Forum

profile |  register |  members |  groups |  faq |  search  login

9/11 The Burden of Proof - is the IJ theory OK to discuss?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Media Lens Forum Index -> off-topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CJ



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 6
Location: UK

Post Post subject: 9/11 The Burden of Proof - is the IJ theory OK to discuss? Reply with quote

Is it now time for the burden of proof in respect of the destruction of the 3 Trade Centre buildings on 9/11/2001 to shift back to the US Authorities?

Is there a case for saying that there is now sufficient evidence to show that terrorism could not have been the reason for the destruction of the 3 Trade Centre buildings on 9/11/2001 and therefore the burden of proving who was responsible falls wholly back on the US Authorities including NIST to explain why they came to that erroneous conclusion and to hold open sessions to re-examine in public the whole question from scratch?

If the burden shifts back to the Authorities then it goes without saying that hypotheses as to what happened, who was responsible and why are perfectly acceptable and in fact necessary as part of the re-investigation. Clearly one hypothesis is that the whole of 9/11 was an inside job.
Given a shift in the burden of proof is it so extreme to put forward this alternative hypothesis?
Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:32 pm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Media Lens Forum Index -> off-topic All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2005 phpBB Group
    printer friendly
eXTReMe Tracker