Hillary Clinton Threatens to Destroy Iran

[Derail]

And Yohan on the issue of the Twin Towers seriously... it has been looked into in ridiculous depth. The verdict from the relevant experts including Scientific American, Popular Mechanics and a whole host of other scientific and engineering speciality groups was that the towers collapsed due to being hit by planes not by bombs. Ignoring a further host of subsequent inquiries which agreed with the obvious cause of collapse... the 3 year $24 million dollar investigation conducted by National Institute of Standards and Technology arrived at the same conclusions.

As for all the stuff about America knowing in advance and all that well that's a different kettle of fish but that too has been the subject of numerous high profile inquiries and the picture created is not the popular conspiracy one of a highly organised secret government plot. The image is of poorly handled reports, bad miscommunication and general all around incompetence.

 

[XtremeU520]

Why do some of you keep insisting this is what he is saying??? He has repeatedly stated that 9-11 was NOT why we invaded Iraq. Sheesh. And you all want to complain about his reading comprehension???




We (as in the multi-national forces here in Afghanistan) did not and have not "decimated" Afghanistan. If anything the country's infrastructure is now stronger than it has been in 30 years and only improving.




Ckava answered this wonderfully. Plenty of people/organizations have looked at this. No point in even arguing it anymore.



You can not roll into a country and NOT take the centers of power. Baghdad had to be taken, the reigning government needed to be controlled, and the military strength lessened before you can go on a "treasure hunt". If the military had gone straight to the suspected sites in the West, or anywhere else without first seizing some type of control, it makes it really hard to dig and nose around when the enemy is still able to attack in full strength.

Tactics and strategy. Some work, some don't. Some of us understand why things are done a certain way; and some, made apparent by your post, do not.


Ckava, great posts. I appreciate when someone with a differing opinion can actually have a civil and intelligent discussion.

 

[jefs]

To reiterate there is a plausible explanation and there is a consensus amongst the major scientific and engineering organisations and the various multi million dollar inquiries conducted into the collapse. As to why the building was on fire... are you serious? There's no plausible explanation? Say like a aircraft carrier full of fuel exploding through it?

Here's just some relevant material that might be worth looking into:

Some FAQ's from the website also has the full report of the NIST which as previously mentioned cost $24 million and took 3 years to complete and concluded that the towers collapsed due to being hit by planes and the fires that resulted- shocking.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_12_2007.htm

Here's a detailed online article from Popular Mechanics dealing with the common conspiracy problems:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

This might also be worth purchasing:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/911myths/

Short article from scientific american that covers the issues with the conspiracy theories:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=fahrenheit-2777

Full report from the 9/11 commision available online:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm