Instead of what they should be doing- disbelieving. Sure you can disbelieve the disbelievers, but that’s what’s on vogue- and that’s certainly what you’ll find on CNBC. Start disbelieving the RIGHT people for crissake! I watched as some woman, as if paid by a pharmeceudical company, literally preached (as if she were a Republican mouthpiece) and said, “I watched Sicko, and despite that, with our standard of living, there’s no country in the world I’d rather go to the doctor in.” Thank you, fake news-lady, you’ve managed to miss the point for an entire generation of people and try to keep people from going to Moore’s movie. I thought calling the guy a “propogandist” was extreme. Is this the crap all of us are going to have to get used to, now, besides all the damn cameras, and guys in riot gear everywhere? Besides, if a news-source starts dropping the “P” bomb, I’ll be more inclined to think they’re the source.

But no, no, for some reason, after I read your post, for some reason… I feel like we might actually be making a tiny scratch in the titanium-plated skulls of these simpletons, who will wall themselves off from information about their governments’ crimes to protect themselves from the worst of their fears.

Somehow, though, I only think two of them will ever actually press down on the links and see what you’re talking about. The others will go to the first bogus website they can find, read a bunch of supposed “refutations” and go to bed peacefully, not having to worry about the United States of Guantanamogulag going after them. (Popular Mechanics has shat away all credibility it ever had since it got into “Area 51″ politically during Glen Campbell’s 15 minutes of fame, and publically announced that the entire base moved to Utah, but for some reason these people will eat it up with a spoon and lick their lips like Mikey).

1. BBC anounced live on air that the “Salomon Brothers Building”, aka WTC 7, had collapsed 23 minutes before it did collapse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s

2. CNN anounced the collapse of WTC 7 at 11:10 Jerusalem time, which was an hour and 10 minutes before the collapse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oltWHvkuoCQ

3. In a “CNN Remembers” special, a 9/11 rescue worker is seen in front of WTC 7 telling people to move out because “That whole thing is about to blow up.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwjmqkjwnvQ

4. Donald Rumsfeld announced on the day before 9/11 that the pentagon had lost track of up to 2.3 TRILLION dollars.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46vK-40FpuY

5. 125 people died inside the Pentagon.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Exec.htm
37 of those were accountants, budget analysts, comptrollers, or financial advisors. (29.6%)
Lt. Gen. Timothy J. Maude was the only general (0.8%)
The next highest ranking casualty was Retired U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Wilson Falor… And he was a passanger in the plane.
No one else above the rank of O6 died in the Pentagon.
http://www.defendamerica.mil/remember/remember_a.html

Just a few to start out with…

I’m really disappointed in all of you.

Apparently, skepticism of skepticism of the government is back again.

It seems like the big stumbling block for almost all of you is “Our government ‘wouldn’t do such a thing.” Whine whine whine.

Well, let’s see.
1) rigged election.
2) rigged election again.
3) organized torture operation.
4) Iraq is radioactive thanks to DU

Figure it out.

I do know that science can not be the answer to all our problems but if you have taken a remot physics class in your life of a 12th grade standard and beyond you would come to knwo the scientific flaws in 9/11 such that no steel frame structured building has ever collapsed due to fire damage until 9/1 i nfact some buildings have burned for long after 24 hours yet u see much debree and ash but their entire structure remains standing straight up into the air. Many argue that they had a “unique structure” what about WTC7 its structure was nothing out of the ordinary and other buildings were far closer to the Trade centers when they collapsed, its rather suspicious that the fire damage in WTC7 is entirely out of control, yet live footage of silverstein(owner of the WTC’s who managed to pull of billion dollars of insurance claims after his buildings all 3 of them fell due to attacks) Silverstein claimed that he spoke with the fire chief and the chief said the damage in WTC7 was fairly high and all the loss that had occurred in this day it wasnt worth it so they “pulled the plug” . I dont know what building designs involve properly placed explosives incase sdamages get out of control so we can spontaneously jump on the scene and demolish a threatening building but we should probably check out office buildings for these nifty contraptions. Lets see another factual flaw in WTC7’s collapse. apparently the fires were so intense inside WTC7 my question is wtahc the video, be shocked in awe and wonder of the magnificent smoke rising from WTC. By the way that was sarcasm if u didn’t get it. Lets use some common sense to derive this shall we. Somethign is on fire that is action, the reaction is extreme rise in temperature and in a combustio nreaction CO2 is emmited in the form of smoke along with debree from whatever is burning we see smoke from fires. office buildigns heated at that temperature fror as many hours as it was on fire, look at the amount of smoke the world trade centers had to let off before they collapsed, all the smoke anywhere near WTC7 was due to the collapse of the other towers and nothing to do with its own structural fires which were non existant because if the fire existed we would see smoke, if the windows were close the fire would be starved of oxygen thus no intense fire.

Another arguement people bring to the table is the unfortunate argument that the world trade centres were brought down by fire damage. It is pathetic that the government didn’t even acknowledge the possibilities of secondary explosive, they didn’t even acknowledge it they said it flat out didn’t happen it was the fire. Im sorry but that is complete ignorance not to mention the unfotunate CNN footage of tons of people sayign they heard secondary explosions all over the televsion just before they collapsed, slightly odd that the government would overlook such an obvious factor let alone deny its possibility at all.

And those who don’t know much about fire I want you to go do your research on them and the melting point at which steel gives out, yes many people believe the jet fuel could have raised the steel to temperatures to lose half of its strength but only a tiny portion of the steel in which it hit, if that part were to buckle it owuldnt have brought the whole building down with it, it would have fallen at an angle and maybe taken a tiny piece with it, a beam acannot buckle into itself directly downwards it has to buckle at an angle otherwise there would be no buckling, and the fires were clearly not hot enough to even do such damage, if you do your research on fires, and if you have ever blown something up with gasious material, you would know that black smoke is a true tell sign that a fire is starving of oxygen thus dying in strength not growing, similarily black smoek was evident fro mthe wound in the WTC buildings so obviously these fires were dying as opposed to growing, now to the explosion of gasious materials, did u know that when gasious materials explode msot of the gas is consumed almost immediately, it is engulfed and than because the fuel to keep the gas fire going is all out it goes away nearly secodns after it arises only lasting long enough to maybe catch things on fire but not to continue fuel the spreading of it, with care try it at home setting a gaseous material on fire it engulfs it almsot spontaneously, the jet fuel was burned up pretty much seconds after the planes crashed into the towers, and go ask a steel welder why they dont just make a combustion reaction out of jet fuel to cut their steel beams, seeing as 9/11 proved that it is very efficient at it, if of course you choose not to look at scientific fact.

I do not knwo what i believe in terms of who did these attacks but i do know that these buildings did not get knocked down by fricken planes and the fire they created, these buildigns were built with plane crashes in mind, u should also notice how when the planes impact the buildings the buildings remain nearly unfazed and unmoved, just as if something punctured them but in no way compromised its structure, it showed no sign of its structure being extremely fractured other then the hole in it, and buildings do not just fall, thigns do not just happen these buildings went from standing up fine with a hole in them to plummeting with no inbetween, if the structure was beginning to sustain immense damage it would have reflected it by swaying back and forth and slowly as each beam would have collapsed you would have noticed immense changes over the course of time not just one full out collapse that appeared to be very similar to a controlled demolition, as they fell symmetrically into their own footprint, to over look the laws of physics in this case.

Did you know that the only buildings that fall relatively at free fall speed are those buildings that undergo controlled demoltions? Did you know that all the WTC’s that fell on 9/11 fell at approximately free fall speed? Did you know newtons first law of inertia “Objectsi n motion stay in motion unless acted upon by an opposing force” The building collapsed and had no opposing forces even though it fell from the top downwards? Were the floors beneath the other floors so weak that it was as if the floor above it enver hit it all to allow the building to fall at free fall speed? Does it cross your mind as to whythis building didn’t fall during or shortl thereafter is construction these floors were so incredibly weak that they could not even brace a floor above it crashing down on it not even for a fraction of a second? Did you notice the planes hit closer to the top of the building to take down the entire building, though that would be the most structurely sound and worst part to strike the building as the rest of the below building is not supporting any greater weight, and even if the beams buckled at the top their are still 42+ beams with 100’s of feet of intact beam below it to continue to support the building and brace the fall….. are you beginning to at least question the logic that 9/11 was brought down by planes because scientifcally it broke so many laws that we might as well throw all mdoern day technology out the window as it was all created with flawed laws of physics because george bush said so.

I have to be biased in my opinions only because the government has been so ignorant about it, and it is in that ignorance that most people believe the government is behind this attack and not terrorists though I am still undecided and can understand both sides of the equation but definetly lean towards the fact that it was at least funded or known by the government.

One last food for though. Did you know the pentagon has one of, if not the best anti aircraft missle defense system in the world? What a waste on money, might as well have invested in Enron if people can still crash planes or missles or whatever the hell hit the pentagon. Very sad that billions of tax payers dollars was wasted into an air defense program that does shit all.

Good day