"News media should illuminate conflicts of interest, not embody them. But the owner of the Washington Post is now doing big business with the Central Intelligence Agency, while readers of the newspaper’s CIA coverage are left in the dark.

The Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, is the founder and CEO of Amazon — which recently landed a $600 million contract with the CIA. But the Post’s articles about the CIA are not disclosing that the newspaper’s sole owner is the main owner of CIA business partner Amazon."

[counterpunch.org]

That what was observed in the collapses does not match the official narrative.

@WilliamCharles Oh. Yeah, shortly after 9/11 Truthers appeared I went into a physics forum for a couple of hours. Fascinating, the collapse of these buildings involved all sorts of physics, some of was not even understood at the time. (research involving crashing fuel laden planes being crashed into skyscrapers is prohibitively expensive, go figure.) the takeaway was twofold: 1. Anyone who claims it was "high school physics" is a liar or a fool. 2. There was nothing even remotely unexplainable about what happened, perfectly consistent with planes flying into buildings. Of course there's always the fact that the theory makes no sense (how would you recruit people into a plot to murder thousands of Americans just for starters?) and no evidence supporting it has even been recovered. The latter is literally scientifically impossible considering the number of conspirators involved, someone would have slipped up or spilt the beans by now.

@Druvius - the questions about the physics is in the video. There are so many elements that do not gel with a gravity collapse. If the physics is so easily explained, then experimental models can be created for the official narrative. That comes first. The rest of the speculation about what could or couldn't be kept quiet is not relevant to the physics. Many of those rejecting the official narrative claims are themselves professionals in science and engineering. If skeptics groups can have open goddamn debates on evolution or the existence of God, then they can do it for this. They tackle the paranormal and pseudoscience all the time. For this, they can model their claims and show their work.

Being tied to the official narrative is a form of "religious" irrationalism. The physics observed in the collapse(s) says otherwise.

It doesn't really matter what comes after determining that the explanations for the collapses don't wash. That they don't is pretty much established.

@WilliamCharles Sorry...I disagree.

The physics is logical.

You're assuming a conspiracy to collapse the buildings at the exact moment that the jet airliners crashed in to them is real?

Sad.

[washingtonpost.com]