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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: stockman_scott who wrote (174842)11/17/2005 11:06:54 AM
From: neolib  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes — which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.

This is rather nonsensical. If, as this guy claims, someone else planted the explosives, how did they get the Muslims to carry out the "diversion tactic"? Further, he is claiming that someone went to elaborate work to carefully place explosives in three buildings, in order to carefully drop them in place, then somehow orchestrated an additional strike involving planes and a third party which clearly ran the risk of thwarting the first step, either by toppling the buildings or by increasing the chances of getting caught. Prof Jones has the cajones to say his theory benefits from parsimony. What??
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News