jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
Childlike:
I'm fairly new here at JREF, like you. I came here because I had heard about "Loose Change" and, while I was pretty sure its claims were bogus, I wanted to know exactly WHY they were bogus so I could discuss the movie intelligently if it ever came up in conversation. I've reviewed many thousands of posts here, both pro and con of the official story. And, in my opinion, which I know has little if any value to you, there is NO compelling evidence whatsoever of any government involvement in 9/11. ALL of the points CTers raise in support of their theories are adequately explained in other ways.
I'm not saying that there isn't a**-covering and fudging of facts in the official reports, because there surely is. When dealing with a bureaucracy, a**-covering is the watchword. Is it frustrating to me that no offcials were held responsible for the pre-9/11 intelligence failures? Sure. If those failures hadn't happened, one of my best friends would still be alive today. But the official story, complete with a**-covering, is still the best we have, and it's likely to be the best we'll ever have, because it's essentially (although not in every detail) accurate.
And, the idea that we're somehow dishonoring the victims of 9/11 by not allowing other nations to poke around in our internal affairs is, to put it mildly, ridiculous.
I'm tired now. That was a lot of typing for me.
I'm fairly new here at JREF, like you. I came here because I had heard about "Loose Change" and, while I was pretty sure its claims were bogus, I wanted to know exactly WHY they were bogus so I could discuss the movie intelligently if it ever came up in conversation. I've reviewed many thousands of posts here, both pro and con of the official story. And, in my opinion, which I know has little if any value to you, there is NO compelling evidence whatsoever of any government involvement in 9/11. ALL of the points CTers raise in support of their theories are adequately explained in other ways.
I'm not saying that there isn't a**-covering and fudging of facts in the official reports, because there surely is. When dealing with a bureaucracy, a**-covering is the watchword. Is it frustrating to me that no offcials were held responsible for the pre-9/11 intelligence failures? Sure. If those failures hadn't happened, one of my best friends would still be alive today. But the official story, complete with a**-covering, is still the best we have, and it's likely to be the best we'll ever have, because it's essentially (although not in every detail) accurate.
And, the idea that we're somehow dishonoring the victims of 9/11 by not allowing other nations to poke around in our internal affairs is, to put it mildly, ridiculous.
I'm tired now. That was a lot of typing for me.
Last edited:
