Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The buildings had asemetric damage to them, there is no reason they should have fallen straight down at nearly freefall speed.
The Bush admin lied us into war. Why would anyone be surprized that they likely lied to us about what really happened on 911.
A new investigation would settle the questions of those who find the official story lacking.
If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all.
I do believe the 9/11 Commission Report. No major inaccuracy has EVER been brought forward. Until one is brought forward, there is no reason to re-open the investigation.
As for your "If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all", we had a complete, bi-partisan, thorough investigation into the attacks involving 12 public hearings, over 1,000 hours of interviews, and an examination of 2.5 million documents and you still have crackpots claiming there were command bunkers in WTC7, phone calls were faked, FDNY firefighters were complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers, and cruise missiles were used.
When a new investigation arrives at the same conclusions as the old one, what makes you think that these nutjobs will be satisfied with the findings? What, because they will have 14 public hearings, 1,500 hours of interviews?
You have to understand that truthers are, by and large, attention whores; nothing more and nothing less.
The buildings had asemetric damage to them, there is no reason they should have fallen straight down at nearly freefall speed.
asymmetrical damage (notice the spelling) does not change the laws of physics. they fell in the direction gravity pulled them.
if you consider it a lie why are you limiting it only to the bush administration? why not include the clinton administration, congress, foreign governments, the media, etc?The Bush admin lied us into war. Why would anyone be surprized that they likely lied to us about what really happened on 911.
no it wont because a new investigation will come to the same conclusions the past investigations have. 19 muslim hijackers flew planes into buildings and they collapsed. you then wont accept the new investigation and call for another investigation until you get the answer you want (which will never come from any true investigation).A new investigation would settle the questions of those who find the official story lacking.
If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all.
reinvestigate all you want. nobody is stopping you. just dont waste my money doing it.
The buildings had asemetric damage to them, there is no reason they should have fallen straight down at nearly freefall speed.
The Bush admin lied us into war. Why would anyone be surprized that they likely lied to us about what really happened on 911.
A new investigation would settle the questions of those who find the official story lacking.
If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all.
I do believe the 9/11 Commission Report. No major inaccuracy has EVER been brought forward. Until one is brought forward, there is no reason to re-open the investigation.
As for your "If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all", we had a complete, bi-partisan, thorough investigation into the attacks involving 12 public hearings, over 1,000 hours of interviews, and an examination of 2.5 million documents and you still have crackpots claiming there were command bunkers in WTC7, phone calls were faked, FDNY firefighters were complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers, and cruise missiles were used.
When a new investigation arrives at the same conclusions as the old one, what makes you think that these nutjobs will be satisfied with the findings? What, because they will have 14 public hearings, 1,500 hours of interviews?
You have to understand that truthers are, by and large, attention whores; nothing more and nothing less.
If it is such a complete investigation can you link for us:
Bush's testimony
Cheney's testimony
Mineta's testimony
Solid evidence proving any phone calls from flight 77 were made post 8:56 am.
Evidence flight 77 was tracked for its entire flight on that day.
WTC 7.
How's that for a start?
I do believe the 9/11 Commission Report. No major inaccuracy has EVER been brought forward. Until one is brought forward, there is no reason to re-open the investigation.
As for your "If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all", we had a complete, bi-partisan, thorough investigation into the attacks involving 12 public hearings, over 1,000 hours of interviews, and an examination of 2.5 million documents and you still have crackpots claiming there were command bunkers in WTC7, phone calls were faked, FDNY firefighters were complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers, and cruise missiles were used.
When a new investigation arrives at the same conclusions as the old one, what makes you think that these nutjobs will be satisfied with the findings? What, because they will have 14 public hearings, 1,500 hours of interviews?
You have to understand that truthers are, by and large, attention whores; nothing more and nothing less.
If it is such a complete investigation can you link for us:
Bush's testimony
Cheney's testimony
Mineta's testimony
Solid evidence proving any phone calls from flight 77 were made post 8:56 am.
Evidence flight 77 was tracked for its entire flight on that day.
WTC 7.
How's that for a start?
is this a new "It doesnt exist if there isnt an internet link to it" theory of physics?
I do believe the 9/11 Commission Report. No major inaccuracy has EVER been brought forward. Until one is brought forward, there is no reason to re-open the investigation.
As for your "If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all", we had a complete, bi-partisan, thorough investigation into the attacks involving 12 public hearings, over 1,000 hours of interviews, and an examination of 2.5 million documents and you still have crackpots claiming there were command bunkers in WTC7, phone calls were faked, FDNY firefighters were complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers, and cruise missiles were used.
When a new investigation arrives at the same conclusions as the old one, what makes you think that these nutjobs will be satisfied with the findings? What, because they will have 14 public hearings, 1,500 hours of interviews?
You have to understand that truthers are, by and large, attention whores; nothing more and nothing less.
If it is such a complete investigation can you link for us:
Bush's testimony
Cheney's testimony
Mineta's testimony
Solid evidence proving any phone calls from flight 77 were made post 8:56 am.
Evidence flight 77 was tracked for its entire flight on that day.
WTC 7.
How's that for a start?
is this a new "It doesnt exist if there isnt an internet link to it" theory of physics?
If it is such a complete investigation can you link for us:
Bush's testimony
Cheney's testimony
Mineta's testimony
Solid evidence proving any phone calls from flight 77 were made post 8:56 am.
Evidence flight 77 was tracked for its entire flight on that day.
WTC 7.
How's that for a start?
is this a new "It doesnt exist if there isnt an internet link to it" theory of physics?
No. This is called accountability. Something OCTAs are truly allergic to. It was claimed the 9E CR is a full and complete investigation. My response proved it is obviously an incomplete Report.
The buildings had asemetric damage to them, there is no reason they should have fallen straight down at nearly freefall speed.
The Bush admin lied us into war. Why would anyone be surprized that they likely lied to us about what really happened on 911.
A new investigation would settle the questions of those who find the official story lacking.
If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all.
I do believe the 9/11 Commission Report. No major inaccuracy has EVER been brought forward. Until one is brought forward, there is no reason to re-open the investigation.
As for your "If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all", we had a complete, bi-partisan, thorough investigation into the attacks involving 12 public hearings, over 1,000 hours of interviews, and an examination of 2.5 million documents and you still have crackpots claiming there were command bunkers in WTC7, phone calls were faked, FDNY firefighters were complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers, and cruise missiles were used.
When a new investigation arrives at the same conclusions as the old one, what makes you think that these nutjobs will be satisfied with the findings? What, because they will have 14 public hearings, 1,500 hours of interviews?
You have to understand that truthers are, by and large, attention whores; nothing more and nothing less.
If it is such a complete investigation can you link for us:
Bush's testimony
Cheney's testimony
Mineta's testimony
Solid evidence proving any phone calls from flight 77 were made post 8:56 am.
Evidence flight 77 was tracked for its entire flight on that day.
WTC 7.
How's that for a start?
is this a new "It doesnt exist if there isnt an internet link to it" theory of physics?
No. This is called accountability. Something OCTAs are truly allergic to. It was claimed the 9E CR is a full and complete investigation. My response proved it is obviously an incomplete Report.
who claimed it was a "full and complete investigation" because i know i didnt. it didnt inculde WTC7, for example, because WTC7 was not attacked.
The buildings had asemetric damage to them, there is no reason they should have fallen straight down at nearly freefall speed.
The Bush admin lied us into war. Why would anyone be surprized that they likely lied to us about what really happened on 911.
A new investigation would settle the questions of those who find the official story lacking.
If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all.
I do believe the 9/11 Commission Report. No major inaccuracy has EVER been brought forward. Until one is brought forward, there is no reason to re-open the investigation.
As for your "If you believe the official story you should welcome a reinvestigation because you know it would settle the issue once and for all", we had a complete, bi-partisan, thorough investigation into the attacks involving 12 public hearings, over 1,000 hours of interviews, and an examination of 2.5 million documents and you still have crackpots claiming there were command bunkers in WTC7, phone calls were faked, FDNY firefighters were complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers, and cruise missiles were used.
When a new investigation arrives at the same conclusions as the old one, what makes you think that these nutjobs will be satisfied with the findings? What, because they will have 14 public hearings, 1,500 hours of interviews?
You have to understand that truthers are, by and large, attention whores; nothing more and nothing less.
If it is such a complete investigation can you link for us:
Bush's testimony
Cheney's testimony
Mineta's testimony
Solid evidence proving any phone calls from flight 77 were made post 8:56 am.
Evidence flight 77 was tracked for its entire flight on that day.
WTC 7.
How's that for a start?
Curvelight,
The preface in the report clearly says "This final report is only a SUMMARY of what we have done, citing only a FRACTION of the sources we have consulted."
The CR report to me was done in order to answer questions as to WHY the attacks occurred, how they occurred, and how to improve the process going forward.
I fail to see why the CR would include how and why WTC7 or the Twin Towers collapsed when NIST has already those studies.
To answer these questions, the Congress and the President created the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Public Law 107-306, November 27, 2002).
Our mandate was sweeping. The law directed us to investigate "facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001," including those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplomacy, immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the Commission.
In pursuing our mandate, we have reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries
and WTC4, 5 and 6 were also destroyedCurvelight,
The preface in the report clearly says "This final report is only a SUMMARY of what we have done, citing only a FRACTION of the sources we have consulted."
The CR report to me was done in order to answer questions as to WHY the attacks occurred, how they occurred, and how to improve the process going forward.
I fail to see why the CR would include how and why WTC7 or the Twin Towers collapsed when NIST has already those studies.
From the report itself:
To answer these questions, the Congress and the President created the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Public Law 107-306, November 27, 2002).
Our mandate was sweeping. The law directed us to investigate "facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001," including those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplomacy, immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the Commission.
In pursuing our mandate, we have reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries
That passage above was in the preface; one would assume that if a debate was to be held on the subject, one would have read the report. Its interesting that some expect WTC7 to be in the report when it clearly states "the terrorist attacks of September 11.". Since it wasn't attacked; gee whiz; there is nothing shocking about it not being in the report.
I'll also point out that the only reason WTC7 is brought up at all stems only from bizarre fantasies truthers have about it. WTC3 was destroyed as well. What...no fantasies about it? Gee, maybe they destroyed all the towers to get someone staying at the Marriott (WTC3)? After 8 years, all they have--and all they will ever have--are their childlike fantasies about it; how sad.
