| Viewing Single Post From: Double standards | |
|---|---|
| look-up | Jul 7 2008, 10:35 AM |
|
Welcome!
No, it is offered as a reason for you to doubt what you have been told about the bulidings. It is not offered as proof. It is a qualifying statement, nothing else.
Because the physical evidence allows for only one possibility, that explosives were used. It matters not that this had never been done before. Think of the scale. It is so large that it is hard to fathom, right? 10-50 story building demolitions are more common, in fact fairly routine. A method is known. That means, studying the method alone and duplicating it works for many of the buildings. If one of these companies, or a military specialist unit were contracted to come up with a plan to demolish a 110 story building, you'd only have to imagine it first. These planners wouldn't even need to know that this was a real thing. Just an excersize. "How would you do it, if you had to do it?" Ever seen "Shooter"? All this person or team would need to do is have the blueprints, and take the variables which are used in classic demolitions and tweak them. I am not an expert on explosives, but say a quantity of X and a destructive force of Y are needed to do a classic demolition... Then what do you do for a 110 story building? You'd take X and Y and multiply several times over. If the person in charge of the operation itself were uneasy about hte resulting model, they could just multiply it again and again. We do not know how many devices were used. WE only know THAT they were used. If you support further investigation into this matter, I"m sure we can eventually get someone to spill the beans, but the public will have to demand a new investigation first. Are you in?
Yes, in relatively small portion of the buildings. The fires died down in the first 10-20 min, and we supposedly have steel getting weaker and weaker up until the point of collapse. The steel should have been cooling shortly after the first large fires died down from consuming most of the available fuel.
Because there is no ongoing investigation about 9/11. There is no reason NOT to realease them. Think about it. Large numbers of people doubt the gov's version of 9/11. Okay, so if you wanted to pacify them, you'd come up with a video, right? But they WON'T, even when the courts tell them to via FOIA requests. Besides, it is not valid to envoke trust in government as a reason for trust in government. "They have other secrets, so why can't they have this one too?"
Read it. See if it answers ANY of the questions we raise in these films on on these forums. All it does is create the landscape of circumstances that they believe led to 9/11. For instance, they focus heavily on the hijackers. Okay, well no one these days really thinks that al-qaeda had no role in 9/11, instead we understand that this is how governments work, especially western governments. They go in with agencies like the CIA, and learn how to control terror groups by getting them to work with them to overthrow governments which the US does not like. See Iran, Venezuela, Afghanistan, and many others. Then they come in later and say, "Hey you guys want to work with us again?" sometimes they don't wish to work with the CIA again. In the case of the Hijackers, if you study where they came from, who they've been in contact with, who they received money from, who recruited them etc... it becomes very obvious that they are only being steered by another force, that is leading them to 9/11. 9/11 is not totally 100% inside job. Yet, the best catch-phrase for when we want to shout out something in a group or put something on a bumper-sticker is "9/11 was an inside job" because it is short and right to the point, although not 100% accurate. Truth is, as you'll learn if you actually care to, is that the CIA is not a part of the USA anylonger, as it does not obey the constitution and the CONSTITUTION is what makes a thing part of the USA. They operate more or less without oversight, and many projects have no oversight whatsoever, especially since BUSH jr. Bush Sr. was CIA director. The ties run deep. The Bush family is very close to the Bin Laden family too. How can there be so many weird little coincidences and yet no one sees anything strange? Well, we do, and we aren't going to shut up about it. I hope you won't either. peace, |
 |
|
| Double standards · Skeptics | |
5:51 AM Dec 3
