I sensed for a while, that you are Ex-Mo. It's a shame that you have fallen into the familiar pattern that most Ex-Mos do. You are typical of so many. Who leave for one reason or other. And then spend the rest of thier lives trying to prove that "Steve is right, and the Mormons are wrong".
Just for the record, being a reasonable person and having some doubts remaining is different than the legal definition of "being certain beyond a reasonable doubt." There can still be some doubt due to some unanswered question. If you insist on resolving EVERY last question or issue, then you wind up with guys like OJ getting away with murder.
We've heard from Smitty on his doubts. I'd be happy to hear what reasonble doubts you have left about the official 911 investigation and explanation.
Not a sin, as long as they put the flag box at the top of the article saying when and why the story was corrected. Very common in the trade rags I read. News is the first draft of history, and first drafts sometimes need to be changed.
-- aem sends...
Just for the record, being a reasonable person and having some doubts remaining is different than the legal definition of "being certain beyond a reasonable doubt." There can still be some doubt due to some unanswered question. If you insist on resolving EVERY last question or issue, then you wind up with guys like OJ getting away with murder.
We've heard from Smitty on his doubts. I'd be happy to hear what reasonble doubts you have left about the official 911 investigation and explanation.
reply: That eye witnesses who saw and heard things were not interviewed or in the report. That the scientist from BYU who said he found explosive or thermite residue was not in the report, and essentially soon afterward fired. That the debris was hustled off so fast. That the official position is that the black boxes were never found when there are witnesses who saw them, and bits of human flesh as small as 1/8" were found. That there is still evidence locked away that the public does not have access to. That the attitude is "the question is answered, and there are no more facts to be learned, and we don't want to hear what anyone has to say". That a witness has stated he heard the black box recordings, and the hijackers were in the cockpit before the plane took off. That there were no military planes scrambled.
I could go on and on and on. I can only list these, but not explain them because as a mere citizen, I'm not allowed access to the evidence. Security and all that. All of these things need protecting. From whom? People with cotton swabs?
I think a public appeal should be made by an independent group for people to bring in anything they have that might have residue on it, and for people to bring in all "souvenirs" they picked up that day. I should think that there would even be some dust laying around in gutters and building mortar cracks that could be collected by motivated scientists.
Unless, of course, it's something that we DON'T want to know..........
Steve
Does that include the people who felt underground explosions prior to the planes hitting the building, and those who claim they actually SAW three out of four of the black boxes? Sometimes it doesn't take an expert to testify about what they saw. It just takes an expert to come in and make the jury believe that the witness did NOT see what they saw.
Steve
Not true. Some asbestos fireproofing material was removed, but not that used on the structural steel. This is in keeping with standard abatement procedures that dictate non-removal when there is no danger from airborne particulates.
No asbestos was used in the construction of WTC2.
I still have doubt about JFK. The pristine bullet. Oswald being able to fire off that many rounds that fast and hit his target with a rifle one was lucky if they could hit the ground with. The hustling of the body out of town back to Bethesda. Conflicting/missing autopsy reports. The back of his skull being blown out instead of the front.
I doubt all that will ever see the light of day.
We're all too stupid to comprehend this stuff. All we're good for is to provide the funds for private jets, $25 caviar wedgies, and a lifestyle for the rich and notorious.
Time tells all. I believe I have a pretty good idea what happened. Good enough to satisfy my own answers. No need for me to be a crusader and tell the world. There will be a few brave souls who do that, but then, maybe not, as there is still a lump under the carpet re: JFK, MM, etc.
It's like living in a mob city. Just shut up. Didn't see anything. Don't know anything.
And all that falderal and rumor that there were fat old men sitting in back rooms somewhere drinking brandy and smoking cigars and setting policy for all the world's energy and money. Pure poppycock, I say.
But that's because I want to keep my head, My Lord.
Steve
But that isn't true. Asbestos was the contemporary fireproofing material when the buildings were constructed. Even though it wasn't friable and actually very robust the "asbestos is like radiation" folks made enough noise to have it remediated. One of the interesting hypothetical arguments is that the very robust asbestos fireproofing material that was removed might have remained intact during the collision.
No offense but speak for yourself. Lots of folks are capable of analyzing a situation and validating it based on their education and experience.
I have no issues with how an airliner that weighed ~350,000 pounds and nearly fully loaded with fuel traveling at 650 MPH at impact would be capable of inflicting the damage it did with the resulting structural failure considering the technique used to support each floor deck and the properties of the materials.
Asbestos was used as fireproofing material on floors 1-40 of WTC1 and not at all on WTC2. The ban on asbestos went into effect before construction started on WTC2.
Here's an interesting question: Suppose it was discovered that the "government" WAS responsible? How would that change anything?
We're pretty much convinced, today, that the Battleship Maine blew up in Havana harbor because of a coal dust explosion, and not by Spanish saboteurs. Should we give the Philippines back to Spain? What if we could prove that Roosevelt knew about an impending Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? Should we dig him up an put him on trial? What if DNA could prove the dude selling Slurpies at a Stop-N-Rob in Duluth really IS Elvis? Could we force him to go on tour?
If one plays the "what if?" game, one should also play the "what then?" portion.
"George" wrote
That eliminates 99.9999999999999999999999999999999% of the general public. Does that constitute "most"?
We agree on something, then.
I just think there is more to it than we will ever be told.
Steve
It's just like Usenet. Give it two weeks, everyone forgets about it, and they're off to the next thing. We already know that Washington is just a bunch of stealing lying thugs anyway.
Steve
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.