pap

Just got a text from a mate about Cantell. Apparently, they have scrapped their old house names and replaced them with the names of the stands at St. Marys. Can anyone confirm this? Pretty cool if so.

Not a loaded question at all. I have no problem reading the Looming Tower, as long you're happy to read "Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory" by David Ray Griffin.

Ah, c'mon. There are plenty of sites and authors out there who are happy to give a full working theory as to what went down and where. Webster Tarpley goes all out, naming names and giving a precise description of what he thinks went down. The people with the biggest theories are the ones who get shot down the most. Looking at some of the responses in this thread to people poking holes in the official account, it's pretty obvious why most of the professional groups don't want to commit to providing a full explanation. They can't prove who might have been running the conspiracy, so they stick to what they do know. Speculation without proof whatever credibility they have left after making their mission statement.

All along, I've talked about keeping an open mind and possiblity. You make a good point about the motive for 7/7. I don't see a clear motive either.

Is it reasonable to expect truthers to be able to tell you everything? Most of the professional organizations out there looking for 911 Truth specifically avoid ascribing blame, preferring to voice professional opinions on the elements they can speak authoratively about. Does their lack of a complete answer mean that their questions should be ignored, or their professional opinions on the stuff they know about should be considered invalid?

Weren't you using the AQ safehouse to validate Khan's lack of manipulation?

Re-reading this, you still haven't answered my question? Real simple. Yes or no. Could Khan and his fellow terrorists have been manipulated without their knowledge?

So, Al Qaeda never been a teensy bit compromised? Never?

Thanks. For a moment, I thought MI5 were a cheap furniture shop. Learn something new, etc. I honestly don't know who orchestrated either set of attacks, so if that's true, then I don't know if they, whoever they might be, knew about it. Whatever we were talking about. I do think that these events have shaped our world, and not in a good way. Don't you think that if there is anything dodgy about the official account, that it should be pursued?

1) Why does training in Pakistan exclude the possibility of manipulation? 2) How does the Al Qaeda safehouse exclude the possibility of manipulation? You've dodged one question too many.

Who said it was MI5? Only you as far as I can tell.

Don't follow. What bearing does Khan's training in Pakistan have on anything? Are you saying that because he was in Pakistan and underwent extensive training, that he could not have been manipulated in some way? Same thing with the Al Qaeda safehouse. How does that exclude the possibility of manipulation? Spell it out for me please, although don't use big words. I'm not very well read.

Er? Wha? Where did I ascribe blame? Or even commit to a viewpoint one way or the other. Where have I said "this is how it went down"? I've pointed to groups like Architects and Engineers for 911 truth, linked one of their vids. I don't endorse every point they make, but I think it adds something to the debate. Isn't that what it is all about? I've read your posts, and while I don't agree with them, I'm trying my best to remain respectful and realise that you have your opinion too. If you want to construct your own theory that the head of MI5 organised 7/7, you're free to do so - but don't pass it off as mine.

Siddique Khan and his cohorts were terrorists. Terrorists normally operate in decentralized cell networks, with minimal contact between the cells. If they were operating under orders, how would they know whether their handler was a genuine jihadist or an operative? As to your second question, how do you even make that link? 7/7 and 21/7 are two separate events. And as I've made clear in my first point, they might not have even known they were being directed. You don't have to be in on the plan to be part of the plan.

I think I've been very careful not to construct an elaborate theory on here, despite your repeated attempts at fishing for one. One possibility that has obviously escaped your attention is that Siddique Khan and friends could have been unwittingly directed by others.

Ah, don't be like that, VFTT - I also think it's possible that everything went down exactly as described. I do think there are questions to be answered though.

Don't put words in my mouth. Anyone who reads my (unedited) post can see that I said "I thought it was possible". Anyone with a basic grasp of the English language would appreciate the distinction between "I think it's possible" and "this is what I believe". Do you have to pay to be a member of the Cretin Club, or have they given you an honorary position on the basis of lifetime achievement?

I think it's possible, yes. I've answered your question. Now, what explanation are you going to provide for the drills?

That's certainly what some contest. But it's not about beliefs, is it? It's about explanations. There are too many things around these events that have not been properly explained or investigated. C'mon, Verbal - what's your explanation for these drills happening at the times that they did?

Had a look through all of those photos you linked. Many of the videos on the subject use the same photos to prove the opposite case. Power to you if you consider that conclusive. Do you not find some of the coincidences fascinating though? Like the drills that were happening on 9/11 that were simulating terrorist attacks using jet planes as weapons? Or the drills on 7/7, which Peter Power, chairman of Visor security, sheepishly admitted that his firm were doing a drill that day which was simulating a multiple bomb terrorist attack in London using the exact same targets?

Yup. They could have put some scorch marks on it or something.

No, I'm not. I'm saying that the evidence that exists is highly disputed, and that the videos do nothing to back it up. You make an interesting point about cameras. I am surprised that there isn't more footage of this event. This is one of the key questions. 99% of my skepticism would disappear if there was conclusive proof that this definitely was a 757.

I was merely pointing out that if you want to debunk the 'no 757' theory, the best strategy would be to show a 757 flying into the Pentagon. The footage that was posted did not show this.

I saw an explosion, I saw a computer generated version of a 757 in a debunking reconstruction. Didn't see any actual footage of a 757 though.

Don't get it. Where's the 757?