Thread: Is it time for the minority that call themselves "9/11 Conspiracy nuts"...?

to fade off into history like the JFK conspiracy nuts?
I have researched 9/11 thoroughly and have found all your "evidence" to either be flat out lies or a misinterpretation of facts.
M.V.P- It does if one of the buildings falls onto the third.
The north tower fell on WTC 7. It did not fall into its own footprint. It damaged the verizon building, and another building (Cant remember its name). From base to base it was only 300 feet from the north tower.
M.V.P- You fail at common sense and logic.
or maybe it is a lack of critical thinking skills.
M.V.P- dont make me laugh. I saw it with my own eyes. The north tower hit WTC 7. There were reports the entire south side of that building "was gone". It looked like it was the Oklahoma city bombing. Smoke was billowing out of the entire south side of that building.
MVP- no it did not fall into its own footprint. It was leaning to the south. Debris was all over the place. It was overlapped with the north tower.
meia and sugar- I expect you are the same person. The last thing i am going to do is watch a conspiracy video made by college students who could not get into college. And there "evidence" has been disproved. Since when does the "truth" need three editions?

MVP- you are twisting my words. The south side of WTC 7 was gone. The twin towers collapsed from the top down like they should have done.
The Zeitgeist- I dont have time to debunk them all right now. I will do that when i have time.
HEre is video of the north tower hitting WTC 7 and the damage it caused to the south face.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=javiWrKZrdk

Until there is a real, independent investigation of 9/11, I don't think there's any evidence to warrant taking any position on it. The 9/11 Commission was a farce. They only had a budget of $3 million - compare that to the $50 million (1986 dollars - almost $100 million today) much less deadly, much less costly, much less complicated explosion of the Challenger space shuttle. Bush and Cheney did not testify separately, publicly, or under oath. The CIA and DoD were almost completely uncooperative with the commission. It can be demonstrated that several Pentagon officials perjured themselves, while several commissioners have publicly wondered if the commission was set up to fail. And the commission itself was selected by the very people it was supposed to be investigating.

Obviously, these all raise doubts about the credibility and reliability of the findings. Even the report itself reads more like an espionage novel than the results of a bona fide independent investigation. Moreover, it's clear that neocons had a huge incentive in either perpetrating the attacks or ignoring the many warning signs. All in all, these discrepancies are more than adequate reason to call for a REAL investigation of 9/11.