the Bush Administration people who reworded the statement) do not care about the average American, therefore it is not a stretch of the imagination to say they murdered all those aboard the plane. Of course, you probably won't like that answer... neither do I!

If you do not know how hazardous something is, take precautions!

Anyway, I think we are jumping to conclusions prematurely. I want to see irrefutable proof, preferably from two sources, before I make any conclusions.

I think the entire thing is "speculation". It's really a joke to say there was some kind of conspiracy by the Bush administration. The people who say that are mentally ill from hatred of Bush. Hatred makes people dulusional.

I hear you - when extreme emotions like hatred are involved, they seem to take over control of one's actions. Which is why I refuse to hate.

I firmly believe that the truth of 9/11 is not contained in the official report. There are just too many holes that have not been answered. Which, of course, adds fuel to the fire.

More money was spent to investigate the Clinton blowjob than 9/11. Sick.