Originally Posted by Hayek
No Axiom, I am not stunned by your fake reality, I have just been busy of late. Your last post really helped the argument- that is mine of course. That is just the sort of "evidence" that the 9/11 conspiracy and many other such theories use and it is precisely because of that sort of "evidence" that the academic community takes no notice of you.
In your above post, you take several out-of-context quotations and try to twist their meaning into something that you want it to say. About the White House delaying the release of information or covering some of it up- how exactly does that help your theory? I think most people know that the government may not have released every single detail of every report they made- frankly they probably never do. This does not mean its a conspiracy though- it could simply mean the info was sensitive intel that if released into the public would hurt the government's chances at finding who they need to find. The delays on some of the info certainly suggest that. Furthermore, even if there was some crime or fraud created by government and that was the reason they wanted to hide some things- that does NOT mean it was an inside job- if you think so, you are just jumping to conclusions.
As humans we not omniscient and as such we base what we accept as fact on rationalism- often through probability. There are holes in every fact out there for this very reason- we do not know everything and most likely we never will. You can not use this human trait as a basis to push any theory or idea because then you can claim anything is true. That is why we have analysis, experimentation, evidence. Provide some real evidence and we'll talk, otherwise maybe it is time for you to reconsider your own reality.
You queried my post on the NIST commissioners , i give unequivocal statements from their own mouths , but now you say they are out of context twisted to suit my meaning !!??
Is there not enough there to support my claim that nist comissioners had serious doubts about their own findings ??
What do you think Cleland was talking about here :
“It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”. ?
The "cave directed boxcutters" explanation is so full of holes as to be ludicrous.
Why has osama bin laden never been on the fbi's wanted list for 9/11 ?
answer: because they admit there is no evidence linking him to the crime !
How did the cave director get norad to stand down and scramble the jets over the atlantic ?
Study the oklahoma bombing case . You will see that criminal elements within the halls of power have a history of false flag attacks .
Tim Mcveigh himself says it was to discredit the rise of the constitutionalist patriot movement at the time .
Remember that people can be convicted of murder on
circumstantial evidence alone .
A good detective does not buy the first story he hears ( ubl "guilty" within hours) , he looks at all inconsistencies and "coincidences" he considers context/ history (back-story) , who benefits and he follows the money .
Think of "all war is a racket"-S.Butler and the "threat of the military industrial complex" - D.Eisenhower and consider the wealth ,power and motive for such acts .
My position on 9/11 is that the official story is so full of holes ,inconsistencies and absurdities , that any clear thinking person once availed of a more full spectrum of the information would conclude that the true real story of 9/11 is significantly different to that of the official fairytale.
on your "academic community taking no notice of" us , you obviously are not aware of
Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice
Why also did you gloss over the list of credible high ranking people who question the official 9/11 story i posted earlier ?
Are These 9/11 Whistleblowers Credible?