Answering the lack of proof rebuke

[noise]

The government has refused to declassify evidence. Furthermore, we have a recent allegation that suggests the CIA destroyed key evidence.

Yet some debunkers completely ignore this information and accuse 9/11 skeptics of failing to provide proof. I agree that speculation shouldn't be confused for truth. But whose actions best demonstrate a lack of regard for the truth? That would be the government and anyone who refuses to acknowledge the government's secretive conduct (in relation to 9/11) which likely now includes obstruction of justice.

[whatchamacallit]

1. Word.

[hack89]

2. Knowingly disregarding fundamental science and engineering principles

to support outlandish CT (space beams, mini-nukes, free fall, static vs dynamic structural loading, etc, etc) is the greater lack of regard for the truth. If you have to make up your own science to "prove" your point then there is no truth to it at all.

[petgoat]

3. The 9CR had $15 Million and didn't provide proof. NIST had $20 Million.

Give us $35 million and two years and subpoena power,
then ask us for proof.

[LARED]

4. Proof of what?

Neither the 9/11 CR or the NIST set out to prove anything.

What are you talking about?

[leftofthedial]

6. then I expect you'll stop offering their propaganda as proof

that's at least some progress

:thumbsup:

[LARED]

8. I offer facts and evidence established by science

I you want to believe the NIST reports are propaganda, have fun. It's sort of you like saying science is propaganda.

[petgoat]

7. My point exactly. Implied much, proved nothing. The body politic

believes the 9CR proved that al Qaeda did it and that the
NIST report proved that fires brought the building down.

[LARED]

9. The point is CT'ers for some unknown reason

seem to expect the NIST reports and the 9/11 CR report to prove something or they are useless to understand the events of 9/11?

What exactly do you expect them to prove?

The 9/11 CR is a chronology of events. Designed to blame no one. (Like congress or the WH) That's what congressional blue ribbon panels do.

The NIST reports makes no attempt to prove anything. The reports are an investigation regarding the performance of the buildings in order to make improvement to new buildings. A very through investigation as well. They did not set out to prove the planes and subsequent fire destroyed the building. That is self evident.

[nebula]

12. How convenient for Cheney

and the rest of the PNACers.

"The 9/11 CR is a chronology of events. Designed to blame no one."

[petgoat]

14. Because those who resist calls for new investigations claim all questions have been answered

by the official reports, CTers point out there's no proof in these "answers" and,
as you say, no attempt at proof.

Thus the official reports fail to convince and new investigations are needed.

[AZCat]

5. Forget proof.

I'd be satisfied if the TM would stop making arguments based on a faulty understanding of physics and engineering.

[Laurier]

13. Who is this "us" that you refer to?

And who is it the unnamed entity that you suggest should give this unidentified "us" $35 million?

[petgoat]

15. Truth-seekers, as opposed to gov't hacks. nt

[noise]

10. IMO, there isn't

enough declassified information to determine what happened on 9/11. The government could remedy this in 24 hours but chooses not to do so. Thus the government is obstructing the public from knowing the truth about 9/11.

[bushsawaa11hitwtc]

11. Naudet Bros and James Hanlon did they collaborate on the film?

they worked together on the "911" CBS movie, now a DVD, but who set them up to meet? Hanlon is an actor/fireman, I have only begun to read up on website 911 foreknowledge dot com and I whole heartedly believe the lucky shot of AA11 caught by Naudet was set up. They were French film students arriving in US in 1989. Don't know anything of their background. They had a TV film Dec. 26th on CBS, Killing in the Name of God, Robert DeNiro narrated "911" but did not want to be on the DVD, maybe it had to do with the deal, maybe he wised up on the government's involvement in 911. He doesn't speak out like Penn, or Robbins, or Sheen. I think they conspired, having full knowledge of the attack. Do a photo search on these 3 guys.