Sunday, 11 September 2011

Why We Need A New 9/11 Investigation - Guest Post



A guest post by Stewart Cowan


Why We Need A New 9/11 Investigation

I was out and about on September 11th 2001 and the first inkling I had that the attacks had taken place was on seeing a picture of one of the Twin Towers on fire on a newspaper stand in the centre of Glasgow while changing buses. When I reached my friends’ house around dinner time, the telly was on and I was finally able to catch up with what had happened: the jets hitting the Towers and pulverising them, the attack on the Pentagon and the other plane that never reached its intended target but crashed in a Pennsylvanian field. Building 7 was still standing at this point (more on that later).

Naturally, I was gobsmacked with what I saw, but at the same time, I just could not believe that the authorities in the US could not have known that something this big was going to happen. I told a few people what I thought, but I pretty much kept quiet about it for the next couple of years – until I came across the “9/11 Truth Movement” and realised that millions of people had the same suspicions I had. I found out that not only did some people think that the government let it happen, but that they made it happen.

Further investigation was called for on my part.

I quickly learned that there were a great many inconsistencies and unbelievable coincidences in the official 9/11 story. For example, no steel framed skyscraper had ever completely collapsed due to fire before. Even those which had been ablaze for many hours never fell to the ground. Yet three of the World Trade Centre buildings fell completely – even the 47-story Salomon Brothers Building (WTC7) which was not hit by a plane.

For many, Building 7 is the biggest ‘smoking gun’ of all because it resembles a classic controlled demolition. 1,500 architects and engineers agree and want a new investigation. So many people in New York City have never seen footage of Building 7’s collapse, that a poster and TV ad campaign is underway this week.

And Building 7 wasn’t even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. But then, the chairman and vice chairman wrote in their book that the Commission was “set up to fail”.

When George W Bush gave his evidence to the Commission it was not under oath and he was chaperoned by Dick Cheney, the man responsible for making NORAD stand down, according to “conspiracy theorists”. Former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta testified that the Vice President had ordered the plane heading for the Pentagon NOT to be shot down. This testimony was omitted from the Commission’s final report.

9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating that restrictions on information from the Presidential Daily Briefs meant that the investigation was “deliberately compromised by the president of the United States”. Another Commissioner, Timothy Roemer said, "To paraphrase Churchill, never have so few commissioners reviewed such important documents with so many restrictions. The 10 commissioners should either have access to this or not at all."

In Cheney’s new book , which seems to have been released to coincide with the tenth anniversary, he claims that he did order that Flight 77 could be shot down when it was eighty miles out then again when it was sixty miles out, but it was allowed to hit the Pentagon. He also claims that Flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania because passengers stormed the cockpit, aware of what had already happened that morning, however, the large area across which the wreckage extends suggests that the plane exploded in mid-air, and pictures from the alleged crash site leave us wondering where the actual plane is, if it crashed without being blown out of the sky first.

It is also difficult to see how a large passenger jet could have made such little initial damage to the outside of the Pentagon, before the walls collapsed.

Osama bin Laden was NOT wanted by the FBI for 9/11 (he had actually been a CIA 'asset' in Bosnia) and ‘al Qaeda’ was a name made up by Western intelligence to give the impression that disparate groups of Islamic terrorists had a united front. After the end of the Cold War, a new enemy was needed to try to frighten us into giving up our rights.

And 9/11 was the excuse the US Government needed to invade Afghanistan.

Many people find it impossible to believe that there could have been any government involvement, but history provides many examples of “false flag” terrorism where state-sponsored attacks were carried out and blamed on political enemies. Operation Gladio was the name given to the clandestine NATO "stay-behind" operations in Europe after World War II to keep communism in check, and many civilian deaths can be attributed to Gladio over decades which were to discredit the likes of the Red Brigades.

And a secret US Government document from 1962 called Operation Northwoods, now declassified, actually suggests hijacking planes then blowing them out of the sky and blaming it on Cuba as a pretext to invade the now Communist island.

I cannot possibly mention all the inconsistencies in a blog post where it has taken others whole books to set out their arguments, but I join the calls for a proper investigation into 9/11 because it just doesn’t add up.

Dr Paul Craig Roberts (father of Reaganomics and the former head of policy at the Department of Treasury) wrote last month, “Even if there were definite proof of government complicity, it is uncertain that Americans could accept it. Architects, engineers, and scientists live in a fact-based community, but for most people facts are no match for emotions”.

I can appreciate that this is what keeps a great many people from questioning the official story. This weekend emotions will be high as we relive those desperate events of a decade ago, but many people who lost family members on 9/11 don’t believe the government’s version of events and have become activists for truth.

They aren't afraid to face the truth because they want justice for their loved ones. 


67 comments:

GHmltn said...

Perhaps JFK did it?

RMcGeddon said...

Firstly, condolences to anyone affected by the attack on the US on 9/11.
It's a conundrum right enough. I can accept that the towers might have collapsed due to weakened steel but that doesn't explain why it was such a 'controlled' collapse. Surely they would have fallen unevenly as different parts of the towers would have been affected differently. And I've no idea why Bldg 7 collapsed at all. Or why we've never been allowed to see any aircraft parts. All buried quickly or melted and shipped to China. The few bits of engine photos that we've seen have been identified as being not the type of engines fitted to the missing aircraft.
The odds of having an 'exercise' of an attack on New York at the same time as a real attack must be pretty high against. One report said it was billions to one against. Was there not the same here on 7/7 ? Exercise and real situation running simultaneously ?
Was Gladio not set up pre Nato by the allies at the end of WW2 ? Hiring former Nazis to work undercover for the West rather than being hung for their crimes ?

William said...

How do you rig up the WTC with explosives beforehand without anyone noticing? If hijackers didn't smash planes into the buildings, who did? What about bin Laden? He seemed determined to take credit for the attack. Why would he do so knowing the US had stitched him up?

petem130 said...

I saw the TV programme earlier this week which covered the topic. They gave short thrift to all the theories apart from the official version.

There are enough questions for a further look at things. It seems unlikely that this will happen though.

Flight 93 seems particularly clouded.

Can't say I'm particularly concerned about this latest threat for an anniversary bombing. It's fits with the "we protect you from the threat which is still there and you need us" by the authoritise.

A tangled web job. Again.

Quiet_Man said...

He'll be trying to tell us it wasn't Muslims next... Oops I think that's exactly what he's implying.

wisnaeme said...

So some folk are not happy with the official take on events then. No surprise there. That and every other official take on events apparently have their sceptics....and with good reason. Lockerbie, Dunblane, Hillsborough,WMD and the lack of them. Take your pick,The inquiry into the costs of the Scottish parliament building, the trams then there was that Professor Kelly inquiry. One should have become vaccinated and immune to the conclusions of official inquiries and their becauses for the use of....or as Victor Meldrew would say," I don't believe it." In many instances you know you are gonna be served up a dish of conveniences even before the fat lady has started singing, such is the contempt we, the little people are held in by our lairds and masters.
.... and as for the swivel serpent mandarins, our so called public servants doing in our name the bidding of politicians and interested parties ... the less said the better. Accountability is not in the public interest apparently. So where did we go wrong? At the risk of the internet thought police kicking in my door on grounds of subversion; I timidly venture to suggest perhaps a few lynchings would have been in order as punishmenir public servantst to fit the crime ...to encourage the others ...so to speak. Lizzie the first of England had the right idea. Off with their heads, has sadly gone out of fashion. More is the pity, for I can see no other option ....if folk are to reclaim their parliament, their public institutions and their trust in "official explanation" of due causes in the name of their becauses.

Yours, one of the countless disenfranchised.

Griya Mobil Kita said...

Nice article, thanks for the information. rental mobil jakarta

Anon said...

Excellent post! Congratulations. Mohamed Atta was trained at a US military base and learnt to fly at a Venice Florida airfield long used by the CIA. 9 11 is similar to the CIA's Operation Northwoods and the CIA's Operation Gladio. The members of the elite who organised the attacks are Mafia and Fascist in their philosophy. The 9 11 operation would have involved spooks from the USA, UK, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan, Germany etc etc. The Bin Ladens are old friends of the Bush family. Salem bin Laden helped the CIA with Iran Contra. Government operatives carry out drills before these false flag attacks. There were government drills just before the Norway Attacks, the London Tube Bombings, 9 11 etc.

- Aangirfan

Anon said...

Those who accept the official version of 9 11 have perhaps not heard of Operation Mockingbird - the CIA takeover of the media. That includes the BBC.

Those who doubt that governments carry out false flag operations should look at the Guy Fawkes plot (done by Lord Cecil's agents) and the Jubilee Plot in Queen Victoria's reign.

Those who doubt that the US and UK governments contain fascists should look back to the 1930s when a large chunk of the Establishment were fans of Mussolini and Hitler.

Then there's the Peterloo Massacre...

- Aangirfan

Billy said...

A new forensic scientific investigation into what happened to the Twin Towers, Building 7, Building 6 with the huge round holes burnt vertically through it and all the other things that happened that day such as the thousands of vehicles that SPONTANIOUSLY burst into flames for miles around and away from the Twin Towers.

How the Earth's Magnetic Field dropped at the EXACT moment of each "plane" impact and also at the EXACT moment of all three buildings "collapse". She also shows how these three buildings managed to "hit" the ground with NO seismic IMPACT because they turned to DUST.

No plane hitting a building nor controlled demolitions can do any of these things so both the US government and thousands of Architects & Engineers are putting out LIES with regard to 9/11.

All the proof is in Dr Judy Wood's book "Where Did The Towers Go? - She is the only person to have taken their evidence right up to the Supreme Court where they broke the law to throw it out - Wonder Why?

JohnB said...

Very brave to write, or even publish this article.

I know certain facts:

Mossad new about the plan and warned the U.S. government beforehand. Repeatedly.

A friend of mine who worked on the trading floor of the Chicago Stock Exchange turned up for work to discover almost all Israel-connected businesses had told their staff to take the day off.

Those are facts.

This means that (a) the U.S.'s intelligence agencies are pish (which has been documented - information was received but didn't go through the right channels a.k.a. "Huge Fuck Up") or (b) some agency within the Government of the U.S. was complicit.

(b) is too wicked to even consider yet history tells us otherwise.

Emotionally, I cannot accept (b) yet the rational, cool and skeptical side of me allows that monstrous possibility to be considered.

Regards,
John

Stewart Cowan said...

RMcGeddon,

Thanks for mentioning some of the other reasons for disbelieving the official story.

Yes, drills were going on at the same stations at the same time as the real attacks on the morning of 7/7.

Stewart Cowan said...

William,

Thermite is considered by many to have been used on the Twin Towers. Firemen witnessed rivers of molten steel as if they were in a foundry.

Bin Laden didn't claim credit for the attacks and wasn't wanted for them.

M said...

I watched a TV programme the other evening where the Structural Engineer who designed the steelwork in the towers was talking about his design.

He said that the buildings were not constructed in the traditional way with an inner steel frame such as that at the Empire State Building, and which enabled it to survive from a plane accidently crashing in to it in the 1940's

It appears that the vertical columns of steel you saw on the outside walls of the World Trade Centre buildings formed the only actual support frame for the whole of the buildings and when the aircraft hit the walls and intense kerosene fuelled fires started this unusual frame support was fatally compromised.

Hope this helps you to understand why the buildings fell.

Stewart Cowan said...

petem130,

Was that the latest BBC hit piece, "911 Conspiracy Road Trip"?

Emily Church was one of the participants and is not happy at how it was edited to make her look stupid.

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150276446778981

Stewart Cowan said...

wisnaeme,

It's becoming clearer all the time why Blair changed the law so that treason was no longer a capital offence!

Yes, Lockerbie is clouded in secrecy and mystery as well. At least there were big bits of plane at the scene for all to see!

Stewart Cowan said...

Thank you Aangirfan,

That's right, some of the hijackers trained in the US. The Bush and bin Laden families are buddies - the bin Ladens were the only people allowed to fly out when all other planes were grounded after the attacks. Might they not have been questioned?

Stewart Cowan said...

Thanks, Billy,

I will check out Dr Judy Wood's book "Where Did The Towers Go?"

Stewart Cowan said...

JohnB,

Yes, the US had warnings from other countries. I have heard stories of Jewish and other people being warned not to turn up for work on 9/11 (like Netanyahu was warned not to leave his room on the morning of 7/7).

I have never been able to ascertain if they are apocryphal or not.

Many folk don't seem to be able to get past the emotional aspects of 9/11 to be able to accept the very probably fraud.

RMcGeddon said...

The attack on the Pentagon by Hani Hanjour was a mean bit of flying ...he took a 757, with zero time in type, did a 400 knot 330 degree sprialing dive at 2500 fpm, only gaining 30 knots, then 30 knots more descending from 2200 feet at full power, with a very steady hand as to not overshoot or hit the lawn, inside ground effect, at 460 knots impact speed, but was refused to rent a light aircraft cause he couldnt land it at 65 knots"
Pity there were no decent camera pictures to show this feat of flying.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html

Stewart Cowan said...

M,

Thanks for your comments, but the Twin Towers also had core columns which went from their bedrock anchors in the sub-basements to near the towers' tops,

Observer said...

I watched the same TV programme as others did, & I found the programme's evidence convincing, not the people doubting the official version.

I do not believe for single minute that this was some kind of government conspiracy - they couldn't keep Watergate a secret, how could they keep something like this under wraps?

You all credit the US government, as inefficient as any other government, with too much ability.

Observer said...

There is a book called The Eleventh Day, which explains why 28 pages of the 9/11 report were suppressed - because it was to cover up the US relationship with Saudi Arabia - which is where the bombers hailed from.

The people who blew up the Twin Towers were fanatical Islamists intent on destroying America because of its support for the state of Israel & for their military presence on what they saw as sacred land.

That is why the American response, supported by Britain, to rain down death & destruction on Iraq was doubly wicked.

They knew where these bombers were from & they knew what they were about. That had nothing to do with Iraq.

Observer said...

& of course by attacking Iraq all the West did was manufacture more fanatical Islamists, just as they are doing by supporting the Israeli siege of Gaza.

Come on people face the truth, it wasn't a government conspiracy that brought down those Towers - it was sheer blind rage, & as long as that sheer blind rage continues to exist then none of us are safe.

Stewart Cowan said...

Observer,

I noticed the subtle propaganda in the programme right from the start. You cannot possibly form your opinions from a BBC hit piece and expect to be taken seriously.

I am not implicating the US Government per se, just elements within it - for example the sort of elements that secretly engage in regime change in other countries.

Many testimonies of ordinary Americans who were there on 9/11 were ignored by the Commission.

At least we agree on Iraq.

William said...

"Thermite is considered by many to have been used on the Twin Towers."

Considered and then subsequently destroyed by scientific fact.

http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm

"Thermite is a slow-burning product in comparison, does not explode, and, as far as I can determine, is never used in demolition of buildings. It can be used to melt horizontal pieces of steel, because it produces molten iron at up to 2,500 degrees centigrade, which flows onto the target and melts it. It cannot be used to melt vertical structures, because the molten iron simply flows past the target.....thermite in its conventional form is useless in demolition."

"Bin Laden didn't claim credit for the attacks and wasn't wanted for them."

Yes, he did and he was.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1362113/Bin-Laden-Yes-I-did-it.html

Still, it is much simpler to blame the Jews.

Observer said...

Stewart I have not formed my opinion based on one BBC programme. I have read numerous websites & articles which claim to provide proof that the Twin Towers were not brought down by those planes. But I think they were, it is the most straightforward & believable explantion supported by evidence.

I believe conspiracy theories are sometimes correct. The assassinatin of JFK is a perfect example, a lone gunman no more shot him than I did, & I wasn't born at the time. When we look at the Lockerbie verdict there is proof that the trial was flawed.

I think there are questions surrounding the knowledge that intelligence services had about 9/11, they seem to have known an event was being planned & perhaps did not act. That is quite believable.

What I think happened is this. They decided to fly planes into buildings to strike fear & horror into Americans - the same fear & horror that has been experienced by so many people in the middle east - at the hands of America or Israel. I don't think they knew the Towers would collapse - because they shouldn't have. Buildings that size should have been designed to withstand an airplane flying into them, as it was a reasonable risk. There was a huge design flaw in the Twin Towers.

I don't think Al Q expected those Towers to collapse any more than any of us did.

But of course I might be completely wrong, I am just saying what I think happened.

Stewart Cowan said...

William,

Thermite residue was found in dust samples from the Twin Towers.

Bin Laden was wanted for the embassy bombings in Africa, but not for 9/11 - Usama bin Laden

Who's blaming "the Jews?"

Stewart Cowan said...

Observer,

You are entitled to form your own opinions, of course, but a great many experts disagree with you.

For Building 7 to be completely demolished as well magnifies the suspicion.

Observer said...

When 9/11 happened to be honest I thought it was Bin Laden because he had had a go at the Twin Towers before. A somewhat aborted mission at basement level if I remember.

I don't know what the Jews have to do with it either.

The onus is on the people who don't believe the official version to provide the proof. If that emerges, like any reasonable person, I will change my mind.

Billy said...

Dear Dear! Observer - Apart from all the facts I have listed above - Most of the supposed hijackers are sill alive and flying Saudi Arabian planes.

These pilots omplained about their pictures and names being used and the US government just ignored them - go watch the Italian video ZERO An Investigation Into 9/11.

Hijackers with planes or people with exlosives cannot change the Earth's Magnetic Field or make three giant buildings, everything in them including people, turn to dust with no seismic impact or cause thousands of vehicles for miles around and away from the Twin Towers to spontaniously burst into flames which the firemen could not put out etc etc etc.

Dr Judy Wood's book "Where Did The Towers Go? concentrates on evidence of eactly what happened on 9/11 and not on who did it or why - Certainly nothing to do with "terrorists".

Observer said...

Was Building 7 constructed at the same time as the Twin Towers? If it was then it was probably the same design flaw. If it wasn't then your argument gets a huge boost.

I don't know the answer to the question I have asked.

Observer said...

I'm sorry I really am because I try to be nice, but Judy Wood's version of what happened is straight out of science fiction.

Michele said...

3,000 people lost their lives that day - and this is their epitaph.

Exoneration of Islamic terrorism has reached a new low.

Apogee said...

Hi Stewart,very well written. I can remember a few years ago now, of a video which included a huge vertical support,at ground level which had been cut at a 45 degree angle, which was cut clean in a straight line by considerable heat,it was obvious where the metal was molten at the cut.There were also explosions reported in the basement just before the crash.
Some one mentioned Lockerbie,I was told that the Americans had choppers at the site inside 45 minutes, pretty good going when you think about it!
Oh! and another report said two floors at different levels were cleared out a frw weeks before supposedly to install internet cabling, could you tell the difference between cat 5 cable for internet use and cable used for demolition charges? Most people couldn't.
Far too many loose ends, and seeming attempts to confuse people!

b. j. edwards said...

How sad that there are still so many of you so gullible to fall for 9/11 conspiracy theories after so many years.

Stewart's post above is simply repetition of long-since debunked misrepresentations and appeals to incredulity. If you don't realize it yet, you haven't bothered to do the most fundamental homework and are happy to let yourselves be used by those who know how to take advantage of gullible people for their own purposes.

The Last Of The Few said...

I can not believe the sheer stupidity of people to come forward with conspiracy theories over this attack.

I can go on at length about the burning of fuel taking the steel out and can conter act the statements like "it never happened to a steel structure that had a fire before" line.

There are many statements about of "why" certain sections of reports etc etc are missing or misplaced but they are not a government or governments that colluded to a fictious incident of this scale that caused a loss of so many lives.

No way were these towers destroyed by explosives, government collusions, insurance claims or any other theory other that the fact Boeing aircraft were hijacked full of people and fuel and smashed into the towers at several 100's of miles per hour weighing several 100 tonnes.

b. j. edwards said...

9/11 Deniers like Stewart Cowan and Subrosa are a dime a dozen. The 9/11 Denial Movement peaked in 2006 and has been in free fall ever since.

Stewart has shown repeatedly that he cannot bring any evidence to the table just as his fellow Deniers could not do for the last 10 years. He keeps promising to do so but never does. And never will.

The burden of proof remains on his shoulders and that of all 9/11 "Truthers". Until they get that, they'll just continue to whine and marginalized themselves even more.

Trooper Thompson said...

@ bjedwards,

make your mind up. Either '9/11 deniers' are 'a dime a dozen' (i.e. they are many) or they're in free fall (like Building 7!)

cynicalHighlander said...

Nothing to see here.

Weekend Yachtsman said...

SR, you don't do yourself any favours by giving blog space to tinfoil hat nonsense on this scale.

Stewart Cowan said...

Michele,

The day I exonerate Islamic terrorists is the day Hell freezes over.

I happen to think that the people who are responsible for these crimes should be the ones who pay.

Stewart Cowan said...

Observer,

Building 7 was completed in the late 80's I think and to a different design, but it was obviously demolished by a different method as it collapsed from the bottom like a traditional demolition, whereas the Twin Towers started collapsing from the top down.

Stewart Cowan said...

Thank you, Apogee,

Building 7 also housed the offices of various secret services, so it would probably have been one of the easiest buildings in New York to wire with explosives.

I'm not an expert on Lockerbie, but I'll check out the claim about the American choppers.

Stewart Cowan said...

B.J. Edwards,

Anyone who calls someone with a different viewpoint a "denier" is clearly not interested in a civilised debate.

Tell me this: do witness statements count as evidence in your world, or are people who were actually there 'deniers' as well?

Stewart Cowan said...

The Last Of The Few,

Even if that were true, you forget about Building 7 which was not "full of people and fuel and smashed into [it] at several 100's of miles per hour weighing several 100 tonnes" ...and tons of other evidence.

Stewart Cowan said...

Trooper Thompson,

Good one. All BJ has in his armoury is name-calling. He's been doing it on my blog for the past few weeks like it's going to make me change my mind on this or any other matter.

Stewart Cowan said...

Weekend Yachtsman,

The mainstream media is the place where honest debate is discouraged. The blogosphere is like the Roman forum where people can meet and talk freely about anything they want to under the sun.

Stewart Cowan said...

cynicalHighlander,

That's a good video. Thank you. And that's just a portion of the crazy story they expect us to believe!

b. j. edwards said...

Stewart,

Hitler had a "different" viewpoint, too. Your statement is meaningless.

You are, in fact, a classic denialist and as such, you will continue to get the derision you willingly earn.

b. j. edwards said...

Trooper,

If you cannot understand the subject matter you would be better to keep your mouth shut then make such a foll of yourself.

Billy said...

Observer - Dr Judy Wood's evidence is nothing to do with science fiction - it is to do with facts.

The buildings turned to dust - documented fact. Including Buildig 7 where only some of the outer walls were left - documented fact. The Earth's Magnetic Field dropped at the exact moment of each plane impact - impossible if it were real planes but - documented fact. The Earth's Magnetic Field dropped at the exact moment of all three buildings collapse - documented fact. Thousands of vehicles spontaniously burst into flames for miles around and away from the Twin Towers - impossible for planes hitting buildings or controled demolitions to do this but - documented facts etc etc etc.

Dr Woods qualifications and experience are vastly more supperior to anyone in the truth movement and any one of us plus Direct Energy Weapons actually exist - Just why were Direct Energy Weapons manufacturers involved in NIST's investigation into the "collapse" of the Twin Towers?

b. j. edwards said...

I think everyone can see that Stewart continues his deliberate evasion of providing evidence for his claims.

If you don't see that, just post anything he has claimed above with the evidence he has provided to back it up.

You won't be able to do that. Which brings up the question: is Stewart incredibly stupid or is he deliberately lying to you knowing how gullible you can be?

Stewart Cowan said...

B.J.

"Hitler had a "different" viewpoint, too."

That says it all. Anyone who disagrees with you is a "Nazi".

Are you going to reply to my simple question, which was, do witness statements count as evidence in your world, or are people who were actually there 'deniers' as well?

"Which brings up the question: is Stewart incredibly stupid or is he deliberately lying to you knowing how gullible you can be?"

It only "brings up the question" in a distorted mind.

When evidence is presented to you, you say it isn't evidence. There doesn't seem to be a way to get through to you, so why don't you stop stalking me, because,

a) Your cheap psychology will never make me change my mind and

b) You are an evidence 'denier'!!

b. j. edwards said...

Stewart, unable to comprehend the Englush language, doesn't understand that "different viewpoints" is completely irrelevant, no matter what those "viewpoints" are. You're "Hitler" evasion shoes why.

You consistently refuse to provide a single stitch of evidence for you claims while desperately tring to shift the burden of proof from your shoulders to mine. It is clear what constitutes a claim and what constitutes evidence and you have YET to do anything but make claims.

Stewart, you need to provide evidence for the claims you have made. Why can't you?

b. j. edwards said...

Billy,

Dr. Judy Woods? If you believe her nonsense, it only illustrates how easy it is for denialists like Stewart to exist.

Poor kid.

Stewart Cowan said...

B.J.

Clearly, you just aren't understanding that EVIDENCE was ignored by the 9/11 Commission, which is the reason so many people want a real investigation.

That EVIDENCE includes the testimonies of numerous witnesses to bombs in the buildings and other aspects of 9/11 which contradict the official version of events and so were left out of the Report.

EVIDENCE also exists in video and photograph form. It is this EVIDENCE which has resulted in over 1,500 architects and engineers to question the official story.

There is EVIDENCE of a possible insurance scam by WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein.

There is physical EVIDENCE of nano-thermite from the debris.

There is EVIDENCE that the US was warned by other countries, yet President Bush was hundreds of miles away reading a story about goats to schoolchildren.

EVIDENCE showed that the anthrax used in attacks after 9/11 was US military stock.

I could go on were I not pressed for time. All this is EVIDENCE which would not be ignored in any other crime, yet it has been forgotten about here.

Oh, and wasn't it a crime in itself to shift all the evidence contained in the rubble as quickly as possible?

There is EVIDENCE which screams out for a proper investigation. One where the commissioners don't resign because it has been "set up to fail".

If you, B.J., don't agree with me then that is your prerogative, but to keep insisting that there is no evidence of possible foul play is surely dishonest.

b. j. edwards said...

Stewart,

Clearly you are showing how desperate you are in repeating debunked "claims" of evidence instead of providing any "actual" evidence to back up your claims

In fact you are so out of touch with reality that you have simply repeated 9/11 "Truther" assertions that go back as far as 2002 that no one was ever able to demonstrate. Now, why do you think anyone would ever start yet another investigation based on your wacko imagination?

It is clear why you are the supremely dishonest one here, Stewart, trying to substitute claims for evidence hoping that no one will notice.

It is why people like me expose you denialists showing your intellectual dishonesty for all the world to see.

Now, are you going to FINALLY provide evidence for your claims, Stewart, or will you continue to try to con everyone here?

It's your choice to continue your charade or come clean and apologize.

Stewart Cowan said...

B.J.

God alone knows why I am still bothering to reply to you.

"Now, why do you think anyone would ever start yet another investigation based on your wacko imagination?"

Are you for real? The families of the victims of 9/11 have been calling for a new enquiry after the last whitewash. Their questions were largely ignored last time. Thousands of architects and engineers and many others are calling for a proper investigation.

This isn't about me. The FAMILIES want a proper investigation and the EXPERTS want a proper investigation.

I cannot make it much simpler, so either tell me you understand or go away because you are obviously a troll.

Do you even realise that your accusations against me can be applied to many of the families of the victims? You are saying they are 'wacko' and 'dishonest' as well, and presumably you think they should apologise for seeking a real investigation into the deaths of their loved ones and nearly 3,000 others.

subrosa said...

Bj, I think Stewart has done his best to patiently answer the question you've repeatedly asked, yet you seem unable to accept his responses.

Time to stop now I think.

Here to help.

RMcGeddon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
b. j. edwards said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
subrosa said...

Bj, I asked you to stop but you ignored me.

This latest comment of yours adds nothing to the debate other than to insult those of a differing opinion to yourself.

Of course I will keep your comment on file in case anyone wishes to question my decision.

b. j. edwards said...

One is entitled to one's own opinion but not to one's own facts.

b. j. edwards said...

Here's a little help:

"How Skeptics Confronted 9/11 Denialism."

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-06-04/#feature

ewingsc said...

b j edwards has been spamming this crap for years.

Always the same.

He's not interested in exploring the truth.

Only in suppressing it.

This doco makes a liar out of him and people like him.

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out

watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ

ewingsc said...

Why You Can NOT Believe the "9/11 Conspiracy Theory De-bunkers!"

http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/911-facts/48-911-commentary/20647-why-you-can-not-believe-the-q911-conspiracy-theory-de-bunkersq.html

Related Posts with Thumbnails