nokilt1 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

wikipedia ISI read all

nokilt1 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

add warren commission,bluebook...what other shady commission investigations can you think of? i cant think of one that i've found believable

nokilt1 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

no doubt WTC got bombed in '93 just like oklahoma city building was bombed in 1985, ahead of the big strike, just like WTC buildings you make a good point sdkee... MUST be govt involvement for both because that blows korresh reason for ok. city outa the water kinda gotta be our govt because it happened in our country italian govt admitted bombing its own buildings awhile back then you got 7/7,8/29,bali,spanish trains(also govt admitted playing part)

RobDegraves (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Wakeymedia2. 1. I have already stated that I am not a demolition expert. I base myself on a number of independent reports, such as the one published by SciAm etc. Are you a demolition expert? 2. A bunch of insults, such as constitutes 90% of your posts so far are hardly convincing either. It just makes you look childish. 3. I have already explained why I don't believe that your free fall objection means anything. You have not responded to that either other than with ad hominen comments.

sdkee (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

> It is not logical to assume that the gvt would both place explosives in the towers and arrange to have planes rammed into it. The first question that comes to mind is "which government?". The next is "why not?". Whoever set this up needed apparent cause (plane hitting) and emotional result (buildings fall, people die). Without both they don't get what they want (be they a government or genuine terrorists). Remember we already had a WTC bomb with little sustained public interest.

Wakeymedia2 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

RobDegraves - The 9/11 Commission Report does not stand up to scrutiny and there are more holes in it than a string vest. I would have thought that the "logical" conclusion is obvious. Obviously for some people it is not. I would say in all seriousness that if you can be made to believe the Bush administration's account of these events then you could also be made to believe three more things; namely - that 2+2=5, that black is white and that the Moon is made of cheese; Gorgonzola specifically.

Wakeymedia2 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

RobDegraves - You have "actual knowledge"? Great! You haven't shared even an iota of your "actual knowledge" with anyone yet but I would be extremely interested to hear it. So - fire away. I am, and I'm sure many others are, eager to read and to learn from your "actual knowledge". I await with interest. Oh, by the way RobDegraves, you should see the entirety of a documentary posted here on Wakeymedia2 entitled "Zero : An Investigation Into 9/11". That means actually watch the whole thing ;)

RobDegraves (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Last bit for now. It is not logical to assume that the gvt would both place explosives in the towers and arrange to have planes rammed into it. They would run a much greater risk of being discovered for a very minor increase in the resulting disaster. Having planes slam into the WTC would have been more than enough to produce the fear and loathing it intended on cashing as political potential for invasion. This conspiracy theory is simply a red herring that distracts from the real issue.

brown55061 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Who says the federal govt was in charge? That's what gets me, you silly folks still think the president runs this country lol. He cant pee w/out wetting the front of his pants. Has everyone forgotten the gulf of tonkin? They have staged attacks in the past to get into wars. You are slandering the poster when any moron can do this math. The towers are a little foggier but WTC7 was blatant. Isn't it convenient all the incriminating files from Enron and Worldcom are gone now?

RobDegraves (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

To temper my earlier post...I do not believe that the WTC collapse was a controlled demolition. The evidence against it is great and to have carried out something like that would have been both difficult and unnecessary. What people seem to miss is that the gvt did not need to create 9/11. It was simply ready to cash in on any terrorist event and to obfuscate it's origin so as to point the blame at Iraq. None of the hijackers were Iraqi.. but Iraq was blamed. There is your conspiracy.