Comment: So one scientist says its

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Simplicity? (see in situ)

So one scientist says its

So one scientist says its nano-thermite, another says its not. Is it possible that one scientist or the other could have been enticed to falsify evidence, such as adding or ommiting the presence of aluminum in the sample?

Is it possible that both scientists were being honest, but one was testing on a nano thermite chip, and the other was testing on a paint chip? I mean do we even know they were using the same sample?

Did the scientist who claimed to have found nano-thermite profit from his claim? What was his end game?

Did the scientist who debunked the nano-thermite claim gain financially up too, or just after his claim?

Is the government known to lie?

Is the government known to destroy and fabricate evidence?

Did anyone gain from 911?

I try to keep an open mind EricHoffer, and it seems like you do as well. Im finding it increasingly difficult to trust the government however, and there are so many things I find questionable about 911. The old saying: "Follow the money" seems to so applicable.

Silverstien and his double-terrorist insurance policy for a start. The military industrial complex's massive gains, the loss of civil liberties and police state actions following. No one can doubt that many people working inside or alongside the US government had much to gain from this. So for me, the real question is, is the government known to do terrible things to innocent people in order to further its own ends.

The overwhelming and resounding answer is yes. Again and again through history it has been prooven and revealed that our government will stage events that result in the death of innocent people in order to further its aims. Even her own citizens.

Why would 911 be any differant?