There is a logic failure here. How do you know this evidence exists if it is classified? Just what they have classified has never been proven by the truther sites, not even its very existence is known with any certainty-it is only an assumption.



But you're not qualified to make that judgement and if the information was falsified the experts would have discovered it. I suppose you assume it was read and believed without thought? Both camps have examined the NIST report ad infinitum since it was published and those who disagree with its findings make fundamental errors in their calculations. There is a new truther analysis being critiqued as we speak and already the cracks in the truther's findings are becoming evident. No-one has been able to discount the findings within the NIST with any accuracy.



When you understand what it takes to rig a building for explosives, and how explosives work, and the fact that the buildings were burning out of control, there is no sane reason to even suspect the use of fire proof explosives, let alone waste time and funding looking for them. The idea is too silly to be contemplated by anyone with a modicum of logic.



Exactly what is classified?



Incorrect. Some of the evidence was presented in the Moussaoui Trial

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution.html

There's a lot to wade through, but there is evidence.

I'll post it again:

The 'post-mortem' analyses clearly show that the safety measures in place weren't adequate.

You wouldn't know as you never read the evidence. Have you read the NIST report? Or just secondary evaluations? Have you read analyses of the report by scientists, not just internet cranks? Have you read any of the scientific material I've posted throughout this thread? Do you have the background to comprehend the science even if you did bother to read them?

No evidence of explosives were found and I would like to add that it is probably because THEY DIDN'T BOTHER TO EVEN LOOK FOR EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES.

This event was planned well in advance by the powers that be. They already had the Patriot act written and ready to push through congress, most of whom did not even read it.

The plan to blame Osama Bin Laden and 16 highjackers was prepared in advance and ready to be given to and announced by media whores within 33 minutes after the towers fell.

They also had some unknown person on the street being interviewed to state that the towers fell, apparently because of structural damage. No one knows who that person was or why he might have been qualified to analyze why the towers fell.

The didn't look for explosives because they already had their story ready and it did not include explosives or controlled demolition because everyone knows that has to be planned well in advance... and after all, this attack took everyone by complete surprise.

They kept saying they were completely surprised that anyone would attack building with planes, which was a total lie because they were going through just such a drill at the same time this happened.

Fighter jets could not tell the real event from the drill and were confused.

This whole event is clearly STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM by globalists criminals.

Cool story bro'!

Because unlike you, I read a lot.

Try asking any valid questions to the FBI or CIA and see what kind of answers you get from them. In a word: "SORRY, THAT IS CLASSIFIED." Either that, or they will say "That is an on-going investigation and we can't discuss it."

On-going to eternity apparently.



The NIST report relies solely on a simulated computer program and fabricated (invented) evidence. Again, unlike you, I have done more reading on the subject and know that they spent more than two million dollars on a computer program and since they had no physical evidence they relied on the computer program to invent facts not in evidence that would allow their desired scenario to be validated, and it was one that excluded explosives.




Exploded buildings usually do include some fires. I saw a lot of smoke in the videos, I did not see a towering inferno burning out of control, particularly in building 7.

Explosions were reported by many witnesses, SOME WERE INJURED BY THEM, they were recorded on video, flashes all in a row down the side of the buildings. To say there was no sane reason to even suspect the use of explosives is INSANE AND RIDICULOUS.

Your claims not only don't hold any water, they are absurd.



Not allowing the public to evidence or proof in the investigation and calling it "classified" using the excuse of "national security" is what I am talking about.

If I wanted access to all the FBI or CIA files they would laugh their butts off at me. It is all classified.



TheY HAVE NO PROOF, NO PICTURES, NO DNA, NO BODIES, NO PROOF.

In fact some of the alleged highjackers are still alive.

and it is all completely true.

THESE ARE ALL FACTS THAT ARE A MATTER OF RECORD.

Please, there is no need to shout. Have you had a look at the evidence prresented in the Moussaoui trial? The drill was a practice to respond to a hijacking, not an attack on the WTC. The drill and the reality were responsible for much of the confusion on the day and that is a about the limit of this as evidence. There was no need to look for explosives as they would not have survived in a burning building without going off as soon as the contact was made with the fire, and this would not have occured universally with the all the charges. The scenario is ridiculous.

The buildings did not burn. They collapsed and turned into mostly dust and some rubble.

If those buildings were engulfed in fire, the entire city of New York would have been in flames.

There was very little actual fire.

Besides, the explosions did not come into contact with any fires. They went off in the lower floors, below the fires. All in a neat little row. You can clearly see them in many videos. They were no where near any fire.

Now, now, there is no need for ridiculous insults. You have no idea of what and the volume I've read.



My point still stands. No-one knows what is classified and the nature of what exists. No-one has mentioned this 'classified evidence' apart from secondary truther sites and they are often exposed as liars so I don't call that 'evidence', just hearsay.





You have absolutely no idea of what I've read since this tragedy, nor the volume, so there is no need for such nonsense claims. I know exactly how the NIST report was produced and your evaluation is quite a stretch.









But the fires occurred before the imagined explosions. Your analysis of the severity of the fires conflicts with the testimony of the firefighters I posted earlier. Did you not read that?



Your video of explosions is a truther fake. I will find the link and post it for you later.



Exactly what is classified?





You missed my point. Exactly what material is classified? And what value do you imagine it to have? Of course they would laugh at you.





Incorrect, and the claim they are still alive was debunked years ago. They are just people with the same names and we all know that never happens with Arabic names. I'll find the evidence for you so you won't read it later. I'm a little busy for it now, but don't worry, I will do it. I posted the evidence for the Moussaoui trial earlier, you can find some of what you're looking for there. I'm sure you won't bother.

While that might be possible, I doubt if it can be proven.

But there is still no evidence that the highjackers ever boarded those planes. No pictures, no valid flight records, no bodies, no DNA etc. How does the FBI even know who was on the planes? Where is the proof?

Classified?

Imagined explosions? LOL That's hilarious.

No they didn't. The explosions can be seen going off below the fires. In building 7 the explosions are going off all in a row just below where the building is collapsing.

Also, witness testimony has explosions going off before a plane ever hits the towers.

No one seems to pay any attention to witness testimony and there were a lot of people who reported explosions going off at ground level.

For the second time, that video is a known hoax. I think I posted the analysis of that video some pages back. Did you not view it? If I haven't, I'll make sure I do. I've posted so many analyses on this thread since its inception, that I'm beginning to forget what I have actually brought to the table.



Also, witness testimony has no explosions going off before a plane ever hits the towers.



And there is plenty of witness testimony that contradicts that testimony. Don't believe witness testimony emphatically. Perceptions change and memory becomes altered unintentionally. No-one can be convicted on witness testimony alone unless it is overwhelming.

No I did not read that. Yes I am sure there were some fires, but the buildings were not towering infernos as you suggest.

I have heard and read testimony of firemen also -- about building 7 and they said that there was not much of a fire there. (And certainly not enough to cause the building to collapse so perfectly.)



Yes I read the NIST report and evaluations. It has been a while and I don't intend to continue reading any of that stuff because that report is not what convinced me that there is a government conspiracy and cover up.

There are literally thousands of things a person can read and study and investigate about the attack on 9-11 and hundreds of expert opinions that do not agree with each other. Hundreds of books have been written and published. I have better things to do.

I have read opinions of experts on both sides of the event and I have used my own common sense and instinct and bull chit meter to make my determinations about the official account of 9-11.

All of the scientific mumbo jumbo in the world would not contribute one thing towards convincing me that the official report is the truth. One does not need to be a rocket scientist or a mathematical genius to make a determination that there is something very rotten in the kingdom.

I trust my instincts, they never fail me. I know propaganda and media hype when I hear it. I have become immune to it. The politicians LIE. They have been caught lying too many times. Shame on me if I continue to believe any of them.

I have seen many videos of building 7 collapsing. I have not seen any evidence of a hoaxed video of that. Claiming that something is a hoax has to be proven.

Of course the claim that the video of planes hitting the towers are hoaxes has also been made. How do you know all of the videos are not hoaxes?

Just as I thought....you don't know anything for sure.

I posted a 109 page report some pages back that demonstrates the severity of the fires in WTC7. I wish you people would read the evidence presented so I don't have to go over the same ground repeatedly. This gets SO tedious.

*Sigh* The video that was hoaxed was the video that shows the row of explosions going off. That one is a hoax and it has been proved. I may have posted that a few pages back. If not I will find and post/re-post it later as I'm not on my computer. It was analysed by a film FX guy who knows the techniques involved.

As to the rest of your point. No-planers claim they are fake, but they can't prove they have been faked.

You are correct. I don't know anything for sure where 9-11 is concerned, But then then NEITHER DO YOU.

I do know enough not to believe the liars who have lied to the public again and again. I do know enough to listen to my bull chit meter. It has had plenty of practice.

As far as going over the same ground repeatedly, I have done the same thing. I agree, it is so tedious.

As far as you telling me that "that video" was a fraud... you don't even know which video I am talking about.

There are hundreds of videos. You don't know which ones are frauds.

And if you claim that the video was a fraud, then tell me how that was proven and by whom and why I should believe it?

I have seen more than one video of building 7 collapsing.