Is there any case in which the name “Wile E. Coyote” is used in any of the cartoons with the Road Runner? He certainly introduces himself that way in the cartoons in which he interacts with Bugs Bunny, but I’m not sure if it’s ever used with the Road Runner. Of course, he’s mute in those cartoons, but his name might appear on a mailbox, package, or invoice from the Acme company.
Barring any such evidence, I maintain the possibility that Wile E. Coyote (talks, attempts to capture Bugs Bunny) and the Coyote (doesn’t talk, attempts to capture the Road Runner) are two different characters.
I jokingly say that they are played by the same actor, who, with a bit of makeup on his nose, was also Ralph Wolf (whose nemesis was Sam Sheepdog).
So do I take it that the Pentagon was behind the attack? Because the one unfailing feature of all Acme products is that they blow up/squash/maim the person who uses them.
Never mind planes, Pentagons, passengers, or pilots. That is the most important correction in this thread. I hope Mr. Coyote isn’t offended by my mistake, as I have some fine Acme products I’d like to sell him.
So you do believe some words of the official story.
Oh, so it’s a conspiracy inside a conspiracy.
A more sane examination of the evidence suggests that in fact 9/11 happened pretty much as it rather obviously did and as the “official story” says, and that the USA’s subsequent military adventures have been rather conveniently tagged onto 9/11 but, frankly, would probably have happened anyway. The invasion of Iraq was a classic example of something we’ve seen throughout history; a powerful nation decided to take over a weak one, and they trumped up a reason to pretend it was justified. It’s been done a thousand times before. The USA’s done it before, and they’re not even in the same league with real veterans of the trump-up-a-reason game like the British.
Why the United States needed to conduct some sort of bizarre, physics-defying conspiracy to blow up the World Trade Center to invade Iraq is simply not a logically explainable thing; they could have invaded Iraq anyway, as plainly evidenced by that fact that it was already being planned before 9/11 and 9/11 wasn’t the primary (or even secondary) excuse for doing it. The reason the USA presented for invading Iraq was Weapons of Mass Destruction; everything else was a tiny side issue. Go back and read the articles, the editorials, the commentary, the news. Read the threads from this board from just before the invasion, which are full of SDMB posters blabbering now-embarrassing nonsense about WMDs. That fiasco might have been accelerated a little by 9/11, but the Bush administration was going to find a sequence of excuses to take over Iraq one way or another.
The biggest problem with the truther conspiracies is that, even assuming the US government was behind the attacks, it would have made absolutely no sense for them to do it in the way the conspiracy claims.
If you’re capable of wiring the WTC with enough explosives to demolish it, why not just do that, instead of making the plan so much more complex by flying planes into the buildings and introducing more ways that things can go wrong? If you can fly planes into the buildings, why bother with explosives?
If you want people to think a plane crashed into the Pentagon, why not just crash a plane into the Pentagon, since you clearly have the ability to crash planes into things anyway? Why bother spiriting Flight 77 away and destroying it secretly when you could destroy it by crashing it into the Pentagon?
If the entire point was to justify a war in Iraq, why not blame Iraq instead of blaming al-Qaeda?
If the towers were to just collapsed by itself, even a child would wonder why?
The planes slamming into the towers provided the shock effect, and we all believed the towers collapsed due to the collision and the fire that ensued on those 5 to 10 floors (my estimate) based on all the videos on the web.
Rumsfeld reported 2.3 Trillion dollars was unaccounted for on Sep 10, 2011. I just find it odd after the pentagon incident on the 11th, none of this was mentioned. 2.3 TRILLION is a lot of dough. Don’t we want to know who has taken it?
If the black ops team was capable of setting explosives that brought the buildings down, why would they have to conceal that at all. “Oh, look, those nasty Arab terrorists blew up our building!”
Positing a monstrous and complex conspiracy to use airliners solely as cover for an otherwise effective demolition effort is just too bugfuck to consider.
Yeah… her point was, why sneak a bomb into the tower, and then crash an airplane into it and blame it on terrorists? Why not just detonate the bomb, and blame that on terrorists?
Or, here’s a better idea. If you’re staging a fake terrorist attack to stir up public support for a war, why target your biggest financial hub and military command center? If you want to provoke national outrage over a false flag attack, pick a dozen or so middle schools, and park fertilizer bombs outside each one of them while class is in session. Hundreds of dead school children give you your perfect excuse to invade just about anyone you care to pick, plus you haven’t dealt serious damage to both your economy and your military right before undertaking a massive and expensive invasion of another country.
