Why would a plane flying into the pentagon disprove MIHOP?

[readmoreoften]

While it certainly would disprove the theory that a plane did not fly into the pentagon, even if flight 77 was proven to have hit the pentagon that doesn't disprove a thing.

It doesn't disprove remote control. It doesn't disprove that the Bin Laden is a CIA asset who hired "terrorists" under false pretenses (or even under actual conditions). It does not answer questions of the WTC implosion, of what the hell happened to WTC 7 (and why buildings closer to the towers were only scratched). It doesn't answer questions about the unusual stock activity or why Willie Brown was told not to fly on 9-11.

I don't understand why some people are SO EAGER to exhonerate the Bush administration. They have motive and opportunity. There is reason to examine suspicious evidence. There is also reason to concede when evidence is consistent with the "official story", but not because it "wholesale disproves MIHOP/LIHOP" but because that aspect is no longer a valid lead.

It may turn out that the Busheviks were indeed surprised, but there is still too much evidence leading to prior knowledge at the moment for many people's tastes. Why not examine every angle possible? What is so "radical" about that? It's a crime scene for cripsake.

[iconoclastic cat]

1. "Quick! Look over here!" *waves comically* nt

[Taverner]

2. No it just proves that the pentagon was probably not hit by a missle

Although why did they wait this long to release it?

Personally I think Loose Change is 50% correct, 50% incorrect. The Osama tapes were faked, and the Bush admin knew what was coming and did nothing.

When things explode chaos ensues, so I'm not surprised that there were no plane parts when the plane hit the pentagon.

Yes, the military did practice runs of buildings falling and attacks, but my thought is that they knew 9/11 was coming and they wanted to know what to expect. They didn't want their "Pearl Harbor" to cause any real damage...to them...

[arcane1]

3. I never understood the missile theory anyway

I've presumed that a plane was, in fact, flown into the Pentagon, and I also presume LIHOP/MIHOP

[Taverner]

4. Whether its LIHOP or MIHOP, the admin is just as guilty

Whether its the sin of omission or comission, it's still murder...

"Bush knew and Atta Flew..."

[arcane1]

9. incompetence, AT BEST n/t

[readmoreoften]

5. (Oh, and I mean cripesakes)

not cripsake. I don't mean "for the sake of the Crips" or "against the sake of the Bloods". And that was not meant to slur the disabled.

I also do not mean "crip sake". I am not aware the the Crips are in the business of distilling Japanese rice wine.

[MnFats]

7. I use 'chrissakes' but some feel that comes too close to blasphemy.

by the way: pretend I'm real stupid and didn't hear about something being released that you are now talking about.
what got released? got a link?

[michael_1166]

6. We're just discussing what we see in that video

And most of us don't see a plane. This proves or disproves nothing about MIHOP/LIHOP. You're right, even if it was a plane, it could still have been remote controlled. It must have been remote controlled then, because the assumed terrorist "pilot" was known to be unable to even fly a Cessna.

[moodforaday]

8. It doesn't, but it is important

You're quite right - it does not disprove MIHOP. But it will, when we see it, disprove some of the most contentious claims. The playing field will be clearer. I admit I was first drawn to MIHOP by the original "Hunt the Boeing" website, and I could never see any Beoing debris in any of the pictures I saw later. But whether it was a Boeing or not is really one of the lesser issues. If we don't have to argue about it anymore, all the better. There are more interesting (and less outrageous) threads to follow.

[readmoreoften]

10. Yeah, talk about a straw man.

I don't care what the methods were anymore than whether Colonel Mustard did it in Library with a Candlestick or the Diningroom wirh a Rope.

There's plenty of motive, opportunity, and boat loads of circumstantial evidence. So let's keep trying to uncover.