> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Land > > I know that other 9/11 analyses have been posted to this > list, but I came across a one-hour documentary that concludes > that "it is more likely than not that the government was > actually behind the attacks"
I have not had a chance to look at this video yet but I have looked a several websites that claim the same thing. They all seem to hinge on the same thing: comments made under stress at the time of the attacks. Things like firefighters saying "it sounded like a bomb going off" or something like that. I have two major problems with this line of reasoning. One is that eyewitness accounts especially under times of extreme stress are notoriously unreliable. Also, people are always making comparisons like the above. How many times have you heard someone say a tornado "sounded like a freight train". Does that mean that tornados don't exist and it really *was* a freight train that destroyed their house...? Or someone saying that the aftermath of a hurricane looked like a war zone. Does that mean that it really wasn't a hurricane but a super-secret battle that happened during that rain storm? So, some firefighters said over the radio that something sounded like a bomb. So what? That's probably what it did sound like. That doesn't make it a bomb. I was a huge JFK conspiracy nut when I was younger. I was absolutely positive that Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy and that he had nothing to do with the assassination. Now, I think he did. Could there have been another gunman? Maybe. But probably not. - jmh _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
