Re: 9/11 nuttery
I interviewed David Duncan, exec ed of Popular Mechanics, about their
new book debunking 9/11 nuttery. Here’s an email I got in response.
great show!
I listened to your show ‘behind the news’? It was great. Finally
someone who got the facts straight. I saw the damage at building 7
and it is clearly damage that would make a building drop down in
the way it did. It was definitely, at least 25% of the building
that was damaged. It makes so much more sense that because of a
twea party, as we now all know, that the fighter pilots who were to
be scrambled were to late to intercept. It makes so much sense.
Even the hole in the pentagon that was pictured in the NY times did
easily fits a boeing.Its ridicules to yhink that the company that took over all the
security in the towers a few months before were connected to Bush’s
first cousin. Its ridicules to think that in the two weeks prior
the towers were evacuated 3 times and the weekend before 9-11 the
sniffer dogs were removed from the building. It is outrages to
think that the wiring all could have been done beforehand and
during the evacs, and that the weekend was chosen to ´click in´ the
bombs. Outrageous.I am really glad that you talked to this pop mechanics dude who is
so totally right in saying that these building were in actual fact
already on the verge of collapse because the stupid towers were
build in such a manner that they are fragile.I´m happy to hear someone like you fill the air with total logic
and that you finally explained away all these crazy conspiracies.
Like Silverstein said, `so we made the decision to pull, so they
pulled the building and we watched it come down´. So ridules….