From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk   
      
   On Wed, 31 May 2006 01:15:25 +0000, Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:   
      
   > I've been watching a lot of 9-11 documentaries, which in effect   
   > say that the official story we are told, are not what happened on the day.   
   > ie. How can a plane disappear into a building?   
      
   It's travelling at two hundred miles an hour, and there's a lot of empty   
   space in both.   
      
   >     How can the Twin Towers collapse as they did? From a fire?   
      
   Because it was an _enormous_ fire, fuelled by hundreds of tonnes of fuel,   
   and they weren't designed to withstand it.   
      
   > Everything in the official story amounts to a lie.   
   > The facts do not check out.   
      
   Got any proof of that?  Or just wild, hopelessly ill-informed,   
   paranoid speculation?   
      
   >   
   > So I wonder if any psychic source does reveal who was behind it,   
   > and what did happen on the day?   
      
   Yeah, 'cos they were so good at predicting it (and finding Osama   
   afterwards).   
      
   >   
   > Note: other similiar events did not happen...   
   > eg. Oklahoma City Bombing - the truck bomb in itself did not bring the   
   >     building down.   
   >     TWA 800 - something else brought that plane down, eyewitnesses   
   >     always said a missile was present (this may? have been the case with   
   >     the Pentagon strike of 9-11?)...   
      
   Eyewitnesses are wrong, as the video footage shows.   
      
   >   
   > It is just that, when looking at the details, particularly eye   
   > witness testimony - they do not tally with the official story, therefore   
   > the official story is a coverup of some kind.   
      
   Great logic!   
      
   Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.  Surely you know that?   
      
   > And the more information   
   > you gather, the more this is the case.   
      
   Depends on your sources.  Are _any_ of yours likely to be reliable?   
      
   > The official story, is not logically plausible.   
      
   You mean that it's not logical that hitting a building with hundreds of   
   tonnes of metal and fuel at hundreds of miles an hour would cause it to   
   catch fire, and burn fiercely enough to fail?   
      
   I beg to differ.   
      
   --   
   =======================================================================   
   = David    --- No, not that one.   
   = Mitchell ---   
   =======================================================================   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)