When will they strike next?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Dino, you are kidding right?

We will never see binding arbitration between the two sides... ever, ever, ever.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Too bad there are so many fans who are sheep. A fan strike would bring both sides into line, especially the players.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, but a fan's strike is also insanely hard to organize. It isn't like the players or owners who talk to each other on a regular basis.

[Gatekeeper]

Frogger, Tingkai:

So I'm not very good with analogies sometimes. It was late, I was tired and (throw in some other excuses here).

Gatekeeper

[red_jon]

I presonally do't see it as diminishing their lives. If I had died in those towers I would want people to properly consider what had happened, rather than just accepting whatever they're told. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I want to properly consider every angle.

To me motive and evidence are major factors in determining who is guilty, so far I haven't been satisfied in either aspect.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ned
The next attack will be against either the Sears Tower or the Golden Gate Bridge. OBL is going after America's symbols of greatness.

If I had a guess, 9/11 is the right date.

I don't know. OBL hasn't had enough time to plot, prepare, and stage anything major for this year. I believe that this September will be a quiet one, at least on the terrorist front that is.

[Capt Dizle]

I read somewhere that the terrorists are going to release their own documentary on the hijackings. Kind of a making of the Twin Towers attack. And they are going to claim that Bin Laden was only informed of it on the 6th of September.

[uh Clem]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
I read somewhere that the terrorists are going to release their own documentary on the hijackings. Kind of a making of the Twin Towers attack. And they are going to claim that Bin Laden was only informed of it on the 6th of September.

Could be. The video from last November (or whenever), allegedly left behind in an al-Qaida house in Afghanistan, had OBL saying that he was told of the attacks five days prior.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

I don't know, does the administration have anything to gain from another terrorist attack?

I hope they hit London...

Hey.

Jon lives nowhere near London and so you spite people like me, who do. Please replace London with Eastbourne.

[Grrr]

I for one am one of those conspiracy theorists.

UberKruX hates me

But in my opinion there is still not enough evidence that OBL or Al Quida conducted the attacks of 11/9. I still don't believe that burning jet fuel (which was gone in a matter of seconds) was responsible for the demolision like precise destruction of the WTC. I also fail to believe that a domestic airliner crashed into the Pentagon; but the remnants thereof are nowhere to be seen.
I wonder why almost all of the steel of the WTC has been recycled as scrap; so that it can no longer be used as evidence in any inquiries. I wonder why the world has not been shown the evidence that was shown to political leaders in the days following 11/9.

I honestly want to know what happened; as I don't wish to take the sugar coated version of events which has been repeated ad nausem on the TV.

[Dauphin]

Grrr, you may never get all the answers.

I've seen loads of sites "debunking" the Pentagon crash, and their evidence is non-existance. Their explanations of why it couldn't have been a plane are full of holes.

Despite the big fat imprint of an aeroplane in the side of the Pentagon, I have seen no proof for the incident.

[Grrr]

Absense of Evidense is not Evidense of Absense.

[Dauphin]

Not fitting the facts is a bit of a downer on a theory though.

[kolpo]

Didn't german investigations pointed out that it was not Al-Qaida but a group supported by Al-Qaida who did it, that group was also heavily motivated by Al-Qaida propaganda and has followed training courses(but not for the attack, the attack wasn't planed when they followed those trainings I think).

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Grrr
I still don't believe that burning jet fuel (which was gone in a matter of seconds) was responsible for the demolision like precise destruction of the WTC.

Although I can't say anything to the rest of your post other than I agree that we the peasants need to be shown the same evidence shown to the politicians...to the excerpt above I can say this: Both of the WTC jetliners, I believe, where setting out on their first flights of the day that day, and both where flying cross-country flights first so they were both ladden with highly volatile fuel for those long flights. Having a tightly confined fire burning in a skyscraper can produce unbelievably high temperatures. Considering the both towers WERE NOT built to modern fire codes (shoddy fire insulation and cited for it several times if I'm not mistaken), those same high temperatures where enough to greatly weaken the support beams, enough to partially melt them. When a support beam is no longer rigid, it can no longer support even its own weight, let alone the weight of a building. Given the unique frame design used in both towers and the spread of the fire through entire floors up and down AND wall to wall, the jetliners were most certainly enough to bring the towers down.