Above conspiring to cover-up?

[ZENSMACK89]

Please stop being deceitful with other people’s words.

What's your investment other then trying to appear to win an argument with a toofer that you would claim his own words don't mean what they say?

Quite clearly, this does not constitute evidence that the commissioners believe the 9/11 Commission Report to contain significant errors. "I do not know at this point of any factual error in our report, that I would absolutely say 'we just plain missed it.' Now, maybe I need to review it more carefully, but I cannot recall right now at this instance any fact that we just plain missed."

How would they know if they are significant or not if they don't know what they are? For instance what does he think they didn't get right or missed? Do you know? Does he? Why do you make excuses for them? Is that critical thinking?

He says that people “will be investigating 9/11 for the next hundred years”. He doesn’t say that people we have to wait a hundred years to know the truth about 9/11.

I know he didn't say I'm asking when? You don't think any is needed.

Again, as shown by the first quotation above, Hamilton did not claim that the report was a first draft period. He said it was a “first draft of history”. There’s an appreciable distinction.

Really? So History will change over time? In who's favor?

 

[gumboot]

What concerns me is not the splatter-gun burst of mish-mash, but the last remark in the OP But there is no need for a closer look at 9/11.

A common Conspiracy Theorist starting point is that there has been no real investigation of 9/11. This is completely untrue.

I mean, forensic investigators from the FBI sorted the frikken WTC debris by hand! How much closer are they supposed to look?

-Gumboot

 

[Drudgewire]

Really? So History will change over time? In who's favor?

Certainly not Fatty Arbuckle's.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Wow, do you always take people's statements so literally?

So it should be taken to mean the opposite? This is your critical thinking?

The reference to "first draft of history" I would say is merely reflecting the fact that the 9/11 Commission Report was the first attempt to pull together a cohesive and comprehensive examination of what transpired.

When’s the next draft due?

As to the reference "people will be investigating 9/11 for the next hundred years" considering that historians to this day still do research and investigations on the events of WWII, I fail to see how the remark has any particular significance. Major events are always subjects for investigations and examinations for many decades.

So only by historians? That's maybe examination not investigation.

By the way, have you given up on the Mexican trucking thread in the Politics forum>

No one has anything significant to add. I'm also aloud to make the bare assertion as to what's significant and what's not aren't I? Besides last I read they were trying to block the funding. I want to see what happens.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

What concerns me is not the splatter-gun burst of mish-mash, but the last remark in the OP But there is no need for a closer look at 9/11.

A common Conspiracy Theorist starting point is that there has been no real investigation of 9/11. This is completely untrue.

I mean, forensic investigators from the FBI sorted the frikken WTC debris by hand! How much closer are they supposed to look?

-Gumboot

So because some FBI diligently did their job down at ground zero this constitutes a full and complete investigation into 9/11? It been said their were other FBI agents tried to also do their job leading up to 9/11. Do we really know what happen there for sure? Have they all been heard?

 

[twinstead]

So because some FBI diligently did their job down at ground zero this constitutes a full and complete investigation into 9/11? It been said their were other FBI agents tried to also do their job leading up to 9/11. Do we really know what happen there for sure? Have they all been heard?

Wanting an additional investigation simply because you disagree with the conclusions of the first one isn't enough. I have said this before, and I'll say it again: Dude. YOU DON'T WANT ANOTHER INVESTIGATION.

IMO any proper investigation carried out by people actually qualified to investigate will come to a similar conclusion as the first, WHICH YOU WILL REJECT OUT-OF-HAND.

I submit the ONLY investigation's results that you will support is one that claims 911 was an inside job. You are too biased to be involved in any way, shape, or form in ANY investigation concerning 911.

So, why bother?

 

[Par]

What's your investment other then trying to appear to win an argument with a toofer that...?

Argumentum ad hominem circumstantial.

...you would claim his own words don't mean what they say

Petitio Principii

How would they know if they are significant or not if they don't know what they are?

I’ve said nothing about this. Originally, I asked you to present evidence that the commissioners believe the 9/11 Commission Report to contain significant errors. In response, you quoted Hamilton saying he doesn’t believe that they got everything right. I then pointed out that said quotation does not constitute the requisite evidence.

I know he didn't say I'm asking when? You don't think any is needed.

This does not appear to make sense.

Really? So History will change over time? In who's favor?

Please do not be childish.

 

[John Blonn]

So you list a bunch of eff ups that this government has allegedly committed to "argue" that we should look into the possibility that this very same government organized and committed the most intricate, complex, and downright ballsy conspiracy without ANY screw ups.

Otay.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

So you list a bunch of eff ups that this government has allegedly committed to "argue" that we should look into the possibility that this very same government organized and committed the most intricate, complex, and downright ballsy conspiracy without ANY screw ups.

Otay.

No.

Ok?

Where does your faith in them regarding their 9/11 version come from?

 

[John Blonn]

No.

Ok?

Where does your faith in them regarding their 9/11 version come from?

I don't have a faith in "them." Nice try.

Scientists and engineers have convinced me of the events of that day. Not George W. Bush or this government.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Argumentum ad hominem circumstantial.




Petitio Principii




I’ve said nothing about this. Originally, I asked you to present evidence that the commissioners believe the 9/11 Commission Report to contain significant errors. In response, you quoted Hamilton saying he doesn’t believe that they got everything right. I then pointed out that said quotation does not constitute the requisite evidence.




This does not appear to make sense.




Please do not be childish.

Incomplete is a significant error.

Now back to the post. What have they done to earn the faith you put into their sponsored 9/11 version?

 

[ZENSMACK89]

I don't have a faith in "them." Nice try.

Scientists and engineers have convinced me of the events of that day. Not George W. Bush or this government.

The NIST report is a theory of collapse initiation regarding the WTC.

The 9/11 commission was put together and lorded over and put out by the Bush administration as the official version of 9/11.

Have you accepted it?

 

[pomeroo]

The questionable track record in no particular order…

PNAC, peak oil, Rebuilding America's Defenses, New Pearl Harbor, “Osama’s is nothing but Clinton wagging the dog”, drunk driven blow snorting Dubya, vacation, AWOL Dubya, Tammy Phillips, Five deferment Cheney, Election Fraud, captured by China spy plane, vacation, missing Pentagon money, My Pet Goat, “Angel is next”, Illegal War, No-Bid contracts, put options, Cheney/KBR, Yellow Cake Uranium, Plame outing, vacation, Libby, Abramoff, Delay, WMD's, AIPAC, Franklin spy scandal, against 9/11 investigation, no post invasion “strategery”, refusal to testify separately under oath, vacation, Feith cooked war intel, Jeff Gannon/Johnny Gosch, vacation, Able Danger, “Fool me once”, Gov Grade Anthrax attacks, Bankruptcy law written by credit card companies, vacation, Guantánamo, vacation, Hijacker Financing?, EPA laws written by coal companies, vacation, “I’m the decider”, Bin Laden-Bush Carlyle Group connection, 9/11 Omission report, plan for UAE based company to guard our ports during a so-called war on terror, vacation, Bin Laden Family allowed to fly, Iraq Oil Missing, Iraq 100 dollar bills missing, Quagmire, CLI, Illegal Wire tapping, Hunting with Cheney, Pat Tillman cover-up, vacation, Katrina, Brownie, Swift boat veterans, Election Fraud again, Patriot Act, Constitution “just a goddamned piece of paper”, Torture, Abu Ghraib, Attorney firings, Libby commuted, surge, Gonzalez, Open borders, vacation, etc., vacation, etc., vacation, etc.

But there is no need for a closer look at 9/11, the events that led up to it or the possibility of a conspiracy to cover-up any aspect of it?

You post a grab bag of internet myths, outright falsehoods, far-left talking points, and other assorted nonsense and pretend that you're making a point. You have none to make.

Incidentally, nobody over the age of ten believes that Bush called the Constitution "a goddamned piece of paper." That ALL of Bush's dear friends in the mainstream media missed this story is a tough sell.

There is no "missing" Pentagon money. One of your fellow liars, Jim Fetzer, made up that yarn out of whole cloth.

 

[John Blonn]

Given that the major conclusions of the 9/11 Commission cohere with the conclusions reached by the scientific and engineering community, I accept these major conclusions. i.e. no "inside job."

And please show me where the 9/11 Commission was deemed the "official version of 9/11."

 

[Bell]

The 9/11 commission was put together and lorded over and put out by the Bush administration as the official version of 9/11.

Have you accepted it?

No, I believe midgets brought down the WTC. Why midgets you ask? They envied the hight of those towers.

 

[Par]

Incomplete is a significant error.

This bit of equivocation is, of course, a fairly transparent attempt at a high-redefinition fallacy. In any event, by that measure there simply doesn’t exist (nor could there exist) an adequate report into a complex historical event.

Now back to the post. What have they done to earn the faith you put into their sponsored 9/11 version?

As I’ve explained a number of times now, you’re committing the begging the question fallacy.

 

[Myriad]

Zen, what action are you recommending to deal with this situation? I'm a U.S. citizen.

Are you suggesting that I should vote for somebody other than George W. Bush in the next presidential election? (Because, not to give away too much private political information, I was probably going to do that anyhow.)

Do you have more specific voting recommendations than that? Is there a candidate or a party you wish me to support?

Are there products you think I should be boycotting? Investments you want me to avoid, or divest if I'm already bought in?

Do you want me to blow something up, or to kill someone? (Just to be clear: I'm not offering to do so, I'm merely asking if that is something you would want me to do.)

I'm asking this because people like you come here over and over and ask me to believe certain things. "So and so is responsible for such and such, and plans to do this and that in the future, and then won't you be sorry you didn't believe me."

But belief is immaterial unless it motivates action. If the beliefs you want me to adopt mean anything, then I assume that if I believe you but do nothing, you think I will be just as sorry as if I didn't believe you at all. So supposing I believed everything that you claim, what action would you wish of me? What must I do, in order to not regret my inaction in the future?

Please note that "help you spread your belief" doesn't really answer the question. That might indeed be what you most want from me specifically, in the short term, but the question still remains what action you would desire from all of those to whom the belief is ultimately spread. Also, please avoid vague verbs like telling me to "support" something. Tell me the tangible form such "support" should take: voting, donating, boycotting, investing, divesting, bombing, singing, digging, etc.

Zen? I think this is a rather important question. Did you miss it or do you not want to address it?

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[pomeroo]

Considering who is selling the woo-woo, I think it best to just keep repeating what I always say. Bush is incompetant and evil. Osama is competant and evil. When they collide, it is like a collision between two drunk drivers at a busy crosswalk. Guess who gets hurt worst.

Thew rest of the discussion is a catfight between ambulance-chasing lawyers of questionable ethics.

Bush is not evil. Why should an intelligent man like yourself express such a irrational sentiment?

 

[twinstead]

This is a good illustration of the need for truthers to distill out all the bogus information, lies, conjecture, half truths, rumor, and bad science from their claims so as to not look like fools.

Zen, your list would be 1 or 2 things if you did all that. Now wouldn't that be easier to type and discuss?

 

[gumboot]

So because some FBI diligently did their job down at ground zero this constitutes a full and complete investigation into 9/11? It been said their were other FBI agents tried to also do their job leading up to 9/11. Do we really know what happen there for sure? Have they all been heard?

I think you missed the point. When you pontificate about "no real investigation" you ignore the enormous volume of investigation that has followed 9/11. I'm not just talking the largest criminal investigation in human history, or the immense NIST investigations, or the 9/11 Commission Report's post mortem. I'm not just talking the thousands of hours spent assembling a case to prosecute those responsible. I'm not just talking the mountain of evidence gathered from seized materials in Afghanistan which will no doubt be used in upcoming warcrimes tribunals.

I'm talking the restructuring of the CIA and FBI. The total change in NORAD's mission. The changes in the FAA. In a myriad of walks of life. 9/11 revealed a LOT of flaws in a LOT of systems. Many of them have since been addressed. Some haven't of course, and should be. Other reactions were perhaps over zealous, and need to be trimmed back.

In September 2001, the US Government, with it's many branches, had no way whatsoever of stopping the attacks, except by dumb luck.

Today, in September 2007, I believe if a similar attack was attempted, it would be stopped dead in its tracks.

In the end, that's all that matters.

-Gumboot