911 Investigation

[dead0man]

For what purpose?

[dead0man]

For what purpose?

Like, for example, expaining how exactly WTC 7 collapsed.

The NIST is already working on it. cite

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[dead0man]

We know what happened.  We all saw it on TV.

[dead0man]

We know what happened.  We all saw it on TV.

The Pentagon was not shown to the public.

But the thousands of people that saw the plane fly into the building, are they all "in on it"?

[dead0man]

Right, because these things are free! 

We should also have them investigate the Moon landings, water dowsing, ghosts, Roswell and Big Foot.  It's all the same BS.

[dead0man]

How the hell can "yes" be winning more than 2:1 when nobody can explain WHY we need to do it again?  One of the most depressing things for me is knowing I'm going to have to live the rest of my life listening to you whack jobs.  Global Warming may or may not happen, the energy crisis may or may not come to pass.  The fresh water issues, terrorism, Yellowstone Caldera and an empty Social Security fund are all potential nightmares for us all, but none of them are as certain as you idiots bringing this sh**t up again and again for the next 60 years.  I shouldn't let it upset me, I shouldn't put that much thought into it (it's obvious you guys didn't), but it makes me so sad to see such willfull ignorance in the face of overwhelming evidence.

There are literally thousands of reasons to dislike and distrust this government and you people latch on to this?

[dead0man]

I didn't say 'al Queda' did it.  That may very well be debateable.  But that's not what this thread is about, nor the part that most 9-11 conspiritards hold as important.

[dead0man]

The best part is, there doesn't have to be any proof at all when you accuse the CIA!  What style do you wear your tin hat opebo?  Over the ear?  Chin strap?

[dead0man]

No, I do not support a second 9/11 Commission.  Despite the shortcomings of the first commission (after-the-fact admissions of CIA destruction of crucial tapes, etc.), enough good has come out of its recommendations that I see no need why taxpayers should have to foot the bill for what will essentially be a duplicate.

I don't think the taxpayers would have to pay for a Senatorial investigation.

Who do you think would pay for it?

[dead0man]

Once again, what do you want to accomplish with another investigation?

[dead0man]

No, it was a weather balloon from Venus!

[dead0man]

Yes - as well as the Kennedy assassination.  I believe the current 9/11 findings, but not Kennedy, but looking at it again after 7 years can't hurt.

Shall we also investigate whether the 1969 Moon landings actually happened?

No, because no one died as a direct result of the moon landing, whereas 3,000 people died as a direct result of 9-11.

That, and it was already thoroughly investigated - by the Soviets.  We were in the middle of the Cold War - do you really think that they didn't have their top analysts investigating our moon landing?

I never said I believed any of those conspiracy theories. Only morons think we didn't land on the moon.

...or that more than one guy shot JFK, or Bush was behind 9-11, or it was pre-planted explosives that brought down buildings that day, or a missle into the Pentagon, or 80mpg cars being kept down by big oil....

[dead0man]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sure you've seen the evidence, a random jackass (me) posting it on a message board one more time isn't going to change your mind.