Thread: Architects & Engineers Discuss WTC No. 7

Testable? You mean like 'testing' the 9/11 rubble that was so quickly broken down and carted away before any actual investigation could be done (as would have been done at any other crime scene in American history)?

You mean testable like the official NIST report, which says it found 'no evidence of explosive material devices, before later saying it didn't actually test for any?

Evidence like allegations of the CIA meeting with Bin Laden in JULY of 2001? (CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July | World news | The Guardian Again, 'evidence' is not proof, simply something that SHOULD be investigated).

Evidence like the Administration telling our nation and THE WORLD that we could not have POSSIBLY thought about terrorists using planes to fly into buildings as a method of attack - when that was EXACTLY what many of our factions have been testing before, right before the bombings?

Evidence like the fact that, on the day of 9/11, drills were being run to tie up the FAA and NORAD (who would have been major players in preventing the attacks), in precisely the way that the police were holding drills on the exact same day of the 7/7 London Bombings, that tied up response. Those 'coincidences' alone imply that - at the very LEAST - the terrorists had prior knowledge to these drills, and timed their attacks accordingly. But of course, that's obviously what happened, because it's completely believable.

Actually, I'll just post this:



No evidence? None? Really?
Sure, I'll go with 'no proof'. But no evidence? Really?