SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LPS5 who wrote (9291)12/14/2004 2:31:25 PM
From: Rock_nj  Read Replies (1) of 20039
 
Does the theory that there were "no planes" make more (or 'better') sense of the events of September 11th, 2001, than that planes struck the towers?

And, does the theory that planes did strike the towers, but that the buildings were already rigged for detonation make more sense of the occurences of that day?


That's exactly what I was referrring to in a later paragraph about how far you actually want to take the conspiracy. I know based on what happened on 9/11/01 that planes were not scrambled by our military in a timely manner. Which tells me there was in fact a conspiracy to make that so, as it is routine, as we all saw the year before when Paine Stewart's plane lost contact, that the military routinely intercepts planes that have lost contact and are off course in a matter of minutes. I don't buy that it was incompetance. Failing to scramlbe planes to protect DC, and to protect some of our most sensitive government buildings in DC, after NYC was hit by airplanes an hour earlier, and it was know that a plane that took over from DC was also showing signs of being hijacked, isn't just some oversight.

Now, I don't buy into some of the more far-flung conspiracy stuff about holographic planes. There's no indication that that was the case. But, as far as the twin towers being rigged to collapse, there are serious scientific questions surrounding those building collapses. The fact that siesmographs picked up shock waves in the vicinity of the WTC before the towers collapsed points to an explosion at ground level and the fact that the towers fell as quickly as an object falls due to gravity is also a red flag that required further investigation. Certainly a building that collapses from the top down would take more time to fully collapse than just the time gravity takes to pull a piece of steel and concrete to the earth, due to all the friction with the structural intact parts of the building. I'd say, while I don't fully buy into the explosion conspiracy, which certainly makes 9/11 a conspiracy of the 1st order, there are lingering questions about how those buildings collapsed, which require answers to put the theory that they were brought down by explosives to rest.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext