Posted on 02/15/2016 5:36:10 PM PST by jessduntno
Given their small numbers, occasional libertarian pandering to the “inside job†morons yields no theoretical benefit greater than a few additional comments on a YouTube video.
Worse, they’ve actually made intelligent discussion more difficult. Questions about the government’s lack of readiness for 9/11, for example, now carry the unmistakable whiff of fringe kookiness.
So do demands for basic government transparency, like calling for more of the 9/11 Commission report to be declassified. Mention this idea and some people will move away before you start ranting about the moon landing being fake.
That’s too bad, because some accountability has been lost in the inside job nonsense. Before we gave the federal government new powers in the aftermath of the attacks, it would have been helpful to know how many of their existing powers weren’t used properly.
We do know a bit about dots that weren’t connected, threats that might not have been taken seriously enough, visa applications that should have been rejected. But undoubtedly there is more.
Far from exposing the truth, the 9/11 truthers’ nuttiness has made political and bureaucratic ass-covering easier. By making the issue government malevolence, they distracted from an important discussion of government competence.
Bwahahahahahaha. So you have no proof of any conspiracy that involved a massive cover up, right?
Your findings do not agree with the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Structural Engineering Institute, who both stated that building 7 collapsed due to the uncontrolled fires caused by failure in the sprinkler system. The fire plus the damage it took from the debris from the other two towers caused a load bearing failure. The collapse of the first tower was like an explosion of massive force, and a lot of that force was directed in the direction of building 7. Since the shear force on any building is directly proportional to its lateral surface area in the direction of the force applied, the shear force must have greatly exceeded any thing that the building was designed to handle. Building 7 was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Based on its investigation, NIST reiterated several recommendations it had made in its earlier report on the collapse of the Twin Towers, and urged immediate action on a further recommendation: that fire resistance should be evaluated under the assumption that sprinklers are unavailable; and that the effects of thermal expansion on floor support systems be considered. Current building codes were drawn to prevent loss of life rather than building collapse. I was not the least surprised that those buildings were destroyed on 9/11.
We were told it was a lone nut. Then the government itself is involved in every screwy aspect of the aftermath. Robert Kennedy, same crap, lone nut, then the LAPD destroys all of the evidence, once again, after the fact screwy crap by those in charge. There are other examples of government screwy handling after the fact of what is always presented as a simple occurrence. They have abused the trust factor into non-existence for many of us. Keep your eyes closed and accept their versions of everything. It's what they want you to do.
“I just gave proof. JFK. We were told it was a lone nut.”
When did the truth come out? Who testified? Who were the ringleaders and when was trial? I missed all that.
Conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen and most are either ridiculous or just plain impossible. But, every once in a while we come to find out that the ridiculously impossible is actually true.
1985 Miami, Florida. Spotlight Magazine versus E Howard Hunt. Facts, testimony, evidence. ZERO media coverage.
“Why?”
It was damaged by the fall of the towers and a fire.
You can read up on this.
The only thing more heinous than a Truther is a Newther
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.