I'd like to see evidence of a 9/11 cover-up. Not "Isn't this weird and doesn't it seem like the actions of people who WOULD do a 9/11 conspiracy?" Your argument that conspiracies are possible and have happened before is a straw man. I've never said conspiracies are impossible. Wrong again. I never said I know what happened. I said that I've yet to see any credible evidence of a government conspiracy to mastermind the 9/11 attacks. It's possible that there was a government conspiracy. I'm just unwilling to believe it without evidence.
I have no idea. That still qualifies under "Isn't this weird?" rather than direct evidence of the government actually taking a role in the attacks. If you want to show that Person A committed a murder, you show evidence that the victim was killed by that person. Saying, "Person B may not have done it, anyway the police don't seem to care about Person B to me, besides Person A took a shower that night, which is exactly what a murderer would do! Please explain that." How about showing evidence that Person A did it, rather that providing reasons why it's not impossible for Person A to have done it?
Wait a minute. You are saying that the government has proven that Osama commited 9/11 aren't you? If so why wouldn't the FBI list that amongst his crimes like they do with the USS Cole which isn't even proven but is strongly suspected... Seriously please explain this. It's not weird man our top investigative agency isn't listing it as a crime they want him in connection with! Let me give you a quote: he goes on to explain how they tracked the suspects. It seems pretty amazing to me that they wouldn't put it on Osama's wanted for crimes. I mean isn't this the DEFINITIVE thing they want him for? Don't they have evidence for it? And what about this?: [video=youtube;VPZnjBWW3lg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPZnjBWW3lg"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPZnjBWW3lg[/video] Look when the FBI and the VP both can't pin it on Bin Laden that doesn't leave you with many folks in the government claiming that OBL definitely did 9/11. Another investigation is warranted. Period.
Why don't you take all the time and effort you're using to try and convince us of a conspiracy and open up your own investigation!
Um so you don't think OBL did it and or you don't know who did it? And you also don't want another investigation is that right? Wow that leaves me speechless!
Right because I really have Subpoena power. I'm sure I can get Cheney, Bush, Mueller and Tenet under oath for the first time (they were never under oath in the first "investigation").
I don't have to suspend my disbelief in the slightest to believe the government. I also don't think that we should get testimony from one additional person, EVER, related to this. I'm quite convinced that terrorists hijacked airplanes and flew them into buildings, and I'm also quite sure that no matter how much investigation is done some people will never believe that was the case because they are inclined to believe in conspiracies. Ed O.
Your logic leaves a lot to be desired. Not believing that it has been proven that Al Qaeda did it does not imply: 1. That I don't believe Al Qaeda did it 1. That I have no opinion on who did it [I believe Al Qaeda did it and I think evidence has been provided; proof is a different and higher standard] 3. That the US government is likely to have done it I want another investigation if there's good evidence that someone other than Al Qaeda did it. So far, that hasn't been provided. The FBI not listing the 9/11 attacks as a crime that Al Qaeda or bin Laden are wanted for is curious, but not evidence that someone else did it. As to why the FBI doesn't, it would be an interesting to ask them.
There's more to it than F = M x A. There's the vertical supports which were damaged and gave way dropping the top 20 or so floors toward the earth. Then there's the horizontal supports that hold up each floor. Those were certainly not capable of supporting 20 floors worth of debris in the interior of the building. If you strategically put 10 ton weights on the top floor, scattered about through the office space, the building would have collapsed the same way. That floor would have fallen to the one below. The floor below would have had all the weight it normally had (desks, walls, water coolers, etc.) plus the weight of that stuff from the floor above. Ih this case, it was 20 floors worth of weight. tlongII spelled it out perfectly:
BTW, the domino effect is pretty obvious using F = MA "A" being 9.8m/sec/sec of gravity. "M" being 45,000 tons (10 floors) plus an additional 4,500 tons (1 floor) for each floor below as it gave way. "F" was thus ever increasing, each floor that got pancaked.
You don't think it should be proven then? I mean we went to war once arguably twice over this event. I have NOT said that the government did it. I don't know what happened that day. If after 7 years the government hasn't proven their case does that mean we just go ho hum? I had relatives go to war in a variety of wars including Vietnam. I have since found out that Vietnam was started by an event now known to be concocted as a pre-text to go to war in Vietnam: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident My Uncle has severe PTSD from Vietnam, lost hearing in his ear and is not the same man who left convinced the Vietnamese attacked us in an act of Aggression. 40 years later we now know it was a lie. I hope you feel that Vietnam was a mistake as it clearly was on so many levels. I'm convinced that we need to investigate 9/11 lest we be left with the legacy of another military invasion based on lies. In the case of 9/11 I'm also worried we are allowing the people who failed to prevent the attack to not be punished (Mueller, Tennet, heads of airforce and possibly NSA who all should have lost their jobs but most got more money and honors). Both of my brothers wanted to sign up to go fight in Afghanistan and it took extensive talking to them by a variety of people to get them not to go. For years we have seen broken men return, if they returned at all from Afghanistan and Iraq. It matters quite alot whether or not this has been proven or not. If we are unable to prove that it was Hijackers alone that pierced our defenses then we have an awful lot of blood on our hands. I thank god all the time that my brothers didn't go there and pray that our troops come home, which as of yet has not happened. This isn't something you can just say happened years ago this is something that we live with the consequences daily. I feel proof is a burden REQUIRED before 1,000's upon 1,000's of american men and women die not to mention the 100's of thousands of Iraqi and Afghani civillians who die. I'm all for millitary action in certain cases, Rwanda, Sudan and possibly even Pakistan or North Korea. We know both of them have WMD's one of them is threatening to pre-emptively Nuke us. That is a far cry from an unproven conspiracy theory of guys with Box cutters!
I'm not sure whether it can be proven and how much money should be devoted to it. Criminal proceedings don't require proof either, because absolute proof is rarely possible. It's not like I'm philosophically opposed to an investigation. I simply want reasonable evidence that one is warranted. No one seems capable of producing that, so I'm not currently in favour of one.
Judging by how the private sector trivially debunks each point in these conspiracy theories, it'd be a massive waste of govt. money to pursue anything at this time. I agree that if there were some reasonable evidence not considered to date, it'd be worth looking at.
Lots of eyewitness testimony about WTC 7 http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires "Every floor was on fire"
