Popular Mechanics 9/11 Author Grilled On Talk Radio

[Gregster]

Originally Posted by computer fogie

The government is keeping secret the pics of the massive damage to WTC7, and they're keeping secret the videos of the 757 hitting the Pentagon.

I've posted the pics of the massive damage to the WTC 7 somewhere between siz and a zillion times, fogie, with accompanying info. The video of the Pentagon was released, but was predictably dismissed and created renewed calls for the other video which you guys swear exists even though you have no way whatsoever of knowing this.

They have a growing problem on their hands; 36% of Americans believe the US government was complicit in 9/11. They could squash this by releasing these things, but they choose not to.

The only thing that releasing info does for the already-convinced such as yourself is create new stupid questions to supplent the old stupid questions, or give you guys one more thing to dismiss out of hand.

Does this make sense? Hell no it doesn't. If someone accuses you of doing something wrong, and you have hard evidence that supports your story, you don't keep it a secret and expect people to trust you. It wouldn't work in court, it doesn't work in life, and it doesn't work in a matter of huge significance to the whole world. They would have let us see these things, if they didn't fear the consequences.

No, it wouldn't work in court, fogie. You know why? Because in court, when you accuse someone of something, especially something as friggin' heinous as mass murder, the burden of proof is on the accuser. If the justice system ran the way you guys approach 9/11, the state would charge someone with murder and then, when asked to justify this accusation, have the prosecutor say "That's not my job...*you* guys need to explain to me why I'm wrong."

Having said that: I grant that it was gratuitous and wholly uncalled for to call you out earlier when addressing Captain Blamo. I shouldn't have done it...my apologies.

[icantstandit]

Originally Posted by computer fogie

The government is keeping secret the pics of the massive damage to WTC7, and they're keeping secret the videos of the 757 hitting the Pentagon.

They have a growing problem on their hands; 36% of Americans believe the US government was complicit in 9/11. They could squash this by releasing these things, but they choose not to.

Does this make sense? Hell no it doesn't. If someone accuses you of doing something wrong, and you have hard evidence that supports your story, you don't keep it a secret and expect people to trust you. It wouldn't work in court, it doesn't work in life, and it doesn't work in a matter of huge significance to the whole world. They would have let us see these things, if they didn't fear the consequences.

So wait a sec... so if some nutball con-artist CTers on the Internet scam a good percentage of people into believing something, it is the govt's obligation to debunk the scam artists?

Nearly all experts and investigators agree with the "official story", so why should the govt waste time convincing paranoids that yes, islamic terrorists really did hijack planes and crash them into building?

It is a waste of time, because they already know that the BS they spout is baseless, factless nonsense flamed by the paranoid fantasies (or con-jobs) of Internet charlatans. We don't need a govt report and investigation on John Edward, because even without one, we know he is a crock.

I would say it is in the govt's interest to debunk them, but they have no obligation to. It is a waste of time and resources.

In fact, debating morons who believe anything they read on the Internet, is, quite frankly, a total waste of time, and it gives credence to their position. Non-experts who claim expertise and who use "priviledged information" that they find on the Internet, and who ignore normal investigatory methods, and who ignore mountains of evidence are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT.

[HomeCheese]

Originally Posted by Gregster

Actually, HC, the pic in question (unless there's another I'm unaware of) has been posted by myself and others repeatedly, as it is contained in a PowerPoint slideshow from NIS summarizing the current working hypothesis of how the building fell.

The only pic I have seen is of the damaged corner, not the famous 25% of the side of WTC7 hole. The PM guy says in the interview that it has not been released. Do you have pictures of the hole?

[Thaiboxer18]

Originally Posted by Pennywise03

Maybe its because they don't want to document what kind of damage can be done to such an important structure. Having a clear video of the incident would show someone exactly what kind of damage can be done to the building and could help engineer future attacks. Plus this was an awful event, why would they put the families of those who died through that pain again just to please someones morbid curiousity?

I think the collapse of the twin towers and the death toll shows what kind of damage enormous planes can do to structures. I don't think that is a mystery anymore.

It was an awful event, but that didn't stop the government from "releasing" the video footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon (the footage that has been available on the internet for at least 2 years). Just because something is bad doesn't mean we should just say "it was bad, let's not discuss it."

[CDiablo]

Going bakc to the DNA thing......I dont exactly buy it, but the forensics(sp?) field is absoloutley amazing. Heres why I find it hard to believe:

rental cars, hotels all that stuff has had tens to hundreds of users in its lifetime. THings like flakes of skin, hair and other things are all over the place from people that have used thes things before as well as whatever the wind brings in. The steering wheel thing is bs because everyone that drove that car has left some piece of themselves on that wheel.

I remember I was in high school and had a retired Police officer as a history teacher. We were on a day before a vacaion so we had a relaxed class and had an open discussion amongst the class which eventually turned to his law enforcement career. We talked about how DNA stuff/dusting for prints and so on works and he said the Majority of the time it is useless cause there is Dna from 100 people/animals in the same spot. With something blatent like blood,seamen, saliva it is different, but skin or fingerprints are pretty.

Thne again as I said forensics is an amazing field so who knows what they can do.

I still dont buy that they found DNA after the raging infernos of 911(pentagon or that flight in PA I can believe)

[computer fogie]

Originally Posted by TheMMAn

...I could have called that guy, stated that i knew for a fact that the planes were not piloted by AQ guys, but an Australian street gang. When he said that was fasle, i would ask him how he he could prove that.

The questioner asked him about the BBC story, not some personal theory. The answer was "it's false". Where is the burden of proof, on the BBC or the guy saying they're wrong? The BBC story wasn't some crackpot theory.

Originally Posted by Gregster

...No, it wouldn't work in court, fogie. You know why? Because in court, when you accuse someone of something, especially something as friggin' heinous as mass murder, the burden of proof is on the accuser. If the justice system ran the way you guys approach 9/11, the state would charge someone with murder and then, when asked to justify this accusation, have the prosecutor say "That's not my job...*you* guys need to explain to me why I'm wrong."...

The government accused the hijackers of mass murder, so the burden of proof is on them. Info came to light that several of them were alive. Again the burden of proof is on the accuser to explain how living people died on 9/11.

I see your point, but you have it backward for sure.

[Mens Rea**]

I like how that 8 sec clip of WTC7 is used as proof of a conspiracu. "It falls faster than freefall, this means that explosives were used that created an implosion vacuum that made the building fall faster than gravity!"
Explosions create a vacuum making things fall faster?! WTF mate?

[bird1965]

Here is an older story about the DNA and how they recovered it http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2808599.stm .

[icantstandit]

Originally Posted by CDiablo

I still dont buy that they found DNA after the raging infernos of 911(pentagon or that flight in PA I can believe)

With bodies, it is easy, because there is always some DNA left. Even if a body burns for hours in a normal fire, there still will be usable, identifiable DNA in what I like to call "the juicy middle"...

Unless there is a prefect Crematorium-like fire/furnace that totally dries up and destroys every scrap of the human body, there wil be DNA left.

[Mens Rea**]

Originally Posted by computer fogie

The government accused the hijackers of mass murder, so the burden of proof is on them. Info came to light that several of them were alive. Again the burden of proof is on the accuser to explain how living people died on 9/11.

There is no trial. The hijackers are not in court. They are not presenting evidence to prove the hijacker's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's not what's happening here.