Re: [UC] Conspiracy Theory Involving Pentagon and 9/11 BS

[Craigsolve]

In a message dated 9/16/2004 3:03:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think you are missing the point -- there is no dispute that SOMETHING struck the Pentagon -- the damage is self-evident.  The controversy (if you can even call it that) is whether it was a 757 as reported, or something else -- a smaller commuter-type plane for example, or a missile. I know this list has a strict no flame policy, but your employer must not run a drug free workplace.   Nobody has Cruise Missile technology remotely close to the capabilities that our military has, with regard to range, payload, and accuracy. From where and how did a missile launch come for which no honest members of the defense intelligence community could/would have not blown the whistle?   What sinister organization has the capability to coordinate a missile strike with the hijacking of the two identifiable planes recorded striking the NYC World Trade Center Towers?   The current fleets of world missiles are designed to carry a high explosive, chemical, or biological payload. Just what technology is currently available that allows a chemical or an explosive to mimic a petroleum-based accelerant. The damage to the Pentagon would have been nowhere near as extensive if there had not been a petroleum-based accelerant present. You did not notice that the initial water delivery systems were ineffective against the petroleum-fueled fire? The video was repeatedly shown on CNN and FNC.   It is time to end the tread, before it further serves to embarrass the greater UCD community. No wonder I cannot get Jannie to take you guys seriously.   Forgive me for being emotional; I do not believe a better more honest government has ever graced our earth!