The 9/11 Controversy is heating up again, N.I.S.T. releases bogus findings about building 7 ?

Question

Once again we are asked to eat crow about 'Magical" and "Mystifying" architectural failures..

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/08/219709.php

and then this...

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport

is it possible to build up enough steam to get another Investigation, an independent investigation, free from DOD and Corporate influence ?

Answer 1

When you have an administration that can proclaim "Mission Accomplished", "the economy is sound", "the rich need tax cuts", "no talking with terrorist nations" (and talk with them a month later), and allow heinous torture for interrogation, what should we expect?

Answer 2

I saw that and completely disregarded it. the falling debree wouldnt have cause the whole building to fall unless the entire tower had fallen on the building. and either way........didnt the top of the tower fall off to the other side?

Answer 3

Well, I do have a copy of the 9-11 commission report.  However, as I have a few other things that are further up on my reading list I can't comment on it.  

Answer 4

The entire WTC complex was built on landfill, does that sound stable to you?  Add in fires and building collapses and do you really think ANY building in the middle of shaky unstable ground would withstand being on fire for 8 hours and not collapse?

PEOPLE?  I am a 9/11 survivor and I can tell you with certainty that terrorists attacked the US on 9/11 and flew planes into buildings killing thousands of people.  Our goverment is not trying to cover anything up.  

Answer 5

In Response to your Edits:  It WAS planned.  The terrorists didn't get in a plane that day and say, hmm, where to?  

Answer 6

Only a jew dis-info agent could believe this was a random act of fire:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...

Answer 7

You would deem everything bogus if it fell short of blaming the Bush administration for 9/11.  Any document describing what happened to the buildings that doesn't conclude they were intentionally brought down by explosives is "wrong" in your opinion.

If they really conspired to just take them down, why not just do it?  Split second, no one would question it, or perhaps some would.  But why the intricacy with hijacked airliners?

Answer 8

It is absolutely amazing that I hear talk radio hosts and others say "Dr.  Shyam Sunder said it was the first steel-framed building to collapse from fire alone in history...that is the truth and nothing but."  

Those who believe the official story are so quick to believe anyone who is an "Official" just because they have a professional name badge affixed to them.  Like the NIST scientists are gods or something.

Without looking at the 77 page report, these fools adamantly defend it despite of the swiss-cheese like content.

Besides...how credible can an investigation be when the crime scene was illegally wiped clean in record timing?

Answer 9

A small child could not come up with more obvious lies than N.I.S.T.

Answer 10

Okay, let's think about this a minute.

Let's assume that there was something flaky about the collapse of Building 7.  If the entire thing was a scheme of the government, why was Building 7 important? Couldn't their point have been made just as well by only the twin towers? I think it could have, there was no reason to care one way or the other about building 7.  

Who might have benefited from the destruction of building 7? The guy that held the 99 year lease on the property?  Are we talking about the same guy that's been paying his ground rent for 7 years now, with no income from the property to show for it? Is he better off?  Wouldn't a guy that was in the position to pre-plan the demolition be smart enough and powerful enough to have SOMETHING rebuilt by now?  And anyway, wouldn't he have been able to package the demo of Bldg 7 into the plan to redevelop the site if that were the whole idea?  There was no need for him to make that look like part of the incident, regardless of whether the planes were a plot or not.

Or is he just a pathetic victim of his own scheme?

Sorry, but even assuming an insider scheme to bring down the twin towers, there's nothing added by the loss of Building 7, not for the government, not for the guy that holds the lease.  

There's no logical reason for it to have been part of the same plan, regardless of whose plan it was to begin with.  

Answer 11

You mean that Clinton and the Democrats planned and executed 9/11? We should look into that...

Couldn't be Bush, after all, you whacko libs keep saying how stupid and ignorant he is and Clinton let his pal Osama go a half dozen times. Sounds like a HUGE liberal conspiracy that backfired...hmmmmm...

Answer 12

haven't you gotten any new toys with which you can play....?