Things to agree on

[Chomp]

Why not come up with some issues we can all agree on rather than abusing each other all the time?

Here are a few of mine (I start from a MIHOP-Sceptic position).


1. Pentagon Visual Images
I think MIHOP have a good point here. I find it odd that there is not a (better) visual record of the Pentagon hit (or indeed plane). There must be dozens of cameras in the area. The absence is odd.


2. Inexperienced Pilots
If, as often stated, at least one of the pilots only had limited Cessna training and still hit a building, then I'm more than willing to say that that is quite startling. I believe we don't fully know the skill level of the pilots, but if it could be shown that one of them had only Cessna training, then he was very "lucky" indeed he hit.


3. Penylvania Shoot-Down
I am perfectly willing acknowledge the possibility that the plane was shot down on the orders of Cheney/Bush. (However, I actually think that if this were proven it would support rather than undermine the "official" version. Why plan an elaborate demolition/missile attack on WTC/Pentagon and then just shoot down the 4th plane? That doesn't make sense). Anyway, perhaps we can all agree that there is at least some possibility that a shoot-down happened?


4. The Official 9/11 Commission Reprt:
Sorry to shout but: JUST BECAUSE I DON'T BUY MIHOP DOES NOT MEAN I BELEIVE EVERY WORD OF THE REPORT. Surely we can all agree that there are dozens of inconsistencies and unanswered questions?




Does either side have any more concessions for the other side? Any MIHOP doubt controlled explosions? Any sceptics think the flight paths are odd?

Come on people, feel the love!

[Jazz2006]

1. I agree with all four of those, Chomp.

I would also add

5. I don't buy controlled demolition but I have no problem imagining that there could have been explosives of some kind in the twin towers - for instance, some small explosive devices planted by accomplices.

Feeling the luvvvv :)

[petgoat]

2. Why shoot down flight 93?

Because the passengers were taking control of the plane. One of them was a pilot and could
conceivably have landed it safely.


The last words on the tape were stuff like "pull it up!" Then there's a three minute gap
between the end of the tape and the seismograph readings of an impact.

Presumably BITLER didn't want any prisoners taken.

[reprehensor]

3. 911 Report: dozens of inconsistencies, etc...

I'll say.

Griffin notes 115 "issues" with the Report.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050523112738404

Here's a bunch more, and thank you, Rep. McKinney;
http://www.gnn.tv/B12001

I'm more inclined to call it a Whitewash, just like Ben DeMott;
http://www.harpers.org/WhitewashAsPublicService.html

And no matter what your stripe, MIHOP, LIHOP, "incompetence theory", whatever, the 9/11 Commission Report is little more than bird cage liner. Several month's worth actually. Depending on the size of the bird.

[rman]

4. why would we all have to agree?

MIHOP and non-MIHOP are opposites; i don't think we all can agree nor that we have to.

[Jazz2006]

5. That was a valiant attempt, Chomp, at

trying to find some middle ground where, obviously to anyone with an open mind, there is middle ground to be found.

I start from a MIHOP-skeptic position but I have all kinds of questions about the events of Sept. 11/01 and I don't approach them from a hardened "can't hear and won't listen to any possible dissent from that position" as many of the MIHOPers here seem to do. Clearly, the few MIHOPers who responded to your very even handed, rational, and friendly opening post are obvious examples of "can't hear and won't listen" MIHOPers.

It really is a shame that your experiment failed due to MIHOPers being unwilling to even consider your premise and unwilling to leave off their official agenda for a nanosecond to consider that there might be some common ground and some things that people with varying points of view can agree upon.

It is also very telling that the MIHOPers who did respond are so unwilling to even consider other views that they couldn't even follow the very simple premise of the thread or budge an inch. Not one of the responding posts so far even attempted to respond to your actual premise, but merely jumped all over their favourite memes.

As a result, the real questions get drowned out and Bush gets a pass yet again because MIHOPers are so busy playing with themselves that they miss the big picture.

Sad, that.

But I applaud your efforts.

Cheers, Jazz.

[KJF]

6. If you ask me

(1) The official Pentagon images are fakes, any further releases of other images would indicate they were fakes. That's why they aren't released.
(2) Hani never boarded, so any discussion of his flying skills is moot.
(3) If you ask me, it was shot down, but what this means is anybody's guess. My opinion is that it should have been shot down and I don't really have a problem with it.
(4) Everybody agrees on that. As far as I can see one of the reasons is that the FBI hired most of the hijackers' support network after 9/11, although this is rather baffling. In addition, the section on Saudi Arabia is not very good, the same goes for the bit about Iran, they soft-pedalled on Pakistan and even claimed Osama wasn't involved in smuggling drugs. Some of it seems to be genuine error (like the problems with the hijackers' fake documents), some of it is spin - how likely is it that the FAA kept the fact United 93 had been hijacked secret from the military for 40 minutes whilst evacuating its own facilities?

More details on application.

A consensus might be acheived on some stuff, but there's no agreement on whether the planes were holograms or not, so such attempts are not likely to be that successful.

[eomer]

7. Concessions from a controlled demolition MIHOPer.

Here are a couple of things that hopefully some of us can agree on:

1. WTC1 and WTC2 did not fall in 10 seconds (free fall speed).
   
2. Seismic data does not (from what I've seen) provide evidence of controlled demolition.