Quote Originally Posted by Sir Evil View Post
Deal with what, a retarded conspiracy?
No, deal with the fact there's no official explanation for the collapse of WTC7.

So now it's just the one building in question, and not the others?
Oh, sorry if I address the strongest points too (Mineta testimony, WTC7 collapse, Punchout hole)! It's easy to dismiss side issues, even Jimnyc did it in the debate. He answered almost all the side issues, so it seems that he solved it all, but as you can see the main issues have still to be answered. No one in the world did it yet, maybe it's you or him that will explain WTC7 collapse to the world (and to NIST!)

This has to be the most rediculous topic ever discussed. Really if there was even a shred of factual evidence to any of this the press would be all over it, what you have is purely fiction based on some inane theories. This stuff is not even intelligent at it's best points, simply reading material created by the insipid douchebags looking to make a buck or a bit of notoriety off a tragedy.
The press? When was the last time you open a paper, Sir? You only know what the biased television networks tell you, they keep showing the hit on WTC1, the hit on WTC2, the collapse of WTC1, the collapse of WTC2... and you assume to see cause and effect.

Why you never saw the collapse of WTC7 on TV? Because then you would question it!
And why you never saw the pentagon plane on TV? There's a video of it, right?
And why you never saw Norman Mineta testimony on TV?

If you really used traditional press, maybe you would notice articles like this one (I post this as an answer to you and to one question raised by Jimnyc about Ron Paul & 9/11):