My response is directly in relation to those who lost family/loved ones.

Sorry but I don't understand then.

There have been conspiracy theory claims that the 9-11 damage to the Pentagon was the result of a missile and not from an airliner being flown into the building. The "missile theory" does not account for the disappearance of the 64 people aboard the Flight 77.

MH's comment seemed pretty straightforward but maybe i'm missing something.

Sorry.... again.
I suppose i broke some unknown rule regarding the usual crap people are allowed to post here.
Maybe the wrong subject.:hmmm:

(thought it was clear that i was joking)

Think Jim is referring to the tongue in cheek comment by MH.

I don't see it as insensitive, not after 10 years. That's just me, tho. :hmmm:

No need to apologise....the internet is full of textual distortion and your response leads me to believe you were not insinuating what I initially suspected....carry on :up:

No harm...no foul.

As I have said before-I'm not into all those conspiracy stuff.

The only question I have, is this:

Why are those who believes in the official explanation, so afraid of an independent investigation.(no the evidence is not gone, it's saved in some bunker)

Would I approve their result? Indeed I would, if ther's no involvement from your government a.s.o

5-7 years back, I was one of those who believed in the official explanation, but after having red and heard others(like me), mocking those that believes otherwise, I have started to raise this question.

YES! I'm starting to wonder if there are some truth, in what those who believes otherwise, claim.


Markus

I have seen lots of conspiracy video on youtube. Some of them, made me laugh so much, that i couldn't breathe and others were just plain stupid.

Markus

Err... who said we are afraid of independent investigation? :doh: While we are
at it, what exactly was wrong with the NIST investigation? Or the quite extensive
Popular Mechanics article debunking many of the myths?

People wouldn't mock them if they'd actually show some evidence to back their claims. ;)

That's good. One shouldn't take anything as true without researching it first.
Especially not in 9/11's case. Look at the both sides and make up your own mind.

So even thou you believe in NIST explanation, you are also one of them who wants an independent investigation on 9/11 or did I misunderstood you?

Have I red the whole report from NIST? No!
Have I red everything from the opposite? No!

I'm just one of those, who wants a fully and truly independent investigation on this 9/11. I my self can't make my mind up before we have had this investigation. Until then I stand (almost)neutral

However, even if there would be such an investigation, there will stil be people who believe otherwise.

Markus

There are some videos that i think is very interesting

Like this one

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

Markus

I haven't read the NIST report completely, but what I've read, they do very
detailed work on explaining what they are out to explain.

As for the independent investigation, sure, it wouldn't hurt. Tho, I don't see
how it would change opinions. For some, being a "truther" is a business, so. :O:

Frankly, I don't think that reading the whole NIST report is mandatory to get
a good idea of what happened. 911myths.com has pretty much everything
you need in nice "their claim, our take" style of explanation.

Look around the internet, plenty of stuff available publicly to make up your own
mind about 9/11.

Personally, I don't see anything suspicious in the collapse of WTC7. :hmmm:

For one, it was badly damaged by the WTC 1 and 2 collapses, secondly it
burned for 6-7 hours more or less unchecked and lastly, WTC7's floors from the
7th up were supported by only 3 trusses, one of them collapsed and that made
the other 2 to collapse few seconds later (supported by video of the collapse).

This is the popular Mechanics report Dowly spoke of.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...ture/911-myths

You 9-11 conspirators piss me off, being thousands of miles away from NYC yet somehow knowing more than locals and actual witnesses...

Am I the only one here that actually saw this crap to call these know nothing fruitcake morons out?

In all fairness, in the age of internet, one doesn't need to have experienced
something personally to know about it. :yep:

But if you were in the close vicinity working and heard and saw the planes hit, you would be equally enraged by"armchair quarterbacks"
who saw a "you tube video on it"

I get your point Dowly, sir:). But nothing beats the eyes.. Not even some dumb you tube video... When did You Tube become facts anyways?

Likewise, I get your point.

Personal experience gives you the edge in some situations, but not sure if that's
the case in something as widely covered as 9/11. :hmmm:

Of course, there's those theories that say everyone who witnessed it were paid off
and what we saw on TV was just CGI. :doh: