Okay, I watched it again and, nope, didn't miss anything. No mention of the specific impact areas of WTC 1 , 2 and the Pentagon being modified prior to 9/11. Just pure speculation and guilt by association nonsense like all of the other YouTube 9/11 truther theories. I have a question though. If Rumsfeld knew that 9/11 was going to happen and knew where the planes were going to hit, why would he mention that more than $2 trillion in Pentagon funds had gone missing the day before? If he knew, as the video implies, that the offices where those records were kept were going to be destroyed the next day, why wouldn't he just keep quiet about it?
Then why would he blab about the missing funds if he KNEW all the evidence was going to be destroyed? Coincidentally is right. But just for fun, let's pretend that you're right (after all, that's all we can really do ) and that he knew it was coming and as an alibi decided to just hang out on the other side of the building. That takes some pretty large testicles on his part to be anywhere around if he knows a plane . . . oh excuse me . . . we're pretending you're right . . . a missile is headed for the Pentagon. He must have had a lot of faith that he knew EXACTLY where the strike was going to be and EXACTLY how much damage was going to be caused. Does any of this sound even a little far-fetched to you?
Isn't that a reason to blab about it?! No. Reasons: 1) Wouldn't you feel more safe in the opposite side of a large building if you knew a small missile was going to hit versus a large 757? 2) Wouldn't you feel more safe knowing the explosion would be in the near empty section that was being renovated to be more "blast resistant" versus any other part of the building? 3) Don't you think a missile can hit a lot more precisely where they'd want it to versus a large 757?
No. That's actually a reason NOT to blab about it because it would be a non-issue after the evidence was destroyed. Personally I wouldn't feel safe in ANY building that was going to be hit by a missile. If I knew that a missile was going to be fired at my place of work, I would certainly have scheduled a meeting or some other commitment AWAY from my place of work. But remember, we were just pretending you were right. It wasn't a missile, it was a 757. See above. Yes, but they didn't use a missile. A 757 crashed into the Pentagon. But let's pretend, again just for a minute, that you're right, and they used a missile. What took out the light poles then?
So the fact would never come out after 9/11 because only Rummy knew about the unaccounted for trillions? That wasn't the question. Please answer: 1) Wouldn't you feel more safe in the opposite side of a large building if you knew a small missile was going to hit versus a large 757? See above. Glad you agree. The light poles that greatly damaged the grass after the ferociously fast 757 plowed threw them at 530 mph?
Just want to be sure I'm thinking about the same light poles you guys are. Was this the official story: The light poles that greatly damaged the grass after the ferociously fast 757 plowed threw them at 530 mph?
No. There were light poles that were over 100' apart that were knocked down by a 757 as it approached the pentagon. The light poles are physical evidence. Your contention is that a missile hit the side of the Pentagon. Please explain what took down the light poles. Please account for the physical evidence.
You people know Moslems didn't do it. The proof that it was the US government is too clear. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/182662-video-message-non-truthers.html#post3774590 There's a thread about you people in this section. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/193865-disinformation-shills.html You're just trying to cause confusion in the truth movement.
If the evidence was going to be destroyed on purpose as the video insinuates, why would he worry about it? And you're claiming that the thousands of people in the intelligence and military communities that would have to be in on the 9/11 conspiracy are afraid to talk but you (conveniently) assume that they couldn't keep some accountant quiet? Sorry, but you're loaded question has no acceptable answers for me. I wouldn't feel safe in ANY building that was going to be hit by ANY missile. It's kind of funny though. If he would have had an appointment or something somewhere else on the morning of Sept. 11 you would be arguing that that was proof of foreknowledge. But he didn't so in order to support your ridiculous foreknowledge claim, you say he felt safe in his office because he KNEW a small missile was going to hit when in fact it was a 757. That's the problem with all the alternate theories. They just don't make sense when you think about them logically. Is there something you want to tell me?
Have you taken a close look at the truth movement? There are as many competing theories as there are supporters. The confusion comes from the truthers themselves. As soon as one ridiculous theory is shown to be flawed, they replace it with an another ridiculous but slightly different theory.
Most of the confusion comes from government infiltrators. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZno7se8mPA"]9/11 Gatekeeping: Barrie Zwicker - YouTube[/ame]
Well, isn't it obvious? The missile was in the shape of a 757! And, just to ensure that it looked real, in case any conspiracy theorists caught wind and information was leaked, they had innocent civilians planted on the missile, and had it hijacked by terrorists! It all makes sense!!!
That has never been reported by creidble sources to my knowledge. Theres a very good reason why three of the worlds' largest structures were targeted...they are easier to find by air.
It's not going to look suspicious when they announce the HUGE unaccounted for trillions after the accounting section of the Pentagon got destroyed in the most bizarre and unexpected attack in US history?! Where'd you get I think thousands were in on it?! Too scared to answer. Got it. Funny you have to always throw your opinion that it was as if you are so worried people might think it didn't. Who you protecting? So tell me how it makes sense for the head of the DoD to be out on the lawn helping the injured, being vulnerable, in the middle of an attack, especially when he's one of the few that can give attack authorizations to protect the country? "Mr. Rumsfeld, we need your authorization URGENTLY!!" "As soon as I finish helping this guy in the stretcher reach the ambulance."
