Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Diane Rheim show today (3/11). Calling those who dispute the official CT paranoid..

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 11:07 AM
Original message
Diane Rheim show today (3/11). Calling those who dispute the official CT paranoid..
A lady caller said the findings of architects & engineers and others, etc. have not been addressed.

David Cole, one of the guests says we have enough to think about with bringing the alleged terrorists to trial without opening the door to the "paranoid" thinking of those who question the events of 9/11.

I'm appalled. I won't go into detail here, because it's all been said over and over and over. But I can only say that no commercial airliner impacted the Pentagon. I can't deny what I know about how the world works. It's amazing how much effort goes into denying all the anomalies that occurred that day.

I'm at a loss as to whether David Cole really believes the official conspiracy theory, or whether he knows better and can't bring himself to open that Pandora's box.

Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. A commercial airliner did indeed hit the Pentagon.
Please read the book Firefight by Patrick Creed and Rick Newman. You can probably get a copy at your local library.

Those architects and engineers are cranks and snake oil salesmen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. and you're just a concerned citizen
trying to do your patriotic duty, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. I certainly don't solicit money for anything I may do. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
17. you don't solicit money, eh?
interesting phrasing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. No, I do not. I don't take money in any form for this at all.
I don't get paid to be here. I don't ask for money to be here. No one drops cash on my doorstep. NO MONEY COMES TO ME FOR DEBUNKING 9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES WHATSOEVER.

Is that phrasing interesting to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. No-- not as much as your first comment
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. "Cranks and snake oil.." From your mouth to God's ear. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. oh, good you have evidence?
"But I can only say that no commercial airliner impacted the Pentagon. I can't deny what I know about how the world works."

So happy that you have solid evidence.
Please present it so I can also say no commercial airliner impacted the pentagon.
And don't tell me it's out there, cuz I can't find it.
Please present the evidence here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm gonna go ahead and not believe your account of what was said
until I see a transcript to back it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. By all means. but I'm not gonna do your work for you.....
You know where to find transcripts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Please let us know when you have a transcript to back it up.
Or a video, whatever.
The people want evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
25. It's YOUR claim, dude...
do you realize how stupid it is to ask someone to prove your claim?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
4. "But I can only say that no commercial airliner impacted the Pentagon"
Yeah, despite the fact there are 100+ direct eyewitnesses that saw the plane hit the Pentagon. Oy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. "plane"....yes, some sort of aircraft, to be sure. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. Dude...
the passengers from the flight that hit the Pentagon were identified by their DNA. Quit being silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. ..
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jakeXT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. AFAIK AE911truth tries to stay away from the Pentagon and make no claims to my knowledge
Edited on Thu Mar-11-10 06:03 PM by jakeXT
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
20. True. But if the official explanation fails on that, then what does it say
about the other events that day.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 04:52 AM
Response to Original message
6. I listened to the responses
Establishment consensus Rule #1: Good faith motives are not up for review. Period. Anyone who deviates from this should rightly be considered an unpatriotic conspiracy nut. Thus Cheney's conduct is properly understood as a good faith overreaction. A panicked response by White House officials who were desperate to protect the country.

Short answer: The guests are full of shit. Nobody should dismiss their doubts about 9/11 because some "serious people" find such questions unseemly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 03:51 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. The disconnect is very strange
They were talking about torture and military commissions. Are these good faith policies? Were the architects of these policies acting in good faith? Have the architects of these policies ever accounted for their pre-9/11 conduct?

Is there such thing as corruption? Is there such thing as secrecy? Not according to these guests. Evidently the debate is over policy disagreements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #6
21. Noise...
In my view, there is enough circumstantial evidence to have brought the 9/11 events to trial a long time ago.

There are some who would say, "Circumstantial evidence....bleh!" But absent a confession or an eyewitness (in this case, someone who actually saw the towers being wired for demolition, for example), all you ever have is circumstantial evidence. People are convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time.

For those in this forum who choose to accept the OCT, there is nothing I can say that would change their mind, as everything that could be said has been said over the past 8+ years. They've come to their own conclusions, for whatever reasons.

There is something to be said for inductive reasoning, however; by means of observations, detecting patterns that lead us to a general conclusion. That conclusion could be tested (in a court of law, perhaps?) but the PTB are never going to let that happen. Sad.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. Circumstantial evidence?
Would be what?
Video of planes impacting?
Thousands of witnesses seeing planes impact?
But, let's just forget all that.
The evil BUSHCO lied alot so they MUST be lying about this in a cover-up requiring thousands, if not millions of co-conspirators.
Best of all, none of the "truthers" who subscribe to the silly "no-planes" theory have yet to explain the missing passengers.
Please explain where these fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, cousins, and friends disappeared to.
Please present the evidence here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. You also have thousands of recovery workers, not one of whom...
found any physical evidence of controlled demolition...no det cord, no blasting caps, nothing.

No prosecutor is going to bring anyone to trial for 9/11 based solely on circumstantial evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 06:32 AM
Response to Original message
7. A timely reminder
no planes = no brains
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
8. the media is full of shills
they are either brainwashed or pure intel--

and the Diane Rehm show is too disgusting for me to listen anymore (like almost opinion/news shows). Pure propaganda presented in oh, such a reasonable way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 22nd 2024, 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC