Anybody run across this?

[Firemeboy]

A group of scholars apparently think that 9/11 didn't quite happen like was reported.  Looks like we've got another JFK conspiracy type event on our hands.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholars_for_9/11_Truth

There is a professor from BYU who has written a paper on the subject, and who is a member of the group.

Apologies if this has been posted before.

[Skar]

I've read that paper.  It seems long on conjecture and short on proof.  The main thrust of it is basically, "We see some odd things in the films of the event and in verbal accounts of conditions at the site afterward, therefore we should be allowed to investigate further."  As far as that goes, I agree. There are some wierd things and there should be no harm in investigating further.  The "Government's" reticence to allow outside experts to examine the physical evidence, frankly, is more disturbing than any of the "evidence" he brings up in his paper.

The "wierdest" thing he points out is the collapse of building 7 (?)  The one that wasn't one of the 2.  In footage of its collapse you can clearly see what look like squibs going off down one side of the building in advance of the collapse.  Very odd.

[Eric James Stone]

I looked at that video of building 7 a while back, and I'm pretty sure those aren't squibs.  What Prof. Jones sees as puffs of smoke don't act like puffs of smoke.  For example, they move downwards at the exact same rate as the building wall as it collapses.

I was rather annoyed when I first heard that Prof. Jones would be speaking about this at Life, the Universe and Everything, but then I realized that what he's proposing is pure fantasy, so it would fit right in at a science fiction and fantasy symposium.

[Firemeboy]

Yeah, but now Charlie Sheen is on the list, and he's like the son of the president...

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27264270.shtml

[Entsuropi]

The "Government's" reticence to allow outside experts to examine the physical evidence, frankly, is more disturbing than any of the "evidence" he brings up in his paper.

You know how much a public enquiry costs? Here the government avoids them like the plague, because they cost tens of millions of pounds usually.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

thats only because someone has to spring for lunch.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I don't mind further investigation. I would invite it. If the government has given a true account, then there should be *no* problem with further investigation. This is also how I felt about the whole UAE ports deal. I think it sends a horrible message to our allies that Congress would stonewall a deal simply because of nationality of the other partner happens to be geographically close to an enemy. However, if they're so squeeky clean, what did Bush have against a Congressional investigation? Sometimes I wonder if the rest of the world is retarded and I'm the only one with a brain.

Anyway, so yeah, something like the September 11 attacks is exceedingly difficult to account for completely. We will never be certain about everything, but that's all the more reason to look at it closer. As a current trial in Alexandria is showing, there was a god-awful amount of governmental incompetence regarding things that went on. One FBI agent sent a report to 17 major FBI officials outlining exactly the scenario that occurred, 2 months before the attacks. Nothing was done. Why? I suppose it *could* be a conspiracy, but Occam's razor, to me, seems to indicate fat lazy bastards in positions of authority.

So, further investigation is warranted. However, it pisses me off that because there are unclear facets people automatically assume this means the president got several people to engineer dark deeds against our own people, and somehow managed to remove any trace of a paper trail, and that you could get everyone who worked on the Pentagon after the attack to be absolutely silent about the fact that they never saw Airplane fuselage. I mean, what? How is any of that *possible?* let alone more likely than government incompetance (which we know is rampant) and some resourceful attacks from terrorists (who we *know* hate us).

meh. Sorry. Bad mood today.

[Skar]

You know how much a public enquiry costs? Here the government avoids them like the plague, because they cost tens of millions of pounds usually.

Yeah.  Expensive.  But people like Prof. Jones are just asking for access to the material.  That can't be too expensive.

I agree with SE.

As for the ports deal... I have an interesting factoid.  When I was in Afghanistan we had a team from the UAE living next to us for a few months at Kandahar Airfield.  They did the same thing everyone else was doing...go out and hunt down the Taliban.  

It's amazing to me that the Democrats could keep a straight face when they claimed that the ports deal was a threat to national security.  It flew in the face of everything they've been saying about national security for the past 4 years, and their reasoning boiled down to "they're arabs so we can't trust them"  I mean honestly, they could have at least come up with something credible.  

[House of Mustard]

Here's an article from Popular Mechanics that refutes most of the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

That's an amazingly sane, logical, and common sense article.

So it must not be true!

(see, the second sentence of this post is called "sarcasm")

[Skar]

How refreshing to see an article written that actually quotes eye-witnesses and shows unclipped data.

Thanks HoM.

[Firemeboy]

http://edition.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/23968.exclude.html

Looks like most people agree with Sheen...

I guess if you can act, then people think you know what you're talking about...

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

well... don't you?

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Skar how can you blame just the Democrats for torpedoing the port deal when the majority of the republican party did the exact same thing? You should expect the party not in power to do everything to press a percived advantage, If the tables were reversed, like under Clinton the Republicans would have been howling for blood and an impeachment preceeding. What stunned me was how willing the republicans were to cut and run from the president over it.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

ARGH!
I'm totally going to lock this if it goes any furhter. I deliberately ignored that so we wouldn't have a fight. Now I'm expecting one.