"bankholiday"
Wrong, there is new evidence. You'd understand this if you'd take the time to review the continuing investigations. Or even prior investigations. Especially those into Bldg 7. The 9/11 panel, after they were forced to conclude their investigation admitted to that they believed there was enough evidence to warrant charges for conspiracy to coverup. This is basic 9/11 knowledge. From 2006! And you're here arguing the same uneducated nonsense. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html
15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi Nationals. Our allies to this day. GWB sealed 28 pages of the official report that outlined Saudi involvement, trying to hide the fact that the attack was supposedly carried out by our allies.
Even the White House Terror Chief Alleges CIA 9/11 Malfeasance and Cover Up.
http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/they-got-away-with-it-white-house-terror-chief-richard-clarke-alleges-cia-911-malfeasance-and-cover-up/
Firefighters that were there that day are still fighting to uncover the truth. These are professionals who saw and heard everything and refuse the official narrative.
https://www.ff911truthandunity.org/
Thousands of experts in engineering, aviation, architecture, senior military, law enforcement, government, & intelligence on record disputing or refuting the official investigation.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
"The seismic signals propagating from New York on September 11, 2001, recorded at Palisades (34 km) and published by the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University (LDEO), have here been subjected to a new critical study concerning their sources. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the nature of the waves, their velocities, frequencies, and magnitudes invalidate the official explanations which imply as sources the percussion of the twin towers by planes and the collapses of the three buildings, WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7."
- Dr. André Rousseau
Dr. Rousseau is a former researcher in geophysics and geology at the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) of France and a specialist in acoustic waves. He is also a member of Scientists for 9/11 Truth.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
I could on and on and on. But something tells me you won't bother. Because, like most Americans, you have an opinion and you're going to stick to it. Seriously, you think your responses here were in the least bit intellectual? You added nothing to the conversation. Have some pride in yourself and get educated, your sniping is pathetic.
how do you define new evidence as something that came out from 2006? Define educated too. You got a GED or something like that?
Typical lazy response. If you bothered to click through the links, you would have found more than an article from '06 including peer reviewed studies and up-to-date studies on Bldg 7. You might want to check your grammar before trying to make a snarky response about my potential level of education. Stay the fuck out of this debate if you're not willing to take it seriously. There are families out there still trying to get to the truth of who murdered their loved ones, and all you're doing is proving what a know-it-all know-nothing you are while polluting the debate with snipe comments that mean and add nothing.
lol u mad? What families don't accept the truth of what happened? It's not a debate, much like the holocaust or sandy hook, what happened happened. Could we have done more to prevent it? Absolutely, unfortunately hind sight is always 20/20. But keeping these nameless and faceless accusations out that it was a hoax, or an inside job, or something else sinister is simply nonsense. So u guys can keep armchair engineering as much as you want, but you're wrong and need to get on with your lives. The blockchain isn't solving a damn thing here.
No, you only say it's not a debate because you're too lazy to read through the research and evidence from qualified researches and investigators. Including the 9/11 Commission. What kind of jack ass doesn't bother reading but will spend all this time denouncing the discussion as "nonsense"? You're a POS troll, that's you're only purpose in this discussion.
YoU'rE a PoS tRoLl. tHaTs YoU'rE oNlY pUrPoSe In ThIs DiScUsSiOn.