Arjay,

[continued]

<<How do buildings collapse in such a synchronised fashion and fall into their own footprints >>

With respect, Arjay, buildings fall DOWN. Where else are they supposed to fall but vertically down ? Sideways ? Onto each other ? And if I were an engineer planting explosives in large buildings, I would plant them in such a way that the buildings fell down exactly as they are supposed to. Again, 'maybe it could have' doesn't constitute 'definitely did'.

And of course, this is such a tiny part of the whole story - four planes, three buildings, one plane crashing in a Pennsylvania forest (or didn't this happen at all ?), tens of thousands of people affected directly.

So doubts notwithstanding, how do you seek to explain it all ? Who are you suggesting plotted the whole kit and kaboodle ? The CIA ? The Jews ? The Masons ? The Mafia (presuming IT exists) ? The New York real estate industry ?

And how come nobody ever suspects the Swedes ? Simply because there is not a shred of evidence of their involvement ? Exactly ! Exactly ! Clever B@st@rds !

Joe

Loudmouth,unfortunately your pseudonym reflects your intellectual capacity.You have no grasp of physics or mathematics.You speak errant nonsense.Go to http://ae911truth.org/ and get an education.

You are wasting my time

Sorry I struck a nerve, Arjay :)

Joe Lane

Oh Arjay, I don't think you're in any position here to offer demeaning comments about the intelligence of others. In the meantime, I'll ask you once again:

1) Did the planes and their passengers exist? If not, how were they fabricated out of thin air without giving rise to any questions? If they were real, what happened to them (and their passengers) after they didn't fly into buildings?

2) What purpose was served by fabricating the whole (and wholly implausible, apparently) hijacked plane story? Indeed, what purpose was served by the whole incident?

ARJAY,

The trouble with most conspiracy theories is they are dreamed up by people who can’t or don’t want to accept the realities of a confronting or shocking event. Especially if the event challenges their main mindset about something. In this case that the Americans must always be the ones to blame for all of the world’s troubles and are the only ones capable of any sort of violence against their fellow man.

Joe
(LOUDMOUTH) Is right when he says it was the weight of the top floors falling on the one below and collapsing it and then the weight of that floor adding extra weight, speeding up the collapse of the floor below it and so on , with the whole thing going faster and faster as one floor after another fell

Hi Otokonoko,

Good questions: let's suppose that the underlying purpose was to discredit a non-existent group called al Qa'ida and link it to the Taliban in Afghanistan, to give the US an excuse to get involved half-way around the world in, of all bloody places, Afghanistan.

Could a more plausible means have been found to incriminate a non-existent al-Qa'ida and the Taliban regime ? Could the CIA (or is it the Jews ? the French secret police ? aliens ?) blow up some less iconic building, the Statue of Liberty for example, or the Brooklyn Bridge ? Or the Hoover Dam ? Something straight-forward, nice and simple ? Sabotage one of their own ships overseas ? Assassinate one of their own ambassadors ? With his dear little children ? And his aged mother ? And their dogs ? And of course, leave a 'trail' of clues implicating al Qa'ida, which, like the Mafia, does not exist ?

Why go to the trouble to blow up something so visible, so iconic to the population of New York AND put it on TV, and think that nothing could go wrong ?

And then there's the Pentagon. Did Colin Powell know for sure that Rumsfeld had left the building ? How did Rumsfeld feel about Powell somehow getting a missile from the DoD (as they laughingly call it) and firing it into his mates ? Is that how it happened ?

Even the Yanks are not that stupid :)