There never has been and never will be an “Official” investigation into the 9/11 episode. If there was ever going to be, we’d have had one already.
Maybe someone will hack something but there is probably nothing left to hack. In fact we don’t really need anyone to hack anything or any phony “Official” anything. I don’t need anybody to tell me what happened – I saw the film. Now who and why is another story.
The time for giving the government the benefit of the doubt or one last opportunity to clean up it’s act is long gone – for all but the most emotional minded among us. There is a fully enacted campaign of “non-experts who denounce the experts as conspiracy kooks” being broad-casted – 24/7 and more than twice on Sunday …
The government account supporters (those true believers) ask people to dismiss scientific evidence because – well, because it isn’t true. (really, that’s what they say) Isn’t true? Belief based government spokespersons, like Alexander Cockburn, Ann Barnhardt and Ted Rall continue to make fools of themselves. Here’s why …
The “Critics” of 9/11 Truth – By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Before I call architects kooks whose careers were spent building steel high rises, I would want to know a lot more about the subject than I do. Before I poke fun at nano-chemists and physicists, I would want to at least be able to read their papers and find the scientific flaws in their arguments.
Yet, none of the people who ridicule 9/11 skeptics are capable of this. How, for example, can Rall, Barnhardt, or Cockburn pass judgment on a nano-chemist with 40 years of experience and 60 scientific publications to his credit?
They cannot, but nevertheless do. They don’t hesitate to pass judgment on issues about which they have no knowledge or understanding. This is an interesting psychological phenomenon worthy of study and analysis.
Another interesting phenomenon is the strong emotional reactions that many have to 9/11, an event about which they have little information. Even the lead members of the 9/11 Commission itself have said that information was withheld from them and the commission was set up to fail. People who rush to the defense of NIST do not even know what they are defending as NIST refuses to release the details of the simulation upon which NIST bases its conclusion.
There is no 9/11 debate.
On the one hand there are credentialed experts who demonstrate problems in the official account, and on the other hand there are non-experts who denounce the experts as conspiracy kooks.
Full article – 9/11 – Experts vs Non-Experts