I received a comment on my post, "The Fundamentalist Redneck Fourth Reich, Part II", from a blogger calling herself Zipcard2. Her comment was as fierce in her defense of Bush as my original post was in criticism.
Out of curiosity, I paid a visit to her blog. While I don't necessarily agree with her viewpoint on certain things, I found that we do have some common ground. For instance, we both support the Patriot Guard Riders, a group that gathers at the funerals of our servicemen and women killed in action, to help protect these solemn moments from (admittedly) obnoxious protesters. Further, it appears we both believe it is incumbent upon the United States to find and exterminate those who were responsible for the 9-11 attacks. (We do disagree, however, on lots of other things)
She also has an interesting article by Jim Hoffman on the "Pentagon No-757-Crash Theory". It's well worth the read.
Now, this may sound bizarre, but I have asked her for permission to blogroll her here, as an opposing point of view. If she agrees, I hope we can start a dialog, where her vitriol (and I mean that in a nice way) counters mine (yeah, I can get a little hot under the collar). And maybe -- just maybe -- readers of both blogs might realize that "the other side" has valid points to make also.
As I said in my comment on her blog, quoting Voltaire, ""I might disagree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I read the rebuttal of the No757 impact into the Pentagon. I wasn't impressed. Assuming that the wings of the 757 fell off and turned into confetti, there would be tons of aviation fuel all over the front of the building and the lawn. Remember the twin towers? The fuel supposedly burned so hot that it melted hardened steel. It would seem that the fuel burning would at least scorch the front of the building and the surrounding lawn.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is a well put together piece and is well thought out. Frankly the back and forth theories about 9/11 really only point out that we as a nation don't have enough information about what happened. We need more verifiable data to come up with a solid conclusion of what transpired five years ago.
The only sure fire way of knowing what happened is to smash fully fueled Boeing 757's into building very similar to the Pentagon, and the twin towers. If the results of several reenactments match the results what has been documented on 9/11 then the case is closed. It would be closed as far as the physical evidence goes. The who really did it, and why did they do it questions could not be answered by tests like this.
Another possibility is doing scale reenactments of each event. I see with Hurricane Katrina that the Army Core of Engineers performed several scale reenactments of the levees breaking in New Orleans. They actually took soil from each levee location and did scale reenactments under conditions until they found out exactly why each levee broke.
It seems that something similar to what was done with the levee investigation could be done for the 9/11 attack. Perhaps tests could be done with detailed scale aircraft and scale buildings. The scale building could be constructed with actual materials from both the pentagon and the twin towers.
But it costs money and takes time to do things like testing. Testing involves science and not jumping to pre conceived notions. With King George running up a $300,000,000 bar tab with the Saudi's and the Chinese for his holy "War On Terror", and handing the American tax payer the bill, we might not be able to afford to know the truth of what really happened on 9/11.
I read the rebuttal of the No757 impact into the Pentagon. I wasn't impressed. Assuming that the wings of the 757 fell off and turned into confetti, there would be tons of aviation fuel all over the front of the building and the lawn. Remember the twin towers? The fuel supposedly burned so hot that it melted hardened steel. It would seem that the fuel burning would at least scorch the front of the building and the surrounding lawn.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is a well put together piece and is well thought out. Frankly the back and forth theories about 9/11 really only point out that we as a nation don't have enough information about what happened. We need more verifiable data to come up with a solid conclusion of what transpired five years ago.
The only sure fire way of knowing what happened is to smash fully fueled Boeing 757's into building very similar to the Pentagon, and the twin towers. If the results of several reenactments match the results what has been documented on 9/11 then the case is closed. It would be closed as far as the physical evidence goes. The who really did it, and why did they do it questions could not be answered by tests like this.
Another possibility is doing scale reenactments of each event. I see with Hurricane Katrina that the Army Core of Engineers performed several scale reenactments of the levees breaking in New Orleans. They actually took soil from each levee location and did scale reenactments under conditions until they found out exactly why each levee broke.
It seems that something similar to what was done with the levee investigation could be done for the 9/11 attack. Perhaps tests could be done with detailed scale aircraft and scale buildings. The scale building could be constructed with actual materials from both the pentagon and the twin towers.
But it costs money and takes time to do things like testing. Testing involves science and not jumping to pre conceived notions. With King George running up a $300,000,000 bar tab with the Saudi's and the Chinese for his holy "War On Terror", and handing the American tax payer the bill, we might not be able to afford to know the truth of what really happened on 9/11.