Rashard Mendenhall = dumbass!

**CR_Dingley** · 05-03-2011, 05:55 PM

thats not a cop out. Some people are sure the official story is true. Some people are sure there were bombs. I am of neither category. IT just seams a little coincidental that High members of bush's cabinet needed a "New Pearl Harbor" to attack iraq and then they got one....lets say the official story is true.. then bush ignored Sandy bergers warning, he ignored al gores warning, he ignored Clintons warnings and he let the man that Clinton said was number one priority crash planes into our buildings. He did this under the pretense that we pull our troops from saudi arabia, and we did this after 9/11, Osama's mission was accomplished the day we pulled our troops.

**HoustonRaven** · 05-03-2011, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by CR_Dingley

thats not a cop out. Some people are sure the official story is true. Some people are sure there were bombs. I am of neither category

here is where I stopped reading.

**CR_Dingley** · 05-03-2011, 06:56 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

here is where I stopped reading.

What you read or don't read doesn't concern me. There has been no 3rd party official investigation. Untill that happens ill be inclined to believe neither of the theories.

**HoustonRaven** · 05-03-2011, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by CR_Dingley

What you read or don't read doesn't concern me. There has been no 3rd party official investigation. Untill that happens ill be inclined to believe neither of the theories.

So Popular Mechanics is a biased source now?!?!

**bmorebirds_24** · 05-03-2011, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by festivus

You can have all the questions you want. If you have questions about whether the earth is, in fact, round, I'm just saying I have an opinion about you. This vage Luke-Scott-like "there are questions" is a cheap copout when you won't stand up and state your idiotic conspiracy theory because you're afraid of being rejected as the gullible fool you, apparently, are.

That crap has been debunked a thousand times.

Sorry to pile on, but this is one of those things that should not pass without firm criticism. Too important.

Bmorebirds, sometimes Houston is an a-hole, but he is 100% correct to respond to this aggressively. If you didn't know before, I'm glad you asked, but I read your post the same way he did.

Here is the Popular Mechanics article from 2005. Honestly I should not have to look it up for you guys, but I did it anyway.

Ok your point? I cleared it up and you still have to make a remark about it?

**CR_Dingley** · 05-03-2011, 07:29 PM

your still going off the premise that you assume I am 100 percent a truther. I never said they were Biased, but after reading it doesn't debunk even a quarter of the truther claims so it doesn't count as a true investigation. I want a 100 percent independent investigation.

**HoustonRaven** · 05-03-2011, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by CR_Dingley

your still going off the premise that you assume I am 100 percent a truther. I never said they were Biased, but after reading it doesn't debunk even a quarter of the truther claims so it doesn't count as a true investigation. I want a 100 percent independent investigation.

How is Popular Mechanics research, a private trade magazine among engineers, not a "100% independent investigation"?

**CR_Dingley** · 05-03-2011, 07:58 PM

cause its not 100 percent. There are books and books of claims, Popular machanics only looked into about 16 claims.

**HoustonRaven** · 05-03-2011, 07:59 PM

Originally Posted by CR_Dingley

cause its not 100 percent. There are books and books of claims, Popular machanics only looked into about 16 claims.

Books and books huh? Name them.

Volumes doesn't equal debatable facts.

I can find "books and books" on the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, etc.

Is it really your contention that sound engineering is trumped by numerous books written by people who have very little to do with engineering?

**CR_Dingley** · 05-03-2011, 08:07 PM

Ive read through one of David-Ray-Griffins, but simple Google search came up with http://911scholars.org/index.php?opt...d=78&Itemid=57 ... The point being a few pages of a magazine cant really be the only thing to say this entire book is false heres why.

**festivus** · 05-03-2011, 08:07 PM

CR Dingley, there is no question that President Bush's legacy is inextricably linked to 9/11. The only thing I remember from the pre-9/11 Bush Presidency is his utterly pathetic late night speech attempting to justify his decision to handcuff medical researchers.

Like Rudolph Guiliani, his legacy is now linked to 9/11, and like Guiliani, he used 9/11 as a moment to define his mission.

Doesn't mean he caused it, though.

edit: Huh. Lots of posts between when I started this & when I sat back down to finish. Dingley, don't encourage people to believe that nonsense. Besides all the scientific and engineering reasons why you're wrong, there is also the reason that a conspiracy of that magnitude would require *way* too many people to keep their mouths shut, and with that many innocents killed, it's absurd to think nobody would have opened his mouth. And for every one of your idiotic websites, there's one somebody put together painstakingly to debunk it. Google is your friend.