I think the biggest problem with these conspiracy theories is that it must be grounded on the assumption that the USG and all the alleged co-conspirators are stupid enough to attempt it. It's a little insulting.

I think that the story of the Gordian Knot is most useful here; what is the simplest solution? A gigantic conspiracy which requires the complicity, cooperation, silence, and stupidity of hundreds of people or a terrorist attack by a group that have attacked several times before?

I leave everyone to their own beliefs.


>Hi Tracy,
>I hv seen videos but no plane.
>Link you sent me points to actually second video from the same camera,
>that I saw and shows some rocket like object flying almost at ground level
>and then hitting Pentagon. Funy part is that date on camera is set on 12/11/2001 which is 3 days afterwards.
>On first video that I saw back on news, there is police car passing by seconds before impact which is NOT shown on the one you sent me.
>On the one with the police car nothing can be seen except blast.
>
>No commercial plane pilot can make descending from sky and then
>folow steady focused horisontal groundlevel path, hitting with the nose of the plane straight inn as it penetated trough the yogurt.
>No fuselage, wings, engines except for few very easily portable peaces.
>Strange to say at least.
>
>But never mind, overall links you sent me are more/less the same
>kind of lite reading found on one gazzilion of 9/11 conspiracy
>site. Nothing to distinguish them in substance from those which they are trying to 'debunk'. 'Righteous' Debunking 'Conspiracy Nuts' and vice versa.
>
>So as I said before I am not convinced at all. I still did not see the plane, and there is no reasonable explanation for buildings falling in their
>footprint at near gravity speed. And how come third one (small one) fell down all by itself.
>It is all one theory versus another. But no reasonable explanation.
>
>I hv no wish to discuss this any further, as It is not me who should
>be concearned about it. (Or yes considering global impact)
>I could understand that everyboody would actually prefer official story
>to be truth, rather then having to deal with something very very ugly
>that might hit the surface.
>
>It is still boggling my mind, but I am not gonna 'bother' anybody here
>about that.
>
>I wish someone actually positively answered my fourth question which is
>about safeguarding mechanisams for preventing snappy military
>interventions.