Burden of Proof

[Yurebiz]

It's been a long time since I last posted. 'Just wanted to refresh my CT habits a little for once

Anyway, this is an opinion-type thread. I want you all to give me your opinion on whether you think the US Govt has taken enough time to prove 9/11 was carried by Al-Qaeda, plus the building collapses, flight 93, flight 77, etc; or you think they have left us wishing for a better inquiry on [whatever you believe they left out].

MY opinion is.. well I think they did left some things unanswered, which is pitiful, because had they not, conspiracy theories would have no place in reality as you know. But because they did, that leaves us wondering what could the molten metal at GZ mean, or what could the ISI connection alleged by the Indian press mean, and so on.

I also think that it's sort of unfair the way you guys treat CTers. Anyway, I know most of us are delusional asshats, but we do hold some legitimate questions. You may think they have been answered, but have they been answered properly? Officially?

And thats what burden of proof is all about. It's irrefutable that the USG has started (at least) war because of 9/11, and it's also due to this ongoing war on terror, that we have had some odd acts passed these last years, which are argued to infringe a few of our constitutional rights.

I would naturally say it's no big deal, as long as there's a reason to enact them, but say, if there's the least possibility to doubt aspects on the official story, shouldn't the government have had done a better job defending their investigations? Because if something is not true, then they're covering up what went on on that day. How can we support their new agendas over the war on terror, if we aren't able to trust them 100%? Especially when it comes to the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions act, etc.?THEY have the burden of proof, because they made all that legislature up.

We CTers are just asking questions (and-making-loony-theories-out-of-our-asses), and if I can make that point straight, we haven't got proper and definite answers from them, in our honest opinion. The jersey girls believe they haven't. First respondents think they haven't. We don't have the burden of proof requiring us prove our theories, be it LIHOP, MIHOP, or whatever. As long as there's doubt, there is legitimacy in being a CTer. The gov't should be the one which all of us should be skeptical about. Put the frigging spotlights on the Commission Report, shall we! They're the ones required to show proof, not us. That's my point. Anyway, do you think they properly investigated the attacks? Or did they not? Only in a few topics? Tell me your opinion whatever it is!

I'll go ahead and say which ones I think they covered up, and did not investigate at all (or at least didn't disclose the information to the public yet)

-Hijackers money trail (ISI connection)
-Prior knowledge from international warnings (or whatever other warnings; Able danger perhaps.)
-Molten metal on GZ
-WTC7 collapse

These below are those I believe they could have done a better job, but I got no direct implications on:

-NORAD War Games (sorry gumboot )
-Flight 93 on Shanksville (yeah, blame me for reading killtown's crap)
-Twin Towers collapse (Well, I just read a DENIAL article which made a good point about them avoiding analyzing the collapse... I can't help it but say they could have done more than prove a possible collapse initiation.)
-Air condition on Manhattan post-collapse (hm yeah, doesn't really has much to do with the attacks itself, but still.)

Hum.. what else... well that's about it. As far as I remember.

And please, I know you guys have had 'debunked' all these topics before, but I just wanted to know your opinion on the government's role in explaining them. Again, just your opinion in whether they did a good job on each separately. Sure I won't stop you from debunking them here, be my guest (I've seen most debunking on all those already), but thats not what this thread is about.. so let's keep it cool.

Thats all, I hope I can get a good word from you people, and not get bashed for being so naive.

 

[Firestone]

It's late here, I'll give you a short answer.

No, the US-authorities have not done everything I would have liked to answer all possible questions about the attacks.

But, before you think I'm with you on this, you should also read the following paragraphs.

As a Belgian citizen, I'm not aware of any serious matter involving some government responsability, where I believe my government has done everything I would have liked to answer all possible questions about the matter at hand. (And I am in broad terms a government supporter politically.)

That's the way it is, Yurebiz.
There is nothing wrong with asking questions, there is nothing wrong with being critical of any authority, on the contrary.
But there are also stupid questions, and most questions the "Truth Movement" asks now are silly or have been answered a long time ago. Some are even outrageous.

My two eurocents.

 

[Yurebiz]

Thanks, your two eurocents are greatly appreciated.

 

[boloboffin]

If your friends would drop the delusional asshattery, and stick to legitimate questions, then they wouldn't get treated like delusional asshats. They neutralize any legitimacy they might have, not us.

There most certainly was a coverup of US mistakes that allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen. This certainly gives the impression that even worse is being covered up as well. There are legitimate questions out there that members of both parties need to answer.

But those four flights were hijacked and crashed into buildings and the field outside Shanksville. They were hijacked by four terrorist cells closely associated with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization. WTC 1, 2, and 7 fell down without aid of controlled demolition. These things are facts, and people who persist in questioning these basic facts are not your friends in these matters.

 

[hellaeon]

It's been a long time since I last posted. 'Just wanted to refresh my CT habits a little for once

Anyway, this is an opinion-type thread. I want you all to give me your opinion on whether you think the US Govt has taken enough time to prove 9/11 was carried by Al-Qaeda, plus the building collapses, flight 93, flight 77, etc; or you think they have left us wishing for a better inquiry on [whatever you believe they left out].

MY opinion is.. well I think they did left some things unanswered, which is pitiful, because had they not, conspiracy theories would have no place in reality as you know. But because they did, that leaves us wondering what could the molten metal at GZ mean, or what could the ISI connection alleged by the Indian press mean, and so on.

Hello again. Take some time to read this opinion/fact piece and I apreciate the clear view in the opening post (to me it is).

The molten arguement has been answered a lot. Analogy- Have you ever seen a compost heap or made your own? try it, it might click your thought process into a specific gear to help understand the 'molten metal' pools at GZ.

ISI is just that - alleged, though I have not looked deeply into this so excuse my ignorance.

I also think that it's sort of unfair the way you guys treat CTers. Anyway, I know most of us are delusional asshats, but we do hold some legitimate questions. You may think they have been answered, but have they been answered properly? Officially?

I think its fine. Look at pdoherty, always complaining about laws and rules and yet cant even keep them on a simple forum. Look at the LCF and the way they run a police state there, whilst complaining about police states. TS1234 is another. Why should I accept a 'star wars space beam theory'. Its totally dumb. Its impossible to build. Why should I be polite when someone persists that its possible. There is only so many hands I can hold before you expect someone to do some kind of self education. He knows what he is doing and its morally wrong. He does it for attention because his music career is crap.

And thats what burden of proof is all about. It's irrefutable that the USG has started (at least) war because of 9/11, and it's also due to this ongoing war on terror, that we have had some odd acts passed these last years, which are argued to infringe a few of our constitutional rights.

Your asking a question and being suspicious because no answer has come forthwith to you. Ok, im suspicious on why the gov over there did not plant WMD's in iraq. Something fishy going on.

I would naturally say it's no big deal, as long as there's a reason to enact them, but say, if there's the least possibility to doubt aspects on the official story, shouldn't the government have had done a better job defending their investigations? Because if something is not true, then they're covering up what went on on that day. How can we support their new agendas over the war on terror, if we aren't able to trust them 100%? Especially when it comes to the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions act, etc.?THEY have the burden of proof, because they made all that legislature up.

Now just remember when you ask these questions you want answered, if the explanation is above your understanding of any kind of science, it does make it void. There are lots of purposely avoided questions regarding agency failures at the government level because no one wants their rule 8 handed to them, however once you understand the failure at that level, then science explains the resulting problems when planes smash into towers.

We CTers are just asking questions (and-making-loony-theories-out-of-our-asses), and if I can make that point straight, we haven't got proper and definite answers from them, in our honest opinion. The jersey girls believe they haven't. First respondents think they haven't. We don't have the burden of proof requiring us prove our theories, be it LIHOP, MIHOP, or whatever. As long as there's doubt, there is legitimacy in being a CTer. The gov't should be the one which all of us should be skeptical about. Put the frigging spotlights on the Commission Report, shall we! They're the ones required to show proof, not us. That's my point. Anyway, do you think they properly investigated the attacks? Or did they not? Only in a few topics? Tell me your opinion whatever it is!

Well, I believe almost every theory is just an attempt to explain something in a way their education level cannot. Opinion noted though.

I'll go ahead and say which ones I think they covered up, and did not investigate at all (or at least didn't disclose the information to the public yet)

-Hijackers money trail (ISI connection)

This?
Its very brief

Indeed, the fbi said in 2002 no paper trail was uncovered, but as with an investigation, as more facts become evident, there was one.

-Prior knowledge from international warnings (or whatever other warnings; Able danger perhaps.)

This I agree with and there will be a mutlitude of links, ignorance of prior warnings though does not mean the government wanted thousands of its citizens dead and an unpopular (worldwide) war. It happens with all bad events. Reccomendations afterwards and the beauty of hindsight.

-Molten metal on GZ

Again, try the compost example. There is a whole different world out there in the land of science and I am constantly astonished by how it works.

-WTC7 collapse

I understand your aprehension on this one, but you do realise it will take time?
How long do you expect such a massive investigation to take? Here in South Aust, we had a factory up in the country explode almost 2 years ago and kill a few people and only now is the investigation coming to a close, thats before any court case on blame goes ahead, which will last for years more.
I think they have done well to investigate such a huge, immensly scaled disaster in the time they have. This year I think the WTC7 report is finalised.

These below are those I believe they could have done a better job, but I got no direct implications on:

-NORAD War Games (sorry gumboot )

argggh!!! I'll let gumboot take the reigns. Sorry, but if I get angry or rude about this at any stage, just remind me to be civil, its just I have seen this soooo many times!

-Flight 93 on Shanksville (yeah, blame me for reading killtown's crap)

What about it? You dont have to go into too much 'sciency stuff' to know he talks about his preverbial. He thinks the debree was planted hahaha. His is a poster child for the mentally disabled.

-Twin Towers collapse (Well, I just read a DENIAL article which made a good point about them avoiding analyzing the collapse... I can't help it but say they could have done more than prove a possible collapse initiation.)

such as? The idea is to explain what happened, not what could have happened or what did not happen.

-Air condition on Manhattan post-collapse (hm yeah, doesn't really has much to do with the attacks itself, but still.)

Yes I was going to say that, but perhaps for this thread we leave it out?

And please, I know you guys have had 'debunked' all these topics before, but I just wanted to know your opinion on the government's role in explaining them. Again, just your opinion in whether they did a good job on each separately. Sure I won't stop you from debunking them here, be my guest (I've seen most debunking on all those already), but thats not what this thread is about.. so let's keep it cool.

Thats all, I hope I can get a good word from you people, and not get bashed for being so naive.

Your not naive to be clueless about things, it just means you need to know a few things. But please lend weight to reality in the answers. I provided a couple for you, other will too.

EG: Killtown says flight 93 was fake or that the planes never hit the towers. TS1234 reckons woods space beams did some damage. You dont need science to explain this is dumb.

Cheers mate

 

[hellaeon]

If your friends would drop the delusional asshattery, and stick to legitimate questions, then they wouldn't get treated like delusional asshats. They neutralize any legitimacy they might have, not us.

There most certainly was a coverup of US mistakes that allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen. This certainly gives the impression that even worse is being covered up as well. There are legitimate questions out there that members of both parties need to answer.

But those four flights were hijacked and crashed into buildings and the field outside Shanksville. They were hijacked by four terrorist cells closely associated with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization. WTC 1, 2, and 7 fell down without aid of controlled demolition. These things are facts, and people who persist in questioning these basic facts are not your friends in these matters.

sorry for the quick post so soon after the last but this puts it in black and white best.

Cheers

 

[T.A.M.]

yes

 

[beachnut]

I also think that it's sort of unfair the way you guys treat CTers. Anyway, I know most of us are delusional asshats, but we do hold some legitimate questions. You may think they have been answered, but have they been answered properly? Officially?

These below are those I believe they could have done a better job, but I got no direct implications on:

-NORAD War Games (sorry gumboot )
-Flight 93 on Shanksville (yeah, blame me for reading killtown's crap)
-Twin Towers collapse (Well, I just read a DENIAL article which made a good point about them avoiding analyzing the collapse... I can't help it but say they could have done more than prove a possible collapse initiation.)
-Air condition on Manhattan post-collapse (hm yeah, doesn't really has much to do with the attacks itself, but still.)

NORAD War Games scheduled would actually make NORAD have more people to help. My opinon is any CTer using the NORAD card is a complete idiot. Just like if the hospital was having a mass causality practice. If they had a mass causality for real, there would be extra people, and the trainers, to take car of it. An inside job would schedule the exercise after the surprise attack, and schedule the idiots for the 9/11 shift. What could the government say to convince the nuts on this one?

Flight 93 is exactly what a high speed aircraft impact is. Exactly. I cheated and went to aircraft investigation school. The government and experts can not fix Killtown's metal illness. Insanity is killtown's work, if you fall for it you may be dumb. There is nothing the government can do to prevent idiots from exercising the right to be terminally stupid.

The tower collapse are how buildings of that scale fall when hit with planes doing 500 mph. I cheated again. My parents did not "pull it", my funding for school was there and I had enough math and physics to complete a degree in engineering. I can look up the equation for energy of an aircraft impact and found the WTC impacts to be 1300 to 2200 pounds of TNT. Aircraft alone had enough energy at impact to cut all the steel beams in the WTC. You know the energy in the fuel was equal to 315 tons of TNT? Did you know the energy of the falling building was as much as 248 TONS of TNT? Nothing the government can say will stop 9/11 truthers from making up stupid stories about the towers and WTC7. I have no idea what WTC7 or melted metal has to do with 9/11 CT. These events were melted aluminum wheels and a building fire failure. The terrorist did not melt the metal, or destroy WTC7 directly. Cause and effect is covered in 2nd grade, CTers need a redo. The molten metal shown by photos is not molten, it is glowing.

There is enough proof out there. Feeble minded CTers are not capable of finding the correct answers, even when they are already there to be read.

My opinion runs along the lines of JFK, "ask not what your government can do for you, ask what you can do for your government". So CTers, go get a degree, take a course on something to wean you off the cult of not using your own brain. Find some individual ability to think on your own. Stop believing lies from people not as smart as yourself. Most CTers have a brain, they have just stopped using it.

9/11 truth does not begin with opinions.

 

[gumboot]

There will always be aspects that are not explained by the government, however I believe your list is a poor one.

Our "answers" do not come just from the government, they come from a myriad of sources. The information is out there. All of your questions, all of your areas of concern, have been described in full. You are simply refusing to see those answers. Your summary of the 10,000 NIST reports as "a possible collapse initiation" is a prime example.

The Conspiracy Theories are not a result of a lack of explanation from the Government, they are a result purely of the people making the claims. It is your own inability to think skeptically and logically about 9/11 that has sent you on these ridiculous wild goose chases.

I'm not even going to respond to the NORAD Wargames because frankly the entire thing bores me. You've been told what wargames were on and how they affected the response. If you refuse to believe that, it's your own problem. May you enjoy your reality.

-Gumboot

 

[babazaroni]

What do you think the government could do to satisfy people who believe Silverstein openly admitted to destroying his building?

Really, if you(most CT'ers) are that foolish to believe insurance companies would pay billions to a man who admits to destroying his building, you deserve no effort from the government to disprove this. You are no threat to anyone but your own movement.

 

[T.A.M.]

ahh...but you see to the twoofers, all our sources are part of the larger USG collective. NIST/FEMA/ASCE/FBI/CIA/CNN/BBC/MSNBC are all part of the greater USG evil NEOCON Cabal...

TAM

 

[Brainster]

The 9-11 Commission did the best it could at the time; there is no doubt that new facts come to light that renders them wrong on some minor point, as with the terrific NEADS tapes story from Vanity Fair last year. But that does not mean we have to authorize a new commission every year or so. Let the historians sort it out. Here's a hint: 19 pissed-off Muslims did it.

 

[The Almond]

It's been a long time since I last posted. 'Just wanted to refresh my CT habits a little for once

Nice to hear from you again. I would start by complimenting you on your polite and rational method of posting. That goes a long way with me at least.

I'd like to address only one of your comments, at least in detail. It's one that I've particularly interested myself in over the last few months.

-Twin Towers collapse (Well, I just read a DENIAL article which made a good point about them avoiding analyzing the collapse...

Once again, NIST did not avoid analyzing the collapse. An author who characterizes NIST as such is being dishonest. NIST was directed to study the collapse by the National Construction Safety Team Act, public law 107-231 of the 107th Congress, signed into law October 1st, 2002.

Purpose of Investigation; Duties
1) Purpose.--The purpose of invetigations by Teams is to improve the safety and structural integrity of buildings in the United States.
2) Duties.--A Team shall--
A) Establish the likely technical cause or causes of the building failure;
B) evaluate the technical aspects of evacuation and emergency response procedures;
C) recommend, as necessary, specific improvements to building standards, codes, and practices based on the findings made pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and (B); and
D) recommend any research or other appropriate actions needed to improve the structural safety of buildings, and improve evacuation and emergency response procedures, based on the findings of the investigation.

Please read over this as many times as is necessary to understand that the Congress did not direct NIST to
1) Study the events after collapse initiation
2) Model the collapse either physically or through computer simulation
3) Make changes to the building code such that buildings would be able to arrest a progressive collapse once it started.

You tried to make this point in another thread regarding NIST, and despite repeated arguments to the contrary, you seem married to the opinion that NIST was somehow delinquent in their response. In truth, NIST acted as the 107th congress directed, and that is all they are capable of doing as a part of the federal government. Any redirection of funds towards areas not defined by the congress could be construed as illegal.

The NCSTA can be found in Appendix A of NCSTAR 1. It is reprinted in full starting on page 231.

I can't help it but say they could have done more than prove a possible collapse initiation.)

Rather, they proved, through extensive use of mathematics, review of the physical and photographic evidence, and analysis of the stochastic nature of the system, the scenario that most completely accounted for the data, and proved the collapse initiation state. Compared with alternative hypotheses set forth by the conspiracy theorists, the NIST hypothesis is far more robust, encompasses more of the data, and provides a more complete analysis of what happened. In this sense, the NIST self initiated collapse is a far better theory than any competing one.

 

[Pardalis]

And round and round we go.

Yurebiz, all of your questions have been answered, time and time again. I can't believe you're still asking about that friggin molten metal at ground zero.

Please read this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/local_links.php?catid=18

this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76025

and the stickies.

Geez.

 

[gumboot]

The 9-11 Commission did the best it could at the time; there is no doubt that new facts come to light that renders them wrong on some minor point, as with the terrific NEADS tapes story from Vanity Fair last year.

That's a common misconception that I really try hard to clear up.

The 9-11 Commission used those NEADS tapes. They were not wrong. They got it all correct.

What happened was NORAD released an early timeline, and initially presented that to the commission. The commission then got hold of the tapes, went WTF, and demanded an explanation.

NORAD staff then testified UNDER OATH and admitted their first versions had been wrong. And the NEW version - based on the tapes - was the one that was used by the Commission for their report.

The thing about the Vanity Fair tapes was finally WE got to find out what was on the tapes. But they weren't new to the commission.

-Gumboot

 

[Yurebiz]

Dang. I know they have been debunked.
I was asking your opinion on the government's job in explaining it, that's all. This thread is called burden of proof for a reason... I'm not asking every little question again.

We got two major documents which explain the attacks to the public, right? The 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST NCSTAR.
I wouldn't even say the NIST is quite fit for the public, but still, that how far one has to dig to find the full, official account for the collapses.

The question is, once again, given the topics I listed before, and any more you want to include, do you think the government has done a good job explaining?

Let me take Almond's input. I agree with pretty much everyone else.
Almond, you say the NIST wasn't requested to study the towers after collapse initiation. I knew that, someone spoon fed me that info back in the pellets thread. I just had a bad wording, sorry.
But taking that into consideration. WELL, do you believe it's a fair investigation, to analyze only the collapse initiation? In other words, do you think congress is being honest and impartial when they set up limiting rules to an investigation?
Was it enough to fulfill congress' burden of proof after engaging in wars and enacting laws allowing wiretapping the public?
Is it within our rights to doubt it, or should we be called delusional?

Sorry for so many questions, I really hate posting like this. But overall , thanks for everyone who replied. I just wanted some straightfoward answers though, like TAM did. Thanks.

Hey, a little off topic, but about the molten metal.. did you guys ever discussed the NASA pics? They're taken 5 days after the collapse, but still indicate about 900 degrees Fahrenheit under the towers + WTC7 (and also under wtc..6, IIRC). if you google it you'll find em.

 

[HyJinX]

Dang. I know they have been debunked.
I was asking your opinion on the government's job in explaining it, that's all. This thread is called burden of proof for a reason... I'm not asking every little question again.

We got two major documents which explain the attacks to the public, right? The 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST NCSTAR.
I wouldn't even say the NIST is quite fit for the public, but still, that how far one has to dig to find the full, official account for the collapses.

The question is, once again, given the topics I listed before, and any more you want to include, do you think the government has done a good job explaining?

Let me take Almond's input. I agree with pretty much everyone else.
Almond, you say the NIST wasn't requested to study the towers after collapse initiation. I knew that, someone spoon fed me that info back in the pellets thread. I just had a bad wording, sorry.
But taking that into consideration. WELL, do you believe it's a fair investigation, to analyze only the collapse initiation? In other words, do you think congress is being honest and impartial when they set up limiting rules to an investigation?
Was it enough to fulfill congress' burden of proof after engaging in wars and enacting laws allowing wiretapping the public?
Is it within our rights to doubt it, or should we be called delusional?

Sorry for so many questions, I really hate posting like this. But overall , thanks for everyone who replied. I just wanted some straightfoward answers though, like TAM did. Thanks.

Hey, a little off topic, but about the molten metal.. did you guys ever discussed the NASA pics? They're taken 5 days after the collapse, but still indicate about 900 degrees Fahrenheit under the towers + WTC7 (and also under wtc..6, IIRC). if you google it you'll find em.

A quick answer to your first question is YES.

If you have issues with the information that is available...it's your job to show evidence that directly contradicts the evidence presented.

Period.

 

[beachnut]

Dang. I know they have been debunked.
I was asking your opinion on the government's job in explaining it, that's all. This thread is called burden of proof for a reason... I'm not asking every little question again.

We got two major documents which explain the attacks to the public, right? The 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST NCSTAR.
I wouldn't even say the NIST is quite fit for the public, but still, that how far one has to dig to find the full, official account for the collapses.

The question is, once again, given the topics I listed before, and any more you want to include, do you think the government has done a good job explaining?

Let me take Almond's input. I agree with pretty much everyone else.
Almond, you say the NIST wasn't requested to study the towers after collapse initiation. I knew that, someone spoon fed me that info back in the pellets thread. I just had a bad wording, sorry.
But taking that into consideration. WELL, do you believe it's a fair investigation, to analyze only the collapse initiation? In other words, do you think congress is being honest and impartial when they set up limiting rules to an investigation?
Was it enough to fulfill congress' burden of proof after engaging in wars and enacting laws allowing wiretapping the public?
Is it within our rights to doubt it, or should we be called delusional?

Sorry for so many questions, I really hate posting like this. But overall , thanks for everyone who replied. I just wanted some straightfoward answers though, like TAM did. Thanks.

Hey, a little off topic, but about the molten metal.. did you guys ever discussed the NASA pics? They're taken 5 days after the collapse, but still indicate about 900 degrees Fahrenheit under the towers + WTC7 (and also under wtc..6, IIRC). if you google it you'll find em.

Maybe you need to research fire better. You must of missed comments on topic. If you know all the CT idiots have been debunked, why are you still a CT nut? Kind of silly to be in a group who has no facts. Kind of like Jim Jones and KoolAid, a cult of lemmings passing lies around, fictional videos used as bibles.

Where did your teachers fail? Why did the CTers fail to learn?

 

[Yurebiz]

Maybe you need to research fire better. You must of missed comments on topic. If you know all the CT idiots have been debunked, why are you still a CT nut? Kind of silly to be in a group who has no facts. Kind of like Jim Jones and KoolAid, a cult of lemmings passing lies around, fictional videos used as bibles.

Where did your teachers fail? Why did the CTers fail to learn?

Well back in my home country, my old teachers failed when they taught me that government deceits people.
Over here, they failed in teaching me about freedom and the constitution.
So I guess I fail in questioning the government. I'm sorry about that, and I'm ashamed of myself.
Not.

 

[beachnut]

Well back in my home country, my old teachers failed when they taught me that government deceits people.
Over here, they failed in teaching me about freedom and the constitution.
So I guess I fail in questioning the government. I'm sorry about that, and I'm ashamed of myself.
Not.

Darn we elect our government and get rid of them by voting. It is self critiquing. We even take them out of office anytime we want; many examples. Maybe you have fallen prey to biased political rant and have problems understanding major systems in the real world.

You still are so very short on facts about 9/11. No facts have you.

I have not had to get any facts from the government to understand most of 9/11 and debunk the 9/11 truth movement. You are researched challenged if your believe anything from the 9/11 truth movement. And that fact is lost on you.