XPost: us.politics, can.politics, alt.military   
   From: sd.green@shaw.ca   
      
   "Tom P"  wrote in message   
   news:O0uMj.105517$Ft5.71045@newsfe15.lga...   
   > tankfixer wrote:   
   >> In article <3UqMj.105490$Ft5.66450@newsfe15.lga>, nospam@nospam.com   
   >> says...   
   >>> Paul Morgan wrote:   
   >>>> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:18:51 -0500, Tom P  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Roy wrote:   
   >>>>>> Sounds like they are all out to lunch.   
   >>>>>> -   
   >>>>> What's wrong with having an independent investigation and having some   
   >>>>> of these questions answered?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Why should we be afraid of the truth?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This is an event that has changed the course of world history. Every   
   >>>>> attempt should be made to remove the cloud of suspicion that lingers   
   >>>>> over this event. Trying to ignore these suspicions will only fuel the   
   >>>>> debate about cover ups.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Why should there not be a thorough investigation?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Using what as evidence?   
   >>> For starters... what about the video of the molten steel flowing from   
   >>> the side of one of the buildings. The NIST reports omitted this fact and   
   >>> has even denied the existence of molten steel.   
   >>   
   >> More correctly molten material.   
   >> What evidance do you have it was steel ?   
   >   
   > What evidence is there that it is not? It's all the more reason to   
   > investigate and find out. If the highjackers had help on the ground,   
   > shouldn't we find out?   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> For it's own credibility, the authors of the NIST report should   
   >>> investigate this and explain what was observed and why it was observed.   
   >>>   
   >>   
      
   Ao in other words you are making complete false assumptions. Who knows it   
   might have been a culdren of liquid fat burning, or melting plastic.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)