Someone comes up with another theory and we go chasing that one too? and on and on?
We're never short of conspiracies. Which one should we investigate first? ~s~



>>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.
>
>Attack did in fact take place. Problem is that investigation was not torough at all as to prove positively who did it, and all focus put instead of on fastpaced consecutive war.
>
>It could hv been (hypoteticaly) gold heist or insurance scam (as per some theories), but there was no resorcefull and dedicated investigation about it
>to examine all facts. Instead of this and simillar to WMD case, official story was built up as a sort of writing on the wall 'Osama/Alqaeda Did It!' and then heavily supported to justify attack, which happened very quickly.
>
>Prety much simillar to old 'tradition' of pointing finger to a black person after some gruesome murder or rape took place and shouting 'He Did it!' and then large group performing lynch. No evidence, just *assumption* based on color of the skin or muslim radical pretext/mantra in this case.
>Or I could even compare it to Doa's case, as whole war happened because sufficient number of people believed that she should be punished, and NOT because there was real reason, Law/Court Case, evidence, conviction
>or anything like that. Just assumption that she is guilty, and punishment is correct thing to do.
>
>Whereas, it could have been easily (as Charles teach us) well organised group of techsavy gangsters counting on element of surprise, who used some terrorist freaks as decoy, while whole goal was let say stealing gold from underneath WTC for instance. Just for instance I repeat. I do not claim, believe or assume this to be the truth. I don't know the truth. But did anybody bother to really investigate all facts ? For instance, single plane crash can take months sometime years of complex investigation to figure out the real truth. How come this one yielded conviction/execution in a month time ?
>
>[ As for Jews conspiracy, mosad involvement, government/military conspiracy, intelligence matters etc, ask Charles he is apparently more versatile on that :)) ]
>
>There4 I marked my fourt question as most important. And that was
>about power control and handling of 'human' reaction NOT leading
>to another war, in month timespan from some future event.
>
>Peace.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>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.