Oh one more thing, you claimed that the audio was removed from the mainstream media’s footage. Ok then, why haven’t the people who allegedly removed it come forward? That would involve a LOT of people.

I trust the government, and the SPLC is good.

The official story for tower seven keeps changing, and I believe them.

I’m a useless sheep listening to this hate group called the SPLC.

Did you bother to look at the things I posted?

“Somehow, with your whole troofer movement, none of these people are feeling the heat, nobody has a conscience, and nobody wants to become an American hero by blowing the lid on the whole thing.”

People are blowing the whistle on it, obviously. But of course the people directly involved in it aren’t going to come forward. Why would the people involved in this in the government, military and the higher ups in the media admit to it? They got what they wanted from it. I wasn’t saying that the journalists on the street that day were a part of the ‘conspiracy’. Some know what’s going on and some don’t. The ones who do know what’s going and have truth in their interests have been asking questions, hence patriotsquestion911.com, obviously.

And I have heard all the arguments you’ve brought up, but those have all been answered by others. It’s not new.

None of the ‘debunking’ sites have ever explained how steel can turn to dust just from fires and structural damages. Does 911myths.com explain that?

So, no. My questions haven’t been answered. But I guess to you we’re not supposed to ask questions in the first place, right?

These aren’t “silly questions”. You are alleging that thousands of people were involved in a conspiracy to cover all of this up. Somehow, with your whole troofer movement, none of these people are feeling the heat, nobody has a conscience, and nobody wants to become an American hero by blowing the lid on the whole thing.

“Go back and watch the videos from the mainstream media of the collapse. THERE IS NO AUDIO OF THE COLLAPSES, just the talking heads running their mouths. ”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....eature=fvw

Took me a couple seconds on Youtube. Do you hear a loud bang or rapid series of bangs that would be associated with such an amount of explosives? Do you realize how loud high explosives are? Even the sound of a single hand grenade exploding at a distance is deafening if you hear it in person.

“There are other possibilities besides the use of conventional explosivies, you know. Ever heard of mini-nukes? ”

Sorry, logical fallacy. Possibility does not equal probability. Why use something untested like that anyway? Can you provide some footage of a mini-nuke explosion?

“Also, what was in the debris at Ground Zero that sickened so many rescue workers has never been really addressed, either. ”

When buildings are destroyed, especially old ones, they release a lot of harmful chemicals in the air. Also, working in any place that generates a lot of floating particles is always dangerous, which is why people who work in such places wear masks.

“…Which you don’t bother to address. Maybe it’s because you don’t know what I’m talking about? I think you should go back and watch some of the footage from that day. I’ve watched 100s of video of the WTC Towers on 9/11.”

You clearly didn’t watch the video I posted in this comment.

“Structural damage, eh? Well, this must have been a very unique event which has never happened before or since! It even caught all of the authorities on that day off-guard! ”

Structural damage, you know, like a plane loaded with fuel smashing through the core of the building. And I’m sorry, buildings collapsing from fire and structural damage are not unprecedented at all.

“The buildings were designed to take the impact of a fully-loaded jet. They were designed to redistribute the weight of the impact. They had factored in all of those possibilities. Or are you smarter than the architects and engineers who built the Towers?”

The Titanic was designed not to sink, the Hindenburg was designed not to become a ball of fire, and the Challenger was designed not to explode in mid-air. How did that work out? Plus, they were designed to take an impact from a much smaller plane, low on fuel, at approach speed- not full speed.

“All that white dust wasn’t from the fires, obviously. That was millions of tons of steel blowing away on the wind.”

Do you have any proof of that? Is that what controlled demolitions do? Is that what mini-nukes do?

“Face it, you limit your “research” to the corporate mainstream media and don’t bother to ask questions and think for yourself.”

Yes, if we don’t accept ridiculous theories about mini-nukes, we never ask questions about anything and we believe everything the media tells us. Lovely false dichotomy there.

“Oh, 9/11myths.com is a debunking site, right? I own a copy of the 9/11 Commission Report. I already know what they have to say. I know all of the arguments. We’ve been fed all of that nonsense since the day it happened.”

Oh I thought you were into keeping an open mind, but apparently not. See you DON’T know all the arguments because several of the ones you made here are easily explained on that site, with sources.

If you can’t realize that you’re asking silly questions, I really don’t know what to say. If you were a part of a crime or a part of a coverup of a crime, why in the world would you admit to it? Would you want to be lynched in the street for admitting to being involved in something as horrendous as 9/11?

Go back and watch the videos from the mainstream media of the collapse. THERE IS NO AUDIO OF THE COLLAPSES, just the talking heads running their mouths.

“Do you understand what goes into rigging a building for demolitions? Even a small building can require over a month to rig, and when this is done the building is usually not safe because walls are knocked out, floors are drilled through, and beams are usually cut most of the way in order to facilitate their destruction. ”

There are other possibilities besides the use of conventional explosivies, you know. Ever heard of mini-nukes?

Also, what was in the debris at Ground Zero that sickened so many rescue workers has never been really addressed, either.

Neither has the fact that most of the steel from the Towers was shipped out in quite a hurry to China after that day. Nothing fishy there, I’m sure…

“The rest of your post is just a bunch of typical truther claims that have been easily answered by sites such as 911myths.com.”

…Which you don’t bother to address. Maybe it’s because you don’t know what I’m talking about? I think you should go back and watch some of the footage from that day. I’ve watched 100s of video of the WTC Towers on 9/11.

And I’ve never been to that site.

“Nobody is claiming they collapsed simply from fire and heat. There was also the structural damage.”

Structural damage, eh? Well, this must have been a very unique event which has never happened before or since! It even caught all of the authorities on that day off-guard!

The buildings were designed to take the impact of a fully-loaded jet. They were designed to redistribute the weight of the impact. They had factored in all of those possibilities. Or are you smarter than the architects and engineers who built the Towers?

“And nobody claims that the steel core turned to dust, which is absolutely ridiculous. ”

Well, they say that truth is stranger than fiction. Not my fault that you didn’t bother to pay attention to the footage that day because that’s exactly what happened. I take it you didn’t even bother to look up the video I told you look up?

All that white dust wasn’t from the fires, obviously. That was millions of tons of steel blowing away on the wind.

“Face it, you limit your “research” to conspiracy sites.”

Face it, you limit your “research” to the corporate mainstream media and don’t bother to ask questions and think for yourself. You don’t even know the issues of 9/11 that I’m bringing up because you haven’t bothered to spend a lot of time looking at the footage.

Sad, really.

Do you understand what goes into rigging a building for demolitions? Even a small building can require over a month to rig, and when this is done the building is usually not safe because walls are knocked out, floors are drilled through, and beams are usually cut most of the way in order to facilitate their destruction.

The rest of your post is just a bunch of typical truther claims that have been easily answered by sites such as 911myths.com. Here’s an example:

“Keep in mind that no steel building ever completely collapsed from fire and heat before or since. They’ve burned out but not turned into dust from it!”

Nobody is claiming they collapsed simply from fire and heat. There was also the structural damage. And nobody claims that the steel core turned to dust, which is absolutely ridiculous.

Face it, you limit your “research” to conspiracy sites.

That’s pretty arrogant of you. Knowing their track record, why should we believe a politician over a wrestler or anyone else?

I’m open to listening to anyone, no matter their profession, if they are interested in trying to bring truth to light.

There was known to be a blackout in the Towers a few weeks before the attacks. Workers reported ‘strange’ men going in and out of the buildings during this time. It was obstensibly for ‘maintenance’.

I have yet to see an explanation as to why the South Tower, which was stuck last and where most of the jet fuel exploded *outside* of it (which caused that giant fireball), collapsed first. Also I have yet to see an explanation for why when the North Tower, I believe, fell, a remnant of the core of the building stayed standing for a few seconds as the rest of the building went around it. Then, it turned into dust instantaneously and blew away on the wind. Can you explain to me what can turn a building’s solid steel core into fine dust in a matter of seconds, or less than a second without using high tech explosives or weaponry in your model? Video of this is found on Plaguepuppy’s site. Just Google ‘plaguepuppy 9/11 strange collapse of the spire’. (Strangely, while filming the pyroclastic cloud formed by the collapse, the film turns green for a few seconds. I found that odd. Gamma rays?)

Keep in mind that no steel building ever completely collapsed from fire and heat before or since. They’ve burned out but not turned into dust from it!

Lastly, why would anyone involved with setting up explosives inside of the Towers admit to it? That doesn’t make any sense.

The ‘official’ fairy tale is what’s illogical to me. It answers none of the questions that I and so many others have.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades......ol_911.htm

You all keep repeating what the MSM says — just like well trained parrots.

I’ll be over here checking the facts for myself, as should eveybody.

One should expect to hear explosions or sounds like explosions in a burning, collapsing building.

Of course it would be absurd to believe that the WTC could be secretly rigged for demolition without anyone noticing or any of the workers coming forward about what they did. Moreover, absolutely no trace of explosives or blasting caps were found at Ground Zero.

Stop reading too much into it. I didn’t say that.

The FBI list is one thing, but apparently you haven’t looked into too many ‘alternative hypothesis’ if you haven’t found one that answers your questions. The official story doesn’t even answer a lot of questions, but you seem to be happy enough with that. But apparently everyone who doesn’t agree with you is a ‘yahoo’, so it doesn’t really much, does it?

I don’t mean to insult but the official story fails the most basic common sense, not to mention that it doesn’t even add up to what was going on on the ground that morning, before the media had a chance to whitewash the coverage.

I don’t really care if you agree with me. You can believe whatever the hell you want.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving.

Of course you wouldn’t because you believe these people.

“Maybe you should take a look at the site and what the hundreds of people listed have to say before typing away. ”

For years I have dealt with hundreds of these people head to head and I have yet to see even one offer a coherent alternative hypothesis or answer my questions.

“But if you want to cling to the idea that 19 ‘fanatical Muslims’ (some of which were dead before the fact or still alive after that day) who barely knew how to fly defeated the nation’s air defense system, that’s your delusion that you’re welcome to cling to. I don’t really care.”

My delusion huh? See, even in your own post here you repeat falsehoods. None of the hijackers were found alive. Doesn’t it bother you that with all the people out there alleging this, nobody has actually collected the money to actually GO and talk to these allegedly alive hijackers and find out what’s going on? It’s only been almost TEN years since then. Nevermind- I’ll answer for you, the “living highjackers” story comes from a story in October 2001 which wrote about the difficulties the FBI had figuring out who these guys were due to several cases of mistaken identity. Several of these guys had names which are very common in the Middle East.

And your assertion that Muslims or Arabs can’t do anything coordinated like that is implicitly racist.

“Alex Jones throws in some of the truth with a bunch of right-wing nonsense for good measure. He’s just a fool. People need to learn how to be discerning.”

Yes, like you, who still believes there are “living hijackers” out there, nearly ten years later, despite the fact that nobody seems interested in actually tracking these guys down and talking to them. Everyone wants to “investigate” on Youtube apparently. Very discerning.

Alex Jones throws in some of the truth with a bunch of right-wing nonsense for good measure. He’s just a fool. People need to learn how to be discerning.

I think you should stick to ranting about the ‘glories’ of Communism.

Also what evidence do you have that Jones is a “disinformation agent”? Occam’s razor suggests he’s just a guy trying to make a buck, just like whoever it is who has convinced you that AJ is a disinfo agent. Clearly you’re just angry because Jones’ conspiracy theory isn’t your beloved conspiracy theory.