Monday, May 15, 2006

The Lone Gunman

Must have written this:

“Oh no, we still hijack a third plane, but we don't crash it, instead we fire a missile into the Pentagon and say that it's the plane we hijacked.”

“Wouldn’t it be easier to just crash an actual plane?”

“Well, yes, it would be easier. But I was talking with Stevens here, from the Office of Making Things Exponentially More Complicated Than Necessary, and he thinks...

A little more amusing debunking. :)


At 16 May, 2006 11:07, Blogger ImpeachBushNow said...

I like good satire as much as the next liberal intellectual - and the post is good satire. But I'm not sure I buy it as a "debunking."

Granted, I don't buy the whole theory behind the movie, but it did raise some interesting questions... like, why did the towers (and building 7) fall? If it was mostly due to poor workmanship in the construction (and not from a pre-planned detonation) then that ought to raise some serious concerns about other buildings from that era. But I haven't heard anyone calling for investigations into the stability of other skyscrapers.

Although, I will say this. Metoo's post did pretty much convince me that the movie's whole "Flight 93 really landed in Ohio" story was ridiculous. He's right. It doesn't make any damn sense.

At 16 May, 2006 12:48, Blogger Pat said...

IBN, there are many revisions to building codes coming out of the investigation into the collapses of those buildings. I've got a post coming on this; thanks for the suggestion!

At 16 May, 2006 14:32, Blogger MeToo said...

Thanks for the nice mention guys. Things sure are hot at your blog today! The stuff the CT "believers" are spouting are funnier than anything I could have written!

Keep up the good work!

(just a head's up that the link you've got up is a dead end... the correct link is:
Thanks again!)


Post a Comment

<< Home