Why IS the Evidence for 9/11 Withheld?

[PatrickHenry]

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/e...e/missing.html

The vast majority of evidence that could shed light on what really happened to Flights 11, 175, 77, and has either mysteriously disappeared or been suppressed by authorities. The information vacuum is less complete for Flight 93, but its true fate is still shrouded in mystery. Consider the following. * No video shows hijackers at two of the three airports from which targeted flights originated. * The flight data recorders from every plane but Flight 93 were either deemed unrecovered or too damaged to yield data. * The cockpit voice recorders from every plane but Flight 93 were either deemed unrecovered or too damaged to yield data. * No audio recordings from any of the phone conversations with passengers or flight attendants have been released. * None of the electronic records of the monitoring of the hijacked flights by air traffic control systems have been released. * No interviews with air traffic controllers involved in the incident have been released. * Human remains from only a fraction of the people onboard Flights 11 and 175 have been identified. Government claims to have identified the remains of Flight 77 are unverifiable. Other gaps in the evidence result from failures to collect it. A striking example is the fact that on September 11th, there were no video cameras in the departure lounges of Logan Airport. This is highly peculiar, since such cameras have been in widespread use in airports since the mid-1980s, and Logan is a large international airport. Attempts by Village Voice reporters James Ridgeway and Russ Kick to obtain communications from the doomed flights using the Freedom of Information Act were met with stonewalling by the authorities. The written response of the Federal Aviation Administration contained the following excerpts: The recordings of communications, transcripts, and any documents relating to your request are part of an ongoing, sensitive investigation. There are no records or other correspondence relating to any signals, alarms, or any other form of nonverbal communications emanating from the four hijacked flights. ... There are no documents in written or recorded form having to do with communications from any of the four hijacked flights. The response from the FBI contained: [The] material you requested is located in an investigative file which is exempt from disclosure. The CIA referred Ridgeway and Kick to the FBI and the FAA. 1 Given all this, the real reason for the withholding of video evidence seems more likely to be that it protects the perpetrators, than that it protects the US public or the cause of justice.

It's all a coverup.

9/11 was the kickoff for a century of imperial warfare. Billions of revenue flow from that horrid event. Monstrous, greedy profit-hogs are feeding at the trough and the public sleeps on. But not all of us...

[tivodan1116]

yeah, the government set up 9/11 and executed it flawlessly...

Would this be the same government that can't fix the potholes on rt 490 or US 15 up near me? Or would this be the government that spends $815 for a toilet seat and has a $500 billion budget deficit?

LOL you conspiracy theorists crack me up.

[Sean]

Pat give it a rest. I gave you the opportunity to form a group for those interested in the subject and I have let the nature of a debate forum show you what the average reaction to such a topic will be.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: tivodan1116 Would this be the same government that can't fix the potholes on rt 490 or US 15 up near me? Or would this be the government that spends $815 for a toilet seat and has a $500 billion budget deficit?

What's the profit in fixing potholes? I see the profit in the military cost overruns.

But neither of you addressed the missing evidence.

Yeah, Sean, you own the forum. I know...

[Son of Belial]

Can we form a group then? I would join.

[Jack]

I would never join a group that allowed me...and you...to be members.

[Son of Belial]

Why?

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: PatrickHenry What's the profit in fixing potholes? I see the profit in the military cost overruns. But neither of you addressed the missing evidence. Yeah, Sean, you own the forum. I know...

Ok, i'll address it... how about the planes flew into freaking buildings at TOP SPEED??? What do you think the black boxes are made out of, Superman's cape? They're not indestructible.

There are better ways to make profit then kill thousands of people and then start a war based on it. I mean, come on dude, you can't actually believe this, right?

[Son of Belial]

Tivo, it's not about profit, it's about a police state and one world government. Sean, what do we have to do to begin a group for this? I'm in.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: tivodan1116 There are better ways to make profit then kill thousands of people and then start a war based on it. I mean, come on dude, you can't actually believe this, right?

I'm serious as a heart attack. What better way to make a profit than to kill people and say that it was someone else?

The recorders are nearly indestructible, by design. (They are supposed to be the evidence after a crash!) http://www.l-3ar.com/html/history.html

Fire Protection and Impact Through the years, Fairchild recorders have survived the most horrible accidents. To ensure their survivability, a series of tests needs to be accomplished, and the test must be done in sequence. Crash Impact Test -- It has been agreed that 3400gs for 6.5 ms would be required to meet most accident scenarios. This test is actually performed with a cannon. A Fairchild CVR has survived a crash that was estimated to be more than 6000 gs. Static Crush -- In this test, 5,000-pound pressure is applied against all six axis points. Pierce Test -- A pierce test employs a 500-lb. weight dropped from 10 feet. It has been modified to be performed with a hardened steel pin. Fire Test -- The devices are subjected to 1100 degrees Centigrade for 60 minutes, then undergo 10 hours at 260 degrees Centigrade. Because of its outstanding fire survival record, the Fairchild Model A100CVR was used as the model to insure mandated standards could be obtained. The very latest FAA standards require the fire test to be expanded to 1 hour at 1100 degrees Centigrade. which all solid state models of L-3 Recorders meet or exceed.

So run along, tivo. Post on something you can contribute to...

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Artic...&VERSION_NUM=1

respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers. Rather, theory has it, the subsequent contents fires attacking the questionably fireproofed lightweight trusses and load-bearing columns directly caused the collapses in an alarmingly short time. Of course, in light of there being no real evidence thus far produced, this could remain just unexplored theory. The frequency of published and unpublished reports raising questions about the steel fireproofing and other fire protection elements in the buildings, as well as their design and construction, is on the rise. The builders and owners of the World Trade Center property, the Port Authority of New York-New Jersey, a governmental agency that operates in an accountability vacuum beyond the reach of local fire and building codes, has denied charges that the buildings' fire protection or construction components were substandard but has refused to cooperate with requests for documentation supporting its contentions. Some citizens are taking to the streets to protest the investigation sellout. Sally Regenhard, for one, wants to know why and how the building fell as it did upon her unfortunate son Christian, an FDNY probationary firefighter. And so do we. Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers. Based on the incident's magnitude alone, a full-throttle, fully resourced, forensic investigation is imperative. More important, from a moral standpoint, for the safety of present and future generations who live and work in tall buildings-and for firefighters, always first in and last out-the lessons about the buildings' design and behavior in this extraordinary event must be learned and applied in the real world. To treat the September 11 incident any differently would be the height of stupidity and ignorance. The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately. The federal government must scrap the current setup and commission a fully resourced blue ribbon panel to conduct a clean and thorough investigation of the fire and collapse, leaving no stones unturned. Firefighters, this is your call to action. Turn to the article, WTC "Investigation"?: A Call to Action in this issue and on http://www.fire-eng.com, then contact your representatives in Congress and officials in Washington and help us correct this problem immediately. Bill Manning Fire Engineering January, 2002 Author(s) : Bill Manning

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: Son of Belial Tivo, it's not about profit,

I only said it was about profit because the original post and subsequent ones did. You bunker-building guys should get your theories straight.

it's about a police state

Reasons why a bunch of oil profiteers who are bought and sold by capitalist industry want a police state?

and one world government.

One world government? Yeah we're going a GREAT job with that, what with our allies disavowing any association with us and all.

I mean really, COME ON... the government "setting up" (conceiving of and carrying out) 9/11 is just preposterous. Your argument is based on a common logical error... Lack of proof of "A" means that "B" must be the truth... but you forget that "C", "D", and "E" could still be possibilities, as well as the fact that lack of evidence of "A" does not rule it out.

[Son of Belial]

Go read up on Operation Northwood and come back kthnx

[Clarence]

It is fear of the implications that holds people from looking twice at the information that is available. For crying out loud, can we please see some investigation at least into why these buildings fell so easily? I beg you Sean, Tivo, whoever. Have a look. Ask questions and give Pat, and others, a chance to provide evidence. I don't think any of us skeptics know what really happened, start to finish. There is ample evidence that we were lied into war. Some of us been screamin it out since day one and only now do people begin to suspect. And few will allow themselves to do more than suspect. It is fear of the implications that holds us back. But now I don't look so crazy after all to those I've been ranting to for almost three years. Now, I feel very strongly about 9/11. And I beg of you to have a closer look. Debunk us! We don't want to believe this either. It is vital that we rise to the challenge at this crossraods for human decency. Rant over.

[Nono]

Am I the only one who hasn't got these flight numbers memorized? Could we not refer to their place of demise instead?

I agree with tivo that it's plausible that flight-data recorders would not survive stuff like that. (FDRs recovered from far less harrowing crashes have disappointed in the past.) So it's plausible, that's all. In any case, did these events not merit the usual investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board with the usual finding on the public record?

Well, if you go to the NTSB site, you find the following for NY: "The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and this material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket."

So where does that leave us? As so often with 911, in an information limbo.
That is fishy.

[Sean]

Quote by: Clarence Debunk us!

That is the problem. You cannot debunk people who feel a) so strongly in favor of a conspiracy and b) rely on sources that can be convincing and so out there that we have nothing but what was reported to throw back at you. Debating with people who are reliant on conspiracies is pointless.

Also some more things that really bother people who do not rely on conspiracies are the more recent events. The suicide bombings in Iraq that have claimed so many lives have demonstrated that these people truly do hate us. Our involvement in Iraq lobbied for by the administration (weapons or not). Does that then make a rational person presume that our own government was behind 9/11? No. Just because Bush saw an opportunity to use the increased nationalism after 9/11 to make the far right section of his party happy does not then imply further involvement in 9/11-especially with the immense evidence of terrorists wanting to take down the WTC for years.

I am not going to convince any of you. That is not my place, and I know I will not anyway. You must understand though that the same is true for you. If people do not already buy into conspiracies you are not going to convince anyone, but you will lower the quality of debate on my forum (because it is all just insults regarding intelligence, etc).

[Osborn F Enready]

Sean said:
That is the problem. You cannot debunk people who feel a) so strongly in favor of a conspiracy and b) rely on sources that can be convincing and so out there that we have nothing but what was reported to throw back at you. Debating with people who are reliant on conspiracies is pointless.

I say:
It is this mentality that leads to bad debate Sean.

No topic is not worthy of debate. I would think you would hold that as a hallmark.

People who don't know the facts, have trouble debating so called "conspiracy theorists" because people who usually wear this label have an immense amount of information covering a wide array of aspects concerning the issue. They are hard to debate, but NOT because they are misinformed, or overly skeptical, but because they have a LOT of information.

If you aren't up to the debate, don't add I always say.

[Osborn F Enready]

On topic:

I would like to know the same thing Patrick. Why aren't the real questions being answered, because they surely aren't making any steps to do so?

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: PatrickHenry What better way to make a profit than to kill people and say that it was someone else?

Ummmmmmmmm lots? How about asking Bill Gates, or Warren Buffett, or any of the other billionaires that would piss on being the CEO of Halliburton and yet miraculously, haven't killed anyone.....

The recorders are nearly indestructible, by design. (They are supposed to be the evidence after a crash!)

Whether they survive intact or not, look at the pile of destruction that they are/would be/were buried in...

How about we apply Ockham's Razor? Is it more likely and simpler to say that 19 (almost 20) people from a group that tells us repatedly they hate us and want to kill us all did this in order to kill us, or is it more likely and simpler to say that a massive government conspiracy orchestrated in secret from the highest levels of government on down (thereby ensuring hundreds or thousands of people knew about it) was kept secret and carried out without anyone figuring it out? Right.

Sean is correct. It is pointless to debate with conspiracy theorists because any logical argument or accurate source will be discounted as just "part of the conspiracy"... The media, the government, Big Oil, the Yeti, the Loch Ness Monster, and the people who faked the moon landing, they're all in it together, right?

So run along, tivo. Post on something you can contribute to...

Waaaaaahhhh! You're so mature and thoughtful. Run along and contribute something that isn't a recycled "X-Files" plot.

[Sean]

Quote by: tivodan1116 Sean is correct. It is pointless to debate with conspiracy theorists because any logical argument or accurate source will be discounted as just "part of the conspiracy"... The media, the government, Big Oil, the Yeti, the Loch Ness Monster, and the people who faked the moon landing, they're all in it together, right?

Indeed. Osborn, I am aware of the "facts" and it is pointless to debate with someone who gets their facts from sources that I would not bet on. I know the history of the struggle to take down the WTC's. The terrorists clearly have had this objective for years. The alternative to such a reality is laughable for most people. You consider regular folks sheep and uninformed, but we are just not buying the alternative argument. You have to be a certain type of person to buy into conspiracy; especially the theory behind 9/11 that has been thrown around. I am not judging you guys, but the argument that we simply are unaware of the facts and that any topic is debatable are just things I do not agree with. You cannot argue with someone who looks at a blue sky and calls it green.

This is the reason most successful debate forums do not allow conspiracy sometimes at all. I at least provide outlets. It is something that discourages regular folks from participating. Not many people want to talk with someone that they cannot even come to basic understandings with.

[Osborn F Enready]

Thats my point though. The only way to distinguish what is and isn't provable is to debate it, air out the facts for all sides, and see where the probabilities lie.

The probabilities are not always right, but when you can't follow what is known to be true, you have to follow what is most probable right?

I am not saying I believe in any one thing about the WTC attacks. I am saying that nothing I have heard yet has been a definitive, all points answering reply.

The official story is lacking, and they left many many things that seem like valid questions unanswered officially, and this is a problem. People like Patrick and others are people who want to know the TRUTH, but sometimes when there is a lot of holes in the official story, people look for the most probable alternative, and that I think is what is happening.

I am sure SOME people like to believe in things like you talk of, true "conspiracy theories" with no factual backing, but not all theories are the same, and many good arguments and debates have been labeled by some as "conspiracy theories" just of the inability to answer questions that are valid.

Also, I think Volconvo is the best debate site I have seen on the net, and I respect your foresight to offer something that many others won't, which is almost completely free speech if in the proper forums. I just want to clarify that I was suprised to hear you say it, but I think you are entitled to your opinions as well as anyone else.