The point remains, even if a plane hit the Pentagon, that doesn't prove explosives weren't used in seven. So, since you have the information about seven, put it out.

You Do know that there are places in life where we walk away and accept that knowing, positively, one way or another, just isn't possible. You're firmly convinced that an airliner hit the Pentagon, I'm not. But, just for the sake of argument, let's just say it did. Now, if an airliner hit the Pentagon, does that mean that the whole 9/11 official report is truthful?


I agree, the whole 9/11 report is not truthful. but define truth.

The infamous 28 pages which will probably be released soon, are not lies.
we will probably find out they were  withheld because the ramifications from what they say would have disrupted foreign-policy at a time when the people in power in the US government decided it wasn't worth poking that bear. I think they're going to show the Saudis had people fairly high up in the government who may have had some ideas that attack was imminent but they decided it was better for these maniacs to turn their attention to the United States as opposed to their country.

as a manager over dozens of employees at various times in my working life, I withheld information because I felt it was better for the company if those people didn't know the truth. if you want to call that a lie, go ahead.

but nothing I've seen leads me to believe senior management in the bush administration even the president and vice president themselves new, and were complicit, in planning and carrying out the attacks. That's utterly ridiculous.

No they didn't and no they weren't.

do you see what you've done? like a clever spider you've lured me into your web. We never finished the Pentagon , but we moved on supposedly to WTC 7, but now you jumped to the dancing Israelies,  a myth impossible to prove or disprove.

Aw.....the predictable methods of a truther...

Nope, one topic at a time.

So, for the record, Jog believes it was one of the hijacked planes that flew into the Pentagon. He no longer thinks anything suspicious about the event because the overwhelming evidence points to only one logical conclusion.

So, if we agree on that statement above,  we can move on to WTC – 7.

Deal?

You want a conspiracy?... here's a conspiracy...

Once Bush pronounced nuclear,.. "nukular",... every Republican and right-wing media outlet started saying "nukular"...
That was  a conspiracy to make GW look like less of an idiot...

It didn't work... it just made all them look like idiots.  ...

If this discussion were solely based on what the logical conclusion IS, we wouldn't be having it. You would understand that what we were told is not possible according to physics.

You can't cause a structural failure with fire unless you pump air in. Grab some logs, build a fire, toss a two inch I beam on it. Watch what happens. It won't get hot enough to work it, like a blacksmith. Watch a blacksmith. Look at how hot he has to get steel to shape it. Understand that buildings aren't BUILT just to hold the Expected load. They are built to withstand fire possibly detracting from the strength of it.
The path of least resistance is how things fall. Every vertical support had to fall away at the exact same time for seven to fall with the roofline so flat AND, it Accelerated at Free Fall Speed for a coupla seconds.
Impossible. Unless someone blows the legs out from under it.

You can post a link.