Charlie Sheen: US Govt. committed 9/11...

[Mad Mike]

Simulators don't do the real thing any justice, otherwise you could log some hours on it, and then proceed to fly a real plane. I have several family members that are pilots who will say the same thing. in fact, it is their questioning of the hijackers flying abilities and abilities to perform in an unknown ****pit w/ zero point of reference, that led me to start investigating and asking questions about 9/11. In the real world, it takes a while to become certified. You have to fly alongside a pro, and you have to watch what they do. Even when you first start, you are not allowed to go away from the landing strip.

It is a big trick to find a large city when you are not near enough to see it, and the planes were no where near enough the cities to see them. When you are flying in the sky that high up, the ground isn't even a reference poitn. the pilots, who's instructors at flight school said they couldn't even manage little Cessna's, had to rely solely on instrument panels that they were not familiar with. Experienced pilots have crashed before b/c their panels failed them. I've read the Commission report, and neglects a lot of things. Like I said, I've argued this so many times, if you are not going to believe, then don't. However, cating soemone of as loony for having a different view isn't very fair. Nobody here is saying UFO's were involved, or Bigfoot was the real hijacker, just providing questions that remain unanswered, or were poorly answered.

Dude your version of the events are not even based in reality. Do you even understand that the simulators the got time in are full on mock ups of the actual ****pit? Do you understand How complex some of the simulators you can run on your PC are down to the exact ****pit instument layout?

You sir are talking out your arse and I also have several freinds who are pilots who would back me up. :doh:

And here.. take a look at a cheap comercialy available package.

http://shop.store.yahoo.com/glide-slope/bo72doformif.html

And one more thing. Have you EVER even been in an airliner? The ground IS a reference, especially the Hudson river. It's a big giant line that leads right to New York City. Good lord, I can't believe anyone can spew the stuff you are tossing around here. :doh:

[Westbrook36]

MM, its easier to just sit back and mock guys like him rather than talk seriously. He already hates our government and is trying to fill in the blanks to ensure the government is the one behind this rather than the terrorists. Think about that for a minute. These guys hate their own government more than they hate arab terrorists who want all of us to die.

Its scary that there are people in America like this, but it's true. They try to conceal their true intentions and thoughts with well worn techniques like "undercovering the truth" even though its right in front of their faces. Lucky for them, there are lots of whackos who have their own sites where new ridiculous theories are spawned everyday.

[Peregrine]

You can see the gross hatred people have for some people when they put forth ridiculous opinions such as this. Thats all these "accusations" are is gross hatred. There isnt a shred of evidence to back it up, they just hate Bush and the GOP in general so much they WANT it to be true.

[chomerics]

MM, its easier to just sit back and mock guys like him rather than talk seriously. He already hates our government and is trying to fill in the blanks to ensure the government is the one behind this rather than the terrorists. Think about that for a minute. These guys hate their own government more than they hate arab terrorists who want all of us to die.

Its scary that there are people in America like this, but it's true. They try to conceal their true intentions and thoughts with well worn techniques like "undercovering the truth" even though its right in front of their faces. Lucky for them, there are lots of whackos who have their own sites where new ridiculous theories are spawned everyday.

No Westbrook, while I think some of the conspiricys are wrong, to not question your government is treasonist. Did you guys not learn anything in civics class?

All you are doing is making a straw man argument saying people like terrorists and hate our government, that is not only blatently false, stereotypical and ignorant in view, it is also offensive to people who actually know a bit about government. Try to tone down the BS, because it does a disservice to this board and our country. When people think questioning the leadership is "unamerican", they are out of touch with history. You need to read up on patriotism, and fascism to truly understand why questioning your government IS patriotic.

[Westbrook36]

Questioning your government by trying to convince people your government was responsible for 3000 deaths while the terrorists were innocent. That's what cracks me up. You aren't questioning some taxes, a policy, or procedure....you are trying to blame the government for the worst terrorist attack in US history....and while you do it, you try to envision yourselves as patriotic Americans. That's rich.

[Skins24]

A little late so if these have been discussed already...sorry.

I see nothing wrong in searching for the truth if you have doubts on the answers given to you.

Nothing wrong with searching for the truth...

But look where these people search for the "truth" at.

The sites these people search have 0 credibility to go along with 0 (credible) evidence to back their claims.

Who's "truth" are they searching for?

Have anyone ever explained how that one building a few blocks away from the WTC imploded even though it wasn't hit?

:laugh:

Several times (popular mechanics, NIST, 9/11 commision, FEMA has a 32 page report, etc. ). If you have more credible info. than them, then please share.

Several blocks away?

[skinfan133]

Interestingly, in the footage of the building's collapse, what appears similiar to demolition "plumes" exploding from the building can be seen. Also, it wouldn't be terribly difficult for a covert team to plant explosives in a building the size of the WTC. Especially, to make it even more odd, George W. Bush's brother was on the board of directors of a company providing electronic security for the World Trade Center. Hmmm - what an odd coincidence!

Also, regarding the fire-proofing, I have seen studies and tests regarding this subject. It cannot be dismissed as a possible reason for the collapse, but the question, to me, still revolves around the duration, length, and size of the fires.

jeb bush? wasnt he kind of pre-ocupied with ruling florida at the time:silly:

anyhow, many diffrent computer simulations have taken place acounting for all the factors of both theories of 911, terrorist or, as you belive, a governmet atack on our own people with a planed demolition. the plane and fire scenario plays out exactly as it happened about 60% of all the simulations, in the other 40% the WTC simple colaped much as a tree cut down the center does, it folded into itself. but the demolition theory had about 70% of the time large fragments of building shooting out at such angles that the building at that hieght with th srtuctural integrity of the building would have almost imediatly colapsed on itself. the problem with the controled demolition theory is that in a controled demolition the destruction takes place all at once, if you were to blow off the top of a building from te inside the explosion coming OUT instead of IN would have signifiacanlty diffrent effects, such as the building imediatly buckling down the side with more stres, the building would not have colapsed into itself but rather topled over in sections in about 70% of simuations. startlingly enough similar results between the two simulations ocured roughly 20% of the time or so.

but again, if there were explosives on the inside that imploded there the building would have colpased difrently becuase of the weight on top that was no longer evenly disrtibuted among te strucures weak points. a similar phenomenon was the tacoma narows bridge.

[skinfan133]

also baculus please explain how you discount thousands of witnesses who saw the planes hit in person, the 50 odd sum novice videos of the second plane hiting? just curoius how you conspiracy guys rationalize that

edit: btw i have a freind who was driving right next to the pentagon when it hit, straight over his head, now i dont think he was lying or had been brainwashed 30 seconds after it happened when he called me up and said, "a PLANE just hit the pentagon man, flew right over me and went right into it!" please explain to me somehow that he was lying, clear it up for me, please.

i also went to the PX three days afterward, the level of paranoia in the military was highly unorthodox, especialy for the marine corps. i highly doubt after having an m-16 pushed down my nose and my car strip searched by a full bomb squad so that i could just go to the PX that it was intentionaly planed, just dont see how the governmet could pull it off without a) the militarys cooperation (absurd, trust me) or without the military knowing.

[Gallen5862]

I voted no. I can't believe that anyone could think that happened.

[Baculus]

also baculus please explain how you discount thousands of witnesses who saw the planes hit in person, the 50 odd sum novice videos of the second plane hiting? just curoius how you conspiracy guys rationalize that

edit: btw i have a freind who was driving right next to the pentagon when it hit, straight over his head, now i dont think he was lying or had been brainwashed 30 seconds after it happened when he called me up and said, "a PLANE just hit the pentagon man, flew right over me and went right into it!" please explain to me somehow that he was lying, clear it up for me, please.

As I have stated before, the "Pentagon missle" theory is not the crux for the theories involving government knowledge or involvement with the 9-11 attack. Unfortunately, this theory apparently becomes the fixation once it's been proposed. My stance is the following - until the government release physical proof, footage, SOMETHING that shows that a 757 hit the Pentagon, then its a debate that is endless. And that is my point - after all, can't they produce something to verify this fact? That is all I am asking - I mean, it was an entire bloody plane. Isn't there anything they can show to demonstrate that fact? That would end the debate, you would think. What security secrets would prevent the release of these tapes? After all, the eyewitnesses appear to be the only thing that supports the official line.

Unfortunately, every time I pose the above question, "Where is the evidence, video tapes, etc...?" no one really appears to have an answer.

[Baculus]

You can see the gross hatred people have for some people when they put forth ridiculous opinions such as this. Thats all these "accusations" are is gross hatred. There isnt a shred of evidence to back it up, they just hate Bush and the GOP in general so much they WANT it to be true.

Well, I believe part of the issue is that the official story lacks evidence as well. Refer to my previous thread, and my desire to see the government produce more *physical* evidence. Or a storyline that appears more valid, other than 19 hijackers with knives, planned by the evil man in a cave, defeating our security appartus and confusing the military so much that we didn't even have a military response. I mean, that sounds as silly as any of the alternative theories that have been proposed.

And if there wasn't a shred of evidence, these theories would die, and die fast. Also, there isn't any evidence if one refuses to even examine or look at what has been proposed as an alternative theory.

[Zguy28]

As I have stated before, the "Pentagon missle" theory is not the crux for the theories involving government knowledge or involvement with the 9-11 attack. Unfortunately, this theory apparently becomes the fixation once it's been proposed. My stance is the following - until the government release physical proof, footage, SOMETHING that shows that a 757 hit the Pentagon, then its a debate that is endless. And that is my point - after all, can't they produce something to verify this fact? That is all I am asking - I mean, it was an entire bloody plane. Isn't there anything they can show to demonstrate that fact? That would end the debate, you would think. What security secrets would prevent the release of these tapes? After all, the eyewitnesses appear to be the only thing that supports the official line.

Unfortunately, every time I pose the above question, "Where is the evidence, video tapes, etc...?" no one really appears to have an answer.

I work for a DOD contractor who specializes in Naval aviation and my bosses are mostly former naval pilots. They saw the plane hit the Pentagon directly from our corporate office nearby. They believe it was a 757, especially since a coworker of mine, a former navy pilot, was on the plane when it hit and was killed. I think I'll take their testimony as true. They know planes, trust me.

[Baculus]

MM, its easier to just sit back and mock guys like him rather than talk seriously. He already hates our government and is trying to fill in the blanks to ensure the government is the one behind this rather than the terrorists. Think about that for a minute. These guys hate their own government more than they hate arab terrorists who want all of us to die.

Once again - the federal government does not equal country. And one does not have to hate the government to know the aspects of the government that isn't well liked. You do not have to LOVE our government to love our country, but to folks such as you, this is one and the same. That isn't the same for all of us. But to a person such as yourself, Westbrook, you probably wouldn't understand what I am attempting to relate.

God and country does not mean God and federal government...

[Baculus]

I work for a DOD contractor who specializes in Naval aviation and my bosses are mostly former naval pilots. They saw the plane hit the Pentagon directly from our corporate office nearby. They believe it was a 757, especially since a coworker of mine, a former navy pilot, was on the plane when it hit and was killed. I think I'll take their testimony as true. They know planes, trust me.

Ok - I have yet to indicate that witnesses are lying about what they saw. But, part of my point which I have repeated several times is the following: Where is the evidence? Tapes, plane parts, etc...? If this is such a well witnessesed event, where is the data on this?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Or a storyline that appears more valid, other than 19 hijackers with knives, planned by the evil man in a cave, defeating our security appartus and confusing the military so much that we didn't even have a military response. I mean, that sounds as silly as any of the alternative theories that have been proposed.

Usually it's not good practice to over-exaggerate one's point in order to make it. I think it's pretty well-documented that Al-Queda is not just a few evil men in a cave, they are pretty good at what they do. Also, when 5 men on a plane are armed and others aren't, it's pretty easy to see that they could take control of the plane.

Hijacked planes had never been used as a weapon before and it was believed that if you cooperate with the hijackers, you stay alive.

I'm not saying that you're wrong...I don't KNOW what happened either. But let's just keep the exaggerations to a minimum if possible.

[Baculus]

Usually it's not good practice to over-exaggerate one's point in order to make it. I think it's pretty well-documented that Al-Queda is not just a few evil men in a cave, they are pretty good at what they do. Also, when 5 men on a plane are armed and others aren't, it's pretty easy to see that they could take control of the plane.

No, it was a over-simplification of what has been suggestion, not an actual exxageration. So you have it backwards. :-) I was simplifying, such as "Who carried out 9-11: The evil bad government or the man in a cave?"

Besides, we really don't know the capabilities of Al Quada, either. Too many times, actions are merely attributed to them, as opposed to the actions of other organizations. After all, most of us didn't even hear of AQ until 9-11.

Hijacked planes had never been used as a weapon before and it was believed that if you cooperate with the hijackers, you stay alive.

I don't think the attack is impossible, just seems improbable - that doesn't mean that it didn't happen. And that is one note - I never said that the 9-11 official story is impossible or happened in no way, shape, or form. But I just have many questions that really haven't been addressed (and that is the issue with some other 9-11 conspiracists).

I'm not saying that you're wrong...I don't KNOW what happened either. But let's just keep the exaggerations to a minimum if possible.

I think everyone exxagerates, my friend.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

No, it was a over-simplification of what has been suggestion, not an actual exxageration. So you have it backwards. :-) I was simplifying, such as "Who carried out 9-11: The evil bad government or the man in a cave?"

Besides, we really don't know the capabilities of Al Quada, either. Too many times, actions are merely attributed to them, as opposed to the actions of other organizations. After all, most of us didn't even hear of AQ until 9-11.

I don't think the attack is impossible, just seems improbable - that doesn't mean that it didn't happen. And that is one note - I never said that the 9-11 official story is impossible or happened in no way, shape, or form. But I just have many questions that really haven't been addressed (and that is the issue with some other 9-11 conspiracists).

I think everyone exxagerates, my friend.

I think everyone does too, however, it just doesn't help the credibility of your side of the debate if you need to inflate the opposing side for your side to sound for logical.

Either way, I see your points. You want evidence and that's perfectly reasonable.

I choose to trust a little more and give most people the benefit of the doubt and assume that something so horrible was what it was, a vicious attack on innocent Americans by a group of extremists. Maybe I'm just being naive...but I hope not!

[Baculus]

Do you have any idea how many people would have to be involved with this? And NONE would be a whistle blower? Come on that doesn't pass the smell test.

Even if the President had that idea, you're going to tell me that nobody in his Cabinet would disagree and go to the media about it? You're crazy if you think that has any ability to be true.

Actually, conspiracies happen all the time and we are completely unaware about it. Something such as what has been suggested wouldn't take a great deal of people. After all, if the official story is true, then the 19 hijackers and their support were able to successfully carry out their attack as well, correct? Remember, the Al Quada plot was a conspiracy as well.

[Baculus]

I think everyone does too, however, it just doesn't help the credibility of your side of the debate if you need to inflate the opposing side for your side to sound for logical.

Either way, I see your points. You want evidence and that's perfectly reasonable.

I choose to trust a little more and give most people the benefit of the doubt and assume that something so horrible was what it was, a vicious attack on innocent Americans by a group of extremists. Maybe I'm just being naive...but I hope not!

Thank you for recognizing a large part of my issue and desire. And hey, we all want to believe in our government, right? Unfortunately, I sometimes have less trust than others.

[Skins24]

This site goes into a lot of detail of what happened before and during 9/11

9/11 timeline

It also gives a lot of background info (all supported with sources), starting way back to 1979.

Pre 9/11

1990 - First bin Laden-related terror attack on US

1992 - Missed oppurtunity to foil first WTC attack and discover Al Q.

We knew about bin Laden, but we didn't know yet he had created al-Qaeda

1993 - Expert panel predicts planes will be used as weapons on symbolic targets

Feb 1993 - First WTC attack. Building doesn't collapse as hoped

I take it the conspiricists have evidence that this was also done by the government? As well as the other dozens of terror attacks against the US (not including the ones that were foiled), right?

1995 - Bonjinka Plot foiled.

9/11 phase one.

The plane was to hijack and bomb a dozen airplanes

First hints of Bojinka second wave revealed

Now I have a question for all those who claim the government was responsible.

WHO?

The government has thousands of people working for it. The heads of those thousands of people change every now and then. As plenty of evidence shows, the planning of 9/11 began under a different administration. Are you telling me that the people in the previous administration somehow convinced the ones in the current administration to murder thousands of Americans?

Has a straight response been given yet to the fact that HUNDREDS of people would have had to been in on it for at least 5 years and not one leak?

1996 - FBI screws up. Terrorists begin pilot training in US

One of the many missed oppurtunities by our intel community.

TWA flight 800 crashes

NOW they decide to increase counterterrorism funding....

1998 - Bin Laden promises to bring Jihad to US

US learns bin Laden is considering attacks against Washington, New York

(skipping ahead a bit)

March 2001 - Al Q to attack in April

May-July 2001 - 9/11 orginally planned for earlier date

So according to some the Bush and his administration (which wasn't even complete) planned 9/11 in 4 or 5 months. They also claim he's dumb as a brick. Well which is it?

Summer 2001- Threat alerts increase to record high

Why is the government warning of attacks if they're the ones carrying it out?

Why are there dozens of warnings from other countries warning that terrorists are planning to strike if it's the government doing it?

If those countries were involved as well then we're now talking THOUSANDS of people that would have been in on the government's plot to carry out 9/11 and yet....no leaks or anything?

Highly unrealistic.

(you also have the dozens of terrorists who have been caught and said they knew of or were planning such attacks)

Anyway, the links go into more details and are based on facts.

Something rare for the people shouting conspiricy.

These people also never give a straight answer to why the gov. would do something like that. What was the purpose and how did they get hundreds of Americans to agree to it?

[Johnny Punani2]

This is what gets me about freedom of speech, we say its OK so long as we say the things that you like to hear. Here's some thoughts on the subject:

The free man is he who does not fear to go to the end of his thought.

~ Leon Blum ~

He who dares not (reason), is a slave.

~ William Drummond ~

When we lose the right to be different, we lose the privilege to be free.

~ Charles Evans Hughes ~

Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently.

~ Rosa Luxemburg ~

He is free... who knows how to keep in his own hands the power to decide.

~ Salvador De Madriaga ~

It is easy to believe in freedom of speech for those with whom we agree.

~ Leo Mckern ~

It is quite possible for someone to choose incorrectly or to judge badly; but freedom must allow such mistakes.

~ Sang Kyu Shin ~

All progress has resulted from people who took unpopular positions.

~ Adlai E. Stevenson ~

A man who goes to bed with itchy butt will wake up with stinky finger.

~Confucius

That you for sharing...

[Baculus]

Skins24, thanks for posting that information - I wasn't able to read all of it, but a few things stuck out at me as I was browsing it:

1. 1990 - First bin Laden-related terror attack on US - This is odd, considering that the US was involved with Bin Laden at that time, and he had toured the United States just a few years earlier as "Tim Osman." And according to what I have read regarding this subject, Bin Laden decided to wage war after the US occupation of Saudi Arabia post First Gulf War. So why all of a sudden attack the US at this time? It does not seem to relate.

Bin Laden tours US as Tim Osman:

http://www.orlingrabbe.com/binladin_timosman.htm

2. This strikes me as odd. Take into consideration the following:

"“The US government was pretty sure Ajaj was a terrorist from the moment he stepped foot on US soil,” because his “suitcases were stuffed with fake passports, fake IDs and a cheat sheet on how to lie to US immigration inspectors,” plus “two handwritten notebooks filled with bomb recipes, six bomb-making manuals, four how-to videotapes concerning weaponry, and an advanced guide to surveillance training.” However, Ajaj is charged only with passport fraud, and serves a six-month sentence."

Ok. Why? I first I thought, "Pretty clever - throw him in jail and help him help you find his accomplices. Mwahaha." But then, this is what happened afterwards: " From prison, Ajaj frequently calls Yousef and others in the 1993 WTC bombing plot, but no one translates the calls until long after the bombing." Ok. So...if our intelligence services are this incompetent, then I am dubious of a lot of this information.

More interestingly, the article continues, "Salem testifies that the FBI knew about the attack beforehand and told him they would thwart it by substituting a harmless powder for the explosives. However, an FBI supervisor called off this plan, and the bombing was not stopped. [New York Times, 10/28/93] Other suspects were ineptly investigated before the bombing as early as 1990. Several of the bombers were trained by the CIA to fight in the Afghan war, and the CIA later concludes, in internal documents, that it was “partly culpable” for this bombing."

So, the FBI knew about it, but didn't do anything. And the bombers involved also have ties with the CIA. This is what I have read previously, and some have suggested that Yousef was not busted before because of ties to black operations or intelligence of some sort.

3. "Expert panel predicts planes will be used as weapons on symbolic targets." Makes the Bush administration's assertions after 9-11 -"no one" would have ever thought of such a crazy idea that planes would be used as a target - appear to be silly.

4. First WTC attack. Building doesn't collapse as hoped - Well, considering #2, which the article you posted even drew connections between the first WTC bombers, the FBI and the CIA...well, what is to be believed? And that is the issue - every time we examine the history of many of the leading terrorists, they end up having ties to US, British, and even Israeli intelligence. Take, as an example the man who was fingered as being connected and the planner of the recent London Bombings. Remember that guy? Haroon Rashid Aswat? Where is he? Oh yeah - he was taken into protective custody by the British because, as it turns out, he is a Mi6 asset. Ooops...better bury that story! Funny enough, an expert went on Fox news and even made this assertion: http://www.infowars.com/articles/London_attack/mastermind_mi6_asset.htm

I cannot say if the first WTC was "government sponsored," but I think it is always viewed that many of these terrorists are working in their only little jihadi vacuum.

5. Bonjinka Plot foiled. and First hints of Bojinka second wave revealed:

I am going to comment on this: “The government has thousands of people working for it. The heads of those thousands of people change every now and then. As plenty of evidence shows, the planning of 9/11 began under a different administration. Are you telling me that the people in the previous administration somehow convinced the ones in the current administration to murder thousands of Americans?

Has a straight response been given yet to the fact that HUNDREDS of people would have had to been in on it for at least 5 years and not one leak?”

First, why would the planners of any such scheme have to change? Such an operation would be deep, deep, deep, and probably hatched by a very insider group. This isn’t the type of scheme that one simply hands over in a manila folder. Take this into consideration: There are members of the military that there are mechanisms in place for not only martial law, but a complete replacement of the civilian government using organizations such as FEMA and the Shadow Government that is constantly on standby in case of national “disaster.” Some have proposes that a scheme has been in place for 30 years for a coup to come into fruition. If this scenario (it may seem far fetched, but bear with me) is actually true, then don’t you think it would stay with a select group of people?

No. Such drastic schemes do not involved hundreds of people, let alone thousands. If the terrorists can hatch a plot that requires dozens of people, why would an insider job require hundreds and thousands? Everyone assumes that every conspiracy that has ever hatched will come to light. It doesn’t happen.

One note regarding this plot: Apparently, according to reports, one of the possible hijackers, Abdul Hakim Murad , who was later arrested and convicted, admitted to being part of a larger plot. After describing this larger plot, apparently nothing was done with this information and the CIA later denied knowing about this information. This is in relation to Able Danger, incidentally.

http://www.abledangerblog.com/2006/03/is-cia-hiding-something-about-911.html

What does that mean? I am not sure. If the government is involved, if there is not a greater plot, then there is a reason 9-11 happened: Because our intelligence agencies are incredibly bungling, and we have little to fear of such an incompetent force spying upon us and overthrowing the government, and much to fear from the same force protecting us.

Is that the case?

Ok, I am running out of lunch time so I will cherry pick:

6. TWA flight 800 crashes: This has now been reported as a shoot down by the US military.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/10-25-99/vo15no22_twa_800.htm

Another example of a less-than-truthful government? (And this was during Clinton’s term, BTW, so it’s not about the Bush administration.)

Why are there dozens of warnings from other countries warning that terrorists are planning to strike if it's the government doing it?

Well, it goes both ways – if there were dozens of warnings, how come the government didn’t do anything? Keep in mind, part of the 9-11 conspiracy isn’t just that the government actually did it, but they knowing allowed it to happen. In this part of the theory, much of what is reported is true: It’s just that the Feds allowed the attack to be conducted. And THIS is the reason why some believe that the “missile Pentagon” attack theory is a red herring to detract from the possible government allowance for the attack to happen. Keep in mind the earlier reports that the FBI knew about the ’93 WTC bombing before it happened.

If those countries were involved as well then we're now talking THOUSANDS of people that would have been in on the government's plot to carry out 9/11 and yet....no leaks or anything? Highly unrealistic.

No it isn’t. As stated before, it does not take a great deal of manpower for such plots to happen. Look at the official story – that did not take hundreds of terrorists to carryout the attack.

Thanks for the information once again – it was informative.

[Predicto]

You can see the gross hatred people have for some people when they put forth ridiculous opinions such as this. Thats all these "accusations" are is gross hatred. There isnt a shred of evidence to back it up, they just hate Bush and the GOP in general so much they WANT it to be true.

I hate Bush and I hate the GOP and I do NOT want this to be true and do not think that it is possible.

Actually, this is not a liberal theory, or one based on hatred of Bush and the GOP. There are always conspiracy theories whenever something extraordinary happens, and a handful of self-proclaimed experts come out of the woodwork to fan the flames. The Kennedy Assassination, whether we walked on the moon, Roswell aliens... people want to question stuff and some go overboard and start believing anything.

Don't paint it as partisanship, because it is not.

[Kilmer17]

I hate Bush and I hate the GOP and I do NOT want this to be true and do not think that it is possible.

Actually, this is not a liberal theory, or one based on hatred of Bush and the GOP. There are always conspiracy theories whenever something extraordinary happens, and a handful of self-proclaimed experts come out of the woodwork to fan the flames. The Kennedy Assassination, whether we walked on the moon, Roswell aliens... people want to question stuff and some go overboard and start believing anything.

Don't paint it as partisanship, because it is not.

I think you should take this one step further, because I agree with you.

But certainly the most VOCAL, and well known are left leaning. There are just as many Right Wing folks who probably believe it as well. But they are pretty silent because they support Bush, or because they are so far out there (ie living on a compound collecting guns and ammo) that they dont get any serious consideration.

But the only public figures making such ridiculous claims are Dems.

[Predicto]

I think you should take this one step further, because I agree with you.

But certainly the most VOCAL, and well known are left leaning. There are just as many Right Wing folks who probably believe it as well. But they are pretty silent because they support Bush, or because they are so far out there (ie living on a compound collecting guns and ammo) that they dont get any serious consideration.

But the only public figures making such ridiculous claims are Dems.

Agreed, in this case. As opposed to, say, the people who beleive that the Clinton's murdered Vince Foster and about 50 other people.

It's not fair for the Democrats to get stuck with Charlie Sheen, as though he were some spokesman for our party, because he isn't. He's a mediocre actor and a putz, and we don't want him. When Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry and Harry Reid and whoever start saying that our military flew the planes into the WTC, then it becomes a partisan thing.