Quote:
|
I just did that. The immediate and illegal removal of crime scene evidence is a blatant and obvious cover up. Bush et al tried to claim there were no pre-9/11 warnings, but now we know there were numerous warnings. For an entire year Bush stonewalled an investigation of one of the most horrendous crimes in history--why? Why did he refuse to testify under oath for the 9/11 Commission? You demand unbiased proof from me, but how much of your own conclusion was based on unbiased sources?
|
The provided proof was unbiased? Really? You cannot prove that anything was taken from the scene of the towers. Besides, if any of the WTC had been brought down with demolitions, where is the proof, not hear-say? Even some actual witness that testifies that they saw at least one piece of the demolitions that would have been needed to collapse removed from the site. With demolitions, do you think it would even be possible to pick up every piece of the required demolitions, even for a building of 7's size, without someone, let alone lots of people not noticing?
Quote:
|
Those tapes, if real, are not proof of the official conspiracy theory. As I mentioned before, the involvement of AQ isn't proof they were able to cause the complete destruction of 3 skyscrapers, or as amateur pilots, perform incredible maneuvers at the Pentagon.
|
Why wouldn't the tapes be real? And if OBL were to say that his group really didn't do it, that it was a conspiracy by or even with the Bush Admin, he would be able to further his jihad even more and get more recruits and villify the US all in one blow. Because if his terrorist organization didn't do it or were in league with anyone from the US government to do it, then Bush and the US government would look totally horrendous to the world. Bush and/or anyone involved could be not only removed from office, but also face charges.
Even if OBL contended to just not being responsible for the Pentagon, he could still land a huge blow to Bush and America. I just don't see this as likely.
Quote:
|
For a straight-down, near free-all speed collapse, the supports must all fail simultaneously. Ask any control demolition expert.
|
Yet, almost every, if not all, building demolitions that I have seen on TV come down one side at a time. It just seems like a really big stretch, especially when there are demolition experts who say that building 7 could have come down due to the debris and fire. You have your experts, I have mine.
Quote:
|
Wait...isn't that what you are doing?
|
No, I am arguing which is the more logical scenario. I will freely admit that it is possible that there is some huge conspiracy involving people in our government (whether only a few people or a whole lot of people) that made all the events of 9/11 occur. I believe, however, that the more logical possibility is the official commission's report on how things happened and that the entire thing was AQ's fault.
Our government does do bad things, but the timing on this one would just be too good for me to be able to buy a conspiracy theory. Our government just isn't that good at not getting caught, and for this to be conspiracy involving our government, there would be a lot of convincing evidence for people to find, not just experts whose opinions are not matching other experts, hearsay, and theories that don't even match each other half the time. You might get me to believe you if you could show me proof that isn't vague at best with disputed experts.