Reply #59: How about proving your theories....

[Feron]

So far I have seen zero evidence for the 9/11 theories presented thus far. All I have gotten is distortions and speculations accompained by a cleverly edited video. A coincidence does not automatically translate into conspiracy.

If you make extraordinary claims, then be prepared to present extraordinary evidence. In other words, if you want the American public to believe the theories then present your Ellsbergs/Mark Felts in goverment and present evidence that the buildings were not brought down by dislodged fire proofing, structural damage, and fire.

Face it, every single 9/11 "truth" allegation has been debunked several times. And the most science I've seen from the CT movement is a man lighting a rabbit hutch on fire. They ARE like the Creationists because instead of testing a theory they twist the facts in order to fit it.

Here are three sites that disprove your theories for example:

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html
http://wtc.nist.gov /
http://www.911myths.com

Of course anyone that does debunk 9/11 theories is dismissed as being a goverment shill, disinfo agent ,actively complicit in the plot (take the Naudets for example), or condescendenly looked upon as a person needing to be "enlightened", "woken up" (which is just as bad as a Christian thinking I need to be "saved"), etc.. According to a CT, it is impossible to question goverment and believe the official story. Which of course is rubbish. I want facts, not faith.

Sometimes a cigar is simply a cigar.

Bush has already done enough to merit criticism and removal. You don't need to make shit up. And he didn't need 9/11 to start another war in Iraq. Apparently many have forgotten the propaganda that got us into Operation Desert Storm. No terror attack necessary.

Is the Bush administration:

Incompetent? Yes
Stonewalling on releasing information? Yes
Covering their ass? Yes
Shortsighted in their foreign policy? Yes

However that in itself is not proof that the administration had anything to do with the attacks. Spinning the aftermath into a temporary advantage is also not proof of complicity.

Furthermore the CIA's presence in WTC7 does not prove conspiracy. They already have things like burn bags for secret document disposal. Secret documents raining down on Manhattan is not a good way to keep them secret.

It's exactly like the cranks during Clinton's presidency that thought that the UN was going to take over the country: black helicopters, the backs of road signs barcoded so that the UN troops could navigate, taking away all the guns, dissenters herded into camps, etc.

Or how about Mena Arkansas?? Clinton body count...it goes on and on.

Even if there were an independent investigation it wouldn't be enough to satisfy the conspiracy theorists. There will always be something "wrong". While there are still questions, I don't think that they merit another investigation at this time.

I do think that if the Democrats retake Congress then pressure can be applied to open up some of those sealed records. And that's a good thing.